content
stringlengths 1
15.9M
|
|---|
\section{Introduction}
The low energy supersymmetry (SUSY) is one of the leading candidates
for physics beyond the standard model. In the SUSY models, the
quadratic divergence in the Higgs mass squared term disappears and the
electroweak symmetry breaking scale is arising from SUSY breaking
parameters and SUSY Higgs mass parameter, $\mu$. Thus, it is plausible
that the SUSY particles will be discovered around the electroweak
symmetry breaking scale. However, the LHC experiments recently
reported strong lower bounds on masses of SUSY particles
\cite{Aad:2011qa,Chatrchyan:2011zy}. For instance, the gluino and
squarks lighter than 1 TeV was already excluded if their masses are
nearly equal. Such a LHC bound imposes a serious fine tuning problem
to SUSY models.
With the tension between the LHC bound on the masses of superparticles
and fine tuning being given, the focus point scenario
\cite{Feng:1999mn,Feng:1999zg, Feng:1999sw} is one of the interesting
possibilities to consider. (See also \cite{Feng:2000bp}.) In the
focus point region, although scalar masses are multi-TeV, the value of
the up-type soft SUSY breaking Higgs mass squared, $m_{H_u}^2$, is
around electroweak scale squared due to the ``focus point'' behavior
of the $m_{H_u}^2$ running; consequently the electroweak symmetry
breaking may be naturally realized by small $m_{H_u}^2$ and $\mu$
parameters. In the multi-TeV scalar mass region, the lower bound on
the gluino mass is relaxed and it is about 600 GeV. Thus, in focus
point scenario, a mild tuning of parameters may be enough to realize
the electroweak symmetry breaking without conflicting the LHC bounds.
As we see below, however, the Higgs mass bound from the LEP experiment
($m_h\geq 114.4\ {\rm GeV}$ \cite{Nakamura:2010zzi}) also puts serious
constraint on the parameter space. In particular, a large fraction of
the parameter region with a tuning of a few \% is excluded by the
Higgs mass constraint if we adopt the particle content of the minimal
supersymmetric standard model (MSSM).
One of the plausible extension of the MSSM is to introduce heavy
right-handed neutrinos. Even if the neutrino Yukawa coupling is
$\mathcal{O}(1)$, the small neutrino mass can be explained by the
seesaw mechanism \cite{Yanagida:1979as, GellMann:1976pg,
Minkowski:1977sc} with the large Majorana mass of the right-handed
neutrino. The purpose of this letter is to show that if the Yukawa
coupling of a neutrino is $\mathcal{O}(1)$, the allowed parameter
space in the focus point region significantly expands and we have a
large region of mild tuning. In particular, we show that a parameter
region with $3-5$ \% tuning is allowed in the focus point region where
multi-TeV scalars exist.
\section{Focus point scenario without seesaw}
First, we briefly summarize how the focus point region is constrained
by various experimental bounds in the framework of the MSSM.
In the MSSM, the electroweak symmetry breaking scale is given by the
SUSY Higgs mass parameter, $\mu$, and soft SUSY breaking masses as
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{1}{2}m_Z^2 =
- \mu^2 + \frac{m_{H_d}^2 - m_{H_u}^2 \tan^2 \beta}{\tan^2 \beta -1}
\sim - \mu^2 - m_{H_u}^2,
\label{eq:FT1}
\end{eqnarray}
where $m_{H_u}^2$ ($m_{H_d}^2$) is the up- (down-) type soft SUSY
breaking Higgs mass squared at the electroweak scale and $\tan\beta =
\langle H_u^0 \rangle / \langle H_d^0 \rangle$. The last relation
holds for a moderately large value of $\tan\beta$ and the relation can
be rewritten by the following form:
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{1}{2}m_Z^2 \sim - \mu^2 - m_{H_u}^2 |_{\rm mess} - \delta m_{H_u}^2,
\label{eq:mz}
\end{eqnarray}
where the $m_{H_u}^2 |_{\rm mess}$ is the up-type Higgs mass at the
SUSY breaking mediation scale and $\delta m_{H_u}^2$ denotes the
contribution of the running from the mediation scale to the
electroweak scale. In naive discussion, naturalness requires that
each term in the right-hand side should not be much larger than the
electroweak symmetry breaking scale.
This requires that the masses of scalar top quarks (stops) should not
be much larger than the electroweak scale in order for the electroweak
symmetry breaking to naturally happen
(for details of the naturalness bound on stop mass, see, for e.g.,
\cite{Chacko:2005ra,Nomura:2005qg,Kitano:2006gv} ).
The above conclusion may change in the focus point region. To see
this, we study the running of MSSM parameters in the framework of the
minimal supergravity (mSUGRA) with the following input parameters:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left( m_0, m_{1/2}, A_0, B_0, \mu \right), \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where $m_0$, $m_{1/2}$, $A_0$ and $B_0$ are the universal scalar mass,
gaugino mass, tri-linear coupling and the dimensionful Higgs mixing
parameter at the grand unified theory (GUT) scale $M_{\rm GUT}$,
respectively. Notice that $B_0$ is determined once the low energy
parameter $\tan\beta$ (as well as other GUT scale parameters) is
fixed. In mSUGRA, eq.\ (\ref{eq:mz}) becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{1}{2}m_Z^2 \sim - \mu^2 - c_{0} m_0^2
- c_{1/2} m_{1/2}^2 - c_A A_0^2 - c_{Am} (m_{1/2} A_0),
\end{eqnarray}
where the coefficients $c_{0}$, $c_{1/2}$, $c_A$ and $c_{Am}$ are
determined once the gauge and Yukawa coupling constants, $M_{\rm
GUT}$, and $\tan\beta$ are given. The focus point mechanism works
if $c_{0}$ is much smaller than $1$
\cite{Barbieri:1987fn,Chan:1997bi,Feng:1999hg,Feng:1999mn,Feng:1999zg,
Feng:1999sw}; in such a case, $m_{H_u}^2$ at the electroweak scale
is insensitive to $m_0$ because the focus scale of the $m_{H_u}^2$
running becomes close to the electroweak scale. This means the
electroweak scale also becomes insensitive to the parameter $m_0$, so
$m_0$ (i.e., typical scalar masses) can be multi-TeV without
conflicting with the fine tuning constraint. Using the GUT scale and
top quark mass suggested by experimental data, it is well known that
the value of $c_{0}$ is relatively small. Notice that, on the
contrary, $m_{1/2}$, $A_0$ and $\mu$ should not be much larger than
the electroweak scale for the naturalness.
In the actual situation, however, the Higgs mass bound imposes a
serious constraint on such a scenario. This is because a large value
of the stop mass is required to enhance the lightest Higgs mass, which
conflicts with the naturalness bound. In Fig.\ \ref{fig:FT}, we show
the contours of constant Higgs mass on $m_0$ vs.\ $m_{1/2}$ plane, as
well as the fine tuning parameter defined as
\cite{Ellis:1986yg,Barbieri:1987fn}
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta \equiv {\rm max} \left( \Delta_a \right), \qquad
\Delta_a \equiv \left| \frac{\partial \ln m_Z^2 }{\partial \ln a} \right|,
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
a = \left( m_0, m_{1/2}, A_0, B_0, \mu \right).
\end{eqnarray}
Notice that $\Delta$ parametrizes the sensitivity of the electroweak
scale to the high scale model parameters. In the same figure, we also
show contours of constant chargino and gluino masses. In addition, we
also draw the contour on which the thermal relic abundance of the
lightest neutralino is consistent with the WMAP value $\Omega_c
h^2=0.112$ \cite{Komatsu:2010fb}. In our analysis, we take
$\tan\beta=10$ and $30$, $M_{\rm GUT}=2\times 10^{16}$ GeV, and the
top quark mass is taken to be $m_t=173\ {\rm GeV}$. The
renormalization group evolution and SUSY mass spectrum are calculated
by using ISAJET 7.81 \cite{Paige:2003mg}.\footnote
{ In ISAJET code, we modified the function {\tt SSRSGT} which computes
the threshold correction of the top Yukawa coupling constant $y_t$
at the SUSY scale. The original code overestimates this correction,
which leads to slightly large $y_t$ above the SUSY scale. It
affects significantly electroweak symmetry breaking condition in
large $m_0$ region. We checked that modified code is almost
consistent with other codes. }
In addition, the lightest Higgs mass and the relic abundance are
calculated by FeynHiggs 2.8.5 \cite{Heinemeyer:1998yj} and DarkSUSY
5.0.5 \cite{Gondolo:2004sc}, respectively.
In Fig.\ \ref{fig:FT}, the green shaded region is excluded by the
chargino mass limit from LEP experiments \cite{LEP}. (Notice that the
green region also includes the parameter region where $m_{H_u}^2$
becomes positive, resulting in the failure of radiative electroweak
symmetry breaking.) On the other hand, the fine tuning parameter
$\Delta$ is mostly determined by $m_{1/2}$ and $\mu$ when $m_{1/2}$ is
large or by $m_0$ in large $m_0$ region. Then, even in focus point
region, there exists an upper bound on $m_0$ (and hence on the scalar
masses) once an upper bound on $\Delta$ is imposed. Such a
naturalness bound contradicts with the Higgs mass bound as seen in
Fig.\ \ref{fig:FT}. For example, if we take $\Delta\mathop{}_{\textstyle \sim}^{\textstyle <} 20$,
which corresponds to $\sim 5\ \%$ tuning of the parameters for the
electroweak symmetry breaking, the allowed region consistent with the
Higgs mass constraint is found to be quite small even for
$\tan\beta=30$. In the following, we see how this changes once the
right-handed neutrinos are introduced.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{MSSM_tanb10.eps}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{MSSM_tanb30.eps}
\caption{\small Experimental bounds and fine tuning parameter on
$m_0$ vs. $m_{1/2}$ plane for $\tan\beta =10$ (left) and $30$
(right) in the framework of the MSSM. Here, we take $A_0 = 0$.
The blue lines show contours of fine tuning parameter $\Delta =
100$, $33$ and $20$ from above. The green shaded region
corresponds to the region excluded by the chargino mass limit of
$103.5$ GeV. The red stripe regions is the region excluded by
Higgs mass limit of $114.4$ GeV, while red contours are for the
Higgs mass of $m_h=116\ {\rm GeV}$ and $118\ {\rm GeV}$ from
below. The black line shows contour of $m_{\tilde{g}}= 600$ GeV
and 1 TeV. The turquoise line shows the region where the
thermal relic density of the lightest neutralino becomes
consistent with the dark matter density suggested by the WMAP
$\Omega_{c} h^2 = 0.112$ \cite{Komatsu:2010fb}. }
\label{fig:FT}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{The focus point scenario with seesaw}
One of the plausible extension of the MSSM is to introduce
right-handed neutrinos in order to explain the small neutrino mass by
seesaw mechanism. Then, the renormalization group running of
$m_{H_u}^2$ is affected by the neutrino Yukawa coupling constants, and
the focus point behavior may change \cite{Kadota:2009fg}.
In the seesaw scenario, the active neutrino mass matrix is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
[m_{\nu_L}]_{ij} = \frac{1}{2} \langle H_u^0 \rangle^2
\sum_{kl} [Y_\nu]_{ik} [Y_\nu]_{jl}
[\mathcal{M}_{\nu_R}]^{-1}_{kl},
\end{eqnarray}
where $Y_\nu$ and $\mathcal{M}_{\nu_R}$ are the neutrino Yukawa matrix
and the Majorana mass matrix of right-handed neutrinos, respectively.
(The indices $i$, $j$, $\cdots$ run $1-3$.) Notice that, using the
Maki-Nakagawa-Sakata (MNS) matrix $V_{\rm MNS}$ \cite{Maki:1962mu},
$m_{\nu_L}$ is expressed as $m_{\nu_L}=V_{\rm MNS}\hat{m}_{\nu_L}
V_{\rm MNS}^T$, where $\hat{m}_{\nu_L}={\rm
diag}(m_{\nu_1},m_{\nu_2},m_{\nu_3})$ with $m_{\nu_i}$ being masses
of active neutrinos. As we will discuss later, the rates of the
lepton-flavor violating processes strongly depend on the origin of the
MNS matrix.
It can be easily seen that the focus scale of $m_{H_u}^2$ parameter
changes if the neutrino Yukawa couplings are ${\cal O}(1)$. This is because
the neutrino Yukawa coupling constant gives negative contribution to
$m_{H_u}^2$ (at lower scale). Consequently, the upper bound on $m_0$
from the electroweak symmetry breaking condition shifts to large $m_0$
region. The above statement holds irrespective of the detailed
structure of the Yukawa and Majorana mass matrices of neutrinos. So,
let us briefly discuss how it happens by adopting universal Majorana
mass matrix (i.e., $\mathcal{M}_{\nu_R}={\rm
diag}(M_{\nu_R},M_{\nu_R},M_{\nu_R})$) to make the point clear.
(Implication of such a choice to the lepton flavor violation will be
discussed later.) Using the active neutrino masses suggested from the
neutrino oscillation experiments, the largest eigenvalue of $Y_\nu$
becomes $\mathcal{O}(1)$ if $M_{\nu_R}$ is around $10^{14}$ GeV.
Then, in models with right-handed neutrinos, the renormalization group
equation of $m_{H_u}^2$ contains the following term:
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{d m_{H_u}^2}{d \log Q} =
\left[ \frac{d m_{H_u}^2}{d \log Q} \right]_{\rm MSSM} +
\frac{y_\nu^2}{16\pi^2}
\left( m_{H_u}^2 + m_{L_3}^2 + m_{N_3}^2 \right)
\theta(Q-M_{\nu_R})
+ \cdots,
\end{eqnarray}
where $Q$ is the renormalization scale, the first term is the MSSM
contribution, $y_\nu$ is the largest eigenvalue of the neutrino Yukawa
matrix, and $m_{L_3}^2$ and $m_{N_3}^2$ are SUSY breaking mass squared
of the slepton doublet and right-handed sneutrino which couple to
$y_\nu$, respectively. (In the above equation, we omit the
contribution of tri-linear coupling, which is irrelevant for our
discussion.) Here, for simplicity, we have assumed that the
eigenvalues of the neutrino Yukawa matrix is hierarchical and that the
contribution of the largest eigenvalue dominates. If $y_\nu$ is
sizable, $m_{H_u}^2(Q)$ becomes negative at the scale higher than that
in the case of the MSSM. Then, the focus scale of $m_{H_u}^2$ becomes
higher compared to the MSSM case, and the region with small $\Delta$
extends to the region with larger $m_0$. In such a region, the Higgs
mass constraint can be satisfied because of large stop masses. In
addition, the fine tuning parameter $\Delta$ may be suppressed
because, in the parameter region near the chargino mass bound, the
$\mu$-parameter is small.
In Fig.\ref{fig:FT_RHN}, we show the contour of the fine tuning
parameter $\Delta$, as well as experimental (and other) bounds. Here,
we take $A_0 = 0$, $\tan \beta = 10$ and $30$, and $M_{\nu_R} =
2\times 10^{14}$ GeV. The soft SUSY breaking mass squared of the
right-handed sneutrinos are also taken to be $m_0^2$ at the GUT
scale. On the contour of the fine tuning parameter, the horizontal
line is due to $\Delta_{M_{1/2}}$ and $\Delta_{\mu}$ while the
(almost) vertical one is from $\Delta_{m_0}$. It is remarkable that
the region with a few \% tuning (i.e, $\Delta\mathop{}_{\textstyle \sim}^{\textstyle <} 33$) becomes
larger as we take into account the effect of the neutrino Yukawa
coupling constant. In the case of $M_{\nu_R} = 2\times 10^{14}$ GeV,
$m_0$ can be as large as $\sim 2\ {\rm TeV}$ even if we require
$\Delta< 33$, which is about $500\ {\rm GeV}$ larger than the case of
the MSSM. This makes the discovery of the squarks at the LHC
challenging. Even in such a case, however, it should be noted that a
bound on the $m_{1/2}$ parameter is imposed from the naturalness,
which can be converted to the upper bound on the gluino mass. If we
require $\Delta<33$ (20), gluino should be lighter than 1 TeV (800
GeV) for the case of $\tan\beta=30$. Thus, for the test of the focus
point scenario, search of the gluino signal is important. In the
present scenario, it is also notable that the lightest Higgs mass
cannot be so heavy. Even adopting the tuning of the level of
$\Delta^{-1}=1\ \%$, the Higgs mass is required to be smaller than
about $120\ {\rm GeV}$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{Nur2e14_tanb10.eps}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{Nur2e14_tanb30.eps}
\caption{\small Same as Fig.\ \ref{fig:FT}, except for the model
with right-handed neutrino multiplets. Here, we take $M_{\nu_R}
= 2\times 10^{14}$ GeV.}
\label{fig:FT_RHN}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In the present case, one may worry about the thermal relic density of
the lightest neutralino because we consider the parameter region where
the sfermion masses are so heavy that the pair annihilation cross
section of the lightest neutralino is extremely suppressed (if the
lightest neutralino is Bino-like) \cite{Feng:2000gh}. In
Fig.\ref{fig:FT_RHN}, we also show the contour on which the thermal
relic density of the lightest neutralino becomes consistent with the
present dark matter density. Notice that, as $m_{1/2}$ becomes
larger, the thermal relic density increases. In the region that we
are interested in, i.e., in the region where $\Delta^{-1}\mathop{}_{\textstyle \sim}^{\textstyle <} $ a
few \%, the thermal relic density of the lightest neutralino is found
to exceed the present dark matter density. If we assume the standard
evolution of the universe, this may cause a problem of the
overproduction of the lightest neutralino. The relic density,
however, depends on the thermal history as well as on the mass
spectrum of SUSY particles. Thus, we do not take this problem
seriously. For example, if a sizable amount of entropy is produced
after the freeze-out of the lightest neutralino, this problem can be
avoided. In addition, if the simple GUT relation among the gaugino
masses does not hold, then the lightest neutralino may not be purely
Bino. If the lightest neutralino has a sizable Wino or Higgsino
component, the thermal relic density of the lightest neutralino can be
suppressed. In the scenario of the product-group unification
\cite{Yanagida:1994vq}, such a situation can be easily realized.
Finally, we comment on the lepton flavor violation. Once we introduce
right-handed neutrinos, it inevitably becomes a new source of lepton
flavor violations. In particular, even if the slepton mass squared
matrix is universal at the GUT scale, the neutrino Yukawa interaction
induces off-diagonal elements via renormalization group effect
\cite{Borzumati:1986qx}. (For detailed study of the lepton flavor
violation processes in supersymmetric model with right-handed
neutrinos, see \cite{Hisano:1995cp, Hisano:1998fj}.) The most
stringent constraint is often from $\mu\rightarrow e\gamma$ process;
the current upper bound on the branching ratio of this process is
${\rm Br} (\mu \to e \gamma) < 2.4 \times 10^{-12}$
\cite{Adam:2011ch}. Even though the slepton masses are of ${\cal
O}(1)\ {\rm TeV}$ in the focus point scenario, ${\rm Br} (\mu \to e
\gamma)$ may become large because we consider the case that the
neutrino Yukawa coupling constants are $\mathcal{O}(1)$. Importantly,
the rates of lepton flavor violating processes strongly depend on the
structures of Yukawa and Majorana mass matrices in the neutrino
sector. For example, if ${\cal M}_\nu$ is universal, the mixing in the
Yukawa matrix should be sizable to realize the mixings of active
neutrinos observed. Then, it is often the case that ${\rm Br} (\mu
\to e \gamma)$ becomes unacceptably large. Even in such a case,
however, ${\rm Br} (\mu \to e \gamma)$ depends on the value of
$[V_{\rm MNS}]_{e3}$, which is presently unknown. If $|[V_{\rm
MNS}]_{e3}|\ll 1$, ${\rm Br} (\mu \to e \gamma)$ becomes larger than
the experimental bound in the region of $\Delta<100$. However if
$|[V_{\rm MNS}]_{e3}|\sim 0.06$, there is a possibility of accidental
cancellation so that ${\rm Br} (\mu \to e \gamma)$ is suppressed.
Furthermore, if the neutrino mixing is dominantly from
$\mathcal{M}_{\nu_R}$, the situation may change. For example, one may
take $[Y_\nu]_{ij}\propto \delta_{ij}$ and
$[\mathcal{M}_{\nu_R}]_{ij}\propto [m_{\nu_L}]^{-1}_{ij}$; then the
flavor violation is significantly suppressed. This is because the
relevant part of the $\beta$-function of the SUSY breaking mass
squared matrix of slepton is proportional to $[Y_\nu
Y_\nu^\dagger]_{jl}$. We have checked that, in such a case, the
experimental constraints can be avoided if $m_0\mathop{}_{\textstyle \sim}^{\textstyle >} 1\ {\rm TeV}$
in the case that the right-handed neutrino masses are around $2\times
10^{14}\ {\rm GeV}$ and $\tan\beta=10$. More detailed discussion on
this issue will be given elsewhere \cite{AsaMorSatoYan}.
\section{Conclusions and Discussion}
In this letter, we have considered the possibility of relaxing the
fine tuning constraint using the focus point scenario. We have shown
that the focus point parameter space consistent with the serious Higgs
mass constraint is expanded by introducing right-handed neutrinos.
Due to the contribution from the large Yukawa coupling of the
right-handed neutrinos, the naturalness bound on the $m_0$ vs.\
$m_{1/2}$ plane is changed. Then, we have shown that the parameter
space with a few percent tuning becomes significantly larger. We have
seen that a parameter space with $\sim 5\ \%$ tuning even exists with
the scalar mass larger than $1\ {\rm TeV}$. We have found that,
adopting $3 \%$ ($5\ \%$) tuning for the electroweak symmetry
breaking, the gluino mass is bounded above as $m_{\tilde{g}} < 1$ TeV
($800$ GeV).
Finally, we comment on the limit on the gluino mass. In deriving the
LHC bound on the gluino mass, the GUT relation among the gaugino
masses is usually adopted. Then, the gluino mass is constrained as
$m_{\tilde{g}} > 600$ GeV in the focus point region. However, in some
class of GUT models, the GUT relation does not always hold; in the
unification model based on product groups \cite{Yanagida:1994vq}, for
example, that is the case \cite{ArkaniHamed:1996jq}. If the masses of
gluino and dark matter are quasi-degenerated, bound on the gluino mass
may be relaxed \cite{gluinolimit}. Implications of such a possibility
in the focus point scenario (as well as in more general framework)
will be discussed elsewhere \cite{AsaMorSatoYan}.
{\it Acknowledgments:} The authors thank H. Baer for useful
discussion. This work is supported by Grant-in-Aid for Scientific
research from the Ministry of Education, Science, Sports, and Culture
(MEXT), Japan, No.\ 22244021 (T.M. and T.T.Y.), No.\ 22540263 (T.M.),
and also by the World Premier International Research Center Initiative
(WPI Initiative), MEXT, Japan. The work of R.S. is supported in part
by JSPS Research Fellowships for Young Scientists. MA acknowledges
support from the German Research Foundation (DFG) through grant BR
3954/1-1.
|
\section{Introduction}
Galaxy clusters are dynamical environments hosting complex astrophysical phenomena,
that provide us with a wealth of information on the intricate processes that shape the
cosmic large-scale structure and galaxy evolution (see reviews by Fabian \cite{fabian94},
Rosati, Borgani \& Norman \cite{rosati02}, Voit \cite{voitrev}).
The intracluster medium (ICM) is the dominant baryonic component of galaxy clusters, a
hot plasma emitting X-ray radiation via thermal bremsstrahlung.
High-resolution X-ray observations show that the surface brightness of the ICM of
about half of the local clusters is
peaked in their central regions, where the inferred cooling time of the gas is shorter
than the typical dynamical time (see Fabian \cite{fabian94} for a review on cooling flows and
Hudson et al. \cite{hudson} for more recent results).
However, X-ray spectroscopy always shows a gas temperature floor, indicating that some distributed source
of heating must stop the cooling process (see Peterson \& Fabian \cite{peterson06} and references therein).
In the current framework, the dominant heating source that prevents the overcooling of the ICM is likely to be an AGN fueling a massive central black hole, leading to an outburst
which can heat the ICM via shocks, buoyantly rising bubbles inflated by radio lobes, or dissipation of
sound waves (see McNamara \& Nulsen \cite{mcnamara} for a review).
The so-called cool-core phenomenon is observed in different wavebands depending on the
cluster component under investigation.
Among them: the ICM (X-ray), the brightest cluster galaxy (BCG, optical),
cold molecular gas (IR), and the central AGN (radio).
The onset of star formation activity in the central galaxy (otherwise a passive, early-type galaxy)
is a well-known manifestation of this phenomenon (Crawford et al. \cite{crawford}, McNamara et al. \cite{mcnamara}, Donahue et al. \cite{donahue}).
However, nuclear activity in the central cluster galaxy is expected to play the major role in
regulating the cool-core thermodynamics, as suggested by the observed interactions between the
radio jets and the ICM and the scaling relations among total radio power and ICM properties
observed in the X-ray band (Birzan et al. \cite{birzan08}). These processes are shown in the spectacular
combined images of nearby clusters in the radio and X-ray bands, where cavities and ripples in the
ICM are observed to correspond to non-thermal radio emission (Blanton et al. \cite{blanton01}; Birzan et al.
\cite{birzan04}; Wise et al. \cite{wise}; Sanders \& Fabian \cite{sanders07};
Sanders, Fabian \& Taylor \cite{sft}, and many others).
There is increasing evidence
from radio and X-ray observations of local clusters that the
formation of bubbles due to radio jets associated to the central AGN
may effectively satisfy the energy balance between cooling and heating
in cool-core regions (Blanton \cite{blanton01}, Ehlert et al. \cite{ehlert}). In this respect, the radio
luminosity of the central galaxy provides an important link
between the black hole activity and the state of the intracluster medium.
To date, systematic studies of the cool-core phenomenon including X-ray, optical and radio
data to understand how the feedback mechanism shapes the evolution of cool-cores have been
limited to samples of nearby clusters (e.g., Heckman et al. \cite{heckman}, Birzan et al. \cite{birzan04},
Cavagnolo et al. \cite{cavagnolo}, O'Dea et al. \cite{odea}, Mittal et al. \cite{mittal},
Sun \cite{sun}, McDonald et al. \cite{mcdonald}), reaching a redshift up to $<z>$=0.3
(Samuele et al. \cite{samuele}).
These studies show clear correlations involving the radio luminosity of the central AGN, optical emission
lines (e.g. H$\alpha$), excess IR/UV emission, and the core entropy of the ICM.
The extension of these studies to high-redshift can provide important
clues also on the timescales of the metal enrichment mechanisms of the ICM,
a process that encompasses different phases of the cool-core
phenomenon. Iron, the main metal locked in the ICM, is produced
primarily by type Ia supernovae, while iron and other heavy elements produced
by both type Ia and type II SNe hosted by the cluster early-type
galaxies (Renzini et al. \cite{renzini}) are eventually diffused
into the ICM via galactic winds and ram pressure striping. According
to local studies, the excess iron mass found in cool-cores is directly
linked to the brightest cluster galaxies (B\"ohringer et
al. \cite{boehringer}, De Grandi et al. \cite{degrandi04}).
A complete understanding of the formation and evolution of cool-cores should encompass all these aspects.
Recent results indicate a moderate evolution in the bulk of the cool-core cluster population
out to $z$=1.3, with an apparent lack of very strong cool-core clusters at high redshifts
(Santos et al. \cite{joana08}; \cite{joana10}). However, to adequately compare the
characteristics of distant and nearby
cool-core clusters, we require deep, high-resolution X-ray data of distant clusters.
The study of cool-cores at high-redshift will not only place
an upper limit on the formation timescale of cool-cores, but will also reveal the strength of
the interactions between the diffuse baryons and the brightest central galaxy (BCG)
at an epoch when the most massive clusters are still assembling.
In this paper we provide a detailed investigation of the ICM of the X-ray selected cluster
WARPJ1415.1+3612 (hereafter WARPJ1415) at $z$=1.03 (Perlman et al. \cite{perlman}),
using a recently acquired deep \textit{Chandra} observation.
This cluster was chosen as the strongest high-$z$ cool-core cluster based on
the analysis of its surface brightness properties (Santos et al. \cite{joana10}).
Using a multi-wavelength dataset comprising radio VLA data, archival optical
GEMINI-GMOS spectroscopy and imaging from HST/ACS F775W, and SUBARU-\textit{Suprime} (BVRiz)
we study the central galaxy and its interactions with the hot plasma.
The analysis presented here is the first detailed study of the feedback process in a cool-core at
such high-redshift.
The paper is organized as follows:
in \S 2 we describe the X-ray data reduction procedures, including the detailed
spatially resolved spectroscopic analysis of the ICM.
In \S 3 we obtain the temperature and metallicity profiles. We perform the deprojection
analysis and present the mass profile in \S 4.
We investigate the surface brightness properties of the ICM in \S 5
and we accurately measure several cool-core diagnostics, namely $c_{SB}$, the
central cooling time and central entropy.
In \S 6 we present the radio and optical properties of the BCG and explore the connection
between the BCG and the ICM core properties. Our conclusions are summarized in \S 7.
The cosmological parameters used throughout the paper are: $H_{0}$=70 km/s/Mpc,
$\Omega_{\Lambda}$=0.7 and $\Omega_{\rm m}$=0.3. Quoted errors are at the 1-$\sigma$
level, unless otherwise stated.
\section{X-ray data reduction and spectral analysis}
\subsection{The X-ray dataset}
The galaxy cluster WARPJ1415 was detected in the Wide Angle ROSAT
Pointed Survey (Jones et al. \cite{jones98}, Perlman et al. \cite{perlman}). This survey
provided several high-redshift galaxy clusters based on
serendipitous detections of extended sources in targeted ROSAT PSPC
observations. The survey covers an area of 71 deg$^{2}$ and contains a
complete sample of 129 X-ray selected clusters down to a flux limit of
$S \sim 6.5 \times 10^{-14}$ erg s$^{-1}$ cm$^{2}$.
A deep, 280 ksec ACIS-S observation of WARPJ1415 was awarded to our
group in \textit{Chandra} AO 12 (PI J. Santos). An additional 90 ksec
observation with ACIS-I (taken in 2004, PI H. Ebeling) was used in
our analysis. The \textit{Chandra} exposure time sums up to a total 370
ksec ({\tt obsid} 4163, 12255, 12256, 13118, 13119).
This dataset represents the deepest \textit{Chandra} observation of a
cluster at $z\simeq 1$, enabling the most detailed X-ray analysis of
any such high redshift galaxy cluster. Previous studies of distant
X-ray clusters with comparable depth used both shallow \textit{Chandra} and XMM-Newton
data (see Maughan et al. \cite{maughan08}), and therefore do not reach the angular
resolution to study the inner regions of the ICM distribution. In the
case of WARP1415, angular resolution has a paramount relevance, since
it allows us to resolve the density, temperature and metal distribution within the
cool-core region on a scale as small as $\sim$10 kpc, and hence to shed
light on the complex physics of the cool-core region at a look back
time of 8 Gyr.
We also examined the XMM-Newton archival data on WARPJ1415. We find
that after removing the time intervals of high-background, the useful
exposure time is about 17 ks for MOS and 14 ks for PN. Given the
modest exposure time and the much lower angular resolution of XMM-Newton, we
do not include this dataset in our analysis.
\subsection{Data reduction}
We performed a standard data reduction starting from the level=1 event
files, using the {\tt CIAO 4.3} software package, with the most recent
version of the Chandra Calibration Database at the time of writing
({\tt CALDB 4.4.5}). We ran the {\tt acis$\_$process$\_$events} task
to update the data calibration, including the {\tt tgain}
correction\footnote{See http://cxc.harvard.edu/ciao/why/acistgain.html}. Since both ACIS-I
and ACIS-S observations were taken in the VFAINT mode, we set the {\tt
check$\_$vf$\_$pha} key to {\tt yes} to flag background events that
are most likely associated with cosmic rays and distinguish them from
real X-ray events. With this procedure, the ACIS particle background
can be significantly reduced compared to the standard grade selection.
We also applied the CTI correction to the ACIS-I observation (taken with
the temperature of the Focal Plane equal to 153 K). This procedure
allows us to recover the original spectral resolution partially lost
because of the CTI (see Grant et al. \cite{grant}). The correction applies
only to ACIS-I data, since the ACIS-S3 did not suffer from radiation
damage. The data were filtered to include only the standard event
grades 0, 2, 3, 4 and 6. We did not remove the {\tt
acis$\_$detect$\_$afterglow} correction since all our data have a
SDP version larger than 7.4.0\footnote{see http://cxc.harvard.edu/ciao/threads/acisdetectafterglow/}.
Nevertheless, we checked visually for hot columns left after the
standard reduction, finding none. We also identified the flickering
pixels as the pixels with more than two events contiguous in time,
where a single time interval was set to 3.3~s. For exposures taken in
VFAINT mode, there are no flickering pixels left after filtering out
bad events. We filtered time intervals with high background by
performing a $3\sigma$ clipping of the background level in the 0.5$-$7
keV band by using the script {\tt analyze\_ltcrv}. We did not detect
any high background interval in both ACIS-I and ACIS-S data (nominally
the removed exposure time is less than 0.5\% for ACIS-I and less than
0.2\% for ACIS-S). We remark that our spectral analysis is not
affected by any possible residual flare unnoticed in the 0.5-7 keV
band, since we compute the background from source-free regions around
the cluster, thus taking into account any possible spectral distortion
of the background itself. Finally, all the ACIS-S {\tt obsid} were
merged together with the {\tt merge\_all} tool. ACIS-S and ACIS-I are kept
separated both for imaging and for spectral analysis, as described in the following sections.
\subsection{Spectral analysis}
We produced soft (0.5-2 keV) and hard (2-7 keV) band images with the full
\textit{Chandra} resolution (1 pixel = 0.492 arcsec). We computed the cluster
center in the soft-band by measuring the position at which the
signal-to-noise ratio (S/N) within circles of different radii is maximum.
Following this procedure we assign the X-ray center of the cluster to
RA=14:15:11.08, DEC=+36:12:03.1.
This position also corresponds to the peak of the surface brightness emission.
We remark that we did not detect any point source which could significantly
contribute to the core emission, by carefully inspecting the 0.5-2.0 keV and the 2.0-7.0 keV X-ray images.
The spectral analysis is performed as follows: starting from the
cluster center, we draw rings at different radii and compute the S/N
in the total 0.5-7 keV band for the ACIS-S image, which has a signal
much stronger than the ACIS-I image. In order to achieve a good
compromise between the S/N ratio in each ring and the total number of
rings, we set a minimum S/N $\ge 24$ within 25$\arcsec$, decreasing at
larger radii down to 14 in the outermost radius. This ensures that we
have always more than 650 net counts in the 0.5-7 keV band in each
ring (with the exception of the central bin with 500 net counts), for
a total of nine rings. We adopted the same set of circular rings in
the ACIS-I image, despite the net counts in each ring are typically
less then 100. In the last radial bin (300-400 kpc), we used only
ACIS-S, since there is no useful signal in the ACIS-I data.
We extracted spectra for each ring from the ACIS-S and ACIS-I data separately.
The response matrices and the ancillary response matrices were computed
for each {\tt obsid} respectively with {\tt mkacisrmf} and {\tt mkwarf}, for the same regions where the
spectra were extracted. A single {\tt arf} and {\tt rmf} files for each ACIS-S spectrum were
finally obtained by summing over the 4 ACIS-S {\tt obsid} with {\tt addarf} and {\tt addrmf}, respectively.
We detected 7500 (6200 in ACIS-S and 1300 in ACIS-I) photons within 50$\arcsec$,
corresponding to 400 kpc.
We selected the background from empty regions of the same CCD in
which the cluster is located. This is possible since the signal from the
cluster has a total extension of less than 1 arcmin, as opposed to the
8$\arcmin$ size of the ACIS-I/-S chips. The background region is scaled
to the source files by the ratio of their geometrical areas. In principle,
the background regions may partially overlap with the outer virialized
regions of the clusters. However, the cluster emission from these
regions is negligible with respect to the instrumental background, and
does not affect our results. Our background subtraction procedure, on
the other hand, has the advantage of providing the best estimate of
the background for that specific observation.
The background is extracted (both for ACIS-I and ACIS-S data) from 3 circular regions
nearby the clusters, up to a maximum distance of 3 arcmin, and with a minimum distance of 1.2 arcmin.
The size of each background region varies between 50 to 70 arcsec in radius, in order to ensure
the background is sampled from a region larger by at least a factor of 10 with respect to the
outermost ring. We repeated the measurement with other background regions selected with these
criteria and found no significant differences in the final results.
The background spectra were scaled by the geometrical factor between the background and source regions before subtraction.
Our spectral analysis is expected to be robust against background variations and vignetting effects thanks to the high S/N set for our circular rings (S/N of 25 except in the two outermost rings, where we have S/N=20 and 15) and to the sparse sampling of the background. To show this, we also compute the scaling factors using the ratio of the exposure maps of the source and background regions, and repeat the spectral analysis. In all cases we obtain results in excellent agreement with those obtained with the simple geometrical scaling. We remark that a full treatment of the vignetting effects would imply modeling the background by treating each component separately. We do not apply this procedure in our paper since it would not introduce any noticeable improvement in the final results.
The spectra of each ring were analyzed with XSPEC v12.6 (Arnaud et
al. \cite{arnaud}) and fitted with a single-temperature {\tt mekal}
model (Kaastra \cite{kaastra}; Liedahl et al. \cite{lied}) using the
solar abundance of Asplund et al. (\cite{asplund})\footnote{The values
normalized to Asplund et al. (2005) are a factor 1.6 larger than the
ones normalized to Anders \& Grevesse (1989) which have been
extensively used so far in the literature.}. The fits were performed
over the energy range $0.5-8.0$ keV. The free parameters in our
spectral fits are temperature, metallicity and normalization. The
local absorption is fixed to the Galactic neutral hydrogen column
density ($N_H$) measured at the cluster position (Wilms et
al. \cite{wilms}) and equal to $N_H=1.05 \times 10^{20}$ cm$^{-2}$,
and the redshift is fixed to $z=1.03$. We used Cash statistics
applied to the source plus background, which is preferable for low S/N
spectra (Nousek \& Shue \cite{nousek}).
The spectra were binned only to one photon per energy bin. The use of Cash statistics
with background subtracted spectra has been used in previous works, and validated with
spectral simulations in the case of typical AGN (see Figure 2 in Tozzi et al. \cite{tozzi}).
The same results were obtained for thermal spectra typical of clusters.
The global temperature and abundance values were measured in the region
of maximum S/N in the ACIS-S data, which corresponds to a radius
$R_{ext} = 32\arcsec$ centered around the cluster position.
The spectrum extracted from this region allows us to measure temperature and Fe
abundance with unprecedented accuracy at such an high redshift.
The best fit values are $kT = 6.82^{+0.43}_{-0.34}$ keV and $Z =
0.88^{+0.11}_{-0.10} Z_\odot$.
In addition, the strong $K_\alpha$ Fe line allow us to measure the redshift with an
accuracy of less than 1\%: $z_{fit} = 1.028_{-0.007}^{+ 0.008}$ (see Fig. \ref{maxsn}).
The same analysis performed with the ACIS-I
data provides consistent results with larger uncertainties. These
global values are still consistent with the values measured with a
previous CALDB version by Balestra et al. (\cite{balestra}), using the 90 ksec
ACIS-I data.
Our temperature measurement is in agreement, albeit with significantly improved accuracy,
with those found by Maughan et al. (\cite{maughan06})
in their analysis of the XMM-Newton data, and by Maughan et al. (\cite{maughan08}) in their analysis
of the ACIS-I \textit{Chandra} data. However, we note that previous measurements of the Fe abundance with
\textit{Chandra} gave very low values, at variance with our findings.
We will not use the average values of temperature and metal abundance obtained from the highest S/N region in the rest of this study.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=6.cm,angle=-90]{cl_data_maxSN_S.ps}
\end{center}
\caption{Folded global spectrum of WARPJ1415 extracted from a circular region
with radius of 32$\arcsec$ in the ACIS-S data (crosses) fitted with a {\tt
mekal} model (continuous line). The redshifted $K_{\alpha}$ line complex of
Hydrogen-like and Helium like Iron (Fe XXV, XXVI) is clearly visible at $ \sim 3.5$ keV.}
\label{maxsn}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\hspace{-1.5cm}
\includegraphics[height=7.5cm,angle=0]{temperature_fit_deproj.ps}
\includegraphics[height=7.5cm,angle=0]{metall_fit_deproj.ps}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.7cm}
\caption{{\sl Left panel:} Observed projected temperature profile of WARP1415 (red points)
and the corresponding fit (red dashed line) compared to the deprojected measured temperature
values (blue solid line). {\sl Right panel:} same as
left panel for the Iron abundance profile. The 68\% uncertainty in the fitted curves is very close to the typical error bars of the measured projected quantities at similar radii, and it is not shown for the sake of clarity.}
\label{tdeproj}
\end{figure*}
\section{Projected temperature and metallicity profiles}
Nearby cool-core clusters are characterized by several particular
features in the central ICM, most of which require spatially
resolved X-ray data and are therefore challenging to measure in
the typical low S/N observations of high-redshift clusters.
In the following subsections, we discuss in detail the spatially
resolved properties of the ICM in WARPJ1415.
\subsection{Projected temperature profile and map}
The most distinctive sign of a cool-core is a temperature drop towards
the cluster center, usually down to a third/half of the global cluster
temperature (see, e.g., Peterson et al. \cite{peterson03}). A resolved temperature
drop at high-redshift has only been observed in 3C186 at $z$=1.1
(Siemiginowska et al. \cite{aneta}), a cluster that harbors a bright quasar in
its center. More recently, the analysis of relatively shallow
\textit{Chandra} data of SPT-CL J2106-5844, a galaxy cluster at
$z$=1.1 discovered with the South Pole Telescope, hints at a
temperature drop from 11.0$^{+2.6}_{-1.9}$ keV to 6.5$^{+1.7}_{-1.1}$ keV
in the core (Foley et al. \cite{foley}), with a drop factor of $1.7 \pm 0.5$.
Similarly, the very massive merging cluster ACT-CL J0102-4215 at $z$=0.87,
shows temperature variations ranging from 22$\pm$6 to 6.6$\pm$0.7 keV (Menanteau et al. \cite{menanteau}),
corresponding to a drop factor of $\sim$2, from the global, core-excluded temperature, to the cluster center.
To measure the projected temperature profile of CL1415 we fitted
the spectra of the rings obtained with the procedure described
in \S 2. For each ring we combined the ACIS-S and ACIS-I data.
Despite the fact that the majority of the signal is provided by the
ACIS-S data, the use of the ACIS-I spectra allows us to obtain slightly
smaller error bars with respect to the analysis based on the ACIS-S
data only. In addition, the ACIS-S analysis shows no significant
difference with respect to the combined analysis. Therefore, from now
on we refer to the combined (ACIS-I+ACIS-S) spectral analysis.
The projected temperature profile is shown in Figure~\ref{tdeproj},
left panel. We are able to trace the temperature profile out to 400
kpc with an accuracy of the order of 10\%, reaching 20\% in the outermost
bin (1-$\sigma$ error). The innermost bin has a size of $\sim 20$ kpc,
while the outermost bin has a size of $\sim 100$ kpc. We measure a
significant central temperature drop with $T_{c}=4.6\pm 0.4$ at $R <
20$ kpc, which is nearly half of the maximum cluster temperature, $kT
= 8.0 \pm 1.2$ keV, reached at $r= 80$ kpc.
The ICM temperature drop, from the maximum value to the core value, is measured to
be $1.7 \pm 0.3$. Clearly, the observed drop depends also on the capability
of measuring the temperature in the very center of the cool core, which in turn
depends on the angular resolution and on the S/N. Therefore, it is dangerous to
use solely the measured temperature drop as an indication of the cool core strength.
To further investigate the temperature structure of WARP1415, we
produced a temperature map. We map a square region of 40'' by side
centered on the cluster, extracting circular regions spaced by 2''.
Each circular region has a radius ranging from 3'' to 10'' going from
the cluster center to the outer regions. Clearly, the spectra assigned
to each pixel are not independent to each other, so the temperature map
is actually a smoothed map, with a smoothing length increasing with
the distance form the cluster center. The temperature map of WARP1415
is shown in Figure \ref{tprofile}, where we masked out
the pixels where the 1 sigma error on the temperature is larger than
50\%. In addition to the cool-core, which appears smooth and round
within a radius of 3'' (the minimum smoothing length of the map) we
notice some anisotropy in the temperature profile, with a difference
of about -2 keV in one sector at a distance of about 80 kpc (the
distance where the temperature is maximum). We will discuss further
this feature in Section 6.
\subsection{Projected Iron abundance profile}
A prominent peak in the Iron distribution is always associated with
the ICM of local cool-core clusters.
The origin of this iron excess with respect to the almost constant
value measured in the outer regions is ascribed mostly to Type Ia
supernovae (e.g. De Grandi et al. \cite{degrandi04}). There is no consensus yet in the literature on the origin
of the iron peak and timescale of its buildup. While some studies of
local cool-cores favor long enrichment times ($>$5 Gyr), and describe
the metal excess as a long lived phenomenon (B\"ohringer et
al. \cite{boehringer}), the lack of high-$z$ data has prevented a more accurate
assessment of this important aspect.
In this section, we trace the spatial distribution of iron in the
cluster ICM out to $r$=400 kpc, as obtained by the spatially resolved,
combined spectral analysis. In Fig. \ref{tdeproj}, we present the ICM
Iron abundance profile in solar units, where the solar abundance is
set to the value of Asplund et al. (\cite{asplund}). We detect an unusually high
central Fe value in the ICM of WARPJ1415, $Z_{Fe,c}/Z_{\sun}=
3.60_{-0.85}^{+1.5}$. Even taking into account the associated large
error bar, such a high abundance level has only been reported in the
local cluster Centaurus (Graham et al. \cite{graham}). The implication of this
high Iron concentration and the associated Iron mass are discussed in
Section 6.5. We investigated also the Iron abundance map obtained
along with the temperature map, but we do not find any significant
anisotropy in the Iron abundance distribution.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[height=6.7cm,angle=0]{tmap.ps}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\caption{Temperature map obtained in a square
region 40$\arcsec \times$40$\arcsec$ centered on the cluster. The
colorbar indicates the temperature scale in keV. Pixels where the 1
sigma error is larger than 50\% are masked in black. See text for
details.}
\label{tprofile}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Other metals}
In addition to Iron, alpha elements (Si, Ni, S, Mg) produced by
core-collapse supernovae (SNII) contribute significantly to the
enrichment of the ICM (e.g. De Grandi \& Molendi \cite{degrandi09}). A spatially
resolved analysis of metals other than Iron is not feasible. Nevertheless,
we searched for emission line of other elements in the spectrum
extracted from the inner $32''$.
Metal lines were visually explored changing manually the abundance of each element.
A given element was then removed whenever its presence was irrelevant to the best fit spectrum.
Therefore, all metals were initially unconstrained, and progressively we froze
to 0.3 the metals which do not contribute significantly
to the folded spectrum. This procedure can be used to identify
possible low S/N emission lines, by setting the corresponding element to zero
the C-statistics increases by $\Delta C >3$. With this method, we confirmed the
detection of the elements Si, S and Ni at 2 $\sigma$ level. The
nominal best fit values are: $Z_{Si}=1.9 \pm 0.7 ~Z_\odot$;
$Z_{S}=1.3 \pm 0.7 ~Z_\odot$ and $Z_{Ni}=3.6 \pm 1.7 ~Z_\odot$.
This is the first detection of these elements in the
spectrum of a cluster at $z\simeq 1$, but the lack of spectral
resolution and S/N prevent us from computing a
meaningful $\alpha/Fe$ profile and to derive robust constraints on the
enrichment sources of the ICM.
\section{Deprojection and mass profile}
The next step in our analysis is to compute the deprojected temperature and metal
abundance profiles, and then to compute total and gas masses.
The direct deprojection of the observed profile with the {\tt projct}
model within XSPEC is not feasible due to the errors on the
temperature and the coarse binning. For the best exploitation of our
data we proceeded as follows. First we fitted the projected
temperature and Iron abundance profiles. For the temperature we use the
functional form of Vikhlinin et al. (\cite{vikhlinin06}):
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e.kt}
kT(r) & = & kT_0
\frac{(r/r_{cool})^{a_{cool}}+kT_{min}/kT_0}{(r/r_{cool})^{a_{cool}}+1}
\frac{(r/r_t)^{-a}}{(1+(r/r_t)^b)^{c/b}}\,\, ,
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent where we set $b=c/0.45$ (as suggested in Maughan et
al. (\cite{maughan07}) and therefore we are left with 7 free parameters.
This functional form is usually taken to represent the 3D temperature distribution, and projected to be fit to the observed projected temperature profile. Instead, we treat $r$ in Eq. 1 as a projected radius and fit the model to the projected temperature profile directly. The best fitting model is then deprojected to obtain the 3D temperature profile.
As for the Iron abundance, we adopt a double beta model (Cavaliere \& Fusco-Feminano \cite{cavaliere}):
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e.met}
Z/Z_\odot = Z_{in}/Z_\odot \frac{1}{(1+(r/r_1)^{2})^{\beta_1}} + Z_{out}/Z_\odot \frac{1}{(1+(r/r_2)^{2})^{\beta_2}} \,\, ,
\end{eqnarray}
\noindent which has 6 free parameters.
Therefore we can estimate the projected temperature and Fe abundance of WARPJ1415 at any given radius using equations 1 and 2 with the best-fit parameters plugged in. The next step is to deproject directly the analytical renditions of the temperature and abundance profile at the same time. Clearly, when deprojecting the best fit temperature and metallicity profiles, we want to preserve the full information coming from the surface brightness in order to directly obtain also the electron volume density $n_e$ as a function of the radius. We adopt a finer binning of the surface brightness profile, with the requirement of keeping the error on the normalization of each spectrum at the level of 5-10\%. This is obtained by selecting rings with a minimum S/N of 15. We used 20 rings with a width ranging from 2\arcsec to 15\arcsec for increasing radii. We assigned a temperature and Iron abundance to each ring according to equations 1 and 2, respectively, computed at the central radius of each ring. We normalized each spectrum in order to have the same predicted net count rate as observed in the real image in the 0.5-2 keV band. We then simulated a spectrum for each ring with a very high S/N. The deprojection was obtained with {\tt projct}, so that we include at the same time the effects of temperature and Fe abundance. In Figure 2, we show the projected data with the best-fit model (dashed line) and the corresponding deprojected profile (solid line).
The best fit normalization of the deprojected spectra is linked to the electron density
$n_{e}$ through the relation
\begin{equation}
Norm = {{10^{-14}}\over {4\pi (D_a (1+z))^{2}}} \int n_e n_H dV
\end{equation}
\noindent where $D_a$ is the angular diameter distance to the source (cm), and $n_e$
and $n_H$ (cm$^{-3}$) are the electron and hydrogen densities, respectively.
We fitted the deprojected $n_e$ profile with a double beta-model. The electron
density profile and the double beta model best fit are shown in Figure
\ref{neprofile}.
The deprojected profiles of the temperature and of the
electron density will be used to compute the total hydrostatic mass, while the
deprojected Iron abundance profile will be used to measure the Iron
mass (see Section 6.5). In this section we only compute the total
dynamical mass up to $\sim 400$ kpc.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\hspace{-1.cm}
\includegraphics[height=6.7cm,width=7.8cm,angle=0]{ne_bestfit_CL1415.ps}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.7cm}
\caption{Deprojected electron density profile (red points) and double beta model
best fit show in solid blue line. The two individual $\beta$ model components are shown in dashed lines. }
\label{neprofile}
\end{figure}
To measure the cluster mass we adopt the usual spherical symmetry and
hydrostatic equilibrium assumption, which leads to the simple equation (Sarazin \cite{sarazin}):
\begin{equation}
M(r) = - 4.0 \times 10^{13} M_\odot T\,{\rm(keV)} \, r\, {\rm(Mpc)} \left ( \frac{d log \,
n_{e} } {d log \, r} + \frac{d log \,T } {d log \, r} \right ) .
\end{equation}
\label{mass}
The logarithmic derivative of the gas density and temperature
profile were computed numerically from our best-fit
profiles. When we compute the total dynamical mass profile, we also
compute the average density contrast with respect to the critical
density at $z=1.03$, so that we can solve the equation
$M_{\Delta}(r_{\Delta})=\Delta4/3\pi r_{\Delta}^{3} \rho_{c}(z_{cl})$
to measure the radius where the average density level is $\Delta$.
Typically, mass measurements are reported for $\Delta=2500, 500, 200$. Our
results are summarized in Table \ref{masstab}. The total mass profile
is shown in Figure \ref{masstot} (solid line) with the corresponding 68\% uncertainty levels.
The 1 $\sigma$ confidence intervals on the mass are computed by assuming
that the relative errors on the deprojected temperature profile are equal to those on the
projected values. Similarly, the relative error on the electron density is equal to half the error
on the spectral normalization (therefore at the level of 5\% as described above). This is a consequence
of the fact that we do not deproject directly the observed profiles, but rather the analytical fitting formulae,
therefore we do not introduce additional noise. Clearly the procedure is correct as far as the fitting formulae accurately reproduce the projected profiles. This is a fair assumption, given the large number of free
parameters, which allow us to neglect systematic errors associated to the assumed analytical models.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Total cluster mass and gas fraction measured at three radii corresponding to the
overdensities of 2500, 500 and 200 with respect to the critical density at redshift $z=1.03$.}
\label{masstab}
\begin{tabular}{@{}ccccccccc@{}}\hline
$\Delta$ & $R_\Delta$ (kpc) & $M_{tot}/M_\odot$ & $ f_{gas}$ & \\ \hline
2500 & $317^{+22}_{-18}$ & $1.49_{-0.24}^{+0.33} \times 10^{14}$ & 0.084$\pm$0.016 \\
500 & $635_{-33}^{+41}$ & $2.40_{-0.36}^{+0.44} \times 10^{14}$ & 0.10$\pm$0.02 \\
200 & $926_{-47}^{+57}$ & $3.0_{-0.4}^{+0.6} \times 10^{14}$ & 0.20$\pm$0.03 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
We remark that we measured temperature and density up to 400 kpc, which
is the upper bound of the last bin with significant signal. Beyond
this radius, all the derived quantities are obtained by extrapolating
the best-fit profiles. As an example, if we assume $kT=const$ for
$R>400$ kpc, instead of extrapolating the analytical temperature
profiles, we measure $M_{200} = 3.7_{0.6}^{+0.7} \times 10^{14}
M_\odot$ (a value 25\% higher). The weak lensing analysis of
WARPSJ1415 has been recently published in Jee et al. (\cite{jee}) using
HST/ACS data, yielding a total mass $M_{tot}(r<1.09 $ Mpc$)=4.7^{+2.0}_{-1.4} \times
10^{14} M_\odot$, that is consistent with the X-ray hydrostatic
$M_{200}$ for $kT=const$ above 400 kpc, and marginally consistent with
that obtained with a straight extrapolation. We defer to a
forthcoming paper the detailed discussion of
the X-ray mass profile of WARPJ1415, as well as independent
measurements of the total mass at different radii from a dynamical
analysis of all cluster members and the modelling of a strong lensing
system.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\hspace{-1.5cm}
\includegraphics[height=6.7cm,width=7.8cm,angle=0]{mass_profile_CL1415.ps}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.7cm}
\caption{Total mass for WARPJ1415 from hydrodynamical equilibrium
(red continuous line) and gas mass (green dashed line). The two dashed lines
above and below the total mass profile show the 1 $\sigma$
confidence interval. The profiles are shown with thick lines up to 400 kpc.
Thin lines at $r>400$ kpc show the extrapolation beyond the X-ray detectable emission.
Dashed vertical lines
corresponds to $R_{2500}$, $R_{500}$ and $R_{200}$, from left to right. The red data point
refers to the mass derived with the global cluster temperature, whereas the blue point corresponds to
the weak lensing mass (Jee et al. \cite{jee}). }
\label{masstot}
\end{figure}
We also computed the total baryonic mass contributed by the ICM. The
mass in baryons is obtained by directly integrating the electron
density shown in Figure \ref{neprofile}, assuming the
$n_{H}$=$n_{e}$/1.2. The measured gas fraction at $r_{500}$ is
$0.10 \pm 0.02$ (see Table 1 for $f_{b}$ measured at different radii), typical of
other distant clusters (see e.g. Ettori et al. \cite{ettori}).
\section{Surface Brightness properties, cooling time and entropy}
The most immediate observational signature of the presence of a
cool-core is a central spike in the surface brightness profile of a
cluster. In this section, we use the cluster surface brightness
properties to derive several cool-core diagnostics.
\subsection{Surface Brightness profile}
We computed the azymuthally averaged surface brightness profile out to
$r$=1 Mpc using the vignetted corrected ACIS-S merged image.
The isothermal $\beta$-model proposed by Cavaliere \&
Fusco-Femiano (\cite{cavaliere}) is often used as a simple description
of the X-ray surface brightness profiles of galaxy clusters.
\begin{table*}
\caption{Single- and double-$\beta$ model fit parameters: (1) central SB in cts/s/arcmin$^2$; (2)
slope $\beta$1;
(3) core radius 1 in kpc; (4) reduced $\chi$2; (5) (6) and (7) correspond to the second model component:
central SB; slope $\beta$ 2 and core radius 2, respectively. Errors are not presented when the parameter value is
at the limit imposed by the fitting procedure.}
\label{table:2}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l | lllllll}
\hline
{\bf Fit} & {\bf S01 } & {\bf $\beta_{1}$} & {\bf $rc_{1}$} & {\bf $\chi$2} & {\bf S02} & {\bf $\beta_{2}$} & {\bf $rc_{\begin{small}\begin{footnotesize} \end{footnotesize} \end{small}2}$} \\
& (1) & (2) & (3) & (4) & (5) & (6) & (7) \\
\hline
1-$\beta$ & 0.135$\pm$0.007 & 0.51 & 50$\pm$2 & 12.27 & - & - & - \\
2-$\beta$ & 0.457$\pm$0.067 & 0.60$\pm$0.15 & 14$\pm$4 & 3.89 & 0.044$\pm$0.011 & 0.74$\pm$0.08 & 150$\pm$27 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm,angle=0]{cl1415_1bfit.ps}
\includegraphics[width=7.5cm,angle=0]{cl1415_2bfit.ps}
\end{center}
\caption{Radial surface brightness profile of WAPSJ1415 (black dots). (\textit{Left})
Single-beta model fit and (\textit{Right}) double-beta model fit in red solid line. The two
components of the double-$\beta$ model are shown in blue dotted lines.}
\label{sbfit}
\end{figure*}
\begin{equation}
S(r) = S_{0} (1+(r/r_{c})^2) ^{-3\beta+0.5} + C
\end{equation}
\label{sbeta}
\noindent where $S_{0}$, $r_{c}$, $\beta$ and $C$ are the central surface brightness,
core radius, slope and constant background, respectively. The fitting procedure is based on
a Levenberg-Marquardt least-squares minimization and constrains the parameter $\beta$
to the range 0.4$<$ $\beta$ $<$1.0.
Local cool-core clusters require a double $\beta$-model to capture the central emission peak.
For distant clusters however, the combination of their intrinsic small angular size
and X-ray data that usually provides only low photon statistics, make it difficult
if not impossible to distinguish between a single- or a two-component $\beta$-model.
We fitted the radial profile of WARPJ1415 using both the
single- and double-$\beta$ model approximations (see Fig.~\ref{sbfit}). Given the high-quality of our data,
we can measure a significant improvement in the fit using the double-beta model,
with respect to the single-beta model, not only qualitatively but also statistically - see Table 2
for a list of the fit parameters.
\subsection{Surface brightness concentration, $c_{SB}$}
In Santos et al. (\cite{joana08}), we defined the phenomenological parameter
$c_{SB}$ that quantifies the excess emission in a cluster core by measuring the
ratio of the surface brightness (SB) within a radius of 40 kpc with respect to the average SB
within a radius of 400 kpc: $c_{SB} =SB (r<40 kpc) / SB (r<400 kpc)$.
This simple parameter is particularly useful when dealing with low S/N data.
The inner aperture with a physical size of 80 kpc corresponds to the
typical size of cool-core clusters regardless of their redshift. We stress that we use
a physical radius instead of a scaled radius, since the cool-core phenomenon is non-gravitational
in nature, and therefore the self-similar scaling relations are not appropriate in this case.
In Santos et al. (\cite{joana10}), we measured
$c_{SB}$=0.144$\pm$0.016 using the 90 ksec ACIS-I observation. The new,
more accurate value measured in these deep observations,
$c_{SB}$=0.150$\pm$0.007, is consistent with the previous one.
\subsection{Core luminosity excess}
Studies of nearby galaxy clusters have estimated that the ICM core contributes to about
25\% of the total cluster luminosity (Peres et al. \cite{peres}, Best et al. \cite{best}).
The method used to compute this luminosity boost was to measure the ratio $L(r<r_{cool}) / L_{bol}$.
We argue that this is not the most efficient way to isolate the contribution of the cool-core to the
luminosity because a fraction of the flux in $L(r<r_{cool})$ comes from the bulk of the cluster.
To quantify the excess luminosity due to the cool-core, we simply
computed the ratio of the flux enclosed by each of the $\beta$-model
components (core and outer part) at $r$=40 kpc (see Table 1). This is
the radius used in $c_{SB}$ and is also very close to the crossing of
the two $\beta$-model components. Following this approach, we
estimate that the core contributes 4 times more flux relative to the
bulk of the cluster luminosity, at the cooling radius.
The cluster soft-band luminosity within $r$=400 kpc is equal to
(2.83$\pm 0.14)\times$10$^{44}$ erg~s$^{-1}$. We extrapolate this
observed luminosity to a radius of 1 Mpc using the single $\beta$
model, and obtain $L(r<1\,\rm{Mpc})$=4.0$\times$10$^{44}$ erg~s$^{-1}$
(note that 1 Mpc is about $R_{200}$ according to our Table 1).
An accurate assessment of the excess core-luminosity has implications for the
completeness of X-ray selected cluster samples. In principle, in a purely flux-limited
sample, cool-core clusters are preferentially selected with respect to non cool-core clusters with the
same mass, thanks to their higher $L_X$. A proper treatment of this effect will be
relevant to properly measure the evolution of cool-cores in future X-ray surveys
(see Santos et al. \cite{joanaproc}).
\subsection{Entropy}
Clusters are usually divided in cool-core and non cool-core on the
basis of the central value of their entropy and cooling time. However,
there are no physical reasons to expect the existence of two distinct
populations, in fact the data rather show a transition between these
two categories. The specific entropy, $K(r)=kTn_{e}^{-2/3}$, is a
widely used quantity to describe the thermodynamical history of the
ICM. Previous studies at low-redshift have shown that cool-core
clusters have a significantly lower central entropy ($K_{c}<30$ kev
cm$^{2}$) than non cool-core clusters (Cavagnolo et
al. \cite{cavagnolo}). Using the deprojected temperature and gas
profiles as described in Section 4, we obtain the entropy profile in
Fig.~\ref{entropy}.
In order to compare the central gas entropy of WARPJ1415
with the quoted values at low redshift, we have to keep in mind that,
since there is no defined radius to perform this measurement, the
local measurements are done in very small radii ($\le$ 1 kpc), whereas
our data do not allow us to go below $r$=8 kpc. Thus, the central entropy
measured in the innermost bin with $r$=8 kpc,
is $K_{c}$=9.9$\pm$2.0 keV cm$^{2}$, which immediately places
WARPJ1415 in the cool-core regime.
Note that the central entropy value obtained from the deprojected profiles refers
to a bin centered at 4 kpc, and therefore it is nominally computed at a scale
below
the actual resolution of our data. We also computed the central entropy at a radius $r=12$ kpc as in
the first spectroscopic bin, where we actually measured the temperature in the projected data
(see Fig.~\ref{tdeproj}, left panel). At $r=12$ kpc the projected temperature is $kT = 3.8 \pm 0.3$,
and this gives a value of $K_c(r=12 kpc)=20.9 \pm 2.7$ kev cm$^2$. This value represents
our conservative estimate of the central entropy and it is consistent with a linear relation
$K(r) \propto r$ for $r< 40$ kpc down to $r< 10$ kpc.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\hspace{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=8.cm,angle=0]{entropy_CL1415.ps}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.8cm}
\caption{Entropy profile of WARPJ1415 computed from the numerically deprojected
temperature and density profiles.}
\label{entropy}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Cooling time}
The ICM central cooling time is the quantity most often used to
characterize and quantify the cool-core strength of a cluster
(e.g. Hudson et al. \cite{hudson}). Without a heating source to
compensate radiative cooling, the ICM will radiate its thermal and
gravitational energy on a timescale $t_{cool} =p / [(\gamma -1) n_{e}
n_{H} \Lambda(T)] < 1$ Gyr (Fabian \& Nulsen \cite{fabian77}), where $p$ is the
gas pressure, $\Lambda(T)$ is the cooling function and $\gamma$ is the
ratio of specific heats of the gas. Adopting an isobaric cooling
model for the central gas, $t_{cool}$ can be computed as:
\begin{equation}
t_{cool}(r) = \frac{2.5n_{g}T}{n_{e}^{2} \Lambda(T,Z) }
\end{equation}
\label{tcool}
\noindent where $\Lambda(T,Z)$, $n_{g}$, $n_{e}$ and T are the cooling
function, gas number density, electron number density and temperature
respectively, with $n_{g}$=1.9$n_{e}$ (Peterson \& Fabian
\cite{peterson06}). Local cool-core clusters are defined by a central
cooling time much lower than the Hubble time (typically $t_{cool,c}
\le$1 Gyr).
An accurate measurement of the ICM cooling time profile of distant
galaxy clusters has been unattainable up to now, due to the use of a
single ICM temperature and the average electron density instead of the
resolved profiles. With the current data, we are able to trace the
precise cooling time profile of WARPJ1415, using the resolved
temperature, density and metal abundance profiles. The cooling
function $\Lambda(T,Z)$, was computed using the cooling tables from
Sutherland \& Dopita (\cite{sutherland}) that account for a varying
metallicity.
By proceeding similarly to the computation of the central entropy, we
obtain a central cooling time $t_{cool}$ ranging from 0.06$\pm$0.01
Gyr at $r$ = 8 kpc to 0.23 Gyr at $r$ = 12 kpc (the central bin
of our spectroscopic analysis). This accurate measurement is a factor
14 lower than the upper limit of $t_{cool}$($r<$20 kpc)=3.4 Gyr
obtained by Santos et al. (\cite{joana10}), using the archival data
and the global cluster properties. This result clearly demonstrates
that, unless deep, high-resolution data of high-$z$ clusters are
available, the central cooling time can only be taken as an upper
limit.
In Table 2, we summarize the X-ray cool-core properties of WARPJ1415
using the various cool-core diagnostics described above.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{X-ray cool-core estimators. The quoted temperature and metallicity values correspond to
the projected quantities, whereas the central cooling time and central entropy values are based on deprojected quantities.}
\label{table:3}
\begin{tabular}{@{}c|c@{}}\hline
{\bf \,\, Cool-core estimator} & \\ \hline
$T_{core} - T_{max} -T_{avg}$ & 4.6 $-$ 8.0 $-$ 5.7 [keV] \\
$Z_{Fe,c}/Z_\odot$ & 3.60$^{+1.50}_{-0.85}$ \\
$c_{SB}$ & 0.150$\pm$0.007 \\
t$_{cool,c}$ & 0.06$\pm$0.01 [Gyr] \\
K$_{c}$ & 9.9$\pm$2.0 [keV cm$^{2}$] \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Connection between ICM core properties and the BCG}
In this paper, we also explore the connection between the radio and
optical properties of the brightest cluster galaxy with the ICM cool
core properties. Brightest cluster galaxies hold a special place in
the history of galaxy formation and evolution. They are the most
massive galaxies in the Universe, and are thought to have developed
through mergers as expected in a hierarchical assembly model. They are
located at the bottom of the potential well of massive clusters and are
often coincident with the X-ray peak emission of the hot gas
permeating galaxy clusters. The role of the BCG in shaping the ICM properties in the
core as a function of cosmic epoch remains unclear, but it is expected to be an important
factor in the ICM evolution, playing an important role in the thermodynamical
equilibrium of the cool-core.
In the center of cool-core clusters, star formation arises as a result of the cooling
process of the ICM (Crawford et al. \cite{crawford}), with typical
star formation rates in their BCGs on the order of 1-10 $M_\odot$/yr
(O'Dea et al. \cite{odea}). Interestingly, this connection may not be
strictly localized in the cluster center, as indicated by McDonald et
al. (\cite{mcdonald}), who found a correspondence between the spatial
location of H$\alpha$ emission regions with the X-ray morphology
(un/disturbed) of the ICM core region in nearby systems.
The radio emission of the central galaxy is related to the accretion process
onto a supermassive black hole. The incidence rate of radio sources
in the center of cool-core clusters is at least 70\% (Best et
al. \cite{best06}, Mittal et al. \cite{mittal}; Dunn et
al. \cite{dunn08}), whereas fewer than 30\% of non-CCs host central
radio sources. Several studies have established a link between the
radio luminosity of these sources with the X-ray and optical
properties of their host clusters. In addition, other morphological
features such as radio lobes or jets are occasionally detected. At
redshift greater than 0.5, interactions between the central galaxy and
the ICM remain largely unexplored.
The BCG of WARPJ1415 is very large, luminous and unusually massive,
with a reported stellar mass of 2$\times$10$^{12}$ M$\sun$ (Fritz et
al. \cite{fritz}). The color image obtained with SUBARU-\textit{Suprime Cam} BRZ
(Fig.~\ref{subaru}) shows that the cluster central galaxy stands out as a large,
massive red galaxy, and we confirm that the BCG, the central radio
source and the peak of the X-ray emission, are spatially coincident
well within 1\arcsec.
In this section, we analyze the radio and optical properties of the central brightest galaxy, in order to
investigate the feedback mechanism between the BCG and the ICM.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=9.0cm,angle=0]{pic1.ps}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\caption{Subaru-Suprime BVR color image of WARPJ1415 covering an area with
2$\arcmin \times$2$\arcmin$ ($\sim\! 1\times 1$ Mpc), centered at RA=14:15:11, DEC=+36:12:03. North is up
and East is to the left. X-ray contours (with levels [3,5,10,20,30,50] $\sigma$ above the background
and smoothed with a gaussian kernel with FWHM=5\arcsec) are overlaid in green.
The 15$\arcsec \times$15$\arcsec$ inset shows the core with a zoom factor of 2.
}
\label{subaru}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=6.cm,angle=0]{panel1_1.ps}
\includegraphics[width=5.95cm,angle=0]{residual2.ps}
\includegraphics[width=5.98cm,angle=0]{panel3.ps}
\end{center}
\caption{(\textit{Left}) \textit{Chandra} full-band image with VLA radio
contours overlaid in green.
(\textit{Middle}) Residual \textit{Chandra} soft-band image after
subtraction of the best-fit single $\beta$-model. A lack of X-ray emission
is observed in sector A with respect to the average surface brightness.
This asymmetry is quantified by comparing the average emission in the circular
regions labeled 1 and 2 (see text).
(\textit{Right}) VLA image of the radio source coincident with the cluster core.
A pronounced extended feature with an extent of 80 kpc is seen in the NW direction.
All images have a size of 1$\arcmin \times$1$\arcmin$. The \textit{Chandra} images are shown in logarithmic scale with a Gaussian smoothing of 2$\arcsec$.}
\label{panels}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Central radio galaxy and extended structure}
WARPJ1415 was observed with the Very Large Array (VLA) of the National
Radio Astronomy Observatory in 2002 and 2003 in the A and B
configurations at 1.4 GHz (proposal code AP439). The combined radio map, with one hour
exposure, has a resolution of 2$\arcsec$ and a noise level of 0.016
mJy/beam. It shows a bright radio source coincident with the X-ray
centroid of the cluster and the BCG. Thanks to our high resolution the
radio source is resolved in a bright nuclear emission (3.59$\pm$0.02
mJy) and a fainter one-sided structure in PA $\sim$ 70$^\circ$ with an
extent of $\sim$ 10$\arcsec$, corresponding to a physical size of 80
kpc at the cluster redshift (see Fig.~\ref{panels}). The flux density of this
structure is (0.71$\pm$0.05) mJy and therefore the total flux density
of the source is 4.3 mJy. Using low resolution NVSS data we estimate a
total flux density of about 5 mJy, suggesting that in our high
resolution image all the radio source is visible.
The source radio power is in the range between Fanaroff-Riley FR I and
FR II radio galaxies, with a total radio power of 2.0$\times$10$^{25}$
W Hz$^{-1}$ ($\nu L_{\nu}$=2.8$\times$10$^{41}$ erg s$^{-1}$).
According to the low-redshift study of Sun et al. (\cite{sun}), all BCGs
with a radio AGN more luminous than 2$\times$10$^{23}$ W Hz$^{-1}$ at
1.4GHz are found to have X-ray cool-cores. We also searched for the
location of WARPJ1415 in the BCG radio power vs. $K_{c}$ correlation
for clusters with $z <$ 0.2 presented in Cavagnolo et
al. (\cite{cavagnolo}) (Figure 2 of that paper). We find that our
cluster falls in the area under the threshold value $K_{c}<$30 keV
cm$^{2}$, and with $\nu L_{\nu} >$10$^{40}$ erg s$^{-1}$, that
characterizes nearby cool-core clusters.
The extended, asymmetric radio structure could be interpreted as a
mildly relativistic one-sided jet. However this is unlikely, since in
relatively low-power radio galaxies jets are relativistic only on a
few kpc scale, therefore with a size of $\sim$ 80 kpc we should expect
to detect radio emission also on the other side of the core. No radio
lobe seems to be present since the total radio flux density at low
resolution is not too far from our high resolution result, and
furthermore the structure is resolved also transversally. We may
interpret this radio morphology as a tail-like structure due to a
strong interaction of extended lobes with the surrounding medium.
Assuming equipartition conditions, we can estimate that in the extended emitting region
($\sim$ 40 kpc) the magnetic field is $\sim$ 6 $\mu$Gauss and the
minimum non thermal energy is $\sim$ 3 $\times$ 10$^{-12}$ erg
cm$^{-3}$.
Deeper and higher angular resolution radio data are required to confirm the
morphology of the extended radio emission and to provide a direct evidence of a jet-ICM interaction.
With the present data, we can only report the tantalizing hint of the feedback mechanism in action in WARPJ1415. However, the high radio power of the central AGN, and the moderate residual star formation estimated in the BCG (see next section) add further evidence in favor of a scenario in which the energy released by the radio loud AGN activity is able to stop the central cooling flow.
\subsection{X-ray cavitives?}
X-ray cavities originated by outflows of a central radio source are
occasionally detected in the ICM of local clusters (e.g. Birzan et
al. \cite{birzan04}, Fabian et al. \cite{fabian06}). The detection of
such bubbles is challenging even at low redshift due to their low
surface brightness contrast and small sizes that range from $<$1 kpc
to $\sim$40 kpc (larger cavities are very rare). Detection rates are
of the order of 20-25\% in the \textit{Chandra} archive (Rafferty et
al. 2008) and in the flux-limited B55 cluster sample (Dunn et
al. \cite{dunn05}). Nearby strong cool-core clusters have a much
higher incidence rate, reaching 70\%.
Even though we have a deep, high-resolution observation, distant
clusters have a small angular size which makes the detection of X-ray
cavities very difficult. We searched for X-ray bubbles and/or surface
brightness asymmetries that could be associated with the extended
radio emission. In order to do this we explored several techniques to
improve the image contrast, namely, by subtracting both single and
double $\beta$-models to the original \textit{Chandra} soft-band
image, and by creating an unsharp-masked image. In the residual
images it was difficult to see a convincing indication of a cavity.
However, there is a clear asymmetry in the residual image obtained by
subtracting the single-$\beta$ model (see Sect. 5.1) to the X-ray
data, with a significant lack of X-ray emission in the upper half of
the SB map (labeled sector A in Fig.~\ref{panels}), in the direction of the
extended radio emission (green contours).
We quantified this asymmetry by measuring the number of net photons in two circular
regions with a radius equal to 10\arcsec in the exposure-corrected \textit{Chandra} image
(see circle 1 and 2 in the middle panel of Figure 9). The two numbers should be consistent with each
other if no asymmetry is present. Instead, we measure $192\pm 14$ photons in circle 2 and
$153 \pm 12$ photons in circle 1, showing that region 1 (the one in the direction of the jet) is
25\% less luminous with respect to region 2 at a 2-$\sigma$ confidence level.
\subsection{Equivalent width of the [OII] emission line}
Optical emission lines (H$\alpha$ at 6563 \AA) are a relatively
dust-independent measure of recent star formation. In alternative, the
[OII] ($\lambda$ 3727) emission line is a good proxy for H$\alpha$.
Brightest cluster galaxies are usually red, early-type galaxies,
undergoing passive evolution. Hence, star-formation is seldom found
in these central, massive, cluster galaxies. In spite of this, high
star formation rates have been found in BCGs of local clusters with
central cooling times shorter than $\sim$ 0.5 Gyr (Rafferty et
al. \cite{rafferty08}; Cavagnolo et al. \cite{cavagnolo}), most likely
caused by a residual cooling flow.
The brightest central galaxy of WARPJ1415 was observed with the Gemini
Multi-Object Spectrograph (GMOS-N, Hook et al. \cite{hook}) in 2003
(PI Ebeling). We reduced the archival data with IRAF procedures and
obtained the final spectrum, with a scale of 1\AA/per pixel and a resolution $R \approx$ 1000, as the
result of the median stacking of 10 spectra with a total exposure time
of 5.3 h and a S/N$\sim$5. We expect no major slit loss since the
average seeing is 0.7$\arcsec$ and the width of the slit is
1$\arcsec$.
A significant, broad [OII] emission line is found at the cluster
redshift. The broadening of optical emission lines originated by warm
ionized gas has been often observed in the BCGs of cool-core clusters and is
likely a Doppler effect caused by motions in the center of the galaxy
(Heckman et al. \cite{heckman}).
We measured the equivalent width (EW) of the [OII] line defined by
\begin{equation}
EW= \int \frac {F_{c}-F_{\lambda}} { F_{c}} d\lambda
\end{equation}
\noindent where $F_{c}$ is the continuum flux and $F_{\lambda}$ is the
flux of the emission line. The rest-frame EW of the [OII] line in the
central galaxy of WARP1415 is -25$\pm$3 \AA.
Our result goes against the interpretation by Samuele et
al. (\cite{samuele}) of a strong decrease of star formation activity
with redshift, based on the EW of the [OII] line in 77 BCGs selected
from the 160 SD survey. In that work, BCGs with an EW stronger than
-15 \AA~are not present. As mentioned in Santos et
al. (\cite{joana10}), we suggest that cool-core clusters might be
under represented in the 400 SD sample (and hence its subset, the
160 SD sample), which might also explain the lack of strong [OII]
lines in the clusters' BCGs.
\subsection{Star-formation rate of the BCG}
We estimate the intrinsic [OII] line luminosity assuming
\textit{E(B-V)}=0.3, using the following relation from Kewley et
al. (\cite{kewley}):
\begin{equation}
L\rm{[OII]_{i}} (erg\, s^{-1}) = L [OII]_{o} \times10^{0.572}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $L$[OII]$_{o}$ is the observed [OII] luminosity.
The [OII] line falls in optical i-band at the cluster redshift, therefore we used the high-resolution \textit{HST/ACS}
F775W ($i'$-band) archival observations to determine the luminosity of the [OII] line. We scaled the
observed spectrum to the F775W magnitude of the BCG measured within a radius of 0.75$\arcsec$,
in the interval encompassed by the F775W filter.
To derive the galaxy star formation rate, we applied the modified Kennicutt law
corrected for reddening as presented in Kewley et al. (\cite{kewley}), considering
a mass range of 0.1-100 $M_\odot$ for a Salpeter (Salpeter \cite{salpeter}) initial mass function:
\begin{equation}
{\rm SFR \, [OII]}\, (M_\odot \, yr^{-1}) = (6.58\pm1.65)\times10^{-42} L\rm{[OII]}.
\end{equation}
\noindent Depending on the assumptions made on the amount of dust, we
provide a range of SFR. In a dust-free scenario, we estimate SFR=2.2
$M_\odot/yr$, instead, if we assume a reddening correction of
\textit{E(B-V)}=0.3, a value typically used in star-forming galaxies
(e.g. Lemaux et al. \cite{lemaux}), we obtain SFR=8.3 $M_\odot \,
yr^{-1}$.
Alternatively, the [OII] line emission in red-sequence galaxies of high-redshift
clusters ($z\sim$0.9) may be caused by an AGN (Lemaux et
al. \cite{lemaux}). Although we cannot entirely rule out emission from
an AGN contributing to the estimated star formation rate in WARPJ1415,
the fact that we do not detect an X-ray point source coincident with
the BCG supports the assumption that the [OII] emission can be entirely
ascribed to star formation processes associated to the residual cooling flow in the core.
In a forthcoming paper, we will further explore
the properties of the BCG and the cluster galaxy population, using a
rich optical-IR dataset, including the photometry used here from
HST/ACS, SUBARU/\textit{Suprime} in addition to \textit{Spitzer}-IRAC.
The use of infrared data will allows us to firmly disentangle a
possible AGN contamination to the SF rate diagnostics.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\hspace{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=7.8cm,angle=0]{spectrum3.ps}
\end{center}
\caption{Observed optical GMOS spectrum of the BCG of WARPJ1415 showing a prominent,
broad [OII] emission line. }
\label{lowz}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Fe excess and the ICM metal enrichment process}
The interplay between the BCGs and their host clusters were first
studied by Edge \& Stewart (\cite{edge}). They found a correlation between
the optical luminosity of the BCG with the X-ray luminosity and hot
gas temperature of its host cluster. This work was expanded by De
Grandi et al. (\cite{degrandi04}), where the excess iron mass in the
core region of the ICM has been shown to correlate with the optical
and NIR luminosity of the BCG, suggesting a co-evolution between the
stellar content of the galaxy and the ICM metal abundance.
We measured a total Fe mass $M_{Fe} = 6.2^{+2.5}_{?1.9}\times 10^{9} M_\odot$
(within $R_{200}$) using the best-fit abundance profile (see Section 4). For the purpose
of our study, it is more interesting to measure the Fe mass excess, M$_{Fe}^{exc}$,
following the definition of De Grandi et al. (\cite{degrandi04}). This is simply the residual iron mass
within 200 kpc, obtained by subtracting the almost constant abundance value measured at
$R > 200$ kpc ($0.25 Z_\odot$ in units of Asplund et al. \cite{asplund}). We measured
M$_{Fe}^{exc}$=1.8$_{-0.5}^{+0.7} \times 10^{9 }M_\odot$ which corresponds to about 30\% of
the total Fe mass. This number is larger than the average value of 10\% found in nearby
cool-core clusters studied in De Grandi et al. (\cite{degrandi04}), but the difference is not significant due
to the large scatter in the observed local values. In fact, we find that our cluster lies in good
agreement with the correlation between the iron mass excess measured in local cool-cores and
their temperature.
To probe the connection between the optical properties of the central galaxy and the metal enrichment of the ICM,
De Grandi et al. (\cite{degrandi04}) found a correlation between the absolute optical magnitude of their local
BCGs computed with the Rc-band
with the excess iron mass.
Assuming that the iron excess is originated entirely by the BCG, this relation may imply that the efficiency
of the metal transport mechanisms from the galaxy to the ICM may be approximately the same in all clusters.
In order to check whether WARPJ1415 is consistent with this correlation found in local cool-cores, we measured the
aperture magnitude of the BCG
using the \textit{Suprime} Rc-band.
The k-correction was computed with a SWIRE elliptical template of 5 Gyr, generated with the GRASIL code
(Silva et al. \cite{silva}).
We obtain an absolute magnitude of -23.8 mag, therefore WARPJ1415 falls in the expected
$M_{optical} - M_{Fe}^{exc}$ relation for local cool-core clusters (see Fig. 10 of De Grandi et al. \cite{degrandi04}).
In the assumption that the excess iron mass is entirely due to Type Ia SNe and stellar mass loss in the BCG,
we can immediately place an upper limit to the time-scale needed to build up the iron peak.
We can safely assume that the bulk of the stars in the BCG formed at about $z\gtrsim$2 (Renzini \cite{renzini06}).
We also consider $z$ = 3 as upper limit to the epoch when most of the stars in BCG have formed, as indicated by
the observation of major star-formation episodes in massive spheroids at $z \ge$ 2 (Daddi et al. \cite{daddi}) or stellar
population modeling of high-z BCGs (e.g. Rosati et al. \cite{rosati09}).
This corresponds to a lookback time of 10.3 Gyr (11.5 Gyr at $z$=3) in the adopted cosmology.
Since WARPJ1415 lies at a lookback time of nearly 7.9 Gyr, the build up of its metal peak must have
happened on a timescale of $\sim$2.4 Gyr with an upper limit of 3.6 Gyr. Our results point towards
times scales shorter than previously claimed ($>$5 Gyr see B\"ohringer et al. \cite{boehringer}) to develop a supra-solar
iron abundance peak. This would imply a SNe Ia rate larger than expected at $z>1$ in the BCG, an
evidence which should be compared with the recent first estimate of Type Ia SN rate in high-z clusters
(Barbary et al. \cite{barbary}).
In a forthcoming paper (Tozzi et al. in prep.) we will investigate the far reaching consequences these data
have on chemical enrichment models,
specifically how one can constrain the time scale of the iron production rate through SNe Ia,
and the relative contributions of SNe Ia, stellar mass loss and SNII.
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper we presented a unique \textit{Chandra} observation of a
distant galaxy cluster. These data enabled a spatially resolved
analysis of the ICM, with the main goal of studying the properties of
the cluster cool-core, and trace a connection with the central galaxy,
using optical and radio data. We measured the following X-ray
properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item a significant temperature decrease towards the center:
$T_{c}$=4.6$\pm$0.4 keV, is 2.2 keV lower than the global
temperature, $T$=6.8 keV and 3.4 keV lower than the maximum
temperature at $r$=90 kpc, $T$=8.0 keV;
\item a surprisingly pronounced metallicity peak, $Z_{Fe,c}$=
3.60$^{+1.50}_{-0.85} Z_\odot$ with a corresponding excess iron mass
M$_{Fe}^{exc}$=1.8$_{-0.5}^{+0.7} \times 10^9 M_\odot$;
\item a central surface brightness excess modeled by a double-$\beta$ model
and quantified by $c_{SB}=0.150\pm 0.007$. The contribution of the cool-core
to the X-ray luminosity within $r=40$ kpc is 4 times the value obtained by
extrapolating the surface brightness profile from outside the cool-core towards the center;
\item the central cooling time, $t_{cool,c}$=0.06 (0.23) Gyr and the
central entropy, $K_{c}$=9.9 (20.9) keV cm$^{2}$ at $r=8$ (12) kpc
(the values in parentheses correspond to a more conservative
estimate);
\item using the measured temperature and density profiles, the cluster
total X-ray mass, under the assumption of hydrostatic equilibrium, is
$M_{200}$=3.0$_{-0.4}^{+0.6}\times$10$^{14}$M$_\odot$.
\end{itemize}
Using VLA high-resolution data we detected a source coincident with
the BCG with a radio luminosity $L_{1.4 GHz}$=2.0$\times$10$^{25}$ W
Hz$^{-1}$. A faint, one-sided structure with an extent of 80 kpc is
seen in the north-west direction, where a significant lack of X-ray
emission was found. Furthermore, the analysis of optical spectroscopy
of the central galaxy shows a broad [OII] emission line, with a
moderate to strong equivalent width of -25 \AA, corresponding to an associated star
formation rate in the range [2.3-8.3] $M_\odot/yr$.
We were also able to trace a connection between the radio and optical
properties of the central galaxy with the X-ray cool-core.
By comparing the correlations among the radio luminosity, SFR and $K_{c}$
measured with low-redshift clusters with our results, we confirm the same
feedback mechanism at work in the core of WARPJ1415.
We were also able to investigate the connection between the radio and the optical properties
of the central galaxy with those of the ICM properties in the core. In particular, the ratio
between radio luminosity, $K_{c}$ magnitude and the estimated SFR in the BCG of
WARPJ1415 is consistent with what is found in low-redshift clusters. These findings
suggest that the feedback mechanism at work in the core of WARPJ1415 is of the same
kind and intensity of that observed in local clusters.
The prominent Fe peak
indicates that the metal enrichment mechanisms by type Ia supernovae (SN Ia)
and star formation in the BCG happened on a short timescale (given the
lookback time of 7.8 Gyr), and/or that the transport processes that
drive away the metals to the outskirts (e.g. galactic winds) were not
efficient to smear out the Fe excess.
The analysis of the \textit{Chandra} data shows that WARPJ1415 at
$z$=1 has all the classical features that characterize nearby
cool-core clusters. These observations enabled the most detailed
analysis of the ICM of a $z \ge$1 cluster and our results highlight the
importance of deep, high-resolution data to adequately characterize
distant clusters. We were able to obtain a noticeable improvement on
the previous X-ray characterization and our results set strong
constraints on cluster evolution models.
Our results are a first step towards understanding a possible
cosmological evolution of the central feedback in galaxy clusters, and
refining AGN feedback prescriptions in galaxy evolution models at
higher redshifts. To this aim, clearly a sizable representative sample
of distant clusters with similar data quality, i.e. S/N
and angular resolution, is needed. This is a task which only
\textit{Chandra} can currently achieve, albeit with a substantial
investment of time, whereas it is within comfortable reach of
next generation wide field X-ray telescopes (e.g., the Wide Field
X-ray Telescope, Giacconi et al. \cite{giacconi}).
In Santos et al. (\cite{joanaproc}), we studied how the measure of the parameter $c_{SB}$ varies
with redshift and angular resolution using simulated clusters. Based on this study we predict that we will
be able to properly evaluate $c_{SB}$ for WARPJ1415 with an angular resolution of 5\arcsec (Half Energy Width)
or better. We conclude that only a combination of a large effective area and a large field of view, when
coupled with a constant angular resolution of the order of 5\arcsec, can provide a significant breakthrough on the
study of cool-core clusters over a wide redshift range up to $z$=1.5, both in terms of statistics and
data quality. With current X-ray facilities, we expect that only few cases can be studied with an accuracy
comparable to that of WARPJ1415.
\begin{acknowledgements}
We thank Italo Balestra for reducing the XMM-Newton data of WARPJ1415,
and Sabrina De Grandi for useful comments on the metal enrichment of the ICM.
We also thank the Chandra team for their assistance.
This work was carried out with Chandra Observation Award Number 12800510 in GO 12.
We acknowledge support under grants ASI-INAF I/088/06/0 e ASI-INAF I/009/10/0.
PT acknowledges support under the grant INFN PD51.
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{aa}
|
\section{Introduction}
Semileptonic decays of $D$-mesons contain rich physics.
Lattice calculations of the form factors for these decays
are important for the search for hints of new physics through
the determination of CKM matrix elements.
These form factors have been well-studied on the lattice.
Previously, some of us tested a stochastic method to measure 3-point
functions needed to calculate the semileptonic decay
form factor \cite{Evans:2010tg}.
The advantage of stochastic methods is that
we have access to a greater range of momenta at fixed cost.
This enables us to extract the form factor more reliably from
results for the three point functions at different momentum transfers.
In particular, the $D_s$ meson is interesting for flavor physics.
Its major semi-leptonic decay is to $\eta$ and $\eta'$, which has
a contribution from a disconnected loop diagram (Fig.~\ref{fig:diagrams}).
The loop runs over three light
flavors so the effect is enhanced by a factor three, and thus may be large.
The purpose of this work is to test the feasibility of measuring
the disconnected diagram, and to quantify its contribution
to the form factor.
We extract the scalar form factor $f_0$ from the relation~\cite{Na:2009au}:
\begin{equation}
f_0(q^2)
=\frac{m_c - m_l}{m_{D_s}^2 - m_\eta^2}\langle \eta |S| D_s \rangle,
\label{eq:f0}
\end{equation}
where $S= \bar{l}c $ is a scalar current made from charm and light quarks.
$m_i$ are the masses of the quarks and mesons.
The matrix element can be extracted from
the following ratio of 3-point over 2-point
functions:
\begin{equation}
\langle \eta(\V{k},t_i) |S(\V{q},t)| D_s(\V{p},t_f) \rangle
= Z_\eta Z_{D_s} \frac{C_3(t_f-t_i,t-t_i; \V{p},\V{q})}
{ C_2^{\eta}(t-t_i;\V{k}) C_2^{D_s}(t_f-t;\V{p})}
= Z_\eta Z_{D_s} R(\V{k},\V{q},\V{p},t-t_i,t_f-t_i),
\label{eq:matrixelement}
\end{equation}
and similarly for $\eta'$.
For large $t_f-t_i$ and $t-t_i$ this ratio should approach a constant.
$Z_{\eta}$ and $Z_{D_s}$ are the overlap factors between the meson state and the
interpolating operator,
which can be extracted from the two point functions
$C_2^{\eta}(t-t_i;\V{k})$ and $C_2^{D_s}(t_f-t;\V{p})$, respectively.
The two point functions for $\eta$ and $\eta'$ also have a disconnected part,
however, at $m_{\rm PS} \simeq 445\ {\rm MeV}$
we expect its contribution to the mass to be small and we neglect
it in this first exploratory study.
We use QCDSF $24^3 \times 48$ $n_f=2+1$ configurations \cite{Bietenholz:2011qq}.
So far we only use the ${\rm SU}(3)$ symmetric set
($\kappa_l=\kappa_s=0.1209$) with lattice spacing $a\simeq0.08 {\ \rm fm}$.
This was generated using the tree-level Symanzik-improved gluonic
action and non-perturbatively improved Wilson fermions with stout links in the
derivative terms (SLiNC action).
We use the same relativistic quark action for the (quenched) charm quark
with $\kappa_{\rm charm}=0.11$. Note that since we use the flavor ${\rm SU}(3)$
symmetric configurations, the disconnected contributions in the
$D_s \to \eta$ 3-point function cancel, when we identify $\eta=\eta_8$.
The Chroma software package~\cite{Edwards:2004sx} is used for some of
the analysis.
\begin{figure}[bp]
\vspace*{-0.5em}
\hfil\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{diagram.eps}
\hfil\hfil\includegraphics[width=0.3\linewidth]{diagram-disconnected.eps}\\[-2.5em]
\caption{Connected (left) and disconnected (right) diagrams which
contribute to $C_3(t_f,t;\V{p},\V{q})$. We use a stochastic method to
estimate the all-to-all propagators, denoted by blue lines. }
\label{fig:diagrams}
\end{figure}
\section{Noise Reduction techniques}
In order to calculate the disconnected loop, all-to-all propagators
are required. These are estimated using stochastic methods,
which involve performing $N$ inversions of the light quark
Dirac operator for each configuration; $N$ should be large enough
to give sufficiently small stochastic errors relative to the gauge noise.
For some quantities the stochastic noise dominates the overall
uncertainty and it is important to use
efficient noise reduction techniques.
We measure the disconnected ``loop''
\begin{align*}
C_1(t;\V{p})
&=\sum_{\V{x},\V{x}',\V{x}''}e^{i\V{p}\cdot\V{x}}
\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits \left[\gamma_5 \phi(\V{x},\V{x}') { M^{-1}(\V{x}',t;\V{x}'',t)}
{\phi(\V{x}'',\V{x})} \right],
\end{align*}
where $M$ is the Dirac operator for a light quark and
$\phi$ is a smearing function. The stochastic estimation of the all-to-all
propagator $M^{-1}(\V{x}',t;\V{x}'',t)$ involves
the following approximation:
\begin{equation}
M^{-1}
=\frac{1}{N}\sum_{i=1}^N |s_i\rangle\langle \eta_i|
+\mathcal{O}\left(\frac{1}{\sqrt{N}} \right),
\end{equation}
where $|\eta_i\rangle$ is a random noise vector and
$|s_i\rangle = M^{-1} |\eta_i\rangle$.
We use $\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}( \mathbb{Z}_2 + i \mathbb{Z}_2$)
complex random numbers for the noise vector.
For each $i$ we need to smear both $|\eta_i\rangle$ and $|s_i\rangle$
($|\eta_i\rangle$ must be
smeared \emph{after} solving for $|s_i\rangle$)
so we need $2N$ applications of the smearing operator.
This significantly increases the computer time needed to calculate the
disconnected loop.
Time dilution (partitioning) \cite{Bernardson:1993yg} is implemented:
the noise vector is only non-zero on one or two time slices.
We test the following three noise reduction techniques.
\begin{description}
\item[Spin dilution/partitioning]
This uses projected noise vectors on a single spinor component
and sums over the projections afterwards \cite{Bernardson:1993yg}:
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{N}\sum_{a=1}^4\sum_{i=1}^N
|s_i^{(a)}\rangle \langle \eta_i^{(a)}|,
\end{equation}
where $|\eta_i^{(a)}\rangle = P^{(a)}|\eta_i\rangle$
is the projected noise vector.
It requires $4N$ inversions
but for some quantities
the stochastic error is reduced by a factor greater than $2$.
In addition, we can reduce
the cost of smearing because the spin projection $P^{(a)}$
commutes with the smearing of our choice.
A naive scaling gives $8N$ smearing
operations, but we only need $5N$ applications:
$4N$ for $|s_i^{(a)}\rangle$
and $N$ for $|\eta_i\rangle$.
\item[Hopping Parameter Acceleration (HPA)]\cite{Thron:1997iy}
This is based on the following identity
\begin{equation}
(\kappa D)^n M^{-1}
= M^{-1} -\kappa D - (\kappa D)^2 - \cdots - (\kappa D)^{n-1},
\label{eq:hpa}
\end{equation}
where $\kappa D$ is the hopping part of the Dirac operator.
Note that the derivative operator satisfies
$\mathop{\rm tr}\nolimits[ \gamma_5 \kappa D] = 0$ due to the spinor
structure so that this term only contributes to the noise.
This means that
$(\kappa D)^2 M^{-1}$ represents an improved estimate of
$M^{-1}$ (we call it $n=2$ HPA).
As long as the smearing is diagonal in spinor space, this is
also true for the smeared all-to-all propagator.
\item[Truncated Solver Method (TSM)]
For some quantities the ultra violet modes dominate.
In these cases, using a small number of CG iterations in the
solver for the solution vector $|s_i\rangle$ provides a good
approximation, for example, to the disconnected loop
\cite{Collins:2007mh,Bali:2009hu}.
To arrive at an unbiased estimate, a correction term needs
to be added to the truncated part:
\begin{equation}
M^{-1} =
\frac{1}{N_1}\sum_{i=1}^{N_1}
|s_{\rm trunc,}{}_i \rangle\langle \eta_i|
+ \frac{1}{N_2} \sum_{j=N_1+1}^{N_1+N_2}
|s_{\rm bias,}{}_j \rangle
\langle\eta_j|.
\label{eq:tsm}
\end{equation}
The first term uses
the truncated solution $|s_{\rm trunc,}{}_i \rangle$,
which is cheap to calculate
and typically causes the main part of
the stochastic error.
The second term contains
$|s_{\rm bias,}{}_j \rangle
= |s_{\rm conv,}{}_j \rangle -|s_{\rm trunc,}{}_j \rangle$,
where $|s_{\rm conv,}{}_j \rangle$ is a converged solution.
$|s_{\rm conv,}{}_j \rangle$ is expensive,
and only accounts for a small part of the stochastic error
if $|s_{\rm bias,}{}_j\rangle $ does not contribute
significantly to the observable.
Therefore, by tuning parameters
--- $n$: number of CG-iterations for the truncated part,
$N_1$: number of stochastic noises for the truncated part,
$N_2$: number of stochastic noises for the bias part ---
we can reduce the total calculation cost.
We use a CG solver for the truncated solutions and a BiCGstab
solver for the converged solutions.
\end{description}
\section{Comparisons}
We investigate the noise reduction techniques using one configuration.
We use Wuppertal smearing \cite{Gusken:1989ad} for the quarks,
with parameters which are
tuned to minimize the contributions from the excited states to the
effective mass.
In Figs.~\ref{fig:err-p000} and \ref{fig:err-p100}
we plot the stochastic errors for
various combinations of the noise reduction techniques.
In each case, the computational cost is fixed.
The horizontal axes correspond to $n$, the number of iterations of
the solver in the TSM.
The data at $n=-100$ indicate the results without the TSM.
In particular, the red plus symbols (``+'') show the results
without any noise reduction techniques.
For a fixed $n$, we have optimized $N_1$ and $N_2$ to give
the smallest stochastic error
under the cost condition
\begin{equation}
N_1 ( n \tau_{\rm CG} + \tau_{\rm smear})
+ N_2( n \tau_{\rm CG} + n_{\rm conv} \tau_{\rm BiCGstab} + \tau_{\rm smear})
= \text{constant},
\end{equation}
assuming the square of error, $\sigma_{\rm stoch.}^2$, to scale according to
\begin{equation}
\sigma^2_{\rm stoch.} = \frac{f_1}{N_1} + \frac{f_2}{N_2},
\end{equation}
where $f_1$ and $f_2$ are the variances of the first and second terms in
eq.~(\ref{eq:tsm}), respectively.
$n_{\rm conv}$ is the number of iterations
needed to obtain the converged solution. $\tau_{\rm CG},\
\tau_{\rm BiCGStab}$ and $\tau_{\rm smear}$ represent
the computer time needed for 1 CG iteration, 1 BiCGstab iteration,
and smearing, respectively.
The optimal ratios of $N_1/N_2$ are around $1$ ($10$),
with (without) smearing.
Although small differences between the results
are not significant due to the uncertainty on the stochastic errors,
in all cases spin dilution together with HPA (purple squares),
gives the minimum error when combined with TSM.
Therefore we use this combination in the following analysis.
The gain factor,
\begin{equation}
g=
\frac{\sigma^2(\text{without noise reduction})}
{ \sigma^2(\text{with noise reduction})},
\end{equation}
strongly depends on the smearing.
Without smearing (left panels),
we obtain maximum gain factors of 16 -- 25,
which translates into a reduction of the computational cost
of the same magnitude.
With smearing, it is only about a factor 2.
This is because the contribution to the error from the bias part (i.e.,
$f_2$) is larger than or of the same magnitude as the truncated part
($f_1$).
\begin{figure}
\vspace*{-0.5em}
\hfil
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{opterr_g15p000smear0.eps}
\hfil
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{opterr_g15p000smear130.eps}
\vspace{-0.5em}
\caption{Estimated stochastic errors at fixed cost for $\V{p}=(0,0,0)$.
The horizontal axes are $n$ for the TSM. Data at $n=-100$ are without
TSM.
Left panel: without smearing.
Right panel: with smearing.}
\label{fig:err-p000}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\vspace{-0.5em}
\hfil
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{opterr_g15p100smear0.eps}
\hfil
\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{opterr_g15p100smear130.eps}
\vspace{-0.5em}
\caption{The same as Fig.~\protect\ref{fig:err-p000}
but for $\V{p}=(1,0,0)$.}
\label{fig:err-p100}
\end{figure}
\section{Results}
Having optimized the noise reduction,
we can now measure the disconnected contribution to the
form factor. For the TSM, we truncate after $n=20$ CG iterations
and the numbers of noise vectors are $N_1=10$ and $N_2=20$.
A total of $939$ configurations were used in the analysis.
Following our previous study \cite{Evans:2010tg},
we use stochastic techniques for the connected contribution as well.
The noise vectors are placed at the sink of the
$D_s$ meson (denoted by a red circle in Fig.~\ref{fig:diagrams}).
For each configuration,
$24\times 4$ spin diluted noise vectors were computed for the
charm quark.
In terms of momenta, $57$ different combinations of $\V{p}$ for the
$D_s$ meson were calculated.
Note that a similar calculation with the sequential method would require
$57\times 12$ inversions.
In order to extract the matrix elements in eq.~(\ref{eq:matrixelement}),
we fixed the time separation between the $\eta$ source
and the $D_s$ sink separately for the connected ($t_f=24$, $t_i=0$)
and the disconnected ($t_f=24$, $t_i=16$) matrix elements.
We combine the two contributions afterwards.
For the connected part, taking the maximum separation $t_f-t_i=T/2=24$
enables us to average over the forward and backward propagations.
For the disconnected part,
in order to average the forward and backward propagations,
the noise vector has a non-zero value at two time-slices separated by
$16$ time-slices ($t_f \pm 8$).
The usage of different $t_f-t_i$ for the connected and disconnected 3-point
functions is allowed because we have assumed
$m_\eta=m_{\eta'}$ (remember that $m_u=m_d=m_s$).
Fig.~\ref{fig:plateau} shows
the ratio of the correlation functions,
which corresponds to ${f_0(q^2)}/{Z_\eta Z_{D_s}}$.
The disconnected
part is multiplied by $3$ because of the $3$ light flavors.
The errors for the disconnected contribution
are small enough to obtain signals, significantly different from zero.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:formfactor} we show the form factors for
the octet ($\eta_8$) and singlet ($\eta_1$) $\eta$s:
\begin{align}
|\eta_8 \rangle
&=\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}
(|\bar{u}u\rangle + |\bar{d}d\rangle - 2|\bar{s}s\rangle)
&&\text{connected only,} \\
|\eta_1 \rangle
&=\frac{1}{\sqrt{3}}
(|\bar{u}u\rangle + |\bar{d}d\rangle + |\bar{s}s\rangle)
&& \text{connected${}-3\times\;$disconnected.}
\end{align}
Preliminary fits to $f_0(q^2)$ of the form $f_0(q^2)=\frac{f_0(0)}{1-b q^2}$
give $f_0(0) = 0.75(3)$ and $f_0(0) = 0.52(5)$, for $D_s \to \eta_8$
and $D_s \to \eta_1$, respectively.
Also included in Fig.~\ref{fig:formfactor} is a value from light cone
QCD sum rules
for the decay into $\eta$ \cite{Azizi:2010zj}, $f_0(0)=0.45(14)$.
Due to ${\rm SU}(3)$ flavor symmetry
the $D_s\to \eta_8$ form factor also represents
the form factor of $D\to l\nu \pi$ and $D\to l\nu K$.
Note that $f_0(0)$ for $\eta_1$ is smaller than that for $\eta_8$.
This is consistent with the form factors for
$B\to \eta,\eta'$ \cite{Ball:2007hb},
which is the heavy quark limit, can be compared to our calculation.
\begin{figure}
\vspace{-0.5em}
\hfil
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{conn-disconn_p000q000k000.eps}
\hfil
\includegraphics[width=0.48\linewidth]{conn-disconn_p000q100k-100.eps}
\caption{Ratios of 3-point over 2-point functions,
$R$ in eq.~\protect\ref{eq:matrixelement},
for connected and
disconnected parts.
$\V{k}=\V{q}=(0,0,0)$
for the left panel and $-\V{k}=\V{q}=(1,0,0)$ for the right panel.}
\label{fig:plateau}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\vspace*{-0.5em}
\hfil
\includegraphics[width=0.56\linewidth
]{formfactor_p2max5_k2max1.eps}
\vspace*{-0.8em}
\caption{
Form factor $f_0(q^2)$ for $D_s\to l\nu\eta_8$ and $D_s\to
l\nu\eta_1$. Errors are statistical only.
A value from QCD light cone sum rules (LCSR) \cite{Azizi:2010zj} is also
plotted.
To enhance visibility, the fitted values at $q^2=0$ and the LCSR results
are slightly shifted to the right and left, respectively.
}
\label{fig:formfactor}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
We tested three methods (and their combinations) of noise reduction
techniques for measuring the disconnected contributions to the $D_s$ meson
semi-leptonic decay form factor.
The combination of spin dilution,
hopping parameter acceleration and truncated solver method was found to
give the biggest gain in computer time.
These noise reduction techniques
allowed us to measure non-zero contributions to the form factor,
on ${\rm SU}(3)$ flavor symmetric QCDSF $n_f=2+1$ configurations.
Further studies with non-${\rm SU}(3)$ symmetric $n_f=2+1$
configurations are planned.
\medskip
This work was supported by the EU ITN STRONGnet (grant number 238353)
and the DFG SFB/Transregio 55. SC
acknowledges support from the Claussen-Simon-Foundation (Stifterverband
f\"ur die Deutsche Wissenschaft).
JZ is supported by
the Australian Research Council under grant FT100100005.
The calculations were performed on the Athene HPC cluster at
the University of Regensburg.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
\subsection{Problem statement}
Let $d$ be a positive integer, $(Y_i,{\bf X}_i)_{i\in \mathbb{Z}}$
be a $\mathbb{R}\times [0,1]^d$-valued stationary process on a
probability space $(\Omega,\mathcal{A},\mathbb{P})$ and $\rho$ be a
given real measurable function. The unknown regression function
associated to $(Y_i,{\bf X}_i)_{i\in \mathbb{Z}}$ and $\rho$ is
defined by
\[
g({\bf x})=\mathbb{E}(\rho(Y)| {\bf X}={\bf x}),
\qquad{\bf x}=(x_1,\ldots,x_d)\in [0,1]^d.
\]
In the additive regression model, the function $g$ is considered to have an additive structure, i.e. there exist $d$ unknown real measurable functions
$g_1,\ldots,g_d$ and an unknown real number $\mu$ such that
\begin{eqnarray} \label{gg}
g({\bf x})= \mu+\sum_{\ell=1}^dg_{\ell}(x_{\ell}).
\end{eqnarray}
For any $\ell\in \{1,\ldots,d\}$, our goal is to estimate $g_{\ell}$
from $n$ observations $(Y_1,{\bf X}_1),\ldots,(Y_n,{\bf X}_n)$ of
$(Y_i,{\bf X}_i)_{i\in \mathbb{Z}}$.
\subsection{Overview of previous work}
When $(Y_i,{\bf X}_i)_{i\in \mathbb{Z}}$ is a ${i.i.d.}$
process, this additive regression model becomes the standard
one. In such a case, Stone in a series of papers \cite{stone1,stone2,stone3} proved that
$g$ can be estimated with the same rate of estimation error as in
the one-dimensional case. The estimation of the component $g_{\ell}$
has been investigated in several papers via various methods (kernel,
splines, wavelets, etc.). See e.g. \cite{buja}, \cite{hastie},
\cite{linton}, \cite{ops1,ops2}, \cite{am1}, \cite{am2}, \cite{sper},
\cite{zhang}, \cite{sar} and \cite{fanjiang}.
In some applications, the ${i.i.d.}$ assumption on the
observations is too stringent. For this reason, some authors
have explored the estimation of $g_{\ell}$ in the dependent case.
When $(Y_i,{\bf X}_i)_{i\in \mathbb{Z}}$ is a strongly mixing
process, this problem has been addressed by \cite {camlong},
\cite{deb0}, and results for continuous time processes under a strong
mixing condition have been obtained by \cite{deb1,deb2}. In
particular, they have developed non-adaptive kernel estimators for
$g_{\ell}$ and studied its asymptotic properties.
\subsection{Contributions}
To the best of our knowledge, adaptive estimation of $g_{\ell}$ for
dependent processes has been addressed only by \cite{gao}. The lack
of results for adaptive estimation in this context motivates this work.
To reach our goal, as in \cite{zhang}, we combine the marginal
integration technique introduced by \cite{newey} with wavelet
methods. We capitalize on wavelets to construct an adaptive thresholding estimator
and show that it attains sharp rates of convergence under mild assumptions on the
smoothness of the unknown function. By adaptive, it is meant that the parameters of the estimator do not depend on the parameter(s) of the dependent process nor on those of the smoothness class of the function. In particular, this leads to a simple and easily implementable estimator.
More precisely, our wavelet estimator is based on term-by-term hard thresholding.
The idea of this estimator is simple:
(i) we estimate the unknown wavelet coefficients of $g_{\ell}$ based on the
observations; (ii) then we select the greatest ones and ignore the others; (iii) and finally we
reconstruct the function estimate from the chosen wavelet coefficients on the
considered wavelet basis. Adopting the minimax point of view under
the $\mathbb{L}_2$ risk, we prove that our adaptive estimator attains a sharp rate of convergence over Besov balls which capture a variety of smoothness features in a function including spatially inhomogeneous behavior. The attained rate corresponds to the optimal one in the ${i.i.d.}$ case for the univariate regression
estimation problem (up to an extra logarithmic term).
\subsection{Paper organization}
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section~\ref{sec:assump} presents our assumptions on the model. In Section~\ref{sec:wav}, we describe wavelet bases on $[0,1]$, Besov balls and tensor product wavelet bases on $[0,1]^d$. Our wavelet hard thresholding estimator is detailed in Section~\ref{sec:estim}.
Its rate of convergence under the $\mathbb{L}_2$ risk over Besov balls is established in Section~\ref{sec:minimax}. Section~\ref{sec:relprior} provides a discussion of the relation of our result with respect to prior work. The proofs are detailed in Section~\ref{sec:proofs}.
\section{Notations and assumptions}
\label{sec:assump}
In this work, we assume the following on our model:
\paragraph{Assumptions on the variables.}
\begin{itemize}
\item For any $i\in \{1,\ldots,n\}$, we set ${\bf X}_i=(X_{1,i},\ldots,X_{d,i})$. We suppose that
\begin{itemize}
\item for any $i\in \{1,\ldots,n\}$, $X_{1,i},\ldots,X_{d,i}$ are identically distributed with the common distribution $\mathcal{U}([0,1])$,
\item ${\bf X}_1,\ldots,{\bf X}_n$ are identically distributed with the common known density $f$.
\end{itemize}
\item We suppose that the following identifiability condition is satisfied: for any $\ell\in \{1,\ldots,d\}$ and $i\in \{1,\ldots,n\}$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{iden}
\mathbb{E}(g_{\ell}(X_{\ell,i}))=0.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{itemize}
\paragraph{Strongly mixing assumption.}
Throughout this work, we use the strong mixing dependence structure on $(Y_i,{\bf X}_i)_{i\in \mathbb{Z}}$. For any $m\in \mathbb{Z}$, we define the $m$-th strongly mixing coefficient of $(Y_i,{\bf X}_i)_{i\in \mathbb{Z}}$ by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{stronglyy}
\alpha_m=\sup_{(A,B)\in \mathcal{F}^{(Y,{\bf X})}_{-\infty,0}\times \mathcal{F}^{(Y,{\bf X})}_{m,\infty}}\left| \mathbb{P}(A\cap B)-\mathbb{P}(A)\mathbb{P}(B)\right|,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathcal{F}^{(Y,{\bf X})}_{-\infty,0}$ is the $\sigma$-algebra generated by $\ldots, (Y_{-1},{\bf X}_{-1}),(Y_0,{\bf X}_0)$ and $\mathcal{F}^{(Y,{\bf X})}_{m,\infty}$ is the $\sigma$-algebra generated by $(Y_m,{\bf X}_m), (Y_{m+1},{\bf X}_{m+1}),\ldots$ ~.
We suppose that there exist two constants $\gamma>0$ and $c>0$ such that, for any integer $m\ge 1$,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{dedans}
\alpha_m\le \gamma \exp(-c m).
\end{eqnarray}
Further details on
strongly mixing dependence can be found in \cite{bradl},
\cite{withers}, \cite{doukhan}, \cite{moda} and \cite{car}.
\paragraph{\bf Boundedness assumptions.}
\begin{itemize}
\item We suppose that $\rho \in \mathbb{L}_1(\mathbb{R}) \cap \mathbb{L}_\infty(\mathbb{R})$, i.e. there exist constants $C_1>0$ and $C_2$ (supposed known) such that
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{refff2}
& \int_{-\infty}^{\infty}|\rho(y)|dy\le C_1, \\
\label{refff}
\text{and} & \sup_{y\in \mathbb{R}}|\rho(y)|\le C_2.
\end{eqnarray}
\item We suppose that there exists a known constant $c>0$ such that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{fal}
\inf_{{\bf x}\in [0,1]^d}f({\bf x})\ge c.
\end{eqnarray}
\item For any $m\in \{1,\ldots,n\}$, let $f_{(Y_0,{\bf X}_{0},Y_m,{\bf X}_{m})}$ be the density of $(Y_0,{\bf X}_{0},Y_m,{\bf X}_{m})$, $f_{(Y_0,{\bf X}_{0})}$ the density of $(Y_0,{\bf X}_{0})$ and, for any $(y,{\bf x},y_*,{\bf x}_*)\in \mathbb{R}\times [0,1]^d\times \mathbb{R}\times [0,1]^d$,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{chemin}
\lefteqn{h_m(y,{\bf x},y_*,{\bf x}_*) =}& & \nonumber \\
&
& f_{(Y_0,{\bf X}_{0},Y_m,{\bf X}_{m})}(y,{\bf x},y_*,{\bf x}_*)-f_{(Y_0,{\bf X}_{0})}(y,{\bf x})f_{(Y_0,{\bf X}_{0})}(y_*,{\bf x}_*). \nonumber \\
&
&
\end{eqnarray}
We suppose that there exists a known constant $C>0$ such that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{boundw}
\sup_{m\in\{1,\ldots,n\}}\sup_{(y,{\bf x},y_*,{\bf x}_*)\in \mathbb{R}\times [0,1]^d\times \mathbb{R}\times [0,1]^d}|h_m(y,{\bf x},y_*,{\bf x}_*) |\le C.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{itemize}
Such boundedness assumptions are standard for the estimation of $g_{\ell}$ from a strongly mixing process. See e.g. \cite{deb1,deb2}.
\section{Wavelets and Besov balls}
\label{sec:wav}
\subsection{Wavelet bases on $[0,1]$}
Let $R$ be a positive integer. We consider an orthonormal wavelet basis generated by dilations and translations of the scaling and wavelet functions $\phi$ and $\psi$ from the Daubechies family $\mathrm{db}_{2R}$. In particular, $\phi$ and $\psi$ have compact supports and unit $\mathbb{L}_2$-norm, and $\psi$ has $R$ vanishing moments, i.e. for any $r\in \{0,\ldots,R-1\}$, $\int x^r\psi(x)dx=0$.
Define the scaled and translated version of $\phi$ and $\psi$
\[
\phi_{j,k}(x)=2^{j/2}\phi(2^jx-k), \qquad \psi_{j,k}(x)=2^{j/2}\psi(2^jx-k).
\]
Then, with an appropriate treatment at the boundaries, there exists an integer $\tau$ satisfying $2^\tau\ge 2R$ such that, for any integer $j_*\ge \tau$, the collection
\[
\{ \phi_{j_*,k}(.), \ k\in \{0,\ldots,2^{j_*}-1\}; \ \psi_{j,k}(.); \ j \in \mathbb{N}-\{0,\ldots, j_*-1\} ,\ k\in \{0,\ldots,2^{j}-1\}\},
\]
is an orthonormal basis of $\mathbb{L}_2(\lbrack 0,1 \rbrack)=\{h : [0,1]\rightarrow \mathbb{R}; \ \ \int_{0}^{1}h^2(x)dx <\infty\}$. See \cite{cohen2,mallat}.
Consequently, for any integer $j_*\ge \tau$, any $h\in \mathbb{L}_2(\lbrack 0,1 \rbrack)$ can be expanded into a
wavelet series as
$$h(x)= \sum_{k=0}^{2^{j_*}-1}\alpha_{j_*,k}\phi_{j_*,k}(x) +\sum_{j= j_*}^{\infty} \sum_{ k=0}^{2^j-1}\beta_{j,k}\psi_{j,k}(x),\qquad x\in [0,1],$$
where
\begin{eqnarray}\label{avion1}
\alpha_{j,k}=\int_{0}^{1}h(x)\phi_{j,k}(x)dx, \qquad \beta_{j,k}=\int_{0}^{1}h(x)\psi_{j,k}(x)dx.
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Besov balls}
As is traditional in the wavelet estimation literature, we will investigate the performance of our
estimator by assuming that the unknown function to be estimated belongs to a Besov ball. The Besov norm for a
function can be related to a sequence space norm on its wavelet coefficients.
More precisely, let $M>0$, $s \in (0,R)$, $ p \ge 1$ and $q \ge 1$.
A function $h$ in $\mathbb{L}_2(\lbrack 0,1 \rbrack)$ belongs to $ \mathbf{B}^s_{p,q}(M)$ if, and only if, there exists a constant $M^*>0$ (depending on $M$) such that the associated wavelet coefficients \eqref{avion1} satisfy
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left(\sum_{j=\tau}^{\infty} \left(2^{j(s+1/2-1/p )}\left(\sum_{k=0}^{2^{j}-1}|\beta_{j,k}|^{p}\right)^{1/p}\right)^{q}\right)^{1/q} \le M^*.
\end{eqnarray*}
In this expression, $s$ is a smoothness parameter and $p$ and $q$ are norm parameters. Besov spaces include many
traditional smoothness spaces. For particular choices of $s$, $ p$ and $q$, Besov balls contain the standard H\"older and Sobolev balls. See \cite{meyer}.
\subsection{Wavelet tensor product bases on $[0,1]^d$}
For the purpose of this paper, we will use compactly supported tensor product wavelet bases on $[0,1]^d$ based on the Daubechies family. Let us briefly recall their construction. For any ${\bf x}=(x_1, \ldots,x_d)\in [0,1]^d$, we construct a scaling function
\[
\Phi({\bf x})=\prod_{v=1}^d \phi (x_v) ~,
\]
and $2^d-1$ wavelet functions
\begin{eqnarray*}
\Psi_u({\bf x})= \left\{
\begin{aligned}
& \psi(x_{u})\prod_{\underset{v\not = u}{v=1}}^d\phi(x_{v})& & {\text{when $u\in \{1,\ldots,d\}$}} ,\\
& \prod_{v\in A_u}\psi(x_{v})\prod_{v\not \in A_u}\phi(x_{v}) & & {\text{when $u\in \{d+1,\ldots,2^d-1\}$,}}
\end{aligned}
\right.
\end{eqnarray*}
where $(A_u)_{u\in \{d+1,\ldots,2^d-1\}}$ forms the set of all non void subsets of $\{1,\ldots,d\}$ of cardinality greater or equal to $2$.
For any integer $j$ and any ${\bf k}=(k_1,\ldots,k_d)$, define the translated and dilated versions of $\Phi$ and $\Psi_u$ as
\begin{align*}
\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x})&=2^{jd/2}\Phi(2^jx_1-k_1, \ldots,2^jx_d-k_d), \\
\Psi_{j,{\bf k},u}({\bf x})&=2^{jd/2}\Psi_{u}(2^jx_1-k_1, \ldots,2^jx_d-k_d), ~ \text{for any $u\in \{1,\ldots,2^d-1\}$}.
\end{align*}
Let $D_j=\{0,\ldots,2^j-1\}^d$. Then, with an appropriate treatment at the boundaries, there exists an integer $\tau$ such that the collection
\[
\{\Phi_{\tau,{\bf k}},
{\bf k} \in D_{\tau}; \ (\Psi_{j,{\bf k},u})_{u\in \{1,\ldots,2^d-1\}}, \ \ \ j\in \mathbb{N}-\{0,\ldots,\tau-1\}, \
{\bf k}\in D_{j}\}
\]
forms an orthonormal basis of $\mathbb{L}_2(\lbrack 0,1 \rbrack^d)=\{h : [0,1]^d\rightarrow \mathbb{R}; \ \ \int_{[0,1]^d}h^2({\bf x})d{\bf x} <\infty\}$.
For any integer $j_*$ such that $j_* \ge \tau$, a function $h \in \mathbb{L}_2(\lbrack 0,1 \rbrack^d)$ can be expanded into a
wavelet series as
$$
h({\bf x})= \sum_{{\bf k}\in D_{j_*}}\alpha_{j_*,{\bf k}}\Phi_{j_*,{\bf k}}({\bf x}) +\sum_{u=1}^{2^d-1}\sum_{j= j_*}^{\infty} \sum_{{\bf k}\in D_j}\beta_{j,{\bf k},u}\Psi_{j,{\bf k},u}({\bf x}), \qquad {\bf x}\in [0,1]^d,
$$
where
\begin{eqnarray}\label{avion}
\alpha_{j,{\bf k}}=\int_{[0,1]^d}h({\bf x})\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x})d{\bf x}, \qquad \beta_{j,{\bf k},u}=\int_{[0,1]^d}h({\bf x})\Psi_{j,{\bf k},u}({\bf x})d{\bf x}.
\end{eqnarray}
\section{The estimator}
\label{sec:estim}
\subsection{Wavelet coefficients estimator}
The following proposition provides a wavelet decomposition of $g_{\ell}$ based on the ``marginal integration'' method (introduced by \cite{newey}) and a tensor product wavelet basis on $[0,1]^d$.
\begin{proposition}\label{woo} Suppose that \eqref{iden} holds. Then, for any $j_*\ge \tau$ and $\ell\in \{1,\ldots,d\}$, we can write
\[
g_{\ell}(x)= \sum_{k=1}^{2^{j_*}-1}a_{j_*,k,\ell}\phi_{j_*,k}(x) +\sum_{j= j_*}^{\infty} \sum_{k=1}^{2^j-1}b_{j,k,\ell}\psi_{j,k}(x) - \mu,\qquad x\in [0,1],
\]
where
\begin{eqnarray}\label{coef1}
a_{j,k,\ell} = a_{j,k_{\ell},\ell}=2^{-j(d-1)/2}\int_{[0,1]^d}g({\bf x})\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x})d{\bf x}, \\
\label{coef2}
b_{j,k,\ell} = b_{j,k_{\ell},\ell} = 2^{-j(d-1)/2}\int_{[0,1]^d}g({\bf x})\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Psi_{j,{\bf k},\ell}({\bf x})d{\bf x},
\end{eqnarray}
and ${\bf k}_{-\ell}=(k_1,\ldots,k_{\ell-1},k_{\ell+1},\ldots,k_d)$ and $D_j^*=\{0,\ldots,2^j-1\}^{d-1}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{remark}
Due to the definitions of $g$ and properties of $\Psi_{j,{\bf k},\ell}$, $b_{j,k,\ell}$ is nothing but the wavelet coefficient of $g_{\ell}$, i.e.
\begin{eqnarray}\label{berti}
b_{j,k,\ell}=\int_{0}^{1}g_{\ell}(x)\psi_{j,k}(x)dx=\beta_{j,k}.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{remark}
Proposition \ref{woo} suggests that a first step to estimate $g_{\ell}$ should consist in estimating the unknown coefficients $a_{j,k,\ell}$ \eqref{coef1} and $b_{j,k,\ell}$ \eqref{coef2}. To this end, we propose the following coefficients estimators
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ru}
\widehat a_{j,k,\ell}=\widehat a_{j,k_{\ell},\ell}=2^{-j(d-1)/2}\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\frac{\rho(Y_i)}{f({\bf X}_i)}\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf X}_i)
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}\label{quier}
\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}=\widehat b_{j,k_{\ell},\ell}=2^{-j(d-1)/2}\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\frac{\rho(Y_i)}{f({\bf X}_i)}\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Psi_{j,{\bf k},\ell}({\bf X}_i).
\end{eqnarray}
These estimators enjoy powerful statistical properties. Some of them are collected in the following propositions.
\begin{proposition}[Unbiasedness]\label{unbiased} Suppose that \eqref{iden} holds. For any $j\ge \tau$, $\ell\in \{1,\ldots,d\}$ and $k\in \{0,\ldots,2^j-1\}$, $\widehat a_{j,k,\ell}$ and $\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}$ in \eqref{ru} and \eqref{quier} are unbiased estimators of $a_{j,k,\ell}$ and $b_{j,k,\ell}$ respectively.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}[Moment inequality I]\label{var22} Suppose that the assumptions of Section~\ref{sec:assump} hold. Let $j\ge \tau$ such that $2^j\le n$, $k\in \{0,\ldots,2^j-1\}$, $\ell\in \{1,\ldots,d\}$.
Then there exists a constant $C>0$ such that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathbb{E}\left( (\widehat a_{j,k,\ell}-a_{j,k,\ell} )^2\right)\le C \frac{1}{n}, \qquad \mathbb{E}\left( (\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell} )^2\right)\le C \frac{1}{n}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{remark}
In the proof of Proposition \ref{var22}, we only need to have the existence of two constants $C>0$ and $q\in (0,1)$ such that $\sum_{m=1}^{n}m^{q}\alpha_{m}^{q}\le C<\infty$. This latter inequality is obviously satisfied by \eqref{dedans}.
\end{remark}
\begin{proposition}[Moment inequality II]\label{var2}
Under the same assumptions of Proposition~\ref{var22}, there exists a constant $C>0$ such that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathbb{E}\left( (\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell} )^4\right)\le C\frac{2^j}{n}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proposition}[Concentration inequality]\label{var3} Suppose that the assumptions of Section~\ref{sec:assump} hold. Let $j\ge \tau$ such that $2^j\le n/(\ln n)^3$, $k\in \{0,\ldots,2^j-1\}$, $\ell\in \{1,\ldots,d\}$ and $\lambda_n=(\ln n/n)^{1/2}$. Then there exist two constants $C>0$ and $\kappa>0$ such that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathbb{P}\left( |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell} | \ge \kappa \lambda_n/2\right)\le C\frac{1}{n^4}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proposition}
\subsection{Hard thresholding estimator}
We now turn to the estimator of $g_\ell$ from $\widehat a_{j,k,\ell}$ and $\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}$ as introduced in \eqref{ru} and \eqref{quier}. Towards this goal, we will only keep the significant wavelet coefficients that are above a certain threshold according to the hard thresholding rule, and then reconstruct from these coefficients. In a compact form, this reads
\begin{eqnarray} \label{hinz2}
\widehat g_{\ell}(x)= \sum_{k=0}^{2^{\tau}-1}\widehat a_{\tau,k,\ell} \phi_{\tau,k}(x)+\sum_{j=\tau}^{j_1}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1}\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}{\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}|\ge \kappa\lambda_n \right \rbrace }\psi_{j,k}(x)-\widehat \mu,
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ahm}
\widehat \mu =\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n\rho(Y_i).
\end{eqnarray}
In \label{hinz2}, $j_1$ is the resolution level satisfying $ 2^{j_1}=[n/(\ln n)^3]$,
$\kappa$ is a large enough constant (the one in Proposition \ref{var3}) and
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lambda_n= \sqrt{\frac{\ln n }{n}}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Note that, due to the assumptions on the model, our wavelet hard
thresholding estimator \eqref{hinz2} is simpler than the one of
\cite{zhang}.
\section{Minimax upper-bound result}
\label{sec:minimax}
Theorem~\ref{theo2} below investigates the minimax rates of convergence attained by $\widehat g_{\ell}$ over Besov balls
under the $\mathbb{L}_2$ risk.
\begin{theorem}\label{theo2}
Let $\ell \in \{1,\ldots,d\}$. Suppose that the assumptions of Section~\ref{sec:assump} hold. Let $\widehat g_{\ell}$ be the estimator given in \eqref{hinz2}. Suppose that $g_{\ell}\in \mathbf{B}^s_{p,q}(M)$ with $q\ge 1$, \{$p \ge 2$ and $s \in (0,R)$\} or \{$p \in [1,2)$ and $s \in (1/p,R)$\}. Then there exists a constant $C>0$ such that
\[
\mathbb{E}\left(\int_{0}^{1}(\widehat g_{\ell}(x)-g_{\ell}(x))^2dx\right)\le C \left( \frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{2s/(2s+1)}.\]
\end{theorem}
The proof of Theorem \ref{theo2} is based on a suitable decomposition of the $\mathbb{L}_2$ risk and the statistical properties of \eqref{ru} and \eqref{quier} summarized in Propositions~\ref{unbiased}, \ref{var22}, \ref{var2} and \ref{var3} above.
\section{Relation to prior work}
\label{sec:relprior}
The rate $(\ln n/n)^{2s/(2s+1)}$ is, up to an extra logarithmic term, known to be the optimal one for the standard one-dimensional regression model with uniform random design. See e.g. \cite{hardle} and \cite{tsybakov}.
Theorem~\ref{theo2} provides an ``adaptive contribution'' to the results of \cite {camlong}, \cite{deb0} and \cite{deb1,deb2}. Furthermore, if we confine ourselves to the ${i.i.d.}$ case, we recover a similar result to \cite[Theorem 3]{zhang} but without the condition $s>\max (d/2,d/p)$. The price to pay is more restrictive assumptions on the model ($\rho$ is bounded from above, the density of ${\bf X}$ is known, etc.). Additionally, our estimator has a more straightforward and friendly implementation than the one in \cite{zhang}.
\section{Proofs}
\label{sec:proofs}
In this section, the quantity $C$ denotes any constant that does not depend on $j$, $k$ and $n$. Its value may change from one term to another and may depends on $\phi$ or $\psi$.
\subsection{Technical results on wavelets}
\paragraph{Proof of Proposition \ref{woo}.}
Because of \eqref{refff}, we have $g\in \mathbb{L}_2([0,1]^d)$. For any $j_*\ge \tau$, we can expand $g$ on our wavelet-tensor product basis as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{bur1}
g({\bf x})= \sum_{{\bf k}\in D_{j_*}}\alpha_{j_*,{\bf k}}\Phi_{j_*,{\bf k}}({\bf x}) +\sum_{u=1}^{2^d-1}\sum_{j= j_*}^{\infty} \sum_{{\bf k}\in D_j}\beta_{j,{\bf k},u}\Psi_{j,{\bf k},u}({\bf x}), \qquad {\bf x}\in [0,1]^d
\end{eqnarray}
where $$\alpha_{j,{\bf k}}=\int_{[0,1]^d}g({\bf x})\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x})d{\bf x}, \qquad\beta_{j,{\bf k},u}=\int_{[0,1]^d}g({\bf x})\Psi_{j,{\bf k},u}({\bf x})d{\bf x}.$$
Moreover, using the ``marginal integration'' method based on \eqref{iden}, we can write
\begin{eqnarray}\label{bur2}
g_{\ell}(x_{\ell})=\int_{[0,1]^{d-1}}g({\bf x}) \prod_{\underset{v\not = \ell}{v=1}}^d dx_{v}- \mu, \qquad x_{\ell}\in [0,1].
\end{eqnarray}
Since $\int_{0}^{1}\phi_{j,k}(x)dx=2^{-j/2}$ and $\int_{0}^{1}\psi_{j,k}(x)dx=0$, observe that
$$\int_{[0,1]^{d-1}}\Phi_{j_*,{\bf k}}({\bf x}) \prod_{\underset{v\not = \ell}{v=1}}^d dx_{v}=2^{-j_*(d-1)/2}\phi_{j_*,k_{\ell}}(x_{\ell})$$ and
\begin{eqnarray*}
\int_{[0,1]^{d-1}}\Psi_{j,{\bf k},u}({\bf x})\prod_{\underset{v\not = \ell}{v=1}}^d dx_{v}= \left\{
\begin{aligned}
& 2^{-j(d-1)/2}\psi_{j,k_{\ell}}(x_{\ell})& & {\text{if $u=\ell$}} ,\\
& 0& & {\text{otherwise.}}
\end{aligned}
\right.
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, putting \eqref{bur1} in \eqref{bur2} and writing $x=x_{\ell}$, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
g_{\ell}(x) = \sum_{{\bf k}\in D_{j_*}}2^{-j_*(d-1)/2}\alpha_{j_*,{\bf k}}\phi_{j_*,k_{\ell}}(x) +\sum_{j= j_*}^{\infty} \sum_{{\bf k}\in D_j}2^{-j(d-1)/2}\beta_{j,{\bf k},\ell}\psi_{j,k_{\ell}}(x) - \mu.
\end{eqnarray*}
Or, equivalently,
$$g_{\ell}(x)= \sum_{k=1}^{2^{j_*}-1}a_{j_*,k,\ell}\phi_{j_*,k}(x) +\sum_{j= j_*}^{\infty} \sum_{k=1}^{2^j-1}b_{j,k,\ell}\psi_{j,k}(x) - \mu,$$
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
a_{j,k,\ell}=a_{j,k_{\ell},\ell}=2^{-j(d-1)/2}\int_{[0,1]^d}g({\bf x})\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x})d{\bf x}
\end{eqnarray*}
and
\begin{eqnarray*}
b_{j,k,\ell}= b_{j,k_{\ell},\ell}=2^{-j(d-1)/2}\int_{[0,1]^d}g({\bf x})\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Psi_{j,{\bf k},\ell}({\bf x})d{\bf x}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Proposition \ref{woo} is proved.
\hspace*{0.98\textwidth}~\QED\par\endtrivlist\unskip
\begin{proposition}\label{mout}
For any $\ell\in \{1,\ldots,d\}$, $j\ge \tau$ and $k=k_{\ell}\in \{0,\ldots,2^j-1\}$, set
$$h^{(1)}_{j,k}({\bf x})=\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x}), \ \ \ \ h^{(2)}_{j,k}({\bf x})=\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Psi_{j,{\bf k},\ell}({\bf x}), \qquad {\bf x}\in [0,1]^d.$$
Then there exists a constant $C>0$ such that, for any $a\in \{1,2\}$,
$$\sup_{{\bf x}\in [0,1]^d}|h^{(a)}_{j,k}({\bf x})|\le C2^{jd/2}, \qquad \int_{ [0,1]^d}|h^{(a)}_{j,k}({\bf x})|d{\bf x}\le C2^{-j/2} 2^{j(d-1)/2}$$ and $$\int_{ [0,1]^d} (h^{(a)}_{j,k}({\bf x}))^2d{\bf x}=2^{j(d-1)}.$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
\begin{itemize}
\item Since $\sup_{x\in [0,1]}|\phi_{j,k}(x)|\le C2^{j/2}$ and $\sup_{x\in [0,1]}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1}|\phi_{j,k}(x)|\le C2^{j/2}$, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sup_{{\bf x}\in [0,1]^d}|h^{(1)}_{j,k}({\bf x})| = (\sup_{x\in [0,1]}|\phi_{j,k}(x)|) \left( \sup_{x\in [0,1]}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1}|\phi_{j,k}(x)|\right)^{d-1} \le C2^{jd/2}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\item Using $\int_{0}^{1}|\phi_{j,k}(x)|dx=C2^{-j/2}$, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\int_{ [0,1]^d}|h^{(1)}_{j,k}({\bf x})|d{\bf x}& \le & \left(\int_{0}^{1}|\phi_{j,k}(x)|dx\right) \left(\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1}\int_{0}^{1}|\phi_{j,k}(x)|dx\right)^{d-1} \\
& =
& C 2^{-j/2} 2^{j(d-1)/2}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\item Since, for any $(u_{\bf k})_{{\bf k}\in D_j}$, $\int_{ [0,1]^d}\left(\sum_{{\bf k}\in D_{j}}u_{\bf k}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x})\right)^2 d{\bf x}=\sum_{{\bf k}\in D_{j}}u_{\bf k}^2$, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\int_{ [0,1]^d}(h^{(1)}_{j,k}({\bf x}))^2d{\bf x} = \int_{ [0,1]^d}\left(\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x})\right)^2 d{\bf x}= 2^{j(d-1)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Proceeding in a similar fashion, using $\sup_{x\in [0,1]}|\psi_{j,k}(x)|\le C2^{j/2}$, $\int_{0}^{1}|\psi_{j,k}(x)|dx=C2^{-j/2}$ and, for any $(u_{\bf k})_{{\bf k}\in D_j}$, $\int_{ [0,1]^d}\left(\sum_{{\bf k}\in D_{j}}u_{\bf k}\Psi_{j,{\bf k},\ell}({\bf x})\right)^2 d{\bf x}=\sum_{{\bf k}\in D_{j}}u_{\bf k}^2$, we obtain the same results for $h^{(2)}_{j,k}$.
\end{itemize}
This ends the proof of Proposition \ref{mout}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Statistical properties of the coefficients estimators}
\paragraph{Proof of Proposition \ref{unbiased}.}
We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathbb{E}(\widehat a_{j,k,\ell})& =& 2^{-j(d-1)/2}\mathbb{E}\left(\frac{\rho(Y_1)}{f({\bf X}_1)}\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf X}_1)\right)\\
& =& 2^{-j(d-1)/2}\mathbb{E}\left(\mathbb{E}(\rho(Y_1)| {\bf X}_1)\frac{1}{f({\bf X}_1)}\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf X}_1)\right)\\
& =& 2^{-j(d-1)/2}\mathbb{E}\left(\frac{g({\bf X}_1)}{f({\bf X}_1)}\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf X}_1)\right)\\
& =
& 2^{-j(d-1)/2}\int_{[0,1]^d}\frac{g({\bf x})}{f({\bf x})}\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x}) f({\bf x})d{\bf x}\\
& =
& 2^{-j(d-1)/2}\int_{[0,1]^d}g({\bf x})\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x}) d{\bf x}= a_{j,k,\ell}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Proceeding in a similar fashion, we prove that $\mathbb{E}(\widehat b_{j,k,\ell})=b_{j,k,\ell}$.
\hspace*{0.98\textwidth}~\QED\par\endtrivlist\unskip
\paragraph{Proof of Proposition \ref{var22}.}
For the sake of simplicity, for any $i\in \{1,\ldots,n\}$, set
$$Z_i=\frac{\rho(Y_i)}{f({\bf X}_i)}\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf X}_i).$$
Thanks to Proposition \ref{unbiased}, we have
\begin{eqnarray} \label{mom}
\mathbb{E}\left( (\widehat a_{j,k,\ell}-a_{j,k,\ell} )^2\right) = \mathbb{V}(\widehat a_{j,k,\ell}) = 2^{-j(d-1)}\frac{1}{n^2} \mathbb{V}\left(\sum_{i=1}^n Z_i\right).
\end{eqnarray}
An elementary covariance decomposition gives
\begin{eqnarray}\label{bouche}
\mathbb{V}\left( \sum_{i=1}^n Z_i\right)& =& n\mathbb{V}\left( Z_1\right)+2\sum_{v=2}^n\sum_{u=1}^{v-1}\mathrm{Cov} \left( Z_v,Z_u\right)\nonumber\\
& \le
& n\mathbb{V}\left( Z_1\right) + 2 \left|\sum_{v=2}^n\sum_{u=1}^{v-1}\mathrm{Cov} \left( Z_v,Z_u\right)\right|.
\end{eqnarray}
Using \eqref{refff}, \eqref{fal} and Proposition \ref{mout}, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{bouche2}
\mathbb{V}\left( Z_1\right) & \le & \mathbb{E}(Z_1^2)\le \frac{\sup_{y\in \mathbb{R}}\rho^2(y)}{\inf _{{\bf x}\in [0,1]^d} f({\bf x})} \mathbb{E}\left( \frac{1}{f({\bf X}_1)}\left(\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf X}_1)\right)^2\right) \nonumber\\
& \le
&C \int_{[0,1]^d}\frac{1}{f({\bf x})}\left(\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x})\right)^2f({\bf x})d{\bf x}\nonumber \\
& =
& C \int_{[0,1]^d}\left(\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x})\right)^2d{\bf x}= C2^{j(d-1)}.
\end{eqnarray}
It follows from the stationarity of $(Y_i,{\bf X}_i)_{i\in \mathbb{Z}}$ and $2^j\le n$ that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{t}
\left|\sum_{v=2}^n\sum_{u=1}^{v-1}\mathrm{Cov} \left( Z_v,Z_u\right)\right| = \left|\sum_{m=1}^{n}(n-m)\mathrm{Cov} \left( Z_0,Z_m\right)\right|\le R_1+R_2,
\end{eqnarray}
where
\[
R_1=n\sum_{m=1}^{2^j-1}\left|\mathrm{Cov} \left( Z_0,Z_m\right)\right|, \ \ \ \ \ R_2=n\sum_{m=2^j}^{n}\left|\mathrm{Cov} \left( Z_0,Z_m\right)\right|.
\]
It remains to bound $R_1$ and $R_2$.
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item {\bf Bound for $R_1$.} Let, for any $(y,{\bf x},y_*,{\bf x}_*)\in \mathbb{R}\times [0,1]^d\times \mathbb{R}\times [0,1]^d$, $h_m(y,{\bf x},y_*,{\bf x}_*)$ be \eqref{chemin}. Using \eqref{boundw}, \eqref{refff2} and Proposition \ref{mout}, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{\left|\mathrm{Cov} \left(Z_0,Z_m\right)\right|} & & \\
& =
& \bigg|\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\int_{[0,1]^d}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\int_{[0,1]^d}h_m(y,{\bf x},y_*,{\bf x}_*)\times \\
&
& \left(\frac{\rho(y)}{f({\bf x})}\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*} \Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x})\frac{\rho(y_*)}{f({\bf x}_*)}\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*} \Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x}_*)\right) dyd{\bf x}dy_*d{\bf x}_*\bigg|\\
& \le
&\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\int_{[0,1]^d}\int_{-\infty}^{\infty}\int_{[0,1]^d} |h_m(y,{\bf x},y_*,{\bf x}_*)| \times\\
&
& \left|\frac{\rho(y)}{f({\bf x})}\right| \left|\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*} \Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x}) \right| \left|\frac{\rho(y_*)}{f({\bf x}_*)}\right| \left|\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*} \Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x}_*)\right| dyd{\bf x}dy_*d{\bf x}_*\\
& \le
& C \left( \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} |\rho(y)|dy\right)^2 \left( \int_{[0,1]^d} \left|\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x})\right|d{\bf x}\right)^2\le C2^{-j} 2^{j(d-1)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore
\begin{eqnarray}\label{t1}
R_1\le Cn2^{-j} 2^{j(d-1)}2^{j}=Cn2^{j(d-1)}.
\end{eqnarray}
\item {\bf Bound for $R_2$.}
By the Davydov inequality for strongly mixing processes (see \cite{davy}), for any $q\in (0,1)$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{\left|\mathrm{Cov} \left( Z_0,Z_m\right)\right|\le 10 \alpha_{m}^q \left( \mathbb{E}\left( |Z_0|^{2/(1-q)}\right)\right)^{1-q}} & & \\
& \le
& 10 \alpha_{m}^q \left(\frac{\sup_{y\in \mathbb{R}}|\rho(y)|}{\inf _{{\bf x}\in [0,1]^d} f({\bf x})}\sup_{{\bf x}\in [0,1]^d}\left|\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x})\right| \right)^{2q} \left( \mathbb{E}( Z_0^{2})\right)^{1-q}.
\end{eqnarray*}
By \eqref{refff}, \eqref{fal} and Proposition \ref{mout}, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\frac{\sup_{y\in \mathbb{R}}|\rho(y)|}{\inf _{{\bf x}\in [0,1]^d} f({\bf x})} \sup_{{\bf x}\in [0,1]^d}\left|\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x})\right| & \le & C\sup_{{\bf x}\in [0,1]^d}\left|\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Phi_{j,{\bf k}}({\bf x})\right| \\
& \le
& C 2^{jd/2}.
\end{eqnarray*}
By \eqref{bouche2}, we have
$$\mathbb{E}\left( Z_0^{2}\right)\le C2^{j(d-1)}.$$
Therefore
\begin{eqnarray*}
\left|\mathrm{Cov} \left( Z_0,Z_m\right)\right|\le C2^{q j}2^{j(d-1)}\alpha_{m}^q.
\end{eqnarray*}
Observe that $\sum_{m=1}^{\infty}m^q\alpha_{m}^q= \gamma^q \sum_{m=1}^{\infty}m^q exp(-c qm)<\infty$. Hence
\begin{eqnarray}\label{t2}
R_2\le Cn2^{q j}2^{j(d-1)}\sum_{m=2^j}^{n}\alpha_{m}^q\le Cn2^{j(d-1)}\sum_{m=2^j}^{n}m^q\alpha_{m}^q\le Cn2^{j(d-1)}.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{enumerate}
Putting \eqref{t}, \eqref{t1} and \eqref{t2} together, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{yeux}
\left|\sum_{v=2}^n\sum_{u=1}^{v-1}\mathrm{Cov} \left( Z_v,Z_u\right)\right| \le C n2^{j(d-1)}.
\end{eqnarray}
Combining \eqref{mom}, \eqref{bouche}, \eqref{bouche2} and \eqref{yeux}, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathbb{E}\left( (\widehat a_{j,k,\ell}-a_{j,k,\ell} )^2\right)\le C2^{-j(d-1)}\frac{1}{n^2}n 2^{j(d-1)}= C \frac{1}{n}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Proceeding in a similar fashion, we prove that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathbb{E}\left( (\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell} )^2\right)\le C \frac{1}{n}.
\end{eqnarray*}
This ends the proof of Proposition \ref{var22}.
\hspace*{0.98\textwidth}~\QED\par\endtrivlist\unskip
\paragraph{Proof of Proposition \ref{var2}.}
It follows from \eqref{refff}, \eqref{fal} and Proposition \ref{mout} that
\begin{eqnarray*}
|\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}| & \le &2^{-j(d-1)/2}\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n \frac{|\rho(Y_i) |}{|f({\bf X}_i)|}\left|\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Psi_{j,{\bf k},\ell}({\bf X}_i)\right|\\
& \le
& 2^{-j(d-1)/2}\frac{\sup_{y\in \mathbb{R}}|\rho(y)|}{\inf _{{\bf x}\in [0,1]^d} f({\bf x})} \sup_{{\bf x}\in [0,1]^d}\left|\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Psi_{j,{\bf k},\ell}({\bf x})\right| \\
& \le
& C 2^{-j(d-1)/2} 2^{jd/2}=C2^{j/2}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Because of \eqref{refff}, we have $\sup_{{\bf x}\in [0,1]^d}|g({\bf x})|\le C$. It follows from Proposition \ref{mout} that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{plus}
|b_{j,k,\ell}| & \le & 2^{-j(d-1)/2}\int_{[0,1]^d}|g({\bf x})| \left|\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Psi_{j,{\bf k},\ell}({\bf x})\right|d{\bf x}\nonumber\\
& \le
& C2^{-j(d-1)/2}\int_{[0,1]^d} \left|\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Psi_{j,{\bf k},\ell}({\bf x})\right|d{\bf x}\nonumber\\
& \le
& C 2^{-j(d-1)/2}2^{-j}2^{jd/2}=C2^{-j/2}.
\end{eqnarray}
Hence
\begin{eqnarray}\label{bu}
|\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell}| \le |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}|+|b_{j,k,\ell}| \le C 2^{j/2}.
\end{eqnarray}
It follows from \eqref{bu} and Proposition \ref{var22} that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathbb{E}\left( (\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell})^4\right) \le C 2^{j}\mathbb{E}\left( (\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell})^2\right)\le C\frac{2^j}{n}.
\end{eqnarray*}
The proof of Proposition \ref{var2} is complete.
\hspace*{0.98\textwidth}~\QED\par\endtrivlist\unskip
\paragraph{Proof of Proposition \ref{var3}.}
Let us first state a Bernstein inequality for exponentially strongly mixing process.
\begin{lemma}[\cite{lieb2}]\label{bnh}
Let $\gamma>0$, $c>0$ and $(Y_i)_{i\in \mathbb{Z}}$ be a
stationary process with the $m$-th strongly mixing coefficient $\alpha_m$ \eqref{stronglyy}. Let $n$ be a positive
integer, $h : \mathbb{R} \rightarrow \mathbb{C}$ be a measurable
function and, for any $i\in \mathbb{Z}$, $U_i=h(Y_i)$. We assume
that $\mathbb{E}(U_1)=0$ and there exists a constant $M>0$
satisfying $|U_1| \le M$. Then, for any $m\in \{1,\ldots,[n/2]\}$ and
$\lambda>0$, we have
\[
\mathbb{P}\left( \left | \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n U_i \right | \ge \lambda \right) \le 4\exp\left(-\frac{\lambda^2 n}{ 16(D_m/m+\lambda M m/{3})} \right)+32\frac{M}{\lambda}n\alpha_m,
\]
where $D_m=\max_{l\in \{1,\ldots,2m\}}\mathbb{V} \left( \sum_{i=1}^l U_i\right)$.
\end{lemma}
We now apply this lemma by setting for any $i\in \{1,\ldots,n\}$,
\[
U_{i}=2^{-j(d-1)/2}\frac{\rho(Y_i)}{f({\bf X}_i)}\sum_{{\bf k}_{-\ell}\in D_{j}^*}\Psi_{j,{\bf k},\ell}({\bf X}_i)-b_{j,k,\ell}.
\]
Then we can write
$$\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell}=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n U_i.$$
So
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathbb{P}\left( |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell}| \ge \kappa\lambda_n/2 \right)=\mathbb{P}\left( \left|\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n U_i\right| \ge \kappa\lambda_n/2 \right),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $U_{1},\ldots,U_{n}$ are identically distributed, depend on $(Y_i,{\bf X}_i)_{i\in \mathbb{Z}}$ satisfying \eqref{dedans},
\begin{itemize}
\item by Proposition \ref{unbiased}, we have $\mathbb{E}(U_1)=0$,
\item using arguments similar to Proposition \ref{var22} with $l$ instead of $n$, we prove that
$$\mathbb{V} \left( \sum_{i=1}^l U_i\right)\le C l.$$
Hence $D_m=\max_{l\in \{1,\ldots,2m\}}\mathbb{V} \left( \sum_{i=1}^l U_i\right)\le Cm$.
\item proceeding in a similar fashion to \eqref{bu}, we obtain $|U_1| \le C2^{j/2}$.
\end{itemize}
Lemma \ref{bnh} applied with the random variables $U_1,\ldots,U_{n}$, $\lambda=\kappa \lambda_n/2$, $\lambda_n=(\ln n/n)^{1/2}$, $m=u\ln n$ with $u>0$ (chosen later), $M=C2^{j/2}$, $2^j\le n/ (\ln n)^3$ and \eqref{dedans} gives
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{\mathbb{P}\left( |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell}| \ge \kappa\lambda_n/2 \right)} & & \\
& \le
& C\left(\exp\left(-C\frac{ \kappa^2\lambda_n^2 n }{1+\kappa \lambda_n mM} \right)+\frac{M}{\lambda_n}n\exp(-c m)\right) \nonumber\\
& \le
& C\left(\exp\left(-C\frac{ \kappa^2\ln n}{1+{\kappa u2^{j/2}\ln n(\ln n/n)^{1/2}}} \right)+\frac{2^{j/2}}{(\ln n/n)^{1/2}}n\exp(-c u\ln n) \right) \nonumber\\
& \le
& C\left( n^{-C \kappa^2/(1+\kappa u)} +n^{1-cu}\right).
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, for large enough $\kappa$ and $u$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathbb{P}\left( |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell}| \ge \kappa\lambda_n/2 \right)\le C \frac{1}{n^4}.
\end{eqnarray*}
This ends the proof of Proposition \ref{var3}.
\hspace*{0.98\textwidth}~\QED\par\endtrivlist\unskip
\subsection{Proof of Theorem~\ref{theo2}}
Using Proposition \ref{woo}, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{\widehat g_{\ell}(x)-g_{\ell}(x)} & & \\
& =
& \sum_{k=0}^{2^{\tau}-1}(\widehat \alpha_{\tau,k,\ell}-\alpha_{\tau,k,\ell})\phi_{\tau,k}(x)+\sum_{j=\tau}^{j_1}\sum_{k=0}^{2^{j}-1}(\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}{\bf 1}_{\left\lbrace |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}|\ge \kappa\lambda_n \right\rbrace}-b_{j,k,\ell})\psi_{j,k}(x) \\
& -
& \sum_{j=j_1+1}^{\infty}\sum_{k=0}^{2^{j}-1}b_{j,k,\ell}\psi_{j,k}(x)-(\widehat \mu-\mu).
\end{eqnarray*}
Using the elementary inequality: $(x+y)^2\le 2(x^2+y^2)$, $(x,y)\in\mathbb{R}^2$, and the orthonormality of the wavelet basis, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{rou}
\mathbb{E}\left(\int_{0}^{1}(\widehat g_{\ell}(x)-g_{\ell}(x))^2dx\right)\le 2(T+U+V+W),
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
T=\mathbb{E}( (\widehat \mu-\mu)^2), &\qquad& U=\sum_{k=0}^{2^{\tau}-1}\mathbb{E}\left((\widehat \alpha_{\tau,k,\ell}-\alpha_{\tau,k,\ell})^2\right), \\
V=\sum_{j=\tau}^{j_1}\sum_{k=0}^{2^{j}-1}\mathbb{E}\left((\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}{\bf 1}_{\left\lbrace |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}|\ge \kappa\lambda_n \right\rbrace}-b_{j,k,\ell})^2\right), &\qquad& W=\sum_{j=j_1+1}^{\infty}\sum_{k=0}^{2^{j}-1}b_{j,k,\ell}^2.
\end{eqnarray*}
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item {\bf Bound for $T$.} We proceed as in the proof of Proposition \ref{var22}. By \eqref{iden}, we have $\mathbb{E}(\rho(Y_1))=\mu$. Thanks to the stationarity of $(Y_i)_{i\in\mathbb{Z}}$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
T = \mathbb{V}(\widehat \mu)\le \frac{1}{n}\mathbb{V}(\rho(Y_1))+2\frac{1}{n}\sum_{m=1}^{n}\left|\mathrm{Cov} \left( \rho(Y_0),\rho(Y_m)\right)\right|.
\end{eqnarray*}
Using \eqref{refff}, the Davydov inequality (see \cite{davy}) and \eqref{dedans}, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{del}
T\le C \frac{1}{n} \left(1+\sum_{m=1}^{n}\alpha_{m}^q\right)\le C\frac{1}{n}\le C\left( \frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{2s/(2s+1)} .
\end{eqnarray}
\item \noindent {\bf Bound for $U$.} Using Proposition \ref{var22}, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{chou}
U \le C 2^{\tau}\frac{1}{n}\le C\left( \frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{2s/(2s+1)} .
\end{eqnarray}
\item {\bf Bound for $W$.} For $q\ge 1$ and $p \ge 2$, we have $g_{\ell}\in \mathbf{B}^s_{p,q}(M)\subseteq \mathbf{B}^s_{2,\infty}(M)$. Hence, by \eqref{berti},
\begin{eqnarray*}
W \le C\sum_{j=j_1+1}^{\infty}2^{-2js}\le C2^{-2j_1s}\le C \left(\frac{(\ln n)^3}{n}\right)^{2s}\le C \left( \frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{2s/(2s+1)} .
\end{eqnarray*}
For $q\ge 1$ and $p \in [1,2)$, we have $g_{\ell}\in {B}^{s}_{p,q} (M)\subseteq
{B}^{s+1/2-1/p}_{2,\infty} (M)$. Since $s>1/p$, we have $s+1/2-{1}/{p}>s/(2s+1)$. So, by \eqref{berti},
\begin{eqnarray*}
W& \le & C\sum_{j= j_1+1}^{\infty} 2^{-2j(s+1/2-{1}/{p})}\le C 2^{-2j_1(s+1/2-{1}/{p})}\nonumber \\
& \le
& C\left( \frac{(\ln n)^3}{n}\right)^{2(s+1/2-{1}/{p})}\le C\left( \frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{2s/(2s+1)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Hence, for $q\ge 1$, \{$p \ge 2$ and $s>0$\} or \{$p \in [1,2)$ and $s>1/p$\}, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{amp}
W\le C \left( \frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{2s/(2s+1)}.
\end{eqnarray}
\item {\bf Bound for $V$.} We have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{dec}
V =V_{1}+V_{2}+V_{3} +V_{4},
\end{eqnarray}
where
$$V_1=\sum_{j=\tau}^{j_1}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1} \mathbb{E}\left( (\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell})^2{\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace | \widehat b_{j,k,\ell}|\ge\kappa\lambda_n\right \rbrace } {\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace | b_{j,k,\ell}|<\kappa\lambda_n/2\right \rbrace }\right),$$
$$V_2=\sum_{j=\tau}^{j_1}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1} \mathbb{E}\left((\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell})^2{\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace | \widehat b_{j,k,\ell}|\ge\kappa\lambda_n\right \rbrace } {\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace |b_{j,k,\ell}|\ge \kappa\lambda_n/2\right \rbrace }\right),$$
$$V_{3}=\sum_{j=\tau}^{j_1}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1}\mathbb{E}\left(b_{j,k,\ell}^2{\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace | \widehat b_{j,k,\ell}|<\kappa\lambda_n\right \rbrace } {\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace | b_{j,k,\ell}|\ge 2{\kappa\lambda_n}\right \rbrace }\right)$$
and
$$V_{4}=\sum_{j=\tau}^{j_1}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1}\mathbb{E}\left(b_{j,k,\ell}^2{\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}|<\kappa\lambda_n\right \rbrace } {\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace | b_{j,k,\ell}|<2{\kappa\lambda_n}\right \rbrace }\right).$$
\begin{itemize}
\item {\bf Bounds for $V_1$ and $V_3$.} The following inclusions hold:
$\left\lbrace |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}|<\kappa\lambda_n, \ |b_{j,k,\ell}|\ge 2\kappa\lambda_n\right\rbrace \subseteq \left\lbrace |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell}|>\kappa\lambda_n/2 \right\rbrace$,
$\left\lbrace |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}|\ge \kappa\lambda_n, \ |b_{j,k,\ell}|<\kappa\lambda_n/2 \right\rbrace \subseteq \left\lbrace |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell}|>\kappa\lambda_n/2 \right\rbrace$
and $\left\lbrace |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}|<\kappa\lambda_n, \ |b_{j,k,\ell}|\ge 2\kappa\lambda_n \right\rbrace \subseteq \left\lbrace |b_{j,k,\ell}|\le 2|\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell}| \right\rbrace$.
So
$$\max(V_1,V_3)\le C \sum_{j=\tau}^{j_1}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1}\mathbb{E}\left((\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell})^2{\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell}|>\kappa\lambda_n/2\right \rbrace} \right) .$$
Applying the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality and using Propositions \ref{var2}, \ref{var3} and $2^j\le n$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lefteqn{\mathbb{E}\left((\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell})^2{\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell}|>\kappa\lambda_n/2\right \rbrace} \right) } & & \nonumber \\
& \le
& \left(\mathbb{E}\left((\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell})^{4}\right)\right)^{1/2}\left(\mathbb{P}\left( |\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell}|>\kappa\lambda_n/2\right)\right)^{{1}/{2}} \nonumber \\
& \le
& C\left(\frac{2^j}{n} \right)^{1/2}\left(\frac{1}{n^4} \right)^{1/2}\le C\frac{1}{n^2}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore
\begin{eqnarray}\label{ko}
\max(V_1,V_3) \le C \frac{1}{n^2}\sum_{j=\tau}^{j_1} 2^{j} \le C \frac{1}{n^2} 2^{j_1} \le C \frac{1}{n} \le C \left( \frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{2s/(2s+1)}.
\end{eqnarray}
\item \noindent {\bf Bound for $V_2$.} Using Proposition \ref{var22}, we obtain
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mathbb{E}\left( (\widehat b_{j,k,\ell}-b_{j,k,\ell})^2\right) \le C\frac{1}{n}\le C\frac{\ln n}{n}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Hence
\begin{eqnarray*}
V_2 \le C\frac{\ln n}{n}\sum_{j=\tau}^{j_1}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1} {\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace |b_{j,k,\ell}|>\kappa\lambda_n/2\right \rbrace}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Let $j_2$ be the integer defined by
\begin{eqnarray}\label{mopp}
2^{j_2}=\left\lbrack\left(\frac{n}{\ln n}\right)^{1/(2s+1)}\right\rbrack.
\end{eqnarray}
We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
V_2 \le V_{2,1}+V_{2,2},
\end{eqnarray*}
where
$$V_{2,1}=C\frac{\ln n}{n}\sum_{j=\tau}^{j_2}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1} {\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace |b_{j,k,\ell}|>\kappa\lambda_n/2\right \rbrace}$$
and
$$V_{2,2}=C \frac{\ln n}{n}\sum_{j=j_2+1}^{j_1}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1} {\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace |b_{j,k,\ell}|>\kappa\lambda_n/2\right \rbrace}.$$
We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
V_{2,1} \le C \frac{\ln n}{n}\sum_{j=\tau}^{j_2}2^{j}\le C \frac{\ln n}{n}2^{j_2 }\le C \left(\frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{2s/(2s+1)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
For $q\ge 1$ and $p\ge 2$, we have $g_{\ell}\in B_{p,q}^s(M)\subseteq \mathbf{B}^s_{2,\infty}(M)$. So, by \eqref{berti},
\begin{eqnarray*}
V_{2,2} & \le & C \frac{\ln n}{n \lambda_n^2}\sum_{j=j_2+1}^{j_1}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1} b_{j,k,\ell}^2\le C\sum_{j=j_2+1}^{\infty}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1} \beta_{j,k}^2\le C 2^{-2j_2s}\\
& \le
& C\left(\frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{2s/(2s+1)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
For $q\ge 1$, $p \in [1,2)$ and $s>1/p$, using \eqref{berti}, ${\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace |b_{j,k,\ell}|>\kappa\lambda_n/2\right \rbrace}\le C |b_{j,k,\ell}|^{p}/\lambda_n^p=C |\beta_{j,k}|^{p}/\lambda_n^p$ and $(2s+1)(2-p)/2+(s+1/2-1/p) p=2s$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
V_{2,2} & \le & C \frac{\ln n}{n \lambda_n^p}\sum_{j=j_2+1}^{j_1}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1} |\beta_{j,k}|^{p}\le C \left(\frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{(2-p)/2}\sum_{j=j_2+1}^{\infty}2^{-j(s+{1}/{2}-{1}/{p})p}\\
& \le & C \left(\frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{(2-p)/2} 2^{-j_2(s+{1}/{2}-{1}/{p})p} \le C \left(\frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{2s/(2s+1)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
So, for $r\ge 1$, \{$p \ge 2$ and $s>0$\} or \{$p \in [1,2)$ and $s>1/p$\}, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{sis}
V_2\le C \left(\frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{2s/(2s+1)}.
\end{eqnarray}
\item \noindent {\bf Bound for $V_4$.} We have
$$V_4 \le \sum_{j=\tau}^{j_1}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1} b_{j,k,\ell}^2 {\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace | b_{j,k,\ell}|<2{\kappa\lambda_n}\right \rbrace }.$$
Let $j_2$ be the integer \eqref{mopp}. Then
$$V_4 \le V_{4,1}+V_{4,2},$$
where
$$V_{4,1}= \sum_{j=\tau}^{j_2}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1} b_{j,k,\ell}^2 {\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace | b_{j,k,\ell}|<2{\kappa\lambda_n}\right \rbrace }, \ \ \ \ \ \ V_{4,2}= \sum_{j=j_2+1}^{j_1}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1} b_{j,k,\ell}^2 {\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace | b_{j,k,\ell}|<2{\kappa\lambda_n}\right \rbrace }.$$
We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
V_{4,1} \le C \sum_{j=\tau}^{j_2}2^j \lambda_n^2=C\frac{\ln n}{n} \sum_{j=\tau}^{j_2}2^{j}\le C \frac{\ln n}{n}2^{j_2} \le C \left(\frac{\ln n}{n} \right)^{2s/(2s+1)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
For $q\ge 1$ and $p\ge 2$, we have $g_{\ell}\in B_{p,q}^s(M)\subseteq \mathbf{B}^s_{2,\infty}(M)$. Hence, by \eqref{berti},
$$V_{4,2}\le \sum_{j=j_2+1}^{\infty}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1} \beta_{j,k}^2\le C2^{-2j_2s}\le C \left(\frac{\ln n}{n} \right)^{2s/(2s+1)}.$$
For $q\ge 1$, $p \in [1,2)$ and $s>1/p$, using \eqref{berti}, $b_{j,k,\ell}^2 {\bf 1}_{\left \lbrace | b_{j,k,\ell}|<2{\kappa\lambda_n}\right \rbrace }\le C \lambda_n^{2-p} |b_{j,k,\ell}|^{p}=C \lambda_n^{2-p} |\beta_{j,k}|^{p}$ and $(2s+1)(2-p)/2+(s+1/2-1/p) p=2s$, we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
V_{4,2}& \le
& C \lambda_n^{2-p} \sum_{j=j_2+1}^{j_1}\sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1} |\beta_{j,k}|^{p} =C\left(\frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{(2-p)/2} \sum_{j=j_2+1}^{j_1} \sum_{k=0}^{2^j-1} |\beta_{j,k}|^{p} \\
& \le
& C\left(\frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{(2-p)/2} \sum_{j=j_2+1}^{\infty}2^{-j(s+{1}/{2}-{1}/{p})p}\\
& \le
& C \left(\frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{(2-p)/2}2^{-j_2(s+{1}/{2}-{1}/{p})p} \le C\left(\frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{2s/(2s+1)}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus, for $q\ge 1$, \{$p \ge 2$ and $s>0$\} or \{$p \in [1,2)$ and $s>1/p$\}, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{qua}
V_4\le C \left(\frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{2s/(2s+1)}.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{itemize}
It follows from \eqref{dec}, \eqref{ko}, \eqref{sis} and \eqref{qua} that
\begin{eqnarray}\label{benj}
V\le C \left(\frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{2s/(2s+1)}.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{enumerate}
Combining \eqref{rou}, \eqref{del}, \eqref{chou}, \eqref{amp} and \eqref{benj}, we have, for $q\ge 1$, \{$p \ge 2$ and $s>0$\} or \{$p \in [1,2)$ and $s>1/p$\},
$$\mathbb{E}\left(\int_{0}^{1}(\widehat g_{\ell}(x)-g_{\ell}(x))^2dx\right)\le C \left(\frac{\ln n}{n}\right)^{2s/(2s+1)}.$$
The proof of Theorem \ref{theo2} is complete.
\hspace*{0.98\textwidth}~\QED\par\endtrivlist\unskip
\paragraph{Acknowledgement.}
This work is supported by ANR grant NatImages, ANR-08-EMER-009.
|
\section{Introduction: Transport Coefficients}
Transport coefficients are quantities that describe how the system tends to equilibrium when an external
perturbation has been applied to it. This perturbation produces a gradient of some hydrodynamical
field (pressure, temperature, velocity...) followed by a response flow in the system (Le Chatelier
principle). This response flow pushes the system towards the equilibrium state. At first order in gradients, the proportionality coefficient
between the hydrodynamical gradient and the response flow is called a transport coefficient (TC):
\be \textrm{TC} \times \nabla \textrm{(Hydrodynamics Field)} = - \textrm{Response Flow} \ . \ee
The response flow corresponds to the motion of a conserved quantity density so there exists one transport coefficient
related to each conserved quantity of the system. Some classical examples of transport coefficients are the shear and bulk viscosities $\eta$, $\zeta$ both
related to the momentum conservation, the heat or thermal conductivity $\kappa$ related to the energy and particle conservation and the electrical conductivity $\sigma$ if
an electric charge is present in the system.
In a relativistic heavy-ion collision, some of them can be extracted from those observables encoding the collective behaviour of the
plasma. One of the most remarkable transport coefficient extracted in this way is the shear viscosity, usually normalized to the entropy density $\eta/s$.
\section{Flow Harmonics and Viscosities}
The way to estimate the value of the viscosity over the entropy density is to compare the experimental measurement of a collective observable to
the result given by hydrodynamics simulations (for which $\eta/s$ is an input parameter). The most impressive collective phenomenon is the presence of momentum anisotropies in the
expanding fireball due to initial spatial anisotropies in noncentral collisions. The quantitative effect of these anisotropies is reflected in the flow harmonics $v_n$, defined
as the averages over the measured particles in some event:
\be v_n = \langle \cos n (\phi_i - \Psi_{RP} ) \rangle \ , \ee
where $\phi_i$ is the azimuthal angle of the outgoing particles and $\Psi_{RP}$ is the reaction plane, defined by the beam axis and the impact parameter vector between the two incoming nuclei.
For a recent estimation of the flow harmonics made by the ALICE collaboration see \cite{alice11}.
For noncentral collisions, the most prominent flow harmonic is the elliptic flow $v_2$ and it is quite dependent on the value of $\eta/s$. By matching the experimental behaviour of $v_2$ and the hydrodynamic calculations
one can estimate the approximate value of $\eta/s$. This value turns out to be very close to $\eta/s \sim 1/(4\pi)$ (see left panel of Fig.\ref{fig:hydro}). The value of the bulk viscosity
over entropy density ($\zeta/s$) can also be estimated following the same method (see right panel of Fig. \ref{fig:hydro}).
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\epsfig{file=v2mbGlauber.eps,height=5cm,width=7cm} \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
\epsfig{file=v2ch.eps,height=5cm,width=6.4cm}
\caption{Left panel: Differential elliptic flow as a function of the transverse momentum as measured at RHIC (dots) and extracted from the hydrodynamic calculation in \cite{luzum08} (lines) for several values of $\eta/s$ and Glauber initial conditions.
Right panel: $p_T$-integrated elliptic flow as a function of the centrality as measured at RHIC and LHC compared to the extracted $v_2$ from the hydrodynamic code of \cite{bozek11} for the optimal values of $\eta/s$ and $\zeta/s$ and Glauber initial conditions.
Figures courtesy of M. Luzum and P. Romatschke (Copyright 2008 by The American Physical Society) and P. Bozek, respectively. \label{fig:hydro}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The newest investigations along these lines are obtaining more precise values for the two viscosities in order to restrict other hydrodynamic parameters and discriminate among different initial condition models.
As an example, the more detailed calculations have began to include the entire temperature dependence of the shear viscosity (see for instance \cite{niemi11}) and of the bulk viscosity (see for example \cite{song08}).
We are going to describe the theoretical calculation of these transport coefficients and its temperature dependence in the low temperature phase, i.e. the hadronic medium.
\section{Hadronized Medium: The Pion Gas}
We will consider that the matter produced after the hadronization time is mainly composed by pions. Experimentally, it has been found
that the pion multiplicity is of the order of ten times larger than the total multiplicity of the next abundant degree of freedom, the kaon.
At moderate temperatures $T \sim 140$ MeV the next mesonic states (kaons and $\eta$ mesons) should be included in the calculation.
The properties of a pion gas at low temperatures are not calculable from perturbative QCD. We will
use effective field theory (ChPT) to describe the interaction between pions. The $SU(2)$ chiral perturbation theory (ChPT)
provides a good description of the scattering amplitudes in the energy range we are interested in.
We will assume that at low temperature the pion gas is dilute enough to only consider binary elastic collisions.
The suppression of the number changing processes ($2 \to 4$ or $4 \to 2$) comes from two sources. First, the Lagrangian
terms describing these processes are of higher order in momentum and therefore are polynomially suppresed at low temperature (as long
as $p \sim \sqrt{mT}$, where $m$ is the physical pion mass $m=138$ MeV).
Second, in the $2 \to 4$ process the energy needed to create two more pions makes this scattering
suppressed by a Boltzmann factor of $e^{-2m}$. Finally, the process $4 \to 2$ is evidently opposed to the spirit of Boltzmann assumptions
for molecular chaos and does not occur at low density. The encounter of four pions is manifiestly unlike to occurs in a dilute gas. Including only elastic scattering, the pion
number is an effectively conserved quantity and a (pseudo-)chemical potential for the pion must be introduced.
The Lagrangian of ChPT with physical pion masses follows a systematic counting based on terms with
even powers of pion momentum and pion mass over the scale $\Lambda \equiv 4\pi F \simeq 1$ GeV:
\be \mathcal{L} = \mathcal{L}_2 + \mathcal{L}_4 + \cdots \ , \ee
where $\mathcal{L}_{2n}$ is $\mathcal{O}[ (p/\Lambda)^{2n}]$ and $\mathcal{O} [ (m/\Lambda)^{2n} ]$. The $G-$parity conservation guarantees that $2n$ is an even number
and it amounts to have interactions between an even number of pions.
The lowest order contribution to the scattering amplitude is the elastic scattering of two pions. We want to stress again that inelastic channels
are suppresed at Lagrangian level (6-particle interaction is described by $\mathcal{L}_6$) and because of Boltzmann
suppression in the final phase-space.
From the power counting scheme in the ChPT Lagrangian the partial scattering amplitudes $t_{IJ}$ (labelled by the isospin and angular momentum channels) are
essentially polymonials in momentum:
\be \label{eq:ampli} t_{IJ}^{(2n)} \sim \mathcal{O} (p^{2n}) \ , \ee
where this term comes from the part of the Lagrangian of order $\mathcal{L}_{2n}$. Truncating the expansion at some finite term gives a scattering amplitude that
increases with energy as $t_{IJ}^{(2n)} \sim s^n$. This effect causes an unphysical increase of the pion-pion cross section at moderate energies and leads to a breaking
of the exact unitarity condition for the scattering amplitude. This conditions reads:
\be \label{eq:unit} \textrm{Im } t_{IJ} (s) = \sqrt{1-4m^2/s} \ |t_{IJ} (s)|^2 \ . \ee
The partial amplitudes in (\ref{eq:ampli}) only satisfy this equation perturbatively, e.g. $\textrm{Im } t_{IJ}^{(2)} (s)=0$, $\textrm{Im } t_{IJ}^{(4)} (s) = \sqrt{1-4m^2/s} \ |t_{IJ}^{(2)} (s)|^2$...
We use the Inverse Amplitude Method \cite{dobado89},\cite{dobado96}, a dispersive method that constructs a new partial amplitude $\tilde{t}_{IJ} (s)$ from
the pertubative ones that exactly satisfies the unitarity condition (\ref{eq:unit}). At lowest order, the unitarized amplitude turns out to be:
\be \label{eq:unitar} \tilde{t}_{IJ} (s)= \frac{t_{IJ}^{(2)} (s)}{1- t_{IJ}^{(4)}(s) / t_{IJ}^{(2)} (s)} \ . \ee
This new amplitude, as rational combination of perturbative amplitudes, makes the pion-pion cross section saturate at moderate energies and allows to dynamically generate
the $\rho$ and $\sigma$ resonances in the $IJ=11$ and $IJ=00$ channels, respectively.
For calculating the transport coefficients, one needs to solve a transport equation for the one-particle distribution function $f^{\pi}$. This transport equation is of the well-known form:
\be \label{eq:transport} \frac{df^{\pi}}{dt} = C[f^{\pi},f^{\pi}] \ . \ee
For a gas of pions the explicit form of the right-hand side is that of the Boltzmann-Uehling-Uhlenbeck (BUU) equation:
\be \label{eq:BUU} \frac{df^{\pi}_p}{dt} = \frac{g_{\pi}}{2} \int d\Gamma_{12,3p} \left[ f^{\pi}_1 f^{\pi}_2 (1+f^{\pi}_3) (1+f^{\pi}_p) -f^{\pi}_3 f^{\pi}_p (1+f^{\pi}_1) (1+f^{\pi}_2)\right] \ , \ee
where $g_{\pi}=3$ and the measure $d\Gamma_{12,3p}$ constains the details of the pion interaction ($1,2 \rightarrow 3,p$)
\be d\Gamma_{12,3p} \equiv \frac{1}{2E_p} |\overline{T}|^2 \prod_{i=1}^3 \frac{d\mathbf{k}_i}{(2\pi)^3 E_i } (2\pi)^4 \delta^{(4)} (k_1+k_2-k_3-p) \ . \ee
The integral equation (\ref{eq:BUU}) is linearized by using the Chapman-Enskog procedure, consisting in an expansion of the distribution function in powers of the Knudsen number ($\epsilon=$ mean free path / characteristic
size of the inhomogeneities of the system)
\be f^{\pi}_p = f_{Bose} + \epsilon f^{(1)} + \cdots \ee
In this sense, the perturbative solution is only valid if hydrodynamics can be applied to our system.
Once the transport equation has been linearized an approximate solution for $f^{(1)}$ is obtained expanding this function in powers of the variable $E_p/m$,
\be \label{eq:expansion} f^{(1)} = \sum_{n=0}^N A_n \left( \frac{E_p}{m} \right)^n \ , \ee
up to some finite $N$. Finally, the linearized BUU equation must be numerically inverted to extract the coefficients $A_n$.
Once $f^{(1)}$ is built from the $A_n$ coefficients, the transport coefficient is expressed as a simple integral (or a scalar product):
\be \textrm{TC } = \langle [ \ \nabla(\textrm{Hydrodynamic field} ) \ ]^{-1} | f^{(1)} \rangle \ . \ee
The shape of the hydrodynamic fields and the parametrization of $f^{(1)}$ are dependent on the transport coefficient we are calculating.
The details of the calculation for the shear viscosity and bulk viscosity can be found in \cite{dobado04}-\cite{dobado08} and \cite{dobado11}, respectively.
In Fig. \ref{fig:coeffs} we show the results for the transport coefficients of a pion gas as a function of temperature and for several values of the pion chemical potential ($\mu \le m$).
In the top panel we show the shear viscosity, the shear viscosity over entropy density and the bulk viscosity. In the bottom panel we show the bulk viscosity over entropy
density, the thermal conductivity and the electrical conductivity.
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\epsfig{file=shear_iam_new.eps,height=4.5cm,width=6cm}
\epsfig{file=kss_iam_new.eps,height=4.5cm,width=6cm}
\epsfig{file=bulk_iam_new.eps,height=4.5cm,width=6cm}
\epsfig{file=bulkovers_iam_new.eps,height=4.5cm,width=6cm}
\epsfig{file=heat_iam_new.eps,height=4.5cm,width=6cm}
\epsfig{file=conduc_iam_new.eps,height=4.5cm,width=6cm}
\caption{Transport coefficients of a unitarized pion gas. Top panel: Shear viscosity, shear viscosity over entropy density and scaled bulk viscosity. Bottom panel: Bulk viscosity over entropy density, thermal conductivity and electrical conductivity. \label{fig:coeffs}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Adding Heavy Quarks to the Medium}
We now include a heavy degree of freedom ($c$ quarks for concreteness) inside the thermalized pion gas. The charm quark
-hadronized into a $D$ or a $D^*$ meson- propagates in the hot medium and interacts with it transferring energy to the pions due to these
collisions. The charm diffusion coefficients describes the energy loss and momentum spreading of these heavy mesons.
Experimentally, the diffusion coefficients are important in order to describe the nuclear modification factor, $R_{AA} = \frac{dN_{AA}^e / dp_T}{<N_{coll}> dN_{pp}^e /dp_T}$
and the elliptic flow of the electrons coming from the semileptonic decays of these heavy mesons \cite{phenix08}. For more details we refer the reader to \cite{abreu11}.
The interaction of the $D$ and $D^*$ mesons with the pions is described by an effective Lagrangian. This Lagrangian encodes
the chiral and the heavy quark symmetries because of the presence of the pions and the charmed mesons, respectively. These two symmetries
are the guiding principles to construct the sucessive orders of the effective Lagrangian \cite{geng10},\cite{abreu11}.
Most of the terms in the Lagrangian are preceded by low energy constants that are not known. Some of these constants can be fixed by symmetry arguments and others
should be adjusted by asking them to correctly reproduce the experimental decay widths or cross sections of charmed resonances. We work at $NLO$ in the chiral expansion and $LO$ in the heavy quark expansion.
After constructing the perturbative scattering amplitude for the $D-\pi$ and $D^*-\pi$ scatterings, we unitarize the amplitudes in the same spirit as for the pion gas.
The unitarization is done by using the ``on-shell' unitarization technique \cite{oller97},\cite{roca05} that consists in solving the Bethe-Salpeter equation
for the $D-\pi$ rescattering. The final expression of the unitarized amplitude resembles very much the rational structure of (\ref{eq:unitar}). Like the Inverse Amplitude Method, the
``on-shell'' unitarization provides a well-behaved cross section. Moreover, we can dynamically generate the $D_0 (2400)$ and $D_1 (2430)$ resonances, that are automatically incorpored in
the calculation.
The transport equation for the distribution function of the $c$ quark reads
\be \frac{df^c}{dt} =C[f^c,f^{\pi}] \ , \ee
in complete analogy with the BUU equation for a gas of pions (\ref{eq:transport}). However the mass of the charmed mesons ($M_D,M_{D^*}$) -much larger
than the pion mass ($m$) or the temperature ($T$)- provides the scale hierarchy
\be \label{eq:masses} M_D, M_{D^*} \ll m \sim T \sim \textrm{transfered momentum} \ , \ee
that simplifies the transport equation for solving the heavy quark distribution function.
The BUU equation tranforms into a Fokker-Planck equation under Eq.~(\ref{eq:masses}):
\be \frac{\partial f^c (t,\mathbf{p})}{\partial t} = \frac{\partial}{\partial p_i} \left[ F_{i} (\mathbf{p}) f^c (t,\mathbf{p})+ \frac{\partial}{\partial p_j} \left( \Gamma_{ij} (\mathbf{p}) f^c (t,\mathbf{p})\right) \right] \ .\ee
Under the assumptions of homogeneity and isotropy one finds three different coefficients that depends on the heavy meson momentum,
one drag force $F(p)$ and two diffusion coefficients $\Gamma_0 (p)$ and $\Gamma_1 (p)$:
\begin{eqnarray}
F_i (\mathbf{p}) & = & F(p) p_i \ , \\
\Gamma_{ij} (\mathbf{p}) & = & \Gamma_0(p) \left( \delta_{ij} - \frac{p_i p_j}{p^2} \right) + \Gamma_1 (p) \frac{p_i p_j}{p^2} \ .
\end{eqnarray}
Because of the fluctuation-dissipation theorem
there are only two independent coefficients. The explicit expression for these coefficients in terms of the scattering amplitude can be found in \cite{abreu11}.
In the static limit $p\rightarrow 0$ only one of them is independent because the two diffusion coefficients become degenerate and also because the
Einstein formula relates this one to the drag force $\Gamma(p \rightarrow 0)=F(p \rightarrow 0)TM_D$.
There are other related quantities, with direct physical interpretation. On the one hand, the spatial diffusion coefficient $D_x$ -that appears in the description of the Brownian motion- is related
to the static diffusion coefficient. On the other hand, momentum and energy losses are directly related to the drag force. The explicit equations for them are the following:
\be D_x=T^2 /\Gamma; \quad -\frac{dp}{dx}=E \times F(p); \quad - \frac{dE}{dx} = p \times F(p)\ . \ee
We summarize the results in Fig.~\ref{fig:diffusion}. We show the two diffusion coefficients $\Gamma_0 (p)$ and $\Gamma_1 (p)$ as a function of the temperature for selected heavy meson momenta.
These diffusion coefficients enter in the description of the momentum anisotropies, i.e. the elliptic flow of the heavy mesons. We also show the same dependence of the heavy meson drag force, that
tells us the momentum losses of the heavy meson affecting to the nuclear modification factor of $D$ and $D^*$ mesons. In the same figure, we show the energy and momentum losses of the heavy
meson that for instance, at $p=1$ GeV leaves about $50$ MeV of momentum per Fermi travelled. Finally, we show the spatial diffusion coefficient
$D_x$ together with some other results along the same lines and the calculation for a perturbative heavy quark inside the quark-gluon plasma (see \cite{abreu11} and references therein).
\begin{figure}[tb]
\begin{center}
\epsfig{file=G0_T_ps.eps,height=4.5cm,width=6cm}
\epsfig{file=G1_T_ps.eps,height=4.5cm,width=6cm}
\epsfig{file=F_T_ps.eps,height=4.5cm,width=6cm}
\epsfig{file=dEdx_both.eps,height=4.5cm,width=6cm}
\epsfig{file=dpdx_both.eps,height=4.5cm,width=6cm}
\epsfig{file=comparison.eps,height=4.5cm,width=6cm}
\caption{Top panels: Values of the two diffusion coefficients and the drag force as a function of temperature and momentum. The three coefficients are related through the fluctuation-dissipation theorem.
Bottom panels: Results for the energy loss, momentum loss and the spatial diffusion coefficient in comparison with other approaches. All the plots has been extracted from \cite{abreu11}. \label{fig:diffusion}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
We have described the theoretical calculation of the transport coefficient of a meson gas at low temperatures. We have studied the pure pion gas and the case where charm degrees of freedom are added to this gas.
For both cases, we have used an effective Lagrangian to describe the interactions between the mesons and we have provided unitarization schemes to ensure that the scattering amplitudes are properly unitarized.
All these coefficients provide valuable information about the experimental observables that reflects collective phenomena of the medium, such as flow harmonics and nuclear modification factors.
We believe that a better understanding of these non-equilibrium effects will provide a better estimation of these observables and an accurate description of the properties of the matter produced at relativistic heavy ion collisions. \\
{ \it Work supported by grants FPA 2008-00592 and AIC10-D-000582 (Spain). The author is recipient of an FPU scholarship from the Spanish Ministry of Education (AP2008-0083).
Work done in collaboration with A. Dobado, F.J. Llanes-Estrada, L.M. Abreu and D. Cabrera.}
|
\section{Introduction}
The Dirac system with a scalar and an electromagnetic potentials is
considered. In \cite{KrAntonio} (see also \cite{APFT}) it was shown that in
the time-harmonic case and when the whole model is independent of one of the
spatial variables the system reduces to a pair of decoupled Vekua-type
equations which differ from the classical Vekua equations considered in the
theory of generalized analytic or pseudoanalytic functions \cite{Berskniga},
\cite{APFT}, \cite{Vekua} by the fact that they are bicomplex. In \cit
{KrAntonio} using this reduction as well as a procedure introduced by L.
Bers, for an arbitrary scalar potential depending on one Cartesian variable
an infinite family of solutions of the Dirac system was constructed.
Nevertheless the completeness of this family in the linear space of all
solutions was not proved due to the lack of some fundamental results in the
theory of bicomplex Vekua equations such as the similarity principle and
many other.
The constructed family of solutions is a system of formal powers
generalizing those introduced by L. Bers onto the bicomplex situation.
Meanwhile in the classical complex case there is a well developed theory of
formal powers with the Runge-type approximation theorem and other related
results (see \cite{CCK} and references therein), in the bicomplex case up to
now no such result was available even for simplest examples.
In the present work we prove the completeness of the family of solutions
obtained in \cite{KrAntonio} by using so-called transmutation operators and
some recent results on their mapping properties \cite{CKT}. The notion and
the name of the transmutation operator appeared in the work of J. Delsarte
\cite{Delsarte1}, \cite{Delsarte2} and later developed in \cit
{DelsarteLions}, \cite{Lions} and many other publications \cite{Gilbert},
\cite{Carroll}, \cite{LevInverse}, \cite{Marchenko}, \cite{Sitnik}, \cit
{Trimeche}. Combining the results from \cite{CKT} on mapping properties of
the transmutation operators with the results from \cite{KT} on the
construction of a transmutation operator for the Darboux transformed Sch
\"{o}dinger equation we obtain transmutation operators which relate the
bicomplex Vekua equations arising from the Dirac system with the
Cauchy-Riemann equation. Using this result we prove that the bicomplex
pseudoanalytic formal powers are the result of application of a
corresponding transmutation operator to the usual powers of the complex
variable $z$. This together with the boundedness of the transmutation
operator and of its inverse allows us to prove the expansion and the Runge
approximation theorems for solutions of the considered bicomplex Vekua
equations.
\bigskip
\section{The Dirac system and bicomplex pseudoanalytic functions}
Consider the Dirac operator
\index{Dirac operator}with a scalar and an electromagnetic potential
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{D}=\gamma _{0}\partial _{t}+\sum_{k=1}^{3}\gamma _{k}\partial
_{k}+i\left( m+p_{el}\gamma _{0}+\sum_{k=1}^{3}A_{k}\gamma _{k}+p_{sc}\right)
\end{equation*
where $\gamma _{j},$ $j=0,1,2,3$ are usual $\gamma $-matrices (see, e.g.,
\cite{BD}, \cite{Thaller})
\begin{equation*}
\gamma _{0}:=\left(
\begin{array}{rrrr}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & -
\end{array
\right) ,\hskip48pt\gamma _{1}:=\left(
\begin{array}{rrrr}
0 & 0 & 0 & -1 \\
0 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
1 & 0 & 0 &
\end{array
\right) ,
\end{equation*
\begin{equation*}
\gamma _{2}:=\left(
\begin{array}{rrrr}
0 & 0 & 0 & i \\
0 & 0 & -i & 0 \\
0 & -i & 0 & 0 \\
i & 0 & 0 &
\end{array
\right) ,\hskip48pt\gamma _{3}:=\left(
\begin{array}{rrrr}
0 & 0 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 \\
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & -1 & 0 &
\end{array
\right) ,
\end{equation*
$m\in \mathbb{R}$, $p_{el}$, $A_{k}$ and $p_{sc}$ are real valued functions.
We will denote the algebra of biquaternions or complex quaternions by
\mathbb{H(C)}$ with the standard basic quaternionic units denoted by
e_{0}=1 $, $e_{1},e_{2}$ and $e_{3}$. The complex imaginary unit is denoted
by $i$ as usual. The set of purely vectorial quaternions $q=\mathbf{q}$ is
identified with the set of three-dimensional vectors.
The quaternionic conjugation of a biquaternion $q=q_{0}+\mathbf{q}$ will be
denoted as
\overline{q}=q_{0}-\mathbf{q}$. Sometimes the following notation for the
operator of multiplication from the right-hand side will be used
M^{p}q=q\cdot p$.
The main quaternionic differential operator introduced by Hamilton himself
and sometimes called the Moisil-Theodoresco operator is defined on
continuously differentiable biquaternion-valued functions of the real
variables $x_{1}$, $x_{2}$ and $x_{3}$ according to the rul
\begin{equation*}
Dq=\sum_{k=1}^{3}e_{k}\partial _{k}q,
\end{equation*
where $\partial _{k}=\frac{\partial }{\partial x_{k}}$.
In \cite{Krbag} (see also \cite{CK2003}, \cite{AQA}, \cite{KSbook}) a simple
invertible matrix transformation was obtained which allows one to rewrite
the classical Dirac equation in biquaternionic terms. Namely, the Dirac
operator $\mathbb{D}$ is equivalent to the biquaternionic operator
\begin{equation*}
R=D-\partial _{t}M^{e_{1}}+\mathbf{a}+M^{-i(\widetilde{p}_{el}e_{1}-i
\widetilde{p}_{sc}+m)e_{2})}
\end{equation*
where $\mathbf{a}=i(\widetilde{A}_{1}e_{1}+\widetilde{A}_{2}e_{2}-\widetilde
A}_{3}e_{3})$ and the notation \ \textquotedblleft $\widetilde{\cdot }
\textquotedblright\ $\ $means the reflection with respect to $x_{3}$,
\widetilde{f}:=f(t,x_{1},x_{2},-x_{3})$. Note that in the absence of the
electromagnetic potential the operator $R$ becomes real quaternionic which
is an important property (see \cite{KrRam}).
In what follows we assume that potentials are time-independent and consider
solutions with a fixed energy: $\Phi (t,\mathbf{x})=\Phi _{\omega }(\mathbf{
})e^{i\omega t}$. The equation for $\Phi _{\omega }$ has the for
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{D}_{\omega }\Phi _{\omega }=0\qquad \text{in }\widehat{G}
\label{DiracOmega}
\end{equation
where $\widehat{G}$ is a domain in $\mathbb{R}^{3}$
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{D}_{\omega }=i\omega \gamma _{0}+\sum_{k=1}^{3}\gamma _{k}\partial
_{k}+i\left( m+p_{el}\gamma _{0}+\sum_{k=1}^{3}A_{k}\gamma
_{k}+p_{sc}\right) .
\end{equation*
Under the mentioned above matrix transformation the operator $\mathbb{D
_{\omega }$ turns into its biquaternionic counterpart
\begin{equation*}
R_{\omega }=D+\mathbf{a}+M^{\mathbf{b}}
\end{equation*
with $\mathbf{b}=-i((\widetilde{p}_{el}+\omega )e_{1}-i(\widetilde{p
_{sc}+m)e_{2})$. Thus, equation (\ref{DiracOmega}) turns into the complex
quaternionic equation
\begin{equation}
R_{\omega }q=0 \label{ROmega}
\end{equation
where $q$ is a complex quaternion valued function. In what follows we study
this equation.
Let us introduce the following notation. For any biquaternion $q$ we denote
by $Q_{1}$ and $Q_{2}$ its bicomplex component
\index{bicomplex number}
\begin{equation*}
Q_{1}=q_{0}+q_{3}e_{3}\qquad
\text{and\qquad }Q_{2}=q_{2}-q_{1}e_{3}.
\end{equation*
Then $q$ can be represented as follows $q=Q_{1}+Q_{2}e_{2}$. For the
operator $D$ we have $D=D_{1}+D_{2}e_{2}$ with $D_{1}=e_{3}\partial _{3}$
and $D_{2}=\partial _{2}-\partial _{1}e_{3}$. Notice that $\mathbf{b}=Be_{2}$
with $B=-(\widetilde{p}_{sc}+m)+i(\widetilde{p}_{el}+\omega )e_{3}$,
\mathbf{a}=A_{1}+A_{2}e_{2}$ with $A_{1}=a_{3}e_{3}$ and
A_{2}=a_{2}-a_{1}e_{3}$.
We obtain that equation (\ref{ROmega}) is equivalent to the syste
\begin{equation}
D_{1}Q_{1}-D_{2}\overline{Q}_{2}+A_{1}Q_{1}-A_{2}\overline{Q}_{2}-\overline
B}Q_{2}=0, \label{Diracsys1}
\end{equation
\begin{equation}
D_{2}\overline{Q}_{1}+D_{1}Q_{2}+A_{2}\overline{Q}_{1}+A_{1}Q_{2}+BQ_{1}=0,
\label{Diracsys2}
\end{equation}
where $Q_{1}$ and $Q_{2}$ are bicomplex components of $q$. We stress \ that
the system (\ref{Diracsys1}), (\ref{Diracsys2}) is equivalent to the Dirac
equation in $\gamma$-matrices (\ref{DiracOmega}).
Let us suppose all fields in our model to be independent of $x_{3}$, and
A_{1}=a_{3}e_{3}\equiv 0$. Then the system (\ref{Diracsys1}), (\re
{Diracsys2}) decouples, and we obtain two separate bicomplex equations \cit
{KrAntonio}, \cite{APFT}
\begin{equation*}
\overline{D}_{2}Q_{2}=-\overline{A}_{2}Q_{2}-B\overline{Q}_{2},\quad \text
and}\quad \overline{D}_{2}Q_{1}=-\overline{A}_{2}Q_{1}-\overline{B}\overline
Q}_{1}.
\end{equation*
Denote $\overline{\partial }=\overline{D}_{2}$, $a=-\overline{A}_{2}$, $b=-B
, $w=Q_{2}$, $W=Q_{1}$, $z=x+y\mathbf{k}$, where $x=x_{2}$, $y=x_{1}$ and
for convenience we denote $\mathbf{k}=e_{3}$. Then we reduce the Dirac
equation with electromagnetic and scalar potentials independent of $x_{3}$
to a pair of Vekua-type equation
\begin{equation}
\overline{\partial }w=aw+b\overline{w} \label{Vekua1D}
\end{equation
and
\begin{equation}
\overline{\partial }W=aW+\overline{bW}. \label{Vekua2}
\end{equation}
\section{Some definitions and results from bicomplex pseudoanalytic function
theory}
\begin{definition}
We consider $\mathbb{B}$-valued functions of two real variables $x$ and $y$.
Denote $\overline{\partial }=\frac{1}{2}(\frac{\partial }{\partial x}
\mathbf{k}\frac{\partial }{\partial y})$ and $\partial =\frac{1}{2}(\frac
\partial }{\partial x}-\mathbf{k}\frac{\partial }{\partial y})$. An equation
of the form
\begin{equation}
\overline{\partial }w=aw+b\overline{w}, \label{Vekuabic}
\end{equation
where $w$, $a$ and $b$ are $\mathbb{B}$-valued functions is called a
bicomplex Vekua equation. When all the involved functions have their values
in $\mathbb{C}_{\mathbf{k}}$ only, equation (\ref{Vekuabic}) becomes the
well known complex Vekua equation (see \cite{APFT}, \cite{Vekua}). We will
assume that $w\in C^{1}(\Omega )$ where $\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^{2}$ is
an open domain and $a$, $b$ are H\"{o}lder continuous in $\Omega $.
\end{definition}
When $a\equiv0$ and $b=\frac{\overline{\partial}\phi}{\phi}$ where $\phi
\overline{\Omega}\rightarrow\mathbb{C}_{i}$ possesses H\"{o}lder continuous
partial derivatives in $\Omega$ and $\phi(x,y)\neq0$, $\forall(x,y)\i
\overline{\Omega}$ we will say that the bicomplex Vekua equation
\begin{equation}
\overline{\partial}w=\frac{\overline{\partial}\phi}{\phi}\overline {w}
\label{Vekuamain}
\end{equation}
is a Vekua equation of the main type or the main Vekua equation.
For classical complex Vekua equations Bers introduced \cite{Berskniga} the
notions of a generating pair, generating sequence, formal powers and Taylor
series in formal powers. As was shown in \cite{KrAntonio}, \cite{APFT} the
definition of these notions can be extended onto the bicomplex situation.
Here we briefly recall the main definitions.
\begin{definition}
A pair of $\mathbb{B}$-valued functions $F$ and $G$ possessing H\"{o}lder
continuous partial derivatives in $\Omega$ with respect to the real
variables $x$ and $y$ is said to be a generating pair if it satisfies the
inequalit
\begin{equation}
\func{Vec}(\overline{F}G)\neq0\qquad\text{in }\Omega. \label{condGenPair}
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
Condition (\ref{condGenPair}) implies that every bicomplex function $w$
defined in a subdomain of $\Omega$ admits the unique representation $w=\phi
F+\psi G$ where the functions $\phi$ and $\psi$ are scalar ($\mathbb{C}_{i}
-valued).
\begin{remark}
\label{RemBanalytic}When $F\equiv 1$ and $G\equiv \mathbf{k}$ the
corresponding bicomplex Vekua equation is
\begin{equation}
\overline{\partial }w=0, \label{C-Rbic}
\end{equation
and its study in fact reduces to the complex analytic function theory \cit
{CKT}. Indeed, consider the following pair of idempotents $\mathbf{P}^{+}
\frac{1}{2}(1+i\mathbf{k})$ and $\mathbf{P}^{-}=\frac{1}{2}(1-i\mathbf{k})$
$\left( \mathbf{P}^{\pm }\right) ^{2}=\mathbf{P}^{\pm }$). Then the
functions $\mathbf{P}^{+}w$ and $\mathbf{P}^{-}w$ are necessarily
antiholomorphic and holomorphic respectively. Indeed, application of
\mathbf{P}^{+}$ and $\mathbf{P}^{-}$ to (\ref{C-Rbic}) gives us
\begin{equation}
\partial _{z}\mathbf{P}^{+}w=0\quad \text{and}\quad \partial _{\overline{z}
\mathbf{P}^{-}w=0 \label{dP}
\end{equation
where $\partial _{z}=\frac{1}{2}(\frac{\partial }{\partial x}-i\frac
\partial }{\partial y})$ and $\partial _{\overline{z}}=\frac{1}{2}(\frac
\partial }{\partial x}+i\frac{\partial }{\partial y})$. Moreover, $\mathbf{P
^{+}w=\mathbf{P}^{+}(u+jv)=\mathbf{P}^{+}(u-iv)$ and $\mathbf{P}^{-}w
\mathbf{P}^{-}(u+iv)$. Due to (\ref{dP}) the scalar functions $w^{+}:=u-iv$
and $w^{-}:=u+iv$ are antiholomorphic and holomorphic respectively. We
stress that $w^{+}$ is not necessarily a complex conjugate of $w^{-}$ ($u$
and $v$ are $\mathbb{C}_{i}$-valued).
Let us notice that due to the equivalence of (\ref{C-Rbic}) and (\ref{dP})
we have that a bicomplex solution $w$ of (\ref{C-Rbic}) admits a convergent
Taylor series $w(z)=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty }a_{n}z^{n}$ if and only if the
series $\sum_{n=0}^{\infty }a_{n}^{+}\left( z^{+}\right) ^{n}$ and
\sum_{n=0}^{\infty }a_{n}^{-}\left( z^{-}\right) ^{n}$ corresponding to
w^{+}$ and $w^{-}$ respectively converge (here $a_{n}^{\pm }$ and $z^{\pm }$
are scalars, $a_{n}^{\pm }=Sc\left( a_{n}\right) \mp iVec\left( a_{n}\right)
$ and $z^{\pm }=x\mp iy$). In particular, the radius of convergence of the
power series $\sum_{n=0}^{\infty }a_{n}z^{n}$ has the form $R=\min \left\{
R_{+},R_{-}\right\} $ where $1/R_{\pm }=\lim \sup_{n\rightarrow \infty
}\left\vert a_{n}^{\pm }\right\vert ^{1/n}$.
\end{remark}
Assume that $(F,G)$ is a generating pair in a domain $\Omega $.
\begin{definition}
Let the $\mathbb{B}$-valued function $w$ be defined in a neighborhood of
z_{0}\in \Omega \subset \mathbb{C}_{\mathbf{k}}$. In a complete analogy with
the complex case we say that at $z_{0}$ the function $w$ possesses the
(F,G) $-derivativ
\index{(F,G)-derivative} $\overset{\cdot }{w}(z_{0})$ if the (finite) limit
\begin{equation}
\overset{\cdot }{w}(z_{0})=\lim_{z\rightarrow z_{0}
\frac{w(z)-\lambda _{0}F(z)-\mu _{0}G(z)}{z-z_{0}} \label{derivative_def}
\end{equation
exists where $\lambda _{0}$ and $\mu _{0}$ are the unique scalar constants
such that $w(z_{0})=\lambda _{0}F(z_{0})+\mu _{0}G(z_{0})$.
\end{definition}
Similarly to the complex case (see, e.g., \cite[Chapter 2]{APFT}) it is easy
to show that if $\overset{\cdot}{w}(z_{0})$ exists then at $z_{0}$,
\overline{\partial}w$ and $\partial w$ exist and equations
\begin{equation}
\overline{\partial}w=a_{(F,G)}w+b_{(F,G)}\overline{w} \label{Vekua_equation}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\overset{\cdot}{w}=\partial w-A_{(F,G)}w-B_{(F,G)}\overline{w}
\label{derivative_with_characteristic}
\end{equation}
hold, where $a_{(F,G)}$, $b_{(F,G)}$, $A_{(F,G)}$ and $B_{(F,G)}$ are the
\emph{characteristic coefficients
\index{characteristic coefficients} of the pair $(F,G)$ defined by the
formulas
\begin{equation*}
a_{(F,G)}=
\frac{\overline{F}\,\overline{\partial}G-\overline{G}\,\overline{\partial}F}
F\overline{G}-\overline{F}G},\qquad b_{(F,G)}=\frac{F\,\overline{\partial
G-G\,\overline{\partial}F}{F\overline {G}-\overline{F}G},
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
A_{(F,G)}=-\frac{\overline{F}\,\partial G-\overline{G}\,\partial F}{
\overline{G}-\overline{F}G},\qquad B_{(F,G)}=\frac{F\,\partial G-G\,\partial
F}{F\overline{G}-\overline{F}G}.
\end{equation*
Note that $F\overline{G}-\overline{F}G=-2\mathbf{k}\func{Vec}(\overline{F
G)\neq 0$.
If $\overline{\partial}w$ and $\partial w$ exist and are continuous in some
neighborhood of $z_{0}$, and if (\ref{Vekua_equation}) holds at $z_{0}$,
then $\overset{\cdot}{w}(z_{0})$ exists, and (\re
{derivative_with_characteristic}) holds. Let us notice that $F$ and $G$
possess $(F,G)$-derivatives, $\overset{\cdot}{F}\equiv\overset{\cdot}{G
\equiv0$ and the following equalities are valid which determine the
characteristic coefficients uniquel
\begin{equation*}
\overline{\partial}F=a_{(F,G)}F+b_{(F,G)}\overline{F},\quad\overline
\partial }G=a_{(F,G)}G+b_{(F,G)}\overline{G},
\end{equation*
\begin{equation*}
\partial F=A_{(F,G)}F+B_{(F,G)}\overline{F},\quad\partial
G=A_{(F,G)}G+B_{(F,G)}\overline{G}.
\end{equation*}
If the $(F,G)$-derivative of a $\mathbb{B}$-valued function $w=\phi F+\psi G$
(where the functions $\phi$ and $\psi$ are scalar) exists, besides the form
\ref{derivative_with_characteristic}) it can also be written as follows
\overset{\cdot}{w}=\partial\phi\,F+\partial\psi\,G$.
\begin{definition}
\label{DefSuccessor_bi}Let $(F,G)$ and $(F_{1},G_{1})$ -- be two generating
pairs in $\Omega$. $(F_{1},G_{1})$ is called \ successor of $(F,G)$ and
(F,G)$ is called predecessor of $(F_{1},G_{1})$ i
\begin{equation*}
a_{(F_{1},G_{1})}=a_{(F,G)}\qquad\text{and}\qquad
b_{(F_{1},G_{1})}=-B_{(F,G)}\text{.}
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
By analogy with the complex case we have the following statement.
\begin{theorem}
\label{ThBersDer_bi}Let $w$ be a bicomplex $(F,G)$-pseudoanalytic function
and let $(F_{1},G_{1})$ be a successor of $(F,G)$. Then $\overset{\cdot}{w}$
is a bicomplex $(F_{1},G_{1})$-pseudoanalytic function.
\end{theorem}
\begin{definition}
\label{DefAdjoint_bi}Let $(F,G)$ be a generating pair. Its adjoint
generating pair $(F,G)^{\ast}=(F^{\ast},G^{\ast})$ is defined by the formula
\begin{equation*}
F^{\ast}=-\frac{2\overline{F}}{F\overline{G}-\overline{F}G},\qquad G^{\ast }
\frac{2\overline{G}}{F\overline{G}-\overline{F}G}.
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
The $(F,G)$-integral is defined as follows
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\Gamma}Wd_{(F,G)}z=\frac{1}{2}\left( F(z_{1})\func{Sc
\int_{\Gamma}G^{\ast}Wdz+G(z_{1})\func{Sc}\int_{\Gamma}F^{\ast }Wdz\right)
\end{equation*}
where $\Gamma$ is a rectifiable curve leading from $z_{0}$ to $z_{1}$.
If $W=\phi F+\psi G$ is a bicomplex $(F,G)$-pseudoanalytic function where
\phi $ and $\psi $ are complex valued functions then
\begin{equation}
\int_{z_{0}}^{z}\overset{\cdot }{W}d_{(F,G)}z=W(z)-\phi (z_{0})F(z)-\psi
(z_{0})G(z), \label{FGAntD}
\end{equation
and this integral is path-independent and represents the $(F,G)
-antiderivative of $\overset{\cdot }{W}$.
\begin{definition}
\label{DefSeq_bi}A sequence of generating pairs $\left\{
(F_{m},G_{m})\right\} $, $m=0,\pm1,\pm2,\ldots$ , is called a generating
sequence if $(F_{m+1},G_{m+1})$ is a successor of $(F_{m},G_{m})$. If
(F_{0},G_{0})=(F,G)$, we say that $(F,G)$ is embedded in $\left\{
(F_{m},G_{m})\right\} $.
\end{definition}
Let $W$ be a bicomplex $(F,G)$-pseudoanalytic function. Using a generating
sequence in which $(F,G)$ is embedded we can define the higher derivatives
of $W$ by the recursion formul
\begin{equation*}
W^{[0]}=W;\qquad W^{[m+1]}=\frac{d_{(F_{m},G_{m})}W^{[m]}}{dz},\quad
m=1,2,\ldots\text{.}
\end{equation*}
\begin{definition}
\label{DefFormalPower_bi}The formal power $Z_{m}^{(0)}(a,z_{0};z)$ with
center at $z_{0}\in\Omega$, coefficient $a$ and exponent $0$ is defined as
the linear combination of the generators $F_{m}$, $G_{m}$ with scalar
constant coefficients $\lambda$, $\mu$ chosen so that $\lambda
F_{m}(z_{0})+\mu G_{m}(z_{0})=a$. The formal powers with exponents
n=0,1,2,\ldots$ are defined by the recursion formul
\begin{equation}
Z_{m}^{(n+1)}(a,z_{0};z)=(n+1)\int_{z_{0}}^{z}Z_{m+1}^{(n)}(a,z_{0}
\zeta)d_{(F_{m},G_{m})}\zeta. \label{recformulaD}
\end{equation}
\end{definition}
This definition implies the following properties.
\begin{enumerate}
\item $Z_{m}^{(n)}(a,z_{0};z)$ is an $(F_{m},G_{m})$-pseudoanalytic function
of $z$.
\item If $a^{\prime }$ and $a^{\prime \prime }$ are scalar constants, then
\begin{equation*}
Z_{m}^{(n)}(a^{\prime }+\mathbf{k}a^{\prime \prime },z_{0};z)=a^{\prime
}Z_{m}^{(n)}(1,z_{0};z)+a^{\prime \prime }Z_{m}^{(n)}(\mathbf{k},z_{0};z).
\end{equation*}
\item The formal powers satisfy the differential relation
\begin{equation*}
\frac{d_{(F_{m},G_{m})}Z_{m}^{(n)}(a,z_{0};z)}{dz
=nZ_{m+1}^{(n-1)}(a,z_{0};z).
\end{equation*}
\item The asymptotic formulas
\begin{equation*}
Z_{m}^{(n)}(a,z_{0};z)\sim a(z-z_{0})^{n},\quad z\rightarrow z_{0}
\end{equation*}
hold.
\end{enumerate}
The case of the main bicomplex Vekua equation is of a special interest also
due to the following relation with the stationary Schr\"{o}dinger equation.
\begin{theorem}
\cite{KrJPhys06} Let $W=W_{1}+\mathbf{k}W_{2}$ be a solution of the main
bicomplex Vekua equation
\begin{equation}
\overline{\partial }W=\frac{\overline{\partial }\phi }{\phi }\overline{W
\quad \text{in }\Omega \label{mainV}
\end{equation
where $W_{1}=\func{Sc}W$, $W_{2}=\func{Vec}W$ and the $\mathbb{C}_{i}
-valued function $\phi $ is a nonvanishing solution of the equation
\begin{equation}
-\Delta u+q_{1}(x,y)u=0\quad \text{in }\Omega \label{eqq1}
\end{equation
where $q_{1}$ is a continuous $\mathbb{C}_{i}$-valued function. Then $W_{1}$
is a solution of (\ref{eqq1}) in $\Omega $ and $W_{2}$ is a solution of the
associated Schr\"{o}dinger equation
\begin{equation}
-\Delta v+q_{2}(x,y)v=0\quad \text{in }\Omega \label{eqq2}
\end{equation
where $q_{2}=8\frac{\overline{\partial }\phi \,\partial \phi }{\phi ^{2}
-q_{1}$.
\end{theorem}
We need the following notation. Let $w$ be a $\mathbb{B}$-valued function
defined on a simply connected domain $\Omega$ with $w_{1}=\func{Sc}w$ and
w_{2}=\func{Vec}w$ such that
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial w_{1}}{\partial y}-\frac{\partial w_{2}}{\partial x
=0,\quad\forall\,(x,y)\in\Omega, \label{compcond}
\end{equation}
and let $\Gamma\subset\Omega$ be a rectifiable curve leading from
(x_{0},y_{0})$ to $(x,y)$. Then the integral
\begin{equation*}
\overline{A}w(x,y):=2\left( \int_{\Gamma}w_{1}dx+w_{2}dy\right)
\end{equation*}
is path-independent, and all $\mathbb{C}_{i}$-valued solutions $\varphi$ of
the equation $\overline{\partial}\varphi=w$ in $\Omega$ have the form
\varphi(x,y)=\overline{A}w(x,y)+c$ where $c$ is an arbitrary $\mathbb{C}_{i}
-constant. In other words the operator $\overline{A}$ denotes the well known
operation for reconstructing the potential function from its gradient.
\begin{theorem}
\cite{KrJPhys06} Let $W_{1}$ be a $\mathbb{C}_{i}$-valued solution of the
Schr\"{o}dinger equation (\ref{eqq1}) in a simply connected domain $\Omega
. Then a $\mathbb{C}_{i}$-valued solution $W_{2}$ of the associated Schr\"{o
dinger equation (\ref{eqq2}) such that $W_{1}+\mathbf{k}W_{2}$ is a solution
of (\ref{mainV}) in $\Omega $ can be constructed according to the formula
\begin{equation*}
W_{2}=\frac{1}{\phi }\overline{A}\left( \mathbf{k}\,\phi ^{2}\,\overline
\partial }\left( \frac{W_{1}}{\phi }\right) \right) +\frac{c_{1}}{\phi }
\end{equation*
where $c_{1}$ is an arbitrary $\mathbb{C}_{i}$-constant.
Vice versa, given a solution $W_{2}$ of (\ref{eqq2}), the corresponding \
solution $W_{1}$ of (\ref{eqq1}) such that $W_{1}+\mathbf{k}W_{2}$ is a
solution of (\ref{mainV}) has the form
\begin{equation*}
W_{1}=-\phi \overline{A}\left( \frac{\mathbf{k}}{\phi ^{2}}\,\overline
\partial }\left( \phi W_{2}\right) \right) +c_{2}\phi
\end{equation*
where $c_{2}$ is an arbitrary $\mathbb{C}_{i}$-constant.
\end{theorem}
As was shown in \cite{KrRecentDevelopments} (see also \cite{APFT}) a
generating sequence can be obtained in a closed form, for example, in the
case when $\phi $ has a separable form $\phi =S(s)T(t)$ where $s$ and $t$
are conjugate harmonic functions and $S$, $T$ are arbitrary twice
continuously differentiable functions. In practical terms this means that
whenever the Schr\"{o}dinger equation (\ref{eqq1}) admits a particular
nonvanishing solution having the form $\phi =f(\xi )\,g(\eta )$ where $(\xi
,\eta )$ is one of the encountered in physics orthogonal coordinate systems
in the plane a generating sequence corresponding to (\ref{mainV}) can be
obtained explicitly \cite[Sect. 4.8]{APFT}. The knowledge of a generating
sequence allows one to construct the formal powers following Definition \re
{DefFormalPower_bi}. This construction is a simple algorithm which can be
quite easily and efficiently realized numerically \cite{CCK}, \cite{CKR}.
Moreover, in the case of a complex main Vekua equation which in the
notations admitted in the present paper corresponds to the case of $\phi $
being a real-valued function (then the main bicomplex Vekua equation
decouples into two main complex Vekua equations) the completeness of the
system of formal powers was proved \cite{CCK} in the sense that any
pseudoanalytic in $\Omega $ and H\"{o}lder continuous on $\partial \Omega $
function can be approximated uniformly and arbitrarily closely by a finite
linear combination of the formal powers. The real parts of the complex
pseudoanalytic formal powers represent then a complete system of solutions
of one Schr\"{o}dinger equation meanwhile the imaginary parts give us a
complete system of solutions of the associated Schr\"{o}dinger equation.
\section{Transmutation operators and a complete family of solutions of the
Dirac equation}
Let us consider the following situation $p_{sc}=p(x),$ $p_{el}=0$ and
\overrightarrow{A}=0$. Then the Dirac equation is equivalent to the pair of
bicomplex Vekua equation
\begin{equation}
\overline{\partial }w=b\overline{w} \label{6}
\end{equation
\begin{equation}
\overline{\partial }W=\overline{bW} \label{7}
\end{equation
where $b=p(x)+m-i\omega \mathbf{k}$.
Let $P$ denote an antiderivative of $p$. Consider the functio
\begin{equation*}
\phi (x,y)=e^{P(x)+mx+i\omega y}
\end{equation*
Note that $\overline{\partial }\phi /\phi =\overline{b}$. Then if $W$ is a
solution of $\left( \ref{7}\right) $ then the complex valued function
W_{1}=Sc(W)$ is a solution of the Schr\"{o}dinger equation
\begin{equation*}
\left( -\Delta +\nu \right) W_{1}=0,\text{ with }\upsilon (x)=p\text
\'{
}(x)+\left( p(x)+m\right) ^{2}-\omega ^{2}
\end{equation*
and the complex valued function $W_{2}=Vec(W)$ is a solution of the
associated Schr\"{o}dinger equation
\begin{equation*}
\left( -\Delta +\mu \right) W_{2}=0,\text{ with }\mu (x)=-p\text
\'{
}(x)+\left( p(x)+m\right) ^{2}-\omega ^{2}
\end{equation*}
On the other hand equation $\left( \ref{7}\right) $ can be written as a main
Vekua equatio
\begin{equation}
\left( \overline{\partial }-\frac{\overline{\partial }\phi }{\phi }C\right)
W=0 \label{8}
\end{equation
where
\begin{equation*}
\phi (x,y)=f(x)g(y)\text{ with }f(x)=e^{P(x)+mx}\text{ \ and \
g(y)=e^{i\omega y}
\end{equation*
Notice that $f$ and $g$ are complex valued functions. We assume that their
domains of definitions are finite segments $\left[ -a,a\right] $ and $\left[
-b,b\right] $ respectively. Assuming that $p\in C^{1}\left[ -a,a\right] $ we
obtain that $f$ and $g$ are nonvanishing $C^{2}$-functions. The separable
form of $\phi $ allows us to write down a generating pair associated with
equation (\ref{8}) $\left( F,G\right) =(\phi ,\mathbf{k}/\phi )$ as well as
a generating sequence of the period two embedding this generating pair
\begin{eqnarray*}
\text{\ }\left( F,G\right) &=&(\phi ,\mathbf{k}/\phi )\text{; \ }\left(
F_{1},G_{1}\right) =\left( \phi /f^{2},\mathbf{k}f^{2}/\phi \right) \text{ \
} \\
\text{ \ }\left( F_{2},G_{2}\right) &=&\left( F,G\right) \text{ \ ; \ \
\left( F_{3},G_{3}\right) =\left( F_{1},G_{1}\right) \text{ \ ; \ }....
\end{eqnarray*
The corresponding formal powers can be constructed as follows. We consider
the formal powers with the centre in the origin and for simplicity assume
that $f(0)=1$ (for $g$ this is also the case). Define the following systems
of functions $\left\{ \varphi _{k}\right\} _{k=0}^{\infty }$ and $\left\{
\psi _{k}\right\} _{k=0}^{\infty }$
\begin{equation}
\varphi _{k}(x)=\QATOPD\{ . {f(x)X^{(k)}(x)\text{, }k\text{ odd}}{f(x
\widetilde{X}^{(k)}(x)\text{, }k\text{ even}} \label{9}
\end{equation
where
\begin{eqnarray*}
X^{(0)}(x) &=&\widetilde{X}^{(0)}(x)=1 \\
\text{\ }X^{(n)}(x) &=&n\int_{o}^{x}X^{(n-1)}(\rho )\left[ f^{2}(\rho
\right] ^{(-1)^{n}}d\rho \text{ } \\
\text{\ }\widetilde{X}^{(n)}(x) &=&n\int_{o}^{x}\widetilde{X}^{(n-1)}(\rho
\left[ f^{2}(\rho )\right] ^{(-1)^{n-1}}d\rho
\end{eqnarray*
an
\begin{equation}
\psi _{k}(y)=\QATOPD\{ . {g(y)Y^{(k)}(y)\text{, }k\text{ odd}}{g(y
\widetilde{Y}^{(k)}(y)\text{, }k\text{ even}} \label{10}
\end{equation
wher
\begin{eqnarray*}
Y^{(0)}(y) &=&\widetilde{Y}^{(0)}(y)=1 \\
\text{\ }Y^{(n)}(y) &=&n\int_{o}^{x}Y^{(n-1)}(\xi )\left[ g^{2}(\xi )\right]
^{(-1)^{n}}d\xi \\
\text{\ }\widetilde{Y}^{(n)}(y) &=&n\int_{o}^{x}\widetilde{Y}^{(n-1)}(\xi
\left[ g^{2}(\xi )\right] ^{(-1)^{n-1}}d\xi .
\end{eqnarray*}
Then the formal powers based on the given generating sequence are defined by
the formula
\begin{equation}
Z^{(n)}(\alpha ,0;z)=\phi (x,y)Sc_{\ast }Z^{(n)}(\alpha ,0;z)+\frac{\mathbf{
}}{\phi (x,y)}Vec_{\ast }Z^{(n)}(\alpha ,0;z) \label{Zn}
\end{equation
wher
\begin{equation}
_{\ast }Z^{(n)}(\alpha ,0;z)=\QATOPD\{ . {\alpha
{\acute{}
\dsum\limits_{m=0}^{n}\binom{n}{m}X^{(n-m)}\mathbf{k}^{m}\widetilde{Y}^{(m)}
\mathbf{k}\alpha
{\acute{}
{\acute{}
\dsum\limits_{m=0}^{n}\binom{n}{m}\widetilde{X}^{(n-m)}\mathbf{k}^{m}Y^{(m)
\text{, }n\text{ odd}}{\alpha
{\acute{}
\dsum\limits_{m=0}^{n}\binom{n}{m}\widetilde{X}^{(n-m)}\mathbf{k}^{m
\widetilde{Y}^{(m)}+\mathbf{k}\alpha
{\acute{}
{\acute{}
\dsum\limits_{m=0}^{n}\binom{n}{m}X^{(n-m)}\mathbf{k}^{m}Y^{(m)}\text{, }
\text{ even.}} \label{Znstar}
\end{equation}
In a similar way the formal powers corresponding to $\left( \ref{6}\right) $
can be constructed, they will be denoted as $\overset{\sim }{Z}^{(n)}(\alpha
,0;z)$. Notice that a generating pair for $\left( \ref{6}\right) $ is given
by
\begin{equation*}
\overset{\sim }{F}_{0}=\frac{g}{f}\text{ \ \ and \ \ }\overset{\sim }{G}_{0}
\mathbf{k}\frac{f}{g}.
\end{equation*}
In \cite{CKT} it was shown that for functions $f$ and $g$ satisfying the
above conditions there exist the transmutation operators $T_{f}$ and $T_{g}$
defined as follow
\begin{equation}
T_{f}\left[ u(x)\right] =u(x)+\int_{-x}^{x}\mathbf{K}(x,t;
{\acute{}
(0)).u(t)dt \label{Tf}
\end{equation
where the kernel $\mathbf{K}(x,t;
{\acute{}
(0))$ is given by
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{K}(x,t;
{\acute{}
(0))=\frac{
{\acute{}
(0)}{2}+K(x,t)+\frac{
{\acute{}
(0)}{2}\int_{t}^{x}\left[ K(x,s)-K(x,-s)\right] ds
\end{equation*
and the function $K(x,t)$ is the unique solution of the Goursat problem (see
\cite{Marchenko}
\begin{equation*}
\QATOPD\{ . {\left( \frac{\partial ^{2}}{\partial x^{2}}-q(x)\right) K(x,t)
\frac{\partial ^{2}}{\partial t^{2}}K(x,t)}{K(x,x)=\frac{1}{2
\int_{0}^{x}q(s)ds\text{; }K(x,-x)=0}
\end{equation*
an
\begin{equation*}
T_{g}\left[ v(y)\right] =v(y)+\int_{-y}^{y}\widetilde{\mathbf{K}}(y,t;
{\acute{}
(0))v(t)dt
\end{equation*
wher
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{\mathbf{K}}(y,t;
{\acute{}
(0))=\frac{
{\acute{}
(0)}{2}+\widetilde{K}(y,t)+\frac{
{\acute{}
(0)}{2}\int_{t}^{y}\left[ \widetilde{K}(y,s)-\widetilde{K}(y,-s)\right] ds
\end{equation*
and the function $\widetilde{K}(x,t)$ is the unique solution of the Goursat
proble
\begin{equation*}
\QATOPD\{ . {\left( \frac{\partial ^{2}}{\partial y^{2}}-\widetilde{q
(y)\right) \widetilde{K}(y,t)=\frac{\partial ^{2}}{\partial t^{2}}\widetilde
K}(y,t)}{\widetilde{K}(y,y)=\frac{1}{2}\int_{0}^{y}\widetilde{q}(s)ds\text{;
\ }\widetilde{K}(y,-y)=0}
\end{equation*
with $q=f\,^{\prime \prime }/f$ \ and \ $\widetilde{q}=g\,^{\prime \prime
}/g $.
Moreover, $T_{f}$ and $T_{g}$ satisfy the relations
\begin{equation}
T_{f}\left[ x^{k}\right] =\varphi _{k}\ \text{\ \ and \ }\ T_{g}\left[ y^{k
\right] =\psi _{k},\ \forall k\in
\mathbb{N}
_{0}. \label{mapping powers 1}
\end{equation
We will need similar systems of functions $\left\{ \widetilde{\varphi
_{k}\right\} _{k=0}^{\infty }$ and $\left\{ \widetilde{\psi }_{k}\right\}
_{k=0}^{\infty }$ corresponding to $1/f$ and $1/g$ respectively,
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{\varphi }_{k}(x)=\QATOPD\{ . {\frac{1}{f(x)}X^{(k)}(x)\text{, }
\text{ even}}{\frac{1}{f(x)}\widetilde{X}^{(k)}(x)\text{, }k\text{ odd}}
\label{11}
\end{equation
\begin{equation}
\widetilde{\psi }_{k}(y)=\QATOPD\{ . {\frac{1}{g(y)}Y^{(k)}(y)\text{, }
\text{ even}}{\frac{1}{g(y)}\widetilde{Y}^{(k)}(y)\text{, }k\text{ odd.}}
\label{12}
\end{equation}
For these systems of functions another pair of transmutations $T_{1/f}$ and
T_{1/g}$ is constructed (see \cite{KT}), one of the representations of which
can be given by the equalities
\begin{equation*}
T_{1/f}u(x)=\frac{1}{f(x)}\left\{ \int_{0}^{x}f(\eta )T_{f}\left[ \partial
u(\eta )\right] d\eta +u(0)\right\} ,
\end{equation*
\begin{equation*}
T_{1/g}v(y)=\frac{1}{g(y)}\left\{ \int_{0}^{y}g(\eta )T_{g}\left[ \partial
v(\eta )\right] d\eta +v(0)\right\} .
\end{equation*
They satisfy the equalities
\begin{equation}
T_{1/f}\left[ x^{k}\right] =\widetilde{\varphi }_{k}\ \text{and\ }T_{1/g
\left[ y^{k}\right] =\widetilde{\psi }_{k},\ \forall k\in
\mathbb{N}
_{0}. \label{mapping powers 2}
\end{equation}
The operators $T_{1/f}$ and $T_{1/g}$ admit the representations as Volterra
integral operators \cite{KT},
\begin{equation*}
T_{1/f}u(x)=u(x)+\int_{-x}^{x}\mathbf{K}_{2}(x,t;-
{\acute{}
(0))u(t)\,dt,
\end{equation*
where the kernel $\mathbf{K}_{2}(x,t;-
{\acute{}
(0))$ has the form
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{K}_{2}(x,t;-
{\acute{}
(0))=-\frac{1}{f(x)}\bigg(\int_{-t}^{x}\partial _{t}\mathbf{K}_{1}(s,t;
{\acute{}
(0))f(s)\,ds+\frac{
{\acute{}
(0)}{2}f(-t)\bigg)
\end{equation*
and the formulas for $T_{1/g}$ are completely analogous with an obvious
substitution of $f$ by $g$.
The introduced transmutation operators satisfy interesting commutation
equalities.
\begin{corollary}
\label{CorCommutation}\cite{KT} The following operator equalities hold on
C^{1}$-functions of the respective variables
\begin{align}
\partial _{x}fT_{1/f}& =fT_{f}\partial _{x},\qquad \partial _{x}\frac{1}{f
T_{f}=\frac{1}{f}T_{1/f}\partial _{x}. \label{CommutT1dx} \\
\partial _{y}gT_{1/g}& =gT_{g}\partial _{y},\qquad \partial _{y}\frac{1}{g
T_{g}=\frac{1}{g}T_{1/g}\partial _{y}. \label{CommutT2dx}
\end{align}
\end{corollary}
Consider the operators projecting onto the scalar and the vector parts
respectively
\begin{equation*}
P^{+}=\frac{1}{2}\left( I+C\right) \text{ \ and \ }P^{-}=\frac{1}{2\mathbf{k
}\left( I-C\right) .
\end{equation*
Let us introduce the following operators
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}\mathbf{=}T_{f}T_{g}P^{+}+\mathbf{k
T_{1/f}T_{1/g}P^{-} \label{20}
\end{equation
and
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{1}}\mathbf{=}T_{1/f}T_{g}P^{+}+\mathbf{k
T_{f}T_{1/g}P^{-}. \label{41}
\end{equation}
From now on let $\Omega \subset \overline{R}=\left[ -a,a\right] \times \left[
-b,b\right] $ be a simply connected domain such that together with any point
$(x,y)$ belonging to $\Omega $ the rectangle with the vertices $(x,y)$,
(-x,y)$, $(x,-y)$ and $(-x,-y)$ also belongs to $\Omega $. In such a domain
application of operators $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}$ and $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{
}}$ is meaningful.
\begin{proposition}
\label{PropCommutationT}The following equalities hold for any $\mathbb{B}
-valued, continuously differentiable function $w$ defined in $\Omega $.
\begin{equation}
\left( \overline{\partial }-\frac{\overline{\partial }\phi }{\phi }C\right)
\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}w=\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{1}}\left( \overline{\partial
w\right) ,\qquad \left( \overline{\partial }+\frac{\partial \phi }{\phi
C\right) \mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{1}}w=\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}\left( \overline
\partial }w\right) . \label{PropertiesT}
\end{equation
\begin{equation}
\left( \partial -\frac{\partial \phi }{\phi }C\right) \mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0
}w=\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{1}}\left( \partial w\right) ,\qquad \left( \partial
\frac{\overline{\partial }\phi }{\phi }C\right) \mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{1}}w
\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}\left( \partial w\right) . \label{PropertiesTder}
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The proof consists in a direct calculation with the aid of the relations
from Corollary \ref{CorCommutation}.
\end{proof}
An immediate corollary of equalities (\ref{PropertiesT}) is the fact that
the operator $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}$ maps bicomplex analytic functions
into $\left( \phi ,\mathbf{k}/\phi \right) -$pseudoanalytic, i.e., into
solutions of $\left( \ref{8}\right) $ and the operator $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{
}}$ maps bicomplex analytic functions into $\left( \frac{g}{f},\mathbf{k
\frac{f}{g}\right) $-pseudoanalytic i.e., into solutions of the equation
\begin{equation}
\left( \overline{\partial }+\frac{\partial \phi }{\phi }C\right) W=0.
\label{VekuaSucceed}
\end{equation}
Moreover, they map powers of the variable $z$ into corresponding formal
powers.
\begin{proposition}
\label{PropMapComplexPowers}For any $z\in \Omega $ and $a\in \mathbb{B}$ the
following equalities are valid
\begin{equation*}
\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}[az^{n}]=Z^{(n)}(a,0;z)\quad \text{and}\quad \mathbf{
}_{\mathbf{1}}[az^{n}]=Z_{1}^{(n)}(a,0;z).
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The proof consists in the observation that for $a=
{\acute{}
+\mathbf{k}
{\acute{}
$ \ and \ $z=x+\mathbf{k}y$ one ha
\begin{equation*}
az^{n}=\left(
{\acute{}
+\mathbf{k}
{\acute{}
\right) \dsum\limits_{m=0}^{n}\binom{n}{m}x^{n-m}\mathbf{k}^{m}y^{m}
\end{equation*
and the result follows from the formulas (\ref{Zn}), (\ref{Znstar}) by
application of the mapping properties (\ref{mapping powers 1}), (\re
{mapping powers 2}).
\end{proof}
Notice that both $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}$ and $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{1}}$ are
bounded operators on the space of continuous functions with respect to the
norm $\left\Vert w\right\Vert =\max (\left\vert u\right\vert +\left\vert
v\right\vert )$ where $w=u+\mathbf{k}v$. Indeed, consider $\left\Vert
\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}w\right\Vert =\max (\left\vert T_{f}T_{g}u\right\vert
+\left\vert T_{1/f}T_{1/g}v\right\vert )\leq M_{1}\max \left\vert
u\right\vert +M_{2}\max \left\vert v\right\vert $ where the constants $M_{1}$
and $M_{2}$ depend only on the corresponding kernels of the bounded Volterra
operators $T_{f}$, $T_{g}$, $T_{1/f}$ and $T_{1/g}$. Then $\left\Vert
\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}w\right\Vert \leq M\left\Vert w\right\Vert $ where
M=\max \left\{ M_{1},M_{2}\right\} $. The proof for the operator $\mathbf{T
_{\mathbf{1}}$ is analogous. Moreover, $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}^{-1}$ and
\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{1}}^{-1}$ are bounded as well (the form of the inverses
for $T_{f}$, $T_{g}$, $T_{1/f}$ and $T_{1/g}$ can be found in \cite{KT}) due
to the fact that their integral kernels enjoy the same regularity properties
as the kernels of $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}$ and $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{1}}$.
Let us establish another useful fact concerning the mapping properties of
the operators $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}$ and $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{1}}$.
\begin{proposition}
\label{PropDerivatives}Let $w$ be a bicomplex analytic function in $\Omega $
and $W=\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}w$ be a corresponding solution of $\left( \re
{8}\right) $. Then
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}\left( \partial ^{(2n)}w\right) =W^{\left[ 2n\right]
}\quad \text{and\quad }\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{1}}\left( \partial
^{(2n-1)}w\right) =W^{\left[ 2n-1\right] }\text{,\quad }n=1,2,\ldots .
\label{Relations for derivatives}
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
From $\left( \ref{PropertiesTder}\right) $ we hav
\begin{equation}
\overset{.}{W}=\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{1}}\left( \partial w\right) . \label{45}
\end{equation
$\overset{.}{W}$ is a solution of the succeeding Vekua equation (\re
{VekuaSucceed}). Denote $W_{1}=\overset{.}{W}$. Any solution of (\re
{VekuaSucceed}) is the image of a bicomplex analytic function under the
action of the operator $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{1}}$, so $W_{1}=\mathbf{T}_
\mathbf{1}}w_{1}$. Due to $\left( \ref{PropertiesTder}\right) $ we have
\overset{.}{W_{1}}=\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}\left( \partial w_{1}\right) $.
Thus, $\overset{..}{W}=\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}\left( \partial ^{2}w\right) $
because from (\ref{45}) $w_{1}=\partial w$. Now (\ref{Relations for
derivatives}) can be easily proved by induction.
\end{proof}
The established relations from Propositions \ref{PropCommutationT} and \re
{PropMapComplexPowers} together with the fact that $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}$
and $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{1}}$ are bounded operators together with their
respective inverses allow us to transfer several results from analytic
function theory onto the solutions of the bicomplex Vekua equations under
consideration and as hence onto the solutions of the Dirac system with a
scalar potential being a function of one Cartesian variable. Here we give
two examples of such results.
\begin{theorem}
Let $W$ be a solution of $\left( \ref{8}\right) $ in a disk $D$ with the
center in the origin and radius $R$. Then it can be expanded into a Taylor
series in formal powers
\begin{equation*}
W(z)=\dsum\limits_{n=0}^{\infty }Z^{(n)}(a_{n},0;z)
\end{equation*
with the radius of convergence $R$. The series converges normally in $D$ and
the coefficients $a_{n}$ have the form
\begin{equation*}
a_{n}=\frac{W^{\left[ n\right] }(0)}{n!}.
\end{equation*}
\begin{proof}
Consider $w=\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}^{-1}W$. It is a bicomplex analytic
function, so we have that it can be expanded into a Taylor series
w(z)=\dsum\limits_{n=0}^{\infty }a_{n}z^{n}$ with the coefficients $a_{n}
\frac{d^{n}w(0)}{dz^{n}}/n!$. Application of $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}$ gives
us a series for $W$, $W(z)=\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}w(z)=\dsum\limits_{n=0}^
\infty }\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}[a_{n}z^{n}]=\dsum\limits_{n=0}^{\infty
}Z^{(n)}(a_{n},0;z)$. Due to the uniform boundedness of $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf
0}}$ the radius of convergence of the series is preserved. Note that the
Taylor coefficients coincide. In order to finish the proof we use
Proposition \ref{PropDerivatives} and the fact that both operators $\mathbf{
}_{\mathbf{0}}$ and $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{1}}$ preserve the values of a
function in the origin. This is obvious from their definition and from the
Volterra integral form of the operators $T_{f}$, $T_{g}$, $T_{1/f}$ and
T_{1/g}$ (see, e.g., (\ref{Tf})). Thus, $W^{\left[ 2n\right] }(0)=\mathbf{T
_{\mathbf{0}}\left( \partial ^{(2n)}w\right) (0)=\partial ^{(2n)}w(0)$ and
W^{\left[ 2n-1\right] }(0)=\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{1}}\left( \partial
^{(2n-1)}w\right) (0)=\partial ^{(2n-1)}w(0)$,\quad $n=1,2,\ldots $.
\end{proof}
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}
Any solution $W$ of $\left( \ref{8}\right) $ in $\Omega $ can be \
approximated arbitrarily closely on any compact subset $K$ of $\Omega $ by a
finite combination of formal powers (a formal polynomial)
\dsum\limits_{n=0}^{N}Z^{(n)}(a_{n},0;z)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Consider $w=\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}^{-1}W$. Due to the Runge approximation
theorem the function $w$ can be arbitrarily closely approximated by a
polynomial in $z$. Then due to the boundedness of $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}$
and $\mathbf{T}_{\mathbf{0}}^{-1}$ and Proposition \ref{PropMapComplexPowers}
we obtain the required result for $W$.
\end{proof}
This theorem in fact means the completeness of the family of functions
\begin{equation*}
\left\{ Z^{(n)}(1,0;z)\text{, \ }Z^{(n)}(\mathbf{k},0;z)\right\}
_{n=0}^{\infty }
\end{equation*
in the space of all solutions of the Vekua equation (\ref{8}). A similar
fact is true for equation (\ref{VekuaSucceed}) and corresponding formal
powers. The combination of both families of formal powers gives us a
complete family of solutions of the Dirac equation (\ref{ROmega}) in the
considered case.
\bigskip
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec1}
Network coding \cite{ahlswede00} attracts much attention recently
because it can offer improvements in several metrics, such as throughput
and energy consumption, see \cite{fragouli07b,fragouli07a}.
On the other hand, the information theoretic security \cite{pls,liang09} also
attracts much attention because it offers security that does not depend on
a conjectured difficulty of some computational problem.
A juncture of the network coding and the information theoretic security
is the secure network coding \cite{cai02b,caiyeung11}, which prevents an eavesdropper, called Eve,
from knowing the message from the legitimate sender,
called Alice, to the multiple legitimate receivers
by eavesdropping intermediate links up to a specified number in a network.
It can be seen \cite{rouayheb07,rouayheb12} as a network coding counterpart of the traditional wiretap channel coding
problem considered by Wyner \cite{wyner75} and subsequently others \cite{liang09}.
In both secure network coding and coding for wiretap channels,
the secrecy is realized by including random bits
into the transmitted signal by Alice
so that the secret message
becomes ambiguous to Eve. The inclusion of random bits, of course,
decreases the information rate.
In order to get rid of the decrease in the information rate,
Yamamoto et~al.\ \cite{yamamoto05}
proposed the secure multiplex coding for wiretap channels, in which
there is no loss of information rate.
The idea of Yamamoto et~al.\ is as follows:
Suppose that Alice has $T$ statistically independent messages
$S_1$, \ldots, $S_T$.
Then $S_1$, \ldots, $S_{i-1}$, $S_{i+1}$, \ldots,
$S_T$ serve as the random bits making $S_i$ ambiguous to Eve, for each $i$.
Independently and simultaneously,
Bhattad and Narayanan \cite{bhattad05} proposed the
weakly secure network coding
based on the same idea as \cite{yamamoto05},
whose goal is also to get rid of
the loss of information rate in the secure network coding.
Their method \cite{bhattad05} ensures that the mutual information
between $S_i$ and Eve's information is zero for each $i$.
Recall that Eve's knowledge on secret information $S_i$ is
usually measured by the mutual information in
the information theoretic security \cite{pls,liang09}.
As drawbacks,
the construction depends on the network topology and coding at intermediate
nodes, and the computational complexity of code construction is large.
Harada and Yamamoto \cite{harada08} defined a stronger security
requirement on the weakly secure network coding,
which will be reviewed later, and called it as
the strongly
secure network coding.
Then they showed its construction procedure. As \cite{bhattad05},
the construction depends on the network topology and coding at intermediate
nodes, and the computational complexity of code construction is large.
In order to remove these drawbacks,
Silva and Kschischang \cite{silva09} proposed the universal
weakly secure network coding, in which they showed an efficient
code construction that can support up to two $\mathbf{F}_q$-symbols in each $S_i$ and
is independent of the network topology and coding at intermediate
nodes, where $\mathbf{F}_q$ denotes the
finite field with $q$ elements throughout this paper.
The independence of coding at the source node from
network topology and coding at intermediate
nodes is termed universal by Silva and Kschischang in \cite{silva09,silva08}.
They \cite{silva09} also showed the existence of universal
weakly secure network coding with more than two $\mathbf{F}_q$-symbols
in $S_i$, but have not shown an explicit construction.
Cai \cite{cai09secure}
removed most of drawbacks mentioned earlier.
Cai proved that random linear network coding \cite{ho06}
gives the strongly
secure network coding in the sense of \cite{harada08} with
arbitrarily high probability with sufficiently large finite
fields. However,
he did not provide evaluation of the required field size, and
it seems huge. Moreover,
for some applications (e.g.\ \cite{yeung06b,yeung06a})
we want to choose coding at intermediate nodes
in non-random fashion.
There exists a common difficulty in all the previous constructions
reviewed above. In practice, we are not sure if the multiple messages
are uniform and statistically independent. However,
all the previous studies\footnote{%
Cai \cite{cai09secure} considered arbitrary probability distribution
in \cite[Theorem 3.2]{cai09secure} but assumed
uniformity and independence for his study of the strongly
secure network coding in \cite[Section IV]{cai09secure}.}
assumed the uniformity and the independence,
and without both of them their security proofs do not seem to hold.
It is important to provide a security proof for weakly and strongly
secure network coding without uniformity or independence assumption.
On the other hand, non-uniformity of secret messages has been considered in
the ordinary secure network coding \cite{cai07securecondition,zhang09securecondition} (see also the survey \cite{cai11survey}).
In \cite{cai11survey,cai07securecondition,zhang09securecondition},
the randomness to hide a secret message was assumed to be statistically
independent of the secret message, while our present
study allows it to be
statistically dependent.
{We shall analyze the security of a slightly modified construction
of the random linear precoder originally proposed in \cite{cai02b}.}
Our modified construction is strongly secure in the sense of \cite{harada08}
and universal secure in the sense of \cite{silva09,silva08}.
{Uniformity and the independence assumptions are required in
previous works to guarantee security. This paper
relaxed the assumptions and aims to determine the
amount of information leakage if the two conditions are
not satisfied.}
The optimality of our modified construction is verified under the uniformity and
independence assumption at the end of
Remark \ref{rem:zeromutual}.
However, we relax an aspect of the security requirements
traditionally used in the secure network coding.
In previous proposals of secure network coding \cite{bhattad05,cai02b,harada08,silva09,silva08}
it is required that the mutual information to the eavesdropper is exactly
zero.
We relax this requirement by regarding sufficiently small mutual information
to be acceptable.
This relaxation is similar to requiring the
decoding error probability
to be sufficiently small instead of strictly zero.
Also observe that our relaxed criterion is much stronger than
one commonly used in the information theoretic security \cite{liang09}.
Our modified construction can realize arbitrary small mutual information
if coding over sufficiently many symbols in single packet is allowed.
We stress that the problem of secure network coding
is a generalization of the secret sharing\cite{Bla,Sha} and
the former problem cannot be solved as the latter,
as clearly observed in, e.g.\ \cite{cai11survey,caiyeung11}.
Because we have to show the security under much more eavesdropper's choices
in secure network coding that that in secret sharing scheme, as is explained
at the end of Subsection \ref{sec33}.
This paper is organized as follows:
Section \ref{sec2} reviews related results used in this paper.
Section \ref{sec3} introduces the strengthened version of the privacy
amplification theorem and the proposed scheme
for secure network coding.
Section \ref{sec4} concludes the paper.
Part of this paper was reported as earlier proceedings papers
\cite{matsumotohayashi2011isit,matsumotohayashi2011netcod}.
We substantially rewrote our security proof in \cite{matsumotohayashi2011netcod}
so that we can analyze the security with dependent and non-uniform multiple
secret messages, which was not done in \cite{matsumotohayashi2011netcod}.
We borrowed ideas from \cite[Section IV]{matsumotohayashi2011isit}
and extended them in Appendix \ref{app:b}
so that we can prove Lemma \ref{lem10}.
\section{Preliminary}\label{sec2}
\subsection{Model of network and network coding
and two-universal hash functions}\label{sec21}
As in \cite{bhattad05,cai02b,caiyeung11,harada08,silva09,silva08}
we consider the single source multicast, and
assume the linear network coding \cite{koetter03,li03}.
The source node is assumed to have at least $n$ outgoing links.
For $i=1$, \ldots, $n$, the source node generates a packet $P_i$
consisting of $m$ symbols in $\mathbf{F}_q$,
and transmits an $\mathbf{F}_q$-linear combination of $P_1$,
\ldots, $P_n$ to each outgoing link, as explained in \cite[Section 2.1]{fragouli06ccr}.
At an intermediate node, only packets generated at the same time
by the source node
are linearly combined, as explained in \cite[Section 2.5]{fragouli06ccr}.
The linear combination coefficients at each node are fixed so that
all the legitimate receivers can decode $n$ packets
$P_1$, \ldots, $P_n$ from the source node.
If the random linear network coding \cite{ho06} is employed,
we have to also include so-called encoding vectors in
each packet $P_i$ \cite[Section 2.2]{fragouli06ccr}.
We ignore those encoding vectors because they do not carry
secret information.
Hereafter, we shall only consider the eavesdropper Eve and
forget about the multiple legitimate receivers.
The $n$ packets $P_1$, \ldots, $P_n$ carry in total
$mn$ symbols in $\mathbf{F}_q$.
We shall propose a method encoding secret information into
$mn$ symbols by
the source node. The $mn$ symbols obtained by the proposed method
are distributed to packets $P_1$, \ldots, $P_n$.
Eve can eavesdrop $\mu$ links.
We assume $\mu \leq n$ throughout this paper.
The total number of eavesdropped symbols is therefore $m \mu$.
The set of $\mu$ eavesdropped links is assumed to be fixed during
packets $P_1$, \ldots, $P_n$ are traveling on the network,
as assumed in \cite{silva09,silva08}.
The situation considered here also includes the conventional
store-and-forward network as a special case.
We shall use a family of two-universal hash functions \cite{carter79}
for the privacy amplification theorem introduced later.
\begin{definition}\label{def:twouniv}
Let $\mathcal{F}$ be a set of functions from a finite set $\mathcal{S}_1$ to
another finite set $\mathcal{S}_2$,
and $F$ a random variable on $\mathcal{F}$. If for any $x_1 \neq x_2
\in \mathcal{S}_1$ we have
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{Pr}[F(x_1)=F(x_2)] \leq \frac{1}{|\mathcal{S}_2|}, \label{eq:two}
\end{equation}
then $\mathcal{F}$ with the probability distribution of
$F$ is said to be a \emph{family of two-universal hash functions}.
\end{definition}
\subsection{Security definitions}
\begin{definition}[Strongly secure network coding]
\cite{harada08}
Let $m=1$, and $S_1$, \ldots, $S_T \in \mathbf{F}_q$
be messages with $T \leq n$.
{We denote by $S_{T+1}$, \ldots, $S_n \in \mathbf{F}_q$
randomness not intended as messages.}
A network coding is said to be $\eta$-strongly secure if
the following relation holds for any $0 \leq \mu \leq n$.
When Eve's observation $Z$ is obtained by eavesdropping $\mu$ links,
any $\mathcal{I} \subset \{1$, \ldots, $T\}$
with $\mu-\eta \leq T-|\mathcal{I}|$
satisfies
\[
I(S_{\mathcal{I}};Z ) = 0,
\]
where $S_{\mathcal{I}} = [S_i : i \in \mathcal{I}]$ and
$I(S_{\mathcal{I}};Z)$ denotes their mutual information
as defined in \cite{cover06}.
\end{definition}
{The parameter $\eta$ is equivalent to $k$ in \cite{harada08}.}
Harada and Yamamoto \cite{harada08} showed a procedure
to construct $(n-T)$-strongly secure network coding
under the uniformity and independence assumption on the messages
$S_1$, \ldots, $S_n$.
We want to consider the universal security studied in \cite{silva09,silva08},
and also want to use multiple symbols in a single packet $P_i$,
that is, $m > 1$.
So we introduce our version of universal strong security,
by following the approach initiated by Silva and Kschischang \cite{silva09,silva08}.
\begin{definition}\label{def:univstrongsec}
Assume that we are given a linear network coding
for single source multicast.
Assume also that linear coding at intermediate nodes and
the set of $\mu$ eavesdropped links are fixed when packets $P_1$, \ldots,
$P_n$ travel from the source node to all the legitimate receivers.
Suppose that we have $T+1$ messages $S_1$, \ldots, $S_{T+1}$ and
$S_i \in \mathbf{F}_q^{k_i}$.
$S_{T+1}$ denotes randomness not intended as a message.
We assume $\sum_{i=1}^{T+1} k_i = mn$.
A linear transformation of $S_1$, \ldots, $S_{T+1}$ at the
source node is said to be a universal $\eta$-strongly
secure network coding
if the following relation holds
for all linear coding at intermediate nodes
and for any $0 \leq \mu \leq n$.
When Eve's observation $Z$ corresponds to $\mu$ eavesdropped links,
any subset $\mathcal{I} \subset \{1$, \ldots, $T\}$
with $m(\mu-\eta) < \sum_{1\leq i \leq T+1, i \notin \mathcal{I}} k_i$
satisfies
\begin{equation}
I(S_{\mathcal{I}};Z )
=0,\label{eq:strongsecure}
\end{equation}
where
$S_{\mathcal{I}} = [S_i : i \in \mathcal{I}]$.
\end{definition}
\section{Universal strongly secure network coding}\label{sec3}
\subsection{Strengthened privacy amplification theorem}
In order to evaluate the mutual information to Eve when the
sum rate of multiple secret information is large,
we need to strengthen the privacy amplification theorem
originally appeared in \cite{bennett95privacy,hayashi11}
as follows.
The following proposition is a slightly enhanced version of
\cite[Theorem 2]{matsumotohayashi2011netcod}.
\begin{proposition}\label{thm2}
Let $A_1$ and $A_2$ be discrete random variables on finite sets $\mathcal{A}_1$ and
$\mathcal{A}$, respectively, and
$\mathcal{F}$ a family of functions from $\mathcal{A}_1$ to $\mathcal{A}_3$.
Let $F$ be a random variable on $\mathcal{F}$.
Assume that $A_1$ and $F$ are conditionally independent given $A_2$,
and that for any fixed realization $a_2$ of $A_2$, the
conditional probability distribution
of $F$ given $a_2$ satisfies the condition for a family of two-universal
hash functions.
Then we have
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{E}_f [\exp(\rho I(F(A_1);A_2|F=f))] \leq
1+ |\mathcal{A}_3|^\rho\mathbf{E}[P_{A_1|A_2}(A_1|A_2)^\rho]\label{hpa1}
\end{equation}
for all $0 \leq \rho \leq 1$,
{where $\mathbf{E}_f[ \cdot ]$ denotes the expectation of $\cdot$ with
$f$ being the random variable.}
We use the natural logarithm for
all the logarithms in this paper,
which include ones implicitly appearing in entropy and mutual information.
Otherwise we have to adjust the above inequality.
\end{proposition}
\begin{IEEEproof}
Proof is given in Appendix \ref{app:a}.
\end{IEEEproof}
{In our analysis of the security,
we shall use Proposition \ref{thm2} with
$A_1$ being the whole secret message,
$A_2$ being part of the secret message whose secrecy we analyze,
and $F(A_1)$ being Eve's observation.}
\subsection{Description of the proposed scheme and
analysis with randomized coding}\label{sec31}
The purpose of this section is
to provide a universal $(k_{T+1}/m - \delta_\rho)$-strongly secure
network coding in a slightly modified sense of Definition \ref{def:univstrongsec}, where $\delta_\rho$ is
a parameter measuring conditional non-uniformity
to be defined in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:delta0}).
The modified sense means that the zero mutual information
in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:strongsecure}) is
relaxed to the requirement that it can be made arbitrarily small.
For this purpose, in this subsection,
we treat the coding scheme with randomized coding.
We assume that we have $T$ secret messages, which can be
dependent or non-uniform, and
that the $i$-th secret message is given as a random variable $S_i$
whose realization is a row vector in $\mathbf{F}_q^{k_i}$.
{We shall provide upper bounds on the information leaked to
Eve for all choices of values of $k_i$.}
We shall also use a supplementary random message
$S_{T+1}$ taking values in $\mathbf{F}_q^{k_{T+1}}$
when the randomness in the encoder is insufficient to make
$S_i$ secret from Eve.
By $S$ we denote the entire collection $(S_1$, \ldots, $S_{T+1})$
of messages.
We assume $mn= k_1 + \cdots+k_{T+1}$.
Let $\mathcal{L}$ be the set of all bijective $\mathbf{F}_q$-linear
maps from $\prod_{i=1}^{T+1} \mathbf{F}_q^{k_i}$ to itself,
and $L$ the uniform random variable on $\mathcal{L}$
statistically independent of $S=(S_1$, \ldots, $S_{T+1})$,
and arbitrary fix nonempty $\mathcal{I} \subseteq \{1$, \ldots, $T\}$.
The source node store $LS^t$ into packets $P_1$, \ldots, $P_n$
defined in Section \ref{sec21} and send them via its $n$ outgoing links,
where $t$ denotes the transpose of a vector.
Our modified construction just attaches a bijective
linear function to an
existing network coding.
{Note that attaching a random linear function was first proposed in
\cite{cai02b} for the secure network coding.}
This coding scheme is illustrated in Fig.\ \ref{fig1}.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\[
\begin{array}{ccccc}
S=(S_1,\ldots, S_{T+1}) \rightarrow &\fbox{\begin{tabular}{c}nonsingular\\ matrix $L$\end{tabular}}& \overset{\displaystyle LS^t}{\rightarrow} &\ovalbox{\begin{tabular}{c}network\\
coded\\ network\end{tabular}}& \rightarrow\fbox{\begin{tabular}{c}one of \\ multiple\\ receivers\end{tabular}}\rightarrow S\\
&&&\downarrow&\\
&&&BLS^t&\\
&&&\fbox{\begin{tabular}{c}eavesdropper\\ Eve\end{tabular}}&
\end{array}
\]
\caption{Proposed coding scheme for the universal strongly secure network coding}\label{fig1}
\end{figure*}
The legitimate sender and all the legitimate receivers agree on
the choice of $L$. The eavesdropper
Eve may also know their choice of $L$.
Choice of $L$ is part of protocol specification,
the chosen $L$ is repeatedly used,
and agreement on its choice among legitimate sender and receivers
is not counted as consumption of the network bandwidth.
A legitimate receiver can recover $S_1$, \ldots, $S_T$,
$S_{T+1}$ by multiplying $L^{-1}$ to his/her received information.
By the assumption on Eve, her information can be expressed as
$BLS^t$ by using an $m\mu \times mn$ matrix $B$ over $\mathbf{F}_q$
as in \cite{silva09,silva08}.
For the nonempty $\mathcal{I} \subseteq \{1$, \ldots, $T\}$,
denote the collection of random variables $[S_i : i \in \mathcal{I}]$
by $S_{\mathcal{I}}$, denote
$[S_i : i \in \{1$, \ldots, $T+1\}\setminus \mathcal{I}]$
by $S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}$,
and let
$k_{\mathcal{I}} = \sum_{i\in\mathcal{I}} k_i$.
For a fixed realization $\ell$ of $L$,
the information gained by Eve is measured by
the mutual information $I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell)$
as a common practice in the information theoretic security
\cite{pls,liang09}.
Since its average $\mathbf{E}_\ell[
I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell)]$ is the conditional mutual
information $I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L)$ \cite{cover06},
we will upper bound $I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L)$.
After upper bounding the average $I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L)$
in Eq.\ (\ref{eq1003}),
we can ensure that for most choices of $\ell$ and all possible
$B$,
$I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell)$ is small, as done in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:prob}).
In order to use Proposition \ref{thm2},
we introduce a lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem10}
For fixed $B$,
the family of mapping $S \mapsto
BLS^t$ is a family of two-universal hash functions
to the $\mathrm{rank}(B)$-dimensional $\mathbf{F}_q$-linear space.
\end{lemma}
\begin{IEEEproof}
See Appendix \ref{app:b}.
\end{IEEEproof}
We can upper bound
$I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L)$ as follows,
by applying Proposition \ref{thm2} with $A_1=S$,
$A_2=S_{\mathcal{I}}$, and $F(A_1)=BLS^t$.
{Observe that the assumption in Proposition \ref{thm2}
holds because $S_{\mathcal{I}}$ is part of $S$ and $L$ is independent of $S$.}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \mathbf{E}_\ell [\exp(\rho I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell))]\nonumber\\
&\leq& 1+ q^{m \rho \times \mathrm{rank}(B)}\mathbf{E}[P_{S|S_{\mathcal{I}}}(S|S_{\mathcal{I}})^\rho]\nonumber\\
&=& 1+ q^{m \rho \times \mathrm{rank}(B)}\mathbf{E}[P_{S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}}}(S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}})^\rho]\nonumber\\
&\leq& 1+ q^{m \rho \mu}\mathbf{E}[P_{S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}}}(S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}})^\rho].\label{eq1002}
\end{eqnarray}From Eq.\ (\ref{eq1002})
we have
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \rho I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L)\nonumber\\
&=&\ln\exp (\rho I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L))\nonumber\\
&\leq&\ln \mathbf{E}_\ell [\exp(\rho I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell))]\nonumber\\
&\leq&\ln (1+ q^{m \rho \mu}\mathbf{E}[P_{S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}}}(S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}})^\rho])\nonumber\\
&\leq&q^{m \rho \mu}\mathbf{E}[P_{S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}}}(S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}})^\rho].\label{eq1003}
\end{eqnarray}
Fix a real number $C_1 > 1$.
Equation (\ref{eq1003}) and the Markov inequality yield that
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{Pr} [\ell\in \mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{I},1}] < 1/C_1
\end{align*}
for any single nonempty $\mathcal{I} \subseteq \{1$, \ldots, $T\}$,
where $\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{I},1}$ $:=$
$\{ \ell \mid I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell) > C_1 \mathbf{E}_{\ell} [I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell)] \}$.
Thus,
\[
\mathrm{Pr} [\ell \in \cup_{\mathcal{I}: \mathcal{I}\neq \emptyset} \mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{I},1}]
< (2^T-1)/C_1.
\]
This means that there is at least a probability of
$1-(2^T-1)/C_1$ such that a realization $\ell$ of $L$
satisfies
\begin{align}
& I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell) \nonumber \\
& \leq
C_1 \mathbf{E}_{\ell} [I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell)] \nonumber \\
& \leq
C_1 q^{m \rho \mu}\mathbf{E}[P_{S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}}}(S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}})^\rho]/\rho\label{eq:ub5}
\end{align}
for all the $(2^T-1)$ nonempty subsets $\mathcal{I}$ of $\{1$, \ldots, $T\}$.
Defining another subset $\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{I},2}$ $:=$
$\{ \ell \mid
\exp(\rho I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell))
>
C_1
\mathbf{E}_{\ell} [\exp(\rho I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell))]\}$,
by Eq.\ (\ref{eq1002}) and the Markov inequality we obtain
\[
\mathrm{Pr} [\ell \in \cup_{\mathcal{I}: \mathcal{I}\neq \emptyset}
(\mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{I},1} \cup \mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{I},2})]
< 2 (2^T-1)/C_1.
\]
Therefore,
a realization $\ell$ of $L$ satisfies both Eq. (\ref{eq:ub5}) and
\begin{align}
\exp(\rho I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell))
&\leq C_1 (1+ q^{m \rho \mu}\mathbf{E}[P_{S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}}}(S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}})^\rho]).\label{eq:ub6}
\end{align}
with probability at least $1-2 \times (2^T-1)/C_1$.
Equation (\ref{eq:ub6}) implies
\begin{align}
& \frac{I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell)}{m}\nonumber\\
& = \frac{1}{m}\ln \exp I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell)\nonumber\\
&\leq \frac{\ln C_1}{m\rho} + \frac{1}{m\rho}\ln
(1+q^{m \rho \mu}\mathbf{E}[P_{S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}}}(S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}})^\rho]) \textrm{ (by Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ub6}))}\nonumber\\
&\leq
\frac{\ln C_1}{m\rho} +
\left|\mu \ln q + \frac{1+\ln \mathbf{E}[P_{S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}}}(S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}})^\rho]}{m\rho}\right|^+, \label{eq:ub7}
\end{align}
where in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ub7}) we used $\ln(1+\exp(x)) \leq |1+x|^+ = \max\{0$,
$1+x\}$.
Summarizing the preceding discussion, we have the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}
Recall that the eavesdropping $m\mu \times mn$ matrix $B$ is fixed,
that $L$ is the uniform random variable on $\mathcal{L}$
statistically independent of $S=(S_1$, \ldots, $S_{T+1})$,
and that a real number $C_1 > 1$ is arbitrarily fixed.
There is at least a probability of $1-2 \times (2^T-1)/C_1$
such that information leakage $I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell)$
to Eve with the chosen realization $\ell$ of $L$
satisfies both inequalities (\ref{eq:ub5}) and (\ref{eq:ub7})
simultaneously.
\end{theorem}
\subsection{Evaluation of the number of different kinds of eavesdropping}\label{sec33}
In the following,
we considered the case when
the matrix $B$ corresponds to $\mu$ eavesdropped links.
Such a case can be mathematically formulated as follows.
Let $x_{i,j} \in \mathbf{F}_q$ be the $j$-th symbol in the $i$-th
packet $P_i$ defined in Section \ref{sec21}.
Then there exists a $\mu \times n$ matrix $B_{\mu \times n}$ such
that what are observed by Eve at the $j$-th symbols
in her eavesdropped $\mu$ packets is expressed as
$B_{\mu \times n} ( x_{1,j}$, \ldots, $x_{n,j})^t$ for $j=1$, \ldots, $m$.
Without loss of generality we may assume $\mathrm{rank}(B_{\mu \times n}) = \mu$ because if $\mathrm{rank}(B_{\mu \times n}) = \mu' < \mu$ then such a
case can be regarded as only $\mu'$ links being eavesdropped.
Then,
the $m\mu \times mn$ matrix\footnote{Mathematically,
the $m\mu \times mn$ matrix $B$ is written as
$B_{\mu \times n} \otimes I_{m \times m}$.} $B$ is completely determined by $B_{\mu \times n}$.
In order to show the universal security in
Definition \ref{def:univstrongsec},
we need to ensure that the mutual information is small for any $B$
and any $0 \leq \mu \leq n$.
For this purpose,
we need to count the number of different kinds of eavesdropping,
which is much larger than that in the secret sharing scheme \cite{Bla,Sha}.
We consider the set $\mathcal{B}(\mu)$ of all possible $m\mu \times mn$
matrices $B$ that
characterize Eve's eavesdropping with the above restriction.
Then, we define an equivalence relation $\sim$
on $\mathcal{B}(\mu)$ as $B_1 \sim B_2$ for $B_1, B_2 \in \mathcal{B}(\mu)$
if there exists an invertible function $f$ such that
$f (B_1 LS^t)= B_2 LS^t$ for all $L$ and $S^t$.
That is, $B_1 \sim B_2$ if and only if the
kernel of $B_1$ is the same as that of $B_2$.
Since $B_1$ and $B_2$ are determined by $\mu \times n$ matrixes,
the space $\mathcal{B}(\mu)/\sim $ is the set of the
$(n-\mu)$-dimensional subspaces in
$\mathbf{F}_q^n$.
The space is called Grassmannian
and the number is evaluated in the following way \cite{Ex}
\begin{align}
& |\mathcal{B}(\mu)/\sim|
=
\prod_{i=0}^{\mu-1}
\frac{q^{n}-q^i}{q^{\mu}-q^i}
\leq
\prod_{i=0}^{\mu-1}
\frac{q^{n}-q^{\mu-1}}{q^{\mu}-q^{\mu-1}}
=
\prod_{i=0}^{\mu-1}
\frac{q^{n-\mu+1}-1}{q-1} \nonumber \\
\le &
\prod_{i=0}^{\mu-1}
q^{n-\mu+1}
= q^{\mu (n-\mu+1)}
\le
q^{\frac{(n+1)^2}{4}}
\label{h-1}
\end{align}
because $(x-z)/(y-z)$ is monotone increasing concerning $z$ when $x>y>z>0$.
The final inequality follows from the inequality
$\sqrt{\mu (n-\mu+1)} \le \frac{\mu+n-\mu+1}{2}=\frac{n+1}{2}$.
Hence,
the total number of equivalence classes
excluding $B(0)$ is upper bounded as
\begin{align}
\sum_{\mu=1}^n |\mathcal{B}(\mu)/\sim| & \leq
n q^{\frac{(n+1)^2}{4}}.
\label{eq-9-14}
\end{align}
Conversely, in order to compare the number of kinds of information leakage with the secret sharing scheme,
we check the tightness of evaluation (\ref{h-1}), i.e., we show the opposite inequality.
Since
$(x-z)/(y-z) > x/y$ holds for $x>y>z>0$,
\begin{align*}
|\mathcal{B}(\mu)/\sim|
=
\prod_{i=0}^{\mu-1}
\frac{q^{n}-q^i}{q^{\mu}-q^i}
\geq
\prod_{i=0}^{\mu-1}
\frac{q^{n}}{q^{\mu}}
= q^{\mu (n-\mu)}.
\end{align*}
That is,
when $\mu$ is fixed,
the number of possible kinds of information leakage
is greater than $q^{\mu (n-\mu)}$
in the network coding scheme.
On the other hand,
in the secret sharing scheme,
the possible information leakage is given as an observation of $\mu$ shares among $n$ shares,
the number is ${n \choose \mu}$, which grows up only polynomially of $n$ with a fixed $\mu$.
Therefore,
the universal code in the network coding scheme
has to satisfy the universality
under much more choices of eavesdropper
than that in the ramp
secret sharing scheme \cite{Bla2,Yam}.
\subsection{Universally strongly secure networking code}
Next, using the above discussion,
we show the existence of universally strongly secure networking code.
Due to (\ref{eq-9-14}),
the probability of $L$ satisfying Eqs. (\ref{eq:ub5}) and
(\ref{eq:ub7}) simultaneously for all possible $B$ is at least
\begin{equation}
1-2 \times (2^T-1)\times n q^{\frac{(n+1)^2}{4}} /C_1. \label{eq:prob}
\end{equation}
Recall that chosen $L$ is part of protocol specification and
repeatedly used.
Because Eqs. (\ref{eq:ub5}), (\ref{eq:ub7}) and (\ref{eq:prob})
are independent of realization of the random variable $S$ representing
secret information, Eqs. (\ref{eq:ub5}) and (\ref{eq:ub7}) are satisfied
in every repeated use of $L$ with probability
at least Eq.\ (\ref{eq:prob}).
The upper bound (\ref{eq:ub5}) can go to either zero or $\infty$
as $m\rightarrow \infty$.
When the upper bound (\ref{eq:ub5}) goes to $\infty$,
the information leakage to Eve grows linearly with $m$ and
its growth rate with $m$ will be analyzed by Eq. (\ref{eq:ub7}).
Firstly, we need to clarify under what condition Eq. (\ref{eq:ub5})
converges to zero as $m \rightarrow \infty$.
To do so, we shall introduce a version of conditional R\'enyi entropy
introduced in \cite{hayashi11}.
There seems to be no standard definition for the
conditional R\'enyi entropy, for example, definitions in
\cite{bennett95privacy} and \cite{golshani09} disagree and
our definition in \cite{hayashi11} is different from
\cite{bennett95privacy,golshani09}.
For discrete random variables $X$, $Y$,
define conditional R\'enyi entropy of order $1+\rho$ as
\[
H_{1+\rho}(X|Y) = -\frac{\log_q \mathbf{E}[P_{X|Y}(X|Y)^\rho]}{\rho}.
\]
For $\rho=0$, we define $H_1(X|Y)$ as $\lim_{\rho\rightarrow 0}
H_{1+\rho}(X|Y)$.
By using l'H\^opital's rule we see that $H_1(X|Y)$ is equal to the
conditional Shannon entropy.
Observe also that $H_{1+\rho}(X|Y) = \log_q |\mathcal{X}|$
if $X$ is conditionally uniform given $Y$, where
$\mathcal{X}$ denotes the alphabet of $X$.
In order to
clarify under what condition Eq. (\ref{eq:ub5})
converges to zero,
we need to assume some knowledge on $P_{S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}}}(S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}})$.
We consider the situation in which each message $S_i$ originates from
a different organization and it is compressed before network coded.
Under such situation, we assume
that $S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}$ is nearly conditionally uniform
given $S_{\mathcal{I}}$. Let $\delta_\rho$ be a nonnegative constant
such that
\begin{equation}
n-\frac{k_{\mathcal{I}}}{m} - \frac{H_{1+\rho}(S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}})}{m\ln q} \leq \delta_\rho \label{eq:delta0}
\end{equation}
for some $0< \rho \leq 1$, for all $\mathcal{I}$, and for sufficiently large $m$.
Observe that if all messages $S_i$'s are uniform and independent
then $\delta_\rho=0$. The parameter $\delta_\rho$ captures the deviation from the
uniform and independent situation in terms of conditional R\'enyi entropy
per the number $m$ of symbols in single packet.
By taking the natural logarithm of Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ub5}), we see
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \ln \mbox{[RHS of Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ub5})]}\nonumber\\
&=& \ln \frac{C_1}{\rho} +m\rho (\mu\ln q +\frac{\ln\mathbf{E}[P_{S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}}}(S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}})^\rho]}{m\rho}) \nonumber\\
&=& \ln \frac{C_1}{\rho} +m\rho (\overbrace{\mu-\frac{H_{1+\rho}(S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}})}{m}}^{(*)})\ln q .
\label{eq1004}
\end{eqnarray}
When
\begin{equation}
\mu < (n-\frac{k_{\mathcal{I}}}{m}) - \delta_\rho
\mbox{ i.e.\ } \frac{k_{\mathcal{I}}}{m} < n-\mu-\delta_\rho,\label{zerocond}
\end{equation}
$(*)$ in Eq.\ (\ref{eq1004})
becomes negative by Eq.\ (\ref{eq:delta0}).
Under such condition Eq.\ (\ref{eq1004}) converges to $-\infty$
as $m\rightarrow \infty$, which means
that the upper bound Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ub5}) can be made arbitrary small
by letting $m$ be large.
Secondly, we shall analyze how much information Eve can gain when
Eq.\ (\ref{zerocond}) does not hold.
In such case we use the other upper bound Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ub7}).
We can rewrite Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ub7}) as
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& \mbox{RHS of Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ub7})}\\
&=& \frac{1+\ln C_1}{m\rho} +
\mu \ln q - \frac{H_{1+\rho}(S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}})}{m}\\
&\leq&
\frac{1+\ln C_1}{m\rho} + (\mu - (n-\frac{k_{\mathcal{I}}}{m}-\delta_\rho))\ln q
\mbox{ (by Eq.\ (\ref{eq:delta0}))}.
\end{eqnarray*}
We see that we can make the upper bound
Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ub7}) on
$\frac{I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell)}{m}$ arbitrary close
to
\begin{equation}
(\mu + \delta_\rho - (n - \frac{k_{\mathcal{I}}}{m}))\ln q \label{eq1005}
\end{equation}
by letting $m$ be large.
By the above modified construction and evaluation of mutual information,
we provide a universal $(k_{T+1}/m-\delta_\rho)$-strongly
secure
network coding in the sense of Definition \ref{def:univstrongsec}
with the zero mutual information requirement in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:strongsecure})
replaced by
arbitrary small one (see also Remark \ref{rem:zeromutual}).
\begin{remark}
The meaning of $C_1$ is as follows:
At Eqs.\ (\ref{eq1002}) and (\ref{eq1003}),
there might not exist a realization $\ell$ of $L$ that
satisfies Eqs.\ (\ref{eq1002}) and (\ref{eq1003})
for all subsets $\mathcal{I}$ of $\{1$, \ldots, $T\}$ simultaneously.
By sacrificing the tightness of the upper bounds, we
ensure the existence of $\ell$ satisfying Eqs.\ (\ref{eq:ub5})
and (\ref{eq:ub6}) for all $\mathcal{I}$.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:zeromutual}
Under the assumption that all messages $S_1$, \ldots, $S_{T+1}$ are
uniform and independent,
the mutual information
can be made exactly zero for every eavesdropping matrix $B$.
The reason is as follows:
For fixed $B$ and $L=\ell$, we have
\begin{equation}
I(S_{\mathcal{I}};BLS^t|L=\ell)= H(S_{\mathcal{I}}|L=\ell) - H (S_{\mathcal{I}}|BLS^t,L=\ell).
\label{eq:mut}
\end{equation}
The first term $H(S_{\mathcal{I}}|L=\ell)$ is an integer multiple of
$\ln q$ since $S_{\mathcal{I}}$ is assumed to have the uniform
distribution.
Let
$\alpha_{\mathcal{I}}$ be the projection from
$\prod_{i=1}^{T+1} \mathbf{F}_q^{k_i}$ to $\prod_{i\in\mathcal{I}} \mathbf{F}_q^{k_i}$
for $\emptyset \neq \mathcal{I} \subseteq \{1$, \ldots, $T\}$.
For fixed $B$ and $\ell$, and a given realization $z$ of $B\ell S^t$,
the set of solutions $s$ such that $z = B\ell s$ is written
as $\ker(B\ell) + $ some vector $v$.
This means that the set of
possible candidates of $S_{\mathcal{I}}$ given
realization $z$ of $B\ell S^t$ is written as $\alpha_{\mathcal{I}}(\ker(B\ell)) +
\alpha_{\mathcal{I}}(v)$, and $S_{\mathcal{I}}$ given
realization $z$ is uniformly distributed on
$\alpha_{\mathcal{I}}(\ker(B\ell)) +
\alpha_{\mathcal{I}}(v)$.
Since the cardinality of $\alpha_{\mathcal{I}}(\ker(B\ell)) +
\alpha_{\mathcal{I}}(v)$ is independent of $\ell S^t$ for fixed $B$ and $\ell$,
the second term $H (S_{\mathcal{I}}|BLS^t,L=\ell)$ is also an
integer multiple of $\ln q$. Therefore, if Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ub5})
holds for every $B$ as verified in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:prob})
and
the RHS of Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ub5}) is $<\ln q$, then
the LHS of Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ub5}) must be zero.
Observe that under this assumption our modified construction is
a universal $k_{T+1}/m$-strongly secure network coding
in the exact sense of Definition \ref{def:univstrongsec}.
The parameter $k_{T+1}/m$ is optimal according to \cite{cai11survey}.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Numerical example of explicit computation of required block size $m$}\label{sec34}
In this section we give a numerical example of computing
required block length $m$ in order to ensure the mutual
information is below some value.
In order to do so,
we need an estimate of $\mathbf{E}[P_{S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}}}(S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}})^\rho]$.
We assume to have $\delta_{0.5}=0.5$ in Eq.\ (\ref{eq:delta0})
at $\rho=0.5$.
Let $q=256$, $n=10$, $\mu=3$, $T=5$, $k_i = 2m$ for all $i$.
We do not have $S_{T+1}$.
We want to ensure that we choose $\ell$ with
probability at least $1-10^{-12}$ such that $I(S_i; BLS^t|L=\ell) < 10^{-6}$
for all $i=1$, \ldots, $5$.
By Eq.\ (\ref{eq:prob}) we choose $C_1$ as
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&2 \times n q^{\frac{(n+1)^2}{4}} (2^T-1)/C_1 = 10^{-12}\\
&\Leftrightarrow &
C_1 = 2 \times 10 \times 256^{11^2/4}(2^T-1) 10^{12}
\end{eqnarray*}
By using $\delta_\rho$, we can upper bound the RHS of Eq.\ (\ref{eq:ub5})
as follows:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&C_1 q^{m \rho \mu}\mathbf{E}[P_{S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}}}(S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}})^\rho]/\rho\nonumber\\
&=& C_1 \exp_q (m \rho (\mu + \frac{H_{1+\rho}(S_{\overline{\mathcal{I}}}|S_{\mathcal{I}})]}{m\ln q})/\rho\nonumber\\
&\leq& C_1 \exp_q (m \rho(\mu - n + k_{\mathcal{I}}/m + \delta_\rho))/\rho
\mbox{ (by Eq.\ (\ref{eq:delta0}))}. \label{eq1006}
\end{eqnarray}
In order to keep the above upper bound to be below $10^{-6}$ we
have to choose
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& C_1 \exp_q (m \rho(\mu - n + k_{\mathcal{I}}/m + \delta_\rho))/\rho < 10^{-6}\\
&\Leftrightarrow & m > -\frac{\log_q (10^6 C_1/\rho)}{\rho (\mu - n + k_{\mathcal{I}}/m + \delta_{\rho})}\\
&\Leftrightarrow & m > -\frac{\log_{256} (10^6 \times 2 \times 10 \times 256^{121/4}(2^5-1)10^{12}/0.5)}{0.5(3 - 10 + 2 +0.5)}\\
&\Leftarrow & m \geq
17.3373
\end{eqnarray*}
This means that we can choose $m=18$ and
should choose the matrix $L$ at least as large as
$180 \times 180$
over $\mathbf{F}_{256}$, which is implementable.
Recall that we assumed $n=10$ outgoing (logical) links from
the source node and that each outgoing link carries
$m=18$ symbols in single coding block in this example.
\begin{remark}
A vector in $\mathbf{F}_q^{mn}$ can be identified with an element
in $\mathbf{F}_{q^{mn}}$, and multiplication by a nonzero element
in $\mathbf{F}_{q^{mn}}$ is an $\mathbf{F}_q$-linear mapping and
can be identified with an element in $\mathcal{L}$.
Let $\mathcal{L}_{\mathbf{F}_{q^{mn}}}$ be a commutative
subgroup of $\mathcal{L}$ whose elements can be identified with
nonzero elements in $\mathbf{F}_{q^{mn}}$.
By looking at the proof of Lemma \ref{lem10} in Appendix \ref{app:b},
we can see that $\mathcal{L}_{\mathbf{F}_{q^{mn}}}$ can be used in place of
$\mathcal{L}$ in our modified construction.
Necessary storage space to record choice of an element in
$\mathcal{L}_{\mathbf{F}_{q^{mn}}}$ is that of $mn$ $\mathbf{F}_q$ symbols
and is smaller than that of
$\mathcal{L}$.
Matrix multiplication by an element in
$\mathcal{L}_{\mathbf{F}_{q^{mn}}}$ is at least as fast as that in
$\mathcal{L}$.
\end{remark}
\section{Conclusion}\label{sec4}
In the secure network coding,
there was loss of information rate due to inclusion of random bits at the source node.
Weakly and strongly secure network coding \cite{bhattad05,cai09secure,harada08,silva09} remove that loss of information rate
by using multiple messages to be kept secret from an eavesdropper,
which require huge computational complexity in code construction or
huge finite field size.
In addition to this, the previous studies assumed uniform and independent
multiple messages, which seems too strong assumption in practice.
In this paper, we have shown that random linear transform of
multiple messages at the source node realizes the strongly
secure network coding with arbitrary high probability
with sufficiently large block length.
We did not assume uniformity nor independence in multiple messages.
Our numerical example in Section \ref{sec34}
showed that ``sufficiently large block length'' can
be small.
\appendices
\section{Proof of Proposition \ref{thm2}}\label{app:a}
In order to show Proposition \ref{thm2},
we introduce the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem1}
Under the same assumption as Proposition \ref{thm2},
we have
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{E}_f [\exp(-\rho H(F(A_1)|A_2,F=f))] \leq
|\mathcal{A}_3|^{-\rho} + \mathbf{E}[P_{A_1|A_2}(A_1|A_2)^\rho]\label{eq:lem1}
\end{equation}
for $0\leq \rho \leq 1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{IEEEproof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{thm2}]
\begin{align*}
& \mathbf{E}_f [\exp(\rho I(F(A_1);A_2|F=f))]\\
&= \mathbf{E}_f [\exp(\rho H(F(A_1)|F=f) - \rho H(F(A_1),A_2|F=f))]\\
&\leq \mathbf{E}_f [|\mathcal{A}_3|^\rho \exp(-\rho H(F(A_1),A_2|F=f))]\\
&\leq |\mathcal{A}_3|^\rho (|\mathcal{A}_3|^{-\rho} + \mathbf{E}[P_{A_1|A_2}(A_1|A_2)^\rho]) \textrm{ (by Eq. (\ref{eq:lem1}))}\\
&= 1+ |\mathcal{A}_3|^\rho\mathbf{E}[P_{A_1|A_2}(A_1|A_2)^\rho].
\end{align*}
\end{IEEEproof}
\begin{IEEEproof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem1}]
Fix $a_2 \in \mathcal{A}_2$.
The concavity of $x^\rho$ for $0\leq\rho\leq 1$ implies
\begin{align}
& \mathbf{E}_f \Bigl[\sum_{a_3 \in \mathcal{A}_3} P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(a_3|a_2)^{1+\rho}\Bigr] \nonumber\\
&= \sum_{a_1\in \mathcal{A}_1} P_{A_1|A_2}(a_1|a_2) \mathbf{E}_f \Bigl[ \sum_{a_1'\in f^{-1}(f(a_1))} P_{A_1|A_2}(a_1'|a_2)\Bigr]^\rho\nonumber\\
&\leq \sum_{a_1\in \mathcal{A}_1} P_{A_1|A_2}(a_1|a_2) \Bigl(\underbrace{\mathbf{E}_f \Bigl[\sum_{a_1'\in f^{-1}(f(a_1))} P_{A_1|A_2}(a_1'|a_2)\Bigr]}_{(**)}\Bigr)^\rho. \label{eq200}
\end{align}
For a fixed realization $a_2$ of $A_2$,
by the assumption in Proposition \ref{thm2} two random variables
$F$ and $A_1$ are statistically independent,
which implies the distribution of $f$ in (**) is independent of
$a_1$.
Since $f$ is chosen from a family of two-universal hash functions
defined in Definition \ref{def:twouniv}, we have
\begin{align*}
(**) &\leq P_{A_1|A_2}(a_1|a_2) + \sum_{a_1 \neq a_1' \in \mathcal{A}_1} \frac{P_{A_1|A_2}(a_1'|a_2)}{|\mathcal{A}_3|}\\
&\leq P_{A_1|A_2}(a_1|a_2) + |\mathcal{A}_3|^{-1}.
\end{align*}
Since any two positive numbers $x$ and $y$ satisfy
$(x+y)^\rho \leq x^\rho + y^\rho$ for $0 \leq \rho \leq 1$,
we have
\begin{equation}
(P_{A_1|A_2}(a_1|a_2) + |\mathcal{A}_3|^{-1})^\rho \leq P_{A_1|A_2}(a_1|a_2)^\rho + |\mathcal{A}_3|^{-\rho}.
\label{eq201}
\end{equation}
By Eqs.\ (\ref{eq200}) and (\ref{eq201}) we can see
\[
\mathbf{E}_f \Bigl[\sum_{a_3 \in \mathcal{A}_3} P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(a_3|a_2)^{1+\rho}\Bigr] \leq
\sum_{a_1 \in \mathcal{A}_1} P_{A_1|A_2}(a_1|a_2)^{1+\rho} + |\mathcal{A}_3|^{-\rho}.
\]
Taking the average over $A_2$ of the both sides
of the last equation, we have
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{E}_f [\mathbf{E}_{A_1A_2} [P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(f(A_1)|A_2)^{\rho}]] \leq
\mathbf{E}_{A_1A_2} [P_{A_1|A_2}(A_1|A_2)^{\rho}] + |\mathcal{A}_3|^{-\rho}. \label{eq203}
\end{equation}
Define $g(\rho) = \mathbf{E}_{A_1A_2} [P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(f(A_1)|A_2)^{\rho}]$
as a function of $\rho$ with fixed $f$ and $P_{A_1A_2}$, and
$h(\rho) = \ln g(\rho)$.
We have
\begin{align*}
g'(\rho)
&= \mathbf{E}_{A_1A_2} [P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(f(A_1)|A_2)^{\rho} \ln P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(f(A_1)|A_2)],\\
g''(\rho)
&= \mathbf{E}_{A_1A_2} [P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(f(A_1)|A_2)^{\rho} (\ln P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(f(A_1)|A_2))^2],\\
h'(\rho) &= g'(\rho)/g(\rho),\\
h''(\rho) &= \frac{g''(\rho)g(\rho) - [g'(\rho)]^2}{g(\rho)^2}.
\end{align*}
Define $(A_1'$, $A_2')$ to be the random variables that have the same
joint distribution as $(A_1,A_2)$ and statistically independent of
$A_1$ and $A_2$.
To examine the sign of $h''(\rho)$ we compute
\begin{align*}
& g''(\rho)g(\rho) - [g'(\rho)]^2\\
&= \mathbf{E}_{A_1A_2A_1'A_2'} [P_{f(A_1)A_2}(f(A_1),A_2)^{\rho}P_{f(A_1)A_2}(f(A_1'),A_2')^{\rho} \\*
&\qquad \{(\ln P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(f(A_1)|A_2))^2 \\
&\qquad - \ln P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(A_1|A_2)\ln P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(A_1'|A_2')\}]\\
&= \frac{1}{2} \mathbf{E}_{A_1A_2A_1'A_2'} [P_{f(A_1)A_2}(f(A_1),A_2)^{\rho}P_{f(A_1)A_2}(f(A_1'),A_2')^{\rho}
\\*
&\qquad\{(\ln P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(f(A_1)|A_2))^2
+ (\ln P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(f(A_1')|A_2'))^2 \\*
&\qquad - 2\ln P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(f(A_1)|A_2)\ln P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(f(A_1')|A_2')\}]\\
&= \frac{1}{2} \mathbf{E}_{A_1A_2A_1'A_2'} [P_{f(A_1)A_2}(f(A_1),A_2)^{\rho}P_{f(A_1)A_2}(f(A_1'),A_2')^{\rho}\\*
&\qquad \{\ln P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(f(A_1)|A_2) - \ln P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(f(A_1')|A_2')\}^2]\\
&\geq 0.
\end{align*}
This means that $h''(\rho) \geq 0$ and $h(\rho)$ is convex.
We can see
\begin{align}
\mathbf{E}_{A_1A_2} [P_{f(A_1)|A_2}(f(A_1)|A_2)^{\rho}] &= \exp(h(\rho)) \nonumber\\
&\geq \exp(\underbrace{h(0)}_{=0} + \rho h'(0))\nonumber\\
&= \exp(-\rho H(f(A_1)|A_2)). \label{eq204}
\end{align}
By Eqs.\ (\ref{eq203}) and (\ref{eq204}) we see that
Eq.\ (\ref{eq:lem1}) holds.
\end{IEEEproof}
\section{Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem10}}\label{app:b}
We shall prove Lemma \ref{lem10} in this Appendix.
Let $\mathcal{L}$ be a subgroup of the group of all bijective
linear maps on $\mathbf{F}_q^{mn}$.
For $\vec{x} \in \mathbf{F}_q^{mn}$,
the orbit $O(\vec{x})$ of $\vec{x}$ under the action of $\mathcal{L}$
is defined by
\[
O(\vec{x}) = \{ L\vec{x} \mid L \in \mathcal{L}\}.
\]
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:orbit0}
Let $\vec{x}$, $\vec{y}$ be two different vectors
belonging to $O(\vec{z})$.
We have
\[
|\{ L \in \mathcal{L} \mid L\vec{z}=\vec{x} \}|
=
|\{ L \in \mathcal{L} \mid L\vec{z}=\vec{y} \}|.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{IEEEproof}
Let $K\in \mathcal{L}$ such that $K\vec{x}=\vec{y}$. We have
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& |\{ L \in \mathcal{L} \mid L\vec{z}=\vec{x} \}|\\
&=& |\{ L \in \mathcal{L} \mid KL\vec{z}=K\vec{x} \}|\\
&=& |\{ L \in \mathcal{L} \mid KL\vec{z}=\vec{y} \}|\\
&=& |\{ L \in \mathcal{L} \mid L\vec{z}=\vec{y} \}|.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{IEEEproof}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:orbit}
Let $B$ be an $m \mu \times mn$ matrix,
$\ker(B) = \{ \vec{x} \in \mathbf{F}_q^{mn} \mid
B\vec{x} = \vec{0} \}$, and
$\mathrm{im}(B) = \{ B\vec{x} \mid \vec{x} \in \mathbf{F}_q^{mn}\}$.
The family of functions $\{ B L \mid L \in \mathcal{L}\}$
with uniformly distributed $L$
is a family of two-universal hash functions from $\mathbf{F}_q^{mn}$
to $\mathrm{im}(B)$ if and only if
\[
\frac{|O(\vec{v}) \cap \ker(B)|}{|O(\vec{v})|}
\leq \frac{1}{|\mathrm{im}(B)|}
\]
for all $\vec{v} \in \mathbf{F}_q^{mn}\setminus \{\vec{0}\}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{IEEEproof}
With the uniform distribution on $\mathcal{L}$,
LHS of Eq.\ (\ref{eq:two}) is equal to
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&\frac{|\{ L \in \mathcal{L} \mid BL\vec{x}_1=BL\vec{x}_2\}|}{|\mathcal{L}|}\\
&=&\frac{|\{ L \in \mathcal{L} \mid BL(\vec{x}_1-\vec{x}_2) =\vec{0}\}|}{|\mathcal{L}|}\\
&=&\frac{|\{ L \in \mathcal{L} \mid L(\vec{x}_1-\vec{x}_2) \in \ker(B) \}|}{|\mathcal{L}|}\\
&=&\frac{|\{ L \in \mathcal{L} \mid L(\vec{x}_1-\vec{x}_2) \in O(\vec{x}_1-\vec{x}_2)\cap\ker(B)\}|}{|\{ L \in \mathcal{L} \mid L(\vec{x}_1-\vec{x}_2) \in O(\vec{x}_1-\vec{x}_2)\}|}\\
&=&\frac{|O(\vec{x}_1-\vec{x}_2)\cap \ker(B)|}{|O(\vec{x}_1-\vec{x}_2)|}
\mbox{ (by Lemma~\ref{lem:orbit0})}.
\end{eqnarray*}
Renaming $\vec{x}_1-\vec{x}_2$ to $\vec{v}$ proves the lemma.
\end{IEEEproof}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:app}
If $\mathcal{L}$ is the set of all bijective linear maps on
$\mathbf{F}_q^{mn}$, then
$\{ B L \mid L \in \mathcal{L}\}$ with uniformly distributed $L$
is a family of two-universal hash functions
from $\mathbf{F}_q^{mn}$ to $\mathrm{im}(B)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{IEEEproof}
For a nonzero $\vec{v} \in \mathbf{F}_q^{mn}$,
we have $O(\vec{v}) = \mathbf{F}_q^{mn}\setminus\{\vec{0}\}$,
which implies
\begin{eqnarray*}
&&|O(\vec{v})| = |\mathbf{F}_q^{mn}|-1,\\
&&|O(\vec{v}) \cap \ker(B)|=\frac{|\mathbf{F}_q^{mn}|}{|\mathrm{im}(B)|} - 1.
\end{eqnarray*}
By Lemma \ref{lem:orbit} we can see that the proposition is true.
\end{IEEEproof}
\begin{IEEEproof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{lem10}]
Lemma \ref{lem10} is equivalent to Proposition \ref{prop:app}.
\end{IEEEproof}
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The authors thank anonymous reviewers of NetCod 2011 and
anonymous reviewers in the previous submission to this journal
for
carefully reading the previous manuscripts and pointing out
its shortcomings.
The first author would like to thank Prof.\ H.\ Yamamoto to teach him
the secure multiplex coding,
Dr.\ S.\ Watanabe to point out the relation between
the proposed scheme and \cite{harada08},
J.\ Kurihara to point out the relation between
the proposed scheme and \cite{silva09},
Dr.\ J.\ Muramatsu and Prof.\ T.\ Ogawa for the helpful discussion on the universal
coding.
A part of this research was done during the first author's stay
at the Institute of Network Coding, the Chinese University
of Hong Kong, and Department of Mathematical Sciences, Aalborg University.
He greatly appreciates the hospitality by Prof.\ R.\ Yeung and
Prof.\ O.\ Geil.
|
\section{Introduction}
The Cardy-Verlinde (CV) formula proposed by Verlinde relates the entropy of a certain conformal field theory (CFT) to its total energy
and its Casimir energy in arbitrary dimensions \cite{1}. Using the $\textmd{AdS}_{\textit{d}}/\textmd{CFT}_{\textit{d}-1}$ \cite{2} and $\textmd{dS}_{\textit{d}}/\textmd{CFT}_{\textit{d}-1}$ \cite{3} correspondence, this formula holds exactly for different black holes \cite{4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13}.
Recently, CV formula was generalized to asymptotically flat spacetimes \cite{14,15} where it was shown that the $d$-dimensional Schwarzschild solution, which is asymptotically flat, satisfies the generalization of the well known CV formula
\begin{eqnarray}\label{0}
S_{CFT}=\frac{2\pi R}{d-2}\sqrt{2EE_c}
\end{eqnarray}
where the related CFT lives in a $(d-1)$-dimensional spacetime \cite{14,16,17}.
Black holes are suitable examples of extreme quantum gravity regimes which should be described by a complete quantum theory of gravity \cite{18.5}. All promising candidates for quantum gravity expect the existence of a minimal observable length \cite{19,20,21,22,23} and therefore the modified dispersion relation (MDR) is well suitable to explore such a finite resolution of the space-time in the framework of the standard model. MDR is a common feature to all candidates of quantum gravity and, in particular, to the
study of loop quantum gravity (LQG) and of models based on non-commutative geometry. In a similar vein, there has been strong interest in modifications to the energy-momentum dispersion relation \cite{24,25,26,27,28}.
Using MDR to study a black hole thermodynamical behavior and comparing the results with other approaches may further our understanding of their properties and structure.
As other, more fundamental theories such as string theory and loop quantum gravity
may be used to study black hole thermodynamics, the results of such studies
are useful to impose constraints on the MDR \cite{29} which would ultimately result in a better understanding of quantum gravity. A study along these lines was performed in a previous work \cite{29}.
In addition, the extra dimensional form of the modified dispersion relation introduced in \cite{299}
has also been used in the past to improve our understanding in such studies. In this paper, we
use the extra dimensional form of MDR, obtained in the above mentioned studies where terms proportional to odd powers of energy are not present \cite{29,299,30}, and obtain the corrections to the $d$-dimensional Schwarzschild black hole thermodynamics by utilizing the MDR. Furthermore,
using such corrected quantities as the entropy, temperature and energy of a black hole, we derive the modified CV formula within MDR.
Previously, the Schwarzschild black hole had been considered to modify the CV formula from the generalized uncertainty principle \cite{16} and space non-commutativity \cite{18}.
Although the extra dimensional form of the generalized uncertainty principle as an equivalent face of the modified dispersion relation has been used frequently \cite{A1,A2,A3} in the past, the modified dispersion relation in extra dimensions is new.
In this work, we first introduce the modified dispersion relation introduced in \cite{299}. We then use the MDR to obtain the black hole thermodynamics corrections. Knowing the corrections to the black hole thermodynamical quantities, we derive the corrections to the CV formula from MDR. It is then shown that the corrections to the CV formula may also be derived by just redefining the Virasoro operator and the central charge within MDR.
\section{Extra dimensional form of the modified dispersion relation}
The 4-dimensional form of the modified dispersion relation is \cite{27}
\begin{equation}\label{1}
(\overrightarrow{p})^2=f(E,m;L_p)\simeq E^2-\mu^2+\alpha_1 L_p
E^3+\alpha_2L_p^2E^4+{\cal O}\left(L_P^3E^5\right),
\end{equation}
where $f$ is the function that gives the exact dispersion relation
and $L_p$ is the Planck length. On the right hand we have
used a Taylor-series expansion for $E\ll
\frac{1}{L_p}$. The coefficients $\alpha_i$ may take different values in
other quantum gravity scenarios. Note that $m$ is the rest
energy of the particle and the mass parameter $\mu$ on the right
hand side is directly related to the rest energy. However we note that $\mu\neq m$ if
$\alpha_i$'s do not all vanish. To include quantum gravity effects, the Bekenstein-Hawking theory of black hole thermodynamics has to be modified. In addition,
loop quantum gravity and string theory give the entropy-area
relation of black holes (for $A\gg L_P^2$)
\begin{equation}\label{2}
S=\frac {A}{4L_P^2}+\rho \ln{\frac{A}{L_p^2}}+{\cal
O}\left(\frac{L_p^2}{A}\right),
\end{equation}
where we expect different values for $\rho$ in string theory and in loop
quantum gravity \cite{27,28,31}. As string theory and loop quantum gravity are believed to provide a more fundamental solution to black
hole thermodynamics, such solutions can be compared to
the ones obtained using the MDR \cite{29}. Therefore, the entropy of
a black hole obtained using equation (\ref{1}) is functionally different from what one obtains using string
theory and loop quantum gravity given by equation (\ref{2}). Introduction of constraints
on the usual form of the MDR therefore become necessary to obtain a consistent black hole thermodynamics in both approaches.
The result is that terms proportional to odd powers of energy should be ignored in the MDR formula
\cite{29,30}. As a consequence, we take the 4-dimensional form of the MDR as
\begin{equation}\label{3}
(\overrightarrow{p})^2=f(E,m;L_p)\simeq E^2-\mu^2+\alpha
L_p^2E^4+{\cal O}\left(L_P^4E^6\right),
\end{equation}
in what follows.
Alternatively, using the extra dimensional form of MDR which was investigated in \cite{299} could be of interest. as is well known, the generalized uncertainty principle (GUP) is the usual feature of all promising candidates for quantum gravity and implies a minimal observable length in the same way as in MDR. Since the relationship between the generalized uncertainty principle and MDR is phenomenologically close, one may use the extra dimensional form of GUP, which is known, to find the extra dimensional form of the MDR \cite{299}. It seems as if the GUP and MDR are phenomenologically two, faces of an underlying quantum gravity proposal. The expectation that they lead to equivalent results in extra dimensions cannot be considered as far fetched. Now, demanding equivalent forms for GUP and MDR in extra dimensions, one may introduce the $d$-dimensional form of the MDR \cite{299} to modify thermodynamics of the $d$-dimensional Schwarzschild black hole. Following \cite{299}, we write
\begin{equation}\label{3.5}
(\overrightarrow{p})^2=f(E,m;L_p)\simeq E^2-\mu^2+\alpha
L_p^2E^4+{\cal O}\left(L_P^4E^6\right).
\end{equation}
It is clear that the form of the MDR in extra dimensions is the same as that in 4-dimensions but $L_p$ now depends on the dimensionality of the spacetime to incorporate the effects of the existence of the extra dimensions.
\section{Black hole thermodynamics within MDR}
A $d$-dimensional Schwarzschild black hole is described by the metric
\begin{eqnarray}\label{4}
ds^2=-\left(1-\frac{m}{r^{d-3}}\right)dt^2+\left(1-\frac{m}{r^{d-3}}\right)^{-1}dr^2+r^2d\Omega^2_{d-2}.
\end{eqnarray}
The mass of the black hole is given by $M=\frac{(d-2)\Omega_{d-2}m}{16\pi G_d}$, where $\Omega_{d-2}=\frac{2\pi^{(d-2)/2}}{\Gamma[(d-2)/2]}$ is the area of a unit $(d-2)$ sphere, $d\Omega^2_{d-2}$ is the linear element on the unit sphere $S^{d-2}$ and $G_d$ is Newton's constant in $d$-dimensions.
The locations of outer horizons are written as $r_s=m^{\frac{1}{d-3}}$ \cite{17}.
To find the corrections to black hole thermodynamics within MDR, we start with differentiating equation (\ref{3.5}),
\begin{eqnarray}\label{5}
dp \simeq dE\left[1+\frac{3}{2}\alpha L_p^2E^2+{\cal O}\left(\alpha ^2 L_P^4E^6\right)\right],
\end{eqnarray}
where we have considered only the first order correction terms and the rest mass has been neglected.
We can then write
\begin{eqnarray}\label{6}
dE \simeq dp\left[1-\frac{3}{2}\alpha L_p^2E^2+{\cal O}\left(\alpha ^2 L_P^4E^6\right)\right].
\end{eqnarray}
To first order corrections, assuming $E\simeq \delta E$, we may apply the standard uncertainty formulae, $\delta E\geq \frac{1}{\delta x}$ and $\delta p\geq\frac{1}{\delta x}$, to obtain \cite{29,299,30}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{7}
dE\geq \frac{1}{\delta x}\left[1-\frac{3}{2}\alpha L_p^2\frac{1}{{\delta x}^2}+{\cal O}\left(\alpha ^2 L_P^4\frac{1}{{\delta x}^6}\right)\right].
\end{eqnarray}
The corrected energy of the black hole within MDR may be written as $E'$ which is assumed to be $E'\simeq dE$
\begin{eqnarray}\label{7.5}
E'\geq \frac{1}{\delta x}\left[1-\frac{3}{2}\alpha L_p^2\frac{1}{{\delta x}^2}+{\cal O}\left(\alpha ^2 L_P^4\frac{1}{{\delta x}^6}\right)\right].
\end{eqnarray}
In the process of Hawking radiation, the uncertainty in the position of
a Hawking particle at the emission is $\delta x\simeq 2r_s$ \cite{29,299}.
Utilizing equation $\delta x\simeq 2m^{\frac{1}{d-3}}$, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{8}
E' \simeq \frac{1}{2m^{\frac{1}{d-3}}}-\frac{3}{16}\alpha L_p^2\frac{1}{m^{\frac{3}{d-3}}}+{\cal O}\left(\alpha ^2 L_P^4\frac{1}{m^{\frac{5}{d-3}}}\right).
\end{eqnarray}
Now, we only consider the first order correction term without loss of generality and write the black hole modified energy as $E'=E+\Delta E$, where
\begin{eqnarray}\label{9}
E \simeq \frac{1}{2m^{\frac{1}{d-3}}} \quad , \quad \Delta E \simeq -\frac{3}{16}\alpha L_p^2\frac{1}{m^{\frac{3}{d-3}}}.
\end{eqnarray}
Note that $E$ is the standard energy and the presence of MDR in a quantum gravity regime results in the appearance of $\Delta E$.
Now, since the Hawking temperature can be identified with energy \cite{16}, we set the constant of proportionality to $\frac{d-3}{2\pi}$ and get
\begin{eqnarray}\label{10}
T' \simeq \frac{d-3}{4\pi}\frac{1}{m^{\frac{1}{d-3}}}-\frac{3(d-3)}{32\pi} \alpha L_p^2 \frac{1}{m^{\frac{3}{d-3}}}+{\cal O}\left(\alpha ^2 L_P^4\frac{1}{m^{\frac{5}{d-3}}}\right).
\end{eqnarray}
Considering only the first order correction term, one may write the temperature as $T'=T+\Delta T$, where
\begin{eqnarray}\label{11}
T \simeq \frac{d-3}{4\pi}\frac{1}{m^{\frac{1}{d-3}}} \quad , \quad \Delta T \simeq -\frac{3(d-3)}{32\pi} \alpha L_p^2 \frac{1}{m^{\frac{3}{d-3}}}.
\end{eqnarray}
Note that $T$ is the standard black hole temperature and the emergence of $\Delta T$ is due to the effects of MDR in quantum gravity regime.
Using the first law of thermodynamics, one may write
\begin{eqnarray}\label{11.5}
dS'_{d} \simeq \frac{\Omega_{d-2}}{4G_d}{\frac{(d-2)}{(d-3)}} dm \left[m^{\frac{1}{d-3}}+\frac{3}{8}\alpha L_p^2 m^{\frac{-1}{d-3}}+{\cal O}\left(\alpha ^2 L_P^4 m^{\frac{-3}{d-3}}\right)\right].
\end{eqnarray}
Thus, the entropy of the black hole can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{12}
S'_{d\neq 4} \simeq \frac{\Omega_{d-2}}{4G_d}m^{\frac{d-2}{d-3}}+\frac{3\Omega_{d-2}(d-2)}{32G_d(d-4)}\alpha L_p^2 m^{\frac{d-4}{d-3}},
\end{eqnarray}
which is true for all $d$'s except $d=4$ up to the first order correction term.
It is important to point out that if one tries to consider higher order correction terms, the entropy for odd $d$ and even $d$ will be different. In fact, a logarithmic correction term will appear in the entropy formula of a black hole with even dimensions for higher order correction terms and this is due to the presence of the factors $m^{\frac{-3}{d-3},\frac{-5}{d-3},\frac{-7}{d-3}...}$ in equation (\ref{11.5}).
Let us now write the entropy as $S'=S+\Delta S$, where
\begin{eqnarray}\label{13}
S \simeq \frac{\Omega_{d-2}}{4G_d}m^{\frac{d-2}{d-3}} \quad , \quad \Delta S_{d\neq 4} \simeq \frac{3\Omega_{d-2}(d-2)}{32G_d(d-4)}\alpha L_p^2 m^{\frac{d-4}{d-3}}.
\end{eqnarray}
For $d=4$, the entropy of a black hole can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{14}
S'_{d=4} \simeq S+ \frac{3\Omega_2}{16 G_4} \alpha L_p^2 \ln m,
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}\label{15}
\Delta S_{d=4} \simeq \frac{3\Omega_2}{16 G_4} \alpha L_p^2 \ln m.
\end{eqnarray}
We again note that $S$ is the standard black hole entropy and the emergence of $\Delta S$ is due to the effects of MDR in a quantum gravity regime.
Therefore, the black hole thermodynamic corrections are obtained from the MDR. It is important to stress that we have considered only the first order correction term during the calculations, without any loss of generality.
As an important point, we mention the appearance of a logarithmic correction term in the entropy of a 4-dimensional black hole.
In the recent past, many researchers have become interested in fixing the coefficient of the logarithmic correction term within the statistical and quantum geometrical approaches \cite{B4,B5,B6,B7,B8,B9,B10,B11}. Since, this particular parameter
might be useful as a discriminator of prospective fundamental theories, fixing it independent of the specific elements of any one particular model of quantum gravity seems to be of importance. Therefore, MDR as a model independent concept is a suitable approach to provide the corrections to black hole entropy.
As has been argued in \cite{29}, the parameter $\alpha$ in MDR is a negative quantity of order one (see also \cite{30}). There, a comparison was made between the results of two approaches, the generalized uncertainty principle and modified dispersion
relation within the context of black hole thermodynamics with that of string theory and Loop
quantum gravity. Demanding the same results in all approaches and considering string theory and
loop quantum gravity as more comprehensive, some constraints were imposed on the form of GUP and
MDR. Also, it was found that GUP and MDR are not independent concepts. In fact, they could be
equivalent in an ultimate quantum theory of gravity. The existence of a positive minimal observable
length necessitates a positive value for the model dependent parameter $\alpha$ in the form of GUP. Since we know the relation between the model dependent parameters in GUP and MDR in \cite{29}, we set the
parameter $\alpha$ as a negative value for MDR in this paper.
Now it is easy to see that the logarithmic correction term in 4-dimensional black hole entropy is negative in our approach.
In spite of the current lack of detailed knowledge about $\alpha$, our calculation might still be
considered as a step towards a final theory of quantum gravity. The fundamental
theory may be able to make a precise statement about $\alpha$ and, as a result, a prediction about the coefficient of the logarithmic term in the present calculation. It may also have something to say about the logarithmic
coefficient through more direct means. The correspondence of the results via these two sets of calculations can be a good test for the validity of the final quantum gravity theory \cite{B6}.
Furthermore, it is interesting to note that the existence of
a logarithmic correction term in the entropy relation is restricted to even black hole dimensionality within MDR.
In fact if one tries to consider the higher order correction terms, the emergence of a logarithmic term in the entropy relation for even dimensions will be certain. Of course, the presence of a logarithmic correction term will put a constraint on the dimensionality of the black hole and its dual CFT. It would also result in a better insight when dealing with formulating quantum gravity.
\section{MDR corrections to the CV formula}
The entropy of a (1+1)-dimensional CFT is given by the well known Cardy formula
\begin{eqnarray}\label{16.1}
S_{CFT}=2\pi \sqrt{\frac{c}{6}\left(L_0-\frac{c}{24}\right)},
\end{eqnarray}
where $L_0=ER$ is the product of energy and radius and the shift $\frac{c}{24}$ is caused by the Casimir effect \cite{32}. After making the appropriate identifications for $L_0$ and $c$, the same Cardy formula is also valid for CFT in arbitrary $(d-1)$-dimensional spacetime in the form \cite{1}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{16.2}
S_{CFT}=\frac{2\pi R}{d-2} \sqrt{E_c(2E-E_c)},
\end{eqnarray}
where $R$ is the radius of the system, $E$ is the total energy and $E_C$ is the Casimir energy defined as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{16.3}
E_c=(d-1)E-(d-2)TS.
\end{eqnarray}
Recently, the CV formula was generalized to asymptotically flat spacetimes (the generalized CV formula) \cite{14,15}. In an asymptotically flat spacetime, it is given by \cite{14,16,17}
\begin{eqnarray}\label{17}
S_{CFT}=\frac{2\pi R}{d-2}\sqrt{2E E_c}.
\end{eqnarray}
We have computed the modified dispersion relation corrections to the thermodynamics of a $d$-dimensional Schwarzschild black hole described by the generalized CV formula (\ref{17}). Therefore, we can write the CV formula within MDR for arbitrary $d$ as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{17.2}
S'_{CFT}=\frac{2\pi R}{d-2}\sqrt{2E' E'_c}
\end{eqnarray}
and the Casimir energy, equation (\ref{16.3}), within MDR as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{18}
E'_c=(d-1)E'-(d-2)T'S',
\end{eqnarray}
where a prime indicates the quantity in MDR. Using equation (\ref{18}), we substitute $E'=E+\Delta E$, $T'=T+\Delta T$ and $S'=S+\Delta S$ in equation (\ref{17.2}) to obtain
\begin{eqnarray}\label{19}
S'_{CFT} \simeq S_{CFT}\left[1+\frac{(d-2)}{2EE_c}\left(\frac{2(d-1)}{(d-2)}E\Delta E-ET\Delta S-E\Delta T S-\Delta E T S\right)\right].
\end{eqnarray}
Since the correction terms induced by MDR are small, we have ignored their product and used Taylor expansion. Substituting the quantities in terms of $E$, one may obtain the modified dispersion relation corrections of CV formula as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{20}
S'_{CFT} \simeq S_{CFT}\left\{1+\frac{(d-2)\alpha L_p^2}{2E E_c}\left[ -\frac{3(d-1)}{(d-2)}E^4 + \frac{3}{256 \pi} \frac{(d-3) (d-6)}{(d-4)}\frac{\Omega_{d-2}}{G_d} (2E)^{6-d} \right]\right\},
\end{eqnarray}
which is valid for $d \neq 4$ up to first order correction terms.
It is also important to write the corrections to CFT entropy for $d=4$ as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{21}
S'_{CFT} \simeq S_{CFT}\left[1+\frac{\alpha L_p^2 }{E E_c}\left( -\frac{9}{2}E^4 + \frac{3}{32 \pi}\frac{\Omega_2}{G_4}E^2 (\ln{2E}+1) \right)\right].
\end{eqnarray}
The correction terms are certainly caused by the modified dispersion relation.
For Schwarzschild black holes, the dual CFT lives in a flat space and the energy has no subextensive part \cite{14,16}. Since the Casimir energy vanishes \cite{14}, the CV formula (\ref{16.2}) makes no sense in this case \cite{14,16}.
In 2-dimensional conformal field theory, when the conformal weight of the ground state is zero, the CV formula
\begin{eqnarray}\label{22}
S=2\pi \sqrt{\frac{cL_0}{6}},
\end{eqnarray}
is valid \cite{14,16,33}. Note that $c$ is the central charge and $L_0$ is the Virasoro operator.
If we use $E_cR=(d-2)\frac{S_c}{2\pi}$ in equation (\ref{16.2}), where $S_c$ is the Casimir entropy and drop $E_c$ in analogy with equation (\ref{22}), we obtain the generalization to equation (\ref{22}) in $(d-1)$ dimensional CFT \cite{14,16,33} as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{22.5}
S=\frac{2\pi}{d-2} \sqrt{\frac{cL_0}{6}},
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}\label{23}
L_0=RE \quad , \quad \frac{c}{6}=\frac{(d-2)S_c}{\pi}=2E_cR.
\end{eqnarray}
Now equation (\ref{22.5}) can be applied to a Schwarzschild black hole with asymptotically flat spacetime.
In fact, as was noted before, the CV (the generalized CV) formula is the outcome of a striking resemblance between the thermodynamics of CFTs with asymptotically Ads (flat) duals and CFTs in two dimensions \cite{14,16,33}.
Therefore, it is possible to take into account the MDR corrections to CV entropy formula by just redefining the Virasoro operator and the central charge, the quantities entering the CV formula. The Virasoro operator can be modified to
\begin{eqnarray}\label{24}
L'_0=RE'=L_0-\frac{3}{2}\alpha L_p^2 R E^3,
\end{eqnarray}
which is correct for all values of $d$. In this manner, the central charge can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{25}
c'_{d \neq 4}=c+12\alpha L_p^2 R \left[-\frac{3 (d-1)}{2}E^3-\frac{3}{64\pi}\frac{(d-3)(d-2)}{(d-4)}\frac{\Omega_{d-2}}{G_d} (2E)^{5-d} \right],
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}\label{26}
c'_{d=4}=c+12\alpha L_p^2 R \left[\frac{-9}{2}E^3+\frac{3}{16\pi}\frac{\Omega_2}{G_4} E \left(\ln(2E)+\frac{1}{2}\right) \right].
\end{eqnarray}
Therefore, one may consider the standard form of the CV formula, but redefine the Virasoro operator and central charge to take into account the MDR corrections.
\section{Conclusions}
We have computed the modified dispersion relation corrections to the entropy of a $d$-dimensional Schwarzschild black hole described by the CV formula, equation (\ref{17}). We have used the modified dispersion relation to correct the thermodynamical properties of the $d$-dimensional Schwarzschild black hole such as entropy, temperature and energy. The corrected black hole thermodynamical quantities have been used to modify the CV formula. In other words, we have obtained the corrections to the entropy of a dual conformal field theory living in a flat space. We also stressed the point that the CV (generalized CV) formula is the outcome of an interesting resemblance between the thermodynamics of CFTs with asymptotically Ads (flat) duals and CFTs in two dimensions. We then derived the corrections to the Virasoro operator and the central charge, the quantities entering the CV formula. We have shown the possibility of taking into account the MDR corrections to the CV entropy formula by just redefining the Virasoro operator and the central charge.
|
\section{Introduction}
According to Olver's opinion \cite{Olver}, we consider that the $1$-jet
spaces and their duals are natural houses for the study of classical and
quantum field theories. For such a reason, the differential geometry of $1
-jet spaces was intensively studied, in a contravariant approach, by a lot
of authors: Saunders \cite{Saun}, Asanov \cite{Asan}, Neagu and Udri\c{s}te
(see \cite{Neag1}, \cite{Neag+Udri}, \cite{Neag+Udri+Oana}), and many others.
In the last decades, numerous physicists and geometers were preoccupied by
the development of that so-called the \textit{covariant Hamiltonian geometry
of physical fields}, which is a multi-parameter, or multi-time, extension of
the classical Hamiltonian formulation from Mechanics. In such a perspective,
we point out that the covariant Hamiltonian geometry of physical fields
appears in the literature of specialty in three distinct variants: \textbf
(1)} $\blacktriangleright $ the \textit{multisymplectic geometry} $-$
developed by Gotay, Isenberg, Marsden, Montgomery and their co-workers (see
\cite{Gota+Isen+Mars}, \cite{Gota+Isen+Mars+Mont}) on a finite-dimensional
multisymplectic phase space; \textbf{(2)} $\blacktriangleright $ the \textit
polysymplectic geometry} $-$ elaborated by Giachetta, Mangiarotti and
Sardanashvily (see \cite{Giac+Mang+Sard1}, \cite{Giac+Mang+Sard2}), which
emphasizes the relations between the equations of first order Lagrangian
field theory on fiber bundles and the covariant Hamilton equations on a
finite-dimensional polysymplectic phase space; \textbf{(3)}
\blacktriangleright $ the \textit{De Donder-Weyl Hamiltonian geometry} $-$
studied by Kanatchikov (see \cite{Kana1}, \cite{Kana2}, \cite{Kana3}) as
opposed to the conventional field-theoretical Hamiltonian formalism, which
requires the space + time decomposition and leads to the picture of a field
as a mechanical system with infinitely degrees of freedom.
From a geometrical point of view, following the ideas initially stated by
Asanov \cite{Asan}, a multi-time Lagrange contravariant geometry on $1$-jet
spaces (in the sense of d-linear connections, d-torsions and d-curvatures)
was recently developed by Neagu and Udri\c{s}te in \cite{Neag1}, \cit
{Neag+Udri} and \cite{Neag+Udri+Oana}. This $1$-jet geometrical theory is a
natural multi-time extension of the classical Lagrangian geometry on tangent
bundles, initiated and developed by Miron and Anastasiei \cite{Miro+Anas}.
On the other hand, suggested by the field theoretical extension of the basic
structures of classical Analytical Mechanics within the framework of the De
Donder-Weyl covariant Hamiltonian formulation, the geometrical studies of
Miron \cite{Miro}, Atanasiu \cite{Atan+Klep}, \cite{Atan1} and others led to
the development of the Hamilton geometry on cotangent bundles, which is
synthesized in the book \cite{Miro+Hrim+Shim+Saba}. Note that the
Miron-Atanasiu Hamiltonian geometrical ideas from cotangent bundles
represent the point start for the development of the jet covariant
Riemann-Hamilton geometry depending on polymomenta, which is presented in
the Atanasiu-Neagu papers \cite{Atan-Neag0} and \cite{Atan+Neag1}. In this
paper we are going on the jet multi-time Hamiltonian geometrical studies
from \cite{Atan-Neag0} and \cite{Atan+Neag1}.
\section{Components of $N$-linear connections on dual $1$-jet bundle
J^{1\ast }(\mathcal{T},M)$}
Let $\mathcal{T}$ and $M$ be a \textit{temporal} (resp. \textit{spatial})
real, smooth manifold of dimension $m$ (resp. $n$), whose coordinates are
(t^{a})_{a=\overline{1,m}}$, respectively $(x^{i})_{i=\overline{1,n}}$. Note
that, throughout this paper, the indices $a$, $b$, $c$, $...$ run from 1 to
m$, while the indices $i,$ $j,$ $k,$ $...$ run from 1 to $n$. The Einstein
convention of summation is also adopted all over this work.
Let $J^{1\ast }(\mathcal{T},M)$ be the dual $1$-jet fibre bundle, whose
coordinates $(t^{a},x^{i},p_{i}^{a})$ are induced from $\mathcal{T}$ and $M
. The coordinate transformations from the product manifold $\mathcal{T
\times $ $M$ produce on $J^{1\ast }(\mathcal{T},M)$ the following coordinate
transformations
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ccc}
\widetilde{t}^{a}=\widetilde{t}^{a}\left( t^{b}\right) , & \widetilde{x}^{i}
\widetilde{x}^{i}\left( x^{j}\right) , & \widetilde{p}_{i}^{a}=\dfrac
\partial x^{j}}{\partial \widetilde{x}^{i}}\dfrac{\partial \widetilde{t}^{a
}{\partial t^{b}}p_{j}^{b}
\end{array
\end{equation*
where $\det \left( \partial \widetilde{t}^{a}/\partial t^{b}\right) \neq 0$
and $\det \left( \partial \widetilde{x}^{i}/\partial x^{j}\right) \neq 0.$
\begin{definition}
A pair of local functions on $E^{\ast }=J^{1\ast }(\mathcal{T},M),$ denoted
by
\begin{equation*}
N=\left( \underset{1}{N}\overset{\left( a\right) }{_{\left( i\right) b}},\
\underset{2}{N}\overset{\left( a\right) }{_{\left( i\right) j}}\right) ,
\end{equation*
whose local components obey the transformation rule
\begin{equation*}
\underset{1}{\widetilde{N}}\overset{\left( b\right) }{_{\left( j\right) c}
\dfrac{\delta \widetilde{t}^{c}}{\delta t^{a}}=\underset{1}{N}\overset
\left( c\right) }{_{\left( k\right) a}}\dfrac{\delta \widetilde{t}^{b}}
\delta t^{c}}\dfrac{\partial x^{k}}{\partial \widetilde{x}^{j}}-\dfrac
\partial \widetilde{p}_{j}^{b}}{\partial t^{a}},
\end{equation*
\begin{equation*}
\underset{2}{\widetilde{N}}\overset{\left( b\right) }{_{\left( j\right) k}
\dfrac{\partial \widetilde{x}^{k}}{\partial x^{i}}=\underset{2}{N}\overset
\left( c\right) }{_{\left( k\right) i}}\dfrac{\delta \widetilde{t}^{b}}
\delta t^{c}}\dfrac{\partial x^{k}}{\partial \widetilde{x}^{j}}-\dfrac
\partial \widetilde{p}_{j}^{b}}{\partial x^{i}},
\end{equation*
is called a \textbf{nonlinear connection} on $E^{\ast }$. The components
\underset{1}{N}\underset{}{\overset{\left( a\right) }{_{\left( i\right) b}}}$
(resp. $\underset{2}{N}\underset{}{\overset{\left( a\right) }{_{\left(
i\right) j}}}$) are called the\ \textbf{temporal} (resp. \textbf{spatial})
\textbf{components} of $N$.
\end{definition}
\begin{example}
Let $h_{ab}\left( t^{f}\right) $ (resp. $\varphi _{ij}\left( x^{k}\right) $)
be a semi-Riemannian metric on the temporal manifold $\mathcal{T}$ (resp.
spatial manifold $M$). Taking into account the local transformation rules of
the Christoffel symbols $\chi _{bc}^{a}\left( t\right) $ (resp. $\Gamma
_{ij}^{k}\left( x\right) $) of the metrics $h_{ab}\left( t\right) $ (resp.
\varphi _{ij}\left( x\right) $), then the pair of local function
\begin{equation*}
N_{0}=\left( \underset{1}{\overset{0}{N}}\overset{\left( a\right) }{_{\left(
i\right) b}},\ \underset{2}{\overset{0}{N}}\overset{\left( a\right) }
_{\left( i\right) j}}\right) ,
\end{equation*
wher
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{cc}
\underset{1}{\overset{0}{N}}\overset{\left( a\right) }{_{\left( i\right) b}
=\chi _{bc}^{a}p_{i}^{c},\quad & \underset{2}{\overset{0}{N}}\overset{\left(
a\right) }{_{\left( i\right) j}}\underset{}{}=-\Gamma _{ij}^{k}p_{k}^{a}
\end{array
\end{equation*
represents a nonlinear connection on $E^{\ast }$. This is called the \textbf
canonical nonli-}\newline
\textbf{near connection attached to the metrics }$h_{ab}(t)$ \textbf{and}
\varphi _{ij}(x)$.
\end{example}
In what follows, we fix a nonlinear connection on $E^{\ast }$, and we
consider the \textit{adapted bases} of the nonlinear connection $N$, defined
b
\begin{equation}
\left\{ \frac{\delta }{\delta t^{a}},\frac{\delta }{\delta x^{i}},\frac
\partial }{\partial p_{i}^{a}}\right\} \subset \mathcal{X}\left( E^{\ast
}\right) ,\quad \left\{ dt^{a},dx^{i},\delta p_{i}^{a}\right\} \subset
\mathcal{X}^{\ast }\left( E^{\ast }\right) , \label{bz}
\end{equation
wher
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{l}
\dfrac{\delta }{\delta t^{a}}=\dfrac{\partial }{\partial t^{a}}-\underset{1}
N}\overset{\left( b\right) }{_{\left( j\right) a}}\dfrac{\partial }{\partial
p_{j}^{b}},\medskip \\
\dfrac{\delta }{\delta x^{i}}=\dfrac{\partial }{\partial x^{i}}-\underset{2}
N}\overset{\left( b\right) }{_{\left( j\right) i}}\dfrac{\partial }{\partial
p_{j}^{b}},\medskip \\
\delta p_{i}^{a}=dp_{i}^{a}+\underset{1}{N}\overset{\left( a\right) }
_{\left( i\right) b}}dt^{b}+\underset{2}{N}\overset{\left( a\right) }
_{\left( i\right) j}}dx^{j}
\end{array
\end{equation*
It is important to note that the transformation rules of the elements of the
adapted bases (\ref{bz}) are tensorial ones
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{lll}
\dfrac{\delta }{\delta t^{a}}=\dfrac{\partial \tilde{t}^{b}}{\partial t^{a}
\dfrac{\delta }{\delta \tilde{t}^{b}},\medskip & \dfrac{\delta }{\delta x^{i
}=\dfrac{\partial \tilde{x}^{j}}{\partial x^{i}}\dfrac{\delta }{\delta
\tilde{x}^{j}}, & \dfrac{\partial }{\partial p_{i}^{a}}=\dfrac{\partial
\tilde{t}^{b}}{\partial t^{a}}\dfrac{\partial x^{i}}{\partial \tilde{x}^{j}
\dfrac{\partial }{\partial \tilde{p}_{j}^{b}}, \\
dt^{a}=\dfrac{\partial t^{a}}{\partial \tilde{t}^{b}}d\tilde{t}^{b}, &
dx^{i}=\dfrac{\partial x^{i}}{\partial \tilde{x}^{j}}d\tilde{x}^{j}, &
\delta p_{i}^{a}=\dfrac{\partial t^{a}}{\partial \tilde{t}^{b}}\dfrac
\partial \tilde{x}^{j}}{\partial x^{i}}\delta \tilde{p}_{j}^{b}
\end{array}
\label{schbz}
\end{equation}
\begin{remark}
The simple tensorial transformation rules (\ref{schbz}) of the adapted bases
(\ref{bz}) determined us to describe in what follows all geometrical objects
on the dual $1$-jet space $J^{1\ast }(\mathcal{T},M)$ in adapted local
components.
\end{remark}
In order to develop the geometrical theory of $N$-linear connections on the
dual $1$-jet space $E^{\ast }$, we need the following result:
\begin{proposition}
\emph{(i)} The Lie algebra $\mathcal{X}\left( E^{\ast }\right) $ of vector
fields decomposes a
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{X}\left( E^{\ast }\right) =\mathcal{X}\left( \mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{
}}\right) \oplus \mathcal{X}\left( \mathcal{H}_{M}\right) \oplus \mathcal{X
\left( \mathcal{V}\right) ,
\end{equation*
wher
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{X}\left( \mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{T}}\right) {\scriptsize =}\text
\emph{Span}}\left\{ \dfrac{\delta }{\delta t^{a}}\right\} {\scriptsize
,\quad }\mathcal{X}\left( \mathcal{H}_{M}\right) {\scriptsize =}\text{\emph
Span}}\left\{ \dfrac{\delta }{\delta x^{i}}\right\} {\scriptsize ,\quad
\mathcal{X}\left( \mathcal{V}\right) {\scriptsize =}\text{\emph{Span}
\left\{ \dfrac{\partial }{\partial p_{i}^{a}}\right\} {\scriptsize .}
\end{equation*
\emph{(ii)} The Lie algebra $\mathcal{X}^{\ast }\left( E^{\ast }\right) $ of
covector fields decomposes a
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{X}^{\ast }\left( E^{\ast }\right) =\mathcal{X}^{\ast }\left(
\mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{T}}\right) \oplus \mathcal{X}^{\ast }\left( \mathcal{H
_{M}\right) \oplus \mathcal{X}^{\ast }\left( \mathcal{V}\right) ,
\end{equation*
wher
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{X}^{\ast }\left( \mathcal{H}_{\mathcal{T}}\right) {\scriptsize =
\text{\emph{Span}}\left\{ dt^{a}\right\} {\scriptsize ,\quad }\mathcal{X
^{\ast }\left( \mathcal{H}_{M}\right) {\scriptsize =}\text{\emph{Span}
\left\{ dx^{i}\right\} {\scriptsize ,\quad }\mathcal{X}^{\ast }\left(
\mathcal{V}\right) {\scriptsize =}\text{\emph{Span}}\left\{ \delta
p_{i}^{a}\right\} {\scriptsize .}
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
Let us consider that $h_{\mathcal{T}}$, $h_{M}$ (horizontal) and $v$
(vertical) are the canonical projections of the above decompositions. In
this context, we introduce the following geometrical concept:
\begin{definition}
A linear connection $D:\mathcal{X}\left( E^{\ast }\right) \times \mathcal{X
\left( E^{\ast }\right) \rightarrow \mathcal{X}\left( E^{\ast }\right) $ is
called \textit{an }$N$\textbf{-linear connection} on $E^{\ast }$ if and only
if $Dh_{\mathcal{T}}=0,Dh_{M}=0$ and $Dv=0$.
\end{definition}
It is obvious that the local description of the $N$-linear connection $D$ on
$E^{\ast }$ is accomplished by \textit{nine} unique adapted component
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{c}
D\Gamma \left( N\right) =\left( A_{bc}^{a},\text{ }A_{jc}^{i},\text{
-A_{\left( i\right) \left( b\right) c}^{\left( a\right) \left( j\right) }
\text{ }H_{bk}^{a},\text{ }H_{jk}^{i},\text{ }-H_{\left( i\right) \left(
b\right) k}^{\left( a\right) \left( j\right) },\right. \medskip \\
\left. C_{b\left( c\right) }^{a\left( k\right) },\text{ }C_{j\left( c\right)
}^{i\left( k\right) },\text{ }-C_{\left( i\right) \left( b\right) \left(
c\right) }^{\left( a\right) \left( j\right) \left( k\right) }\right)
\end{array}
\label{coef_N-cl}
\end{equation
which are locally defined by the relations
\begin{eqnarray*}
{\scriptsize D}_{\dfrac{\delta }{\delta t^{c}}}\frac{\delta }{\delta t^{b}}
{\scriptsize =}&{\scriptsize A}_{bc}^{a}\frac{\delta }{\delta t^{a}
{\scriptsize ,}\text{ }{\scriptsize D}_{\dfrac{\delta }{\delta t^{c}}}\frac
\delta }{\delta x^{j}}{\scriptsize =A}_{jc}^{i}\frac{\delta }{\delta x^{i}
{\scriptsize ,}\text{ }{\scriptsize D}_{\dfrac{\delta }{\delta t^{c}}}\frac
\partial }{\partial p_{j}^{b}}{\scriptsize =-A}_{\left( i\right) \left(
b\right) c}^{\left( a\right) \left( j\right) }\frac{\partial }{\partial
p_{i}^{a}}, \\
{\scriptsize D}_{\dfrac{\delta }{\delta x^{k}}}\frac{\delta }{\delta t^{b}}
{\scriptsize =}&{\scriptsize H}_{bk}^{a}\frac{\delta }{\delta t^{a}
{\scriptsize ,}\text{ }{\scriptsize D}_{\dfrac{\delta }{\delta x^{k}}}\frac
\delta }{\delta x^{j}}{\scriptsize =H}_{jk}^{i}\frac{\delta }{\delta x^{i}
{\scriptsize ,}\text{ }{\scriptsize D}_{\dfrac{\delta }{\delta x^{k}}}\frac
\partial }{\partial p_{j}^{b}}{\scriptsize =-H}_{\left( i\right) \left(
b\right) k}^{\left( a\right) \left( j\right) }\frac{\partial }{\partial
p_{i}^{a}}, \\
{\scriptsize D}_{\dfrac{\partial }{\partial p_{k}^{c}}}\frac{\delta }{\delta
t^{b}} &{\scriptsize =}&{\scriptsize C}_{b\left( c\right) }^{a\left(
k\right) }\frac{\delta }{\delta t^{a}}{\scriptsize ,}\text{ }{\scriptsize D
_{\dfrac{\partial }{\partial p_{k}^{c}}}\frac{\delta }{\delta x^{j}
{\scriptsize =C}_{j\left( c\right) }^{i\left( k\right) }\frac{\delta }
\delta x^{i}}{\scriptsize ,}\text{ }{\scriptsize D}_{\dfrac{\partial }
\partial p_{k}^{c}}}\frac{\partial }{\partial p_{j}^{b}}{\scriptsize =-C
_{\left( i\right) \left( b\right) \left( c\right) }^{\left( a\right) \left(
j\right) \left( k\right) }\frac{\partial }{\partial p_{i}^{a}}.
\end{eqnarray*}
\begin{example}
Let $N_{0}=\left( \underset{1}{\overset{0}{N}}\overset{\left( a\right) }
_{\left( i\right) b}},\ \underset{2}{\overset{0}{N}}\overset{\left( a\right)
}{_{\left( i\right) j}}\right) $ be the canonical nonlinear connection
produced by the semi-Riemannian metrics $(h_{ab},\varphi _{ij})$. Taking
into account the transformation rules of the Christoffel symbols $\chi
_{bc}^{a}$ and $\Gamma _{jk}^{i}$, by local computations, we can show that
the local component
\begin{equation*}
B\Gamma \left( N_{0}\right) =\left( \chi _{bc}^{a},\text{ }0,\text{
-A_{\left( i\right) \left( b\right) c}^{\left( a\right) \left( j\right) }
\text{ }0,\text{ }\Gamma _{jk}^{i},\text{ }-H_{\left( i\right) \left(
b\right) k}^{\left( a\right) \left( j\right) },\text{ }0,\text{ }0,\text{
0\right)
\end{equation*
wher
\begin{equation*}
A_{\left( i\right) \left( b\right) c}^{\left( a\right) \left( j\right)
}=-\delta _{i}^{j}\chi _{bc}^{a},\quad H_{\left( i\right) \left( b\right)
k}^{\left( a\right) \left( j\right) }=\delta _{b}^{a}\Gamma _{ik}^{j},
\end{equation*
verify the transformation rules of the components of an $N$-linear
connection (for more details, see \emph{\cite{Atan+Neag1}}). Consequently,
B\Gamma \left( N_{0}\right) $ is an $N_{0}$-linear connection on $E^{\ast }
, which is called the \textbf{Berwald connection}\textit{\ of the metric
pair }$\left( h_{ab},\varphi _{ij}\right) .$
\end{example}
Now, let $D\Gamma (N)$ be an $N$-linear connection on $E^{\ast }$, locally
defined by (\ref{coef_N-cl}). The linear connection $D\Gamma (N)$ induces a
linear connection on the set of d-tensors on the dual $1$-jet fibre bundle
E^{\ast }=J^{1\ast }\left( \mathcal{T},M\right) ,$ in a natural way. Thus,
starting with a d-vector field $X$ and a d-tensor field $T$, locally
expressed b
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{lll}
X & = & X^{a}\dfrac{\delta }{\delta t^{a}}+X^{i}\dfrac{\delta }{\delta x^{i}
+X_{\left( i\right) }^{\left( a\right) }\dfrac{\partial }{\partial p_{i}^{a}
,\medskip \\
T & = & T_{cj\left( b\right) \left( l\right) ...}^{ai\left( k\right) \left(
d\right) ...}\dfrac{\delta }{\delta t^{a}}\otimes \dfrac{\delta }{\delta
x^{i}}\otimes \dfrac{\partial }{\partial p_{l}^{d}}\otimes dt^{c}\otimes
dx^{j}\otimes \delta p_{k}^{b}\otimes ...
\end{array
\end{equation*
we can define the covariant derivativ
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{l}
D_{X}T=X^{g}D_{\dfrac{\delta }{\delta t^{g}}}T+X^{s}D_{\dfrac{\delta }
\delta x^{s}}}T+X_{\left( s\right) }^{\left( g\right) }D_{\dfrac{\partial }
\partial p_{s}^{g}}}T=\medskip \\
=\left\{ X^{g}T_{cj\left( b\right) \left( l\right) .../g}^{ai\left( k\right)
\left( d\right) ...}+X^{s}T_{cj\left( b\right) \left( l\right)
...|s}^{ai\left( k\right) \left( d\right) ...}+\right. \medskip \\
\left. +X_{\left( s\right) }^{\left( g\right) }T_{cj\left( b\right) \left(
l\right) ...}^{ai\left( k\right) \left( d\right) ...}\mid _{\left( g\right)
}^{\left( s\right) }\right\} \dfrac{\delta }{\delta t^{a}}\otimes \dfrac
\delta }{\delta x^{i}}\otimes \dfrac{\partial }{\partial p_{l}^{d}}\otimes
dt^{c}\otimes dx^{j}\otimes \delta p_{k}^{b}\otimes ...
\end{array
\end{equation*
where
\begin{itemize}
\item the $\mathcal{T}$\textit{-horizontal covariant derivative }of $D\Gamma
(N)$
\begin{equation*}
\left( h_{\mathcal{T}}\right) \text{ }\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
T_{cj\left( b\right) \left( l\right) .../g}^{ai\left( k\right) \left(
d\right) ...}=\dfrac{\delta T_{cj\left( b\right) \left( l\right)
...}^{ai\left( k\right) \left( d\right) ...}}{\delta t^{g}}+T_{cj\left(
b\right) \left( l\right) ...}^{fi\left( k\right) \left( d\right)
...}A_{fg}^{a}+\medskip \\
+T_{cj\left( b\right) \left( l\right) ...}^{ar\left( k\right) \left(
d\right) ...}A_{rg}^{i}+T_{cj\left( f\right) \left( l\right) ...}^{ai\left(
r\right) \left( d\right) ...}A_{\left( r\right) \left( b\right) g}^{\left(
f\right) \left( k\right) }+...-\medskip \\
-T_{fj\left( b\right) \left( l\right) ...}^{ai\left( k\right) \left(
d\right) ...}A_{cg}^{f}-T_{cr\left( b\right) \left( l\right) ...}^{ai\left(
k\right) \left( d\right) ...}A_{jg}^{r}-T_{cj\left( b\right) \left( r\right)
...}^{ai\left( k\right) \left( f\right) ...}A_{\left( l\right) \left(
f\right) g}^{\left( d\right) \left( r\right) }-...
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*}
\item the $M$\textit{-horizontal covariant derivative }of $D\Gamma (N)$
\begin{equation*}
\left( h_{M}\right) \text{ }\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
T_{cj\left( b\right) \left( l\right) ...|s}^{ai\left( k\right) \left(
d\right) ...}=\dfrac{\delta T_{cj\left( b\right) \left( l\right)
...}^{ai\left( k\right) \left( d\right) ...}}{\delta x^{s}}+T_{cj\left(
b\right) \left( l\right) ...}^{fi\left( k\right) \left( d\right)
...}H_{fs}^{a}+\medskip \\
+T_{cj\left( b\right) \left( l\right) ...}^{ar\left( k\right) \left(
d\right) ...}H_{rs}^{i}+T_{cj\left( f\right) \left( l\right) ...}^{ai\left(
r\right) \left( d\right) ...}H_{\left( r\right) \left( b\right) s}^{\left(
f\right) \left( k\right) }+...-\medskip \\
-T_{fj\left( b\right) \left( l\right) ...}^{ai\left( k\right) \left(
d\right) ...}H_{cs}^{f}-T_{cr\left( b\right) \left( l\right) ...}^{ai\left(
k\right) \left( d\right) ...}H_{js}^{r}-T_{cj\left( b\right) \left( r\right)
...}^{ai\left( k\right) \left( f\right) ...}H_{\left( l\right) \left(
f\right) s}^{\left( d\right) \left( r\right) }-...
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*}
\item the \textit{vertical covariant derivative }of $D\Gamma (N)$
\begin{equation*}
\left( v\right) \text{ }\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
T_{cj\left( b\right) \left( l\right) ...}^{ai\left( k\right) \left( d\right)
...}|_{\left( g\right) }^{\left( s\right) }=\dfrac{\partial T_{cj\left(
b\right) \left( l\right) ...}^{ai\left( k\right) \left( d\right) ...}}
\partial p_{s}^{g}}+T_{cj\left( b\right) \left( l\right) ...}^{fi\left(
k\right) \left( d\right) ...}C_{f\left( g\right) }^{a\left( s\right)
}+\medskip \\
+T_{cj\left( b\right) \left( l\right) ...}^{ar\left( k\right) \left(
d\right) ...}C_{r\left( g\right) }^{i\left( s\right) }+T_{cj\left( f\right)
\left( l\right) ...}^{ai\left( r\right) \left( d\right) ...}C_{\left(
r\right) \left( b\right) \left( g\right) }^{\left( f\right) \left( k\right)
\left( s\right) }+...-\medskip \\
-T_{fj\left( b\right) \left( l\right) ...}^{ai\left( k\right) \left(
d\right) ...}C_{c\left( g\right) }^{f\left( s\right) }-T_{cr\left( b\right)
\left( l\right) ...}^{ai\left( k\right) \left( d\right) ...}C_{j\left(
g\right) }^{r\left( s\right) }-T_{cj\left( b\right) \left( r\right)
...}^{ai\left( k\right) \left( f\right) ...}C_{\left( l\right) \left(
f\right) \left( g\right) }^{\left( d\right) \left( r\right) \left( s\right)
}-...\text{.
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*}
\end{itemize}
\begin{remark}
If $T=Y$ is a d-vector field on $E^{\ast },$ locally expressed b
\begin{equation*}
Y=Y^{a}\frac{\delta }{\delta t^{a}}+Y^{i}\frac{\delta }{\delta x^{i}
+Y_{\left( i\right) }^{\left( a\right) }\frac{\partial }{\partial p_{i}^{a}},
\end{equation*
then the following expressions of the local covariant derivatives hold good
\begin{equation*}
\left( h_{\mathcal{T}}\right) \text{ }\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
Y_{\text{ }/c}^{a}=\dfrac{\delta Y^{a}}{\delta t^{c}}+Y^{b}A_{bc}^{a}
\medskip \\
Y_{\text{ }/c}^{i}=\dfrac{\delta Y^{i}}{\delta t^{c}}+Y^{j}A_{jc}^{i}
\medskip \\
Y_{\left( i\right) /c}^{\left( a\right) }=\dfrac{\delta Y_{\left( i\right)
}^{\left( a\right) }}{\delta t^{c}}-Y_{\left( j\right) }^{\left( b\right)
}A_{\left( i\right) \left( b\right) c}^{\left( a\right) \left( j\right) }
\end{array
\right. \left( h_{M}\right) \text{ }\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
Y_{\text{ }|k}^{a}=\dfrac{\delta Y^{a}}{\delta x^{k}}+Y^{b}H_{bk}^{a}
\medskip \\
Y_{\text{ }|k}^{i}=\dfrac{\delta Y^{i}}{\delta x^{k}}+Y^{j}H_{jk}^{i}
\medskip \\
Y_{\left( i\right) |k}^{\left( a\right) }=\dfrac{\delta Y_{\left( i\right)
}^{\left( a\right) }}{\delta x^{k}}-Y_{\left( j\right) }^{\left( b\right)
}H_{\left( i\right) \left( b\right) k}^{\left( a\right) \left( j\right) }
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*}
\end{remark}
\begin{equation*}
\left( v\right) \text{ }\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
Y^{a}|_{\left( c\right) }^{\left( k\right) }=\dfrac{\partial Y^{a}}{\partial
p_{k}^{c}}+Y^{b}C_{b\left( c\right) }^{a\left( k\right) },\medskip \\
Y^{i}|_{\left( c\right) }^{\left( k\right) }=\dfrac{\partial Y^{i}}{\partial
p_{k}^{c}}+Y^{j}C_{j\left( c\right) }^{i\left( k\right) },\medskip \\
Y_{\left( i\right) }^{\left( a\right) }|_{\left( c\right) }^{\left( k\right)
}=\dfrac{\partial Y_{\left( i\right) }^{\left( a\right) }}{\partial p_{k}^{c
}-Y_{\left( j\right) }^{\left( b\right) }C_{\left( i\right) \left( b\right)
\left( c\right) }^{\left( a\right) \left( j\right) \left( k\right) }
\end{array
\right.
\end{equation*}
\section{Components of $h$-normal $N$-linear connections on dual $1$-jet
spaces}
Because the number of components which characterize an $N$-linear connection
on $E^{\ast }$ is big one (nine local components), we are constrained to
study only a particular class of $N$-linear connections on $E^{\ast }$,
which must be characterized by a reduced number of components. In this
direction, let us fix on the temporal manifold $\mathcal{T}$ a
semi-Riemannian metric $h_{ab}$, together with its Christoffel symbols $\chi
_{bc}^{a}$. Let $\mathbb{J}$ be the $h$\textit{-normalization d-tensor field
}on $E^{\ast }$, locally expressed by \cite{Atan+Neag1
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{J}=J_{\left( a\right) bj}^{\left( i\right) }\delta p_{i}^{a}\otimes
dt^{b}\otimes dx^{j},
\end{equation*
where $J_{\left( a\right) bj}^{\left( i\right) }=h_{ab}\delta _{j}^{i}$. In
this context, we introduce the following geometrical concept:
\begin{definition}
An $N$-linear connection $D\Gamma (N)$ on $E^{\ast }$, whose local
components (\ref{coef_N-cl}) verify the relation
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{cccc}
A_{bc}^{a}=\chi _{bc}^{a},\quad & H_{bi}^{a}=0,\quad & C_{b\left( c\right)
}^{a\left( i\right) }=0,\quad & D\mathbb{J}=0
\end{array
\end{equation*
is called an $h$\textbf{-normal }$N$\textbf{-linear connection} on the dual
1$-jet fibre bundle $E^{\ast }$.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}
The adapted components of an $h$-normal $N$-linear connection $D\Gamma (N)$
verify the following identities
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{c}
A_{bc}^{a}=\chi _{bc}^{a},\quad H_{bi}^{a}=0,\quad C_{b\left( c\right)
}^{a\left( i\right) }=0,\medskip \\
A_{\left( i\right) \left( b\right) c}^{\left( a\right) \left( j\right)
}=\delta _{b}^{a}A_{ic}^{j}-\delta _{i}^{j}\chi _{bc}^{a},\quad H_{\left(
i\right) \left( b\right) k}^{\left( a\right) \left( j\right) }=\delta
_{b}^{a}H_{ik}^{j},\medskip \\
C_{\left( i\right) \left( b\right) \left( c\right) }^{\left( a\right) \left(
j\right) \left( k\right) }=\delta _{b}^{a}C_{i\left( c\right) }^{j\left(
k\right) }
\end{array}
\label{2.22}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
It is obvious that the first three relations come immediately from the
definition of an $h$-normal $N$-linear connection. To prove the other three
relations, we emphasize that, taking into account the definition of the
local $\mathcal{T}$-horizontal\ ($"_{/g}"$), $M$-horizontal ($"_{|s}"$) and
vertical ($"|_{\left( g\right) }^{\left( s\right) }")$ covariant derivatives
produced by $D\Gamma (N)$, the condition $D\mathbb{J}=0$ is equivalent t
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ccc}
J_{\left( a\right) bj/g}^{\left( i\right) }=0,\quad & J_{\left( a\right)
bj|s}^{\left( i\right) }=0,\quad & J_{\left( a\right) bj}^{\left( i\right)
}|_{\left( g\right) }^{\left( s\right) }=0
\end{array
\end{equation*
Consequently, the condition $D\mathbb{J}=0$ provides the local identitie
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{c}
h_{bf}A_{\left( j\right) \left( a\right) c}^{\left( f\right) \left( i\right)
}=h_{ab}A_{jc}^{i}-\delta _{j}^{i}\left( \dfrac{\partial h_{ab}}{\partial
t^{c}}-h_{ag}\chi _{bc}^{g}\right) ,\medskip \\
h_{bf}H_{\left( j\right) \left( a\right) k}^{\left( f\right) \left( i\right)
}=h_{ba}H_{jk}^{i},\quad h_{bf}C_{\left( j\right) \left( a\right) \left(
c\right) }^{\left( f\right) \left( i\right) \left( k\right)
}=h_{ba}C_{j\left( c\right) }^{i\left( k\right) }
\end{array
\end{equation*
Contracting now the above relations by $h^{be}$, we obtain the last required
identities from (\ref{2.22}).
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The above theorem says us that an $h$-normal $N$-linear connection on
E^{\ast }$ is an $N$-linear connection determined by \textbf{four} effective
components (instead of nine in the general case)
\begin{equation*}
D\Gamma (N)=\left( \chi _{bc}^{a},\text{ }A_{jc}^{i},\text{ }H_{jk}^{i}
\text{ }C_{j\left( c\right) }^{i\left( k\right) }\right) .
\end{equation*
The other five components either vanish or are provided by the relations
\ref{2.22}). Consequently, we can assert that the Berwald $N_{0}$-linear
connection associated to the pair of metrics $\left( h_{ab},\varphi
_{ij}\right) $ is an $h$-normal $N_{0}$-linear connection on $E^{\ast }$,
whose four effective components ar
\begin{equation*}
B\Gamma \left( N_{0}\right) =\left( \chi _{bc}^{a},\text{ }0,\text{ }\Gamma
_{jk}^{i},\text{ }0\right) .
\end{equation*}
\end{remark}
\section{Adapted components of torsion and curvature tensors}
The study of the adapted components of the torsion and curvature tensors of
an arbitrary $N$-linear connection $D\Gamma (N)$ on $E^{\ast }$ was done in
\cite{Atan+Neag1}. In that context, one proves that the torsion tensor
\mathbb{T}$ is determined by \textit{twelve} effective local adapted
d-tensors, while the curvature tensor $\mathbb{R}$ is determined by \textit
eighteen} local adapted d-tensors. In what follows, we study the adapted
components of the torsion and curvature tensors for an $h$-normal $N$-linear
connection $D\Gamma (N)$.
\begin{theorem}
The torsion tensor $\mathbb{T}$ of an $h$-normal $N$-linear connection
D\Gamma (N)$ is determined by \textbf{nine} effective local adapted
d-tensors (instead of twelve in the general case)
\begin{equation}
\begin{tabular}{||l||l||l||l||}
\hline\hline
& $h_{T}$ & $h_{M}$ & $v$ \\ \hline\hline
$h_{T}h_{T}$ & $0$ & $0$ & $R_{\left( r\right) ab}^{\left( f\right) }$ \\
\hline\hline
$h_{M}h_{T}$ & $0$ & $T_{aj}^{r}$ & $R_{\left( r\right) aj}^{\left( f\right)
}$ \\ \hline\hline
$vh_{T}$ & $0$ & $0$ & $P_{\left( r\right) a\left( b\right) }^{\left(
f\right) \left. {}\right. \left( j\right) }$ \\ \hline\hline
$h_{M}h_{M}$ & $0$ & $T_{ij}^{r}$ & $R_{\left( r\right) ij}^{\left( f\right)
}$ \\ \hline\hline
$vh_{M}$ & $0$ & $P_{i\left( b\right) }^{r\left( j\right) }$ & $P_{\left(
r\right) i\left( b\right) }^{\left( f\right) \left. {}\right. \left(
j\right) }$ \\ \hline\hline
$vv$ & $0$ & $0$ & $S_{\left( r\right) \left( a\right) \left( b\right)
}^{\left( f\right) \left( i\right) \left( j\right) }$ \\ \hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{Table1}
\end{equation
wher
\begin{equation*}
T_{aj}^{r}=-A_{aj}^{r},\quad T_{ij}^{r}=H_{ij}^{r}-H_{ji}^{r},\quad
P_{i\left( b\right) }^{r\left( j\right) }=C_{i\left( b\right) }^{r\left(
j\right) },
\end{equation*
\begin{equation*}
P_{\left( r\right) a\left( b\right) }^{\left( f\right) \ \left( j\right) }
\dfrac{\partial \underset{1}{N}\overset{\left( f\right) }{_{\left( r\right)
a}}}{\partial p_{j}^{b}}+\delta _{b}^{f}A_{ra}^{j}-\delta _{r}^{j}\chi
_{ba}^{f},\quad P_{\left( r\right) i\left( b\right) }^{\left( f\right) \
\left( j\right) }=\dfrac{\partial \underset{2}{N}\overset{\left( f\right) }
_{\left( r\right) i}}}{\partial p_{j}^{b}}+\delta _{b}^{f}H_{ri}^{j},
\end{equation*
\begin{equation*}
R_{\left( r\right) ab}^{\left( f\right) }=\dfrac{\delta \underset{1}{N
\overset{\left( f\right) }{_{\left( r\right) a}}}{\delta t^{b}}-\dfrac
\delta \underset{1}{N}\overset{\left( f\right) }{_{\left( r\right) b}}}
\delta t^{a}},\quad R_{\left( r\right) aj}^{\left( f\right) }=\dfrac{\delta
\underset{1}{N}\overset{\left( f\right) }{_{\left( r\right) a}}}{\delta x^{j
}-\dfrac{\delta \underset{2}{N}\overset{\left( f\right) }{_{\left( r\right)
i}}}{\delta t^{a}},
\end{equation*
\begin{equation*}
R_{\left( r\right) ij}^{\left( f\right) }=\dfrac{\delta \underset{2}{N
\overset{\left( f\right) }{_{\left( r\right) i}}}{\delta x^{j}}-\dfrac
\delta \underset{2}{N}\overset{\left( f\right) }{_{\left( r\right) j}}}
\delta x^{i}},\quad S_{\left( r\right) \left( a\right) \left( b\right)
}^{\left( f\right) \left( i\right) \left( j\right) }=-\left( \delta
_{a}^{f}C_{r\left( b\right) }^{i\left( j\right) }-\delta _{b}^{f}C_{r\left(
a\right) }^{j\left( i\right) }\right) .
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Particularizing the general local expressions from \cite{Atan+Neag1}, which
generally give those twelve d-components of the torsion tensor of an $N
-linear connection, an $h$-normal $N$-linear connection $D\Gamma (N)$, we
deduce that the adapted components $T_{bc}^{a},$ $T_{bj}^{a}$ and
P_{b\left( c\right) }^{a\left( k\right) }$ vanish, while the other nine are
given by the formulas from theorem.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
All torsion d-tensors of the Berwald $h$-normal $N_{0}$-linear connection
B\Gamma \left( N_{0}\right) $ (associated to the metrics $h_{ab}$ and
\varphi _{ij}$) are zero, excep
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{ll}
R_{\left( r\right) ab}^{\left( f\right) }=\chi _{gab}^{f}p_{r}^{g}, &
R_{\left( r\right) ij}^{\left( f\right) }=-\mathcal{R}_{rij}^{s}p_{s}^{f}
\end{array
\end{equation*
where $\chi _{gab}^{f}(t)$ (resp. $\mathcal{R}_{rij}^{s}(x)$) are the local
curvature tensors of the semi-Rie\-ma\-nni\-an metric $h_{ab}$ (resp.
\varphi _{ij}$).
\end{remark}
\begin{theorem}
The curvature tensor $\mathbb{R}$ of an $h$-normal $N$-linear connection
D\Gamma (N)$ is characterized by \textbf{seven} effective adapted local
d-tensors (instead of eighteen in the general case)
\begin{equation}
\begin{tabular}{||l||l||l||l||}
\hline\hline
& $h_{\mathcal{T}}$ & $h_{M}$ & $v$ \\ \hline\hline
$h_{\mathcal{T}}h_{\mathcal{T}}$ & $\chi _{abc}^{d}$ & $R_{ibc}^{l}$ &
-R_{\left( l\right) \left( a\right) bc}^{\left( d\right) \left( i\right)
}=\delta _{l}^{i}\chi _{abc}^{d}-\delta _{a}^{d}R_{lbc}^{i}$ \\ \hline\hline
$h_{M}h_{\mathcal{T}}$ & $0$ & $R_{ibk}^{l}$ & $-R_{\left( l\right) \left(
a\right) bk}^{\left( d\right) \left( i\right) }=-\delta _{a}^{d}R_{lbk}^{i}$
\\ \hline\hline
$wh_{\mathcal{T}}$ & $0$ & $P_{ib\left( c\right) }^{l\ \left( k\right) }$ &
-P_{\left( l\right) \left( a\right) b\left( c\right) }^{\left( d\right)
\left( i\right) \ \left( k\right) }=-\delta _{a}^{d}P_{lb\left( c\right)
}^{i\ \left( k\right) }$ \\ \hline\hline
$h_{M}h_{M}$ & $0$ & $R_{ijk}^{l}$ & $-R_{\left( l\right) \left( a\right)
jk}^{\left( d\right) \left( i\right) }=-\delta _{a}^{d}R_{ljk}^{i}$ \\
\hline\hline
$wh_{M}$ & $0$ & $P_{ij\left( c\right) }^{l\ \left( k\right) }$ &
-P_{\left( l\right) \left( a\right) j\left( c\right) }^{\left( d\right)
\left( i\right) \ \left( k\right) }=-\delta _{a}^{d}P_{lj\left( c\right)
}^{i\ \left( k\right) }$ \\ \hline\hline
$ww$ & $0$ & $S_{i\left( b\right) \left( c\right) }^{l\left( j\right) \left(
k\right) }$ & $-S_{\left( l\right) \left( a\right) \left( b\right) \left(
c\right) }^{\left( d\right) \left( i\right) \left( j\right) \left( k\right)
}=-\delta _{a}^{d}S_{l\left( b\right) \left( c\right) }^{i\left( j\right)
\left( k\right) }$ \\ \hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{Table2}
\end{equation
where$\medskip $
$R_{abc}^{d}:=\chi _{abc}^{d}=\dfrac{\delta \chi _{ab}^{d}}{\delta t^{c}}
\dfrac{\delta \chi _{ac}^{d}}{\delta t^{b}}+\chi _{ab}^{f}\chi
_{fc}^{d}-\chi _{ac}^{f}\chi _{fb}^{d},\medskip $
$R_{ibc}^{l}=\dfrac{\delta A_{ib}^{l}}{\delta t^{c}}-\dfrac{\delta A_{ic}^{l
}{\delta t^{b}}+A_{ib}^{r}A_{rc}^{l}-A_{ic}^{r}A_{rb}^{l}+C_{i\left(
f\right) }^{l\left( r\right) }R_{\left( r\right) bc}^{\left( f\right)
},\medskip $
$R_{ibk}^{l}=\dfrac{\delta A_{ib}^{l}}{\delta x^{k}}-\dfrac{\delta H_{ik}^{l
}{\delta t^{b}}+A_{ib}^{r}H_{rk}^{l}-H_{ik}^{r}A_{rb}^{l}+C_{i\left(
f\right) }^{l\left( r\right) }R_{\left( r\right) bk}^{\left( f\right)
},\medskip $
$P_{ib\left( c\right) }^{l\ \left( k\right) }=\dfrac{\partial A_{ib}^{l}}
\partial p_{k}^{c}}-C_{i\left( c\right) /b}^{l\left( k\right) }+C_{i\left(
f\right) }^{l\left( r\right) }P_{\left( r\right) b\left( c\right) }^{\left(
f\right) \ \left( k\right) },\medskip $
$R_{ijk}^{l}=\dfrac{\delta H_{ij}^{l}}{\delta x^{k}}-\dfrac{\delta H_{ik}^{l
}{\delta x^{j}}+H_{ij}^{r}H_{rk}^{l}-H_{ik}^{r}H_{rj}^{l}+C_{i\left(
f\right) }^{l\left( r\right) }R_{\left( r\right) jk}^{\left( f\right)
},\medskip $
$P_{ij\left( c\right) }^{l\ \left( k\right) }=\dfrac{\partial H_{ij}^{l}}
\partial p_{k}^{c}}-C_{i\left( c\right) |j}^{l\left( k\right) }+C_{i\left(
r\right) }^{l\left( f\right) }P_{\left( f\right) j\left( c\right) }^{\left(
r\right) \ \left( k\right) },\medskip $
$S_{i\left( b\right) \left( c\right) }^{l\left( j\right) \left( k\right) }
\dfrac{\partial C_{i\left( b\right) }^{l\left( j\right) }}{\partial p_{k}^{c
}-\dfrac{\partial C_{i\left( c\right) }^{l\left( k\right) }}{\partial
p_{j}^{b}}+C_{i\left( b\right) }^{r\left( j\right) }C_{r\left( c\right)
}^{l\left( k\right) }-C_{i\left( c\right) }^{r\left( k\right) }C_{r\left(
b\right) }^{l\left( j\right) }.$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The general formulas that express the local curvature d-tensors of an
arbitrary $N$-linear connection (for more details, see \cite{Atan+Neag1}),
applied to the particular case of an $h$-normal $N$-linear connection
D\Gamma (N)$, imply the above formulas and the relations from the Table (\re
{Table2}).
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
In the case of the Berwald $h$-normal $N_{0}$-linear connection $B\Gamma
(N_{0})$ (associated to the pair of metrics $\left( h_{ab},\varphi
_{ij}\right) $), all curvature d-tensors are zero, excep
\begin{equation*}
R_{abc}^{d}=\chi _{abc}^{d},\quad R_{\left( l\right) \left( a\right)
bc}^{\left( d\right) \left( i\right) }=-\delta _{l}^{i}\chi _{abc}^{d},\quad
R_{ijk}^{l}=\mathcal{R}_{ijk}^{l}\quad R_{\left( i\right) \left( a\right)
jk}^{\left( d\right) \left( l\right) }=\delta _{a}^{d}\mathcal{R}_{ijk}^{l},
\end{equation*
where $\chi _{gab}^{f}(t)$ (resp. $\mathcal{R}_{rij}^{s}(x)$) are the local
curvature tensors of the semi-Rie\-ma\-nni\-an metric $h_{ab}$ (resp.
\varphi _{ij}$).
\end{remark}
\section{Local Ricci identities. Non-metrical deflection d-tensor identities}
Let us consider now the following more particular geometrical concept:
\begin{definition}
An $h$-normal $N$-linear connection, whose local component
\begin{equation*}
CD\Gamma (N)=\left( \chi _{bc}^{a},\text{ }A_{jc}^{i},\text{ }H_{jk}^{i}
\text{ }C_{j\left( c\right) }^{i\left( k\right) }\right) ,
\end{equation*
verify the relation
\begin{equation*}
H_{jk}^{i}=H_{kj}^{i},\qquad C_{j\left( c\right) }^{i\left( k\right)
}=C_{j\left( c\right) }^{k\left( i\right) },
\end{equation*
is called an $h$\textbf{-normal }$N$\textbf{-linear connection of Cartan
type }or a $CD\Gamma (N)$\textbf{-linear connection} on $E^{\ast }=J^{1\ast
}\left( \mathcal{T},M\right) $.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
The torsion tensor $\mathbb{T}$ of an $h$-normal $N$-linear connection of
Cartan type $CD\Gamma (N)$ is characterized only by \textbf{eight} adapted
local d-tensors because the torsion components
T_{jk}^{i}=H_{jk}^{i}-H_{kj}^{i}$ from the Table (\ref{Table1}) are vanishin
$.$
\end{remark}
\begin{example}
Taking into account that the Christoffel symbols $\Gamma _{jk}^{i}(x)$ of
the spatial metric $\varphi _{ij}(x)$ are symmetric, it follows that the
Berwald $h$-normal $N_{0}$-linear connection $B\Gamma (N_{0})$ is of Cartan
type.
\end{example}
\begin{theorem}
The following local \textbf{Ricci identities} for a $CD\Gamma (N)$-linear
connection are true:
\begin{itemize}
\item the $h_{\mathcal{T}}$-Ricci identities:\bigskip
$\medskip X_{/b/c}^{a}-X_{/c/b}^{a}=X^{f}\chi
_{fbc}^{a}-X^{a}|_{(f)}^{(r)}R_{(r)bc}^{(f)},$
$\medskip
X_{/b|k}^{a}-X_{|k/b}^{a}=-X_{|r}^{a}T_{bk}^{r}-X^{a}|_{(f)}^{(r)}R_{(r)bk}^{(f)},
$
$\medskip X_{|j|k}^{a}-X_{|k|j}^{a}=-X^{a}|_{(f)}^{(r)}R_{(r)jk}^{(f)},$
$\medskip
X_{/b}^{a}|_{(c)}^{(k)}-X^{a}|_{(c)/b}^{(k)}=-X^{a}|_{(f)}^{(r)}P_{(r)b(c)}^{(f)\;\;(k)},
$
$\medskip
X_{|j}^{a}|_{(c)}^{(k)}-X^{a}|_{(c)|j}^{(k)}=-X_{|r}^{a}C_{j(c)}^{r(k)}-X^{a}|_{(f)}^{(r)}P_{(r)j(c)}^{(f)\;(k)},
$
$\bigskip
X^{a}|_{(b)}^{(j)}|_{(c)}^{(k)}-X^{a}|_{(c)}^{(k)}|_{(b)}^{(j)}=-X^{a}|_{(f)}^{(r)}S_{(r)(b)(c)}^{(f)(j)(k)};
$
\item the $h_{M}$-Ricci identities:$\bigskip$
$\medskip
X_{/b/c}^{i}-X_{/c/b}^{i}=X^{r}R_{rbc}^{i}-X^{i}|_{(f)}^{(r)}R_{(r)bc}^{(f)},
$
$\medskip
X_{/b|k}^{i}-X_{|k/b}^{i}=X^{r}R_{rbk}^{i}-X_{|r}^{i}T_{bk}^{r}-X^{i}|_{(f)}^{(r)}R_{(r)bk}^{(f)},
$
$\medskip
X_{|j|k}^{i}-X_{|k|j}^{i}=X^{r}R_{rjk}^{i}-X^{i}|_{(f)}^{(r)}R_{(r)jk}^{(f)},
$
$\medskip
X_{/b}^{i}|_{(c)}^{(k)}-X^{i}|_{(c)/b}^{(k)}=X^{r}P_{rb(c)}^{i\
\;(k)}-X^{i}|_{(f)}^{(r)}P_{(r)b(c)}^{(f)\;\;(k)},$
$\medskip X_{|j}^{i}|_{(c)}^{(k)}-X^{i}|_{(c)|j}^{(k)}=X^{r}P_{rj(c)}^{i\;\
(k)}-X_{|r}^{i}C_{j(c)}^{r(k)}-X^{i}|_{(f)}^{(r)}P_{(r)j(c)}^{(f)\;(k)},$
X^{i}|_{(b)}^{(j)}|_{(c)}^{(k)}-X^{i}|_{(c)}^{(k)}|_{(b)}^{(j)}=X^{r}S_{r(b)(c)}^{i(j)(k)}-X^{i}|_{(f)}^{(r)}S_{(r)(b)(c)}^{(f)(j)(k)};\bigskip
$
\item the $v$-Ricci identities:$\bigskip$
$\medskip
X_{(i)/b/c}^{(a)}-X_{(i)/c/b}^{(a)}=X_{(r)}^{(a)}R_{ibc}^{r}-X_{(i)}^{(f)
\chi _{fbc}^{a}-X_{(i)}^{(a)}|_{(f)}^{(r)}R_{(r)bc}^{(f)},$
$\medskip
X_{(i)/b|k}^{(a)}-X_{(i)|k/b}^{(a)}=X_{(r)}^{(a)}R_{ibk}^{r}-X_{(i)|r}^{(a)}T_{bk}^{r}-X_{(i)}^{(a)}|_{(f)}^{(r)}R_{(r)bk}^{(f)},
$
$\medskip
X_{(i)|j|k}^{(a)}-X_{(i)|k|j}^{(a)}=X_{(r)}^{(a)}R_{ijk}^{r}-X_{(i)}^{(a)}|_{(f)}^{(r)}R_{(r)jk}^{(f)},
$
$\medskip
X_{(i)/b}^{(a)}|_{(c)}^{(k)}-X_{(i)}^{(a)}|_{(c)/b}^{(k)}=X_{(r)}^{(a)}P_{ib(c)}^{r\;\;(k)}-X_{(i)}^{(a)}|_{(f)}^{(r)}P_{(r)b(c)}^{(f)\;\;(k)},
$
$\medskip
X_{(i)|j}^{(a)}|_{(c)}^{(k)}-X_{(i)}^{(a)}|_{(c)|j}^{(k)}=X_{(r)}^{(a)}P_{ij(c)}^{r\;\ (k)}-X_{(i)|r}^{(a)}C_{j(c)}^{r(k)}-X_{(i)}^{(a)}|_{(f)}^{(r)}P_{(r)j(c),}^{(f)\;(k)}
$
$\bigskip
X_{(i)}^{(a)}|_{(b)}^{(j)}|_{(c)}^{(k)}-X_{(i)}^{(a)}|_{(c)}^{(k)}|_{(b)}^{(j)}=X_{(r)}^{(a)}S_{i(b)(c)}^{r(j)(k)}-X_{(i)}^{(a)}|_{(f)}^{(r)}S_{(r)(b)(c)}^{(f)(j)(k)}
\newline
$wher
\begin{equation*}
{X=X^{a}{\dfrac{\delta }{\delta t^{a}}}+X^{i}{\dfrac{\delta }{\delta x^{i}}
+X_{(i)}^{(a)}{\dfrac{\partial }{\partial p_{i}^{a}}}}
\end{equation*
is an arbitrary d-vector field on the dual $1$-jet space $E^{\ast }=J^{1\ast
}(\mathcal{T},M)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $(Y_{A})$ and $(\omega ^{A})$, where $A\in \left\{ a,i,{_{\left(
i\right) }^{\left( a\right) }}\right\} $, be on $E^{\ast }=J^{1\ast }
\mathcal{T},M)$ the dual bases adapted to the nonlinear connection $N$, and
let $X=X^{F}Y_{F}$ be a d-vector field on $E^{\ast }$. In this context,
using the following true equalities (applied for a $CD\Gamma (N)$-linear
connection $D$):\medskip
\begin{enumerate}
\item $D_{Y_{C}}Y_{B}=\Gamma _{BC}^{F}Y_{F},\medskip $
\item $[Y_{B},Y_{C}]=R_{BC}^{F}Y_{F},\medskip $
\item $\mathbb{T}(Y_{C},Y_{B})=\mathbb{T}_{BC}^{F}Y_{F}=\{\Gamma
_{BC}^{F}-\Gamma _{CB}^{F}-R_{CB}^{F}\}Y_{F},\medskip $
\item $\mathbb{R}(Y_{C},Y_{B})Y_{A}=\mathbb{R}_{ABC}^{F}Y_{F},\medskip $
\item $D_{Y_{C}}\omega ^{B}=-\Gamma _{FC}^{B}\omega ^{F},\medskip $
\item $[\mathbb{R}(Y_{C},Y_{B})X]\otimes \omega ^{B}\otimes \omega
^{C}=\{D_{Y_{C}}D_{Y_{B}}X-\medskip $
$-D_{Y_{B}}D_{Y_{C}}X-D_{[Y_{C},Y_{B}]}X\}\otimes \omega ^{B}\otimes \omega
^{C},\medskip$
\end{enumerate}
by a direct calculation, we find tha
\begin{equation}
X_{:B:C}^{A}-X_{:C:B}^{A}=X^{F}\mathbb{R}_{FBC}^{A}-X_{:F}^{A}\mathbb{T
_{BC}^{F}, \label{ric}
\end{equation
where \textquotedblright $_{:G}$\textquotedblright\ represents one from the
local covariant derivatives \textquotedblright $_{/b}$\textquotedblright ,
\textquotedblright $_{|j}$\textquotedblright\ or \textquotedblright
|_{(b)}^{(j)}$\textquotedblright\ produced by the $h$-normal $N$-linear
connection of Cartan type $CD\Gamma (N)$.
Taking into account in (\ref{ric}) that the indices $A,B,C,\ldots $ belong
to the se
\begin{equation*}
\left\{ a,i,{_{\left( i\right) }^{\left( a\right) }}\right\} ,
\end{equation*
and using the particular features of an $h$-normal $N$-linear connection of
Cartan type $CD\Gamma (N)$ (i.e., the torsion d-components $T_{jk}^{i}$ are
zero; we have the curvature relations from the Table (\ref{Table2})), by
complicated computations, we find what we were looking for (see also the
Table (\ref{Table1})).
\end{proof}
In order to find an interesting application of the preceding Ricci
identities, let us consider the \textit{canonical Liouville-Hamilton
d-tensor field of polymomenta }on $E^{\ast }=J^{1\ast }(T,M)$, which is
given b
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{C}^{\ast }{=p_{i}^{a}{\dfrac{\partial }{\partial p_{i}^{a}}}}.
\end{equation*
In this context, for an $h$-normal $N$-linear connection of Cartan type
CD\Gamma (N)$, we can construct the \textit{non-metrical deflection d-tensor
}, setting
\begin{equation*}
\Delta _{(i)b}^{(a)}={p_{i/b}^{a}},\quad \Delta _{(i)j}^{(a)}={p_{i|j}^{a}
,\quad \vartheta _{(i)(b)}^{(a)(j)}={p_{i}^{a}}|_{(b)}^{(j)},
\end{equation*
where "$_{/b}$", "$_{|j}$" and "$|_{(b)}^{(j)}$" are the local covariant
derivatives produced by $CD\Gamma (N)$.
By direct local computations, we deduce that the non-metrical deflection
d-tensors of $CD\Gamma (N)$ have the expressions
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{c}
\medskip \Delta _{(i)b}^{(a)}=-\underset{1}{N}\overset{\left( a\right) }
_{\left( i\right) b}}-A_{ib}^{r}p_{r}^{a}+\chi _{fb}^{a}p_{i}^{f},\quad
\Delta _{(i)j}^{(a)}=-\underset{2}{N}\overset{\left( a\right) }{_{\left(
i\right) j}}-H_{ij}^{r}p_{r}^{a}, \\
\vartheta _{(i)(b)}^{(a)(j)}=\delta _{b}^{a}\delta
_{i}^{j}-C_{i(b)}^{r(j)}p_{r}^{a}
\end{array
\end{equation*}
Applying now the preceding $(v)$-set of Ricci identities (attached to an $h
-normal $N$-linear connection of Cartan type) to the components of the
canonical Liouville-Hamilton d-vector field\textit{\ }of polymomenta, we get
\begin{corollary}
The following the \textbf{deflection d-tensor identities}, associated to an
h$-normal N-linear connection of Cartan type, are true:
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{l}
\medskip \Delta _{(i)b/c}^{(a)}-\Delta
_{(i)c/b}^{(a)}=p_{r}^{a}R_{ibc}^{r}-p_{i}^{f}\chi _{fbc}^{a}-\vartheta
_{(i)(f)}^{(a)(r)}R_{(r)bc}^{(f)} \\
\medskip \Delta _{(i)b|k}^{(a)}-\Delta
_{(i)k/b}^{(a)}=p_{r}^{a}R_{ibk}^{r}-\Delta
_{(i)r}^{(a)}T_{bk}^{r}-\vartheta _{(i)(f)}^{(a)(r)}R_{(r)bk}^{(f)} \\
\medskip \Delta _{(i)j|k}^{(a)}-\Delta
_{(i)k|j}^{(a)}=p_{r}^{a}R_{ijk}^{r}-\vartheta
_{(i)(f)}^{(a)(r)}R_{(r)jk}^{(f)} \\
\medskip \Delta _{(i)b}^{(a)}|_{(c)}^{(k)}-\vartheta
_{(i)(c)/b}^{(a)(k)}=p_{r}^{a}P_{ib(c)}^{r\;\;(k)}-\vartheta
_{(i)(f)}^{(a)(r)}P_{(r)b(c)}^{(f)\;\;(k)} \\
\medskip \Delta _{(i)j}^{(a)}|_{(c)}^{(k)}-\vartheta
_{(i)(c)|j}^{(a)(k)}=p_{r}^{a}P_{ij(c)}^{r\;\ (k)}-\Delta
_{(i)r}^{(a)}C_{j(c)}^{r(k)}-\vartheta
_{(i)(f)}^{(a)(r)}P_{(r)j(c)}^{(f)\;(k)} \\
\medskip \vartheta _{(i)(b)}^{(a)(j)}|_{(c)}^{(k)}-\vartheta
_{(i)(c)}^{(a)(k)}|_{(b)}^{(j)}=p_{r}^{a}S_{i(b)(c)}^{r(j)(k)}-\vartheta
_{(i)(f)}^{(a)(r)}S_{(r)(b)(c)}^{(f)(j)(k)}
\end{array
\right. \label{defl_ID_h-normal_Cartan}
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
\begin{remark}
The deflection d-tensor identities (\ref{defl_ID_h-normal_Cartan}) will be
used in the near future for the construction of the \textbf{geometrical
Maxwell equations} that will govern the abstract multi-time geometrical
"electromagnetism" produced by a quadratic Hamiltonian depending on
polymomenta (this is our work in progress).
\end{remark}
\section{The local Bianchi identities of the $CD\Gamma (N)$-connections on
the dual jet bundle $J^{1\ast }(T,M)$}
From the general theory of linear connections on a vector bundle, one knows
that the torsions $\mathbb{T}$ and curvature $\mathbb{R}$ of a connection $D$
on the dual $1$-jet space $E^{\ast }=J^{1\ast }(T,M)$ are not independent.
In other words, they are interrelated by the following general \textit
Bianchi identities} (for any $X,Y,Z,U\in \mathcal{X}\left( E^{\ast }\right)
)
\begin{equation*}
\begin{array}{c}
\sum\limits_{\left\{ X,Y,Z\right\} }\left\{ \left( D_{X}\mathbb{T}\right)
\left( Y,Z\right) -\mathbb{R}(X,Y)Z+\mathbb{T}\left( \mathbb{T
(X,Y),Z\right) \right\} =0,\medskip \\
\sum\limits_{\left\{ X,Y,Z\right\} }\left( D_{X}\mathbb{R}\right) \left(
Y,Z,U\right) +\mathbb{R}\left( \mathbb{T}(X,Y),Z\right) U=0
\end{array
\end{equation*
where $\Sigma _{\left\{ X,Y,Z\right\} }$ means a cyclic sum. Obviously,
working with a $CD\Gamma (N)$-linear connection and the local adapted basis
of d-vector fields $\left( X_{A}\right) \subset \mathcal{X}\left( E^{\ast
}\right) $ (associated to the given nonlinear connection $N$ on $E^{\ast }
), the above Bianchi identities are locally described by the equalities
\begin{equation}
\begin{array}{c}
\sum\limits_{\left\{ A,B,C\right\} }\left\{ \mathbb{R}_{ABC}^{F}-\mathbb{T
_{AB:C}^{F}-\mathbb{T}_{AB}^{G}\mathbb{T}_{CG}^{F}\right\} =0,\medskip \\
\sum\limits_{\left\{ A,B,C\right\} }\left\{ \mathbb{R}_{DAB:C}^{F}+\mathbb{T
_{AB}^{G}\mathbb{R}_{DCG}^{F}\right\} =0
\end{array}
\label{Bianchi_local}
\end{equation
where $\mathbb{R}(X_{A},X_{B})X_{C}=\mathbb{R}_{CBA}^{D}X_{D}$, $\mathbb{T
(X_{A},X_{B})=\mathbb{T}_{BA}^{D}X_{D},$ and \textquotedblright $_{:C}
\textquotedblright\ represents one from the local covariant derivatives
\textquotedblright $_{/a}$\textquotedblright , \textquotedblright $_{|i}
\textquotedblright\ or \textquotedblright $|_{(a)}^{(i)}$\textquotedblright\
of the $CD\Gamma (N)$-linear connection $D$ (for similar details, see the
works \cite{Miro+Anas}, \cite{Miro+Hrim+Shim+Saba} and \cite{Ne9}).
Consequently, we find:
\begin{theorem}
The following \textbf{thirty} effective local \textbf{Bianchi identities}
for an $h$-normal $N$-linear connection of Cartan type $CD\Gamma (N)$ are
true on the dual $1$-jet space $E^{\ast }=J^{1\ast }(\mathcal{T},M)$:
\medskip $
\begin{itemize}
\item the first set:$\medskip $
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\emph{1.}] $\sum_{\{a,b,c\}}\chi _{abc}^{d}=0,\medskip $
\item[\emph{2.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\{a,b\}}\left\{
T_{ar}^{l}T_{bk}^{r}-T_{ak/b}^{l}\right\}
=R_{kab}^{l}-C_{k(f)}^{l(r)}R_{(r)ab}^{(f)},\medskip$
\item[\emph{3.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\{j,k\}}\left\{
C_{k(f)}^{l(r)}R_{(r)aj}^{(f)}+R_{jak}^{l}+T_{aj|k}^{l}\right\} =0,\medskip$
\item[\emph{4.}] $\sum_{\{i,j,k\}}\left\{
C_{k(f)}^{l(r)}R_{(r)ij}^{(f)}-R_{ijk}^{l}\right\} =0,\medskip$
\end{enumerate}
\item the second set:\medskip
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\emph{5.}] $\sum_{\{a,b,c\}}\left\{
R_{(l)ab/c}^{(d)}+P_{(l)c(f)}^{(d)\;\;(r)}R_{(r)ab}^{(f)}\right\}
=0,\medskip $
\item[\emph{6.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\{a,b\}}\left\{
R_{(l)ak/b}^{(d)}+P_{(l)b(f)}^{(d)\
\;(r)}R_{(r)ak}^{(f)}+R_{(l)br}^{(d)}T_{ak}^{r}\right\} =\medskip$
$=R_{(l)ab|k}^{(d)}+P_{(l)k(f)}^{(d)\;\;(r)}R_{(r)ab}^{(f)},\medskip$
\item[\emph{7.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\{j,k\}}\left\{
R_{(l)aj|k}^{(d)}+P_{(l)k(f)}^{(d)\;\
(r)}R_{(r)aj}^{(f)}+R_{(l)kr}^{(d)}T_{aj}^{r}\right\} =\medskip$
$=-R_{(l)jk/a}^{(d)}-P_{(l)a(f)}^{(d)\;\;(r)}R_{(r)jk}^{(f)},\medskip$
\item[\emph{8.}] $\sum_{\{i,j,k\}}\left\{
R_{(l)ij|k}^{(d)}+P_{(l)k(f)}^{(d)\;\ (r)}R_{(r)ij}^{(f)}\right\}
=0,\medskip $
\end{enumerate}
\item the third set:\medskip
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\emph{9.}]
T_{ak}^{l}|_{(e)}^{(p)}-C_{r(e)}^{l(p)}T_{ak}^{r}+P_{ka(e)}^{l\
\;(p)}+C_{k(e)/a}^{l(p)}-C_{k(f)}^{l(r)}P_{(r)a(e)}^{(f)\
\;(p)}+C_{k(e)}^{r(p)}T_{ar}^{l}=0,\medskip$
\item[\emph{10.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\{j,k\}}\left\{
C_{j(e)|k}^{l(p)}+C_{k(f)}^{l(r)}P_{(r)j(e)}^{(f)\;\ (p)}+P_{jk(e)}^{l\;\
(p)}\right\} =0,\medskip$
\end{enumerate}
\item the fourth set:\medskip
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\emph{11.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\{a,b\}}\left\{
P_{(l)a(e)/b}^{(d)\;\;(p)}+P_{(l)b(f)}^{(d)\;\;(r)}P_{(r)a(e)}^{(f)\;\;(p)
\right\} =\medskip$
=R_{(l)ab}^{(d)}|_{(e)}^{(p)}+R_{(l)(e)ab}^{(d)(p)}+S_{(l)(e)(f)}^{(d)(p)(r)}R_{(r)ab}^{(f)},\medskip
$
\item[\emph{12.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\{a,k\}}\left\{
P_{(l)a(e)|k}^{(d)\;\;(p)}+P_{(l)k(f)}^{(d)\;\;(r)}P_{(r)a(e)}^{(f)\;\;(p)
\right\} =\medskip $
=R_{(l)ak}^{(d)}|_{(e)}^{(p)}+R_{(l)(e)ak}^{(d)(p)}+S_{(l)(e)(f)}^{(d)(p)(r)}R_{(r)ak}^{(f)}+R_{(l)ar}^{(d)}C_{k(e)}^{r(p)}-T_{ak}^{r}P_{(l)r(e)}^{(d)\;(p)}\medskip
$
\item[\emph{13.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\{j,k\}}\left\{
P_{(l)j(e)|k}^{(d)\;(p)}+P_{(l)k(f)}^{(d)\;(r)}P_{(r)j(e)}^{(f
\;(p)}+R_{(l)kr}^{(d)}C_{j(e)}^{r(p)}\right\} =\medskip$
=R_{(l)jk}^{(d)}|_{(e)}^{(p)}+R_{(l)(e)jk}^{(d)(p)}+S_{(l)(e)(f)}^{(d)(p)(r)}R_{(r)jk}^{(f)},\medskip
$
\end{enumerate}
\item the fifth set:\medskip
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\emph{14.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\left\{ {_{(b)}^{(j)}},{_{(c)}^{(k)}
\right\} }\left\{
C_{i(b)}^{l(j)}|_{(c)}^{(k)}+C_{i(c)}^{r(k)}C_{r(b)}^{l(j)}\right\}
=S_{i(b)(c)}^{l(j)(k)}-C_{i(f)}^{l(r)}S_{(r)(b)(c)}^{(f)(j)(k)},\medskip$
\end{enumerate}
\item the sixth set:\medskip
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\emph{15.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\left\{ {_{(b)}^{(j)}},{_{(c)}^{(k)}
\right\} }\left\{
P_{(l)a(b)}^{(d)\;\;(j)}|_{(c)}^{(k)}+P_{(r)a(b)}^{(f)\
\;(j)}S_{(l)(c)(f)}^{(d)(k)(r)}-P_{(l)(b)a(c)}^{(d)(j)\;\;(k)}\right\}
=\medskip$
$=-S_{(l)(b)(c)/a}^{(d)(j)(k)}-S_{(r)(b)(c)}^{(f)(j)(k)}P_{(l)a(f)}^{(d)\
\;(r)},\medskip$
\item[\emph{16.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\left\{ {_{(b)}^{(j)}},{_{(c)}^{(k)}
\right\} }\left\{
P_{(l)i(b)}^{(d)\;(j)}|_{(c)}^{(k)}+P_{(r)i(b)}^{(f
\;(j)}S_{(l)(c)(f)}^{(d)(k)(r)}-P_{(l)(b)i(c)}^{(d)(j)\;(k)}-\right.
\medskip $
$\left. -C_{i(b)}^{r(j)}P_{(l)r(c)}^{(d)\;\ (k)}\right\}
=-S_{(l)(b)(c)|i}^{(d)(j)(k)}-S_{(r)(b)(c)}^{(f)(j)(k)}P_{(l)i(f)}^{(d
\;(r)},\medskip$
\end{enumerate}
\item the seventh set:\medskip
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\emph{17.}] $\sum_{\left\{ {_{(a)}^{(i)}},{_{(b)}^{(j)}},{_{(c)}^{(k)}
\right\} }\left\{
S_{(l)(a)(b)}^{(d)(i)(j)}|_{(c)}^{(k)}+S_{(r)(a)(b)}^{(f)(i)(j)}S_{(l)(c)(f)}^{(d)(k)(r)}+S_{(l)(a)(b)(c)}^{(d)(i)(j)(k)}\right\} =0,\medskip
$
\end{enumerate}
\item the eight set:\medskip
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\emph{18.}] $\sum_{\{a,b,c\}}\chi _{eab/c}^{d}=0,\medskip$
\item[\emph{19.}] $\chi _{eab|k}^{d}=0,\medskip$
\item[\emph{20.}] $\chi _{eab}^{d}|_{(c)}^{(k)}=0,\medskip$
\item[\emph{21.}] $\sum_{\{a,b,c\}}\left\{
R_{pab/c}^{l}+R_{(r)ab}^{(f)}P_{pc(f)}^{l\;\;(r)}\right\} =0,\medskip$
\item[\emph{22.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\{a,b\}}\left\{
R_{pak/b}^{l}+R_{(r)ak}^{(f)}P_{pb(f)}^{l\;\;(r)}+T_{ak}^{r}R_{pbr}^{l
\right\} =R_{pab|k}^{l}+R_{(r)ab}^{(f)}P_{pk(f)}^{l\;\ (r)},\medskip$
\item[\emph{23.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\{j,k\}}\left\{
R_{paj|k}^{l}+R_{(r)aj}^{(f)}P_{pk(f)}^{l\;\;(r)}+T_{aj}^{r}R_{pkr}^{l
\right\} =-R_{pjk/a}^{l}-R_{(r)jk}^{(f)}P_{pa(f)}^{l\;\ (r)},\medskip$
\item[\emph{24.}] $\sum_{\{i,j,k\}}\left\{
R_{pij|k}^{l}+R_{(r)ij}^{(f)}P_{pk(f)}^{l\;\ (r)}\right\} =0,\medskip$
\end{enumerate}
\item the nineth set:\medskip
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\emph{25.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\{a,b\}}\left\{
P_{ia(e)/b}^{l\;\;(p)}+P_{(r)a(e)}^{(f)\;\;(p)}P_{ib(f)}^{l\;(r)}\right\}
=R_{iab}^{l}|_{(e)}^{(p)}+R_{(r)ab}^{(f)}S_{i(e)(f)}^{l(p)(r)},\medskip$
\item[\emph{26.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\{a,k\}}\left\{
P_{ia(e)|k}^{l\;\;(p)}+P_{(r)a(e)}^{(f)\;\;(p)}P_{ik(f)}^{l\;\;(r)}\right\}
=\medskip$
=R_{iak}^{l}|_{(e)}^{(p)}+R_{(r)ak}^{(f)}S_{i(e)(f)}^{l(p)(r)}+C_{k(e)}^{r(p)}R_{iar}^{l}-T_{ak}^{r}P_{ir(e)}^{l\;\;(p)},\medskip
$
\item[\emph{27.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\{j,k\}}\left\{
P_{ij(e)|k}^{l\;\;(p)}+P_{(r)j(e)}^{(f)\;\;(p)}P_{ik(f)}^{l\
\;(r)}+C_{j(e)}^{r(p)}R_{ikr}^{l}\right\} =\medskip$
$=R_{ijk}^{l}|_{(e)}^{(p)}+R_{(r)jk}^{(f)}S_{i(e)(f)}^{l(p)(r)},\medskip$
\end{enumerate}
\item the tenth set:\medskip
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\emph{28.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\left\{ {_{(b)}^{(j)}},{_{(c)}^{(k)}
\right\} }\left\{
P_{pa(b)}^{l\;\;(j)}|_{(c)}^{(k)}+P_{(r)a(b)}^{(f)\
\;(j)}S_{p(c)(f)}^{l(k)(r)}\right\} =\medskip$
$=-S_{p(b)(c)/a}^{l(j)(k)}-S_{(r)(b)(c)}^{(f)(j)(k)}P_{pa(f)}^{l\;\;(r)}
\medskip$
\item[\emph{29.}] $\mathcal{A}_{\left\{ {_{(b)}^{(j)}},{_{(c)}^{(k)}
\right\} }\left\{
P_{pi(b)}^{l\;\;(j)}|_{(c)}^{(k)}+P_{(r)i(b)}^{(f)\
\;(j)}S_{p(c)(f)}^{l(k)(r)}-C_{i(b)}^{r(j)}P_{pr(c)}^{l\;\;(k)}\right\}
=\medskip$
$=-S_{p(b)(c)|i}^{l(j)(k)}-S_{(r)(b)(c)}^{(f)(j)(k)}P_{pi(f)}^{l\;\;(r)}
\medskip$
\end{enumerate}
\item the eleventh set:\medskip
\begin{enumerate}
\item[\emph{30.}] $\sum_{\left\{ {_{(a)}^{(i)}},{_{(b)}^{(j)}},{_{(c)}^{(k)}
\right\} }\left\{
S_{p(a)(b)}^{l(i)(j)}|_{(c)}^{(k)}+S_{(f)(a)(b)}^{(r)(i)(j)}S_{p(c)(r)}^{l(k)(f)}\right\} =0,\medskip
$
\end{enumerate}
where, if $\{A,B,C\}$ are indices of type $\left\{ a,i,{_{(i)}^{(a)}
\right\} $, then $\sum_{\{A,B,C\}}$ represents a cyclic sum, and $\mathcal{A
_{\{A,B\}}$ represents an alternate sum.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Taking into account that the indices $A,B,C,D...$ are of typ
\begin{equation*}
\left\{ a,i,{_{\left( i\right) }^{\left( a\right) }}\right\} ,
\end{equation*
and the torsion $\mathbb{T}_{AB}^{C}$ and curvature $\mathbb{R}_{ABC}^{D}$
adapted components are given in the Tables (\ref{Table1}) and (\ref{Table2
), after laborious local computations, the formulas (\ref{Bianchi_local})
imply the required Bianchi identities.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
We point out that, in the particular single-time cas
\begin{equation*}
(\mathcal{T},h)=(\mathbb{R},\delta =1),
\end{equation*
the last identity of our each set of local Bianchi identities reduces to one
of the classical eleven Bianchi identities that characterize the $N$\textit
-linear connections} in the classical Hamilton geometry on cotangent bundles
(see \emph{\cite{Miro+Hrim+Shim+Saba}}).
\end{remark}
\textbf{Acknowledgements.} The authors of this paper would like to express
their sincere gratitude to Professor Gh. Atanasiu for his suggestions and
useful discussions on this research topic.
|
\section{Introduction, and statement of results}
\subsection{Some decompositions of the Grassmannian}\label{ssec:decomps}
This paper is concerned with the geometric properties of a stratification of the Grassmannian studied in
\cite{Lus,Pos,Rie,BGY,Wil}. It fits into a family of successively
finer decompositions:
$$ \{\text{Bruhat cells}\} ,
\{\text{open Richardson varieties}\} ,
\{\text{open \bf positroid varieties}\} ,
\{\text{GGMS strata}\}. $$
We discuss the three known ones in turn, and then see how the
family of positroid varieties fits in between.
The {\em Bruhat decomposition} of the Grassmannian of $k$-planes in
$n$-space dates back, despite the name, to Schubert in the 19th
century. It has many wonderful properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item the strata are easily indexed (by partitions in a $k\times (n-k)$ box)
\item it is a stratification: the closure (a {\em Schubert variety})
of one open stratum is a union of others
\item each stratum is smooth and irreducible (in fact a cell)
\item although the closures of the strata are (usually) singular,
they are not too bad: they are normal and Cohen-Macaulay, and
even have rational singularities.
\end{itemize}
The Bruhat decomposition is defined relative to a choice of coordinate flag,
essentially an ordering on the basis elements of $n$-space.
The {\em Richardson decomposition} is the common refinement of the
Bruhat decomposition and the {\em opposite} Bruhat decomposition, using
the opposite order on the basis. Again, many excellent properties hold for
this finer decomposition:
\begin{itemize}
\item it is easy to describe the nonempty intersections of Bruhat and opposite Bruhat
strata (they correspond to {\em nested} pairs of partitions)
\item it is a stratification, each open stratum is smooth and irreducible,
and their closures are normal and Cohen-Macaulay
with rational singularities \cite{BrionPos}.
\end{itemize}
At this point one might imagine intersecting the Bruhat decompositions
relative to {\em all} the coordinate flags, so as not to prejudice one
over another. This gives the {\em GGMS decomposition} of the Grassmannian
\cite{GGMS},
and as it turns out, these good intentions pave the road to Hell:
\begin{itemize}
\item it is infeasible to index the nonempty strata~\cite{LostAxiom}
\item it is not a stratification \cite[\S 5.2]{GGMS}
\item the strata can have essentially any singularity~\cite{Mnev}.
In particular, the nonempty ones need not be irreducible,
or even equidimensional.
\end{itemize}
This raises the question: can one intersect more than two permuted Bruhat
decompositions, keeping the good properties of the Bruhat and
Richardson decompositions, without falling into the GGMS abyss?
The answer is yes: we will intersect the $n$ {\em cyclic
permutations} of the Bruhat decomposition. That is to say, we will define
an {\em open positroid variety} to be an intersection of $n$ Schubert cells, taken with respect to the
the $n$ cyclic rotations of the standard flag. We will define a {\em positroid variety} to be
the closure of an open positroid variety. See section~\ref{sec:pos} for details.
It is easy to show,
though not immediately obvious, that this refines the Richardson
decomposition. It is even less obvious, though also true, that the
open positroid varieties are smooth and irreducible (as we discuss in Section
\ref{ssec:projectedRichardsons}).
There is a similar decomposition for any partial flag manifold $G/P$,
the projection of the Richardson stratification from $G/B$.
That decomposition arises in the study
of several seemingly independent structures:
\begin{itemize}
\item total nonnegativity, in e.g. \cite{Lus,Pos,Rie},
see \S \ref{ssec:jugafftnn};
\item prime ideals in noncommutative deformations of $G/P$ (though worked
out only for the Grassmannian, in \cite{LLR}),
and a semiclassical version thereof in Poisson geometry \cite{BGY,GY};
\item the characteristic $p$ notion of Frobenius splitting
(\cite{KLS}).
\end{itemize}
We show that the positroid stratification and the projected Richardson stratification coincide. Specifically, we prove:
\begin{thm*}[Theorem \ref{thm:projectedRichardsons}]
If $X_u^w$ is a Richardson variety in the full flag manifold
($u,w \in S_n$), then its image under projection to $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$
is a positroid variety. If $w$ is required to be a Grassmannian
permutation, then every positroid variety arises uniquely this way.
\end{thm*}
Theorem~\ref{thm:projectedRichardsons} has been suspected, but has not previously been proved in print, and is surprisingly difficult in its details.
This result was already known on the positive part of $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$, as we explain in Remark~\ref{rem:StratHistory}.
Once we know that positroid varieties are projected Richardson varieties, the following geometric properties follow from the results of \cite{KLS}. Part (1) of the following Theorem was also established by Billey and Coskun \cite{BC} for projected Richardson varieties.
\begin{thm*}[\cite{KLS} and Theorem \ref{T:LinearGeneration}]
\
\begin{enumerate}
\item Positroid varieties are normal and Cohen-Macaulay,
with rational singularities.
\item Though positroid varieties are defined as the closure of
the intersection of $n$ cyclically permuted Bruhat cells,
they can also be defined (even as schemes) as
the intersection of the $n$ cyclically permuted Schubert varieties.
In particular, each positroid variety is defined as a scheme by the
vanishing of some Pl\"ucker coordinates.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm*}
\begin{thm*}[\cite{KLS}]
The standard Frobenius spliting on the Grassmannian compatibly
splits all positroid varieties. Furthermore, positroid varieties
are exactly the compatibly split subvarieties of the Grassmannian.
\end{thm*}
\newcommand\into{\hookrightarrow}
Before going on, we mention a very general construction given
two decompositions $\{Y_a\}_{a\in A}$,$\{Z_b\}_{b\in B}$ of
a scheme $X$, one refining the other. Assume that
\begin{itemize}
\item $X = \coprod_A Y_a = \coprod_B Z_b$,
\item for each $a\in A$, there exists a subset $B_a \subseteq B$ such that
$Y_a = \coprod_{B_a} Z_b$,
\item each $Y_a$ is irreducible (hence nonempty), and
each $Z_b$ is nonempty. (We do not assume that each $Z_b$ is irreducible.)
\end{itemize}
Then there is a natural surjection $B \twoheadrightarrow A$ taking $b$ to the unique
$a$ such that $Z_b \subseteq Y_a$, and a natural inclusion $A\into B$
taking $a$ to the unique $b\in B_a$ such that $Z_b$ is open in $Y_a$.
(Moreover, the composite $A \into B \twoheadrightarrow A$ is the identity.)
We will call the map $B\twoheadrightarrow A$ the \defn{$A$-envelope}, and will generally use
the inclusion $A\into B$ to identify $A$ with its image.
Post this identification, each $a\in A$ corresponds to two strata $Y_a$, $Z_a$,
and we emphasize that these are usually {\em not} equal;
rather, one only knows that $Y_a$ contains $Z_a$ densely.
To each GGMS stratum $X$, one standardly associates the set of
coordinate $k$-planes that are elements of $\overline X$,
called the \defn{matroid of $X$}.
(While ``matroid'' has many simple definitions, this is not one of
them; only \defn{realizable} matroids arise this way, and
characterizing them is essentially out of reach \cite{LostAxiom}.)
It is a standard, and easy, fact that the matroid characterizes
the stratum, so via the $A\into B$ yoga above,
we can index the strata in the Schubert, Richardson,
and positroid decompositions by special classes of matroids.
Schubert matroids have been rediscovered many times in the matroid
literature (and renamed each time; see \cite{Bonin}).
Richardson matroids are known as {\em lattice path matroids} \cite{Bonin}.
The matroids associated to the open positroid varieties are
exactly the positroids \cite{Pos} (though Postnikov's original definition
was different, and we give it in the next section).
In our context, the observation two paragraphs above says that if a
matroid $M$ is a positroid, then the positroid stratum of $M$ is
usually {\em not} the GGMS stratum of $M$, but only contains it
densely.
\begin{remark}\label{rem:SashaParam}
For each positroid $M$, Postnikov gives many parametrizations by
${\mathbb R}_{+}^{\ell}$ of the totally nonnegative part (whose definition we will
recall in the next section) of the GGMS stratum of $M$. Each
parametrization extends to a rational map $({\mathbb C}^\times)^{\ell} \to \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$;
if we use the parametrization coming (in Postnikov's terminology)
from the Le-diagram of $M$ then this map is well defined on all of
$({\mathbb C}^\times)^{\ell}$. The image of this map is neither the GGMS
stratum nor the positroid stratum of $M$ (although the nonnegative parts of all three coincide). For example, if
$(k,n)=(2,4)$ and $M$ is the ``uniform'' matroid in which any two elements of
$[4]$ are independent, this parametrization is
$$(a,b,c,d) \mapsto (p_{12}: p_{13}: p_{14}: p_{23}: p_{24}: p_{34})
= (1: d : cd: bd: (a+1)bcd: abcd^2).$$
The image of this map is the open set where $p_{12}$, $p_{13}$,
$p_{14}$, $p_{23}$ and $p_{34}$ are nonzero. It is smaller than the
positroid stratum, where $p_{13}$ can be zero. The image is larger than the GGMS stratum, where $p_{24}$ is also nonzero.
One may regard this, perhaps, as evidence that matroids
are a philosophically incorrect way to index the strata. We shall see
another piece of evidence in Remark \ref{rem:notPluckerDefined}.
\end{remark}
\newcommand\Sym{{\rm Sym}}
\newcommand\integers{\mathbb Z}
\newcommand\naturals{{\mathbb N}}
\subsection{Juggling patterns, affine Bruhat order, and total nonnegativity}\label{ssec:jugafftnn}
We now give a lowbrow description of the decomposition we are
studying, from which we will see a natural indexing of the strata.
\newcommand\junk[1]{}
Start with a $k\times n$ matrix $M$ of rank $k$ ($\leq n$),
and think of it as a list of column vectors $\vec v_1,\ldots,\vec v_n$.
Extend this to an infinite but repeating list
$\ldots,\vec v_{-1}, \vec v_0, \vec v_1,\ldots, \vec v_n, \vec v_{n+1}, \ldots$
where $\vec v_i = \vec v_j$ if $i\equiv j \bmod n$.
Then define a function $f:\mathbb{Z} \to \mathbb{Z}$ by
$$ f(i) = \min\ \left\{ j \geq i : \vec v_i \in
{\rm span}( \{\vec v_{i+1}, \vec v_{i+2}, \ldots, \vec v_{j}) \right\} $$
Since $\vec v_{n+i} = \vec v_i$, each $f(i) \leq n+i$, and each
$f(i) \geq i$ with equality only if $\vec v_i = \vec 0$.
It is fun to prove that $f$ must be $1:1$, and has enough finiteness
to then necessarily be onto as well.
Permutations of $\mathbb{Z}$ satisfying $f(i+n) = f(i) + n\ \forall i$
are called \defn{affine permutations}, and the group thereof can
be identified with the affine Weyl group of $GL_n$ (see e.g. \cite{ER}).
This association of an affine permutation to each $k\times n$ matrix of rank $k$
depends only on the $k$-plane spanned by the rows, and so descends
to $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$, where it provides a complete combinatorial invariant of the
strata in the cyclic Bruhat decomposition.
\begin{thm*}[Theorem \ref{T:pairsboundedposet}, Corollary \ref{cor:shell}] \footnote{This result is extended to projected Richardson varieties in partial flag varieties $G/P$ of arbitrary type by He and Lam \cite{HL}.}
This map from the set of positroid strata to the affine Weyl group is
order-preserving, with respect to the closure order on positroid strata
(Postnikov's \defn{cyclic Bruhat order}) and the affine Bruhat order,
and identifies the set of positroids with a downward Bruhat order ideal.
Consequently, the cyclic Bruhat order is Eulerian and EL-shellable
(as shown by hand already in \cite{Wil}).
\end{thm*}
We interpret these $f$ physically as follows. Consider a juggler who is
juggling $k$ balls, one throw every second, doing a pattern of period $n$.
At time $i \in \mathbb{Z}$, they throw a ball that lands shortly\footnote{%
almost exactly at time $f(i)-\frac{1}{2}$, according to video
analysis of competent jugglers}
before, to be thrown again at, time $f(i)$.
No two balls land at the same time, and there is always a ball
available for the next throw.
If we let $t_i = f(i)-i$ be the \defn{throw} at time $i$,
this cyclic list of $n$ numbers $(t_1,\ldots,t_n)$ is a {\em juggling pattern}%
\footnote{%
Not every juggling pattern arises this way;
the patterns that arise from matrices can only have throws
of height $\leq n$. This bound is very unnatural from the juggling
point of view, as it excludes the standard $3$-ball cascade
$(t_1 = 3)$ with period $n=1$.}
or {\em siteswap} (for which our references are \cite{Polster,Siteswap};
see also \cite{BuhlerEGW,ER,Warrington,G1,G2}).
This mathematical model of juggling was developed by several groups of
jugglers independently in 1985, and is of great practical use
in the juggling community.
If $M$ is generic, then
the pattern is the lowest-energy pattern, where every throw
is a $k$-throw.\footnote{%
These juggling patterns are called ``cascades'' for $k$ odd and
``(asynchronous) fountains'' for $k$ even.}
At the opposite extreme, imagine that $M$ only has entries in
some $k$ columns. Then $n-k$ of the throws are $0$-throws,
and $k$ are $n$-throws.\footnote{%
These are not the most excited $k$-ball patterns of length $n$;
those would each have a single $kn$-throw, all the others being $0$-throws.
But juggling patterns associated to matrices must have each $t_i \leq n$.}
If one changes the cyclic action slightly, by moving the first column
to the end {\em and multiplying it by} $(-1)^{k-1}$, then one
preserves the set of real matrices for which every $k\times k$
submatrix has nonnegative determinant. This, by definition, lies over the
\defn{totally nonnegative part} $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)_{\geq 0}$
of the Grassmannian. (This action may have period either $n$ or $2n$ up on matrices, but it always has period $n$ down on the Grassmannian.)
Postnikov's motivation was to describe those matroids whose GGMS strata
intersect this totally nonnegative part; it turns out that
they are exactly the positroids, and the totally nonnegative part
of each open positroid stratum is homeomorphic to a ball.
\begin{remark}\label{rem:StratHistory}
Now that we have defined the totally nonnegative part of the Grassmannian, we can explain
the antecedents to Theorem~\ref{thm:projectedRichardsons}.
Postnikov~(\cite{Pos}) defined the totally nonnegative part of the Grassmannian as we have done above, by nonnegativity of all minors.
Lusztig~(\cite{Lus}) gave a different definition which applied to any $G/P$.
That the two notions agree is not obvious, and was established in~\cite{Rie09}.
In particular, the cyclic symmetry seems
to be special to Grassmannians.\footnote{Milen Yakimov has
proven the stronger result that the standard Poisson
structure on $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$, from which the positroid stratification
can be derived, is itself cyclic-invariant \cite{Milen}.}
Lusztig, using his definition, gave a stratification of $(G/P)_{\geq 0}$ by the projections of Richardson varieties.
Theorem~3.8 of \cite{Pos} (which relies on the results of~\cite{MR}
and~\cite{RW}) states that Postnikov's and Lusztig's stratifications
of $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)_{\geq 0}$ coincide.
This result says nothing about how the stratifications behave away from the totally nonnegative region.
Theorem~\ref{thm:projectedRichardsons} can be thought of as a
complex analogue of~\cite[Theorem~3.8]{Pos}; it implies but does not
follow from~\cite[Theorem~3.8]{Pos}.
We thank Konni Rietsch for helping us to understand the connections between these results.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Affine permutations, and the associated cohomology class of a positroid variety}
\newcommand\iso{\cong}
\newcommand\complexes{{\mathbb C}}
\newcommand\mathrm{codim}{{\rm codim\ }}
Given a subvariety $X$ of a Grassmannian, one can canonically
associate a symmetric polynomial in $k$ variables, in a couple of
equivalent ways:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
Sum, over partitions $\lambda$ with $|\lambda| = \mathrm{codim} X$,
the Schur polynomial $S_\lambda(x_1,\ldots,x_k)$
weighted by the number of points of intersection of $X$ with a
generic translate of $X_{\lambda^c}$ (the Schubert variety associated
to the complementary partition inside the $k\times (n-k)$ rectangle).
\item
Take the preimage of $X$ in the Stiefel manifold of $k\times n$ matrices
of rank $k$, and the closure $\overline X$ inside $k\times n$ matrices.
(In the $k=1$ case this is the affine cone over a projective variety,
and it seems worth it giving the name ``Stiefel cone'' in general.)
This has a well-defined class in the equivariant Chow ring
$A^*_{GL(k)}(\complexes^{k\times n})$,
which is naturally the ring of symmetric polynomials in $k$ variables.
\end{enumerate}
The most basic case of $X$ is a Schubert variety $X_\lambda$, in which case
these recipes give the Schur polynomial $S_\lambda$.
More generally, the first construction shows that the symmetric polynomial
must be ``Schur-positive'', meaning a positive sum of Schur polynomials.
In reverse, one has ring homomorphisms
$$ \{\text{symmetric functions}\}
\twoheadrightarrow \integers[x_1,\ldots,x_k]^{S_k}
\iso A^*_{GL(k)}(\complexes^{k\times n})
\twoheadrightarrow A^*_{GL(k)}(\text{Stiefel})
\iso A^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)) $$
and one can ask for a symmetric function $f$ whose image is the class $[X]$.
\begin{thm*}[Theorem \ref{thm:affineStanley}\footnote{
Snider \cite{Snider} has given a direct geometric explanation of this result by identifying affine patches on $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ with opposite Bruhat cells in the affine flag manifold,
in a way that takes the positroid stratification to the Bruhat decomposition. Also, an analogue of this result for projected Richardson varieties in an arbitrary $G/P$ is established by He and Lam \cite{HL}: the connection with symmetric functions is absent, but the cohomology classes of projected Richardson varieties and affine Schubert varieties are compared via the affine Grassmannian.
}]
The cohomology class associated to a positroid variety can be
represented by the affine Stanley function of its affine permutation,
as defined in \cite{Lam1}.
\end{thm*}
This is a surprising result in that affine Stanley functions are not
Schur-positive in general, even for this restricted class of affine
permutations. Once restricted to the variables $x_1,\ldots,x_k$, they are!
In Theorem \ref{thm:positiveKTclass}
we give a much stronger abstract positivity result,
for positroid classes in $T$-equivariant $K$-theory.
Our proof of Theorem \ref{thm:affineStanley} is inductive.
In future work, we hope to give a direct geometric proof of this and
Theorem \ref{T:pairsboundedposet}, by embedding the Grassmannian
in a certain subquotient of the affine flag manifold,
and realizing the positroid decomposition as the transverse pullback
of the affine Bruhat decomposition.
\subsection{Quantum cohomology
and toric Schur functions}
In \cite{BKT}, Buch, Kresch, and Tamvakis related quantum Schubert
calculus on Grassmannians to ordinary Schubert calculus on $2$-step
partial flag manifolds. In \cite{PosQH}, Postnikov showed that the
structure constants of the quantum cohomology of the Grassmannian
were encoded in symmetric functions he called toric Schur
polynomials. We connect these ideas to positroid varieties:
\begin{thm*}[Theorem \ref{thrm:QuantumPositroid}]
Let $S \subset \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ be the union of all genus-zero stable
curves of degree $d$ which intersect a fixed Schubert variety $X$
and opposite Schubert variety $Y$. Suppose there is a non-trivial
quantum problem associated to $X,Y$ and $d$. Then $S$ is a
positroid variety: as a projected Richardson variety it is obtained
by a pull-push from the 2-step flag variety considered in
\cite{BKT}. Its cohomology class is given by the toric Schur
polynomial of \cite{PosQH}.
\end{thm*}
The last statement of the theorem is consistent with the connection
between affine Stanley symmetric functions and toric Schur functions
(see \cite{Lam1}).
\subsection*{Acknowledgments}
Our primary debt is of course to Alex Postnikov, for getting us
excited about positroids. We also thank Michel Brion, Leo Mihalcea, Su-Ho Oh, Konni Rietsch,
Frank Sottile, Ben Webster, Lauren Williams, and Milen Yakimov for useful conversations.
\section{Some combinatorial background}
Unless otherwise specified, we shall assume that nonnegative
integers $k$ and $n$ have been fixed, satisfying $0 \leq k \leq n$.
\subsection{Conventions on partitions and permutations}
\label{ssec:conventions}
For integers $a$ and $b$, we write
$[a,b]$ to denote the interval $\{a, a+1, \ldots, b \}$, and $[n]$
to denote the initial interval $\{ 1,2, \ldots, n \}$.
If $i \in \mathbb Z$, we let $\bar i \in [n]$ be the unique integer
satisfying $i \equiv \bar i \mod n$. We write
$\binom{S}{k}$ for the set of $k$-element subsets of $S$. Thus
$\binom{[n]}{k}$ denotes the set of $k$-element subsets of
$\{1,2,\ldots,n\}$.
As is well known, there is a bijection between $\binom{[n]}{k}$ and
the partitions of $\lambda$ contained in a $k \times (n-k)$ box.
There are many classical objects, such as Schubert varieties, which
can be indexed by either of these $\binom{n}{k}$-element sets. We
will favor the indexing set $\binom{[n]}{k}$, and will only discuss
the indexing by partitions when it becomes essential, in
\S \ref{sec:cohomology}.
We let $S_n$ denote the permutations of the set $[n]$. A
permutation $w \in S_n$ is written in one-line notation as
$[w(1)w(2)\cdots w(n)]$. Permutations are multiplied from right to
left so that if $u, w \in S_n$, then $(uw)(i) = u(w(i))$. Thus
multiplication on the left acts on values, and multiplication on the
right acts on positions. Let $w \in S_n$ be a permutation. An
\defn{inversion} of $w$ is a pair $(i,j) \in [n] \times [n]$ such that $i <
j$ and $w(i) > w(j)$. The length $\ell(w)$ of a permutation $w \in
S_n$ is the number of its inversions. A factorization $w = uv$ is
called \defn{length-additive} if $\ell(w) = \ell(u) + \ell(v)$.
The longest element $[n(n-1)\cdots 1]$ of $S_n$ is denoted $w_0$.
The permutation $[234 \cdots n 1]$ is denoted $\chi$ (for Coxeter
element). As a Coxeter
group, $S_n$ is generated by the simple transpositions $\{s_i = [12
\cdots(i-1)(i+1)i(i+2)\cdots n]\}$.
For $k \in [0,n]$, we let $S_k \times S_{n-k} \subseteq S_n$ denote
the parabolic subgroup of permutations which send $[k]$ to $[k]$ and
$[k+1,n]$ to $[k+1,n]$. A permutation $w \in S_n$ is called
\defn{Grassmannian} (resp. \defn{anti-Grassmannian}) if it is
minimal (resp. maximal) length in its coset $w(S_k \times S_{n-k})$;
the set of such permutations is denoted $S_{n,k}^{\mathrm{min}}$ (resp. $S_{n,k}^{\mathrm{max}}$).
If $w \in S_n$ and $k \in [0,n]$, then $\sigma_k(w) \in \binom{[n]}{k}$
denotes the set $w([k])$.
Often, we just write $\sigma$ for $\sigma_k$ when no confusion will arise. The map
$\sigma_k: S_n \to \binom{[n]}{k}$ is a bijection when restricted to $S_{n,k}^{\mathrm{min}}$.
\subsection{Bruhat order and weak order}
We define a partial order $\leq$ on $\binom{[n]}{k}$ as
follows. For $I = \{i_1 < i_2 < \cdots < i_k\}$ and $J = \{j_1 < j_2
\cdots < j_k\} \in \binom{[n]}{k}$, we write $I \leq J$ if $i_r \leq
j_r$ for $r \in [k]$.
We shall denote the \defn{Bruhat order}, also called the
\defn{strong order}, on $S_n$ by $\leq$ and $\geq$. One has the
following well known criterion for comparison in Bruhat order: if
$u, w \in S_n$ then $u \leq w$ if and only if $u([k]) \leq w([k])$
for each $k \in [n]$. Covers in Bruhat order will be denoted by
$\lessdot$ and $\gtrdot$.
The map $\sigma_k: (S_{n,k}^{\mathrm{min}}, \leq) \to \left( \binom{[n]}{k},\leq\right)$
is a poset isomorphism.
The \defn{(left) weak order} $\leq_{\mathrm{weak}}$ on $S_n$ is the
transitive closure of the relations
$$
w \leq_{\mathrm{weak}} s_iw \ \ \ \mbox{if $\ell(s_iw) = \ell(w) + 1$}.
$$
The weak order and Bruhat order agree when restricted to $S_{n,k}^{\mathrm{min}}$.
\subsection{$k$-Bruhat order and the poset ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$.}
\label{sec:kBruhat}
The \defn{$k$-Bruhat order} \cite{BS,LS} $\leq_k$ on $S_n$ is
defined as follows. Let $u$ and $w$ be in $S_n$. Then $u$ \defn{$k$-covers}
$w$, written $u \gtrdot_k w$, if and only if $u \gtrdot w$ and
$\sigma_{k} (u) \neq \sigma_{k} (w)$. The $k$-Bruhat order is the partial order on
$S_n$ generated by taking the transitive closure of these cover
relations (which remain cover relations). We let $[u,w]_k \subset
S_n$ denote the interval of $S_n$ in $k$-Bruhat order. It is shown
in \cite{BS} that every interval $[u, w]_k$ in $(S_n, \leq_k)$ is
a graded poset with rank $\ell(w)- \ell(u)$. We have the following
criterion for comparison in $k$-Bruhat order.
\begin{thm}[{\cite[Theorem A]{BS}}]
\label{T:BScriterion} Let $u, w \in S_n$. Then $u \leq_k w$ if and
only if
\begin{enumerate}
\item $1 \leq a \leq k < b \leq n$ implies $u(a) \leq w(a)$ and $u(b)
\geq w(b)$.
\item If $a < b$, $u(a) < u(b)$, and $w(a) > w(b)$, then $a \leq k <
b$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{thm}
Define an equivalence relation on the set of $k$-Bruhat intervals,
generated by the relations that $[u,w]_k \sim [x,y]_k$ if there is a
$z \in S_k \times S_{n-k}$ so that we have length-additive
factorizations $uz = x$ and $wz = y$.
If $u \leq_k w$, we let $\langle u,w \rangle$ denote the equivalence
class containing $[u,w]_k$. Let ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$ denote the equivalence
classes of $k$-Bruhat intervals.
We discuss this construction in greater generality in \cite[\S 2]{KLS}.
To obtain the current situation, specialize the results of that paper to $(W, W_P) = (S_n, S_{k} \times S_{n-k})$.
The results we describe here are all true in that greater generality.
\begin{prop} \label{prop:EasyEquiv}
If $[u_1, w_1] \sim [u_2, w_2]$ then $u_1^{-1} u_2 = w_1^{-1} w_2$ and this common ratio is in $S_k \times S_{n-k}$. Also $\ell(w_1) - \ell(w_2) = \ell(u_1) - \ell(u_2)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
This is obvious for the defining equivalences and is easily seen to follow for a chain of equivalences. \end{proof}
We will prove a converse of this statement below as Proposition~\ref{prop:Equivalence}.
The reader may prefer this definition of $\sim$.
\begin{prop} \label{prop:GrassRep}
Every equivalence class in ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$ has a unique representative of the form $[u',w']$ where $w'$ is Grassmannian.
If $[u,w]$ is a $k$-Bruhat interval, and $[u', w']$ is equivalent to $[u,w]$ with $w'$ Grassmannian, then we have length-additive factorizations $u=u' z$ and $w = w' z$ with $z \in S_k \times S_{n-k}$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Lemma 2.4]{KLS} for the existence of a representative of this form.
If $[u', w']$ and $[u'', w'']$ are two such representatives, then $(w')^{-1} w''$ is in $S_k \times S_{n-k}$ and both $w'$ and $w''$ are Grassmannian, so $w'=w''$. Then $(u')^{-1} u'' = (w')^{-1} w'' = e$ so $u' = u''$ and we see that the representative is unique.
Finally, let $[u', w']$ be the representative with $w'$ Grassmannian, and let $[u,w] \sim [u', w']$.
Set $z = (u')^{-1} u = (w')^{-1} w$ with $z \in S_k \times S_{n-k}$.
Since $w'$ is Grassmannian, we have $\ell(w) = \ell(w') + \ell(z)$.
Then the equation $\ell(w) - \ell(w') = \ell(u) - \ell(u')$ from Proposition~\ref{prop:EasyEquiv} shows that $\ell(u) = \ell(u') + \ell(z)$ as well.
So the products $u=u'z$ and $w=w'z$ are both length-additive, as desired.
\end{proof}
We can use this observation to prove a more computationally useful version of the equivalence relation:
\begin{prop} \label{prop:Equivalence}
Given two $k$-Bruhat intervals $[u_1, w_1]$ and $[u_2, w_2]$, we have $[u_1, w_1] \sim [u_2, w_2]$ if and only if $u_1^{-1} u_2 = w_1^{-1} w_2$ and common ratio lies in $S_k \times S_{n-k}$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The forward implication is Proposition~\ref{prop:EasyEquiv}.
For the reverse implication, let $[u_1, w_1]$ and $[u_2, w_2]$ be as stated.
Let $[u'_1, w'_1]$ and $[u'_2, w'_2]$ be the representatives with $w'_i$ Grassmannian.
Since $(w'_1)^{-1} w'_2$ is in $S_k \times S_{n-k}$, and both $w'_i$ are Grassmannian, then $w'_1 = w'_2$.
Since $(u'_1)^{-1} u'_2 = (w'_1)^{-1} w'_2 = e$, we deduce that $u'_1 = u'_2$.
So $[u_1, w_1] \sim [u'_1, w'_1] = [u'_2, w'_2] \sim [u_2, w_2]$ and we have the reverse implication.
\end{proof}
We also cite:
\begin{thm}[{\cite[Theorem 3.1.3]{BS}}]
\label{T:BSisom} If $u \leq_k w$ and $x \leq_k y$ with $wu^{-1} =
yx^{-1}$, then the map $v \mapsto vu^{-1}x$ induces an isomorphism
of graded posets $[u,w]_k \to [x,y]_k$.
\end{thm}
We equip ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$ with a partial order $\leq$ given by $q' \leq q$
if and only if there are representatives $[u,w]_k \in q$ and
$[u',w']_k \in q'$ so that $[u', w'] \subseteq [u, w]$. This partial order was studied by Rietsch \cite{Rie}, see also \cite{Wil,GY}.
The poset ${\mathcal Q}(2,4)$ already has $33$ elements; its Hasse diagram
appears in \cite{Wil}. See also Figure \ref{fig:gr24}.
\section{Affine permutations, juggling patterns and positroids}
\label{sec:posets}
Fix integers $0 \leq k \leq n$. In this section, we will define several posets of objects and prove that the posets are all isomorphic. We begin by surveying the posets we will consider. The objects in these posets will index positroid varieties, and all of these indexing sets are useful. All the isomorphisms we define are compatible with each other. Detailed definitions, and the definitions of the isomorphisms, will be postponed until later in the section.
We have already met one of our posets, the poset ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$ from \S \ref{sec:kBruhat}.
The next poset will be the poset $\Bound(k,n)$ of bounded affine permutations:
these are bijections $f: \mathbb{Z} \to \mathbb{Z}$ such that $f(i+n)=f(i)+n$,
$i \leq f(i) \leq f(i)+n$ and $(1/n) \sum_{i=1}^n (f(i)-i) =k$. After
that will be the poset $\Jugg(k,n)$ of bounded juggling patterns. The elements
of this poset are $n$-tuples $(J_1, J_2, \ldots, J_n) \in \binom{[n]}{k}^n$
such that $J_{i+1} \supseteq (J_i \setminus \{ 1 \}) - 1$, where the
subtraction of $1$ means to subtract $1$ from each element and our indices
are cyclic modulo $n$. These two posets are closely related to the posets of decorated
permutations and of Grassmann necklaces, considered in~\cite{Pos}.
We next consider the poset of cyclic rank matrices. These are infinite periodic matrices which relate to bounded affine permutations in the same way that Fulton's rank matrices relate to ordinary permutations. Finally, we will consider the poset of positroids. Introduced in~\cite{Pos}, these are matroids which obey certain positivity conditions.
The following is a combination of all the results of this section:
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:Bijections}
The posets ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$, $\Bound(k,n)$, $\Jugg(k,n)$, the poset of
cylic rank matrices of type $(k,n)$ and the poset of positroids of
rank $k$ on $[n]$ are all isomorphic.
\end{theorem}
The isomorphism between $\Bound(k,n)$ and cyclic rank matrices is Corollary~\ref{c:boundmanyfollowing}; the isomorphism between $\Jugg(k,n)$ and $\Bound(k,n)$ is Corollary~\ref{C:boundedjugg}; the isomorphism between $Q(k,n)$ and $\Bound(k,n)$ is Theorem~\ref{T:pairsboundedposet}; the isomorphism between $\Jugg(k,n)$ and positroids is Proposition~\ref{prop:JuggMatroid}.
\subsection{Juggling states and functions}\label{ssec:juggling}
\newcommand\shift{s_{+}}
\newcommand\st{{\rm st}}
Define a \defn{(virtual) juggling state $S\subseteq \integers$} as a subset
whose symmetric difference from $-\naturals := \{ i \leq 0\}$
is finite. (We will motivate this and other juggling terminology below.)
Let its \defn{ball number} be
$\left| S \cap \integers_+ \right | - \left| -\naturals \setminus S \right |$,
where $ \integers_+ := \{i > 0\}$.
Ball number is the unique function on juggling states
such that for $S \supseteq S'$,
the difference in ball numbers is $|S\setminus S'|$, and
$-\naturals$ has ball number zero.
Call a bijection $f:\mathbb Z \to \mathbb Z$ a \defn{(virtual) juggling function}
if for some (or equivalently, any) $t\in\mathbb Z$, the set $f\left(\{i : i
\leq t\}\right)$ is a juggling state. It is sufficient (but not
necessary) that $\{ |f(i)-i| : i \in \mathbb Z \}$ be bounded. Let $G$ be
the set of such functions: it is easy to see that $G$ is a group,
and contains the element $\shift: i \mapsto i+1$. Define the
\defn{ball number of $f\in G$} as the ball number of the juggling
state $f(-\naturals)$, and denote it $\av(f)$ for reasons to be
explained later.
\begin{lem}
$\av : G \to \integers$ is a group homomorphism.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We prove what will be a more general statement,
that if $S$ is a juggling state with ball number $b$,
and $f$ a juggling function with ball number $b'$,
then $f(S)$ is a juggling state with ball number $b+b'$.
Proof: if we add one element to $S$, this adds one element to $f(S)$,
and changes the ball numbers of $S,f(S)$ by $1$.
We can use this operation and its inverse to reduce to the case that
$S = -\naturals$, at which point the statement is tautological.
Now let $f,g \in G$, and apply the just-proven statement
to $S = g(-\naturals)$.
\end{proof}
For any bijection $f:\mathbb Z \to Z$, let
\begin{eqnarray*}
\st(f,t) &:=& \{f(i) - t: i \leq t\} \\
&=& \st(\shift^t f \shift^{-t}, 0)
\end{eqnarray*}
and if $f\in G$, call it the \defn{juggling state of $f$ at time
$t$}. By the homomorphism property just proven $\av(f) =
\av\left(\shift^k f \shift^{-k}\right)$, which says that every state
of $f\in G$ has the same ball number (``ball number is
conserved''). The following lemma lets one work with juggling states
rather than juggling functions:
\begin{lem}\label{lem:reconstructjug}
Say that a juggling state $T$ \defn{can follow} a state $S$ if
$T = \{t\} \cup \left(\shift^{-1}\cdot S\right)$,
and $t \notin \shift^{-1}\cdot S$. In this case say that a
\defn{$t$-throw takes state $S$ to state $T$}.
Then a list $(S_i)_{i\in\integers}$ is the list of states of a
juggling function iff $S_{i+1}$ can follow $S_i$ for each $i$.
In this case the juggling function is unique.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
If the $(S_i)$ arise from a juggling function $f$, then the
condition is satisfied where the element $t_i$ added
to $\shift^{-1}\cdot S_{i-1}$ is $f(i)-i$.
Conversely, one can construct $f$ as $f(i) = i+t_i$.
\end{proof}
In fact the finiteness conditions on juggling states and permutations
were not necessary for the lemma just proven. We now specify a further
finiteness condition, that will bring us closer to the true functions
of interest.
\begin{lem}\label{lem:finitestates}
The following two conditions on a bijection $f:\mathbb Z\to\mathbb Z$ are equivalent:
\begin{enumerate}
\item there is a uniform bound on $|f(i)-i|$, or
\item there are only finitely many different $\st(f,i)$
visited by $f$.
\end{enumerate}
If they hold, $f$ is a juggling function.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Assume first that $f$ has only finitely many different states.
By Lemma \ref{lem:reconstructjug}, we can reconstruct the value of $f(i)-i$
from the states $S_i, S_{i+1}$. So $f(i)-i$ takes on only finitely
many values, and hence $|f(i)-i|$ is uniformly bounded.
For the reverse, assume that $|f(i)-i| < N$ for all $i\in\mathbb Z$.
Then $f(-\naturals) \subseteq \{i < N\}$,
and $f(\integers_+) \subseteq \{i >-N\}$.
Since $f$ is bijective, we can complement the latter to learn that
$f(-\naturals) \supseteq \{i\leq -N\}$. So $\st(f,0)$, and similarly
each $\st(f,t)$, is trapped between $\{i\leq -N\}$ and $\{i < N\}$.
There are then only $2^{2N}$ possibilities, all of which
are juggling states.
\end{proof}
In the next section we will consider juggling functions which cycle
periodically through a finite set of states.
\newcommand\hght{{\rm ht}}
Define the \defn{height of the juggling state $S \subseteq \mathbb Z$} as
$$ \hght(S)
:= \sum_{i \in S \cap \integers_+} i - \sum_{i \in -\naturals \setminus S} i, $$
a sort of weighted ball number. We can now motivate the notation $\av(f)$,
computing ball number as an average:
\begin{lem}\label{lem:avheight}
Let $a,b\in \integers, a\leq b$ and let $f\in G$. Then
$$ \sum_{i=a+1}^{b} (f(i)-i)
= (b-a) \av(f) + \hght(\st(f,b)) - \hght(\st(f,a)).$$
In particular, if $f$ satisfies the conditions of
Lemma \ref{lem:finitestates}, then for any $a\in \integers$,
$$ \lim_{b\to \infty} \frac{1}{b-a} \sum_{i=a+1}^{b} (f(i)-i)= \av(f). $$
This equality also holds without taking the limit, if
$\st(f,a) = \st(f,b)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
It is enough to prove the first statement for $b=a+1$, and add the
$b-a$ many equations together. They are of the form
$$ f(a+1)-(a+1) = \av(f) + \hght(\st(f,a+1)) - \hght(\st(f,a)). $$
To see this, start with $S = \st(f,a)$, and use $f(a+1)$ to calculate
$\st(f,a+1)$. The three sets to consider are
\begin{eqnarray*}
S &=& f(\{i \leq a\}) \text{ shifted left by $a$} \\
S'&=& f(\{i \leq a\}) \text{ shifted left by $a+1$} \\
\st(f,a+1) &=& f(\{i \leq a+1\}) \text{ shifted left by $a+1$}
\end{eqnarray*}
By its definition, $\hght(S') = \hght(S) - \av(f)$.
And $\hght(\st(f,a+1)) = \hght(S') + f(a+1)-(a+1)$. The equation follows.
For the second, if $f$ only visits finitely many states then the
difference in heights is bounded, and dividing by $b-a$ kills this
term in the limit.
\end{proof}
We now motivate these definitions from a juggler's point of view. The canonical reference is \cite{Polster},
though our setting above is more general than considered there.
All of these concepts originated in the juggling community
in the years 1985-1990, though precise dates are difficult to determine.
Consider a idealized juggler who is juggling with one hand\footnote{%
or as is more often assumed, rigidly alternating hands},
making one throw every second, of exactly one ball at a time,
has been doing so since the beginning of time and will continue
until its end. If our juggler is only human (other than being immortal)
then there will be a limit on how high the throws may go.
Assume at first that the hand is never found empty when a throw
is to be made.
The history of the juggler can then be recorded by a function
$$
f(t) = \text{the time that a ball thrown at time $t$ is next thrown.}
$$
The number $f(t)-t$ is usually called the \defn{throw at time $t$}.
If ever the juggler {\em does} find the hand empty i.e. all the balls
in the air, then of course the juggler must wait one second for the
balls to come down. This is easily incorporated by taking $f(t)=t$,
a \defn{$0$-throw}.
While these assumptions imply that $f$ is a juggling function,
they would also seem to force the conclusion that $f(i)\geq i$,
i.e. that {\em balls land after they are thrown}. Assuming that for a
moment, it is easy to compute the number of balls being juggled in
the permutation $f$: at any time $t$, count how many balls were thrown
at times $\{i\leq t\}$ that are still in the air, $f(i)>t$.
This is of course our formula for the ball number, in this special case.
The formula $\av(f) = \av(\shift^t f \shift^{-t})$ then says that
balls are neither created nor destroyed.
The state of $f\in G$ at time $t$ is the set of times in the
future (of $t$) that balls in the air are scheduled to land. (This
was introduced to study juggling by the first author and,
independently, by Jack Boyce, in 1988.) The ``height'' of a state
does not seem to have been considered before.
Thus, the sub-semigroup of $G$ where $f(t) \geq t$ encodes
possible juggling patterns. Since we would like to consider $G$
as a group (an approach pioneered in~\cite{ER}), we must permit
$f(t) < t$. While it may seem fanciful to view this as describing
juggling with antimatter, the ``Dirac sea'' interpretation of antimatter is suggestive of the connection with the affine Grassmannian.
\subsection{Affine permutations}\label{S:affineperm}
Let $\tilde S_n$ denote the group of bijections, called \defn{affine
permutations}, $f: \mathbb Z \to \mathbb Z$ satisfying
$$
f(i + n) = i + n \ \ \mbox{for all $i \in \mathbb Z$}.
$$
Plainly this is a subgroup of $G$. This group fits into an exact
sequence
$$ 1 \to \mathbb Z^n \xrightarrow{t} \tilde S_n \twoheadrightarrow S_n \to 1 $$
where for $\mu = (\mu_1,\ldots,\mu_n) \in
\mathbb Z^n$, we define the \defn{translation element} $t_\mu \in \tilde S_n$ by
$t_\mu(i) = n\mu_i + i$ for $1 \leq i \leq n$.
The map $\tilde S_n \twoheadrightarrow S_n$ is evident. We can give a splitting map $S_n \to \tilde S_n$ by
extending a permutation $\pi : [n] \to [n]$ periodically.
By this splitting, we have $\tilde S_n \simeq S_n \ltimes \mathbb Z^n$,
so every $f \in \tilde S_n$ can be uniquely factorized as $f =
w\ t_\mu$ with $w \in S_n$ and $\mu \in \mathbb Z^n$.
An affine permutation $f \in \tilde S_n$ is written in one-line notation
as $[\cdots f(1)f(2)\cdots f(n) \cdots]$ (or occasionally just as
$[f(1)f(2) \cdots f(n)]$). As explained in Section
\ref{ssec:jugafftnn}, jugglers instead list one period of the
periodic function $f(i)-i$ (without commas, because very few people
can make $10$-throws\footnote{%
The few that do sometimes use $A,B,\ldots$ to denote throws $10,11,\ldots$,
which prompts the question of what words are jugglable. Michael Kleber
informs us that THEOREM and TEAKETTLE give valid juggling patterns.}
and higher), and call this the
\defn{siteswap}. We adopt the same conventions when multiplying
affine permutations as for usual permutations. The ball number $
\av(f) = \frac{1}{n} \sum_{i=1}^n (f(i) - i) $ is
always an integer; indeed $\av(w\ t_\mu) = \av(t_\mu) = \sum_i
\mu_i$. Define
$$
\tilde S_n^k = \{f \in \tilde S_n \mid \av(f) = k\} = \shift^k \tilde S_n^0
$$
so that $\tilde S_n^0 = \ker \av$ is the Coxeter group with simple generators
$s_0,s_1,\ldots,s_{n-1}$, usually called the \defn{affine symmetric
group}.\footnote{%
One reason
the subgroup $\tilde S_n^0$ is more commonly studied than $\tilde S_n$
is that it is the Coxeter group $\widetilde{A_{n-1}}$;
its relevance for us, is that it indexes the
Bruhat cells on the affine flag manifold for the group $SL_n$.
In \S \ref{sec:cohomology} we will be concerned with the affine flag manifold
for the group $GL_n$, whose Bruhat cells are indexed by all of $\tilde S_n$.
}
Note that if $f \in \tilde S_n^a$ and $g \in \tilde S_n^b$ then the
product $fg$ is in $\tilde S_n^{a+b}$. There is a canonical bijection
$f \mapsto f \circ (i \mapsto i+b-a)$
between the cosets $\tilde S_n^a$ and $\tilde S_n^b$. The group $\tilde S_n^0$ has a Bruhat
order ``$\leq$'' because it is a Coxeter group $\widetilde{A_{n-1}}$.
This induces a partial order on each $\tilde S_n^a$, also denoted $\leq$.
An \defn{inversion} of $f$ is a pair $(i,j) \in \mathbb Z \times \mathbb Z$ such that $i
< j$ and $f(i) > f(j)$. Two inversions $(i,j)$ and $(i',j')$ are
equivalent if $i' = i + rn$ and $j' = j + rn$ for some integer $r$.
The number of equivalence classes of inversions is the \defn{length}
$\ell(f)$ of $f$. This is sort of an ``excitation number'' of the
juggling pattern; this concept does not seem to have been studied
in the juggling community (though see \cite{ER}).
An affine permutation $f \in \tilde S_n^k$ is \defn{bounded} if $i \leq
f(i) \leq i+n$ for $i \in \mathbb Z$. We denote the set of bounded affine
permutations by $\Bound(k,n)$. The restriction of the Bruhat order
to $\Bound(k,n)$ is again denoted $\leq$.
\begin{lem}\label{L:orderideal}
The subset $\Bound(k,n) \subset \tilde S_n^k$ is a lower order ideal in
$(\tilde S_n^k,\leq)$. In particular, $(\Bound(k,n),\leq)$ is graded by
the rank function $\ell(f)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $f \in \Bound(k,n)$ and $g \lessdot f$. Then $g$ is
obtained from $f$ by swapping the values of $i + kn$ and $j + kn$
for each $k$, where $i < j$ and $f(i) > f(j)$. By the assumption on the
boundedness of $f$, we have $i+n \geq f(i) > f(j) = g(i) \geq j > i$
and $j +n > i + n \geq f(i) = g(j) > f(j) \geq j$. Thus $g \in
\Bound(k,n)$.
\end{proof}
Postnikov, in \cite[\S 13]{Pos}, introduces ``decorated permutations''.
A decorated permutation is an element of $S_n$, with each fixed point colored either $1$ or $-1$.
There is an obvious bijection between the set of decorated permutations and $\coprod_{k=0}^n \Bound(k,n)$:
Given an element $f \in \Bound(k,n)$, form the corresponding decorated permutation by reducing $f$ modulo $n$
and coloring the fixed points of this reduction $-1$ or $1$ according to whether $f(i)=i$ or $f(i)=i+n$ respectively.
In~\cite[\S 17]{Pos}, Postnikov introduces the cyclic Bruhat order, $CB_{kn}$, on those decorated permutations corresponding to elements of $\Bound(k,n)$.
From the list of cover relations in~\cite[Theorem 17.8]{Pos}, it is easy to see that $CB_{kn}$ is anti-isomorphic to $\Bound(k,n)$.
\begin{example}
In the $\mathrm{Gr}(2,4)$ case there are already $33$ bounded affine permutations,
but only $10$ up to cyclic rotation. In Figure \ref{fig:gr24} we show
the posets of siteswaps, affine permuations, and decorated permutations,
each modulo rotation. Note that the cyclic symmetry is most visible on the
siteswaps, and indeed jugglers draw little distinction between
cyclic rotations of the ``same'' siteswap.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\epsfig{file=gr24.eps,width=6in}
\caption{The posets of siteswaps, bounded affine permutations,
and decorated permutations for $\mathrm{Gr}(2,4)$, each up to
cyclic rotation. (The actual posets each have 33 elements.)}
\label{fig:gr24}
\end{figure}
\end{example}
\subsection{Sequences of juggling states}
A \defn{$(k,n)$-sequence of juggling states} is a sequence ${\mathcal J} =
(J_1,\ldots, J_n) \in \binom{[n]}{k}^n$ such that for each $i \in
[n]$, we have that $J_{i+1} \cup -\naturals$ follows $J_i \cup -\naturals$,
where the indices are taken modulo $n$. Let $\Jugg(k,n)$ denote the
set of such sequences.
Let $f \in \Bound(k,n)$. Then the sequence of juggling states
$$
\ldots, \st(f,-1), \st(f,0), \st(f,1), \ldots
$$
is periodic with period $n$. Furthermore for each $i \in \mathbb Z$, (a)
$-\naturals \subset \st(f,i)$, and (b) $\st(f,i) \cap [n] \in
\binom{[n]}{k}$. Thus
$$
{\mathcal J}(f) = (\st(f,0) \cap [n], \st(f,1) \cap [n], \ldots, \st(f,n-1)
\cap [n]) \in \Jugg(k,n).
$$
\begin{lem}
The map $f \mapsto {\mathcal J}(f)$ is a bijection between $\Bound(k,n)$ and
$\Jugg(k,n)$.
\end{lem}
We now discuss another way of viewing $(k,n)$-sequences of juggling
states which will be useful in \S \ref{ssec:crank}. Let $S$ be
a $k$-ball virtual juggling state. For every integer $j$, define
$$R_j(S) = k - \# \{x \in S: \ x > j \}.$$
These $\{R_j\}$ satisfy the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item $R_j(S) - R_{j-1}(S)$ is either $0$ or $1$, according to whether
$j \not \in J$ or $j \in J$ respectively,
\item $R_j(S) = k$ for $j$ sufficently positive, and
\item $R_j(S) = j$ for $j$ sufficiently negative.
\end{itemize}
Conversely, from such a sequence $(R_j)$ one can construct a
$k$-ball juggling state.
Let $S_1$ and $S_{2}$ be two $k$-ball juggling states. Define a $2
\times \infty$ matrix $(r_{ij})$ by $r_{ij} = R_{j-i+1}(S_i)$.
\begin{lemma} \label{l:following}
The state $S_2$ can follow $S_1$ if and only if $r_{1j}-r_{2j} =0$
or $1$ for all $j \in \mathbb Z$ and there is no $2 \times 2$ submatrix for
which $r_{1j}=r_{2j}=r_{2(j+1)}=r_{1(j+1)}-1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It is easy to check that $S_2 = \shift^{-1} S_1 \cup \{ t \}$ if and
only if $r_{1j} = r_{2j}+1$ for $j \leq t$ and $r_{1j} = r_{2j}$ for
$j \geq t+1$. If this holds, it immediately follows that
$r_{1j}-r_{2j} =0$ or $1$ for all $j$ and that there is no $j$ for
which $r_{1j}=r_{2j}$ while $r_{2(j+1)}=r_{1(j+1)}-1$.
Conversely, suppose that $r_{1j}-r_{2j} =0$ or $1$ for all $j \in
\mathbb Z$ and there is no $j$ for which
$r_{1j}=r_{2j}=r_{2(j+1)}=r_{1(j+1)}-1$. Then we claim that there
is no $j$ for which $r_{1j}=r_{2j}$ and $r_{2(j+1)}=r_{1(j+1)}-1$.
Proof: suppose there were. If $r_{2(j+1)}=r_{2j}$, then we are done
by our hypothesis; if $r_{2(j+1)} = r_{2 j}$ then $r_{1(j+1)} =
r_{1j}+2$, contradicting that $r_{1(j+1)}-r_{1j}=0$ or $1$. Since
$r_{2(j+1)}-r_{2j}=0$ or $1$, we have a contradiction either
way. This establishes the claim. Now, we know that $r_{1j}=r_{2j}$
for $j$ sufficently positive and $r_{1j}=r_{2j}+1$ for $j$
sufficently negative, so there must be some $t$ such that $r_{1j} =
r_{2j}+1$ for $j \leq t$ and $r_{1j} = r_{2j}$ for $j \geq t+1$.
Then $S_{2}$ can follow $S_1$.
\end{proof}
It is immediate to extend this result to a sequence of juggling
states. Let $G$ be the group of juggling functions introduced in
\S \ref{ssec:juggling} and let $G^{\av=k}$ be those juggling
functions with ball number $k$. For any $f$ in $G^{\av=k}$, let
${\mathcal J}(f) = (J_1, J_2,\ldots,J_{n})$ be the corresponding
$(k,n)$-sequence of juggling states. Define an $\infty \times
\infty$ matrix by $r_{ij} = R_{(j-i+1)}(J_i \cup -\naturals)$. Then,
applying Lemma~\ref{l:following} to each pair of rows of $(r_{ij})$
gives:
\begin{cor} \label{c:manyfollowing} The above construction gives a
bijection between $G^{\av=k}$ and $\infty \times \infty$ matrices such
that
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(C1)] for each $i$, there is an $m_i$ such that $r_{ij} =
j-i+1$ for all $j \leq m_i$,
\item[(C2)] for each $i$, there is an $n_i$ such that $r_{ij} = k$ for all $j \geq n_i$,
\item[(C3)] $r_{ij} - r_{(i+1)j} \in \{0,1\}$ and $r_{ij} - r_{i(j-1)} \in
\{0,1\}$ for all $i, j \in \mathbb Z$, and
\item[(C4)] if $r_{(i+1)(j-1)}=r_{(i+1)j}=r_{i(j-1)}$ then $r_{ij}=r_{(i+1)(j-1)}$.
\end{enumerate}
Under this bijection, $r_{ij} = r_{(i+1)j} = r_{i(j-1)} >
r_{(i+1)(j-1)}$ if and only if $f(i)=j$.
\end{cor}
\begin{prop} \label{prop:rankBruhat}
Let $f, g \in \tilde S_n^k \subset G^{\av = k}$ and let $r$ and $s$ be
the corresponding matrices. Then $f \leq g$ (in Bruhat order) if and
only if $r_{ij} \geq s_{ij}$ for all $(i,j) \in \mathbb Z^2$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
See \cite[Theorem 8.3.1]{BjB}.
\end{proof}
When $r_{ij} = r_{(i+1)j} = r_{i(j-1)} > r_{(i+1)(j-1)}$, we say
that $(i,j)$ is a \defn{special entry} of $r$.
An easy check shows:
\begin{cor} \label{c:boundmanyfollowing}
Under the above bijection, $\Bound(k,n)$ corresponds to $\infty \times \infty$ matrices such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(C1')] $r_{ij} = j-i+1$ for all $j < i$,
\item[(C2')] $r_{ij} = k$ for all $j \geq i+n-1$,
\item[(C3)] $r_{ij} - r_{(i+1)j} \in \{0,1\}$ and $r_{ij} - r_{i(j-1)} \in
\{0,1\}$ for all $i, j \in \mathbb Z$,
\item[(C4)] if $r_{(i+1)(j-1)}=r_{(i+1)j}=r_{i(j-1)}$ then $r_{ij}=r_{(i+1)(j-1)}$, and
\item[(C5)] $r_{(i+n)(j+n)} = r_{ij}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{cor}
We call a matrix $(r_{ij})$ as in Corollary~\ref{c:boundmanyfollowing} a \defn{cyclic rank matrix}.
(See~\cite{Fulton} for the definition of a rank matrix, which we are mimicking.)
We now specialize Proposition~\ref{prop:rankBruhat} to the case of $\Bound(k,n)$:
Define a partial order $\leq$ on $\Jugg(k,n)$ by
$$
(J_1,\ldots, J_n) \leq (J'_1,\ldots, J'_n) \ \ \mbox{if and only if
$J_i \leq J'_i$ for each $i$.}
$$
\begin{cor}\label{C:boundedjugg}
The map $f \mapsto {\mathcal J}(f)$ is an isomorphism of posets from bounded
affine permutations $(\Bound(k,n),\leq)$ to $(k,n)$-sequence of
juggling states $(\Jugg(k,n),\leq)$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
One simply checks that the condition $r_{ij} \geq r'_{ij}$ for all $j$ is equivalent to $J_i \leq J'_i$.
\end{proof}
\begin{example}
Let $n = 4$ and $k = 2$. Consider the affine permutation $[\cdots
2358 \cdots]$, last seen in Figure \ref{fig:gr24}. Its siteswap is
$4112$, and the corresponding sequence of juggling states is $(14,
13, 12, 12)$. Below we list a section of the corresponding infinite
permutation matrix and cyclic rank matrix. Namely, we display the
entries $(i,j)$ for $1 \leq i \leq 4$ and $i \leq j \leq i+4$. The
special entries have been underlined.
$$\begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
& 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \\
& & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
& & & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1
\end{pmatrix} \quad
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & \underline{1} & 1 & 2 & 2 \\
& 1 & \underline{1} & 2 & 2 & 2 \\
& & 1 & 2 & \underline{2} & 2 & 2 \\
& & & 1 & 2 & 2 & 2 & \underline{2}
\end{pmatrix}
$$
\end{example}
In \S \ref{ssec:jugafftnn} we associated an affine permutation to
each $k\times n$ matrix $M$ of rank $k$;
a modification of that rule gives instead a $(k,n)$-sequence of juggling states.
Call a column of $M$ \defn{pivotal} if it
is linearly independent of the columns to its left.
(If one performs Gaussian elimination on $M$, a column will
be pivotal exactly if it contains a ``pivot'' of
the resulting reduced row-echelon form.)
There will be $k$ pivotal columns,
giving a $k$-element subset of $\{1,\ldots,n\}$; they form the
lex-first basis made of columns from $M$.
Now rotate the first column of $M$ to the end.
What happens to the set of pivotal columns?
Any column after the first that was pivotal still is pivotal, but (unless the
first column was all zeroes) there is a new pivotal column;
the new state can follow the previous state.
The $n$ cyclic rotations of $M$ thus give
a $(k,n)$-sequence of juggling states.
\junk{
Assume that the $k$ pivotal numbers in $\{1,\ldots,n\}$ describe the times
that the balls currently in the air are going to land. If there is no ball in
the hand right now (the first column being $\vec 0$), then all the juggler can
do is wait $1$ second for the balls to come lower.
Otherwise there is a ball in the hand now,
which the juggler throws so that it will come down $t$ steps in the
future; this is called a {\em $t$-throw}.
(The empty hand case is called a $0$-throw.)
Postnikov proves that
the nearly-identical notion of ``Grassmann necklaces'' (to which these
juggling patterns biject in a simple way) is a complete invariant
of the strata, and all necklaces arise.
}
\subsection{From ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$ to $\Bound(k,n)$}\label{S:pairstobounded}
The symmetric group $S_n$ acts on $\mathbb Z^n$ (on the left) by
\begin{equation}\label{E:Snaction}
w \cdot (\omega_1,\ldots,\omega_n) = (\omega_{w^{-1}(1)}, \ldots
\omega_{w^{-1}(n)}).
\end{equation}
If $w \in S_n$ and $t_\lambda, t_{\lambda'} \in \tilde S_n$ are translation
elements,
we have the following relations in $\tilde S_n$:
\begin{equation}\label{E:translation} wt_\lambda w^{-1} = t_{w \cdot \lambda} \ \
\ \ \ \ t_{\lambda} t_{\lambda'} = t_{\lambda+ \lambda'}.
\end{equation}
Let $\omega_k = (1,\ldots,1,0,\ldots,0)$ with $k$ $1$s be the $k$th
fundamental weight of $GL(n)$. Note that $t_{\omega_k} \in \tilde S_n^k$. Now fix
$\langle u,w \rangle \in {\mathcal Q}(k,n)$, the set of equivalence classes
we defined in \S \ref{sec:kBruhat}.
Define an affine permutation $f_{u,w} \in \tilde S_n^k$ by
$$
f_{u,w} = ut_{\omega_k}w^{-1}.
$$
The element $f_{u,w}$ does not depend on the representative
$[u,w]_k$ of $\langle u,w \rangle $: if $u' = uz$ and $w' = wz$ for
$z \in S_k \times S_{n-k}$ then
$$
u't_{\omega_k}(w')^{-1} = uzt_{\omega_k}z^{-1}w^{-1} = ut_{z\cdot
\omega_k} w^{-1} = u t_{\omega_k} w^{-1}
$$
since $z$ stabilizes $\omega_k$.
\begin{prop}\label{P:pairstobounded}
The map $\langle u,w \rangle \mapsto f_{u,w}$ is a bijection from
${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$ to $\Bound(k,n)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
We first show that $\langle u,w \rangle \mapsto f_{u,w}$ is an
injection into $\tilde S_n^k$.
Suppose that $f_{u,w} = f_{u', w'}$.
It is clear from the factorization
$\tilde S_n \simeq S_n \ltimes \mathbb Z^n$ that there is some $z \in S_k \times S_{n-k}$ such that $u=u' z$ and $w = w' z$.
Using Proposition~\ref{prop:Equivalence}, we have $[u,w] \sim [u', w']$.
We now show that for $\langle u,w \rangle \in
{\mathcal Q}(k,n)$, we have $f_{u,w} \in \Bound(k,n)$. Let $i \in [1,n]$ and
$a = w^{-1}(i)$. Then
$$
f_{u,w}(i) = \begin{cases} u(a) & \mbox{if $a > k$}
\\
u(a) + n & \mbox{if $a \leq k$.}
\end{cases}
$$
The boundedness of $f_{u,w}$ now follows from Theorem
\ref{T:BScriterion}(1).
Conversely, if $f \in \Bound(k,n)$ then it is clear from
\eqref{E:translation} that $f$ has a factorization as
$$
f = u t_\omega w^{-1}
$$
for $u, w \in S_n$ and $\omega \in \{0,1\}^n$. Since $f \in
\tilde S_n^k$, the vector $\omega$ has $k$ $1$s. By changing $u$ and $w$,
we may further assume that $\omega = \omega_k$ and $w \in S_{n,k}^{\mathrm{min}}$.
It remains to check that $u \leq_k w$, which we do via Theorem
\ref{T:BScriterion}; its Condition (2) is vacuous when $w \in S_{n,k}^{\mathrm{min}}$ and
checking Condition (1) is the same calculation as in the previous
paragraph.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{T:pairsboundedposet}
The bijection $\langle u,w \rangle \mapsto f_{u,w}$ is a poset isomorphism from
the pairs $({\mathcal Q}(k,n),\leq)$ to bounded affine permutations
$(\Bound(k,n),\leq)$. Furthermore, one has $\ell(f_{u,w}) =
\binom{n}{k} - \ell(w) + \ell(u)$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
It is shown in \cite{Wil} that $({\mathcal Q}(k,n), \leq)$ is a graded poset,
with rank function given by $\rho(\langle u,w \rangle ) = k(n-k) -
(\ell(w) - \ell(u))$. It follows that each cover in ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$ is of
the form
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\langle u,w' \rangle \gtrdot \langle u,w \rangle$ where $w' \lessdot w$, or
\item $\langle u',w \rangle \gtrdot \langle u,w \rangle$ where $u \lessdot u'$.
\end{enumerate}
We may assume that
$w \in S_{n,k}^{\mathrm{min}}$ (Proposition~\ref{prop:GrassRep}). Suppose we are in Case (1). Then $w' = w(ab)$ where
$a \leq k < b$ and $w(a) > w(b)$. Here $(ab) \in S_n$ denotes the
transposition swapping $a$ and $b$. Thus $f_{u,w'} =
f_{u,w}(w(a)w(b))$. Using the formula in the proof of Proposition
\ref{P:pairstobounded}, we see that $f_{u,w}(w(a)) > n$ while
$f_{u,w}(w(b)) \leq n$. Thus $f_{u,w'} > f_{u,w}$.
Suppose we are in Case (2), and that $u' = u(ab)$ where $a < b$ and
$u(a) < u(b)$. It follows that $f_{u,w'} = (u(a)u(b))f_{u,w}$.
Suppose first that $a \leq k < b$. Then $(t_{\omega_k})^{-1}(a) = a
- n$, while $(t_{\omega})^{-1}(b) = b$ so we also have $f_{u,w'} =
f_{u,w}((w(a)-n)w(b))$ where $w(a) - n$ is clearly less than
$w(b)$. Thus $f_{u,w'} > f_{u,w}$. Otherwise suppose that $a,
b \geq k$ (the case $a,b \leq k$ is similar). Then $f_{u,w'} =
f_{u,w}(w(a)w(b))$. Since $w \in S_{n,k}^{\mathrm{min}}$, we have $w(a) < w(b)$.
Again we have $f_{u,w'} > f_{u,w}$.
We have shown that $\langle u',w'\rangle \geq \langle u,w\rangle$
implies $f_{u',w'} \geq f_{u,w}$. The converse direction is
similar.
The last statement follows easily, using the fact that both of the
posets $({\mathcal Q}(k,n),\leq)$ and $(\Bound(k,n),\leq)$ are graded.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Shellability of ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$}\label{ssec:shellability}
A graded poset $P$ is \defn{Eulerian} if for any $x \leq y \in P$
such that the interval $[x,y]$ is finite we have $\mu(x,y) = (-1)^{{\rm
rank}(x) - {\rm rank}(y)}$, where $\mu$ denotes the M\"{o}bius
function of $P$. A labeling of the Hasse diagram of a poset $P$ by
some totally ordered set $\Lambda$ is called an \defn{$EL$-labeling}
if for any $x \leq y \in P$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
there is a unique label-(strictly)increasing saturated chain $C$
from $x$ to $y$,
\item
the sequence of labels in $C$ is $\Lambda$-lexicographically minimal amongst
the labels of saturated chains from $x$ to $y$.
\end{enumerate}
If $P$ has an $EL$-labeling then we say that $P$ is {\it
$EL$-shellable}.
Verma \cite{Ver} has shown that the Bruhat order of a Coxeter group
is Eulerian. Dyer \cite[Proposition 4.3]{Dye} showed the stronger
result that every Bruhat order (and also its dual) is
$EL$-shellable. (See also~\cite{BW}.) Since these properties are
preserved under taking convex subsets, Lemma \ref{L:orderideal} and
Corollary \ref{C:boundedjugg} and Theorem \ref{T:pairsboundedposet}
imply the following result, proved for the dual of $({\mathcal Q}(k,n), \leq)$
by Williams \cite{Wil}.
\begin{cor}\label{cor:shell}
The posets $({\mathcal Q}(k,n), \leq)$, $(\Bound(k,n),\leq)$, and
$(\Jugg(k,n),\leq)$, and their duals are Eulerian and
$EL$-shellable.
\end{cor}
\begin{remark}
Williams' result is stronger than
Corollary~\ref{cor:shell}: in our language, she shows that the poset
$\widehat{{\mathcal Q}(k,n)}$, formed by adding a formal maximal element
$\hat{1}$ to ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$, is shellable.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Positroids}\label{S:positroids}
A \defn{matroid ${\mathcal M}$ on $[n]$ with rank $k$} is a non-empty
collection of $k$-element subsets of $[n]$, called \defn{bases},
satisfying the Unique Minimum Axiom: For any permutation $w \in
S_n$, there is a unique minimal element of $w \cdot {\mathcal M}$, in the
partial order $\leq$ on $\binom{[n]}{k}$. This is only one of many
equivalent definitions of a matroid; see~\cite{Bry} for a compendium
of many others, in which this one appears as Axiom $B2^{(6)}$.
Let ${\mathcal M}$ be a matroid of rank $k$ on $[n]$. Define a sequence of
$k$-element subsets ${\mathcal J}({\mathcal M}) = (J_1, J_2, \ldots, J_n)$ by letting
$J_r$ be the minimal base of $\chi^{-r+1}({\mathcal M})$, which is
well-defined by assumption. Postnikov proved, in the terminology of
Grassmann necklaces,
\begin{lem}[{\cite[Lemma 16.3]{Pos}}]
For a matroid ${\mathcal M}$, the sequence ${\mathcal J}({\mathcal M})$ is a $(k,n)$-sequence of
juggling states.
\end{lem}
Let ${\mathcal J} =(J_1,J_2,\ldots,J_r) \in \Jugg(k,n)$. Define
$$
{\mathcal M}_{\mathcal J} = \left\{I \in \binom{[n]}{k} \mid \chi^{-r+1}(I) \geq J_r\right\}.
$$
\begin{lem}[\cite{Pos, Oh}]
Let ${\mathcal J} \in \Jugg(k,n)$. Then ${\mathcal M}_{\mathcal J}$ is a matroid and ${\mathcal J}({\mathcal M}_{{\mathcal J}}) = {\mathcal J}$.
\end{lem}
The matroids ${\mathcal M}_{\mathcal J}$ are called \defn{positroids}.
\begin{prop} \label{prop:JuggMatroid}
The maps ${\mathcal J} \mapsto {\mathcal M}_{{\mathcal J}}$ and ${\mathcal M} \mapsto {\mathcal J}({\mathcal M})$ are inverse isomorphisms between the poset $\Jugg(k,n)$ and the poset of positroids, ${\mathcal J}({\mathcal M}_1) \leq {\mathcal J}({\mathcal M}_2)$ if and only if ${\mathcal M}_1 \supseteq {\mathcal M}_2$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The composition ${\mathcal J} \mapsto {\mathcal M}_{{\mathcal J}} \mapsto {\mathcal J}({\mathcal M}_{{\mathcal J}})$ is the identity by the above lemma and, since the set of positroids is defined as those matroids of the form ${\mathcal M}_{{\mathcal J}}$, the compositions are inverse in the other order as well.
It is easy to see from the definitions, that $M_1 \supseteq M_2$ implies ${\mathcal J}(M_1) \leq {\mathcal J}(M_2)$ and that ${\mathcal J}_1 \leq {\mathcal J}_2$ implies ${\mathcal M}_{{\mathcal J}_1} \supseteq {\mathcal M}_{{\mathcal J}_2}$. Since these correspondences are inverse, then ${\mathcal J}_1 \leq {\mathcal J}_2$ if and only if ${\mathcal M}_{{\mathcal J}_1} \supseteq {\mathcal M}_{{\mathcal J}_2}$.
\end{proof}
If ${\mathcal M}$ is an arbitrary
matroid, then we call the positroid ${\mathcal M}_{{\mathcal J}({\mathcal M})}$ the
\defn{positroid envelope} of ${\mathcal M}$ (see the discussion
before Remark \ref{rem:SashaParam}). Every positroid is a matroid.
The positroid envelope of a positroid is itself.
\begin{example}
Let $M_1$ and $M_2$ be the matroids $\{ 12, 13, 14, 23,
24, 34 \}$ and $\{ 12, 23, 34, 14 \}$. In both cases, ${\mathcal J}({M_i})$ is
$( 12, 23, 34, 14 )$ and, thus, $M_1$ is the positroid envelope of
both $M_1$ and $M_2$. The corresponding affine permutation is
$[\cdots 3456 \cdots]$. On the other hand, if $M_3 = \{ 12, 13, 14, 23, 24 \}$,
then ${\mathcal J}(M_3) = \{ 12, 23, 13, 14 \}$, with corresponding affine
permutation $[\cdots 3546 \cdots]$.
\end{example}
\begin{remark}
Postnikov \cite{Pos} studied the totally nonnegative part
$\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)_{\geq 0}$ of the Grassmannian. Each point $V \in
\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)_{\geq 0}$ has an associated matroid ${\mathcal M}_V$. Postnikov
showed that the matroids that can occur this way, called positroids,
were in bijection with Grassmann necklaces of type $(k,n)$ (similar
to our $(k,n)$-sequences of juggling states), with decorated
permutations of $[n]$ with $k$ anti-exceedances, and with many other
combinatorial objects. Oh \cite{Oh}, proving a conjecture of
Postnikov, showed that positroids can be defined in the way we have
done.
\end{remark}
\section{Background on Schubert and Richardson varieties}
\newcommand\Project{\mathrm{Project}}
We continue to fix nonnegative integers $k$ and $n$, satisfying $0
\leq k \leq n$. For $S$ any subset of $[n]$,
let $\Project_S : \complexes^n \twoheadrightarrow \complexes^S$
denote the projection onto the coordinates indexed by $S$.
(So the kernel of $\Project_S$ is $\Span_{s \not \in S} e_s$.)
\subsection{Schubert and Richardson varieties in the flag manifold}
\label{ssec:SchubertRichardsonInFlag}
Let $F \ell(n)$ denote the variety of flags in ${\mathbb C}^n$.
For a permutation $w \in S_n$, we have the
\defn{Schubert cell}
$$
\mathring{X}_w = \{G_\bullet \in F \ell(n) \mid \dim(\Project_{[j]}(G_i)) = \#\{w([i]) \cap [j] \} \; {\rm for \; all}\; i,j\}
$$
and \defn{Schubert variety}
$$
X_w = \{G_\bullet \in F \ell(n) \mid \dim(\Project_{[j]}(G_i)) \leq \#\{w([i]) \cap [j] \} \; {\rm for \; all}\; i,j\}
$$
which both have codimension $\ell(w)$;
moreover $X_w = \overline{\mathring{X}_w}$.
(For basic background on the combinatorics of Schubert varieties, see~\cite{Fulton} or~\cite[Chapter 15]{MS}.)
We thus have
$$F \ell(n) =
\coprod_{w \in S_n} \mathring{X}_w \ \ \ \ \ {\rm and} \ \ \ \ \ X_w =
\coprod_{v \geq w} \mathring{X}_v.
$$
Similarly, we define the
\defn{opposite Schubert cell}
$$
\mathring{X}^{w} = \{G_\bullet \in F \ell(n) \mid \dim(\Project_{[n-j+1,n]}(G_i)) = \#\{w([i]) \cap [n-j+1,n] \} \; {\rm for \; all}\; i,j\}
$$
and \defn{opposite Schubert variety}
$$
X^{w} = \{G_\bullet \in F \ell(n) \mid \dim(\Project_{[n-j+1,n]}(G_i)) \leq \#\{w([i]) \cap [n-j+1,n] \} \; {\rm for \; all}\; i,j\}
$$
It may be easier to understand these definitions in terms of matrices.
Let $M$ be an $n \times n$ invertible matrix and let $G_i$ be the span of the top $i$ rows of $M$.
Then $G_{\bullet}$ is in $\mathring{X}_w$ (respectively, $X_w$), if and only if,
for all $1 \leq i,j \leq n$, the rank of the top left $i \times j$ submatrix of $M$ is the same as
(respectively, less than or equal to) the rank of the corresponding submatrix of the permutation matrix $w$.
Similarly, $G_{\bullet}$ is in $\mathring{X}^{w}$ (respectively $X^w$) if the ranks of the top right
submatrices of $M$ are equal to (respectively less than or equal to) those of $w$.
(The permutation matrix of $w$ has $1$s in positions $(i, w(i))$ and $0$s elsewhere.)
Define the \defn{Richardson varieties} as the transverse intersections
$$
X_u^w = X_u \cap X^w \ \ \ \ \ {\rm and} \ \ \ \ \
\mathring{X}_{u}^{w} = \mathring{X}_u \cap \mathring{X}_w.
$$
The varieties $X_v^w$ and $\mathring{X}_{v}^{w}$ are nonempty if and
only if $v \leq w$, in which case each has dimension $\ell(w) -
\ell(v)$. Let $E_{\bullet}$ be the flag $(\Span(e_1), \Span(e_1, e_2), \ldots)$
The coordinate flag $v E_{\bullet}$ is in $X_u^w$ if
and only if $u \leq v \leq w$.
We will occasionally need to define \defn{Schubert cells and varieties with respect to a flag $F_{\bullet}$}.
We set
$$
\mathring{X}_w(F_\bullet) = \{G_\bullet \in F \ell(n) \mid \dim(G_i/(G_i \cap
F_{n-j})) = \#\{w([i]) \cap [j] \} \; {\rm for \; all}\; i,j\}
$$
and define $X_w(F_{\bullet})$ by replacing $=$ with $\leq$.
Warning: under this definition $X_w$ is $X_w(w_0 E_{\bullet})$.
\subsection{Schubert varieties in the Grassmannian}
Let $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ denote the Grassmannian of $k$-planes in ${\mathbb C}^n$, and
let $\pi: F \ell(n) \to \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ denote the natural projection. For
$I \in \binom{[n]}{k}$, we let
$$
\mathring{X}_I = \{V \in \mathrm{Gr}(k,n) \mid \dim \Project_{[j]}(V)) = \#(I \cap [j]) \}
$$
denote the Schubert cell labeled by $I$ and
$$
X_I = \{V \in \mathrm{Gr}(k,n) \mid \dim \Project_{[j]}(V) \leq \#(I \cap [j]) \}
$$
the Schubert variety labeled by $I$.
Thus we have $\pi(X_w) =
X_{\pi(w)}$ and
$$\mathrm{Gr}(k,n) =
\coprod_{I \in \binom{[n]}{k}} \mathring{X}_I \ \ \ \ \ {\rm
and} \ \ \ \ \ X_J = \coprod_{I \geq J} \mathring{X}_I.
$$
We define
$$
\mathring{X}^{I} = \{V \in \mathrm{Gr}(k,n) \mid \dim \Project_{[n-j+1,n]}(V) = \#(I \cap [n-j+1,n]) \},
$$
$$
X^I = \{V \in \mathrm{Gr}(k,n) \mid \dim \Project_{[n-j+1,n]}(V) \leq \#(I \cap [n-j+1,n]) \},
$$
So, for $J \in \binom{[n]}{k}$, the $k$-plane $\Span_{j \in J} e_j$ lies in $X_I$ if and only if $I \leq J$, and lies in $X^K$ if and only if $J \leq K$.
To review: if $u$ and $w$ lie in $S_n$, then $X_u$ is a Schubert variety, $X^w$ an opposite Schubert and $X_u^w$ a Richardson variety in $F \ell(n)$.
If $I$ and $J$ lie in $\binom{[n]}{k}$, then $X_I$, $X^J$ and $X_I^J$ mean the similarly named objects in $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$.
(Note that permutations have lower case letters from the end of the alphabet while subsets have upper case letters chosen from the range $\{ I, J, K \}$.)
The symbol $\mathring{X}$ would indicate that we are dealing with an open subvariety, in any of these cases.
\section{Positroid varieties} \label{sec:pos}
We now introduce the positroid varieties, our principal objects of
study. Like the Schubert and Richardson varieties, they will come in
open versions, denoted $\mathring{\Pi}$, and closed versions, denoted
$\Pi$.\footnote{%
$\Pi$ stands for ``positroid", ``Postnikov", and ``projected Richardson''.}
The positroid varieties will be subvarieties of $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$, indexed by
the various posets introduced in \S \ref{sec:posets}. For each of
the different ways of viewing our posets, there is a corresponding way
to view positroid varieties. The main result of this section will be
that all of these ways coincide. Again, we sketch these results here
and leave the precise definitions until later.
Given $[u,w]_{k}$, representing an equivalence class in ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$,
we can project the Richardson variety $\mathring{X}_u^w$ (respectively
$X_u^w$) to $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$. Given a $(k,n)$-sequence of juggling states
$(J_1, J_2, \ldots, J_n) \in \Jugg(k,n)$, we can take the
intersection $\bigcap \chi^{i-1} \mathring{X}_{J_i}$ (respectively $\bigcap
\chi^{i-1} X_{J_i}$) in $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$. (Recall $\chi$ is the cyclic
shift $[234\ldots n1]$.) Given a cyclic rank matrix $r$, we can
consider the image in $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ of the space of $k \times n$
matrices such that the submatrices made of cyclically consecutive
columns have ranks equal to (respectively, less than or equal to)
the entries of $r$. Given a positroid $M$, we can consider those
points in $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ whose matroid has positroid envelope equal to
(respectively, contained in) $M$.
\begin{theorem}
Choose our $[u,w]_{k}$, $(J_1, \ldots, J_n)$, $r$ and $M$ to correspond
by the bijections in \S \ref{sec:posets}. Then the projected open
Richardson variety, the intersection of cyclically permuted open
Schubert varieties, the
space of matrices obeying the rank conditions, and the space of
matrices whose matroids have the required positroid envelope, will
all coincide as subsets of $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$.
\end{theorem}
The equalities of the last three spaces is essentially a matter of unwinding definitions.
The equality between the projected open Richardson variety, and the space of matrices obeying the cyclic rank conditions, is nontrivial and is checked in Proposition~\ref{P:triplecyclicrank}.
We call the varieties we obtain in this way \defn{open positroid
varieties} or \defn{positroid varieties} respectively, and denote
them by $\mathring{\Pi}$ or $\Pi$ with a subscript corresponding to any of the
possible combinatorial indexing sets.
The astute reader will note that we did not describe how to define a
positroid variety using a bounded affine permutation (except by
translating it into some other combinatorial data).
We hope to address this in future work using the geometry of the affine flag manifold. The significance of bounded
affine permutations can already be seen in this paper, as it is
central in our description in \S \ref{sec:cohomology}
of the cohomology class of $\Pi$.
\subsection{Cyclic rank matrices} \label{ssec:crank}
Recall the definition of a cyclic rank matrix from the end of
\S \ref{ssec:juggling}. As we explained there, cyclic rank
matrices of type $(k,n)$ are in bijection with $\Bound(k,n)$ and hence
with ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$ and with bounded juggling patterns of type $(k,n)$.
Let $V \in \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$. We define an infinite array $r_{\bullet\bullet}(V) = (r_{ij}(V))_{i, j \in \mathbb Z}$ of integers as follows: For $i>j$, we set $r_{ij}(V)=j-i+1$ and for $i \leq j$ we have
$$
r_{ij}(V) = \dim (\Project_{\{i, i+1, \ldots, j \}}(V) \}).
$$
where the indices are cyclic modulo $n$. (So, if $n=5$, $i=4$ and
$j=6$, we are projecting onto $\Span(e_4, e_5, e_1)$.) Note that,
when $j \geq i+n-1$, we project onto all of $[n]$. If $V$ is the row
span of a $k \times n$ matrix $M$, then $r_{ij}(V)$ is the rank of
the submatrix of $M$ consisting of columns $i$, $i+1$, \dots, $j$.
\subsection{Positroid varieties and open positroid varieties}
\begin{lem}\label{L:rankcyclic}
Let $V \in \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$. Then $r_{\bullet \bullet}(V)$ is a cyclic
rank matrix of type $(k,n)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Conditions (C1'), (C2'), and (C5) are clear from the definitions.
Let $M$ be a $k \times n$ matrix whose row span is $V$; let $M_i$ be the $i^{\textrm{th}}$ column of $M$.
Condition (C3) says that adding a column to a matrix either preserves the rank of that matrix or increases it by one.
The hypotheses of condition (C4) state that $M_{i}$ and $M_{j}$ are in the span of $M_{i+1}$, $M_{i+2}$, \dots, $M_{j-1}$; the conclusion is that
$\dim \Span(M_i, M_{i+1}, \dots,M_{j-1}, M_j) = \dim \Span(M_{i+1}, \dots, M_{j-1})$.
\end{proof}
For any cyclic rank matrix $r$, let $\mathring{\Pi}_r$ be the subset of $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ consisting of those $k$-planes $V$ with cyclic rank matrix $r$.
We may also write $\mathring{\Pi}_f$, $\mathring{\Pi}_{{\mathcal J}}$ or $\mathring{\Pi}_u^w$ where $f$ is the bounded affine permutation, ${\mathcal J}$ the juggling pattern or $\langle u, w \rangle$ the equivalence class of $k$-Bruhat interval corresponding to $r$.
The next result follows directly from the definitions.
Recall that $\chi = [23\cdots (n-1)n1] \in S_n$ denotes the long cycle.
\begin{lem} \label{lem:OpenCyclic}
For any ${\mathcal J} = (J_1, J_2, \ldots, J_n) \in \Jugg(k,n)$, we have
$$
\mathring{\Pi}_{{\mathcal J}} = \mathring{X}_{J_1} \cap \chi(\mathring{X}_{J_2}) \cap \cdots \cap
\chi^{n-1}(\mathring{X}_{J_n}).
$$
\end{lem}
By Lemma \ref{L:rankcyclic} and our combinatorial bijections, we
have
$$
\mathrm{Gr}(k,n) = \coprod_{{\mathcal J} \in \Jugg(k,n)} \mathring{\Pi}_{{\mathcal J}}.
$$
We call the sets $\mathring{\Pi}_{{\mathcal J}}$ \defn{open positroid varieties}.
Postnikov \cite{Pos} showed that $\mathring{\Pi}_{{\mathcal J}}$ (and even $(\mathring{\Pi}_{{\mathcal J}})_{\geq 0}$)
is non-empty if ${\mathcal J} \in
\Jugg(k,n)$ (this statement also follows from Proposition
\ref{P:triplecyclicrank} below). We define the
\defn{positroid varieties} $\Pi_{{\mathcal J}}$ to be the closures $\Pi_{{\mathcal J}}
:= \overline{\mathring{\Pi}_{{\mathcal J}}}$.
\subsection{From ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$ to cyclic rank matrices}
We now describe a stratification of the Grassmannian due to
Lusztig~\cite{Lus}, and further studied by Rietsch~\cite{Rie}.
(This stratification was also independently discovered by Brown, Goodearl
and Yakimov~\cite{BGY, GY}, motivated by ideas from Poisson geometry;
we will not discuss the Poisson perspective further in this paper.)
Lusztig and Rietsch's work applies to any partial flag variety, and we
specialize their results to the Grassmannian.
The main result of this section is the following:
\begin{prop}\label{P:triplecyclicrank}
Let $u \leq_k w$, and
$f_{u,w}$ be the corresponding affine
permutation from \S \ref{S:pairstobounded}. Recall that
$\mathring{X}_u^w$ denotes the open Richardson variety in $F \ell(n)$ and $\pi$ the map
$F \ell(n) \to \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$. Then $\mathring{\Pi}_f = \pi(\mathring{X}_u^w)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{remark}
If $u \leq w$, but $u \not \leq_k w$, then $\pi(\mathring{X}_u^w)$ may not
be of the form $\mathring{\Pi}_f$. See \cite[Remark 3.5]{KLS}.
\end{remark}
The projection $\pi(\mathring{X}_{u}^{w})$ depends only on the equivalence class of $[u,w]_k$ in ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$.
\begin{prop}[{\cite[Lemma 3.1]{KLS}}] \label{P:EquivalenceClass}
Suppose $[u,w]_k \sim [u',w']_k$ in ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$. Then
$\pi(\mathring{X}_{u}^{w}) = \pi(\mathring{X}_{u'}^{w'})$.
\end{prop}
We now introduce a piece of notation which will be crucial in the proof of Proposition~\ref{P:triplecyclicrank}, but will then never appear again.
Let $V \in \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$. Given a flag $F_\bullet$ in ${\mathbb C}^n$, we obtain
another flag $F_\bullet(V)$ containing $V$ as the $k$th subspace,
as follows. Take the sequence $F_0 \cap V, F_1 \cap V, \ldots, F_n
\cap V$ and remove repetitions to obtain a partial flag $F_\bullet \cap V$
inside ${\mathbb C}^n$, with dimensions $1$, $2$, \dots $k$. Next take the sequence $V+F_0$, $V+F_1$,
$V+F_2$, \dots, $V+F_n$ and remove repetitions to obtain a partial
flag $F_\bullet + V$ inside ${\mathbb C}^n$ of dimensions $k$, $k+1$, \dots, $n$.
Concatenating $F_\bullet \cap V$ and $F_\bullet + V$ gives a flag $F_\bullet(V)$ in ${\mathbb C}^n$. The
flag $F_\bullet(V)$ is the ``closest'' flag to $F_\bullet$ which
contains $V$ as the $k$th subspace.
This notion of ``closest flag'' is related to the notion of ``closest Borel subgroup'' in~\cite[\S 5]{Rie}, and many of our arguments are patterned on arguments of~\cite{Rie}.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:GrassSchubert}
Let $w$ be a Grassmannian permutation.
Let $F_{\bullet}$ be a complete flag and let $V = F_k$.
Then $F_{\bullet} \in \mathring{X}^{w}$ if and only if
\begin{enumerate}
\item $V \in \mathring{X}^{\sigma(w)}$
and
\item $F_{\bullet} = E_{\bullet}(V)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The flag $F_{\bullet}$ is in $\mathring{X}^{w}$ if and only if, for every $i$ and $j$,
\[
\dim(F_i \cap E_j) = \# \left( w([i]) \cap [j] \right) \mbox{ or, equivalently, } \dim(F_i + E_j) = (i+j) - \# \left( w([i]) \cap [j] \right). \label{InSchubert}
\]
When $i=k$, the equation above
is precisely the condition that $V \in \mathring{X}^{\sigma(w)}$.
Therefore, when proving either direction of the equivalence, we may assume that $V \in \mathring{X}^{\sigma(w)}$.
Since $V \in \mathring{X}^{\sigma(w)}$,
$$E_{\bullet}(V) = \left( E_{w(1)} \cap V, E_{w(2)} \cap V, \ldots, E_{w(k)} \cap V, E_{w(k+1)}+V, E_{w(k+2)}+V, \ldots, E_{w(n)}+V \right).$$
Let $i \leq k$. If $F_{\bullet} \in \mathring{X}^{w}$, then $\dim (F_i \cap E_{w(i)}) = \# \left( w([i]) \cap [w(i)] \right) = i$, where we have used that $w$ is Grassmannian.
However, $F_i \cap E_{w(i)} \subseteq V \cap E_{w(i)}$, which also has dimension $i$ because $V \in \mathring{X}^{\sigma(w)}$.
So $F_{\bullet} \in \mathring{X}^{w}$ implies that $F_i = V \cap E_{w(i)}$.
Similarly, for $i > k$, the equation $\dim (F_i + E_{w(i)}) = i+w(i) - \# \left( w([i]) \cap [w(i)] \right)$
implies that $F_i = E_{w(i)}+V$.
So, if $F_{\bullet} \in \mathring{X}^{x}$ then $F_{\bullet} = E_{\bullet}(V)$.
The argument is easily reversed.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:RietschMainPoint}
Let $w$ be a Grassmannian permutation, with $u \leq w$ and let $V \in \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$.
Then $V \in \pi(\mathring{X}_{u}^{w})$ if and only if
\begin{equation}
E_{\bullet}(V)_i= V \cap E_{w(i)} \mbox{ for $1 \leq i \leq k$} \label{E:RMP1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
E_{\bullet}(V)_i =V + E_{w(i)} \mbox{ for $k < i \leq n$} \label{E:RMP2}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
E_{\bullet}(V) \in \mathring{X}_{u}. \label{E:RMP3}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By definition, $V \in \pi(\mathring{X}_{u}^{w})$ if and only if there is a flag $F_{\bullet}$ with $V= F_k$ and $F_{\bullet} \in \mathring{X}_{u} \cap \mathring{X}^{w}$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:GrassSchubert}, this flag $F_{\bullet}$, should it exist, must be $E_{\bullet}(V)$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:GrassSchubert}, $E_{\bullet(V)}$ lies in $\mathring{X}^{w}$ if and only if $V$ lies in $\mathring{X}^{\sigma(w)}$.
So $E_{\bullet(V)} \in \mathring{X}_{u} \cap \mathring{X}^{w}$ if and only if $V \in \mathring{X}^{\sigma(w)}$ and $E_{\bullet}(V) \in \mathring{X}_{u}$.
Now, conditions~(\ref{E:RMP1}) and~(\ref{E:RMP2}) determine the dimension of $V \cap E_{w(i)}$ for all $i$.
They are precisely the condition on $\dim \left( V \cap w(j) \right)$ occuring in the definition of $\mathring{X}^{\sigma(w)}$.
So conditions~(\ref{E:RMP1}), (\ref{E:RMP2}) and~(\ref{E:RMP3}) are equivalent to the condition that $V \in \mathring{X}^{\sigma(w)}$ and $E_{\bullet}(V) \in \mathring{X}_{u}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{P:triplecyclicrank}]
First, note that by Proposition~\ref{P:EquivalenceClass}, and the
observation that $f_{u,w}$ only depends on the equivalence class
$\langle u,w \rangle$ in ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$, we may replace $(u,w)$ by any
equivalent pair in ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$. We may thus assume that $w$ is
Grassmannian (Proposition~\ref{prop:GrassRep}). By Lemma~\ref{lem:RietschMainPoint}, $V \in
\pi(\mathring{X}_{u}^{w})$ if and only if conditions~(\ref{E:RMP1}), (\ref{E:RMP2}) and~(\ref{E:RMP3}) hold.
Suppose that $V \in \pi(\mathring{X}_{u}^{w})$.
Let $r=r_{\bullet \bullet}(V)$.
Let $a \in \mathbb Z$ and let $b = f_{u,w}(a)$; without loss of generality we may assume that $1 \leq a \leq n$.
Set $i = w^{-1}(a)$.
We now check that $(a,b)$ is a special entry of $r$.
\textbf{Case 1:} $i \not \in [k]$.
In this case $f_{u,w}(a) = u t_{\omega_k} w^{-1}(a) \in [n]$.
Since $f_{u,w} \in \Bound(k,n)$, we deduce that $a \leq b \leq n$.
(Occasionally, our notation will implicitly assume $a<b$, we leave it to the reader to check the boundary case.)
By conditions~(\ref{E:RMP2}) and~(\ref{E:RMP3}),
$$\dim \Project_{[b]} \left( V + E_a \right) =\# \left( u([i]) \cap [b] \right).$$
We can rewrite this as
$$\dim \left( V + E_a + w_0 E_{n-b} \right) = (n-b) +\# \left( u([i]) \cap [b] \right)$$
or, again,
$$\dim \Project_{[a+1,b]} (V) = \# \left( u([i]) \cap [b] \right)-a. $$
(We have used $a \leq b \leq n$ to make sure that $\dim E_a + w_0 E_{n-b} = n-b+a$.)
In conclusion,
$$r_{(a+1)b} = \# \left( u([i]) \cap [b] \right) -a.$$
A similar computation gives us
$$r_{(a+1)(b-1)} = \# \left( u([i]) \cap [b-1] \right) -a.$$
We now wish to compute $r_{ab}$ and $r_{a(b-1)}$.
This time, we have $V+E_{a-1} = E_{\bullet}(V)_{i-1}$.
So we deduce from condition~(\ref{E:RMP2}) that
$$r_{ab} = \# \left( u([i-1]) \cap [b] \right) - (a-1)$$
and
$$r_{a(b-1)} = \# \left( u([i-1]) \cap [b-1] \right) - (a-1).$$
Now, $u(i) = u(w^{-1}(a))=b$.
So, $r_{(a+1)b} - r_{(a+1)(b-1)}=1$ and, since $b \not \in u([i-1])$, we also have $r_{ab} - r_{a(b-1)}=0$.
So $(a,b)$ is special as claimed.
\textbf{Case 2:} $i \in [k]$.
In this case, $b=u(i)+n$ and $n+1 \leq b \leq a+n$.
We mimic the previous argument, using $V \cap E_a \cap w_0 E_{2n-b}$ in place of $V+E_a+w_0 E_{n-b}$, the conclusion again is that $(a,b)$ is a special entry of $r$.
We have now checked, in both cases, that $(a,b)$ is a special entry of $r$.
Therefore, the affine permutation $g$ associated to $r$ has $g(a)=b$.
Since $f_{u,w}(a)=b$, we have checked that $f_{u,w}=g$.
We have thus shown that, if $V \in \pi(\mathring{X}_{u}^{w})$, then $V \in \mathring{\Pi}_{f_{u,w}}$.
We now must prove the converse. Let $r_{\bullet \bullet}(V) =
r(f_{u,w})$. Let $(u', w')$ be such that $E_{\bullet}(V) \in
\mathring{X}_{u'}^{w'}$, so we know that $V \in \pi(\mathring{X}_{u'}^{w'})$. By
Lemma~\ref{lem:GrassSchubert}, $w'$ is Grassmannian. So $r_{\bullet
\bullet}(V) = r(f_{u',w'})$ and $f_{u',w'}=f_{u,w}$. However, by
Proposition~\ref{P:pairstobounded}, this shows that $[u,w]_k$ and
$[u',w']_k$ represent the same element of ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$. Since $w$ and
$w'$ are both Grassmannian, this means that $u = u'$ and $w = w'$,
and $V \in \pi(\mathring{X}_{u}^{w})$ as desired.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Positroid varieties are projected Richardson varieties}
\label{ssec:projectedRichardsons}
Lusztig~\cite{Lus} exhibited a stratification $\coprod P_{(u,v,w)}$
of $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ indexed by triples $(u,v,w) \in S_{n,k}^{\max} \times (S_k \times S_{n-k})
\times S_{n,k}^{\mathrm{min}}$ satisfying $u \leq wv$, and showed that his strata satisfy
$$P_{(u,v,w)} = \pi(\mathring{X}^{wv}_{u}) = \pi(\mathring{X}^{w}_{uv^{-1}}).$$
Furthermore, the projection $\pi: F \ell(n) \to \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ restricts to
an isomorphism on $\mathring{X}^{wv}_{u}$. Using the bijection between the
triples $(u,v,w)$ and ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$ (see \S \ref{sec:kBruhat}), it
thus follows from Proposition \ref{P:triplecyclicrank} that
\begin{thm}\label{thm:projectedRichardsons}
The stratification of $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ by open positroid
varieties is identical to Lusztig's stratification.
If $f = f_{u,w}$ corresponds to $\langle u, w \rangle$ under the
bijection ${\mathcal Q}(k,n) \to \Bound(k,n)$ of \S \ref{S:pairstobounded},
then $\pi(\mathring{X}_u^w) = \mathring{\Pi}_f$. The varieties $\Pi_f$ and $\mathring{\Pi}_f$ are
irreducible of codimension~$\ell(f)$, and $\mathring{\Pi}_f$ is smooth.
For any Richardson variety $X_u^w$, whether or not $u \leq_k w$, the projection $\pi(X_u^w)$ is a closed positroid variety.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Open Richardson varieties in the flag manifold are smooth and irreducible
(by Kleiman transversality).
Lusztig's strata are, by definition, the projected open Richardson varieties, which we have just showed are the same as the open positroid varieties. Lusztig shows that $\pi$ restricted to $\mathring{X}_u^w$ is an isomorphism on its image, so $\dim \Pi_f=\dim X_u^w = \ell(w) - \ell(u)$ and $\Pi_f$ is irreducible. By Theorem~\ref{T:pairsboundedposet}, $\ell(w)-\ell(u) = k(n-k) -\ell(f)$, so $\mathring{\Pi}_f$ has codimension $\ell(f)$, as does its closure $\Pi_f$.
See \cite[Proposition 3.3]{KLS} for the fact that the projection of any Richardson $X_{u}^w$ is equal to the projection of some $X_{u'}^{w'}$ with $u'$ anti-Grassmannian.
\end{proof}
For $u \leq_k w$, we shall call $X^w_u$ a \defn{Richardson model}
for $\Pi_{f_{u,w}}$. We refer the reader to \cite{KLS} for a discussion of projections of closed Richardson varieties. In particular, for any $u\leq w$ (not necessarily a $k$-Bruhat relation) there exists a bounded affine permutation $f$ such that $\pi(X_u^w) = \Pi_f$.
Postnikov \cite{Pos} parametrized the ``totally nonnegative part''
of any open positroid variety, showing that it is homeomorphic to an
open ball. Before one knows that positroid varieties are actually
irreducible, one can use this parametrizability to show that only one
component intersects the totally nonnegative part of the
Grassmannian. A priori there might be other components, so it is
nice to know that in fact there are not.
We now describe the containments between positroid varieties:
\begin{thm}\label{thm:intersectSchubs}
Open positroid varieties form a stratification of the Grassmannian.
Thus for $f \in \Bound(k,n)$ we have
$$
\Pi_f = \coprod_{f' \geq f} \mathring{\Pi}_{f'} = X_{J_1} \cap
\chi(X_{J_2}) \cap \cdots \cap \chi^{n-1}(X_{J_n}).
$$
where $(J_1,J_2,\ldots,J_n) \in \Jugg(k,n)$ corresponds to $f$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Rietsch \cite{Rie} described the closure relations of Lusztig's
stratification of partial flag varieties; see also \cite{BGY}. The first equality is Rietsch's result, translated from the language of ${\mathcal Q}(k,n)$ to $\Bound(k,n)$.
We know that $X_J = \coprod_{I \geq J} \mathring{X}_I$. Using this to expand the
intersection $X_{J_1} \cap \chi(X_{J_2}) \cap \cdots \cap \chi^{n-1}(X_{J_n})$
and applying Lemma~\ref{lem:OpenCyclic} gives the second equality.
\end{proof}
We note that Postnikov \cite{Pos} also described the same closure
relations for the totally nonnegative Grassmannian, using Grassmann
necklaces and decorated permutations.
For a matroid ${\mathcal M}$ let
$$
\GGMS({\mathcal M}) = \{V \in \mathrm{Gr}(k,n) \mid \Delta_I(V) \neq 0
\Longleftrightarrow I \in M \}
$$
denote the GGMS stratum of the Grassmannian \cite{GGMS}. Here for $I
\in \binom{[n]}{k}$, $\Delta_I$ denotes the Pl\"{u}cker coordinate
labeled by the columns in $I$. Recall that in Section
\ref{S:positroids}, we have defined the positroid envelope of a
matroid. It is easy to see that
$$
\mathring{\Pi}_f = \coprod_{{\mathcal M} :\ {\mathcal J}({\mathcal M}) = {\mathcal J}(f)} \GGMS({\mathcal M}).
$$
\begin{prop}\label{P:GGMSdense}
Let ${\mathcal M}$ be a positroid. Then $\GGMS({\mathcal M})$ is dense in
$\mathring{\Pi}_{{\mathcal J}({\mathcal M})}$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $f \in \Bound(k,n)$ is such that ${\mathcal J}(f) = {\mathcal J}({\mathcal M})$. Postnikov
\cite{Pos} showed that the totally nonnegative part $\GGMS({\mathcal M})_{
\geq 0}$ of $\GGMS({\mathcal M})$ is a real cell of dimension $k(n-k) -
\ell(f)$. Thus $\GGMS({\mathcal M})$ has at least dimension $k(n-k) -
\ell(f)$. By Theorem~\ref{thm:projectedRichardsons} $\mathring{\Pi}_{f}$ is
irreducible with the same dimension. It follows that $\GGMS({\mathcal M})$ is
dense in $\mathring{\Pi}_{{\mathcal J}({\mathcal M})}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{cor:pluckerdefined}
Let ${\mathcal M}$ be a positroid. Then as sets,
$$
\Pi_{{\mathcal J}({\mathcal M})} = \overline{\GGMS({\mathcal M})} = \{V \in \mathrm{Gr}(k,n) \mid I \notin
{\mathcal M} \Rightarrow \Delta_I(V) = 0 \}.
$$
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
The first equality follows from Proposition \ref{P:GGMSdense}. The
second follows from Theorem~\ref{thm:intersectSchubs} and the
description of Schubert varieties by vanishing of Pl\"{u}cker coordinates:
\hfill
$
X_J = \{V \in \mathrm{Gr}(k,n) \mid I < \sigma(J) \Rightarrow
\Delta_I(V) = 0 \}.
$\hfill
\end{proof}
Consider the set on the right hand side of the displayed equation in Corollary~\ref{cor:pluckerdefined}. Lauren Williams conjectured that this set was irreducible; this now follows from Corollary~\ref{cor:pluckerdefined} and Theorem~\ref{thm:projectedRichardsons}.
\subsection{Geometric properties of positroid varieties}
The following results follow from Theorem \ref{thm:projectedRichardsons} and the geometric results of \cite{KLS}.
\begin{thm}\label{thm:geometry}
Positroid varieties are normal, Cohen-Macaulay, and have rational singularities.
\end{thm}
\begin{thm}\label{thm:Frobenius}
There is a Frobenius splitting on the Grassmannian that compatibly
splits all the positroid varieties therein. Furthermore, the set of positroid varieties is exactly the set of compatibly split subvarieties of the Grassmannian.
\end{thm}
\begin{theorem} \label{T:LinearGeneration}
Let ${\mathcal M}$ be a positroid. Then the ideal defining the variety $\Pi_{{\mathcal J}({\mathcal M})}$ inside $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$
is generated by the Pl\"ucker coordinates $\{\Delta_I : I \notin {\mathcal M}\}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{thm:intersectSchubs}, $\Pi_{{\mathcal J}({\mathcal M})}$ is the
set-theoretic intersection of some permuted Schubert varieties.
By the Frobenius splitting results of \cite{KLS}, it is
also the scheme-theoretic intersection.
Hodge proved that Schubert varieties (and hence permuted Schubert varieties) are defined by the vanishing of Pl\"ucker
coordinates. (See e.g. \cite{Ramanathan}, where a great
generalization of this is proven using Frobenius splitting.)
The intersection of a family of them is defined by the vanishing of all their individual coordinates.
As explained in \cite[Proposition 3.4]{FZrec},
it is easy to determine which Pl\"ucker coordinates vanish on
a $T$-invariant subscheme $X$ of the Grassmannian;
they correspond to the fixed points not lying in $X$.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor} \label{cor:QuadGeneration}
Let $M$ be a positroid. Embed $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ into $\mathbb{P}^{\binom{n}{k}-1}$ by the Pl\"ucker embedding.
Then the ideal of $\Pi_{{\mathcal J}(M)}$ in $\mathbb{P}^{\binom{n}{k}-1}$ is
generated in degrees $1$ and $2$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem~\ref{T:LinearGeneration}, the ideal of $\Pi_{{\mathcal J}(M)}$ is
the sum of a linearly generated ideal and the ideal of $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$.
It is classical that the ideal of $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ is generated
in degree $2$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}\label{rem:notPluckerDefined}
For a subvariety $X\subseteq G/P \subseteq \mathbb{P} V$ of a general flag
manifold embedded in the projectivization $\mathbb{P} V$ of an irreducible
representation, one can ask whether $X$ is defined as a set by the
vanishing of extremal weight vectors in $V$. This is easy to show
for Schubert varieties (see \cite{FZrec}) and more generally for
Richardson varieties.
Since the above collorary proves this property for positroid varieties,
and \cite{FZrec} prove it for Richardson varieties in $G/B$,
one might conjecture that it would be true for
projected Richardson varieties in other $G/P$s.
This is {\em not} the case:
consider the Richardson variety $X_{1324}^{4231}$ projecting
to a divisor in the partial flag manifold $\{(V_1 \subset V_3 \subset \complexes^4)\}$.
One can check that the image contains every $T$-fixed point,
so no extremal weight vector vanishes on it.
For any irreducible $T$-invariant subvariety $X \subseteq G/P$,
the set of $T$-fixed points $X^T \subseteq (G/P)^T \iso W/W_P$
forms a {\em Coxeter matroid} \cite{CoxeterMatroids},
and $X$ is contained in the set where the extremal weight vectors
corresponding to the complement of $X^T$ vanish. If the containment is
proper, as in the above example, one may take this as evidence that the
Coxeter matroid is not a good description of $X$.
We saw a different knock against matroids in Remark \ref{rem:SashaParam}.
\end{remark}
\section{Examples of positroid varieties}
\label{sec:examples}
In this section, we will see that a number of classical objects
studied in algebraic geometry are positroid varieties, or closely
related to positroid varieties.
First, for any $I \in \binom{[n]}{k}$, the Schubert variety
$X_{I}$ in the Grassmannian is the positroid variety associated
to the positroid $\{ J : J \geq I \}$. Similarly, the cyclically permuted Schubert varieties $\chi^i \cdot X_{I}$ are also positroid varieties.
Similarly, the Richardson varieties $X_{I}^{K}$ are positroid varieties, corresponding to the positroid
$\{ J : I \leq J \leq K \}$.
\newcommand{\mathrm{GL}}{\mathrm{GL}}
\newcommand{\mathrm{Mat}}{\mathrm{Mat}}
\newcommand{\mathrm{Id}}{\mathrm{Id}}
Another collection of objects, closely related to Schubert
varieties, are the {\em graph Schubert varieties}. Let $X_w$ be a
Schubert variety in $F \ell(n)$. Considering $F \ell(n)$ as $B_{-}
\backslash \mathrm{GL}_n$ (where $B_{-}$ is the group of invertible lower
triangular matrices), let $X'_w$ be the preimage of $X_w$ in
$\mathrm{GL}_n$. The \defn{matrix Schubert variety} $MX_w$, introduced in
\cite{Fulton}, is the closure of $X'_w$ in $\mathrm{Mat}_{n \times n}$.
$MX_w$ is cut out of $\mathrm{Mat}_{n \times n}$ by imposing certain rank
conditions on the top-left justified submatrices (as was explained
in \S \ref{ssec:SchubertRichardsonInFlag}). Embed $\mathrm{Mat}_{n
\times n}$ into $\mathrm{Gr}(n,2n)$ by the map $\Gamma$ which sends a matrix
$M$ to the graph of the linear map $\vec v \mapsto M\vec v$; its
image is the \defn{big cell} $\{ \Delta_{[n]} \neq 0 \}$. In
coordinates, $\Gamma(M)$ is the row span of the $n \times 2n$ matrix
$\left[ \begin{smallmatrix} \mathrm{Id} & M \end{smallmatrix} \right]$. We
will abuse notation by also calling this matrix $\Gamma(M)$. We
introduce here the \defn{graph Schubert variety}, $GX_w$, as the
closure of $\Gamma(MX_w)$ in $\mathrm{Gr}(n,2n)$. Graph Schubert varieties
will be studied further in a separate paper by the first author,
\cite{Knutson}.
Let us write $M_{[1,i],[1,j]}$ for the top-left $i \times j$ submatrix
of $M$. Then the rank of $M_{[1,i], [1,j]}$ is $n-i$ less than the
rank of the submatrix of $\Gamma(M)$ using rows $\{i+1, i+2, \ldots,
n, n+1, \ldots, n+j \}$. So every point of $GX_w$ obeys certain rank
bounds on the submatrices of these types. These rank bounds are
precisely the rank bounds imposed by $r(f)$, where $f$ is the affine
permutation $f(i)=w(i)+n$ for $1 \leq i \leq n$, $f(i)=i+n$ for
$n+1 \leq i \leq 2n$. So $GX_w$ is contained in $\Pi_f$, with
equality on the open set $\Gamma(\mathrm{Mat}_{n \times n})$. But $\Pi_f$ and $GX_w$
are both irreducible, so this shows that $GX_w=\Pi_f$.
In \S \ref{sec:cohomology}, we will see that cohomology classes of general
positroid varieties will correspond to affine Stanley symmetric
functions; under this correspondence, graph Schubert varieties give
the classical Stanley symmetric functions.
The example of graph Schubert varieties can be further generalized
\cite[\S 0.7]{BGY}. Let $u$ and $v$ be two elements of $S_n$
and consider the affine permutation $f(i)=u(i)+n$ for $1 \leq i \leq
n$, $f(i)=v^{-1}(i-n)+2n$ for $n+1 \leq i \leq 2n$. (So our
previous example was when $v$ is the identity.) Let us look at
$\Pi_f \cap \Gamma(\mathrm{Mat}_{n \times n})$. This time, we impose
conditions both on the ranks of the upper left submatrices and the
lower right submatrices. In fact, $\mathring{\Pi}_f$ lies entirely within
$\Gamma(\mathrm{GL}_n)$ and is $\Gamma \left( B_{-} u B_{+} \cap B_{+} v
B_{-} \right)$. This is essentially Fomin and Zelevinsky's \cite{FZdouble} \defn{double Bruhat cell}.
Precisely, the double Bruhat cell $\mathrm{GL}_n^{u,v}$ is $B_{+} u B_{+} \cap
B_{-} v B_{-}$. So the positroid variety $\Pi_{f}$ is the closure in
$\mathrm{Gr}(n,2n)$ of $\Gamma(w_0 \mathrm{GL}_n^{w_0 u, w_0 v})$.
Finally, we describe a connection of positroid varieties to quantum
cohomology, which we discuss further in \S \ref{sec:QH}. For
$C$ any algebraic curve in $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$, one defines the degree of $C$
to be its degree as a curve embedded in $\mathbb{P}^{\binom{n}{k}-1}$ by
the Pl\"ucker embedding; this can also be described as
$\int_{\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)} [C] \cdot [X_{\Box}]$ where
$X_{\Box}$ is the Schubert divisor. Let $I$,
$J$ and $K$ be three elements of $\binom{n}{k}$ and $d$ a
nonnegative integer, $d \leq k$, such that $\mathrm{codim} X_I + \mathrm{codim} X_J
+ \mathrm{codim} X_K = k(n-k) + d n$.
Intuitively, the (genus
zero) quantum product $\langle X_{I} X_{J} X_{K} \rangle_d$
is the number of curves in $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$, of genus zero and degree $d$,
which meet $X_{I}(F_{\bullet})$, $X_{J}(G_{\bullet})$ and
$X_{K}(H_{\bullet})$ for a generic choice of flags $F_{\bullet}$, $G_{\bullet}$ and
$H_{\bullet}$. This is made precise via the construction of spaces of stable
maps, see \cite{FP}.
Define $E(I,J,d)$ to be the space of degree $d$ stable maps of a genus
zero curve with three marked points to $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$, such that the first
marked point lands in $X^I$ and the second marked point lands in
$X_J$. Let $S(I,J,d)$ be the subset of $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ swept out by the
third marked point. It is intuitively plausible that
$\langle X_{I} X_{J} X_{K} \rangle_d$ is $\int_{\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)} [S(I,J,d)]\cdot [X_K]$
and we will show that, under certain hypotheses, this holds. We will
show that (under the same hypotheses) $S(I,J,d)$ is a positroid variety.
\section{The cohomology class of a positroid variety}
\label{sec:cohomology}
Let $H^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)), H^*_T(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$
denote the ordinary and equivariant
(with respect to the natural action of $T = ({\mathbb C}^*)^n$) cohomologies of the
Grassmannian, with integer coefficients.
If $X \subset \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ is a $T$-invariant subvariety of the
Grassmannian, we let $[X]_0 \in H^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$ denote its ordinary
cohomology class, and $[X] \in H^*_T(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$ denote its
equivariant cohomology class. We also write $[X]|_p$ for the
restriction of $[X]$ to a $T$-fixed point $p$. We index the fixed
points of $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ by $\binom{[n]}{k}$. We use similar notation
for the flag manifold $F \ell(n)$, whose fixed points are
indexed by $S_n$.
Recall that $\pi : F \ell(n) \to \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ denotes the ($T$-equivariant)
projection.
In \cite{Lam1}, a symmetric function $\tilde F_f \in \Sym$ is introduced
for each affine permutation $f$. Let $\psi: \Sym \to H^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$
denote the natural quotient map. In this section, we show
\begin{thm}\label{thm:affineStanley}
Let $f \in \Bound(k,n)$. Then $\psi(\tilde F_f) = [\Pi_f]_0 \in
H^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$.
\end{thm}
\subsection{Monk's rule for positroid varieties}
The equivariant cohomology ring $H^*_T(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$ is a module over
$H^*_T(\mathrm{pt}) = \mathbb Z[y_1,y_2,\ldots,y_n]$. The ring $H^*_T(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$
is graded with the real codimension, so that $\deg(y_i) = 2$ and
$\deg([X]_T) = 2\ \mathrm{codim}(X)$ for an irreducible
$T$-equivariant subvariety $X \subset \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$.
Let $X_\square \in
H^*_T(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$ denote the class of the Schubert divisor. Note
that $\pi^*(X_\square) \in H^*_T(F \ell(n))$ is the class $[X_{s_k}]$ of the
$k$th Schubert divisor.
We recall the equivariant Monk's formula (see for example \cite{KK}):
\begin{equation}\label{E:monk}
[X_{s_k}].[X_w]= ([X_{s_k}]|_w).[X_w] + \sum_{w \lessdot_k v} [X_v].
\end{equation}
\begin{prop}\label{P:monk}
Let $\Pi_f$ be a positroid variety with Richardson model
$X_u^{w}$. Then
\begin{equation}\label{E:posmonk}
X_\square\cdot[\Pi_f] = (X_\square|_{\sigma(u)})\cdot[\Pi_f] + \sum_{u \lessdot_k u'
\leq_k w} [\Pi_{f_{u',w}}].
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
Here $\sigma$ is the map $\sigma_k : S_n \to \binom{[n]}{k}$.
\begin{proof}
Let $X_u^{w}$ be a Richardson model for $\Pi_f$. Then, using the
projection formula and \eqref{E:monk}, we have in $H^*_T(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$,
\begin{align*}
X_\square \cdot[\Pi_f] &= \pi_*( \pi^*(X_\square)\cdot[X^{w}]\cdot[X_u] ) \\
&= ([X_{s_k}]|_u)\cdot[\Pi_f] + \pi_*( \sum_{u \lessdot_k u'} [X_{u'}]\cdot[X^{w}]) \\
&= (X_\square|_{\sigma(u)})\cdot[\Pi_f] + \sum_{u \lessdot_k u'} \pi_*( [X_{u'}^{w}]).
\end{align*}
But
$$\pi_*( [X_{u'}^{w}]) = \begin{cases} [\Pi_{f_{u',w}}] & \mbox{if $u' \leq_k w$,} \\
0 & \mbox{otherwise.} \end{cases}
$$
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}\label{C:hypsection}
Let $\Pi_f$ be a positroid variety with Richardson model
$X_u^{w}$, and let $X_\square \subseteq \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ denote the Schubert divisor.
Then as a scheme,
$$ (u\cdot X_\square) \cap \Pi_f
= \bigcup_{u \lessdot_k u' \leq_k w} \Pi_{f_{u',w}}. $$
\end{cor}
\begin{proof}
The containment $\supseteq$ follows from Theorem \ref{T:LinearGeneration}.
The above Proposition tells us that the two sides have the
same cohomology class, hence any difference in scheme structure must occur in
lower dimension; this says that $(u\cdot X_\square) \cap \Pi_f$
is generically reduced (and has no other top-dimensional components).
But since $\Pi_f$ is irreducible and normal
(Theorem \ref{thm:projectedRichardsons} and Theorem \ref{thm:geometry}),
a generically reduced hyperplane section of it must be equidimensional
and reduced.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{L:recursive}
The collection of positroid classes $[\Pi_f] \in H^*_T(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$
are completely determined by:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$[\Pi_f]$ is homogeneous with degree $\deg([\Pi_f]) = 2\ell(f)$,
\item
Proposition \ref{P:monk}, and
\item the positroid point classes
$\left\{ [\Pi_{t_{w.\omega_k}}] = [\sigma(w)] \mid w \in S_{n,k}^{\mathrm{min}} \right\}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Let $f \in \Bound(k,n)$. We may assume by induction that the
classes $[\Pi_{f'}]$ for $\ell(f')> \ell(f)$ have all been
determined. The case $\ell(f) = k(n-k)$ is covered by assumption
(3), so we assume $\ell(f) < k(n-k)$. Using Proposition
\ref{P:monk}, we may write
$$
(X_\square-X_\square|_{\sigma(v)}).[\Pi_f] = \sum_{v \lessdot_k v' \leq_k w}
[\Pi_{f_{(v',w)}}].
$$
Now, the class $X_\square-X_\square|_{\sigma(v)}$ does not vanish when restricted to
any fixed point $J \neq \pi(v)$ (see \cite{KT}), so the above
equation determines $[\Pi_f]|_J$ for every $J \neq \pi(v)$. Thus
if $a$ and $b$ are two classes in $H^*_T(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$ satisfying
\eqref{E:posmonk}, then $a - b$ must be supported on
$\pi(v)$. This means that $a - b$ is a multiple of the
point class $[\pi(v)]$. But $\deg([\pi(v)]) = 2k(n-k)$ and
$\deg(a) = \deg(b) = \ell(f) < 2k(n-k)$ so
$a = b$. Thus $[\Pi_f]$ is determined by the three
assumptions.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Chevalley formula for the affine flag variety}
Let
$\widetilde{{\mathcal F} \ell}(n)$ denote the affine flag variety of $GL(n,{\mathbb C})$. We let
$\{\xi^f \in H^*_T(\widetilde{{\mathcal F} \ell}(n))\mid f \in \tilde S_n \}$ denote the
equivariant Schubert classes, as defined by Kostant and Kumar in
\cite{KK}.
Now suppose that $f \in \tilde S_n$. We say that $f$ is \defn{affine
Grassmannian} if $f(1) < f(2) < \cdots < f(n)$. For any $f \in
\tilde S_n$, we write $f^0 \in \tilde S_n$ for the affine permutation given by
$f^0 = [\cdots g(1)g(2) \cdots g(n) \cdots]$ where $g(1), g(2),
\cdots, g(n)$ is the increasing rearrangement of $f(1), f(2),
\cdots, f(n)$. Then $f^0$ is affine Grassmannian. Suppose that $f
\lessdot g$ and $f^0 \neq g^0$. Then we say that $g$
\defn{0-covers} $f$ and write $f \lessdot_0 g$.
These affine analogues of $k$-covers were studied in \cite{LLMS}.
For a transposition $(ab) \in \tilde S$ with $a < b$, we let
$\alpha_{(ab)}$ (resp. $\alpha^\vee_{(ab)}$) denote the
corresponding positive root (resp. coroot), which we shall think of
as an element of the \defn{affine root lattice} $Q =
\bigoplus_{i=0}^{n-1} \mathbb Z\cdot \alpha_i$ (resp. \defn{affine coroot
lattice} $Q^\vee = \bigoplus^{n-1}_{i=0} \mathbb Z\cdot \alpha_i^\vee$). We
have $\alpha_{(ab)} = \alpha_a + \alpha_{a+1} + \cdots
\alpha_{b-1}$, where the $\alpha_i$ are the simple roots, and the
indices on the right hand side are taken modulo $n$. A similar formula holds for coroots.
Note that $\alpha_{(ab)} = \alpha_{(a+n,b+n)}$.
In the following $s_0$ denotes $[\cdots k,k+2,k+3,\ldots,k+n-1,k+n+1 \cdots] \in \tilde S_n$.
\begin{lem}\label{L:affinechev}
Suppose that $f \in \Bound(k,n)$. Then
$$
\xi^{s_0}\cdot \xi^f = \xi^{s_0}|_f \cdot \xi^f + \sum_{f \lessdot_0
g \in \Bound(k,n)} \xi^g + \; \; \text{other terms},
$$
where the other terms are a linear combination of Schubert classes
not labeled by $\Bound(k,n)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We deduce this formula by specializing the Chevalley formula for
Kac-Moody flag varieties in \cite{KK}\footnote{The formula in
Kostant and Kumar \cite{KK}, strictly speaking, applies to the
affine flag variety $\widetilde{{\mathcal F} \ell}(n)_0$ of $SL(n)$. But each component of
$\widetilde{{\mathcal F} \ell}(n)$ is isomorphic to $\widetilde{{\mathcal F} \ell}(n)_0$.}, which in our situation
states that for any $f \in \tilde S$,
$$
\xi^{s_0}\cdot \xi^f = \xi^{s_0}|_f \cdot \xi^f + \sum_{f \lessdot g
= f\cdot(ab) } \langle \alpha_{(ab)}^\vee, \chi_0 \rangle\, \xi^g
$$
where $\chi_0$ is a weight of the affine root system satisfying
$\langle \alpha_i^\vee,\chi_0 \rangle = \delta_{i0}$. We see that
$$\langle \alpha_{(ab)}^\vee,
\chi_0 \rangle = \# \left( \{\ldots,-2n,-n,0,n,2n,\ldots\} \cap [a,b)\right).$$
Now suppose that $g \in \Bound(k,n)$. Since $i \leq g(i) \leq i +
n$, if $g\cdot (ab) \lessdot g$ then we must have $0 < b-a < n$. In
this case, the condition that $[a,b)$ intersects
$\{\ldots,-2n,-n,0,n,2n,\ldots\}$ is the same as $f \lessdot_0 g$,
and furthermore one has $\langle \alpha_{(ab)}^\vee, \chi_0 \rangle
=1$. This proves the Lemma.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Positroid classes and Schubert classes in affine flags}
For the subsequent discussion we work in the topological category.
Our ultimate aim is to calculate certain cohomology classes, and
changing from the algebraic to the topological category does not
alter the answers. We refer the reader to \cite{PS, Mag} for background material.
Let $U_n$ denote the group of unitary $n \times n$ matrices and let
$T_{\mathbb R} \simeq (S^1)^n$ denote the subgroup of diagonal matrices. We
write $LU_n$ for the space of polynomial loops into $U_n$, and
$\Omega U_n$ for the space of polynomial based loops into $U_n$. It
is known that $LU_n/T_{\mathbb R}$ is weakly homotopy equivalent to
$\widetilde{{\mathcal F} \ell}(n)$, and that $\Omega U_n \simeq LU_n/U_n$ is weakly homotopy
equivalent to the affine Grassmannian (see \cite{PS}).
The connected components of $\Omega U_n$ and $LU_n$ are indexed by $\mathbb Z$,
using the map $L\det: LU_n \to LU_1 = Map(S^1,U(1)) \sim \pi_1(U(1)) = \mathbb Z$.
We take as our basepoint of the $k$-component of $\Omega U_n$ the loop
$t \mapsto {\rm diag}(t,\ldots,t,1,\ldots,1)$, where there are $k$
$t$'s. Abusing notation, we write $t_{\omega_k} \in \Omega U_n$ for
this point, identifying the basepoint with a translation element.
The group $LU_n$ acts on $\Omega U_n$ by the formula
$$
(a \cdot b)(t) = a(t)b(t)a(t)^{-1}
$$
where $a(t) \in LU_n$ and $b(t) \in \Omega U_n$. The group $U_n$
embeds in $LU_n$ as the subgroup of constant loops. The action of
$LU_n$ on $\Omega U_n$ restricts to the conjugation
action of $U(n)$ on $U(n)$.
It then follows that the orbit of the basepoint under the action of $U_n$
\begin{equation}\label{E:orbit}
U_n \cdot t_{\omega_k} \simeq U_n/(U_k \times U_{n-k})
\end{equation}
is isomorphic to the Grassmannian $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$.
Thus we have a map $q: \mathrm{Gr}(k,n) \hookrightarrow \Omega U_n$. Let
$r: \Omega U_n \to LU_n/T$ be the map obtained by composing the
natural inclusion $\Omega U_n \hookrightarrow LU_n$ with the
projection $LU_n \twoheadrightarrow LU_n/T$. We let
$$
p := r \circ q: \mathrm{Gr}(k,n) \longrightarrow LU_n/T
$$
denote the composition of $q$ and $r$. All the maps are $T_{\mathbb R}$-equivariant,
so we obtain a ring homomorphism $p^*: H_T^*(\widetilde{{\mathcal F} \ell}(n)) \to H_T^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$.
\begin{lem}\label{L:fixedpoints}
Suppose $w \in S_{n,k}^{\mathrm{min}}$ and $I = \sigma(w)$, which we identify with a
$T$-fixed point of $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$.
Then $p(I) = t_{w\cdot \omega_k} T_{\mathbb R} \in LU_n / T_{\mathbb R}$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
It follows from the action of $S_n \leq U_n$ on $\Omega U_n$
that $q(I) = t_{w \cdot \omega_k} \in \Omega U_n$. But by definition
$r(t_{w \cdot \omega_k}) = t_{w \cdot \omega_k} \in LU_n$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{L:pointclass}\
\begin{enumerate}
\item Suppose $w \in S_{n,k}^{\mathrm{min}}$. Then $p^*(\xi^{t_{w \cdot \omega_k}}) =
[\sigma(w)]$.
\item $p^*(\xi^{s_0}) = X_\square$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We prove (1). Let $f = t_{w \cdot \omega_k}$. It is enough to
check that $\xi^f|_{t_{u \cdot \omega_k}} = [\pi(w)]|_{\sigma(u)}$ for
each $u \in S_{n,k}^{\mathrm{min}}$. We have $[\pi(w)]|_{\sigma(u)} = 0$ unless $u = w$. By
\cite[Proposition 4.24(a)]{KK}, $\xi^f|_g = 0$ unless $f \leq g$.
Since $f$ is maximal in $\Bound(k,n)$, it is enough to calculate
$$ \xi^{f}|_f = \prod_{\alpha \in f^{-1}(\Delta_-) \cap \Delta_+} \theta(\alpha).$$
Here $\Delta_+$ (resp. $\Delta_-$) are the positive (resp. negative)
roots of the root system of $\tilde S_n$, and $\theta(\alpha) \in
H_T^*(\mathrm{pt}) = \mathbb Z[y_1,y_2,\ldots,y_n]$ denotes the image of $\alpha$
under the linear map defined by
$$
\theta(\alpha_i) = \begin{cases} y_i - y_{i+1} & \mbox{for $i = 1
,2, \ldots, n-1$,}
\\
y_n - y_1 & \mbox{for $i = 0$.}
\end{cases}
$$
Applying $\theta$ corresponds to specializing
from $H_{T \times S^1}^*(\widetilde{{\mathcal F} \ell}(n))$ to $H_T^*(\widetilde{{\mathcal F} \ell}(n))$.
With this terminology, $\alpha_{(ab)} \in f^{-1}(\Delta_-)$ if and
only if $f(a) > f(b)$. We have $\theta(\alpha_{(ab)}) = y_a - y_b$,
where the indices are taken modulo $n$. Thus
$$
\xi^{f}|_f = \prod_{i \in \sigma(w) \; \text{and} \; j \in [n]
\backslash \sigma(w)} (y_i - y_j)
$$
which is easily seen to agree with $[\pi(w)]|_{\sigma(w)}$.
Now we prove (2). The class $p^*(\xi^{s_0}) \in H_T^*(G/P)$ is
of degree 2. So by \cite[Lemma 1]{KT}, it is enough to show that it vanishes when
restricted to the identity basepoint, and equals $X_\square|_{s_k} = y_k - y_{k+1}$ when restricted to $s_k$. We know that
$$
\xi^{s_0}|_{\rm id} = 0 \qquad \text{and} \qquad \xi^{s_0}|_{s_0} = y_k - y_{k+1}
$$
since $\rm id < s_0$, and the inversions of $s_0^{-1}$ are exactly $\{\alpha_k\}$. (Here $\rm id$ denotes $[\cdots k+1,k+2,\ldots,k+n \cdots]$.)
But we have that $t_{\omega_k}$ is in the same (right) $S_n$-coset as $\rm id$ and $t_{s_k \cdot \omega_k}$ is in the same $S_n$-coset as $s_0$. Since
$\xi^{s_0}$ is a Grassmannian class, it follows that \cite{KK} $\xi^{s_0}|_{\rm id} = \xi^{s_0}|_{t_{\omega_k}}$ and $\xi^{s_0}|_{s_0} = \xi^{ s_0}|_{t_{s_k\cdot \omega_k}}$. Applying Lemma \ref{L:fixedpoints}, we see that $p^*(\xi^{s_0})$ has the desired properties.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{T:posaffineflags}
For each $f \in \tilde S_n^k$, we have in $H_T^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$,
\begin{align*}
p^*(\xi^f) = \begin{cases} [\Pi_f] &\mbox{if $f \in \Bound(k,n)$,} \\
0 &\mbox{otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\end{align*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $f \notin \Bound(k,n)$. Then by \cite[Proposition
4.24(a)]{KK}, $\xi^f|_g = 0$ unless $f \leq g$, so that $\xi^f|_g =
0$ for $g \in \Bound(k,n)$ (using Lemma \ref{L:orderideal}). It
follows that $p^*(\xi^f)$ vanishes at each $T$-fixed point of
$\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$, and so it is the zero class.
We shall show that the collection of classes $\{p^*(\xi^f) \mid f
\in \Bound(k,n)\}$ satisfies the conditions of Lemma
\ref{L:recursive}. (1) is clear. (3) follows from Lemma
\ref{L:pointclass}(1). We check (2). The map $p^*$ is a ring
homomorphism, so the formula in Lemma \ref{L:affinechev} holds for
the classes $p^*(\xi^f)$ as well. Suppose $f \lessdot g \in
\Bound(k,n)$ and $f = f_{u,w}$ and $g = f_{u',w'}$. As in the proof
of Theorem \ref{T:pairsboundedposet}, we may assume that either (1)
$u' = u$ and $w' \lessdot w$, or (2) $u' \gtrdot u$ and $w' = w$. If
$f \lessdot_0 g$, then writing $f_{u,w} = t_{u \cdot \omega_k}
uw^{-1}$ and recalling that right multiplication by $uw^{-1}$ acts
on the positions, we see that we must have $u \cdot \omega_k \neq u'
\cdot \omega_k$. This implies that we are in Case (2), and that $u'
\gtrdot_k u$. Conversely, if $w' = w$ and $u' \gtrdot_k u$ then we
must have $f \lessdot_0 g$. Comparing Lemma \ref{L:affinechev} and
Proposition \ref{P:monk}, and using Lemma \ref{L:pointclass}(2), we
see that we may apply Lemma \ref{L:recursive} to the classes
$\{p^*(\xi^f) \mid f \in \Bound(k,n)\}$.
Thus $p^*(\xi^f) = [\Pi_f]$ for every $f \in \Bound(k,n)$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Affine Stanley symmetric functions}
Let $\Sym$ denote the ring of symmetric functions over $\mathbb Z$. For
each $f \in \tilde S_n^0$, a symmetric function $\tilde F_f \in \Sym$, called
the \emph{affine Stanley symmetric function} is defined in
\cite{Lam1}. This definition extends to all $f \in \tilde S_n$ via the
isomorphisms $\tilde S_n^k \simeq \tilde S_n^0$.
We will denote the simple reflections of the Coxeter group $\tilde S_n^0$
by $s_0,s_1,\ldots,s_{n-1}$, where the indices are taken modulo $n$.
Let $w \in \tilde S_n^0$. We say that $w$ is \defn{cyclically decreasing}
if there exists a reduced expression $s_{i_1} s_{i_2} \cdots s_{i_\ell}$
for $w$ such that (a) no simple reflection is repeated, and (b) if
$s_i$ and $s_{i+1}$ both occur, then $s_{i+1}$ precedes $s_i$. Then
the \defn{affine Stanley symmetric function} $\tilde F_f$ is defined by letting
the coefficient of $x_1^{a_1} x_2^{a_2} \cdots x_r^{a_r}$ in
$\tilde F_f(x_1,x_2,\ldots)$ to be equal to the number of factorizations
$w = w^{(1)} w^{(2)} \cdots w^{(r)}$,
where each $w^{(i)}$ is cyclically decreasing, $\ell(w^{(i)}) = a_i$,
and $\ell(w) = \ell(w^{(1)}) + \ell(w^{(2)}) + \cdots + \ell(w^{(r)})$.
For example, consider $k = 2$, $n = 4$ and $f = [5,2,7,4]$.
The corresponding element of $\tilde S_n^0$ is $f_0 = [3,0,5,2]$; the reduced words for $f_0$ are $s_1 s_3 s_0 s_2$, $s_1 s_3 s_2 s_0$, $s_3 s_1 s_0 s_2$ and $s_3 s_1 s_2 s_0$. So the coefficient of $x_1 x_2 x_3 x_4$ in $\tilde F_f$ is $4$, corresponding to these $4$ factorizations. Similar computations yield that $\tilde F_f = 4 m_{1111} + 2 m_{211} + m_{22} = s_{22} + s_{211} - s_{1111}$ where the $m$'s are the monomial symmetric functions and the $s$'s are the Schur functions. Note that affine Stanley symmetric functions are not necessarily Schur positive!
The ordinary cohomology $H^*(\Omega SU_n)$ can be identified with a
quotient of the ring of symmetric functions:
$$
H^*(\Omega SU_n) \simeq \Sym/\langle m_\lambda \mid \lambda_1 > n
\rangle,
$$
where $m_\lambda$ denotes the monomial symmetric function labeled by
$\lambda$. We refer to \cite{EC2} for general facts concerning
symmetric functions, and to \cite{Lam2} for more about $H^*(\Omega SU_n)$.
Let $s_\lambda \in \Sym$ denote the Schur functions, labeled by
partitions. As each component of $\Omega U_n$ is homeomorphic to
$\Omega SU_n$, the inclusion $q: \mathrm{Gr}(k,n) \rightarrow \Omega U_n$
(defined after \eqref{E:orbit}) induces a map $\tilde \psi:
H^*(\Omega SU_n) \rightarrow H^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$. Let $\psi: \Sym \to
H^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$ denote the composition of the quotient map $\Sym
\twoheadrightarrow H^*(\Omega SU_n)$ with $\tilde \psi: H^*(\Omega
SU_n)\rightarrow H^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$.
For a partition $\lambda=(\lambda_1, \lambda_2, \ldots, \lambda_k)$
with $\lambda_1 \leq n-k$,
let $\sigma(\lambda)$
be $\{ \lambda_k+1, \lambda_{k-1}+2, \ldots, \lambda_1+k \}$.
This is a bijection from partitions with at most $k$ parts and largest
part at most $n-k$ to $\binom{[n]}{k}$. We denote the set of such
partitions by $\Par(k,n)$.
\begin{lem}
The map $\psi: \Sym \to H^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$ is the natural quotient map
defined by
$$
\psi(s_\lambda) = \begin{cases} [X_{\sigma(\lambda)}]_0 & \mbox{$\lambda \in
\Par(k,n)$,} \\ 0 & \mbox{otherwise.} \end{cases}
$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The copy of $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ inside $\Omega U_n$ is the union of the
$\binom{n}{k}$ Schubert varieties labeled by the translation
elements $\{t_{w\cdot \omega_k} \mid w \in S_{n,k}^{\mathrm{min}}\}$. It follows that
the map $\tilde \psi: H^*(\Omega SU_n) \to H^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$ sends
Schubert classes to Schubert classes.
It is well known that $H^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$ is isomorphic to the quotient
ring of $\Sym$ as stated in the Lemma. To check that the quotient
map agrees with $\psi$, it suffices to check that they agree on the
homogeneous symmetric functions $h_i \in \Sym$, which generate
$\Sym$. In \cite[Theorem 7.1]{Lam2} it is shown that the Schubert
classes of $H^*(\Omega SU_n)$ are the ``affine Schur functions'',
denoted $\tilde F_\lambda$. When $\lambda$ is a single row, we have
$\tilde F_{(r)} = h_r \in \Sym/\langle m_\lambda \mid \lambda_1 > n
\rangle$. Furthermore, the finite-dimensional Schubert variety in
$\Omega U_n$ with dual Schubert class $\tilde F_{(r)}$ lies in $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)
\subset \Omega U_n$ exactly when $r \leq n-k$. It follows that
$\psi(h_r) = [X_{(r)}]_0 \in H^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$ for $r \leq n-k$, and
$\psi(h_r) = 0$ for $r \geq n -k$. Thus $\psi$ is the stated map.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thm:affineStanley}] Let $\xi^f_0 \in H^*(\widetilde{{\mathcal F} \ell}(n))$ denote the non-equivariant Schubert
classes. It is shown\footnote{%
The setup in \cite{Lam2} involves $\Omega SU_n$, but each
component of $\Omega U_n$ is isomorphic to $\Omega SU_n$ so the
results easily generalize.}
in \cite[Remark 8.6]{Lam2} that we have $r^*(\xi^f_0) = \tilde F_f \in
H^*(\Omega SU_n)$, where we identify $\tilde F_f \in \Sym$ with its image
in $H^*(\Omega SU_n) = \Sym/\langle m_\lambda \mid \lambda_1 > n \rangle$.
Thus we calculate using the non-equivariant version of Theorem
\ref{T:posaffineflags}
\begin{align*}
[\Pi_f]_0 = p^*(\xi^f_0) = q^* r^*(\xi^f_0) = \psi(\tilde F_f).
\end{align*}
\vskip -.3in
\end{proof}
Recall our previous example where $k=2$, $n=4$ and $f=[5274]$,
with siteswap $4040$. This positroid variety is a point.
The affine Stanley function $\tilde F_f$ was $s_{22} + s_{211} -
s_{1111}$, so $\psi(\tilde F_f) = \psi(s_{22})$, the class of a point.
\begin{example}
Stanley invented Stanley symmetric functions in order to prove that the number of reduced words for the long word $w_0$ in $S_m$ was equal to the number of standard Young tableaux of shape $(m-1, m-2,\ldots,2,1)$.
He showed that $F_{w_0} = s_{(m-1) (m-2) \cdots 21}$, so the number of reduced words for $w_0$ is the coefficient of the monomial $m_{1 1 \cdots 1}$ in the Schur polynomial $s_{(m-1) (m-2) \cdots 21}$, as required.
See~\cite{StanSym} for more background.
We show how to interpret this result using positroid varieties.
Let $(k,n) = (m,2m)$.
The Stanley symmetric function $F_{w_0}$ is the affine Stanley associated to the affine permutation
$$v: i \mapsto \begin{cases} i+n & 1 \leq i\leq n \\ w_0(i-n) + 2n & n+1 \leq i \leq 2n \end{cases}$$
As discussed in section~\ref{sec:examples}, the positroid variety $\Pi_v$ is a graph matrix Schubert variety, and can be described as the Zariski closure, within $G(m,2m)$, of $m$-planes that can be represented in the form
$$\mathrm{RowSpan} \begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \ast \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \ast & \ast \\
0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & \ast & \ast & \ast \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 & \ast & \ast & \ast & \ast \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & \ast & \ast & \ast & \ast & \ast \\ \end{pmatrix}$$
(The example shown is for $m=5$.)
Reordering columns turns $\Pi_v$ into the Zariski closure of those $m$-planes that can be represented in the form
$$\mathrm{RowSpan} \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & \ast \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & \ast & 0 & \ast \\
0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 1 & \ast & 0 & \ast & 0 & \ast \\
0 & 0 & 1 & \ast & 0 & \ast & 0 & \ast & 0 & \ast \\
1 & \ast & 0 & \ast & 0 & \ast & 0 & \ast & 0 & \ast \\
\end{pmatrix}$$
This is the Schubert variety $X_{1357\cdots (2m-1)}$, which is associated to the partition $(m-1) (m-2) \cdots 321$.
Reordering columns acts trivially in $H^{\bullet}(G(k,n))$, so the cohomology classes of $\Pi_v$ and $X_{135\cdots (2m-1)}$ are the same, and they thus correspond to the same symmetric function.
This shows that $F_{w_0} = s_{(m-1) (m-2) \cdots 21}$.
\end{example}
\subsection{The $K$- and $K_T$-classes of a positroid variety}
We conjecture that the $K$-class of a positroid variety is given by
the affine stable Grothendieck polynomials defined in \cite{Lam1}.
These symmetric functions were shown in \cite{LSS} to have the same
relationship with the affine flag manifold as affine Stanley
symmetric functions, with $K$-theory replacing cohomology.
\begin{conjecture}
The $K$-theory class of the structure sheaf of a positroid variety
$\Pi_f$ is given by the image of the affine stable Grothendieck
polynomial $\tilde{G}_f$, when $K^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$ is identified with a
ring of symmetric functions as in \cite{Buc}.
\end{conjecture}
This conjecture would follow from suitable strengthenings of
Proposition \ref{P:monk}, Lemma \ref{L:recursive}, and
Lemma \ref{L:affinechev}.
We have the necessary characterization of the $K_T$ positroid classes:
Corollary \ref{C:hypsection} and the main result of \cite{AKMobius}
give the $K_T$-analogue of Proposition \ref{P:monk}.
The degree-based argument used in Lemma \ref{L:recursive} must be
modified, in the absence of a grading on $K$-theory, to comparing
pushforwards to a point, and it is easy to show using
\cite[Theorem~4.5]{KLS} that the pushforward of a positroid class is $1$.
What is currently missing are the two corresponding results on
affine stable Grothendieck polynomials.
While the class associated to an algebraic subvariety of a
Grassmannian is always a positive combination of Schubert classes,
this is not visible from Theorem \ref{thm:affineStanley}, as affine
Stanley functions are not in general positive combinations of Schur
functions $s_\lambda$.
We can give a much stronger positivity result on positroid classes:
\begin{thm}\label{thm:positiveKTclass}
Let $X$ be a positroid variety, and $[\O_X] \in K_T(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$ the
class of its structure sheaf in equivariant $K$-theory.
Then in the expansion $[\O_X] = \sum_\lambda a_\lambda [\O_\lambda]$
into classes of Schubert varieties, the coefficient $a_\lambda \in K_T(pt)$
lies in
$(-1)^{|\lambda| - \dim X} \naturals\left[ \{e^{-\alpha_i}-1\} \right]$,
where the $\{\alpha_i\}$ are the simple roots of $GL(n)$.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
This is just the statement of \cite[Corollary 5.1]{AGM},
which applies to any $T$-invariant subvariety $X$ of a flag manifold
such that $X$ has rational singularities (as positroid varieties do,
\cite[Corollary 4.8]{KLS}).
\end{proof}
After our first version of this preprint was circulated,
a very direct geometric proof of Theorem \ref{T:posaffineflags} was given
in \cite{Snider}, which also proves the corresponding statement
in equivariant $K$-theory.
Snider identifies each affine patch on $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ with an
opposite Bruhat cell in the affine flag manifold, $T$-equivariantly,
in a way that takes the positroid stratification to the Bruhat decomposition,
thereby corresponding the $K_T$-classes.
\section{Quantum cohomology, toric Schur functions, and positroids}\label{sec:QH}
\def\rm dist{\rm dist}
\def\mathrm{codim}{\mathrm{codim}}
\subsection{Moduli spaces of stable rational maps to the Grassmannian}
For background material on stable maps we refer the reader to~\cite{FW}. Let $I, J \in \binom{[n]}{k}$, which we assume to be fixed throughout this section. We now investigate the variety $S(I,J,d)$ consisting of points lying on
a stable rational map of degree $d$, intersecting $X_J \subset \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ and $X^I \subset \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$. Let $M_{0,3}(d)$ denote the moduli space of stable rational maps to $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ with 3 marked points and degree $d$.
Write $p_1,p_2,p_3: M_{0,3}(d) \to \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ for the evaluations at the three marked points.
Denote by $E(I,J,d)$ the subset
$$
E(I,J,d) = p_1^{-1}(X_J) \cap p_2^{-1}(X^I) \subset M_{0,3}(d).
$$
It is known \cite{FW} that $E(I,J,d)$ is reduced and locally
irreducible, with all components of dimension $\dim(X_J) + \dim(X^I)
+ dn - k(n-k)$. Furthermore, the pushforward $(p_3)_*([E(I,J,d)])
\in H^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$ is a generating function for three-point, genus
zero, Gromov-Witten invariants, in the sense that
\begin{equation}\label{E:GW}
(p_3)_*([E]) \cdot \sigma = \langle [X_J], [X^I], \sigma \rangle_d
\end{equation}
for any class $\sigma \in H^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$. We now define $S(I,J,d) :=
p_3(E(I,J,d))$. Let us say that \defn{there is a non-zero quantum problem
for $(I,J,d)$} if $\langle [X_J], [X^I], \sigma \rangle_d$ is
non-zero for some $\sigma \in H^*(\mathrm{Gr}(k,n))$. It follows from
\eqref{E:GW} that $S(I,J,d)$ and $E(I,J,d)$ have the same dimension
whenever there is a non-zero quantum problem for $(I,J,d)$, namely,
\begin{equation}\label{E:dimS}
\dim(S(I,J,d)) = \dim(E(I,J,d)) = \dim(X_J) + \dim(X^I) + dn - k(n-k).
\end{equation}
The torus $T$ acts on $M_{0,3}(d)$ and, since $X_J$ and $X^I$ are
$T$-invariant, the space $E(I,J,d)$ also has a $T$-action. The
torus fixed-points of $E(I,J,d)$ consist of maps $f: C \to
\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$, where $C$ is a tree of projective lines, such that
$f_*(C)$ is a union of $T$-invariant curves in $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ whose
marked points are $T$-fixed points, satisfying certain stability
conditions. Since $p_3$ is $T$-equivariant, we have $S(I,J,d)^T =
p_3(E(I,J,d)^T)$. The $T$-invariant curves in $\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ connect
pairs of $T$-fixed points labeled by $I, J \in \binom{[n]}{k}$
satisfying $|I \cap J| = k- 1$. We'll write $T(I,J,d)$ for
$S(I,J,d)^T$, considered as a subset of $\binom{[n]}{k}$.
We now survey the rest of this section. In \S \ref{sec:QComb},
we use the ideas of the previous paragraph to give an explicit
combinatorial description of $T(I,J,d)$. We then define an explicit
affine permutation $f$ associated to $(I,J,d)$ in \eqref{E:fIJd} below. We say that
$(I,J,d)$ is \defn{valid} if for $i \in I$, we have $i+k \leq f(I,J,d)(i) \leq i+n$ and, for $m \in [n] \setminus I$, we have $m \leq f(I,J,d)(m) \leq m+k$. In particular, $(I,J,d)$ is valid implies $f(I,J,d)$ is bounded. The main result of this
section is:
\begin{theorem} \label{thrm:QuantumPositroid}
When $(I,J,d)$ is valid, the image $p_3(E(I,J,d))$ is $\Pi_f$.
Moreover, there is one component $F_0$ of $E(I,J,d)$ for which $p_3
: F_0 \to \Pi_f$ is birational; on any other component $F$ of
$E(I,J,d)$, we have $\dim p_3(F) < \dim F$.
When $(I,J,d)$ is not valid, then $\dim p_3(F) < \dim F$ for every
component $F$ of $E(I,J,d)$. Thus, $(I,J,d)$ is valid if and only if
there is a non-zero quantum problem for $(I,J,d)$.
\end{theorem}
Our key combinatorial result is
\begin{prop} \label{P:IJd}
Let $(I,J,d)$ be valid. Then $T(I,J,d)$ is the positroid corresponding to the bounded affine permutation $f(I,J,d)$.
\end{prop}
We should point out that we use previously known formulas for
Gromov-Witten invariants to establish part of
Theorem~\ref{thrm:QuantumPositroid}. Namely, when $f$ is valid, we
can establish directly that $p_3(E(I,J,d)) \subseteq \Pi_f$. To
prove that $(p_3)_*([E]) = [\Pi_f]$, we combine previous work of
Postnikov with Theorem \ref{thm:affineStanley}.
It was shown in~\cite{Lam1} that $\psi(\tilde F_f)$ is Postnikov's ``toric
Schur function''. Postnikov showed that this toric Schur function
computed Gromov-Witten invariants but did not provide a subvariety of
$\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ representing his class; Theorem~\ref{thrm:QuantumPositroid}
can thus be viewed as a geometric explanation for toric Schur functions.
\subsection{Formulas for $T(I,J,d)$ and $f(I,J,d)$} \label{sec:QComb}
We proceed to describe $S(I,J,d)^T$ explicitly.
If $I \in \binom{[n]}{k}$, then we let $A(I)$ (resp. $B(I)$) denote
the upper (resp. lower) order ideals generated by $I$. Thus $A(J) =
\{K \in \binom{[n]}{k} \mid K \geq J\}$ is the set of $T$-fixed points
lying in $X_J$ and $B(I)$ is the set of $T$-fixed points lying in $X^I$.
Define the undirected \defn{Johnson graph} $G_{k,n}$ with vertex
set $\binom{[n]}{k}$, and edges $I \leftrightarrow J$ if $|I \cap J|
= k -1$. The distance function $\rm dist(I,J)$ in $G_{k,n}$ is given
by $\rm dist(I,J) = k - |I \cap J|$. Then one has
$$
S(I,J,d)^T = T(I,J,d)
:= \left\{K \in \binom{[n]}{k} \mid \rm dist(K,B(I)) + \rm dist(K,A(J))\leq d\right\}.
$$
For a pair $(I,J)$, it is shown in \cite{FW} the minimal $d$ such
that $T(I,J,d)$ is non-empty (or equivalently, that there is a path
of length $d$ from $I$ to $J$ in $G_{k,n}$), is equal to the minimal
$d$ such that a non-zero quantum problem for $(I,J,d)$ exists.
Denote by $M = \{m_1 < m_2 < \cdots < m_{n-k}\}$ the complement of $I$ in $[n]$ and similarly $L = \{l_1 < l_2 < \cdots < l_{n-k} \}$ the complement of $J$.
We define a bi-infinite sequence $\tilde{i}$ such that $\tilde{i}_a=i_a$ for $1 \leq a \leq k$ and $\tilde{i}_{a+k} = \tilde{i}_a+n$.
Similarly, we extend $J$, $M$ and $L$ to bi-infinite sequences $\tilde{j}$, $\tilde{m}$ and $\tilde{l}$, such that $\tilde{j}_{a+k} = \tilde{j}_a+n$, $\tilde{m}_{a+n-k} = \tilde{m}_a+n$ and $\tilde{l}_{a+n-k} = \tilde{l}_a+n$.
Define an affine permutation $f(I,J,D)$ by
\begin{equation}\label{E:fIJd}
f(I,J,d)(\tilde{i}_r) = \tilde{j}_{r+k-d} \quad f(I,J,d)(\tilde{m}_r) = \tilde{l}_{r+d}
\end{equation}
We say that $(I,J,d)$ is \defn{valid} if, for $i \in I$, we have $i+k \leq f(I,J,d)(i) \leq i+n$ and, for $m \in M$, we have $m \leq f(I,J,d)(m) \leq m+k$.
In particular, if $(I,J,d)$ is valid, then $f(I,J,d)$ is bounded.
For example, let $k =2$ and $n = 6$. Pick $I = \{1,4\}$, $J =
\{2,4\}$, $d = 1$. Then $M = \{2,3,5,6\}$ and $L = \{1,3,5,6\}$.
The equation $f(\tilde{i}_r) = \tilde{j}_{r+k-d}$ gives $f(1) = 4$ and $f(4) = 8$.
The equation $f(\tilde{m}_r) =\tilde{l}_{r+d}$ gives $f(2) = 3$, $f(3) = 5$, $f(5) =
6$ and $f(6) = 7$. Thus $f(I,J,d) = [\cdots 435867 \cdots]$.
Our next task is to prove proposition~\ref{P:IJd}; we shorten $f(I,J,d)$ to $f$.
Our approach is to first find the cyclic rank matrix for $f$.
Let $\tilde{I}$ and $\tilde{J}$ be the preimages of $I$ and $J$ under the projections $\mathbb{Z} \to \mathbb{Z}/n\mathbb{Z}$.
For integers $a \leq b$, we adopt the shorthand $I[a,b]$ for $\# \left( \tilde{I} \cap [a,b] \right)$ and similar notations $J[a,b)$ etcetera.
For $1 \leq a \leq b \leq a+n$, define
\begin{equation}
r_{ab} : = \min \left( b-a+1, d+J[1,b] - I[1,a), k \right) \label{3min}
\end{equation}
and define $r_{ab}$ for all $r_{ab}$ such that $r_{a+n, b+n} = r_{ab}$; by $r_{ab} = b-a+1$ for $a>b$ and by $r_{ab} = k$ for $a+n < b$.
\begin{lem}\label{L:valid}
If $(I,J,d)$ is valid, then the matrix $r_{ab}$ is the cyclic rank matrix for $f$.
\end{lem}
It will be convenient to introduce the functions $\alpha_1(a,b) = b-a+1$, $\alpha_2(a,b) = d+J[1,b] - I[1,a)$ and $\alpha_3(a,b) = k$, so that $r_{ab} = \min(\alpha_1(a,b), \alpha_2(a,b), \alpha_3(a,b))$.
\begin{proof}
We first check that $r_{ab}$ is a cyclic rank matrix, meaning that it obeys the conditions in Corollary~\ref{c:boundmanyfollowing}.
Conditions $(C1')$, $(C2')$ and $(C5)$ hold by definition.
For $r=1$, $2$ or $3$, it is easy to see that, $\alpha_r(a,b) - \alpha_r(a+1,b)$ and $\alpha_r(a,b+1) - \alpha_r(a,b)$ are clearly either $0$ or $1$, and are integer valued.
So $r_{ab} - r_{(a+1)b)}$ and $r_{ab} - r_{a(b-1)}$ are either $0$ or $1$.
This verifies $(C3)$.
Similarly, for any $(a,b)$ and $r=1$, $2$ or $3$, the $2 \times 2$ matrix $\left( \begin{smallmatrix} \alpha_r(a,b-1) & \alpha_r(a,b) \\ \alpha_r(a+1 ,b-1) & \alpha_r(a+1,b) \end{smallmatrix} \right)$ is of one of the forms
$$\begin{pmatrix} s & s \\ s & s \end{pmatrix} \quad \begin{pmatrix} s & s+1 \\ s & s+1 \end{pmatrix} \quad \begin{pmatrix} s+1 & s+1 \\ s & s \end{pmatrix} \quad \begin{pmatrix} s+1 & s+2 \\ s & s+1 \end{pmatrix}$$
for some integer $s$. Looking at what happens when we take the minimum of three matrices of this form (where we never take both the two middle matrices), we see that we always get one of the above forms, or $\left( \begin{smallmatrix} s+1 & s+1 \\ s & s+1 \end{smallmatrix} \right)$. In particular, condition $(C4)$ holds. We have now shown that $r_{ab}$ is a cyclic rank matrix. Let $g$ be the associated permutation.
We now show that $g=f$. Let $(a,b) = (i_r, \tilde{j}_{r+k-d})$ for some $r$ between $1$ and $k$.
Then $\# \left( \tilde{I} \cap [1,a) \right) = r-1$ and $\# \left( \tilde{J} \cap [1,b] \right) = r+k-d$, so $\alpha_2(a,b) = k+1$. Similar arguments let us compute
$$\begin{pmatrix} \alpha_2(a,b-1) & \alpha_2(a,b) \\ \alpha_2(a+1 ,b-1) & \alpha_2(a+1,b) \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} k & k+1 \\ k-1 & k \end{pmatrix}.$$
The assumption that $i_r+k \leq f(I,J,d)(i_r) = \tilde{j}_{r+k-d}$ translates into $b-a \geq k$, so the $\alpha_1$ term in~(\ref{3min}) has no effect and we deduce that
$$\begin{pmatrix} r_{a,b-1} & r_{a,b} \\ r_{a+1 ,b-1} & r_{a+1,b} \end{pmatrix} = \begin{pmatrix} k & k \\ k-1 & k \end{pmatrix}.$$
By the last sentence of Corollary~\ref{c:manyfollowing}, this means that $g(a)=b$.
Similarly, if $(a,b) = (m_r, \tilde{l}_{r+d})$ we can show that $g(a)=b$.
So, for every $a \in \mathbb{Z}$, we have shown that $g(a)=f(a)$, as desired.
\end{proof}
We now begin proving the lemmas which will let us prove Proposition \ref{P:IJd}.
\begin{lem}\label{L:dist}
We have $\rm dist(K,B(I)) \leq s$ if and only if for all $r \in [n]$,
one has $I[1,r)-K[1,r) \leq s$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $\rm dist(K,B(I)) \leq s$. Then $\rm dist(K,L) \leq s$ for some $L \leq I$. Thus for each $r$, we have $I[1,r)-K[1,r) \leq L[1,r) - K[1,r) \leq s$.
Now suppose $I[1,r)-K[1,r) \leq s$ for each $r$. Construct $L \leq I$ recursively, starting with $L = \emptyset$. Assume $L \cap [1,r)$ is known. If $r \in K$, place $r$ in $L$. Otherwise, if $r \notin K$, place $r$ in $L$ only if $r \in I$ and $L[1,r) = I[1,r)$. Repeat until we have constructed a $k$-element subset $L$ which clearly satisfies $L \leq I$. The elements in $L \setminus K$ are all in $I$.
Let $\ell$ be the largest element in $L \setminus K$. Then $I[1,\ell]$ differs from $K[1,\ell]$ by $|L \setminus K|$, and so $|L \setminus K| \leq s$. Thus $\rm dist(K,L) \leq s$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lem}\label{L:TIJd}
We have $K \in T(I,J,d)$ if and only if
\begin{equation}\label{E:nomaxes}
I[1,r)-K[1,r) + K[1,s)-J[1,s) \leq d
\end{equation}
for all $1 \leq r,s, \leq n+1$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{L:dist}, we have $K \in T(I,J,d)$ if and only if
\begin{equation}\label{E:maxes}
\max(I[1,r)-K[1,r),0) + \max(K[1,s)-J[1,s),0) \leq d
\end{equation}
for all $1 \leq r,s, \leq n+1$. Equation \eqref{E:maxes} certainly implies the stated condition. Conversely, if \eqref{E:nomaxes} holds, but \eqref{E:maxes} fails, then we must have $I[1,r) - K[1,r) > d$ or $K[1,s) - J[1,s) > d$ for some $r$, $s$. In the first case setting $s = 1$ in \eqref{E:nomaxes} gives a contradiction. In the second case, setting $r = 1$ gives a contradiction.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{P:IJd}]
First, suppose that $K \in T(I,J,d)$.
By Lemma \ref{L:valid}, $K$ is in the positroid corresponding to $f(I,J,d)$ if and only if for each cyclic interval $[a,b] \subset [n]$ we have
$$
K[a,b] \leq \min( b-a+1, d+J[1,b]-I[1,a), k).
$$
Since $\# [a,b] = b-a+1$ and $\#(K)=k$, we always have $K[a,b] \leq b-a+1$ and $K[a,b] \leq k$, so we must check that $K[a,b] \leq d+J[1,b] - I[1,a)$.
First, suppose that $1 \leq a \leq b \leq n$. Then $K[a,b] = K[1,b] - K[1,a)$ so the required equation is
$$K[1,b] - K[1,a) \leq d+J[1,b] - I[1,a).$$
This is easily equivalent to~(\ref{E:nomaxes}) for $(r,s) = (a,b)$.
Now, suppose that $a \leq n < b$. Then $K[a,b] := K[1,b] - K[1,a)$ and we again want to show that $K[1,b] - K[1,a) \leq d+J[1,b] - I[1,a)$.
Let $b=b'+n$. Then $K[1,b] = K[1,b'] + n$ and $J[1,b] = J[1,b']+n$. So it is equivalent to show
$$K[1,b'] - K[1,a) \leq d+J[1,b'] - I[1,a)$$
which is~(\ref{E:nomaxes}) for $(r,s) = (a,b')$.
The reverse implication is similar.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Toric shapes and toric Schur functions}\label{ssec:toric}
In \cite{PosQH}, Postnikov introduced a family of symmetric
polynomials, called {\it toric Schur polynomials}, and showed that the
expansion coefficients of these symmetric functions in terms of Schur
polynomials gave the three-point, genus zero, Gromov-Witten invariants
of the Grassmannian. In \cite{Lam1}, it was shown that toric Schur
functions were special cases of affine Stanley symmetric functions.
We now put these results in the context of Theorem \ref{thm:affineStanley}
and equation \eqref{E:GW}: the subvariety $S(I,J,d) \subset \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ is a
positroid variety whose cohomology class is a toric Schur polynomial.
We review the notion of a toric shape and refer the reader to \cite{PosQH}
for the notion of a toric Schur function. A \defn{cylindric shape} is
a connected, row and column convex subset of $\mathbb Z^2$ which is invariant
under the translation $(x,y) \mapsto (x+n-k,y-k)$. Also, every row or
column of a cylindric shape must be finite, and in addition the
``border'' of a cylindric shape is an infinite path which has steps
going north and east only (when read from the southwest).
A \defn{toric shape} is a cylindric shape such that every row has at
most $n-k$ boxes, and every column has at most $k$ boxes. For
example, the following is a toric shape for $k = 2$, $n = 5$:
$$
\tableau[sbY]{\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl&& \\
\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl&&& \\
\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl&\tf&\tf&\bl&\bl \\
\bl&\bl&\bl&\tf&\tf&\tf&\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl \\
\bl&\bl&&&\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl \\
&&&\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl&\bl
}
$$
where a fundamental domain for the action of the translation has
been highlighted. In \cite{PosQH}, Postnikov associated a toric
shape $\theta(I,J,d)$ to each triple $(I,J,d)$ for which a
non-trivial quantum problem could be posed involving the Schubert
varieties $X^I$ and $X_J$, and rational curves of degree $d$. The
steps of the upper border of $\theta$ is determined by $I$, the
lower border by $J$. The gap between the two borders is determined
by $d$. We do not give a precise description of Postnikov's
construction here as our notations differ somewhat from Postnikov's.
If $\theta$ is a cylindric shape, we can obtain an affine permutation as follows. First label the edges of the upper border of $\theta$ by integers, increasing from southwest to northeast. Now label the edges of the lower border of $\theta$ by integers, so that if $e$ and $e'$ are edges on the upper border and lower border respectively, and they lie on the same northwest-southeast diagonal, then $e'$ has a label which is $k$ bigger than that of $e$. One then defines $f(\theta)$ as follows: if $a \in \mathbb Z$ labels a vertical step of the upper border, then $f(a)$ is the label of the step of the lower border on the same row; if $a \in \mathbb Z$ labels a horizontal step, then $f(a)$ is the label of the step of the lower border on the same column. This determines $\theta(I,J,d)$ from $f(I,J,d)$ up to a translation: the equations \eqref{E:fIJd} say that the labels inside $I$ or $J$ are vertical steps, while labels in $M$ and $L$ are horizontal steps.
The condition that $(I,J,d)$ is valid translates to $\theta(I,J,d)$ being toric. In our language, Postnikov \cite[Lemma 5.2 and Theorem 5.3]{PosQH} shows that a non-trivial quantum problem exists for $(I,J,d)$ if and only if the toric shape $\theta(I,J,d)$ is well-defined. Thus:
\begin{lem}\label{L:qvalid}
A non-trivial quantum problem exists for $(I,J,d)$ if and only if $(I,J,d)$ is valid.
\end{lem}
\begin{lem}\label{L:boxes}
Suppose $(I,J,d)$ is valid. Then
$$
\ell(f(I,J,d)) = |\theta(I,J,d)| = \mathrm{codim}(X_J) + \mathrm{codim}(X^I) - dn.
$$
where $ |\theta(I,J,d)|$ is the number of boxes in a fundamental domain for $\theta(I,J,d)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The first equality follows from \cite{Lam1}, and can be explained simply as follows: each box in a fundamental domain for $\theta(I,J,d)$ corresponds to a simple generator in a reduced expression for $f(I,J,d)$. Indeed, the equations \eqref{E:fIJd} can be obtained by filling $\theta(I,J,d)$ with a wiring diagram, where each wire goes straight down (resp. across) from a horizontal (resp. vertical) step. The second equality follows from \cite{PosQH}. A simple proof is as follows: if we decrease $d$ by $1$, then the lower border of $d$ is shifted one step diagonally southeast, increasing $|\theta(I,J,d)|$ by $n$. When the upper and lower borders are far apart, then changing $\mathrm{codim}(X^I)$ or $\mathrm{codim}(X_J)$ by one also changes $|\theta(I,J,d)|$ by one. Finally, when $I = J$ and $ d= 0$, one checks that $|\theta(I,J,d)|$ is $k(n-k)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{thrm:QuantumPositroid}]
Suppose that $(I,J,d)$ is valid.
Consider any index $K \in \binom{[n]}{k} \setminus T(I,J,d)$. Then the Pl\"ucker coordinate $p_K$ is zero on $T(I,J,d)$, and hence on $S(I,J,d)$. By Corollary \ref{cor:pluckerdefined}, $\Pi_f$ is cut out by $\{p_K = 0 \mid K \notin T(I,J,d)\}$, so $S(I,J,d) \subseteq \Pi_f$.
By Lemma \ref{L:boxes}, \eqref{E:dimS} and Theorem \ref{thm:projectedRichardsons}, $S(I,J,d)$ and $\Pi_{f(I,J,d)}$ have the same dimension and $\Pi_f$ is irreducible. So $S(I,J,d)=\Pi_f$. Now, let $F_1$, $F_2$, \ldots, $F_r$ be the components of $E(I,J,d)$; let $c_1$, $c_2$, \ldots, $c_r$ be the degrees of the maps $p_3 : F_i \to S(I,J,d)$. Using again that $\Pi_f$ is irreducible, we know that $(p_3)_*(E(I,J,d)) = \left( \sum_{i=1}^r c_i \right) [\Pi_f]$. By the main result of~\cite{PosQH}, the left hand side of this equation is the toric Schur polynomial with shape~$\theta(I,J,d)$ and by \cite[Proposition 33]{Lam1}, this is the affine Stanley function $\psi(\tilde F_f)$. But by Theorem~\ref{thm:affineStanley}, the right hand side is $\left( \sum_{i=1}^r c_i \right) \psi(\tilde F_f)$. So $\sum_{i=1}^r c_i=1$. We deduce that $p_3$ is birational on one component of $S(I,J,d)$ and collapses every other component.
Finally, if $(I,J,d)$ is not valid, then there is no nonzero quantum product for $(I,J,d)$ by Lemma~\ref{L:qvalid}, so $p_3$ must collapse all components of $E(I,J,d)$ in this case.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Connection with two-step flag varieties}
Let $F \ell(k-d, k, k+d; n)$ and $F \ell(k-d, k+d; n)$
be the spaces of three-step and two-step flags of dimensions
$(k-d,k,k+d)$ and $(k-d,k+d)$ respectively. We have maps $q_1 :
F \ell(k-d, k, k+d; n) \to \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ and $q_2 : F \ell(k-d, k, k+d; n) \to
F \ell(k-d, k+d; n)$. For a subvariety $X \subset \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ we define, following \cite{BKT},
$$
X^{(d)} = q_2(q_1^{-1}(X)) \subset F \ell(k-d,k+d;n).
$$
Let us now consider the subvariety
$$
Y(I,J,d) = (X_J)^{(d)} \cap (X^I)^{(d)} \subset F \ell(k-d,k+d;n).
$$
Buch-Kresch-Tamvakis studied varieties similar to $Y(I,J,d)$, which
arise from intersections of three Schubert varieties, and showed in a
bijective manner that these intersections solved quantum problems.
Let us now consider the subvariety $q_1(q_2^{-1}(Y(I,J,d))) \subset
\mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$. The subvarieties $(X_J)^{(d)}, (X^I)^{(d)} \subset
F \ell(k-d,k+d;n)$ are Schubert (and opposite Schubert) subvarieties.
Thus $q_1(q_2^{-1}(Y(I,J,d))) \subset \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ is a positroid variety
by Theorem \ref{thm:projectedRichardsons}.
The following result can also be deduced directly from \cite{BM}.
\begin{prop}
Suppose $(I,J,d)$ is valid. Then $q_1(q_2^{-1}(Y(I,J,d))) = S(I,J,d)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let us first show that $S(I,J,d) \subset q_1(q_2^{-1}(Y(I,J,d)))$. Since $(I,J,d)$ is valid, we know that $\dim S(I,J,d)= \dim(X_J) + \dim(X^I) + dn - k(n-k) =:N$. Choose $K \in \binom{[n]}{d}$ such that $\mathrm{codim} \ X_K=N$ and $\langle [S(I,J,d)], [X_K] \rangle \neq 0$. Then, for a general flag $F_{\bullet}$, $S(I,J,d)$ intersects $X_K(F_{\bullet})$ at a finite set of points. Moreover, the set of all points that occur as such intersections is dense in $S(I,J,d)$. (If this set were contained in a subvariety of smaller dimension, then $X_{K}(F_{\bullet})$ would miss $S(I,J,d)$ for generic $F_{\bullet}$, contradicting our choice of $K$.)
So, for $V$ in a dense subset of $S(I,J,d)$, we know that $V$ also lies on some $X_K(F_\bullet)$ and we can impose furthermore that $F_\bullet$ is in general position with both $E_\bullet$ and $w_0 E_\bullet$. It follows from \cite[Theorem 1]{BKT} that there is a corresponding point $W \in Y(I,J,d)$ such that $V \in q_1(q_2^{-1}(W))$. Thus $S(I,J,d) \subset q_1(q_2^{-1}(Y(I,J,d)))$.
Conversely, let $W \in Y(I,J,d)$ be a generic point, and $Z =
q_1(q_2^{-1}(W)) \subset \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$. The space $Z$ is isomorphic to
$\mathrm{Gr}(d,2d)$. Pick a point $U \in Z \cap X_J$ and $V \in Z \cap
X^I$, and another generic point $T \in Z$. By \cite[Proposition
1]{BKT}, there is a morphism $f: \mathbb{P}^1 \to Z \subset \mathrm{Gr}(k,n)$ of
degree $d$ which passes through $U$, $V$, and $T$. It follows that
a generic point in $Z$ lies in $S(I,J,d)$. Thus
$q_1(q_2^{-1}(Y(I,J,d))) \subset S(I,J,d)$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{An example}
Let $k = 2$ and $n = 5$. We take $I = J = \{1, 4\}$ and $d = 1$.
The affine permutation $f(I,J,d)$ is $[\cdots 43567 \cdots]$, with
siteswap $31222$. The positroid $T(I,J,d)$ is $\{12, 13, 14,
15,24,25,34,35,45\}$ and the juggling states are ${\mathcal J}(f(I,J,d)) =
(12,13,12,12,12)$. If we pull back $Y(I,J,d)$ to $F \ell(n)$ we get
the Richardson variety $X_{12435}^{45132}$. (Following the
description given in \cite{BKT}, we obtained $12435$ by sorting the
entries of the Grassmannian permutation $14235$ in positions
$k-d+1,k-d+2,\ldots,k+d$ in increasing order. For $45132$, we first
applied $w_0$ to $J = \{1,4\}$ to get $\{2,5\}$. Then we did the
sorting, and left-multiplied by $w_0$ again.)
By \cite[Proposition 3.3]{KLS}, we have
$\pi(X_{12435}^{45132}) = \pi(X_{21543}^{54312})$. With $(u,w) =
(21543,54312)$, we have $f_{u,w} = [2,1,5,4,3]\cdot t_{(1,1,0,0,0)}
\cdot [4,5,3,2,1] = [4,3,5,6,7]$, agreeing with $f(I,J,d)$.
Alternatively, one can check that the $T$-fixed points inside
$X_{21543}^{54312}$, that is, the interval $[21543,54312]$, project
exactly to $T(I,J,d)$.
|
\section{Introduction}
The realization \cite{dolg,sievtak,taken} that there can exist
stable strongly localized excitations in perfect classical
anharmonic lattices has led to theoretical studies exploring a
variety of possibilities
\cite{Page,KisBick,SievPage,flach,LaiSi,KisBS,Schrod,KisSiev,Bishop}.
The frequency of such a localized vibration depends on its
amplitude and lies outside the phonon spectrum. Such excitations
are called intrinsic localized modes (ILMs) \cite{sievtak}, to
emphasize their similarity in appearance to defect impurity modes,
or called discrete breathers \cite{flach} or discrete solitons
\cite{Toda,christ} to make a connection to solitons in continuous
systems. Some experimental evidence for the existence of intrinsic
localized modes in 1-D lattices in microscopic and macroscopic
lattices has been demonstrated
\cite{Swanson,Schwartz,TrMaOr,Bind,Craig,Fleisch,MSato,Wrubel}.
It is to be expected that the appearance of an ILM would change
the local properties of the lattice including the local phonon
dynamics. This back reaction on the phonon spectrum should have
physical consequences since the ILM could induce local
modes outside the plane wave spectrum.
The presence of these additional resonances and their
dependence on the amplitude of the ILM should add some complexity
to the energy relaxation rate of the ILM to the phonon bath. In a different
direction, since an ILM can move through the lattice
it is expected that such trapped local modes would also move or, more likely,
tend to inhibit the translational motion of such localized energy.
In this communication we examine analytically the small amplitude
vibrations of a 1-D nonlinear chain with intersite coupling in
the presence of an ILM. The results show that an ILM with
sufficient nonlinear amplitude stabilizes the appearance of
linear local modes (LLMs) above the top of the plane wave spectrum.
Next molecular dynamics (MD) simulations are used to verify these
findings. First an ILM is formed and the power spectrum
calculated, next the initial conditions are changed and very small
amplitude shifts associated with a LLM are added to the neighboring
atoms and the power spectrum calculated again.
The cases when the new spectra contain
one additional weak peak above the phonon spectrum are studied in
detail. The frequencies of the additional peaks do not depend
on their amplitudes but they do depend on the ILM amplitude
consistent with the linear requirement. Good agreement is
obtained between the positions of the additional peaks and the
theoretically calculated frequencies of the LLMs.
\section{Theory}
Let us consider an anharmonic monatomic chain with interactions of
nearest-neighboring atoms. Taking into account only quartic
anharmonicity, the equation of motion of atoms in this model reads
\begin{equation}
\ddot{U}_n= \sum_{n' = n \pm 1}\big[k_2( U_{n'}-U_n) + k_4(
U_{n'}-U_n)^3 \big], \label{difeq}
\end{equation}
where ${U}_{n}$ are the reduced displacements of atoms located at
the site $n$ of the chain, the subscripts $n$ indicate the number
of the site, $k_2$ and $k_4$ are the parameters of harmonic and
anharmonic springs, whereat $k_2 = \omega_m^2/4 $ determines the
top phonon frequency $\omega_m$. If $k_4>0$ then ILMs may be
excited in the chain with the frequencies above the allowed phonon
spectrum \cite{sievtak,Page}.
To describe small vibrations of the chain in presence of an ILM,
we add to $U_n$ an infinitesimal displacement $q_n$: $ U'_n (t) =
U_n (t) + q_n (t)$. For the displacements of the ILM we take
$U_n(t)=A_n \cos{\omega_L t}$, where $A_n$ is the amplitude
parameter of the ILM which may be both, positive or negative (the
small contribution of higher-order harmonics is omitted). The
shift $U'_n (t)$ also satisfies Eq. (\ref{difeq}). Subtracting
from this equation the equation for $U_n(t)$ we get
\begin{equation}
\ddot{q}_n = \sum_{n' = n \pm 1}\big[k_2+ 3 k_4 (A_n -A_{n'})^2
\cos^2{\omega_L t}\big](q_{n'}-q_n). \label{Eq_q_n}
\end{equation}
One \ can \ divide \ $q_n$ \ into two parts: \ 1) the shifts \ $q_{0,n}$ \
describing small variations of the ILM (they have been considered
in \cite{HNS,SheHiKlo}) \ 2) all other shifts \ $q_{1,n}$. Here we are
interested in the stable solutions of equation (\ref{Eq_q_n}) which
correspond to the latter modes. These modes are orthogonal to (i.e.
independent from) the ILM. We can take the orthogonality condition
into account if we add in Eq. (\ref{Eq_q_n}) the term \ $ \lambda
\sum_{n'} A_n A_{n'} q_{n'},$ where the Lagrange multiplier \
$\lambda$ \ should \ be found from the orthogonality condition of the
LLM under consideration. However, if one considers the linear modes
of symmetry different from the ILM then there is no need to add the
term $\propto \lambda$, since the orthogonality conditions are
already fulfilled.
To identify LLMs, we first apply the
rotating wave approximation which corresponds to the replacing in
equation (\ref{Eq_q_n}) the factor \ $\cos^2{\omega_L t} = (1+ \cos{2
\omega_L t})/2$ \ by \ $1/2$ \ (i.e. we neglect the oscillating in time
term $(1/2)\cos{2 \omega_L t}$). In this approximation the equation
of motion of the linear modes takes the form:
\begin{equation}
-\ddot{q}_n =\sum_{n'}(D_{n n'} + v_{n n'})q_{n'}, \label{qddot}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $D_{n n'}=k_2 (2 \delta_{n n'} -\delta_{n \pm
1,n'})$ is the dynamical matrix of the perfect monatomic chain,
\begin{eqnarray}
v_{nn'} & = & \frac{3k_4}{2} \big[ \delta_{n n'}
\big((A_n-A_{n+1})^2+
(A_n-A_{n-1})^2 \big) \nonumber\\
& - &\delta_{n \pm 1,n'}(A_n-A_{n'})^2 \big] + \lambda A_n A_{n'}
\label{matrix_v}
\end{eqnarray}
is the perturbation of the dynamical matrix,
The effect of the perturbation can be found by the Lifshitz
method \cite{maradudin}. Thus a linear local mode $l$ exists if
the imaginary part of the Green's function of the perturbed
lattice has a pole at $\omega_l$ outside the allowed phonon
spectrum. The latter function can be found from the equation
\begin{equation}
G (\omega) = \big(I-G^{(0)} (\omega)\, v \big)^{-1} G^{(0)}
(\omega), \label{Green_omega}
\end{equation}
where $G$, $v$, and $G^{(0)}$ are matrices; $v$ is given by Eq.
(\ref{matrix_v}),
\begin{equation}
G^{(0)}_{nn'}(\omega) = [-\rho(\omega)]^{|n-n'|}/ \omega
\sqrt{\omega^2 -1}, \label{cheneGreen}
\end{equation}
is the $(n,n')$-component of the Green's function matrix of the
perfect chain \cite{economou}, $\rho (\omega) = (\omega -
\sqrt{\omega^2-1})^2 \leq 1$ (the units $\omega_{m} = 1$ are used).
The amplitude parameters of a LLM are given by the relation
\begin{equation}
a_{n,\,l}= G_{nn_1}(\omega_l)/G_{n_1n_1}(\omega_l). \label{norm_an}
\end{equation}
The time oscillatory terms in Eq. (\ref{Eq_q_n}), neglected in the rotating wave
approximation, can lead to new effects not found in the vibrations
of a lattice with a static defect. This difference follows from the
Floquet theorem according to which in a periodically time-dependent
system with the period $T$, besides the excitations with the
frequency $\omega_l$, there exist also excitations with the
frequencies $|\pm \omega_l + 2 \pi N /T|$, where $N$ is an integer.
In our case $T= \pi/\omega_L$; the repetitions of the frequency
result from the time-dependent part of the anharmonic interaction of
the LLMs with ILMs.
The \ time \ oscillatory terms \ in \ Eq. (\ref{Eq_q_n}) \ can \ also \ cause
a \ renormalization \ of \ the frequencies \ of \ linear modes. This \
follows \ from \ the \ fact \ that \ these \ terms \ oscillate \ in \ time \ with \ the
frequencies \ $2\omega_L- \omega$ \ and \ $2 \omega_L + \omega$ \ (here
$\omega$ is the frequency of a small vibration), one of which, $2
\omega_L - \omega_l,$ may be comparable with the perturbation $v$.
As a result, the frequencies of some linear modes may acquire complex
values, which will cause these modes to become
unstable \cite{Kiv,SadPage,Daumont,LaiSievers}.
To find whether a LLM is stable or not we apply in Eq.
(\ref{Eq_q_n}) the expansion $q_n=\sum_j e_{nj}x_j$, where $e_{n j}$
is the normalized contribution of the atom $n$ to the normal
coordinate $x_j$ of the perturbed lattice. We get
\begin{equation}
-\ddot{x}_{l}= \omega_l^2 x_{j} + \cos{2 \omega_{L} t} \,\sum_{n
n'} \sum_{j} e_{n l} \, w_{n n'} e_{n' j} \, x_{j}. \label{ddotxl}
\end{equation}
The effect of the time oscillatory term in Eq. (\ref{ddotxl}) is
most important for the modes with frequencies close to $\omega_L$.
Supposing that only the LLM under consideration has such a
frequency, we can neglect in the right-hand-side of this equation
the terms $j \neq l$. In this approximation
\begin{equation}
-\ddot{x}_{l}= \omega_l^2(1+h \cos{2\omega_L t}) \, x_l.
\label{parametric}
\end{equation}
where $ h= \omega_l^{-2} \,\sum_{n n'} e_{n l} \, w_{n n'}\, e_{n'
l}.$ (Here the inhomogeneous term $\propto x_L (t) \cos{2
\omega_{L} t}$ also has been neglected; this term describes the
infinitesimal forced oscillations with the frequencies $\omega_L$
and $3 \omega_L$resulting in the infinitesimal shift of the ILM
phase.)
Equation (\ref{parametric}) is the Mathieu equation describing the
parametric resonance \cite{Landau}. The term $\propto h$
may result in a) renormalization of the frequency of the LLM,
or b) in the modes instability; in the latter case the renormalized
frequency is complex. Below we consider the renormalization and the
instability conditions numerically.
\subsection{LLMs induced by even ILM}
Both even and odd ILMs can exist in the nonlinear
monatomic chain \cite{Page}. Here we consider an even ILM to be the effective
defect in this lattice calculation, since this mode is stable with
respect to small translational fluctuations \cite{SadPage}. This
choice will permit calculations of ILMs + LLMs with high precision.
The amplitude patterns for such an ILM for different values of the
dimensionless nonlinear parameter, $k_4 A_0^2/k_2$ , are given in
rows 3 and 4 of Table 1.
An even ILM can induce the appearance of both, odd and even LLMs. In
the case of odd LLMs the $\lambda$- multiplier in Eq.
(\ref{matrix_v}) equals zero. Then, if one considers an ILM
localized of six neighboring central atoms, the perturbation matrix
$v$ (see Eq. (\ref{matrix_v})) is the six-range symmetric matrix
with the following nonzero elements:
\begin{eqnarray}
v_{00}&=& v_{11}= \gamma_0 +\gamma_1, \,\,v_{01}=-\gamma_0 ,
\,\,v_{12}=-\gamma_1, \nonumber\\
v_{22}&=&\gamma_1+\gamma_2,\ v_{23} = - \gamma_2, \ v_{33}=\gamma_3,
\label{matrix}
\end{eqnarray}
and with few matrix elements with negative index satisfying the
relations $v_{-n-n'} =v_{n+1 n'+1}$ ($n > 0$) . Here $\gamma_n
\approx 3 k_4 (A_n-A_{n+1})^2/2 k_2$ are the changes of the springs
(in dimensionless units).
The effect of an even ILM upon even phonons is described by the
perturbation matrix given by Eq. (\ref{matrix_v}), which is equal to
the previous perturbation matrix $v$ plus the term $\lambda A_n
A_{n'}$; the value of $\lambda$ must be found self-consistently from
the orthogonality condition $\sum _n e_{n,evn}A_n =0$.
Inserting the matrix $v$ into Eqs. (\ref{Green_omega}) and
(\ref{norm_an}) gives the frequencies and relative amplitudes of the
LLMs.
The parametric resonance parameter $h$, which determines the
frequency correction equals
\begin{equation}
h=\frac{3 K_4 A_0^2}{K_2 \omega_l^2} \sum_{n \geq 1} \left(
|e_{n}|+|e_{n+1}| \right)^2 \left(|A_n|+|A_{n+1}| \right)^2.
\label{hfin}
\end{equation}
\vspace{0mm} {\bf Table 1.} Analytical calculations of odd and even
LLMs for a lattice containing an even ILM with a range of nonlinear
parameter $k_4 A_0^2/k_2$ values. Given are the relative ILM
frequency $\omega_L/\omega_m$, the ILM amplitudes of the four
next-to central particles $A_n$ with $A_{-n} = -A_{n+1}$, the
relative frequency of the odd and even LLM $\omega_{odd}/\omega_m$
and $\omega_{evn}/\omega_m$, the amplitudes of these modes
$a_{-n,odd} = a_{n+1,odd}$ and $a_{-n,evn} = -a_{n+1,evn}$ ($n \ge
0$); $A_1-A_0 =1$; $a_{1,odd}=a_{1,evn} =1.$ (The frequencies of the
odd LLMs are corrected for the time oscillatory perturbation; $h$
and $h_{cr}$ are the corresponding parameters of this perturbation.)
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular} {|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
$k_4 A_0^2/k_2$& 0.50 & 0.75 & 1.00 & 1.25 &1.50 & 1.75 & 2.00 \\
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
\hline
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
\vspace{-4mm} $\omega_L/\omega_m$& 1.36 & 1.51 & 1.64 & 1.77 & 1.88 & 2.00 & 2.10 \\
& & & & & & & \\
\hline
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
$-A_2$& 0.199 &0.170 &0.153 &0.141 &0.133 &0.127 &0.121 \\
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
\hline
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
\vspace{-4mm} $A_3$ & 0.042 & 0.027 & 0.019 & 0.015 & 0.012& 0.010& 0.008 \\
& & & & & & & \\
\hline \hline
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
$\omega_{odd}/\omega_m$& 1.288 & 1.418 & 1.486 & 1.58& 1.677 & 1.78 & 1.86 \\
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
\hline
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
$a_{1,odd}$ & 0.729 & 0.784 & 0.819 & 0.844 & 0.862 & 0.876& 0.887 \\
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
\hline
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
\vspace{-4mm} $a_{3,odd}$ & 0.347 &0.262 &0.212 &0.179 &0.156 & 0.138 &0.124 \\
& & & & & & & \\
\hline
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
\vspace{-4mm} $h_{odd}$ & 0.456 &0.560 &0.629 &0.679 &0.711 & 0.746 &0.770 \\
& & & & & & & \\
\hline
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
\vspace{-4mm} $h_{odd,cr}$ & 0.52 &0.63 &0.77 &0.84 &0.89 & 0.94 &0.98 \\
& & & & & & & \\
\hline \hline
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
$\omega_{evn}/\omega_m$ & 1.009 &1.031 &1.063 &1.102&1.142& 1.179& 1.219 \\
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
\hline
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
$a_{1,evn}$ & 0.383& 0.308& 0.273 &0.252 &0.238& 0.228& 0.220 \\
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
\hline
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
\vspace{-4mm} $-a_{3,evn}$ &1.143 & 0.822 &0.639 &0.522 &0.442 &0.384&0.340 \\
& & & & & & & \\
\hline
\vspace{-4mm} & & & & & & & \\
\vspace{-4mm} $\tilde{\lambda} \cdot 10^2$ & 0.70& 0.83& 0.87
&0.92
& 0.96 &0.98 &1.01 \\
& & & & & & & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
In Table 1 the calculated values for odd and even LLMs are
presented for different values of the nonlinear parameter of the
ILM, $k_4 A_0^2/k_2$. Comparing the LLM amplitude patterns with the
amplitudes of the ILM shows that they are mutually orthogonal and
the ILM and the LLM belong to the different degrees of freedom.
Note that the frequency of the odd LLM is rather close to $\omega_L$. For
this mode consideration of the time oscillatory term in Eq.
(\ref{parametric}) is important. The numerical calculations of the
Mathieu equation (\ref{parametric}) shows that in all cases the
parametric resonance parameter $h$ is less than its critical value
$h_{cr}$ for the instability. The frequency of the even LLM is
significantly different from $\omega_L$ so that the correction caused by the
time oscillatory term is now small.
\section{MD simulations}
To perform MD simulations of ILMs and LLMs, we integrate numerically
the equation of motion given by Eq. (\ref{difeq}). We calculate the
vibrational amplitudes and velocities of atoms of the finite chain
with $10^4$ atoms in $10^5$ time points. The time interval includes
$\sim 10^3$ periods of the ILMs. We also calculate the vibrational
power spectrum. To decrease the background in the spectrum, Fourier
transformations are carried out between the time points
corresponding to the same phase of vibrations.
For the initial condition, we used the ILM displacements of the six central
atoms from their equilibrium positions.
The amplitude difference of the two central
atoms is fixed at unity with $k_2=100$ ($\omega_{m} = 20$).
In this case the actual values of $k_4$ for ILMs with frequency
$\leq 2\omega_m$ are of the order of $k_2$.
The initial shifts of other four central atoms are selected so
that only the ILM is excited. The resulting amplitude parameters $A_n$ of
six central atoms are those shown in Table 1.
\begin{figure}[th]
\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=.49\textwidth]{fig1.eps}\hspace*{0em}
\caption{Power spectra of ILMs for two different nonlinear parameter
values with and without LLMs. Left column of figures: the main
spectral feature is an even ILM with $k_4 A_0^2/k_2$ = 0.75, right
column of figures: same even ILM but with $k_4 A_0^2/k_2$ = 1.5.
Bottom panels: the unperturbed even ILM; middle panels: an ILM
perturbed by an odd LLM; top panels: an ILM perturbed by an even
LLM. Although the dotted and solid lines differ by $10^2$ in the LLM
amplitude its frequency remains unchanged. The amplitude patterns of
the ILMs and LLMs are shown by arrows.}
\end{figure}
Examples of the calculated power spectrum of an even ILM are given
in the bottom panels of Fig. 1. Two different values of the
nonlinear parameter are shown. Each \ spectrum \ has \ a single \ peak \
with \ a \ frequency $\omega_L > \omega_m$. Not shown are the much weaker
peaks associated with the higher odd harmonics at $3 \omega_L$, $5
\omega_L$, etc. Hence the bottom panels demonstrate that our initial
conditions correspond solely to the excitation of an ILM (at least
with the accuracy $10^{-14}$).
When small additional amplitude shifts appropriate to the odd or
even symmetry LLM presented in Table 1 are added to the ILM
amplitude pattern, then additional small \ peaks \ appear \
in \ the \ power \ spectrum, \ one \ at $\omega < \omega_L$, and an even smaller
symmetrically situated peak at $\omega > \omega_L$. The middle panels
in Fig. 1 show the case for an odd LLM, with its amplitude pattern,
and the top panel for an even LLM, again with its amplitude pattern.
One finds analogous sideband spectra for other $k_4A_0^2/k_2$
values. These data show that the frequencies of the new spectral
peaks depend on the amplitude and hence the frequency of the ILM. At
the same time the solid and dotted traces presented in Fig. 1, where
the LLM amplitude is varied by $10^2$, demonstrate that these LLM
frequencies do not depend on their own amplitudes as expected for a
linear response (the amplitudes of the LLMs are $\sim 10^5$ and
$\sim 10^3$ times less than the amplitude of the ILM). The
$\tilde{\omega}_l = 2 \Omega_L - \omega_l$ of the symmetrically
situated weak peak indicates that this spectral feature is the four
wave mixing response of the LLM with the ILM.
\section{Discussion and Conclusions}
There \ is \ value \ in \ a \ quantitative \ comparison \ of \ the \ analytical \
results \ and \ MD \ simulations \ for \ the \ LLMs. Figure 2 presents the frequencies of
the LLMs obtained by both these methods.
\begin{figure}[th]
\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=.50\textwidth]{fig2.eps}\hspace*{0em}
\caption{The dependence of the frequencies of the odd and even LLMs
on the dimensionless nonlinear parameter $k_4 A_0^2/k_2$ of the ILM.
The frequencies of the odd LLM are given with (dotted line) and
without (dash-dotted line) taking into account the time-oscillatory
term $h \cos{2\omega_l t}$ in Eq. (\ref{parametric}). The ILM
frequency dependence is also shown.}
\end{figure}
Inspection of these results shows that there is excellent agreement
between the two methods. Note that the time oscillatory terms provide
a significant correction for odd LLM case but are insignificant for the
even LLM. The reason is \ in the relatively small difference of \
$\omega_L-\omega_{odd}$ \ as compared to $\omega_L-\omega_{evn}$.
We have presented a theory which allows one to describe the effect
of an ILM on phonons in a nonlinear monatomic chain. The
prediction of linear localized modes above the top of the plane wave
spectrum is in good agreement with MD simulations. Basically
the appearance of the ILM changes the nearby nonlinear spring
constants sufficiently so that linear local modes can also
appear. The resulting lattice
perturbation produced by the ILM is analogous to that associated
with a force constant defect in a linear lattice in that a small number of
degrees of freedom can be strongly perturbed but all phonons are
perturbed to some extent. Looking ahead to more realistic
diatomic lattices involving two body potentials \cite{KisBS},
we expect that a variety of LLM possibilities may appear.
These could include modes of the local, gap, and resonant types
as well as tunneling states, all made possible by the
fundamental combination of nonlinearity and lattice discretness.
One may anticipate that, in analogy with the
previously studied force constant defect cases,
ILM-induced IR and Raman-activity may occur
throughout the entire phonon spectrum \cite{Barker,Cardona}.
There are also some very interesting differences between
the properties of extrinsic and intrinsic localized excitations evident
from our study of this simple model system. One is
that an ILM introduces a periodically time-dependent perturbation
that supports nonlinear mixing processes between the ILM
and the LLMs and a second is that for a
moving ILM the "effective defect space" with its associated
LLMs will travel together with the nonlinear excitation.
\section{Acknowledgments}
This research is supported by the Estonian Science Foundation,
Grant No 6534, the U.S. National Research Council Twinning Program
with Estonia, by NSF-DMR under Grant No. 0301035 and by the
Department of Energy under Grant No. DE-FG02-04ER46154.
|
\section{Introduction and the results}
\label{s_intro}
We study properties of the interlacement set~$\mathcal{I}^u$ of the random
interlacement model. We are mainly interested in its connectivity
properties, in particular in the internal distance (sometimes called the
chemical distance) on the interlacement cluster.
The random interlacement model was introduced in~\cite{Szn10} in order to
describe the microscopic structure in the bulk which arises when studying
the disconnection time of a discrete cylinder or the vacant set of random
walk on a discrete torus. It can be informally described as a dependent
site percolation on $\mathbb Z^d$, $d\ge 3$, which is `generated' by a
Poisson cloud of independent simple random walks whose intensity is
driven by a non-negative multiplicative parameter $u$. The set covered by
these random walks is called the \emph{interlacement set at level $u$} and is
denoted by $\mathcal I^u$. As the precise definition of $\mathcal I^u$ is
rather lengthy, we postpone it to Section~\ref{s_preliminaries} and state
our results first.
Let $\mathbb P_0^u = \mathbb P[ \,\cdot\, | \, 0\in \mathcal I^u] $ be
the conditional distribution given that
the origin is in the interlacement set $\mathcal{I}^u$.
For $x,y\in\mathcal{I}^u$ we define $\rho_u(x,y)$ to be the internal distance
between~$x$ and~$y$ within the interlacement set~$\mathcal{I}^u$:
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\rho_u(x,y) = \min\{n&: \text{there exist }x_0,x_1,\ldots,x_n\in\mathcal{I}^u
\text{ such that }x_0=x, x_n=y, \\
&\text{ and }\|x_k-x_{k-1}\|_1=1
\text{ for all }k=1,\ldots,n\},
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
where $\|\cdot\|_1$ denotes the $\ell_1$-norm in~$\mathbb{Z}^d$. As we shall see
below, the set $\mathcal{I}^u$ is $\mathbb{P}$-a.s.\ connected for all~$u$, so
$\rho_u(x,y)<\infty$ for all $u>0$ and $x,y\in\mathcal{I}^u$. Assuming that
$x\in\mathcal{I}^u$, let $\Lambda^u(x,n) = \{y\in\mathcal{I}^u: \rho^u(x,y)\leq n\}$ be the
ball centred at~$x$ with radius~$n$ in the internal distance. We
abbreviate $\Lambda^u(n):=\Lambda^u(0,n)$.
The first main result of this paper is the shape theorem for large balls
in the internal distance.
\begin{theorem}
\label{t_shape}
For every $u>0$ and $d\ge 3$
there exists a compact convex set $D_u\subset\mathbb{R}^d$ such that
for any $\varepsilon>0$ there exists a
$\mathbb{P}_0^u$-a.s.\ finite random variable~$N$ such that
\[
\big((1-\varepsilon)nD_u\cap \mathcal{I}^u\big) \subset \Lambda^u(n)
\subset (1+\varepsilon)nD_u
\]
for all $n\geq N$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
Clearly, the set $D_u$ is symmetric under rotations and
reflections of~$\mathbb{Z}^d$ and
$D_u\subset\{x\in\mathbb{R}^d:\|x\|_1\leq 1\}$ for all~$u$.
It is straightforward to show that
$D_u\to \{x\in\mathbb{R}^d:\|x\|_1\leq 1\}$ as $u\to\infty$;
it would be interesting, however, to be able to say something about
the behaviour of~$D_u$ when $u\to 0$ (e.g., does the shape become
close to the Euclidean ball, and what can be said
about the size of~$D_u$ as $u\to 0$?).
\end{remark}
The key technical step in the proof of Theorem~\ref{t_shape} is a fact
(which is of independent interest) that the distance within the
interlacement cluster should typically be of the same order as the usual
distance.
\begin{theorem}
\label{t_ap}
For every $u>0$ and $d\ge 3$ there exist
constants $C,C' < \infty$ and
$\delta \in (0,1)$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{P}^u_0[\text{there exists }x\in \mathcal{I}^u\cap[-n,n]^d
\text{ such that } \rho_u(0,x)>C n]
\leq C' e^{-n^{\delta}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
A corresponding result for the Bernoulli percolation on $\mathbb Z^d$ was
proved by Antal and Pisztora; in their case the constant $\delta $ equals
one and is optimal, see \cite[Theorem~1.1]{AP96}. We did not try to
optimise the constant~$\delta$ in Theorem~\ref{t_ap}.
\begin{remark}
It is trivial to replace $\mathbb P^u_0$ by $\mathbb P$ in
Theorems~\ref{t_shape} and~\ref{t_ap}. To this end it is only necessary
to extend $\rho_u(x,y)$ to all $x,y\in \mathbb Z^d$ by setting
\begin{equation*}
\rho_u(x,y)=\rho_u(x^u,y^u),
\end{equation*}
where $x^u$ (respectively, $y^u$) is the closest point to~$x$
(respectively, $y$) on $\mathcal I^u$ (one can choose the rule how ties
are broken in any convenient translational-invariant way).
\end{remark}
\medskip
The methods used to show Theorem~\ref{t_shape} also imply the following
result.
\begin{theorem}
\label{t_connected}
It holds that $\mathbb{P}[\mathcal{I}^u \text{ is connected for all }u>0] = 1$.
\end{theorem}
Previously it was known that for every fixed $u>0$, the set~$\mathcal{I}^u$ is
$\mathbb P$-a.s.\ connected (see (2.21) in~\cite{Szn10}); the above
theorem means that $\mathbb P$-a.s.\ there are no `exceptional values' of
the parameter~$u$. Remark also that much more is known about the
connectivity of $\mathcal I^u$ for fixed $u$, see \cite{PT11,RS12}.
Theorems~\ref{t_shape} and~\ref{t_ap} indicate that the interlacement
set~$\mathcal I^u$ looks at large scales very much like~$\mathbb Z^d$. In
the same direction, R\'ath and Sapozhnikov recently proved that the
interlacement set $\mathcal I^u$ percolates in slabs~\cite{RS11b}, and
that random walk on~$\mathcal I^u$ is transient~\cite{RS11}.
Theorem~\ref{t_ap} can be also used to answer a related question: `How
much the range of the random walk on the torus resembles the torus?' To
this end we consider $(X_k)_{k\in \mathbb N}$ to be a simple random walk
on the discrete $d$-dimensional torus of size $N$,
$\mathbb T_N^d=(\mathbb Z/N\mathbb Z)^d$, and write $P^N$ for its law
when started from the uniform distribution. We let $\mathcal{I}_N^u$ to denote the
range of the random walk up to time $uN^d$,
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{I}_N^u = \{X_0,\dots, X_{\lfloor u N^d\rfloor}\}.
\end{equation*}
Let $\rho^u_N(x,y)$ be the minimal distance of $x,y\in \mathcal{I}_N^u$ within
$\mathcal{I}_N^u$, defined similarly as~$\rho_u$, and let $d_N(x,y)$ be their
usual graph distance on the torus.
\begin{theorem} For large enough $\bar C$ and $\gamma $, we have
\label{t_torus}
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{N\to\infty} P^N\big[\rho^u_N(x,y)\le \bar C d_N(x,y)
\text{ for all }
x,y\in \mathcal{I}_N^u \text{ such that } d_N(x,y)\ge \ln^{\gamma} N\big]=1.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
This theorem improves the result of Shellef~\cite{She10}, where a similar
claim was proved for $\bar C$ growing very slowly with~$N$ using entirely
different methods. More
precisely, \cite{She10} requires $\bar C=\ln^{(k)}N$ where $\ln^{(k)}$
is the $k$-times iterated logarithm, $k\ge 1$ being arbitrary. On the
other hand, Shellef needs $\gamma=5d$ only; we do not have control on the
size of this constant.
The main difficulty of the paper stems in proving our results for $d<5$,
in particular for $d=3$. In fact, for $d\ge 5$ there is a rather simple
argument, based on the results of~\cite{RS11}, which shows Theorem~\ref{t_ap}
with $\delta =1$, and which we sketch in the Appendix. This argument uses
the fact that for $d\ge 5$ the random interlacement restricted to a
thick-enough two-dimensional slab dominates in some sense the standard
Bernoulli percolation, which allows an application of~\cite{AP96}.
Heuristically, in large dimensions it is possible to construct `long straight
connections' within~$\mathcal{I}^u$ locally, independently of the connections in
other places.
It seems that this argument cannot be extended to $d<5$. It is much harder
to construct the straight connections locally in an independent manner.
This we do in Section~\ref{s:ap}, where we dominate the internal distance
between the origin and the point $(n,0,\dots,0)$ by the sum of a sequence of
random variables with a finite range of dependence and stretched
exponential tails, cf.~\eqref{sum_T} below. To obtain the finite range of
dependence, we should show that connections within
a large box of size~$m$ can be constructed using less than $\Theta(m^{d-2})$ random walk trajectories (which is
the typical number of random walks intersecting this box;
here and in the sequel we write $f(m)=\Theta(g(m))$
when for positive constants $c_1,c_2$ we have
$c_1g(m)\leq f(m) \leq c_2 g(m)$ for all~$m$). In fact, in
Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness}
we will show that a `backbone' of~$\mathcal{I}^u$ in this box can be constructed using $\Theta(m^{d-2-h})$ trajectories
only, $h<2/d$. This also means that for every $u>0$ the
interlacement set~$\mathcal{I}^u$ is `largely supercritical', that is it remains
locally connected, even when considerably thinned.
The paper is organised as follows. After introducing the notation in
Section~\ref{s_preliminaries}, we collect in Section~\ref{s_estimates}
some estimates on the hitting probabilities of sets and on the range of
the simple random walk. Section~\ref{s_intersections} contains the key
technical result of this paper, Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness}. This
proposition roughly states that all points in (a possibly thinned version
of) the set $\mathcal{I}^u$ within box of size $n$ are at internal distance $n^2$,
with a very high probability. Using this proposition, in
Section~\ref{s_connected}, we give a short proof of
Theorem~\ref{t_connected}. Sections~\ref{s:ap}--\ref{s:torus} contain the
proofs of Theorems~\ref{t_ap}, \ref{t_shape}, and~\ref{t_torus}.
\medskip
\textit{Acknowledgements.} The authors would like to thank Augusto
Teixeira for many useful discussions, and Bal\'azs R\'ath for pointing
out Shellef's paper~\cite{She10}. The work of Serguei Popov was partially
supported by CNPq (301644/2011--0) and FAPESP (2009/52379--8).
\section{Preliminaries}
\label{s_preliminaries}
In this section we fix the notation and recall the definition of the
random interlacement model.
Let $\mathbb N=\{0,1,\dots\}$ be the set of natural numbers. We denote
with $\mathbf{e}_1,\ldots,\mathbf{e}_{d}$ the coordinate vectors in~$\mathbb{Z}^d$, and write
$\|\cdot\|,\|\cdot\|_1, \|\cdot\|_\infty$ for the Euclidean, $\ell_1$,
and $\ell_\infty$ norms correspondingly. We use $B(x,r)$ to denote the
closed $\|\cdot\|_\infty$-ball centred at $x$ with radius $r$, and
abbreviate $B(r):=B(0,r)$. We say that~$A\subset \mathbb Z^d$ is
connected if for any $x,y\in A$ there is a nearest-neighbor path that
lies fully inside~$A$ and connects~$x$ to~$y$. We write $|A|$ for the
cardinality of~$A$, $\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(A)=\max_{x,y\in A} \|x-y\|_\infty$ for its
diameter in $\ell_\infty$-norm, and
$\partial A=\{x\in A: \exists y \in A^c, \|x-y\|=1\}$ for its internal
boundary.
Let us write $P_x$ for the law of a discrete-time simple random walk
$(X_n)_{n\in \mathbb N}$ on $\mathbb Z^d$ started from $x$. For
$A\subset \mathbb Z^d$ we denote with $H_A$, $\tilde H_A$ and $T_A$ the
entrance time in~$A$, the hitting time of~$A$, and the exit time from~$A$:
\begin{equation}
\label{def_entrance}
\begin{split}
H_A&=\inf\{n\ge 0: X_n\in A\}, \\
\tilde H_A&=\inf\{n\ge 1: X_n\in A\},\\
T_A&=\inf\{n\ge 0: X_n\notin A\}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Given $A\subset \mathbb Z^d$ finite, we define the equilibrium measure of~$A$ by
\begin{equation*}
e_A(x)=P_x[\tilde H_A=\infty]\boldsymbol 1_A(x)
\end{equation*}
and denote by
$\mathop{\mathrm{cap}}(A)=\sum_{x\in A}e_A(x)$ its total mass.
We now recall the definition of the random interlacement from
\cite{Szn10}. In order to do this we need to introduce another notation
which is, however, mostly used only locally. Let~$W$ be the space of
doubly-infinite nearest-neighbour trajectories in~$\mathbb{Z}^d$ which tend to
infinity at positive and negative infinite times, and let $W^\star$ be
the space of equivalence classes of trajectories in~$W$ modulo
time-shift. (These spaces are equipped with $\sigma $-algebras
$\mathcal W$, $\mathcal W^\star$ as in (1.2), (1.10) of~\cite{Szn10}.)
The random interlacement is defined via a Poisson point process taking
values in the space $\Omega $ of point measures on the space
$W^\star\times [0,\infty)$ with the intensity measure $\nu \otimes du$.
We denote by $\mathbb P$ the law of this process.
To describe the measure~$\nu$ appearing in the intensity of the Poisson
point process, for $A\subset \mathbb Z^d$, $u\ge 0$, we denote by~$\mu_A^u$
the mapping from~$\Omega$ to the space of point measures on~$W$
which selects from $\omega \in \Omega $ the trajectories with labels
smaller than~$u$ intersecting~$A$ and parametrises them so that they
enter~$A$ at time~$0$. Formally, for
$\omega =\sum_{i\ge 0}\delta_{ (w^\star_i,u_i)}\in \Omega $ ,
$w^\star_i\in W^\star$, $u^i\ge 0$, we define
\begin{equation}
\label{e:muKu}
\mu_K^u(\omega)=\sum_{i\ge 0}\delta_{s_A(w^\star_i)}
\boldsymbol 1\{\mathop{\mathrm{Ran}}(w^\star_i)\cap A\neq\emptyset,u_i\le u\},
\end{equation}
where $\mathop{\mathrm{Ran}}(w^\star)=\bigcup_{n\in \mathbb Z} w(n)$ for an arbitrary~$w$
in the equivalence class of~$w^\star$, and $s_A(w^\star)$ is the unique
$w\in W$ in this equivalence class such that $w_0\in A$, $w_{-n}\notin A$,
$n>0$. As follows from \cite{Szn10}, Theorem~1.1, the measure~$\nu $ is uniquely
determined by the following two properties which we will frequently use:
\begin{itemize}
\item For every finite set $A\subset \mathbb Z^d$, under~$\mathbb P$,
the number $\eta _A^u:=\mu_A^u(\omega )(W)$ of trajectories in~$\omega $
with labels smaller than~$u$ entering~$A$ has the Poisson distribution
with parameter $u\mathop{\mathrm{cap}}( A)$.
\item Let
$\mu_A^u(\omega )=\sum_{i=1}^{\eta_A^u}\delta_{w_i}$, $w_i \in W$. Then,
under $\mathbb P$, $w_i$ are i.i.d., independent of $\eta_A^u$, with
the law given by
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb P[(w_i(n))_{n\ge 0}\in F]=\sum_{x\in
A}\frac{e_A(x)}{e_A(A)}P_x[F],
\end{equation*}
for any measurable set $F$ in the space of single-infinite
nearest-neighbour paths. It means that~$w_i$, restricted to
non-negative times, are i.i.d.\ simple random walk trajectories started
from the normalised equilibrium measure $e_A(\cdot)/e_A(A)$.
\end{itemize}
The interlacement set at level~$u$ is then defined as the trace of all
trajectories in~$\omega$ with labels smaller than~$u$,
\begin{equation*}
\mathcal{I}^u(\omega )=\bigcup_{i\ge 0} \mathop{\mathrm{Ran}}(w^\star_i)\boldsymbol 1 \{u_i\le u\}.
\end{equation*}
We now explain the conventions for the use of constants in this paper. We
denote by
$C,C_1, C_1', C_2, \ldots$ the
`global' constants, that is, those that are used all along the paper and
by $c,c',c_1, c_2,c_3,\ldots$ the `local' constants, that is, those that
are used only in the small neighbourhood of the place where they appear
for the first time. For the local constants, we restart the numeration
either in the beginning of each subsection or in the beginning of each
long proof. All these constants are positive and finite and may depend on
dimension, $u$, and other quantities that are supposed to be fixed;
usually we omit expressions like `there exist positive constants $c_1,c_2$
such that \dots' and just directly insert $c$'s to the formulas.
Also, the reader will notice that very frequently in this paper the
probability of events (indexed by some integer parameter, say, $n$) will
happen to be bounded from above by~$e^{-cn^{\delta}}$ or from below
by~$1-e^{-cn^{\delta}}$, where~$\delta$ is typically (but not necessarily)
between~$0$ and~$1$. So, we decided to use the following definition:
\begin{definition}
\label{def_s.e.}
We say that $f(n)$ is s.e.-small (where s.e.\ stands for
`stretched-exponentially') if for all~$n\geq 1$ it holds that
\[
0 \leq f(n) \leq c_1 e^{-c_2n^{c_3}},
\]
and write $f(n)=\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)$.
\end{definition}
Observe that $n^c\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)=\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)$ for any fixed $c>0$. So, it is quite
convenient to use this notation e.g.\ in the following situation: assume
that we have at most~$n^c$ events, each of probability bounded from above
by~$\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)$. Then, the probability of their union is~$\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)$ as well.
\section{Estimates on hitting probabilities}
\label{s_estimates}
In this section we collect several estimates on hitting probabilities of
subsets of~$\mathbb{Z}^d$ by random walk trajectories. We recall that $P_x$
denotes the law of the simple random walk $(X_n)_{n\in \mathbb N}$ in
$\mathbb{Z}^d$, $d\geq 3$, starting at $x$. We denote by~$g$ the `stopped' Green
function:
\[
g(x,y;n) = \sum_{k=0}^n P_x[X_k=y],
\]
and write $g(x,y)$ for $g(x,y;\infty)$.
For the case $d\geq 3$ it holds that $g(x,y)$ is finite for
all $x,y\in\mathbb{Z}^d$, $g(x,y;n)=g(y,x;n)=g(0,y-x;n)$, and, for
all $n\geq \|x-y\|^2$
\begin{align}
g(x,y;n) &\geq \frac{C_1}{1+\|x-y\|^{d-2}},
\label{Green_asymp>}\\
g(x,y)&\leq \frac{C'_1}{1+\|x-y\|^{d-2}},
\label{Green_asymp<}
\end{align}
for all $x,y\in\mathbb{Z}^d$. The upper bound \eqref{Green_asymp<} follows
directly from Theorem~1.5.4 of~\cite{Law91}. The lower bound
\eqref{Green_asymp>} can be proved easily adapting the proof of the same
theorem.
For $n\geq 0, x\in\mathbb{Z}^d, A\subset\mathbb{Z}^d$, let
\[
q_x(A;n) = P_x[H_A\le n]
\]
be the probability that, starting from~$x$, the simple random walk
enters~$A$ before time~$n$. We use the abbreviation
$q_x(y;n):=q_x(\{y\};n)$ for the hitting probabilities of one-point sets,
and $q_x(A):=q_x(A;\infty)$ for the probability that the simple random
walk ever enters the set~$A$. It is elementary to obtain that for all
$x,y\in\mathbb{Z}^d$ and
$n\geq \|x-y\|^2$ (see e.g.\ Theorem~2.2 of~\cite{AMP02})
\begin{equation}
\label{prob_to_hit>}\\
\begin{split}
q_x(y;n) &\geq \frac{C_2}{1+\|x-y\|^{d-2}},\\
q_x(y)&\leq \frac{C'_2}{1+\|x-y\|^{d-2}}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Next, for $x \in \mathbb{Z}^d$ and a finite set $A \subset \mathbb{Z}^d$, define
\[
g(x,A;n) = \sum_{y\in A} g(x,y;n).
\]
Clearly, $g(x,A;n)$ is the expected number of visits to~$A$ up to
time~$n$, starting from~$x$. As before, we set
$g(x,A):=g(x,A;\infty)$.
The following lemma will be used repeatedly to estimate the hitting
probabilities:
\begin{lemma}
\label{l_hit_Green}
For all $x\in \mathbb Z^d$, finite $A\subset \mathbb Z^d$, and
$0\leq n\leq \infty$
\begin{equation}
\label{hit_Green}
\frac{g(x,A;n)}{\max_{y\in A}g(y,A;n)} \leq q_x(A;n) \leq
\frac{g(x,A)}{\min_{y\in A}g(y,A)}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Using the definition of $g$ and
the strong Markov property,
\begin{align*}
g(x,A) &=
\sum_{y\in A} P_x[H_A<\infty, X_{H_A}=y]g(y,A)\\
& \geq \min_{y\in A}g(y,A)\sum_{y\in A}
P_x[H_A<\infty, X_{H_A}=y] .
\end{align*}
Since $q_x(A;n)\leq q_x(A)=\sum_{y\in A} P_x[H_A<\infty, X_{H_A}=y]$,
the second inequality in~\eqref{hit_Green} follows.
The first inequality is then implied by
\begin{align*}
g(x,A;n) &= \sum_{k=0}^n
\sum_{y\in A} P_x[H_A=k, X_{H_A}=y]g(y,A;n-k)\\
&\leq \sum_{k=0}^n\sum_{y\in A}
P_x[H_A=k, X_{H_A}=y]g(y,A;n)\\
& \leq \max_{y\in A}g(y,A;n)\sum_{k=1}^n\sum_{y\in A}
P_x[H_A=k, X_{H_A}=y],
\end{align*}
together with
$q_x(A;n) = \sum_{k=0}^n\sum_{y\in A} P_x[H_A=k, X_{H_A}=y]$.
\end{proof}
Let us use the notation $\ell(x,A)=\max_{y\in A}\|x-y\|_\infty$
for the maximal distance between~$x$ and the points
of~$A$.
Two following simple lemmas contain lower bounds on
hitting probabilities of sets.
\begin{lemma}
\label{l_diam}
Suppose that $A$ is a connected finite subset of~$\mathbb{Z}^d$, containing
at least two sites.
Then, for all $x\in \mathbb{Z}^d$ and $n\geq (\ell(x,A))^2$,
\begin{equation*}
q_x(A;n) \geq
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle
\frac{C_3\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(A)}
{(\ell(x,A))^{d-2}\ln \mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(A)},\qquad
& d=3,
\medskip
\\
\displaystyle
\frac{C_3\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(A)}{(\ell(x,A))^{d-2}},
& d\geq 4.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since~$A$ is connected, it is possible to find (not necessarily
connected) set $A'\subset A$ with the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item $|A'|=\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(A)$,
\item one can represent
$A'=\{x_1,\ldots,x_{\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(A)}\}$ in such a way that
$\|x_i-x_j\|_\infty\geq |i-j|$ for all $i,j=1,\ldots,\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(A)$.
\end{itemize}
Indeed, it holds that the size of the projection of~$A$ on one of the
coordinate axes is at least $\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(A)$ and this projection is an
interval; then, for all points in the projection pick exactly one
element of~$A$ that projects there, and erase `unnecessary' points of~
$A$. Then, by~\eqref{Green_asymp>} we have for any $n\geq (\ell(x,A))^2$
\[
g(x,A';n) \geq \frac{C_1\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(A)}{1+(\ell(x,A))^{d-2}},
\]
and, by~\eqref{Green_asymp<},
for any $y\in A'$,
\[
g(y,A';n) \leq \sum_{j=0}^{\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(A)}\frac{2C'_1}{1+j^{d-2}} \leq
\begin{cases}
c_1\ln \mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(A), & d=3,\\
c_1, & d\geq 4.
\end{cases}
\]
Since $q_x(A;n)\geq q_x(A';n)$ for all~$n$, the claim follows
from Lemma~\ref{l_hit_Green}.
\end{proof}
The previous lemma works well for sparse connected sets. For more densely
packed sets we need another estimate:
\begin{lemma}
\label{l_ball}
For all $x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$, finite $A\subset\mathbb{Z}^d$ containing
at least two sites, and all $n\geq (\ell(x,A))^2$,
\begin{equation*}
q_x(A;n) \geq \frac{C_4|A|^{1-\frac{2}{d}}}{(\ell(x,A))^{d-2}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Again using~\eqref{Green_asymp>}, we have for any $n\geq (\ell(x,A))^2$
\[
g(x,A;n) \geq \frac{C_1|A|}{1+(\ell(x,A))^{d-2}}.
\]
To obtain an upper bound on $g(y,A;n)$ for $y\in A$, we
observe that
\[
|\{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d: \|x\|\in[k,k+1)\}| = \Theta(k^{d-1}).
\]
So, using~\eqref{Green_asymp<}, we have for $y\in A$
\begin{align*}
g(y,A;n) &\leq \sum_{z\in A} \frac{C'_1}{1+\|y-z\|^{d-2}}\\
&\leq \sum_{k=0}^{c_3|A|^{1/d}}
\frac{C'_1 c_4k^{d-1}}{1+k^{d-2}}\\
&\leq c_5 |A|^{2/d},
\end{align*}
where we have used an obvious worst-case estimate (all the points of~$A$
are grouped around~$y$, forming roughly a ball of radius
$\Theta(|A|^{1/d})$) on the passage from the first to the second line of
the above display. Then, applying Lemma~\ref{l_hit_Green} we conclude
the proof of Lemma~\ref{l_ball}.
\end{proof}
We end this section by stating a few well-known facts about the behavior
of the set of sites visited by a simple random walk by time~$n$. As we
could not locate suitable references, we also sketch their proofs.
\begin{lemma}
\label{l_range_SRW}
Suppose that $d\geq 3$ and let
$R(n)=\{X_0,\ldots,X_n\}$ be the set of sites visited by a simple random
walk by time~$n$. Then,
for any fixed $\alpha_1\in (0,1)$,
\begin{equation*}
P\big[n^{1-\alpha_1}\leq
\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(R(n^2))\leq n^{1+\alpha_1},
|R(n^2)|\geq n^{2-2\alpha_1}\big]
\geq 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n).
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The upper bound on the diameter follows from
any convenient large deviation bound on the
displacement of the simple random walk (e.g.\ Lemma~1.5.1
of~\cite{Law91}).
To control the diameter and the number of visited sites from below, we
use the following simple argument: We divide the temporal interval
$[0,n^2]$ into $c^{-1}n^{2\alpha_1}$ subintervals of length
$cn^{2-2\alpha_1}$, for a large enough~$c$. Clearly, on each of the
subintervals of length $cn^{2-2\alpha_1}$ the maximal displacement of
the simple random walk is at least $n^{1-\alpha_1}$ with a constant
probability, e.g.,\ by the central limit theorem. Noting that by
time~$k$ the number of visited sites is at most~$k$, and that the
expectation of this number is at least $c'k$
(it is straightforward to obtain this from~\eqref{Green_asymp>}),
we deduce that also with at least constant probability%
\footnote{For any random variable~$\xi$ with $0\leq \xi\leq a$ a.s.\
and $E \xi\geq b$, it is true that $P[\xi\geq b/2]\geq b/(2a)$.} the
number of different sites visited by the random walk during a fixed
temporal interval of length $cn^{2-2\alpha_1}$ is at least
$n^{2-2\alpha_1}$ (if $c$ is large enough).
Finally, to estimate the
probability that the event of interest occurs on at least one of the
$c^{-1}n^{2\alpha_1}$ subintervals, use the independence. The claim
then follows easily.
\end{proof}
We also need an estimate on the number of different sites
visited by \emph{several} random walks:
\begin{lemma}
\label{l_range_many}
Consider~$k$ independent simple random walks
$(X^{(1)}_j)_{j\ge 0},\ldots,(X^{(k)}_j)_{j\ge 0}$ started from arbitrary points
$x^{(1)},\dots, x^{(k)}$, and denote
$R_j(m)=\{X^{(j)}_0,\ldots,X^{(j)}_m\}$, $j=1,\ldots,k$.
Assume that $n^{h}\leq k\leq n^{d-2}$ for some fixed $h\in(0,d-2)$.
Then, for any~$\alpha_3\in(0,h)$ we have
\begin{equation*}
P\Big[\Big|\bigcup_{j=1}^k R_j(n^2)\Big|\geq kn^{2-\alpha_3}\Big]
\geq 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n).
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We use a similar argument as in the previous proof.
We divide the~$k$ walks into
$c^{-1}n^{\alpha_3}$ groups, each containing $ckn^{-\alpha_3}$
walks. Consider now the $ckn^{-\alpha_3}$ walks of the, say,
first group, suppose that they are labelled from~$1$
to~$ckn^{-\alpha_3}$. Let
\[
V=\bigcup_{j=1}^{ckn^{-\alpha_3}} R_j(n^2)
\]
be the set of sites visited by the walks from the first group. For
$y\in\mathbb{Z}^d$, define
\[
\zeta(y) = \sum_{j=1}^{ckn^{-\alpha_3}} \1{\|x^{(j)}-y\|\leq n}
\]
to be the number of walks of the first group that start at
distance at most~$n$ from~$y$. By~\eqref{prob_to_hit>},
using $\zeta (y)\le k\le n^{d-2}$, we have
\[
P[y\in V] = 1-\prod_{j=1}^{ckn^{-\alpha_3}}
\big(1-q_{x^{(j)}}(y;n^2)\big)
\geq \frac{c'\zeta(y)}{n^{d-2}}.
\]
So, if $c$ is large enough
\begin{align*}
E|V| &= \sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}P[y\in V] \\
& \geq \frac{c'}{n^{d-2}} \sum_{y\in\mathbb{Z}^d}\zeta(y)\\
& \ge \frac{c'ckn^{-\alpha_3}}{n^{d-2}}
\big|\{y:\|y\|\leq n\}\big|\\
&\geq 2kn^{2-\alpha_3}.
\end{align*}
Since, trivially, $|V|\leq ckn^{2-\alpha_3}$, it holds that
$|V|\geq kn^{2-\alpha_3}$ with at least a constant probability.
As the same
reasoning applies to each of the $c^{-1}n^{\alpha_3}$ groups,
the claim of the lemma follows by independence.
\end{proof}
\section{Intersections of random walks}
\label{s_intersections}
In this section we show that the set of points visited by sufficiently many
walks started in~$B(n)$ is typically well connected; the precise statement of
this fact is contained in Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness}.
To state this proposition we need some notation.
We consider
two
sequences of positive random variables
${\hat \eta}^{(n)}_1, {\hat \eta}^{(n)}_2$ satisfying
${\hat \eta}^{(n)}_1\le {\hat \eta}^{(n)}_2$ and
\begin{align}
\mathbb{P}[{\hat \eta}^{(n)}_1\geq C_5 n^{d-2-h}] &\geq 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n),
\label{heta_1}
\\
\mathbb{P}[{\hat \eta}^{(n)}_2\leq C_6 n^{M}] &\geq 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n),
\label{heta_2}
\end{align}
for some $h<\frac{2}{d}$ and $M>0$.
Let $X^{(1)},\ldots,X^{({\hat \eta}^{(n)}_2)}$ be
${\hat \eta}^{(n)}_2$ independent simple random walks starting from
some sites $x^{(1)},\ldots,x^{({\hat \eta}^{(n)}_2)}\in B(n)$. We write $P$
for the joint distribution of these walks.
Let $R_k(m)=\{X^{(k)}_0,\ldots,X^{(k)}_m\}$
be the set of different sites visited by
$k$th random walk until time~$m$. We write $H^k_A$, $\tilde H^k_A$ for
the entrance and hitting time of~$A$ by random walk $X^{(k)}$
(recall~\eqref{def_entrance}).
\begin{definition}
\label{def_(...)-connected}
For integers $s,m\geq 1$
we say that $X^{(i)}$ is $(s,m)$-connected to $X^{(j)}$ if there exist
a sequence of integers $i=k_0,k_1,\ldots,k_s=j$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
&k_t\leq {\hat \eta}^{(n)}_1,
\qquad \text{for all }t=0,\dots,s\\
&R_{k_t}(m)\cap R_{k_{t-1}}(m)\neq \emptyset,
\qquad \text{for all }t=1,\dots,s.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
(We do not indicate the dependence on~$n$ in order to keep the notations
not too heavy.)
\end{definition}
In words, the definition says that
the trajectories are $(s,m)$-connected if one can go from the
starting point of the $i$th trajectory to the starting point of the $j$th
trajectory within the cluster of the first ${\hat \eta}^{(n)}_1$ trajectories,
by changing no more than~$s$ times the trajectory,
and using at most~$m$ sites in the beginning of each trajectory.
Let us define for $k\leq {\hat \eta}^{(n)}_2$ the following set of integers:
\[
L_k = \big\{m\geq 1:
\{X^{(k)}_{3mn^2},\ldots,X^{(k)}_{3(m+1)n^2-1}\}\cap B(n)\neq \emptyset \big\},
\]
and let
\begin{equation}
\label{e:Jn}
J^{(n)} = \{k\leq {\hat \eta}^{(n)}_2 : |L_k|=0\}
\end{equation}
be the index set of the walks that do not come back to~$B(n)$
after the time~$3n^2$.
For $d\geq 3$ and $h<\frac{2}{d}$, define
\begin{equation}
\label{def_beta_d}
\beta(d,h) := \min\Big\{k\geq 1:
\frac{dh}{2}+\Big(d-3+h-\frac{dh}{2}\Big)
\Big(1-\frac{2}{d}\Big)^{k-1}<1\Big\}
\end{equation}
(in fact, this quantity represents the necessary number of steps in the recursive construction used in the proof of Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness}, see~\eqref{def_a_n}
and~\eqref{recursion_a_n}; at this point we only observe that
$\beta(d,h)$ is finite since $\frac{dh}{2}<1$).
The following proposition plays the key role in this paper:
\begin{proposition}
\label{p_connectedness}
Let
${\hat \eta}^{(n)}_1$, ${\hat \eta}^{(n)}_2$ and $X^{(k)}$,
$k\le {\hat \eta}^{(n)}_2$, be as above. Then
\begin{equation}
\label{n2connected}
P\big[\forall i,j\leq {\hat \eta}^{(n)}_1, X^{(i)}\text{ and } X^{(j)}
\text{ are $\big(2\beta(d,h)+1,2n^2\big)$-connected}\big]
\geq 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n).
\end{equation}
Moreover,
\begin{equation}
\label{connected_lower_level}
P\big[\forall i\leq {\hat \eta}^{(n)}_2 \ \exists j\leq {\hat \eta}^{(n)}_1
\text{ such that } R_i(n^2)\cap R_j(2n^2)\neq\emptyset\big]
\geq 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n),
\end{equation}
and
\begin{align}
\label{connected_later_times}
\begin{split}
P\big[&\forall i\leq {\hat \eta}^{(n)}_2\ \forall m\in L_i\
\exists j\leq {\hat \eta}^{(n)}_1
\text{ such that } \\
& ~~~\{X^{(i)}_{3mn^2},\ldots,X^{(i)}_{3(m+1)n^2-1}\}
\cap R_j(2n^2)\neq\emptyset\big]
\geq 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n).
\end{split}
\end{align}
\end{proposition}
\begin{remark}
(a) The estimates in the above proposition only depend on
the number of walks that we consider, they
are uniform with respect to the choice of the starting positions.
(b) Typically, when applying Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness} to the
interlacement set (say, in the ball $B(n)$), the variables
${\hat \eta}^{(n)}_{1}$, ${\hat \eta}^{(n)}_{2}$ will be of order $n^{d-2}$, so
that $h=0$. The proposition implies that the model of random
interlacements is `far from the criticality' with respect to the
connectedness of the interlacement cluster; we typically need much less
than $\Theta(n^{d-2})$ walks to ensure that the interlacement set is `well
connected'.
(c) In the most important case $h=0$, it holds that
$\beta(3,0)=1, \beta(4,0)=2, \beta(5,0)=3, \beta(6,0)=4$, but then
$\beta(7,0)=6$. Comparing this with the results of \cite{RS12,PT11} (where it
is proved that every two points in $\mathcal I^u$ can be joined by a
path switching the trajectory at most $(\lceil d/2\rceil -1)$-times)
indicates that the constants $\beta(d,h)$ are not optimal. The authors
did not check if the formula~\eqref{def_beta_d} can be further
simplified, but it is clear that $\beta(d,h)=\Theta(d\ln d)$ as $d\to\infty$.
In any case, for our needs it is enough to know that $\beta(d,h)$ is
finite for any $d\geq 3$ and $h<2/d$, and this fact is quite obvious.
\end{remark}
First, let us describe informally the idea of the proof
for the particular case $h=0$
(one may note that there are many similarities with the
proof of Theorem~3.2 of~\cite{AMP02}, and with techniques used in
\cite{RS12}).
Consider the random walk~$X^{(1)}$ and run it up to time~$n^2$.
Then, $\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(R_1(n^2))$ is typically of order~$n$, so any other
random walk $X^{(k)}$ hits the set~$R_1(n^2)$ with probability
at least
of order roughly~$n^{-(d-3)}$ (with logarithmic correction for $d=3$)
by Lemma~\ref{l_diam}. Since there are $\Theta(n^{d-2})$ other
available walks, with high probability $R_1(n^2)$ will be hit
by $\Theta(n)$ \emph{different} other walks. In dimension~$d=3$, running
these $\Theta(n)$ walks
for~$n^2$ time units more after the respective hitting
moments of $R_1(n^2)$ is already enough to meet all the other trajectories
(again applying Lemma~\ref{l_diam}, one obtains that
the probability that any other trajectory hits none of those walks
is almost exponentially small in~$n$).
In dimension $d\ge 4$ this argument, however, just barely does not work.
So, what to do in dimension~$4$? Consider those $\Theta(n)$ trajectories
(of length~$n^2$)
that intersect the initial one. Together with the initial
trajectory, they form a connected set of cardinality roughly~$n^3$.
We then apply Lemma~\ref{l_ball} to obtain that a random walk starting
somewhere at the boundary of~$B(n)$ will hit such a set with
probability
at least of order $n^{-2}\times n^{3(1-\frac{2}{d})}$. Since
(recall that now $d=4$) we have $\Theta(n^2)$ walks in total,
typically $\Theta(n^{3(1-\frac{2}{d})})$ of them will hit that set.
Since in four dimensions Lemma~\ref{l_diam} gives lower bound of
order~$n^{-1}$ for the hitting probability of the initial piece
of length~$n^2$ of a generic trajectory and
$3(1-\frac{2}{4})=\frac{3}{2}>1$, running these $\Theta(n^{3/2})$
walks a bit more we meet all the other trajectories with high
probability (see on Figure~\ref{f_inters_RWs} an illustration of the
proof for $d=4$).
\begin{figure}
\centering \includegraphics{intersecting_RWs}
\caption{On the proof
of Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness} for $d=4$. One considers first
the trajectory of some particle (labelled here by~`$1$') up to
time~$n^2$. The trajectories of particles labelled by~`$2$' meet
the first trajectory (the small boxes indicate the corresponding
places of first hitting). The particles labelled by~`$3$' then
hit the set formed by the trajectories with labels~`$1$' and~`$2$'.
Continuing the trajectories of `$3$'-particles a bit more, one
finds a `generic' trajectory (the thick one on this picture) with
very high probability.}
\label{f_inters_RWs}
\end{figure}
Again, in dimension~$d=5$ this fails since Lemma~\ref{l_diam}
now gives a lower bound of order $n^{-2}$. However, iterating the above
construction, we then obtain roughly
$\Theta(n^{(2+3(1-\frac{2}{d}))(1-\frac{2}{d})})$ independent walks,
and, since
$(2+3(1-\frac{2}{5}))(1-\frac{2}{5})=\frac{57}{25}>2$, these are enough to detect
all the other walks. For any fixed~$d$ one can perform enough iterations
to make this construction work.
If we recursively define the sequence
\begin{equation}
\label{def_a_n}
a_1^{(d)}=1, \qquad
a_{n+1}^{(d)}=(a_n^{(d)}+2)\Big(1-\frac{2}{d}\Big),
\end{equation}
then the necessary number of iterations~$\beta(d,0)$ can be calculated
as follows:
\[
\beta(d,0)=\min\{k: a_k^{(d)}>d-3\}.
\]
Since it is straightforward to obtain from the
recursion~\eqref{def_a_n} that
\[
a_n^{(d)}=d-2-(d-3)\Big(1-\frac{2}{d}\Big)^{n-1},
\]
we see
that the above definition of $\beta(d,0)$ agrees
to~\eqref{def_beta_d}.
In order to make the above argument rigorous,
we have to address several issues, for example:
\begin{itemize}
\item Deal with the dependence of the walks that participate
in different stages of the above construction. This can be done
by dividing the walks we use into~$\beta(d,h)$ groups and use one
group on each stage.
\item In fact, the trajectories can go back to the ball~$B(n)$
at later epochs (i.e., much later then $n^2$).
To prove~\eqref{connected_later_times},
we have to assure that the random walks constructed on the
$\beta(d,h)$th stage would meet these pieces of the trajectories
too,
otherwise we would have no good control on the distance within
the interlacement cluster. So, we have to control the `total number
of returns' (see~\eqref{control_Lm} below).
In addition, in the above construction we shall use only the walks
conditioned on not returning
to~$B(n)$ after time~$3n^2$
(in order not to be obliged to condition on a too much
detailed future behaviour of the trajectory).
\item Finally, all the events described in the informal construction
should not only be `typical' in some sense, but hold with probability
at least $1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)$.
For that, we need to `adjust' (by sufficiently
small amounts) the values in the power of~$n$ on each stage.
\end{itemize}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness}]
We start with the formal proof of Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness}. To
simplify the notation we write $\beta = \beta (d,h)$.
Recall~\eqref{e:Jn} and define for $m=1,\ldots,\beta$
\[
J^{(n)}_{m} = \Big\{k\in J^{(n)}:
\frac{(m-1){\hat \eta}^{(n)}_1}{\beta}
\leq k <
\frac{m {\hat \eta}^{(n)}_1}{\beta}
\Big\}.
\]
Since, clearly, there is a constant $c_4>0$ such that for
all~$x\in B(n)$ we have
\begin{equation}
\label{quit_ball}
P_x[X_m\notin B(n)\text{ for all }m\geq n^2] > c_4,
\end{equation}
we obtain that
\begin{equation}
\label{enough_part_psi_d}
P\big[|J^{(n)}_m|
\geq c_5n^{d-2-h}
\text{ for all }m=1,\ldots,\beta\big]
\geq 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n).
\end{equation}
Inequality~\eqref{quit_ball} further implies that
that for every~$k, m\ge 1$
\begin{equation}
\label{control_Lm}
\mathbb{P}[|L_k|>m]\leq e^{-c_7m}.
\end{equation}
In the sequel, we will repeatedly use the following observation. For a
simple random walk~$X$, let $X_{[0,2n^2]}$ be the piece of trajectory
of the walk~$X$ up to time~$2n^2$. Then there is a constant~$c_8>0$
such that for any event~$A$ which depends only on the initial piece of
the trajectory of length~$2n^2$
\begin{equation}
\label{cond_behaviour}
P[X_{[0,2n^2]}\in A \mid X_m\notin B(n) \text{ for all }m>3n^2]
\geq c_8 P[X_{[0,2n^2]}\in A].
\end{equation}
Indeed, to prove~\eqref{cond_behaviour}, we write
\begin{align*}
\lefteqn{P[X_{[0,2n^2]}\in A \mid X_m\notin B(n) \text{ for all }m>3n^2] }\\
&\geq P[X_{[0,2n^2]}\in A , X_m\notin B(n) \text{ for all }m>3n^2] \\
&= P[X_{[0,2n^2]}\in A] P[X_m\notin B(n) \text{ for all }m>3n^2
\mid X_{[0,2n^2]}\in A],
\\&\ge P[X_{[0,2n^2]}\in A] \inf_{x\in \mathbb Z^d}
P_x\Big[X_m\notin B(n) \text{ for all }m>n^2\Big]
\end{align*}
and use~\eqref{quit_ball}
to argue that the last
term is at least of constant order.
As a last preparatory observation, note that,
for any~$\varepsilon>0$,
by Lemma~\ref{l_range_SRW} and the observation following
Definition~\ref{def_s.e.},
\begin{equation}
\label{diam>}
P\bigg[\,
\parbox{10cm}{for all $k\leq{\hat \eta}^{(n)}_2, \mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(R_k(n^2))\geq
n^{1-\varepsilon}$, \\
$\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(\{X^{(k)}_{3mn^2},\ldots,X^{(k)}_{3(m+1)n^2-1}\})\geq n^{1-\varepsilon}$
for all $m\in L_k$}
\bigg]
\geq 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n).
\end{equation}
Let $i_1=\min\{j:j\in J^{(n)}_1\}$, and define
\[
V_1 = R_{i_1}\big(n^2\wedge T^{i_1}_{B(2n)}\big).
\]
For any $j$ we obtain using Lemma~\ref{l_diam},
and~\eqref{cond_behaviour} with $A=\{R_j(n^2)\cap V_1\neq\emptyset\}$,
\begin{equation}
\label{hit_V1}
P[R_j(n^2)\cap V_1\neq \emptyset \mid j\in J^{(n)}_1] \geq
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle
\frac{c_9\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(V_1)}{n\ln n},\qquad & d=3,\\[0.5cm]
\displaystyle\frac{c_9\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(V_1)}{n^{d-2}}, & d\geq 4.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
We introduce the set of indices
$K_1=\big\{j\in J^{(n)}_1\setminus\{i_1\}:
R_j(n^2)\cap V_1\neq \emptyset\big\}$.
By~\eqref{enough_part_psi_d},
\eqref{diam>}, and~\eqref{hit_V1}, using the independence the random
walks $X^{(j)}$,
it holds that
\begin{equation*}
P[|K_1|\geq n^{1-h-\varepsilon_1}]
\geq 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n),
\end{equation*}
where $\varepsilon_1:=2\varepsilon$ ($\varepsilon$ is supposed to be sufficiently
small so that $1-h-\varepsilon_1>0$).
For $d=3$, everything is ready to finish the proof
of Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness}, but for other values of~$d$ we
first need to describe a general step of the construction
(recall that~$\beta$ steps are necessary).
Define recursively (recall~\eqref{def_a_n})
\begin{equation}
\label{recursion_a_n}
\begin{split}
a_1 &= a_1(d,h)=1-h, \\
a_{n+1} &= a_{n+1}(d,h)=(a_n(d,h)+2)\Big(1-\frac{2}{d}\Big)-h.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
From the above recursion it is straightforward to obtain
that
\[
a_n = d-2-\frac{dh}{2}-\Big(d-3+h-\frac{dh}{2}\Big)
\Big(1-\frac{2}{d}\Big)^{n-1}.
\]
So, with $\beta$ defined by~\eqref{def_beta_d},
it holds that $a_{\beta}>d-3$.
Assume that for some $1\leq m\leq \beta-1$ we have constructed
the connected sets~$V_m\subset\mathbb{Z}^d$ and also
the sets $K_m\subset J^{(n)}_m$ of indices of the walks which
hit~$V_m$ before time~$n^2$,
such that with probability at least $1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)$
\begin{equation}
\label{size_Km}
|K_m|\geq n^{a_m-\varepsilon_m}.
\end{equation}
Then, define
\[
V_{m+1}
= V_m\cup\Big(\bigcup_{j\in
K_m}R_j\big(2n^2\wedge T^j_{B(2n)}\big) \Big).
\]
By Lemma~\ref{l_range_many} (observe that, by~\eqref{cond_behaviour},
its proof still goes through in this situation)
and~\eqref{size_Km}
it holds that
\begin{equation}
\label{size_Vm}
P\big[|V_{m+1}|\geq n^{2+a_m-2\varepsilon_m}\big]
\geq 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n).
\end{equation}
Define
$K_{m+1}=\{j\in J^{(n)}_{m+1}: R_j(n^2)\cap V_m\neq \emptyset\}$.
Observe that, by Lemma~\ref{l_ball} and~\eqref{cond_behaviour} with
$A=\{R(n^2)\cap V_{m+1}\neq \emptyset\}$,
for any $j\in J^{(n)}_{m+1}$
\begin{equation}
\label{hit_Vm+1}
P[R_j(n^2)\cap V_{m+1}\neq \emptyset]
\geq \frac{c|V_{m+1}|^{1-\frac{2}{d}}}{n^{d-2}}.
\end{equation}
So, using~\eqref{enough_part_psi_d},
\eqref{diam>}, \eqref{size_Vm}, and~\eqref{hit_Vm+1},
we obtain
\begin{equation*}
P\big[|K_{m+1}|\geq
n^{(2+a_m-2\varepsilon_m)(1-\frac{2}{d})-h-\varepsilon_m}\big]
\geq 1- \mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n),
\end{equation*}
and (for the next induction step) denote
$\varepsilon_{m+1}=a_{m+1}-(2+a_m-2\varepsilon_m)(1-\frac{2}{d})+\varepsilon_m$,
so that~\eqref{size_Km} would hold with $m+1$ instead of~$m$.
Now we describe the last step needed for the proof
of~\eqref{n2connected}, \eqref{connected_lower_level},
and~\eqref{connected_later_times}. Assume that on the initial
step the parameter~$\varepsilon$ was chosen to be so small that
$a_{\beta}-\varepsilon_{\beta}>d-3+\varepsilon$.
Consider the walks with indices in~$K_{\beta}$; after hitting
$V_{\beta}$ the rest of the trajectory is conditionally
independent from the initial part, so
Lemma~\ref{l_diam} and~\eqref{cond_behaviour} imply that,
for $j\in K_{\beta}$
\[
P\Big[\big\{X^{(j)}_{H^j_{V_{\beta}}+1},
\ldots,X^{(j)}_{H^j_{V_{\beta}}+n^2}\big\}
\cap A\neq \emptyset\Big] \geq
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle
\frac{cn^{-\varepsilon}}{\ln n}, & d=3,\\[0.5cm]
\displaystyle\frac{cn^{-\varepsilon}}{n^{d-3}}, & d\geq 4,
\end{cases}
\]
for any connected set
$A\subset B(2n)$ such that $\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(A)\geq n^{1-\varepsilon}$.
Using this together with~\eqref{control_Lm} and~\eqref{diam>},
we conclude the proof of Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness}.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{t_connected}}
\label{s_connected}
Using Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness}, it is straightforward to show
Theorem~\ref{t_connected}.
Denote by $\eta^{(n)}_u$ the number
of trajectories at level $u$ entering $B(n)$, that is the number of
trajectories in the support $\mu^u_{B(n)}$ (recall \eqref{e:muKu} for
the notation). By the definition of random interlacement,
$\eta^{(n)}_u$ has Poisson distribution
with parameter $u\mathop{\mathrm{cap}}(B(n)) = \Theta(un^{d-2})$.
Therefore,
using e.g.\ Chernoff bounds we obtain for small enough~$c_1$
and large enough $c_2$ that
\begin{equation}
\label{est_num_eta}
\mathbb{P}[c_1u n^{d-2}<\eta^{(n)}_u < c_2un^{d-2}]
\geq 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n).
\end{equation}
Assume for the moment that
\begin{equation}
\label{int_absurd}
\mathbb{P}[\text{there exists $u>0$ such that $\mathcal{I}^u$ is not connected}]>0.
\end{equation}
Then, one can find $\varepsilon>0$ and $0<u<{\hat u}<\infty$ such that
\[
\mathbb{P}[\text{there exists $u'\in[u,{\hat u}]$
such that $\mathcal{I}^{u'}$ is not connected}] \geq\varepsilon,
\]
and so, denoting by
$\mathcal{I}^u_{(n)} := \bigcup_{i:w_i\in \mathop{\mathrm{supp}} \mu^u_{B(n)}}\mathop{\mathrm{Ran}} w_i$ the interlacement set generated
by the trajectories that intersect~$B(n)$, we have
\[
\liminf_{n\to\infty} \mathbb{P}[\text{there exists $u'\in[u,{\hat u}]$
such that $\mathcal{I}^{u'}_{(n)}$ is not connected}] \geq\varepsilon.
\]
This, however, contradicts Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness}:
putting
${\hat \eta}^{(n)}_1=\eta^{(n)}_u$,
${\hat \eta}^{(n)}_2=\eta^{(n)}_{{\hat u}}$,
and using~\eqref{est_num_eta}, we see that,
if both events in the left-hand sides of~\eqref{n2connected}
and~\eqref{connected_lower_level} occur, then $\mathcal{I}^{u'}_{(n)}$
should be connected for all $u'\in[u,{\hat u}]$;
on the other hand, the probability of these events
approaches~$1$ as $n\to\infty$.
So,~\eqref{int_absurd} cannot be true.
\qed
\section{Large deviations for the internal distance}
\label{s:ap}
In this section we prove Theorem~\ref{t_ap}. To this end we fix
$a\in (0,1/3)$ and
investigate the properties of $\mathcal I^u$ when restricted to
\[
G^{(n)}_a = \bigcup_{k=0}^n B(k\mathbf{e}_1,n^a).
\]
In words, $G^{(n)}_a$ is the $n^a$-neighbourhood of the segment
between the origin and $n\mathbf{e}_1$
(recall that $B(x,r)$ denotes the ball in the $\|\cdot\|_\infty$-distance).
First,
we need the following elementary estimate on $e_{G_a^{(n)}}(A)$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{l:escape_sausage}
Let $F_k$ be the hyperplane $\{x\in\mathbb{Z}^d:x\cdot \mathbf{e}_1 =k\}$. Then, for
any $k\in \{-\lfloor n^a \rfloor + 1, \dots, \lfloor n + n^a\rfloor-1\}$, it holds that
\begin{equation*}
e_{G^{(n)}_a}(F_k)=
\sum_{x\in \partial G^{(n)}_a\cap F_k}
P_x[\tilde H_{G^{(n)}_a}=\infty] \geq
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle
\frac{cn^{a(d-3)}}{\ln n}, & d=3,\\[0.3cm]
\displaystyle
{c}{n^{a(d-3)}}, & d\geq 4.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We adapt the proof of Proposition~2.4.5 of~\cite{Law91}. Let
$\tilde G_{n}=([-4n,4n]\times[-n^a,n^a]^{d-1})\cap \mathbb Z^d$.
As $\tilde G_n -\ell \mathbf{e}_1 \supset G_a^{(n)}-k \mathbf{e}_1$ for any $k$ as in the
statement and $\ell\in \{-2n,\dots,2n\}$,
\begin{equation}
\label{e:fga}
\sum_{z\in \partial G^{(n)}_a\cap F_k}
P_z[\tilde H_{G^{(n)}_a}=\infty]\ge
\sum_{z\in \partial \tilde G_n\cap F_\ell}
P_z[\tilde H_{\tilde G_n} = \infty].
\end{equation}
Let $W=\tilde G_n\cap \{x:|x\cdot \mathbf{e}_1|> 2n\}$. It is elementary to see that
$P_0[H_W=\infty]\ge c$.
Inspecting the proof of \cite[Proposition 2.4.1(c)]{Law91}, denoting by
$L$ the last time the random walk visits $\tilde G_n$, we get
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
c&\le P_0[H_W=\infty] \\ &\le P_0[|X_L\cdot \mathbf{e}_1|\le 2n]
\\&=
\sum_{z\in\partial \tilde G_n,|z\cdot \mathbf{e}_1|\le 2n}g(0,z)
P_z[\tilde H_{\tilde G_n}=\infty]
\\&\le \sum_{\ell=-2n}^{2n}\sup_{z\in \partial \tilde G_n\cap F_\ell}
g(0,z) \sum_{z\in \partial \tilde G_n\cap F_\ell}
P_z[\tilde H_{\tilde G_n}=\infty] .
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Using \eqref{e:fga}, we then get
\begin{equation*}
c\le
\sum_{z\in \partial G_a^{(n)}\cap F_k}
P_z[\tilde H_{\tilde G_n}=\infty]
\sum_{\ell=-2n}^{2n}\sup_{z\in \partial \tilde G_n\cap F_\ell} g(0,z) .
\end{equation*}
The lemma then follows using the elementary asymptotics
$g(0,z)\asymp \|z\|^{2-d}$
(recall~\eqref{Green_asymp>}--\eqref{Green_asymp<}).
\end{proof}
Let $\eta_n=\eta_n(u,a)$ be the number of trajectories of
$\mu^u_{G^{(n)}_a}$ (recall~\eqref{e:muKu}). As before, we enumerate the
corresponding random walks as $X^{(1)},\ldots, X^{(\eta_n)}$, denote
their starting positions by $x^{(1)},\dots, x^{(\eta_n)}$, and let
$R_k(m)$ be the set of different sites visited by $k$th random walk by
time~$m$.
Let us define
\begin{equation}
\label{def_Uj}
U_k = B(\lfloor kn^a\rfloor\mathbf{e}_1,n^a) =
\{y\in G^{(n)}_a : |y\cdot\mathbf{e}_1-\lfloor kn^a\rfloor|<n^a\},
\qquad k=0,\dots, n.
\end{equation}
Due to Lemma~\ref{l:escape_sausage}, for any $k\in \{0,\dots,n\}$,
\begin{equation*}
e_{G_a^{(n)}}(U_k) \ge f_d(n) :=
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle
\frac{cn^{a(d-2)}}{\ln n}, & d=3,\\[0.3cm]
\displaystyle
{c}{n^{a(d-2)}}, & d\geq 4.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Let $\eta_{n,k}=|\{i\le \eta_n:X^{(i)}_0\in U_k \}|$ be the number
of walks starting in $U_k$.
Using the large deviation properties of the Poisson distribution,
as in~\eqref{est_num_eta}, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{e:entracesaussage}
\mathbb P\big[c_1f_d(n)\le \eta_{n,k} \le
c_2f_d(n)\big]\ge 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n).
\end{equation}
We now fix a small positive constant $\varepsilon>0$, and define for
$1\le k\le \eta_n$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
j_k&=\inf\{j\ge 0:
X^{(k)}_{n^{2(a+\varepsilon )}+(j-1) n^{2a}+i} \notin G_a^{(n)},
\forall i=0,\dots, n^{2a}\},\\
\hat t_k &= n^{2(a+\varepsilon )}+j_k n^{2a},\\
\tilde t_k &= \inf\{j\ge 0: \mathop{\mathrm{diam}} (R_k(j))\ge 2 n^{2(a+\varepsilon) }\}
\wedge \hat t_k.
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
Denote by $\hat \mathcal{I}$ (respectively, $\tilde \mathcal{I}$) the `interlacement' set
formed only by the initial pieces of length~$\hat t_k$ (respectively,
$\tilde t_k$) of the trajectories $(X^{(k)}, k=1,\ldots,\eta_n)$:
\[
\hat{\mathcal{I}} = \bigcup_{k=1}^{\eta_n} R_k(\hat t_k),\qquad
\tilde{\mathcal{I}} = \bigcup_{k=1}^{\eta_n} R_k(\tilde t_k).
\]
Observe that $\mathcal{I}^u\supset \hat \mathcal{I}\supset \tilde \mathcal{I}$. Further, by the central limit
theorem, for any $x\in G_a^{(n)}$, $P_x[T_{G_a^{(n)}}\le n^{2a}]\ge c$.
Therefore, using the strong Markov property recursively on the definition
of $j_k$,
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb P[j_k\ge n^\varepsilon ]\le \mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.} (n).
\end{equation*}
When $j_k\le n^\varepsilon $, then
$\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(R_k(\hat t_k))\le 2n^{2(a+\varepsilon )}$. Therefore,
\begin{equation}
\label{e:hatItildeI}
\mathbb P[\hat \mathcal{I} \neq \tilde \mathcal{I}]\le \mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n).
\end{equation}
Heuristically, the set $\hat \mathcal{I}$, is `well suited' for application of
Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness} as it has no `dangling ends' in
$G_a^{(n)}$. By this we mean that knowing that
$X^{(k)}$ is in $G_a^{(n)}$ at some time $j$, its next $n^{2a}$ steps will
be contained in $\hat \mathcal{I}$:
\begin{equation*}
\{X^{(k)}_j\in G_a^{(n)}, j\le \hat t_k\} \implies \{\hat t_k \ge j+n^{2a}\}.
\end{equation*}
On the other hand, the trajectories in $\tilde \mathcal{I}$ are `short range', which
will introduce some independence later.
We now introduce a notation that will be useful many times,
see Figure~\ref{f:psis} for its illustration.
For $x\in\mathbb{Z}^d\setminus\{0\}$ and $y\in\mathbb{Z}^d$, we define
\begin{align*}
\zeta^{(x)}_0(y) &= \max\{m\leq 0 : mx+y\in\mathcal{I}^u\},\\
\zeta^{(x)}_{k+1}(y) &= \min\{m>\zeta^{(x)}_k(y) : mx+y\in\mathcal{I}^u\},
\quad k\geq 0.
\end{align*}
We set
$\psi^{(x)}_k(y):=y+\big(\zeta^{(x)}_k(y)\big)x$ to be the
site on~$\mathcal{I}^u$ corresponding to~$\zeta^{(x)}_k(y)$.
When $y=0$ and/or $x=\mathbf{e}_1$, we omit them from the notation, that is
e.g.~$\zeta_k:=\zeta^{(\mathbf{e}_1)}_k(0)$.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics{psizeta}
\caption{Construction of $\zeta^{(x)}_i(y)$ and $\psi^{(x)}_i(y)$.
Here ${\zeta^{(x)}_0(y)=-1}$, $\zeta^{(x)}_1(y)=2$,
$\zeta^{(x)}_2(y)=3$ and $\zeta^{(x)}_3(y)=5$.}
\label{f:psis}
\end{figure}
As the first step of the proof of Theorem~\ref{t_ap}, we control the
distance between the left- and right-most intersection of $\mathcal I^u$
with the segment $(0,n\mathbf{e}_1]$. More precisely, we want to show that
\begin{equation}
\label{e:rho_onedir}
\mathbb{P}[\rho_u(\psi_1, \psi_0(n\mathbf{e}_1))\geq cn]\le \mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)
\end{equation}
for a $c$ large. (Observe that $\mathbb{P}^u_0[\psi_0=0]=1$.)
We write $\hat\rho(x,y)$ for the internal distance of $x$, $y$ on
$\hat \mathcal{I}$ and define ${\hat \psi}_i^{(x)}(y)$ similarly as $\psi_i^{(x)}(y)$,
using $\hat\mathcal{I}$ instead of $\mathcal{I}^u$. Observe that ${\hat \psi}_i^{(x)}(y)$ depends
on $n$. It may happen that
${\hat \psi}_1 = \psi_1$, ${\hat \psi}_0(n\mathbf{e}_1)=\psi_0(n\mathbf{e}_1)$, but that is not
certain. In any case,
\begin{equation}
\label{e:triangle}
\rho_u(\psi_1, \psi_0(n\mathbf{e}_1)) \le
\rho_u(\psi_1,{\hat \psi}_1) + \hat\rho({\hat \psi}_1,{\hat \psi}_0(n\mathbf{e}_1)) +
\rho_u({\hat \psi}_0(n\mathbf{e}_1), \psi_0(n\mathbf{e}_1)).
\end{equation}
To bound the right-hand side,
we need few lemmas.
\begin{lemma}
\label{l:dist_exp_tail}
Let $g_d(k)=e^{-c_4k}$ when $d\ge 4$, and $g_3(k)=e^{-c_4k/\ln k}$.
Then, for every $a\in (0,1/3)$, $\varepsilon >0$,
$x\in \mathbb Z^d\setminus\{0\}$, $y\in\mathbb Z^d$,
\begin{equation}
\label{e:inbox}
\mathbb{P}\big[\|\psi^{(x)}_1(y)\|_\infty\ge k\big]\le g_d(k),\\
\end{equation}
Further, for $y$ such that $B(y,n^{a/2})\subset G_a^{(n)}$,
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{P}\big[\|{\hat \psi}_1^{(\mathbf{e}_1)}(y)\|_\infty\ge k\big]\le g_d(k)+\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n).
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $S_k=\{y+jx:0\le j\le k\}$. The first claim follows directly from
the definition of~$\mathcal{I}^u$ (observe that for any $A\subset\mathbb{Z}^d$
it holds that $\mathbb{P}^u[A\cap \mathcal{I}^u = \emptyset]=e^{-u\mathop{\mathrm{cap}}(A)}$)
and the simple estimate on the capacity of
the `segment' $S_k$ (see e.g.~\cite{Law91}, Proposition~2.4.5)
\begin{equation*}
\mathop{\mathrm{cap}} S_k =
\begin{cases}
\Theta(k/\ln k), \quad & d=3,\\
\Theta(k), &d\ge 4.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
For the second statement, we assume without loss of generality that
$y=0$, and define
$A_n=\{0\le k \le n^\varepsilon, k \text{ even}\}$.
For every $j\in A_n$,
and $x\in U_j$, by Lemma~\ref{l_diam},
\begin{equation*}
q_x(S_k;n^{2(a +\varepsilon) }) \ge
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle
\frac{ck}{((j+1)n^a)^{d-2}\ln k}, & d=3,\\[0.3cm]
\displaystyle
\frac{ck}{((j+1)n^a)^{d-2}}, & d\ge4.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Combining this estimate with \eqref{e:entracesaussage}, using
$\hat t_k\ge n^{2(a+\varepsilon )}$, we obtain in
$d=3$,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{P}\big[\|{\hat \psi}_1\|_\infty\ge k\big]
&\le \mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)+\prod_{j\in A_n}
\Big(1-\frac{ck}{((j+1)n^a)^{d-2}\ln k}\Big)^{c_1 n^{a(d-2)}/\ln n}
\\&\le \mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)+
\exp\bigg\{-\frac{c_3 k}{\ln n\ln k}
\sum_{j\in A_n}\frac{1}{(j+1)^{d-2}}\bigg\}
\\&\le e^{-c_4 k /\ln k} + \mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.} (n).
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
For $d\ge 4$ the calculation is very similar. Actually, it is
sufficient to consider only the term $j=0$, as there are no
logarithmic terms in the denominator.
\end{proof}
As a consequence of the last lemma and Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness}
we obtain,
\begin{align}
\mathbb{P}[\rho_u({\hat \psi}_1,\psi_1)\leq c'n^{2a}]
&\geq 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n),
\label{distance_psi0}\\
\mathbb{P}[\rho_u({\hat \psi}_0(n\mathbf{e}_1),
\psi_0(n\mathbf{e}_1))\leq c'n^{2a}]
&\geq 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n).
\label{distance_psin}
\end{align}
Indeed, obviously
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\label{e:odhad}
\mathbb{P}&[\rho_u(\psi_1,{\hat \psi}_1)\geq c'n^{2a}]
\\&\le
\mathbb P[\{\psi_1,{\hat \psi}_1\}\not\subset B(n^a)]
+
\mathbb P\big[\{\psi_1,{\hat \psi}_1\}\subset B(n^a), \rho_u(\psi_1,{\hat \psi}_1)\ge
c'n^{2a}\big].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The first term in the right-hand side is $\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)$ by
Lemma~\ref{l:dist_exp_tail}. For the second one, it suffices to set
$c'=3(2\beta (h,d)+1)$ and apply Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness}
to~$U_0$ (recall~\eqref{def_Uj}) and ${\hat \eta}_1^{(n)}={\hat \eta}_2^{(n)}=\eta_{n,0}$
which satisfy the assumptions~\eqref{heta_1} and~\eqref{heta_2} due
to~\eqref{e:entracesaussage}. Claim~\eqref{distance_psi0} then follows.
The proof of~\eqref{distance_psin} is completely analogous.
Similarly, applying Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness} to
the sequence of sets~$U_k$, $k=0,\ldots,n$,
we obtain that
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{P}[\hat\mathcal{I} \text{ is connected}]\geq 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n).
\end{equation*}
To bound the middle term on the right-hand side of \eqref{e:triangle}, we
consider the sequence of random variables
\begin{equation*}
\hat T^n_k = \begin{cases}
\hat \rho(k\mathbf{e}_1,{\hat \psi}_1(k\mathbf{e}_1)), & \text{ if }
k\mathbf{e}_1\in{\hat\mathcal{I}}, \|{\hat \psi}_1(k\mathbf{e}_1)-k\mathbf{e}_1\|\le n^a\\
0, & \text{ otherwise }.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
It is clear that on the event
$\{\|{\hat \psi}_1(k\mathbf{e}_1)-k\mathbf{e}_1\|\le n^a:k=0,\dots,n\}$, which by
Lemma~\ref{l:dist_exp_tail} has probability $1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)$, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{sum_T}
\hat \rho({\hat \psi}_1,{\hat \psi}_0(n\mathbf{e}_1))
\leq \sum_{k=0}^n \hat T^n_k .
\end{equation}
To control the sum, we need a tail estimate on $\hat T^n_k$ that is
uniform in $n$.
\begin{lemma} For every $k=0,\dots,n$, uniformly in $k$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb P[\hat T^n_k\ge \ell]\le \mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)+\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(\ell).
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Without loss of generality we consider $k=0$ only. First, we fix
$m\le n^a/2$ and control the number of trajectories entering $B(m)$. We
claim that
\begin{equation}
\label{e:entrancesBm}
\mathbb P[|\{i\le \eta_{n}:H^i_{B(m)}\le \hat t_i\}\ge c_5 m^{d-2}]
\ge 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.} (m).
\end{equation}
To prove \eqref{e:entrancesBm} we use an argument similar to the proof
of Lemma~\ref{l:dist_exp_tail}.
We define
$A_n=\{0\le k \le n^{\varepsilon/2}, k \text{ even}\}$.
For every $j\in A_n$,
and $x\in U_j$, by Lemma~\ref{l_ball},
\begin{equation*}
q_x(B(m);n^{2(a +\varepsilon) }) \ge
\frac{cm^{d-2}}{((j+1)n^a)^{d-2}}.
\end{equation*}
Using \eqref{e:entracesaussage}, the number of walks starting in~$U_j$
hitting $B(m)$ has a Poisson distribution with parameter at least
\begin{equation*}
\frac{cf_d(n)m^{d-2}}{((j+1)n^a)^{d-2}} \ge
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle
\frac{c'm^{d-2}}{(j+1)^{d-2} \ln n}, \qquad &d=3,\\[3mm]
\displaystyle
\frac{c'm^{d-2}}{(j+1)^{d-2} }, &d\ge 4.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
Using the stability of the Poisson distribution, this yields that the
number of walks starting in $\bigcup_{j\in A_n}U_j$ hitting $B(m)$
has a Poisson distribution with mean at least $c'' m^{d-2}$.
Claim~\eqref{e:entrancesBm} then follows from the large deviation
properties of the Poisson distribution again.
We now apply Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness} with $m$ instead of $n$,
$G_m=B(m)$ and ${\hat \eta}_1^{(m)}$, ${\hat \eta}_2^{(m)}$ being the number of
walks entering $B(m)$. Assumptions \eqref{heta_1}, \eqref{heta_2} are
satisfied by the previous discussion. The construction of $\hat \mathcal{I}$
assures that the walks do not stop earlier than after making
$2m^2\le 2n^{2a}$ steps. Therefore, by an argument similar to proof of
\eqref{distance_psi0}, for $c'=2(2 \beta (h,d)+3)$
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb P[\hat T_0^n\ge c'm^2]\le \mathbb P[0\in \hat \mathcal{I}]\big(
\mathbb P_0^u[{\hat \psi}_1 \notin B(m)] +
\mathbb P_0^u[\hat T_0^n\ge c'm^2,{\hat \psi}_1\in B(m)]\big).
\end{equation*}
Both terms in the parentheses are $\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(m)$, the first one by
Lemma~\ref{l:dist_exp_tail}, the second one by
Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness}. Taking $m_\ell$ such that
$c'm_\ell^2 = \ell$, the lemma follows for for $\ell < c'(n/2)^{2a}$.
For the remaining $\ell$'s it suffices to observe that
$\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(\ell)\le \mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)$ and apply the same reasoning as before with
$B(n^a)$ instead of $B(m)$.
\end{proof}
We can now control the sum \eqref{sum_T}. To this end we define
$\tilde \rho $, $\tilde \psi_i^{(x)}(y)$, $\tilde T_k^n$ in the same way
as $\hat \rho$, $\hat \psi_i^{(x)}(y)$, $\hat T_k^n$, using $\tilde \mathcal{I}$
instead of $\hat\mathcal{I}$. Due to \eqref{e:hatItildeI},
\begin{equation}
\label{e:tildeThatT}
\mathbb P[\text{there exists }
0\le k \le n:\hat T_n^k \neq \tilde T_n^k] \le \mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n).
\end{equation}
Therefore, by the previous lemma, for every $k$,
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb P[\tilde T^n_k\ge \ell]\le \mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)+\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(\ell).
\end{equation*}
The random variable $\tilde T^n_k$ depends only on the random walks that
can enter the ball $B(k\mathbf{e}_1, n^a)$. As
$\mathop{\mathrm{diam}}(R_i(\tilde t_k))\le 2n^{2(\alpha +\varepsilon )}$ by definition,
setting $b_n=5n^{2(\alpha +\varepsilon )}$, this implies that for every
$j\in \{1,\dots, b_n\}$ the random variables
$(T_{kb_n +j}:k=1,\ldots, n/b_n)$ are independent.
Therefore, for large enough~$c$, using the
observation above \eqref{sum_T}, and \eqref{e:tildeThatT},
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\label{e:middlebound}
\mathbb{P}[\hat \rho({\hat \psi}_1,{\hat \psi}_0(n\mathbf{e}_1))\geq cn/2]
&\leq \mathbb{P}\Big[\sum_{k=0}^n \hat T_k\geq cn/2\Big] + \mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)\\
&\leq \mathbb{P}\Big[\sum_{k=0}^n \tilde T_k\geq cn/2\Big] + \mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n)\\
&\leq \mathbb{P}\Big[\exists j\in[1,b_n] :
\sum_{k=0}^{n/b_n} T_{kb_n+j}\geq cn/(2b_n) \Big]
\\
&\leq 1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where for the last inequality we used the fact that $a<\frac{1}{3}$ and
then applied a large deviation bound for random variables without
exponential moments (e.g., Theorem~1.1 of~\cite{Nag79}).
Combining \eqref{e:middlebound}, \eqref{distance_psi0},
\eqref{distance_psin} with \eqref{e:triangle}, the inequality
\eqref{e:rho_onedir} follows.
To conclude the proof of Theorem~\ref{t_ap}, observe
that~\eqref{e:rho_onedir} implies that for large enough~$c$
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{P}[\exists k\in[n/2&,n] \text{ such that }k\mathbf{e}_1\in\mathcal{I}^u \text{ and }
\rho_u(\psi_1, k\mathbf{e}_1)\geq cn]
\\
&\leq \mathbb{P}\Big[\bigcup_{j\in[n/2,n]}
\{\rho_u(\psi_1, \psi_0(j\mathbf{e}_1))\geq cn\}\Big]\\
& \leq\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n),
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
and then, since for any $k\in[0,n/2]$ such that $k\mathbf{e}_1\in\mathcal{I}^u$ one can
write
$\rho_u(\psi_1, k\mathbf{e}_1)\leq \rho_u(\psi_1, \psi_0(n\mathbf{e}_1))
+\rho_u(\psi_0(n\mathbf{e}_1), k\mathbf{e}_1)$,
we have
\begin{equation}
\label{reach_line}
\mathbb{P}[\exists k\in[-n,n] \text{ such that }k\mathbf{e}_1\in\mathcal{I}^u \text{ and }
\rho_u(\psi_1, k\mathbf{e}_1)\geq cn] \leq\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n).
\end{equation}
Observe that, by symmetry, \eqref{reach_line} also holds
if one substitutes~$\mathbf{e}_1$ by any coordinate vector~$\mathbf{e}_j$,
$j=2,\ldots,d$.
The claim of the lemma then follows if one writes, on
$x=(x_1,\ldots,x_d)\in \mathcal{I}_u$ and $0\in \mathcal{I}^u$,
\begin{equation*}
\begin{split}
\rho_u(0,x)&\leq \rho_u(0,\psi_1^{(\mathbf{e}_1)}(0))
+\rho_u(\psi_1^{(\mathbf{e}_1)(0)},\psi_0^{(\mathbf{e}_1)}(x_1\mathbf{e}_1))
\\&
+\rho_u(\psi_0^{(\mathbf{e}_1)}(x_1\mathbf{e}_1),\psi_1^{(\mathbf{e}_2)}x_1\mathbf{e}_1)
+\rho_u(\psi_1^{(\mathbf{e}_2)}x_1\mathbf{e}_1,\psi_0^{(\mathbf{e}_2)}(x_1\mathbf{e}_1+x_2\mathbf{e}_2))
\\&+ \dots
\\&+
\rho_u(\psi_0^{(\mathbf{e}_{d-1})}(x_1\mathbf{e}_1+\cdots+x_{d-1}\mathbf{e}_{d-1})
,\psi_1^{(\mathbf{e}_d)}(x_1\mathbf{e}_1+\cdots+x_{d-1}\mathbf{e}_{d-1}))
\\&\qquad +\rho_u(\psi_1^{(\mathbf{e}_d)}(x_1\mathbf{e}_1+\cdots+x_{d-1}\mathbf{e}_{d-1}),\psi_0^{(\mathbf{e}_d)}(x)),
\end{split}
\end{equation*}
and uses the same reasoning for the even terms in the right-hand side,
and bounds the odd terms using~\eqref{e:inbox} and
Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness}, using the same argument as e.g.\
in~\eqref{e:odhad}. This completes the proof of Theorem~\ref{t_ap}. \qed
\section{Proof of the shape theorem}
\label{s_proof_shape}
In this section, to prove Theorem~\ref{t_shape}, we use more or less
standard argument based on the Subadditive Ergodic Theorem. For reader's
convenience, let us state this theorem here (we use the version
of~\cite{Lig85}):
\begin{theorem}
\label{t_subadd}
Suppose that $\{Y(m,n)\}$ is a collection of
positive random variables indexed by integers
satisfying $ 0 \leq m< n $ such that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $ Y(0,n) \le Y(0,m) + Y(m,n)$
for all $ 0 \le m < n $;
\item[(ii)] The joint distribution of $ \{Y(m+1, m+k+1), k \ge 1\} $
is the same as that of $ \{ Y(m, m+k), k \ge 1\} $ for each $ m
\ge 0 $;
\item[(iii)] For each $ k \ge 1 $ the sequence of random variables
$ \{Y(nk, (n+1)k), n \ge 1\} $ is a stationary
ergodic process;
\item[(iv)] $ \mathbb{E} Y(0,1) < \infty $.
\end{itemize}
Then, it holds that
\[
\lim_{n \to \infty} \frac{Y(0,n)}{n} = \inf_{n \ge 0}
\frac{\mathbb{E} Y(0,n)}{n} \qquad \text{a.s.}
\]
\end{theorem}
We are going to verify the hypotheses of Theorem~\ref{t_subadd}
for the sequence of random variables
\begin{equation*}
Y(m,n) = \rho_u(\psi^{(x)}_m,\psi^{(x)}_n),
\end{equation*}
under the measure~$\mathbb{P}_0^u$. First, (i) is obvious since $\rho_u$
is a metric. Stationarity and ergodicity in (ii)--(iii) follow
from the corresponding properties of $\mathcal{I}^u$, see Theorem~2.1
of~\cite{Szn10}.
The property~(iv) then follows from the estimate
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{P}_0^u[\rho_u(0,\psi^{(x)}_1)>n]
\leq \mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(n),
\end{equation*}
which can be proved by applying the same procedure as in \eqref{e:odhad},
using Lemma~\ref{l:dist_exp_tail} and Proposition~\ref{p_connectedness}.
Theorem~\ref{t_subadd} implies that for
any~$x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$ there exists a positive
number $\sigma_u'(x)$ such that
\begin{equation}
\label{def_sigma'}
\mathbb{P}^u_0\Big[\lim_{n\to\infty}
\frac{\rho_u(0,\psi^{(x)}_n)}{n}=\sigma_u'(x)\Big] = 1.
\end{equation}
Then, define for $x\neq 0$
\begin{equation}
\label{def_sigma}
\sigma_u(x) = \frac{\sigma_u'(x)}{\mathbb{E}^u_0 \zeta^{(x)}_1},
\end{equation}
and $\sigma_u(0):=0$.
With~\eqref{def_sigma'} it is straightforward to obtain
(observe that, according to our notations,
$\psi^{(x)}_0(nx)$ is either~$nx$ itself in the case~$nx\in\mathcal{I}^u$,
or it is the `last site before $nx$' on the
discrete ray $\{kx, k\geq 0\}$ if~$nx\notin\mathcal{I}^u$), using also
the usual Ergodic Theorem and \eqref{e:inbox}, that
\begin{equation}
\label{lim_sigma}
\lim_{n\to\infty} \frac{\rho_u(0,\psi^{(x)}_0(nx))}{n}
=\sigma_u(x) \qquad \text{$\mathbb{P}^u_0$-a.s.}
\end{equation}
It is also straightforward to obtain that for any integer~$m$
and $x\in\mathbb{Z}^d$, it holds that $\sigma_u(mx)=m\sigma_u(x)$; this permits
us to extend~$\sigma_u$ to~$\mathbb{Q}^d$ by $\sigma_u(x):=m^{-1}\sigma_u(mx)$,
where~$m$ is such that $mx\in\mathbb{Z}^d$.
Also, it is clear that $\sigma_u(x)\geq \|x\|_1$ for any $x\in\mathbb{Q}^d$.
Next, the goal is to prove that~$\sigma_u$ is a norm.
\begin{lemma}
\label{l_norm_rationals}
For all $x,y\in\mathbb{Q}^d$ we have
\begin{equation}
\label{norm_rationals}
\sigma_u(x+y)\leq \sigma_u(x)+\sigma_u(y).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Abbreviate $b_x=\mathbb{E}^u_0\zeta^{(x)}_1$; from the Ergodic Theorem
we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{norm_psi}
\lim_{n\to\infty}\frac{\|\psi^{(x)}_{b_x^{-1}n}-nx\|}{n} = 0
\qquad \text{ $\mathbb{P}^u_0$-a.s.}
\end{equation}
Since~$\rho_u$ is a metric, we have (see Figure~\ref{f_norm})
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics{norm}
\caption{On the proof of Lemma~\ref{l_norm_rationals}}
\label{f_norm}
\end{figure}
\begin{equation}
\label{triangle}
\frac{\rho_u\big(0,
\psi^{(y)}_{b_y^{-1}n}(\psi^{(x)}_{b_x^{-1}n})\big)}{n}
\leq \frac{\rho_u(0,\psi^{(x)}_{b_x^{-1}n})}{n}
+ \frac{\rho_u\big(\psi^{(x)}_{b_x^{-1}n},
\psi^{(y)}_{b_y^{-1}n}(\psi^{(x)}_{b_x^{-1}n}) \big)}{n}
\end{equation}
for any~$n$.
Then, the trick is to take the limit as $n\to\infty$
in~\eqref{triangle} \emph{in probability}. First of all,
a direct application of~\eqref{def_sigma'}--\eqref{def_sigma}
shows that
the first term in the right-hand side of~\eqref{triangle}
converges to~$\sigma_u(x)$, even $\mathbb{P}^u_0$-a.s. Next,
under $\mathbb{P}^u_0$ it holds that
$\rho_u\big(\psi^{(x)}_{b_x^{-1}n},
\psi^{(y)}_{b_y^{-1}n}(\psi^{(x)}_{b_x^{-1}n}) \big)$ is equal to
$\rho_u\big(0,\psi^{(y)}_{b_y^{-1}n}\big)$ in distribution,
so the second term in the right-hand side of~\eqref{triangle}
converges to~$\sigma_u(y)$ in distribution and hence in probability.
As for the term in the left-hand side of~\eqref{triangle},
write
\begin{equation}
\label{oc_1st_term}
\frac{\rho_u\big(0,
\psi^{(y)}_{b_y^{-1}n}(\psi^{(x)}_{b_x^{-1}n})\big)}{n}
\geq \frac{\rho_u\big(0,
\psi^{(x+y)}_{b_{x+y}^{-1}n}\big)}{n} -
\frac{\rho_u\big(\psi^{(y)}_{b_y^{-1}n}(\psi^{(x)}_{b_x^{-1}n}),
\psi^{(x+y)}_{b_{x+y}^{-1}n}\big)}{n}.
\end{equation}
Again, the first term in the right-hand side of~\eqref{oc_1st_term}
converges $\mathbb{P}^u_0$-a.s.\ to~$\sigma_u(x+y)$. To obtain
that the second term in the right-hand side of~\eqref{oc_1st_term}
converges to~$0$ in probability, observe that
\begin{align}
\frac{\|\psi^{(y)}_{b_y^{-1}n}(\psi^{(x)}_{b_x^{-1}n})-
\psi^{(x+y)}_{b_{x+y}^{-1}n}\|}{n}
&\leq \frac{\|(x+y)n-
\psi^{(x+y)}_{b_{x+y}^{-1}n}\|}{n} +
\frac{\|nx-\psi^{(x)}_{b_{x}^{-1}n}\|}{n} \nonumber\\
&\qquad + \frac{\|\psi^{(y)}_{b_y^{-1}n}
(\psi^{(x)}_{b_x^{-1}n})-\psi^{(x)}_{b_{x}^{-1}n}-ny\|}{n}.
\label{3norms}
\end{align}
Since the third term in the right-hand side of~\eqref{3norms} equals in
distribution to $n^{-1}\|ny-\psi^{(y)}_{b_{y}^{-1}n}\|$,
\eqref{norm_psi} implies that the left-hand side of~\eqref{3norms}
converges to~$0$ in probability, and so Theorem~\ref{t_ap} implies that
the second term in the right-hand side of~\eqref{oc_1st_term} converges
to~$0$ in probability. This proves~\eqref{norm_rationals}.
\end{proof}
Now, Lemma~\ref{l_norm_rationals} shows that~$\sigma_u$ can be extended
to a norm in~$\mathbb{R}^d$ by continuity,
and we are able to finish the proof of Theorem~\ref{t_shape}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{t_shape}]
At this point the argument is quite standard.
Let
\[
D_u = \{x \in \mathbb{R}^d : \sigma_u(x) \le 1 \}.
\]
Let $\varepsilon'=(1-\varepsilon)^{-1}-1$, and $\varepsilon''=1-(1+\varepsilon)^{-1}$. To prove
Theorem~\ref{t_shape}, it is enough to prove that
$ nD_u\cap\mathcal{I}^u \subset \Lambda^u((1+\varepsilon')n)$ and
$\Lambda^u((1-\varepsilon'')n) \subset nD_u$ for all~$n$ large enough, $\mathbb{P}^u_0$-a.s.
Since~$D_u$ is compact, one can find a finite set
$ F:= \{x_1, \ldots, x_k\} \subset D_u\cap \mathbb{Q}^d$ such that
$ \sigma_u(x_i) < 1 $ for $i=1,\ldots,k$, and
(with $C$ from Theorem~\ref{t_ap})
\[
D_u \cap\mathcal{I}^u \subset \bigcup_{i=1}^{k}B(x_i, C^{-1}\varepsilon').
\]
Consider any $x_i\in F$; let~$m_i$ be the minimal positive
integer such that $m_ix_i\in\mathbb{Z}^d$. Let~$n=jm_i+s$, where
$0\leq s \leq m_i-1$. Then, for all~$n$ large enough it holds
by~\eqref{lim_sigma} that
$\psi^{(m_ix_i)}_0(jm_ix_i)\in \Lambda^u(n)$, $\mathbb{P}^u_0$-a.s.
Now, Theorem~\ref{t_ap}, \eqref{e:inbox}
and the Borel-Cantelli lemma imply
that $\mathbb{P}^u_0$-a.s.\
for all~$n$ large enough we have
\[
B( n x_i, C^{-1}n\varepsilon')\cap\mathcal{I}^u
\subset
\Lambda^u (jm_ix_i,n\varepsilon'),
\]
for all $i=1,2, \dots ,k$.
So $ nD_u\cap\mathcal{I}^u \subset \Lambda^u((1+\varepsilon')n)$,
which completes the first part of the proof.
For the second, choose $G := \{y_1, \ldots, y_k\} \subset
(2D_u \setminus D_u)\cap\mathbb{Q}^d$ in such a way that
\[
2D_u \setminus D_u
\subset \bigcup_{i=1}^k B(y_i, \varepsilon''\delta ).
\]
Notice that $ \sigma_u(y_i) > 1 $ for $i=1,\ldots,k$. Again,
$ n G \cap \Lambda^u(n) =\emptyset$ for all~$n$ large enough $\mathbb{P}^u_0$-a.s.
Analogously, by Theorem~\ref{t_ap} and Borel-Cantelli we get that for
all~$n$ large enough, if
$\Lambda^u((1-\varepsilon'')n) \cap n(2D_u \setminus D_u ) \neq \emptyset$, then
$\Lambda^u(n) \cap n G \neq \emptyset$. This shows that
$\Lambda^u((1-\varepsilon'')n) \subset nD_u $ for all~$n$ large enough,
$\mathbb{P}^u_0$-a.s., and so concludes the proof of Theorem~\ref{t_shape}.
\end{proof}
\section{Random walk on the torus}
\label{s:torus}
It remains to show Theorem~\ref{t_torus}. We recall that $\mathbb T_N^d$
denotes the $d$-dimensional discrete torus of size $N$, $P^N$ the law of
the simple random walk on $\mathbb T_N^d$ started from the uniform
distribution, and $\rho^u_N(x,y)$ the internal distance within the set
$\mathcal{I}^u_N$ of
sites visited by the random walk before time $uN^d$,
$\mathcal{I}^u_N=\{X_0,\dots,X_{\lfloor uN^d\rfloor}\}$.
Let $B_N(x,r)\subset \mathbb T_N^d$ be the ball of
radius $r$ around $x$ in the usual distance, $d_N$, on the torus.
We first control the internal distance in balls of radius $\ln^\gamma N$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{l:toruslocal}
Let $x\in \mathbb T_N^d\subset \mathbb Z^d$.
Then, for $c_1$, $\gamma $ large enough,
\begin{equation}
\label{e:toruslocal}
P^N\big[\text{there exist }y,z\in B_N(x,\ln^\gamma N)
\text{ such that }
\rho_N^u(y,z)\ge c_1 \ln^\gamma N\big] = o(N^{-d}).
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
Before proving this lemma, let us explain how it implies
Theorem~\ref{t_torus}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{t_torus}]
By the lemma and a simple union bound, with
probability tending to $1$, the event in \eqref{e:toruslocal} is
satisfied for all $x\in \mathbb T_N^d$. If this is the case, we can chain
these boxes to obtain the claim of the theorem. More precisely, consider
$x,y$ such that $d_n(x,y)> \ln^\gamma N$. Then, one can find points
$x=x_1,x_2, \ldots, x_n=y$ such that $x_{i+1}\in B(x_i, \ln^\gamma N)$,
$i<n$, and $\sum_{i=1}^{n-1} d_N(x_i,x_{i+1})\le 2 d_N(x,y)$. As we
assume that the event in \eqref{e:toruslocal} is satisfied for all balls,
for all $i<n$,
\begin{equation*}
\rho^u_N(x_i,x_{i+1}) \le c_1 d_N(x_i,x_{i+1}).
\end{equation*}
The theorem then follows using the triangular inequality, setting
$\bar C= 2c_1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma~\ref{l:toruslocal}]
Let $r=\ln^\gamma N$ and $R=C r$, with~$C$ of
Theorem~\ref{t_ap}.
By Theorem~1.1 of~\cite{TW11}, for any $\alpha>0$, there exists a
coupling~$Q$ of random interlacement on~$\mathbb Z^d$ and random walk
on the torus, such that
\begin{equation*}
Q\big[\big(\mathcal{I}^{u(1-\varepsilon )}\cap B(x,R)\big)
\subset \big(\mathcal{I}_N^u\cap B_N(x,R)\big)\subset
\big(\mathcal{I}^{u(1+\varepsilon )}\cap B(x,R)\big)\big]\ge 1- N^{-\alpha }.
\end{equation*}
For points that are in $\mathcal{I}^{u(1-\varepsilon )}\cap B(x,r)$ we can use
Theorem~\ref{t_ap} and obtain the required statement.
For points in $\mathcal{I}^u_N\setminus \mathcal{I}^{u(1-\varepsilon )}$, however, this
simple argument fails and we need more details on the coupling
construction.
The construction starts by splitting the random walk trajectory into
so-called excursions. These excursions are independent simple random
walk trajectories started at the boundary of $B_N(x,R)$ and stopped
when staying a sufficiently long time out of $B_N(x,N^{1-\varepsilon })$,
see Section 4 of \cite{TW11} for the precise definition.
We denote the excursions started before time $uN^d$ by
$X^{(1)}, \ldots, X^{(\eta )}$, where~$\eta$ is random.
These excursions are constructed in such a way that
\begin{equation}
\label{e:torusinclusion}
\Big(\bigcup_{i=1}^{\eta -1} \mathop{\mathrm{Ran}} X^{(i)} \cap B(x,R)\Big)
\subset \big(\mathcal{I}^u_N\cap B(x,R)\big)
\subset
\Big(\bigcup_{i=1}^{\eta } \mathop{\mathrm{Ran}} X^{(i)} \cap B(x,R)\Big).
\end{equation}
Using Lemma~4.3 of \cite{TW11}, it is easy to see
that the random variable $\eta $ satisfies
\begin{equation}
\label{e:torusnumber}
P^N[(u+\varepsilon ) \mathop{\mathrm{cap}} B(x,R)
\ge \eta \ge (u-\varepsilon )\mathop{\mathrm{cap}} B(x,R)]
\ge 1- e^{-c \mathop{\mathrm{cap}} B(x,R)}.
\end{equation}
Further, combining Lemmas~3.9,~3.10 of \cite{TW11}, it follows that the
distribution of the starting points satisfies for every
$z\in \partial B(x,R)$ and $i=2,\ldots,R$
\begin{equation}
\label{e:torusinitial}
P^N[X^{(i)}_0=z]\ge
\frac{(1-\varepsilon )e_{B(x,R)}(z) }{\mathop{\mathrm{cap}} B(x,R) },
\end{equation}
that is, it is close to the normalised equilibrium measure. The
distribution of the first excursion cannot be controlled so precisely,
as in principle it can start inside of $B(x,R)$, but it is not issue for
us.
The proof of Lemma~\ref{l:toruslocal} is then completely analogous to
proof of Theorem~\ref{t_ap}. It suffices to observe that the only
property of the random interlacement that we used in the proof of
Theorem~\ref{t_ap} are the bounds on the number and starting
distribution of trajectories entering a fixed set. These bounds follow
from~\eqref{e:torusnumber}, \eqref{e:torusinitial}. Finally one should
observe that $\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(R)= o( N^{-d})$ if~$\gamma $ is chosen large enough.
There is a small issue with the fact that the last point
of the trajectory, $X_{\lfloor uN^d\rfloor}$, might be contained in the last excursion,
cf.~\eqref{e:torusinclusion}.
To solve
this issue, observe that our techniques apply to the both `clusters'
$\mathcal C:=\bigcup_{i=1}^{\eta-1 }\mathop{\mathrm{Ran}} X^{(i)}$ and
$\bar {\mathcal C}:=\bigcup_{i=1}^{\eta }\mathop{\mathrm{Ran}} X^{(i)}$. Hence, with
probability $1-\mathfrak{s\kern-0.1em.\kern-0.13em{}e\kern-0.1em.}(R)$, the internal distances on these clusters within
$B(x,r)$ are bounded by~$c_1 r$. If this is the case, then the trajectory of
$X^{(\eta) }$ must intersect~$\mathcal C$ at least every $(2c_1+1)$-steps.
For any $x\in B(x,r)\cap X^{(\eta )}\cap \mathcal{I}^u_N$ there is thus a path of
length at most $(2c_1+1)$ lying inside of~$\mathcal{I}^u_N$
which connects~$x$
to~$\mathcal C$. Lemma~\ref{l:toruslocal} then follows by triangular
inequality, by increasing $c_1$ to $2(2c_1+1)+c_1$.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
Recent surveys of nearby young clusters spanning a range in ages and masses have revealed extensive information on the disc frequencies and the disc dissipation timescales. The general picture of inner disc evolution that emerges from {\it Spitzer}/IRAC observations of several clusters shows a sharp decline in the disc frequency of young stars with ages between $\sim$1 and 3 Myr. By an age of $\sim$5 Myr, the disc fraction has dropped by more than 80\%, while the timescale for nearly all stars to lose their inner discs appears to be $\sim$10 Myr (e.g., Haisch et al. 2001; Hillenbrand 2005; Hernandez et al. 2007). Other than the overall disc fractions, the strength in the disc emission at mid-infrared wavelengths also shows a decrease with age. A majority of young disc sources in Taurus ($\sim$1 Myr) possess optically thick inner discs, while most stars by an age of $\sim$5 Myr possess ``anemic'' discs which display weaker IRAC excesses than optically thick disc systems (e.g., Lada et al. 2006; Carpenter et al. 2009). The age of $\sim$5 Myr is thus critical, in the sense that nearly all optically thick primordial disc material in the inner $\sim$1 AU region has dissipated by this age, and most discs begin to show a transition from a primordial to a debris disc system.
The disc dissipation timescales, however, show a dependence on the stellar mass and the stellar density in the region, such that longer disc lifetimes are observed for the sub-stellar sources, and disc fractions are found to be higher in less dense environments (e.g., Riaz \& Gizis 2008; Riaz et al. 2009). In Riaz et al. (2009), we had determined a BD disc fraction of $\sim$10\% in the $\sim$5 Myr old Upper Scorpius OB association (hereafter, USco). In comparison with younger $\sim$1-3 Myr old clusters that show a $\sim$40-50\% disc fraction, this indicated significant disc dispersal for sub-stellar sources over a short $\sim$2 Myr time span. In contrast, the BD disc fraction in the $\sim$10 Myr old TW Hydrae Association (hereafter, TWA; Webb et al. 1999) is much higher (50$\pm$20\%; Riaz \& Gizis 2008). We had argued that the BD density in the TWA is at least $\sim$100 times less than in USco, which could prolong the disc lifetimes. Thus age may not be a dominant factor but a less dense environment could explain the higher disc fractions observed.
In the present work, we have further investigated the dependence of the BD disc fractions on the age, density and the BD formation mechanisms in a cluster. We have focused again on the USco association, since it is at a critical intermediate age of $\sim$5 Myr which is important to probe inner disc dissipation timescales. The USco association is part of the Scorpius Centaurus complex (de Geus et al.\ 1989), located at a distance of 145$\pm$2 pc (de Bruijne et al.\ 1997). The age of USco is $\sim$5 Myr, with little scatter of $\pm$2 Myr (e.g., Preibisch \& Zinnecker 1999). The region is relatively free of extinction (Av $\leq$ 2 mag) and star formation has already ended (Walter et al.\ 1994). The association has been targeted at multiple wavelengths over the past decade starting with X-rays (e.g.\ Preibisch et al.\ 1998), with Hipparcos (de Zeeuw et al.\ 1999), in the optical (Preibisch et al.\ 2001; 2002; Ardila et al. 2000; Mart\'{\i}n et al.\ 2004; Slesnick et al.\ 2006), and in the near-infrared (e.g., Lodieu et al.\ 2007), resulting in several low-mass stars and BDs being confirmed as genuine spectroscopic members (Ardila et al. 2000; Mart\'{\i}n et al.\ 2004; Slesnick et al.\ 2006; Lodieu et al.\ 2008; Lodieu et al.\ 2011). The disc population in USco has been studied by Carpenter et al. (2006; 2009), Scholz et al. (2007) and Riaz et al. (2009). The B/A and F/G type stars are all found to be debris disc systems, while primordial discs with inner disc clearing (no excess shortward of $\sim$8$\micron$) are more abundant among the K/M types and the sub-stellar sources. We have compiled a sample of all spectroscopically confirmed BD members in USco, and have made use of the recently released Wide Field Survey Explorer (WISE; Wright et al.\ 2010) catalog to identify the disc candidates. Our sample also includes some M dwarfs in USco that have not been previously studied in the mid-infrared. In Section \S\ref{WISE}, we describe our WISE spectral energy distribution (SED) classification scheme and the WISE colors that can best distinguish between the discless and the disc population. Section \S\ref{results} presents the results on new disc sources found in USco, and Section \S\ref{halpha-disc} compares the H$\alpha$ emission strength with the disc emission. Section \S\ref{discussion} discusses the various factors that may affect the disc fractions in a cluster.
\section{Sample Selection}
\label{sample}
We have included in our sample the optical ($RI$) survey complemented by 2MASS infrared photometry conducted by Slesnick et al.\ (2006; 2008) over the full association down to $R \sim$ 20 mag (corresponding to masses of $\sim$0.02 M$_{\odot}$). This is the most complete survey of the entire USco region. A large number of photometric candidates were selected and a total of 107 were confirmed as spectroscopic members based on strong H$\alpha$ emission and weak gravity-sensitive features. The spectral types (SpT) for these sources are between M4 and M8.5. We note that the disc properties of 28 USco members with SpT later than M6 identified by Slesnick et al.\ (2006) are already discussed in Riaz et al. (2009) using {\it Spitzer} archival data. The USco association has been independently targeted by the UKIRT Infrared Deep Sky Survey (UKIDSS) Galactic Clusters Survey (GCS) in two optical filters ($ZY$) and three infrared passbands ($JHK$) (Dye et al. 2006). The depth of GCS in terms of mass is roughly 10 Jupiter masses. Lodieu et al.\ (2007) identified over 140 photometric candidates in 6.5 square degrees imaged by the GCS based on their photometry, colours, and proper motions. Over 90\% of these candidates were confirmed spectroscopically as USco members using cross-dispersed near-infrared spectroscopy (Gemini/GNIRS; Lodieu et al.\ 2008) and multi-fibre optical spectroscopy (AAT/AAOmega; Lodieu et al. 2011). The SpT for these members range between M3.5 and M9. The GCS USco surveys are complete down to the SpT of M9.
We have cross-matched this list of USco spectroscopic members with the WISE catalog. We adopted a matching radius of 6.5 arcsec to take into account the spatial resolution of WISE, which is $\sim$6 times poorer than the UKIDSS seeing-limited images. We note that all WISE counterparts to the UKIDSS sources are within one arcsec (or less) as the result of the good astrometric precision of WISE (0.15 arcsec; Wright et al.\ 2010). We will refer to the WISE 3.4, 4.6, 12 and 22$\micron$ bands as WISE band 1, 2, 3 and 4, respectively. Our final USco-WISE matched catalog consists of 215 sources and covers spectral types (SpT) between M3.5 and M8.5. We have considered the sources in our sample with SpT $\geq$M6 to be BDs or sub-stellar sources, as described in Section \S\ref{appendix}. Out of the 215 sources in our sample, 43 are BDs and 146 are M dwarfs. The USco samples previously studied by Carpenter et al. (2006; 2009) covered SpT of B0-M5. Our sample is complete for M4 and later types in USco.
As discussed in Section \S\ref{WISE}, we have considered the WISE 3.4, 4.6, and 12$\micron$ bands for SED classification, and have therefore required that all sources are detected at a $\geq$3-$\sigma$ level in these bands. A majority of the USco sources lack detections in the WISE band 4 at a $>$3-$\sigma$ level. Our $\geq$3-$\sigma$ quality criteria is to ensure good S/N detections, and to avoid spurious sources where the large excesses could be due to the background noise. This quality criteria imposed could introduce a potential bias to the disc fraction obtained, since the full sample detected in WISE at a $>$3-$\sigma$ level would be smaller in size than the number detected in e.g., a deep Spitzer survey. A disc fraction obtained with WISE could thus be higher than the ``true'' fraction inferred from the higher signal-to-noise Spitzer observations. This difference, however, is found to be small ($\sim$3\%), and the disc fractions obtained with WISE in USco and the other comparison regions are found to be consistent within the uncertainties, as discussed in detail in Sections \S\ref{USco} and \S\ref{appendix}.
What is the smallest excess emission that we could detect for the brown dwarfs with WISE? This can be determined by calculating the ratio of the observed flux to the predicted photospheric flux, (Fobs/Fphot). As we discuss in Section \S\ref{USco}, the 12$\micron$ point is vital in the confirmation of excess sources. The predicted photospheric flux at 12$\micron$ and 22$\micron$ for an M6 dwarf is $\sim$0.25 mJy and $\sim$0.12 mJy, respectively. For the latest type objects in our sample at spectral type of M8-M8.5, the predicted photospheric flux at 12$\micron$ and 22$\micron$ is $\sim$0.15 mJy and $\sim$0.04 mJy, respectively. The WISE 5-$\sigma$ point source sensitivity at 12$\micron$ and 22$\micron$ is $\sim$0.7 mJy and $\sim$5 mJy, respectively (WISE Explanatory Supplement). It is therefore impossible to detect the photospheres for the BDs at these wavelengths, and our survey in these bands is only sensitive to disc detections. If we consider the WISE 5-$\sigma$ detection limit of $\sim$0.7 mJy at 12$\micron$ to be the lowest detectable observed flux, then this implies Fobs/Fphot $\sim$ 2.8 for the M6 sources and Fobs/Fphot $\sim$ 4.6 for the later type M8-M8.5 targets. Therefore, the minimum 12$\micron$ excesses that we can detect will be at the level of Fobs/Fphot $>$ 3--5 for our M6--M8.5 targets. At 22$\micron$, the minimum detectable excess would be Fobs/Fphot $>$ 40 for the M6 sources and Fobs/Fphot $>$ 125 for the later type targets. These large limits would explain why most of our disc sources were not detected in the 22$\micron$ band (Section \S\ref{USco}). At 3.4$\micron$ and 4.6$\micron$, the predicted photospheric fluxes are between $\sim$3 and 0.7 mJy for the M6-M8.5 spectral type range. These fluxes are higher than the WISE 5-$\sigma$ sensitivity of 0.04 mJy and 0.08 mJy in the 3.4$\micron$ and 4.6$\micron$ bands, respectively. Photospheric detection is thus possible in these shorter wavelength bands, and we should be able to detect any small excess above the photosphere. We note that the minimum excess that can be detected at any wavelength would also be dependent on the calibration uncertainty, the finite signal to noise, and the intrinsic spread in the stellar colors. To summarize, the two potential biases in our WISE disc survey are the $\geq$3-$\sigma$ quality criteria, and the minimum excess that can be detected at 12 and 22$\micron$. We have discussed the completeness level of our WISE disc survey in USco in Section \S\ref{USco}, and a comparison with the Spitzer surveys in other young regions is provided in Section \S\ref{appendix}.
\section{WISE SED Classification}
\label{WISE}
In order to devise a SED classification scheme based on the observed fluxes in the WISE bands, we started with the {\it Spitzer}/IRAC catalog of disc population in the Taurus star-forming region provided in Luhman et al. (2010). We cross-matched the Taurus sources in the WISE catalog and selected the ones that were detected at a $\geq$5-$\sigma$ level in WISE 1, 2, and 3 bands. This Taurus-WISE catalog consists of 194 sources. Luhman et al. (2010) have computed spectral slopes [$\alpha$ = {\it d} log($\lambda F_{\lambda}$)/{\it d} log($\lambda$)] using four different wavelength ranges: ($K_{s}$/[8.0], $K_{s}$/[24], [3.6]/[8.0], and [3.6]/[24]). They have then marked certain thresholds in the spectral slope versus SpT diagrams to distinguish between the red population of Class I and II sources and the sequence of Class III stars. For most of the sources, the 2-8$\micron$ ($K_{s}$/[8.0]) slope has been used for classification purposes. This particular spectral slope shows a rise in values towards later types of $>$M4. As mentioned, a majority of the USco sources lack detections in the WISE 4 band at 22$\micron$. We have therefore computed the 2-12$\micron$ ($K_{s}$/[12]) spectral slopes to classify these sources. This wavelength range covers four data points at $\sim$2.16, 3.4, 4.6 and 12$\micron$. As we discuss later in this section, including the 12$\micron$ point is essential as it is the only point that can identify the disc candidates. Nearly all of the USco sources show photospheric emission at shorter wavelengths and most are undetected at 22$\micron$. We could use the 3.4-12$\micron$ wavelength range, although it would provide lesser number of points to determine the spectral slopes. We first computed WISE 2-12$\micron$ spectral slopes ($\alpha_{WISE}$) for the Taurus sources, and compared these to the IRAC spectral slopes of 2-8$\micron$ from Luhman et al. (2010). Fig.~\ref{slopes} shows that the two slopes are well correlated, as indicated by the straight line fit to the plotted points. We have plotted with different colors the Taurus Class I/II/III sources. These are the SED classes assigned by Luhman et al. (2010) using the IRAC 2-8$\micron$ slopes. The Class III sources in Fig.~\ref{slopes} have $\alpha_{WISE}$ of $\leq$ -2, the Class II sources are mainly concentrated between $\alpha_{WISE}$ of $\sim$ -1.8 and $\sim$ -0.2, while the Class I sources have $\alpha_{WISE}$ $\geq$ -0.2. The Class III sources show a more clear separation from the Class II systems. The boundary between Class I and II is less distinguished. Fig.~\ref{slope-spt2} shows $\alpha_{WISE}$ plotted against the SpT for the Taurus sources. There is a lack of sources with SpT later than M8 that have good S/N detections in the 12$\micron$ band, and thus do not have $\alpha_{WISE}$ estimates. The threshold of $\alpha_{WISE}$ = -2 provides a good separation between the Class II and III sources. There may be a rise in this threshold at later types, such as the threshold may be at -1.5 at SpT of M8.5 and later. However, we do not have enough points at later types to confirm a rise in the Class II/III threshold. The threshold between Class I and II is around $\sim$ -0.2, although a higher value of $\alpha_{WISE}$$\sim$ 0.0 is required to distinguish between these two classes at earlier types.
In Fig.~\ref{W-slopes}, we have compared the WISE spectral slopes with various WISE and WISE-NIR colors for the Taurus sources. For colors including the 22$\micron$ photometry, we have only plotted the objects with a S/N$\geq$3 in the 22$\micron$ band. The [3.4]-[12] and $K_{s}$-[12] colors ({\it top panel}) are well correlated with the WISE slopes and can best distinguish between the different SED classes. We can consider a boundary of [3.4]-[12] $\sim$1.2 and $K_{s}$-[12] $\sim$1.8 to separate the Class III sources from the disc population of Class I and II systems. The color [4.6]-[12] ({\it 2nd panel}) also provides a good separation between Class II and Class III sources (boundary of [4.6]-[12]$\sim$1). The color [3.4]-[4.6] is vague in separating the Class II and III sources, but can be used to identify the protostellar systems ([3.4]-[4.6]$>$1). The bottom two panels in Fig.~\ref{W-slopes} plot the WISE colors which include the 22$\micron$ photometry. The typical range in these colors for the photospheric sources is between 0 and 1. However, there are a few evolved/transition discs among the Class III objects which show redder colors between $\sim$1 and 3. A transition disc exhibits photospheric emission at wavelengths shortward of $\sim$10$\micron$ due to inner disc clearing, but retains excess emission at longer wavelengths due to the presence of circumstellar material in the outer disc regions. Such transition discs can be more clearly separated from the main Class III locus in the [4.6]-[22] and the [12]-[22] colors (boundary of $>$1). To summarize, colors which include the 12$\micron$ magnitudes can more clearly make a distinction between the photospheric and the disc population, whereas the colors which include the 22$\micron$ magnitudes can be important in identifying the transition disc candidates.
Based on the analysis above, we have classified the USco sources as Class III if $\alpha_{WISE}$ $\leq$ -2.0, and as Class II if -2.0 $<$$\alpha_{WISE}$$<$ -0.2. Figure~\ref{slope-spt-USco} shows the SpT vs. $\alpha_{WISE}$ diagram for the full USco sample. The disc sources identified are above the threshold of $\alpha_{WISE}$ = -2.0, and have been classified as Class II systems. The extinction estimate in USco is A$_{V}$ $\leq$ 2 mag (Walter et al. 1994). We have therefore not applied any reddening corrections to the spectral slopes. The values for $\alpha_{WISE}$ and the SED classes assigned to the USco sources are listed in Table~\ref{USco-phot}.
\section{Results}
\label{results}
\subsection{New Discs in USco}
\label{USco}
Out of a sample of 215 sources, we have found 48 new discs in USco, 12 of which are BD discs. The SEDs for the disc sources are shown in Figs.~\ref{USco-BD} and \ref{USco-Mdwarf}. To fit the stellar photosphere, we have considered the NextGen models (Hauschildt et al. 1999) for solar metallicity and log {\it g} = 3.5. The effective temperature was obtained from the SpT using the relation for young sources in Luhman et al. (2003a). We have checked the various flags associated with the WISE photometry. Out of the 48 disc sources, 40 have `cc\_flag' of '0000', indicating that these are not affected by any artifacts. The other disc sources either have cc\_flag=h000 or d000, implying that the photometry in band 1 may be affected by the halo of a nearby bright source or a diffraction spike. However, we have checked the WISE and UKIDSS images and do not find the sources to be extended or blended with any bright nearby star, or a spike located close to or across the object. The photometric quality flag, ph\_qual, for these sources is either 'AAAA' or 'AAAB'. Thus even if band 1 may be affected by some artifact, the photometric quality is the 'highest', so these should be reliable detections. One source (USco162847) is blended with a bright nearby star in bands 1, 2 and 3 (cc\_flag is 'h' in these 3 bands). This object has ph\_qual = 'AAAB', indicating 'highest' quality photometry in bands 1, 2, and 3. This source is resolved into 2 bright stars in the UKIDSS GCS images but lies close to a nearby bright star in the WISE images. The WISE resolution is 6.5$\arcsec$ which is large compared to seeing-limited images taken by UKIDSS. Since the composite source shows an excess emission at 12 and 22$\micron$, we have considered this source as a disc candidate. The WISE photometry for the disc sources is listed in Table~\ref{USco-phot}. The value of `99.999' in Table~\ref{USco-phot} indicates a non-detection in that band.
In Fig.~\ref{USco-color}, we have compared the WISE colors for the disc sources from our work with the primordial and debris discs in USco found by Carpenter et al. (2009). The range in uncertainties are 0.03-0.06 mag for the $K_{s}$-[3.4] color, 0.03-0.15 mag for the [3.4]-[12] color, and 0.04-0.2 mag for the [4.6]-[22] color. The colors for all primordial discs are much redder than the debris disc sources. Carpenter et al. have noted a high fraction of primordial discs among the M-type stars, the K/G types are mainly all debris discs with a few primordial discs, while the higher mass B/A/F stars are all debris disc systems. Their categorization of a primordial disc is based on excess emission observed at 8 and 16$\micron$, while a debris disc is classified based on excess emission at $\geq$24$\micron$ (Section \S\ref{appendix}). Thus these primordial discs can be considered as primordial transition discs. The age of $\sim$5 Myr for USco is considered to be a transitional age, when circumstellar discs are in a transition from a primordial to a debris disc system. A majority of disc sources at this age are found to exhibit inner disc clearing. In the literature, different definitions have been used to distinguish between a primordial transition disc and a debris disc. A primordial transition disc is basically defined to be a disc that shows photospheric emission shortward of $\sim$10$\micron$, indicating that the inner $\sim$0.1-1 AU disc region (depending on the mass of the central source) is devoid of optically thick material, but it retains strong excess emission at longer wavelengths of $>$10$\micron$, which indicates the presence of primordial material in the outer disc regions. The color excesses at longer wavelengths for the primordial transition discs would be comparable in strength to the main Class II population in the cluster.
Fig.~\ref{USco-color} shows that the WISE colors for our M dwarf and BD discs are similar to the primordial transition discs in USco. If we consider the Luhman et al. (2010) boundary of K-[3.6] $\sim$0.4 for photospheric colors of M4-M5 stars, and K-[3.6] $\sim$0.5 for M6-M8 objects, then we have about 11 M dwarf discs and 3 BD discs that lie above this boundary. Among these sources, we have two BD discs, USco161005 and USco162847, and 6 M dwarf discs, USco155140, USco161117, USco161349, USco162222, USco161816, and USco161819, which have Fobs/Fphot $\sim$2-2.5 at 3.4 and 4.6$\micron$, while the rest have Fobs/Fphot $\sim$ 1.1-1.4 (Figs.~\ref{USco-BD}, \ref{USco-Mdwarf}). A large fraction of USco discs thus show signs of inner disc clearing, with weak or no excess emission shortward of 12$\micron$. We have therefore classified the new discs found in our survey as primordial transition discs. Among the BD discs, four sources, USco155420 (M8), USco160953 (M6), USco161940 (M6) and USco163027 (M6), show flaring between 12 and 22$\micron$ (Fig.~\ref{USco-BD}). For most of the previously known USco brown dwarf discs, the 24$\micron$ flux density is between $\sim$2 and 5 mJy, and only a few discs have been found with higher fluxes of 15-20 mJy at 24$\micron$ (Scholz et al. 2007, Riaz et al. 2009). A $\sim$2-5 mJy flux density will be below the WISE 5-$\sigma$ point-source sensitivity of 6 mJy at 22$\micron$ (WISE Explanatory Supplement), which could explain why most of these discs were not detected in the 22$\micron$ band. In Fig.~\ref{USco-color2}, the USco BD discs show larger color excesses compared to the earlier type discs. The 12$\micron$ to $K_{s}$ flux ratio for most BD discs is also larger in comparison to earlier type discs, indicating larger 12$\micron$ flux excess for the BD discs. Since these disc sources are presumably at the same age, this suggests that discs persist for a longer time around later type stars. We discuss this further in Section \S\ref{discussion}.
All of the disc sources show excess emission at 12$\micron$, including the BD discs, and there are no discs that have excesses at 22$\micron$ but none at 12$\micron$. Based on WISE data, a debris disc can be defined as a source with excess at 22$\micron$ only. The minimum excess that we can detect with WISE for a brown dwarf disc at 22$\micron$ would have to be at least $\sim$40 times larger than the photospheric flux at this wavelength. Therefore WISE may have missed brown dwarf debris discs due to low sensitivities. However, we note that none of the deeper Spitzer surveys have found BD debris discs, i.e. discs that showed excess emission at 24$\micron$ but none at shorter wavelengths. In comparison, for an M4 dwarf, an excess $\sim$5 times larger than the photospheric flux could have been detected with WISE. As mentioned, a high fraction of M dwarf discs in USco are found to be in the primordial stage, compared to earlier-type stars (Carpenter et al. 2009). The absence of debris systems among our M dwarf and BD targets is thus consistent with previous results.
From our present survey in USco, we find a BD disc fraction of 28$\pm$9\% (12/43). The error bars are the 1-$\sigma$ Gaussian distribution uncertainties. This fraction is comparable to the 37$\pm$9\% fraction reported by Scholz et al. (2007) from their $\sim$8-14$\micron$ {\it Spitzer}/IRS spectral observations. In Riaz et al. (2009), we had reported a much lower USco BD disc fraction of 11$\pm$4\% (3/28). This fraction was based on {\it Spitzer}/IRAC and MIPS 24$\micron$ observations, and was mainly determined from the excess emission observed at 8$\micron$. Nearly 90\% of the sources in that survey were undetected at 24$\micron$. As we have found in the present work, a majority of the discs show photospheric emission shortward of 12$\micron$. A small disc fraction based on 8$\micron$ excess emission is thus expected. Combining our present work with Scholz et al. (2007) and Riaz et al. (2009), we have a USco BD disc fraction of 26$\pm$9\%. For the M dwarfs in USco, we have a disc fraction of 25$\pm$8\% (36/146). Our M dwarf disc fraction is comparable (within the uncertainties) to the 17$\pm$6\% fraction reported by Carpenter et al. (2009) for the M type primordial discs in their sample.
We note that due to lower sensitivities, a disc survey conducted with WISE could be incomplete as compared to earlier deep Spitzer surveys. There are 16 known brown dwarf discs in USco detected by previous Spitzer surveys (Scholz et al. 2007; Riaz et al. 2009). The 1-$\sigma$ sensitivity at 8-11$\micron$ from these Spitzer surveys is $\sim$0.09 mJy. These surveys were thus deep enough to detect the photospheres for the brown dwarf targets. Out of these 16 Spitzer BD discs, 15 were detected in the WISE 1, 2, and 3 bands at S/N $>$ 3. One of the discs (usd161916) was detected in the WISE 1 and 2 bands, but was undetected at 12$\micron$. The observed flux density for this object at 11$\micron$ is 0.65 mJy (Scholz et al. 2007), which is below the WISE 5-$\sigma$ sensitivity at 12$\micron$ ($\sim$0.7 mJy). This is an M8 disc. However, the M9 discs from Scholz et al. (2007) Spitzer survey were also recovered by WISE at a $>$3-$\sigma$ level in the 1, 2, and 3 bands. Half of these Spitzer discs are detected in the WISE 22$\micron$ band at a S/N$>$3, while the rest are undetected at this wavelength (S/N $<$ 2). Other than the WISE lower sensitivities, another potential bias could be due to the quality criteria that we have applied, in terms of the S/N to be at least 3 in bands 1, 2 and 3, which would reduce the size of the original sample and bias the results towards a higher disc fraction. We have checked for WISE matches for the full Spitzer sample of 63 sources, including the discless objects, from the work of Riaz et al. (2009) and Scholz et al. (2007). There are 11 objects which have S/N $<$ 3 in the WISE 12$\micron$ band, while the rest were detected at higher S/N in all three WISE bands. The BD disc fraction in USco from Spitzer surveys was 16/63 = 25.4\%$\pm$ 9\%. Based on the WISE-recovered sample, the BD disc fraction will be 15/52 = 28.8\% $\pm$ 9\%. These fractions are still consistent within the uncertainties and the differences are not significant. We can therefore estimate that the lower WISE sensitivities and our quality criteria would result in a BD disc fraction in USco which is slightly higher (by $\sim$3\%) than the fraction determined from the higher S/N Spitzer data.
\subsection{H$\alpha$ versus Disc Emission in USco}
\label{halpha-disc}
Figure~\ref{Halpha} compares the H$\alpha$ emission strength for the disc sources in USco. The new discs we have found in this work are marked by black squares. The H$\alpha$ equivalent width and SpT are from Slesnick et al. (2006; 2008) and Lodieu et al. (2008; 2011). We have included in this figure previously known USco discs from Scholz et al. (2007) and Riaz et al. (2009). The dashed line in this figure is the empirical accretor/non-accretor boundary from Barrado y Navascu\'{e}s \& Mart\'{i}n (2003). Sources that lie above this boundary can be considered as CTTS, and the ones below it as the non-accreting weak-line T Tauri stars (WTTS). We find a nearly equal number of disc sources above and below the accretor boundary, which indicates that the presence of passive or non-accreting discs is as common in USco as accreting disc sources. The disc bearing sources among the BDs (SpT$\geq$M6) are mostly all accreting systems. Emission in H$\alpha$ is known to rise towards the later types, with a peak near SpT of M6-M7 (e.g., Riaz et al. 2006). It is thus more likely to find disc sources among the later types that also show strong emission in H$\alpha$.
A lack of correlation between Class II and CTTS systems, or Class III and WTTS systems, is expected at this transition age of $\sim$5 Myr. A large fraction of USco discs show photospheric emission shortward of 12$\micron$, indicating the inner $\sim$0.1-1 AU disc region to be cleared of circumstellar material. The H$\alpha$ emission line traces the gas in the inner disc regions and is not a diagnostic of the total gas content in the disc. It thus seems reasonable to find an anti-correlation between the presence of disc emission and lack of H$\alpha$ emission, since the disc emission is being detected at longer wavelengths and not from the inner part of the disc close to the central source. Fig.~\ref{Halpha} thus indicates that selecting young stellar objects based on the strength in H$\alpha$ emission could result in a rejection of young disc sources with inner disc clearings.
\section{Discussion}
\label{discussion}
\subsection{Disc Fractions versus Stellar Mass, Age and Density}
In Fig.~\ref{fractions}, we have plotted the disc fractions for clusters at ages of $\sim$1-10 Myr in 3 mass bins: the sub-stellar sources (SpT=M6-M9; $<$0.1 $M_{\sun}$), the low-mass stars (SpT=K5-M5; $\sim$0.1-1 $M_{\sun}$), and the high-mass stars (SpT$<$K5; $\sim$1-4 $M_{\sun}$). Section\S\ref{appendix} provides details on the compilation of the disc fractions as well as the fraction of discs that WISE might have missed around M6-M8.5 type objects due to limited sensitivity. The disc fractions plotted here imply the `inner' disc fractions, since these have been obtained from observations at $\sim$3-24$\micron$, which probe the inner disc regions of radii within $\sim$1 AU in BD discs and within $\sim$5 AU in higher mass T Tauri discs (e.g., Hillenbrand 2005). It is important to determine the evolutionary stage of these discs, i.e. whether these are in the primordial, primordial transition, or debris phase. As discussed in detail in Section \S\ref{appendix}, nearly all of the discs in Taurus, Cha I, IC 348 and SOri are in the primordial/primordial transition stage, and a small $\sim$1-2\% fraction is found to be of debris discs. On the other hand, a majority of the high- and low-mass discs in USco and TWA are in the debris phase, while the BD discs in these older clusters can all be classified as primordial/primordial transition discs. Thus the later type discs tend to remain in the primordial stage for a longer time. We note that the uncertainties on the disc fractions are quite large for some of these young clusters, which would make the fractions comparable to each other. Nevertheless, we find some obvious differences in the disc frequency trends for the different mass bins, as discussed further below. In Fig.~\ref{density}, we have plotted the disc fractions versus the stellar density in a cluster. By stellar density, we imply the total number of objects (stars + BDs) detected in a given survey area. Details on the compilation of stellar densities are provided in Section\S\ref{appendix}. Our results for stellar densities indicate SOri and Cha I to be denser than Taurus and USco, which is in agreement with what has been previously noted by several surveys.
The disc fractions in Fig.~\ref{fractions} are the lowest and nearly constant in USco over a wide range in stellar masses, unlike the SOri or Taurus clusters. The disc fractions decrease with stellar mass in Taurus, while the opposite trend is observed in SOri. IC 348 also shows a slight increase in disc fractions with decreasing stellar mass. In comparison, Cha I which is at a similar age of $\sim$2 Myr as IC 348, shows a higher disc fraction for the high-mass stars. Luhman et al. (2010) had noted that IC 348 and SOri are denser than Cha I or Taurus, and that a denser environment could result in a lower disc fraction for the high-mass stars in a cluster. This can be seen in Fig.~\ref{density} (top panel), where the fractions for the high-mass stars in the denser regions of SOri and IC 348 are lower than in Taurus or Cha I. However, the disc fractions are lower in USco than SOri, even though the two clusters are at similar ages ($\sim$3-5 Myr) and USco is even more sparse, with a stellar density $\sim$20 times lower than in SOri. A denser environment also does not seem to affect the low-mass and the sub-stellar sources (Fig.~\ref{density}). The disc fractions for these mass groups are similar in IC 348 and Cha I, which have about an order of a magnitude difference in stellar densities. Pfalzner et al. (2006) have simulated the relative disc mass loss induced by encounters between stars in a cluster. At an age of 2 Myr, their simulations indicate a disc mass loss of $\sim$30\% for intermediate-mass (1-10$M_{\sun}$) and low-mass ($<$1$M_{\sun}$) stars, whereas for stars with $M>$10$M_{\sun}$, it is $\sim$60\% or higher. As they explain, the average number of stellar collisions for high mass stars ($>$10$M_{\sun}$) is higher compared to intermediate- or low-mass stars, and so the disc dispersion rate will also be higher for the high mass sources. Also, if the disc sizes for BDs are smaller than high-mass stars, then frequent flyby events would be less likely to disrupt the sub-stellar discs. While the mass ranges from Pfalzner et al. are different than the ones considered here, their simulations could explain why we see similar low-mass and BD disc fractions in Cha I and IC 348, compared to a factor of $\sim$3 difference observed for the high-mass stars (Fig.~\ref{density}). A denser environment thus may be more effective in increasing the disc disruption rate for the high-mass stars.
An alternate explanation for the prominent difference between the Taurus and SOri/USco disc fractions for the high-mass stars could be their early transition from a primordial to a debris phase. By an age of $\sim$5 Myr, $\sim$86\% of the high-mass discs are in the debris phase. Thus nearly all massive sources have experienced significant inner disc clearing by this age, and are found to have excesses only at wavelengths of $\geq$24$\micron$, with photospheric emission at shorter wavelengths. The disc fraction then shows a rise again at older ages, from $\sim$20\% at 5 Myr to $\sim$50\% at 10 Myr. All of these older discs are in the debris phase, as these are mainly detected due to strong 24$\micron$ or 70$\micron$ excess emission. Debris disc particles undergo continual shattering collisions with planetesimals and larger bodies in the system, due to which debris dust is continually generated. This results in an increase in the dust mass at the onset of the debris disc phase. The increase in the debris disc fraction is due to the detection of large mass of cold dust in the outer regions of the disc, while the inner warm regions have been dissipated. We note that the TWA disc fraction has a high uncertainty due to the sparse population of this region (Section \S\ref{appendix}). However, Siegler et al. (2007) and Reike et al. (2005) have reported disc fractions of $\sim$40-50\% for B-A type stars in 30-50 Myr old clusters, based on much larger sample sizes. To summarize, the dip in the USco fraction for the high-mass stars is due to the decline of primordial discs by this age, or the fewer number of discs detected at this age with excesses at short wavelengths ($\leq$24$\micron$).
In comparison to the high-mass stars, BD discs seem to evolve at a slower rate, as their inner disc fraction remains nearly constant until $\sim$3 Myr. Thereafter, the disc fractions show a steep decline by a factor of $\sim$2 between 3 and 5 Myr. The statistical significance of this sharp drop in fractions between 3 and 5 Myr is discussed in Section \S\ref{appendix}. This rapid inner disc dispersal over a short $\sim$2 Myr timescale thus seems to occur for both the high-mass and the sub-stellar sources, albeit at an earlier age of 2-3 Myr for the high-mass stars, but at an older age of 3-5 Myr for the BDs. The later drop for the BDs could be explained by their slower viscous evolution timescales. The viscous scaling time for BDs are expected to be of the order of $10^{6}$ yr, longer than the typical $10^{4}$-$10^{5}$ yr for T Tauri stars (e.g., Alexander \& Armitage 2009). In other words, if accretion of material onto the BD occurs at a slower rate than higher mass stars, then discs could persist for a longer timescale. The inner discs around higher mass stars may also be replenished faster by material coming in from the outer disc region. Such a process of outer disc accretion seems to occur either at a slower rate for BDs, or may not be that significant if the disc sizes are too small compared to the higher mass T Tauri discs. It is interesting to note that the high mass and sub-stellar sources provide two extreme cases of rapid inner disc dispersion, while the intermediate low-mass stars show a more linear decline in disc fractions with age (Fig.~\ref{fractions}). These sources have an almost 50/50 debris/primordial disc fraction at 5 Myr, which increases to 70/30 by 10 Myr (Table~\ref{frac-den}). The low-mass discs also show a rise at ages older than 10 Myr, due to an increase in the debris disc fraction (e.g., Siegler et al. 2007). Thus a large fraction of the low-mass discs are in the debris phase by $\sim$10 Myr, but the transition is more gradual than that seen for the high-mass stars, with no sudden drops in the disc fractions observed.
The rapid inner disc dispersal could be due to processes such as dust coagulation or planetesimal formation. The processes of significant grain growth and dust settling in the inner disc regions could lead to rapid formation of kilometer-sized large bodies or planatesimals in the disc. From the simulations of Dullemond \& Dominik (2004), such processes occur on a faster timescale in the inner disc regions, and small grains can be removed from the inner regions on a timescale of less than 1 Myr. Photoevaporation could also result in rapid inner disc clearing. The process of photoevaporation sets in when the disc accretion rate falls below the photoevaporative wind rate, which is about 10$^{-10} M_{\sun}$/yr (e.g., Muzerolle et al. 2006). From the simulations of Alexander et al. (2009), giant planet formation and photoevaporation can both dominate inner disc clearing. At early times, planet formation/migration is the more dominating process as the accretion rates are too high for photoevaporation to set in. At ages of $\geq$2 Myr, the disc accretion rate falls below the photoevaporative wind rate and essentially all discs are being cleared out by photoevaporation. By an age of $\sim$5 Myr, the inner disc fraction in their simulations has dropped to $\sim$20\% from nearly 100\% at $\sim$2 Myr. Thus a coupling of the planet formation/migration and photoevaporation processes could result in rapid inner disc clearing over a $\sim$2-3 Myr timescale. Such processes would work for the high-mass stars where accretion rates measured from UV continuum emission are $\sim$10$^{-8} - 10^{-9} M_{\sun}$/yr at an age of $\sim$1 Myr (e.g., Herczeg et al. 2008). For BDs, the accretion rates are $<$ 10$^{-10} M_{\sun}$/yr at an age of $\sim$1 Myr (e.g., Muzerolle et al. 2005), which would imply that photevaporation can be effective even at these early ages. The inner disc fractions for BDs at $\sim$1-3 Myr should then be as small as the fraction found in the USco. Giant planet formation is also feasible for large disc masses of $\sim$0.1 $M_{\sun}$ as considered by Alexander et al. (2009), whereas typical disc masses for BDs in Taurus are found to be much smaller, of the order of $\sim$10$^{-4}$ $M_{\sun}$ (e.g., Scholz et al. 2007). From the simulations by Payne \& Lodato (2007), a close-in rocky planet with a mass of $\sim$0.1 $M_{\earth}$ can form around a BD at a semi-major axis as small as $\sim$0.2 AU, considering an average BD disc mass of 1.5 x10$^{-4} M_{\sun}$ and an outer disc radius of 100 AU. However, the growth of such planetary cores is at a much slower rate around BDs compared to the solar-type stars. Dust coagulation leading to planet formation thus would take longer for the sub-stellar case, and cannot explain the sharp drop observed between the SOri and USco inner disc fractions in Fig.~\ref{fractions}.
Other processes such as photoionisation could also be in play. The ionizing radiation and winds from massive stars can affect their immediate surroundings, thereby dispersing the circumstellar material around stars. In Fig.~\ref{spatial}, we have plotted the known OB stars in USco, along with the disc sources from all mass groups. We do not find any particular concentration of the disc sources farther away from the massive stars, which might have suggested minimal interaction with the ionizing winds and so a higher probability of disc survival. Among the low-mass stars, there is a small concentration of disc sources near ($\alpha$, $\delta$)$\sim$(242$\degr$, -22$\degr$). Also, nearly all of the BD discs are located south of $\delta$ $\sim$ -21$\degr$, while most of the higher mass debris discs are located north of this declination. There may be a possible mass dependency in the spatial distribution of the discs. We note that these discs come from different surveys that may not cover the same region in USco. Overall, the discs are largely spread throughout the association, and we do not find any strong evidence of photoionisation in USco. Also, both SOri and USco are known to host OB stars. We would thus expect similar disc fractions in these regions if photoionization is the main cause of inner disc dissipation.
To summarize the discussion above, we can explain the rapid decline in the high-mass inner disc fraction between $\sim$2 and 3 Myr using planet formation and/or photoevaporation models. Accretion of material onto planets as well as photoevaporation would lead to a transition from a gas-rich optically thick disc to a secondary debris disc. This would explain the high fraction of debris disc systems found in USco for the high-mass stars (Table~\ref{frac-den}). Stellar density may also play a role and disc lifetimes may be prolonged in a less dense environment. But this is only notable for the high-mass stars. None of the processes above can explain the drop observed for the BD disc fractions between 3 and 5 Myr. In order to determine the significance of the observed decline between 3 and 5 Myr, we have built a probability distribution for the USco BD disc fraction using the method described in Burgasser et al. (2003). The distribution was constructed using a sample size of N=106, and number of discs n=28 (combining this work with Scholz et al. and Riaz et al. surveys). The peak is at 26.4\% with 1-sigma Gaussian uncertainties of 9\%. The 3 Myr SOri disc fraction is 57\%$\pm$ 19\%, i.e. the disc fraction could be between 38\% and 76\%. From the probability distribution, the probability that the USco sub-stellar disc fraction is between 38\% and 76\% is found to be $\sim$28\%, at a confidence level of 97.5\%. There is thus a $\sim$70\% probability that the 3 and 5 Myr disc fractions are different. We note that the USco point is not just 1-sigma below the SOri point, it is also 1-sigma lower than the Cha I, IC 348 and Taurus points. The question we have tried to address in this paper is not how likely it is that USco could actually be the same as any *one* of the others, but that it could be the same as *all* of the other clusters, which seems unlikely. Also notable for the BD discs is their persistent optically thick emission even at later ages. By $\sim$5 Myr, $\sim$86\% of the high-mass sources are in the debris phase, while for the BDs, even the $\sim$10 Myr old discs show excesses at wavelengths as short as $\sim$5$\micron$, and are in their primordial phase (Riaz \& Gizis 2008). In Fig.~\ref{fractions}, comparing the SOri and TWA disc fractions for BDs suggests that it may be nearly constant at $\sim$50\% over 1-10 Myr ages. The sharp drop between 3 and 5 Myr may not be a real trend with age, but perhaps the intrinsic or the original BD disc fraction in USco is much smaller than the younger or the older clusters.
\subsection{BD Formation Mechanisms}
Could it be possible that this particular low BD disc fraction in USco is due to the different formation mechanism of BDs dominant in these clusters? As noted earlier, Taurus, Cha I and USco are low density clusters and always have been, but IC 348 and SOri are more classic denser clusters. It may be that the denser clusters formed more BDs from collapsing low-mass cores rather than other mechanisms such as, by fragmenting massive discs or ejection of protostellar embryos, and so initially they had a higher disc fraction. In Fig.~\ref{ratio}, we have plotted the BD disc fraction versus the ratio of the number of BDs to the number of stars in these clusters. Details on the compilation of the BD/Star number ratios are provided in Section \S\ref{appendix}. USco has a factor of $\sim$2 higher ratio than the other clusters but the lowest disc fraction, which indicates that a higher number of BDs formed does not necessarily translate into a higher disc fraction. Also, the denser clusters such as SOri do not form a higher number of BDs, as the ratios are quite similar to the less dense Taurus and Cha I.
Different formation mechanisms of BDs in these clusters could also lead to different disc properties, even if the total number of BDs formed is similar. There are five standard models considered for the formation of BDs:
\begin{enumerate}
\item From very low-mass cores, which should result in the presence of a large disc around the sub-stellar source formed (e.g., Padoan \& Nordlund 2004; Hennebelle \& Chabrier 2008; Machida et al. 2009)
\item Ejection from larger cores, which would result in a small, truncated disc at best (e.g., Reipurth \& Clarke 2001; Goodwin et al. 2004)
\item From massive discs; it is estimated that $\sim$20-70\% of the BDs formed by disc fragmentation can have discs (e.g., Stamatellos \& Whitworth 2009ab)
\item Liberated from binaries, which should result in the presence of a disc (e.g., Goodwin \& Whitworth 2007)
\item In small 'cores' in filaments, the BD disc fraction should be the same as the low-mass disc fraction (e.g., Bonnell et al. 2008; Clarke et al. 2008; Bate 2009)
\end{enumerate}
To clarify these models further, model (1) is based on a star-like formation of BDs, i.e. via the collapse of molecular cloud cores with sub-stellar masses. In this model, gravitationally unstable protostellar cores of BD mass are formed directly by the process of turbulent fragmentation (e.g., Padoan \& Nordlund 2004). Since this is a star-like formation, and since most stars are formed with circumstellar discs, BDs formed via this mechanism are expected to be surrounded by discs. Model (2) considers that BDs are not formed through the collapse of low-mass cores, but that rather they are ejected as a result of encounters in multiple systems made up of a small number of stellar embryos. The ejected BDs have suffered multiple encounters that will have pruned their circumstellar discs. As a result, this model predicts weaker accretion diagnostics and few BDs with discs (e.g., Reipurth \& Clarke 2001). In model (3), BDs are formed due to gravitational fragmentation of massive extended discs around Sun-like primary stars. At an early age of $\sim$20 kyr, this model predicts 23\% of the BDs liberated in the field to have discs. Many of the BDs that still remain bound to the central star are loosely bound, and so when they escape, they are expected to retain their discs. The disc fraction could thus increase up to a maximum of 70\% (Stamatellos \& Whitworth 2009ab). Model (4) is based on a binary disruption mechanism. In this model, BDs form as distant companions to low-mass stars, in particular M-dwarfs. Such systems are then readily disrupted by the mild perturbations of passing stars at relatively large distances (a few hundred AU or more). The result is a population of single BDs and low-mass hydrogen-burning stars. Since the disruption is gentle, both the BDs and the low-mass hydrogen-burning stars are able to retain their circumstellar discs (e.g., Goodwin \& Whitworth 2007). In model (5), BDs form in filamentary structures that develop as the gas falls in the gravitational potential of the forming cluster. In this model, there is no need for close interactions or ejections to ensure the formation of sub-stellar cores. Ejections can occur but are not fundamental to the process. This model predicts BDs to have the same disc properties as the low-mass stars formed, i.e., the circumstellar disc properties for BDs should form a continuum with low-mass stars. However, this mechanism would only be expected to be efficient in dense clusters. The abundance of BDs in stellar clusters is of the order of 25\% in highly clustered regions, whereas it decreases to the order of 10\% in isolated regions (Bonnell et al. 2008; Clarke et al. 2008).
Any, some, or all of these mechanisms could operate in a cluster, perhaps with the same relative efficiency, or perhaps different in different regions. Different mechanisms should give different disc properties relative to the other mechanisms, for e.g., very low-mass cores would probably produce fairly massive extended discs, while ejection would produce lower-mass truncated discs, or no discs at all. Once formed, we can probably assume that the same discs evolve in the same way independent of the formation mechanism. But the initial disc fraction may be different and discs could start significantly less massive/extended depending on the formation mechanism. The observations seem to suggest that BD discs do not have a nice decline in fraction with time. If different clusters form BDs via different mechanisms, then the initial BD disc populations will be different in these clusters. {\it The observed BD disc fraction thus may only partially be due to age evolution, and rather the disc fraction may be a signature of the BD formation mechanism dominant in the cluster}. For e.g., the mechanism (2) may be more active in USco than the rest. The ejection model (2) could result in an excess of BDs being formed, but very few of those BDs will have circumstellar discs. This mechanism may also be prevalent in Taurus that has a lower BD disc fraction than SOri despite being younger than this region. Model (3) may also be applicable in USco if the low disc fraction limit of $\sim$20\% is taken into account. In comparison, formation from very low-mass cores (1) would require higher turbulence and likely a denser region. Model (5) is also applicable in a dense region. A large fraction of the sub-stellar sources formed via these mechanisms could end up with discs, resulting in high disc fractions as found in the dense SOri or IC 348 regions. Thus while a dense environment could disrupt the discs around high-mass stars (e.g., Pfalzner et al. 2006), it could result in a high disc fraction for BDs. This can explain the large difference in the BD and high-mass disc fractions in SOri and IC 348 (Fig.~\ref{density}). On the other hand, if mechanisms such as (4) are in play, the disc disruptions are minimal and all BDs formed should be able to retain their discs, irrespective of the stellar density in the region. This could explain the difference in the BD disc fractions for Cha I and USco, which have similar stellar densities.
The sharp decline in the BD disc fraction between 3 and 5 Myr thus may not be an age effect but likely indicates that USco has formed its BDs differently than SOri or the other young clusters. The one mechanism that seems the most applicable in USco to explain the low BD disc fraction is the ejection model. All of the other models imply similar BD disc properties as found for the stellar members in the cluster. We do find the disc fraction for BDs in USco to be similar to the stars. Then perhaps any of the other formation mechanisms could work as well, although density could be an issue. We could argue that the disc fractions for the stars may also be indicative of the respective formation mechanism. A difference in BD and star formation mechanisms has been argued for in e.g., Thies \& Kroupa (2007), and it has been suggested that stars and BDs are two correlated but disjoint populations with different dynamical histories. However, the high- and low-mass stars 'arrive' at this low USco fraction via a different track, i.e. via a transition to the debris phase. We have observational evidence of it in terms of the high debris disc fraction in USco for these higher mass bins, unlike the BDs. The similar disc fraction for stars and BDs in USco is probably not indicative of similar formation mechanisms for stars and BDs in USco,
rather a coincidence that at this time stellar discs have evolved to a low fraction whilst BD discs started with a low fraction. The absence of any clear age dependency would explain the primordial nature of older BD discs. The $\sim$10 Myr old TWA could be an exception where the extremely low-density environment might allow more BD discs to survive at early times of formation. A better argument could be that the disc fractions observed are a combination of evolution with age and the initial disc fraction due to the different formation mechanisms that are dominant in each cluster.
\section{Summary}
We have studied the BD disc dissipation timescales in clusters at ages of $\sim$1-10 Myr, and have investigated the various factors that may affect disc dissipation for BDs. Combining with several previous surveys, we find no clear age dependence for the BD disc fractions. The two most notable points are a sharp drop in the BD inner disc fraction between 3 and 5 Myr, and the persistent primordial nature of these discs even at older ages. This indicates that while the overall BD inner disc fractions have decreased, the discs tend to remain in their primordial stages at ages as old as $\sim$10 Myr. We do not find any convincing evidence that any of the well-known inner disc dispersal mechanisms are active in BD discs. We have instead considered the different BD formation theories, and have argued that USco may have formed its BDs differently than SOri and other younger clusters. Thus the sharp decline in disc fractions may not be due to the difference in ages but may be indicative of the different BD formation mechanisms in these clusters, and there may not be a clear age dependence for the BD disc fractions.
Our work also includes a SED classification scheme based on the $K_{s}$ and WISE bands of 3.4-12$\micron$. We find the WISE [3.4]-[12] color to provide a clear distinction between the photospheric and the disc population
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This publication makes use of data products from the Wide-field Infrared Survey Explorer, which is a joint project of the University of California, Los Angeles, and the Jet Propulsion Laboratory/California Institute of Technology, funded by the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. NL was funded by the Ram\'on y Cajal fellowship number 08-303-01-02 and the program number AYA2010$\_$19136 from the Spanish ministry of Science and Innovation.
|
\section{}
\label{sec:intro}
The free energy of crystal phases is generally minimized by a finite fraction of point defects like vacancies and interstitials.
However, the equilibrium number of such defects in most, if not all, colloidal and atomic/molecular crystals with a single constituent is extremely low.
Exemplarily, for the face-centered cubic crystal of hard spheres, one of the few colloidal
systems where the vacancy and interstitial fractions have been calculated, the fraction
of vacancies and interstitials is on the order of $10^{-4}$ and $10^{-8}$ respectively,
near coexistence \cite{defects}. As such, neither the vacancies nor the interstitials
strongly affect the phase behaviour and so most studies of crystals
ignore the effect of these defects.
Nevertheless, vacancies and interstitials have a significant effect on the dynamics in an otherwise perfect crystal,
as the main mechanism for particle diffusion is hopping of particles from filled to empty sites or between interstitial sites.
In this paper, we examine a system of hard cubes where, as we will demonstrate, one cannot ignore the presence of vacancies.
Arguably, a cube is one of the simplest non-spherical shapes and the archetype of a space-filling polyhedron.
Surprisingly, despite the simplicity of this system, we find that the stable ordered phase is strongly affected by the presence of vacancies,
so much that vacancies actually {\it increase} the positional order and change the
melting point. Remarkably, the fraction of vacancies in this system is more than two orders of
magnitude higher than that of hard spheres or any other known typical, experimentally realizable, single-component atomic or colloidal system, reaching 6.4\% near coexistence.
Additionally, while purely hard (not rounded) colloidal cubes are yet to be realized, colloidal cubes with various interactions are now a reality
\cite{microcubesynthesis1,nanocubesynthesis1,nanocubesynthesis2,nanocubesynthesis3,rossi2010cubic,nanocubes2011}
and it is likely that hard cubes will be realized in the future.
Here, we use Monte Carlo (MC) and event driven molecular dynamics (EDMD)
\cite{edmdanisotropic} simulations
to examine in detail the effect of vacancies on the equilibrium phase behavior
of hard cubes.
The model we study consists of $N$ perfectly sharp hard cubes
with edge length $\sigma$ in a volume $V$.
Aside from hard-core interactions which prevent configurations of overlapping cubes,
the particles do not interact.
In both types of simulation (MC and EDMD), overlaps are detected using an algorithm based on the
separating axis theorem (e.g. Ref. \cite{separatingaxis}). More information on the EDMD implementation for cubes
is given in the Supporting Information.
\section{Results}
\subsection{Spontaneous vacancy formation}
The equation of state for a {\it vacancy-free} system of hard cubes has been the subject of a number
of studies \cite{escobedopolyhedral,escobedoparallelepipeds,jagla_1998}
and was most recently examined by Agarwal and Escobedo \cite{escobedopolyhedral}. It clearly shows a single,
first-order phase transition between a fluid and an ordered phase.
The authors of Ref. \cite{escobedopolyhedral} identified the ordered phase at coexistence
to be a liquid crystal mesophase, i.e. a cubatic phase, which is characterized by the presence of long-range orientational
order along three perpendicular axes, but a lack of long-range positional order.
However, the authors noted that finite-size effects made it difficult to
determine the extent of the positional order in their system, and based this
identification on their observation of finite diffusion in the ordered phase.
At high densities, both Refs. \cite{escobedopolyhedral} and \cite{jagla_1998}
agree that the ordered phase is a simple cubic crystal.
There is no fundamental reason why diffusion cannot occur in a crystal,
hence this is an insufficient criterion for distinguishing between a cubatic
phase and a crystal.
To study more closely the range of the positional order
along the ordered branch we re-examined the intermediate density region (near
coexistence) using highly efficient EDMD
\cite{edmdanisotropic} simulations allowing us to access system sizes more than an order of
magnitude larger than the ones considered in Ref.
\cite{escobedopolyhedral}. We simulated systems
of $N=40^3=64000$ particles starting from a
simple cubic crystal lattice. Coexistence
between the fluid and ordered phase is observed directly for overall packing fractions $0.455 \leq \eta = N \sigma^3/V \leq 0.480$.
Snapshots of typical configurations are
shown in the supporting information.
Looking in detail at the EDMD simulations for $\eta$ between 0.52 and 0.56, i.e., in the region where
Ref. \cite{escobedopolyhedral} reported the cubatic phase,
we noticed that in many simulations the crystal lattice spontaneously transformed in one of two distinct ways (see the supporting information).
In most cases, the simple cubic crystal did not maintain its original
orientation in the box; instead it rotated, introducing defects and frustrations to the crystal lattice. In others, the
system spontaneously added extra layers, i.e. extra lattice sites.
As long as the crystal lattice remains aligned with the simulation box, the number of lattice sites can easily be measured from the number of
peaks in the three-dimensional density profile of the cubes. Figure \ref{fig:density} shows a two-dimensional
projection of such a density profile from simulations with $N=40^3$ particles. From this plot we can determine that the system has $N_L=41^3$ lattice sites.
Thus, the system spontaneously incorporated a large number of excess lattice sites into the crystal.
The resulting crystal has a net vacancy concentration, of approximately
$\alpha=(N_L-N)/N_L=8$\%.
It should be noted that since the volume and the number of particles in the system are fixed,
it is generally not possible to reach an equilibrium concentration of defects in the system. However,
the formation of extra layers and lattice distortions both significantly increase the number of lattice sites
in the crystal, and suggest that the thermodynamically stable phase in this regime might be a vacancy-rich crystal structure.
We note here that the systems sizes examined by Ref. \cite{escobedopolyhedral} would not have allowed for extra layers to form.
Hence, we believe that the rotated, defective crystals we see are what the authors of Ref. \cite{escobedopolyhedral} identified as cubatic.
To examine the effect of vacancies on the crystal structure, we performed additional EDMD simulations on systems
with various net vacancy concentrations $\alpha = (N_L-N)/N_L$ for a number of packing fractions $\eta=N \sigma^3/V$.
The average global positional order in the system was measured using the
positional order parameter averaged over all particles:
\begin{equation}
\left< G_{global} \right> = \left| \left( 1/N \right)\sum_j\exp(i \mathbf{K}\cdot\mathbf{r}_j) \right|,
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{K}$ is a reciprocal lattice vector of the crystal under consideration
and $\mathbf{r}_j$ is the position of particle $j$. In all our plots we have chosen $\mathbf{K}$ to correspond
to a single lattice vector, i.e $\mathbf{K_\mathbf{e}}=\frac{2\pi}{a} \hat{\mathbf{e}}$ with $\hat{\mathbf{e}} = \hat{\mathbf{x}},\hat{\mathbf{y}},\hat{\mathbf{z}}$
and $a$ the lattice spacing.
To set the net vacancy concentration we placed $N=(1-\alpha) N_L$ particles randomly on a simple cubic lattice with $N_L=40^3=64000$ lattice sites,
and then rescaled the volume (and thus the lattice spacing) of the box to the desired packing fraction $\eta$. Hence, the resulting system
has a lattice spacing that depends on the chosen packing fraction $\eta$ and net vacancy concentration $\alpha$.
These simulations show that there is a maximum in the global positional order as a function of net vacancy
concentration $\alpha$ for varying packing fractions $\eta$ (Fig. \ref{fig:order}).
An increase in order due to an increase in number of vacancies is unexpected as typically the presence of
defects (such as vacancies) decreases the order. This observation suggests that adding defects reduces
frustration in the crystal, potentially stabilizing a defect-rich crystal.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width= 0.3\textwidth]{densprof.pdf}
\caption{Peaks in the density profile associated with a two-dimensional projection of the centers of mass of the cubes at packing fraction $\eta = 0.52$, as measured in an EDMD simulation initialized with $N=$40$^3$ particles on a $N_L=$40$^3$
simple cubic lattice, i.e. no vacancies. The number of lattice sites in the system spontaneously increased to $N_L=41^3$ lattice sites, corresponding to a net vacancy concentration of approximately 8\%. The lines were added to highlight the 41 evenly spaced layers in both (x and y) directions.
\label{fig:density} }
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width= 0.45\textwidth]{fig2.pdf}
\caption{Global positional order $\left< G_{\mathrm{global}} \right>$ as a function of the net vacancy concentration $\alpha$ for packing fractions $\eta=0.51$, 0.52, 0.53, 0.54, and 0.56 in a system with $N_L=64000$ lattice sites. The points indicate
measurements of $\left< G_{\mathrm{global}} \right>$ along the $x$, $y$, and $z$ axes separately, while the
lines are averaged over all three directions.
\label{fig:order}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Defect realization}
The `net vacancy concentration' $\alpha$, defined above, is simply the excess of lattice sites $N_L$
compared to the number of particles $N$, divided by $N_L$, i.e. the fraction of lattice sites that does not have a particle associated with it.
In a typical system, for instance hard spheres, a vacancy is localized to a single lattice site
and one can determine the number of vacancies by counting the number of
empty lattice sites. In a hard-sphere crystal, a particle next to an empty lattice site is kept in place by its other neighbors.
This is not the case for hard cubes and, as a result, the way vacancies manifest in this system is very atypical.
In hard cubes, entirely empty lattice sites are rarely seen even in the vacancy-rich crystals
near coexistence. Instead, a defect manifests itself as a finite-length chain of particles along one of the
three principal axes in the crystal, in which the particles have a slightly larger inter-particle spacing than the average
as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:defectsnapshot}. Hence, if a vacancy extends over 4 lattice sites, as
is the case for one of the vacancies highlighted in Fig. \ref{fig:defectsnapshot}, then the vacancy is realized by
3 particles sharing 4 lattice sites in a one-dimensional chain. Additionally, while a two dimensional
layer in a typical snapshot, such as in Fig. \ref{fig:defectsnapshot} shows regions of disorder,
it should be noted that even at high vacancy concentrations,
the crystal still shows a well-defined lattice spacing on average, which can be easily determined from the
position of the peaks in the scattering function $S(\mathbf{k})$ or the three-dimensional pair correlation function $g(\mathbf{r})$ (Fig. \ref{gofxy}).
It should be noted that the {\it net} vacancy concentration includes both vacancies as well as interstitials in the sense
that each interstitial cancels a vacancy. However, the number of vacancies is higher than the number of interstitials
resulting in the large positive net vacancy concentrations we find in this system. Similar to a vacancy, interstitials are also not localized in this
system and occur by $n$ particles sharing $n-1$ lattice sites.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width= 0.45\textwidth]{gofxy2.pdf}
\caption{Three-dimensional pair correlation function $g(x,y,z)$ with $z=0$, measured in an EDMD simulation of a system of $N=64000$ particles with packing fraction $\eta = 0.51$ and vacancy concentration $\alpha = 0.055$. The $x$, $y$, and $z$ directions are taken along the three axes of the simulation box. The data is averaged over 50 snapshots, and over the four quadrants of the $xy$-plane.
\label{gofxy}}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Phase diagram of hard cubes}
So far we have established a relationship between the order in the system and the net vacancy concentration. However,
there is no way to determine the equilibrium net vacancy concentration and the phase boundaries from the EDMD simulations.
A proper determination of the equilibrium concentration of vacancies as well as the phase diagram requires
free-energy calculations. The free energy per particle ($f=\beta F/N$) of the solid with vacancies is given by:
\begin{equation}
f^{\mathrm{vac}}_{\mathrm{ein}}(\lambda) = f_{\mathrm{ein}}(\lambda) + f_{\mathrm{rot}}(\lambda) + f_{\mathrm{comb}},
\end{equation}
where the first term is the translational free energy of a normal Einstein crystal \cite{bookfrenkel}, the second term is the
rotational free energy of the crystal \cite{noya_2007}, and the third term is the
combinatorial entropy associated with placing $N$ particles on $N_L$ lattice sites:
\begin{equation}
f_{\mathrm{comb}}=- ({1}/{N}) \log [{N_L!}/({N! (N_L - N)!})].
\end{equation}
Detailed descriptions on how these terms were calculated using Monte Carlo simulations are given in the Methods section.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width= 0.3\textwidth]{defects.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{A typical configuration where three delocalized defects, and the particles directly surrounding the defects, have been highlighted (yellow) in a system with $N_L = 8000$ lattice sites at packing fraction $\eta=0.56$ and defect concentration $\alpha = 0.016$ from an EDMD simulation.
The color of the other particles indicates the orientation of each particle with respect to the crystal lattice, with colors closer to blue indicating more closely aligned particles.
In the defect furthest to the right, the highlighted area shows three cubes sharing four lattice sites. The uppermost defect has six cubes sharing seven lattice sites, and the bottom most defect has seven cubes sharing eight lattice sites. \label{fig:defectsnapshot}}
\end{figure}
We determined the free energy as a function of net vacancy concentration $\alpha$, at a fixed packing fraction $\eta=0.52$. As shown in the inset in Fig. \ref{fig:defects}b, the minimum in the free energy occurs for a high concentration of vacancies.
Specifically, we find that at this density the number of particles is 4\% lower than the number of lattice sites.
While calculating the free energy as a function of $\alpha$, we also
observed that the free energy, excluding the combinatorial contribution, was almost linear.
This is shown in the inset of Fig. \ref{fig:defects}b.
While we are uncertain to the origin of this linearity, it seems to suggest that the vacancies
are only weakly interacting.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[height=0.755\columnwidth]{fig5.pdf}
\caption{{\bf (a)} The equilibrium phase diagram of hard cubes as a function of packing fraction $\eta$. For $\eta<0.45$ we predict a stable fluid
phase, for $\eta>0.50$ we find a stable crystal phase with vacancies (see, e.g. Fig. 2), and in between these two packing fractions we find coexistence between the
crystal and fluid. {\bf (b)} Free energy per particle as a function of net vacancy concentration $\alpha$ at packing fraction $\eta = 0.52$. The points correspond to measurements while the solid line is a guide to the eye. The estimated error in the free energies, based on independent runs, is $\simeq 0.004 k_B T$. Inset: Free energy per particle without taking into account the combinatorial free energy: $f_\mathrm{def} = f - f_\mathrm{comb}$. The solid line is a linear fit.
{\bf (c)} The net vacancy concentration $\alpha$ as a function of packing fraction $\eta$ in the crystal phase. The error bars are based on the width of the free energy minimum.
Inset: Equations of state for the fluid phase (black), the stable vacancy-rich crystal (green), and the crystal without vacancies, i.e. $\alpha = 0$ (red, dashed). Note that the phase transition (dotted lines) shifts to lower densities when vacancies are taken into account. The phase transition for the vacancy-free system essentially coincides with the one in Ref. \cite{escobedopolyhedral}.
\label{fig:defects}}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
For each value of $\alpha$, the free energy as a function of density was obtained by combining the reference free energies shown in Fig. \ref{fig:defects}b with a separate equation of state measured for that value of $\alpha$.
By minimizing the resulting free energy with respect to $\alpha$, we find that the number of excess lattice sites decreases as a function of
the density, as expected (Fig. \ref{fig:defects}c).
Using a common tangent construction (see the supporting information) in
combination with the determined free energies, we mapped out the phase diagram which is shown in Fig. \ref{fig:defects}a.
We find coexistence between a fluid phase with coexisting density $\eta_f=N\sigma^3/V=0.45$ and a vacancy-rich simple cubic
crystal structure with coexisting density $\eta_m=0.50$ and net vacancy concentration $\alpha = (N_L - N)/N_L \simeq 0.064$. The
pressure and chemical potential at coexistence are $\beta p \sigma^3 = 6.16$ and $\beta \mu = 18.4$, respectively.
The inset of Fig. \ref{fig:defects}c shows the equations of state and phase transitions both including and excluding the effects of vacancies in the crystal phase.
The presence of vacancies in the crystal significantly lowers the melting density compared to the one reported by
Ref. \cite{escobedopolyhedral} where they found that a defect-free crystal melted at
$\eta_m=0.52$, while the freezing packing fraction is approximately the same. We note here
that we also find a melting number density of $\eta_m=0.52$ if we exclude vacancies.
Hence, we find that vacancies increase the range of stability of the simple cubic crystal.
\subsection{Diffusion}
As was already shown in Ref. \cite{escobedopolyhedral}, the ordered phase has appreciable diffusion in the intermediate density regime.
This can be understood in terms of the delocalized defects, which diffuse through the crystal and allow particles to diffuse in the opposite direction.
To investigate the effect of vacancies on the diffusion coefficient in the solid, we measured the long-time self-diffusion constant of cubes in the crystal phase using EDMD simulations. Figure \ref{fig:diffusion} shows the diffusion constant as a function of density, where the net vacancy concentration at each density was chosen to correspond to the equilibrium net vacancy concentration shown in Fig. \ref{fig:defects}c. Near coexistence, the diffusion coefficient increases significantly, up to a maximum of $D \tau /\sigma^2 = 0.05$, where $\tau = \sqrt{\beta m \sigma^2}$ is the unit of time in the EDMD simulations and $m$ is the mass of a single cube. For comparison, the diffusion constant in the fluid at coexistence is $D \tau / \sigma^2 = 0.15$, three times higher than in the coexisting solid.
At fixed density, the diffusion constant increases approximately linearly with the number of vacancies, with very little diffusion remaining at $\alpha = 0$. An example of this is shown in the inset of Fig. \ref{fig:diffusion}, for packing fraction $\eta = 0.56$. Note that even for vanishing net vacancy concentration, diffusion is still possible via the spontaneous formation of delocalized interstitial-vacancy pairs. However, at the equilibrium net vacancy concentration ($\alpha = 0.013$), the diffusion coefficient is eight times as high as in the vacancy-free crystal, indicating that vacancies play a major role in the dynamics of the particles in the solid.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width= 0.45\textwidth]{diffusion.pdf}
\caption{Dimensionless diffusion coefficient $D \tau / \sigma^2$ in the solid phase as a function of the packing fraction $\eta$. Here, $\tau = \sqrt{\beta m \sigma^2}$ is the unit of time in the EDMD simulations and $m$ is the mass of a single cube. For each density, the crystal has the equilibrium net vacancy concentration as determined from the free energy calculations. The inset shows the diffusion coefficient at a fixed packing fraction $\eta = 0.56$ and varying net vacancy concentration.
\label{fig:diffusion} }
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion and Conclusions}
In this paper, we have examined the effects of vacancies on the phase diagram of hard cubes
using both event driven molecular dynamics simulations as well as Monte Carlo simulations.
From the molecular dynamics simulations it is clear that vacancies play an important role in
the equilibrium phase behavior of hard cubes. Free-energy calculations
show conclusively a first-order phase transition between
a fluid phase and a vacancy-rich simple cubic crystal phase with up to 6\% vacancies.
Up to the system sizes we have studied (40$^3$ particles), we
find long-range positional order for systems with an equilibrium concentration of vacancies (see Fig. \ref{gofxy}).
Thus, we find that the stable phase is a simple cubic crystal for all densities, albeit one with significant diffusion due to the high defect concentration.
The number of vacancies in this system is orders of magnitude larger than typically seen in colloidal systems.
The stability of this vacancy-rich phase can most likely be attributed to the delocalization of defects in the crystal (Fig. \ref{fig:defectsnapshot}):
clearly, one vacancy provides additional free volume for multiple nearby particles, decreasing the entropic cost of creating
a defect. In most other colloidal crystals, such as hard-sphere face-centered cubic crystals, particles near a vacancy are still confined to their lattice site by
their remaining neighbors. As a result, the local entropy gain from a defect is much lower.
The only other similar result we are aware of is for parallel hard cubes;
a somewhat artificial system which shows a very peculiar second order freezing transition from a fluid to
a simple cubic crystal.
\cite{Cuesta,Groh_Mulder_2001,Matthieu}
The existence of a vacancy-stabilized simple cubic phase in hard cubes leads
to the question of whether vacancy-stabilized crystal structures are present
in other anisotropic, entropy-driven systems.
We would expect vacancies to be relevant for other (likely hard) systems with crystal structures where vacancies can delocalize. Note that delocalization also requires the absence of strong interactions that constrain particles to their lattice sites. For example, we would not expect high vacancy concentrations to occur in the simple cubic structure studied by Rechtsman {\it et al.},\cite{interactingsc} which resulted from isotropic interactions.
Recently, the phase behavior of a large number of polyhedral shapes has been studied using Monte Carlo simulations. \cite{escobedopolyhedral, glotzer1, glotzer2} Since vacancies are easily overlooked in the case of spontaneously formed crystals, and unlikely to form in simulations starting from a fully filled lattice, it is possible that high equilibrium vacancy concentrations occur in many of these systems.
Specifically, for crystal structures where some or all of the neighboring particles can freely move into an empty lattice site, the possibility of crystal vacancies should likely be taken into account. Examples include the crystal structures predicted for hexagonal and triangular prisms in Ref. \cite{escobedopolyhedral}, or the 2d
(rounded) hard squares studied in Refs. \cite{hardsquares, escobedosquares}.
\section{Methods}
\subsection{Event driven molecular dynamics simulations} Please refer to the supporting text for a full description.
\subsection{Free energy of the liquid}
Thermodynamic integration allows one to calculate the free energy for all densities assuming that both the equation of state and the free energy at a reference density are known.
When the free energy of a reference density $F(\rho_0)$ is known, the free energy as a
function of number density $F(\rho)$ can be determined using the equation of state. In particular, the free energy is given by
\begin{equation}
\frac{\beta F\left( \rho \right)}{N} = \frac{\beta F\left( \rho_0 \right)}{N}
+ \beta \int_{\rho_0}^{\rho} \frac{P\left(\rho^{\prime}\right)}{\left(\rho^{\prime}\right)^2}d\rho^{\prime} \label{eq:thermoint}
\end{equation}
where $\rho$ is the density and $\beta = 1/k_B T$ with $k_B$ Boltzmann's constant and $T$ the temperature.
To measure the free energy of the fluid at a reference density, we used Widom insertion test particle method\cite{bookfrenkel}.
The free energy of the fluid at density $\rho_0$ is then given by
\begin{equation}
\frac{\beta F_\mathrm{f}(\rho_0)}{N} = \beta \mu(\rho_0) - \frac{\beta P(\rho_0)}{\rho_0}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Solid free energies with and without vacancies}
To calculate the Helmholtz free energy as a function of the density for the solid phase
we use thermodynamic integration \cite{bookfrenkel} in MC simulations of systems with $N_L = 20^3 = 8000$ or $N_L = 25\times 20\times 18=9000$ lattice sites. We checked during our simulations that the number of lattice sites did not change spontaneously. For systems with the same density and net vacancy concentration, the differences in free energy between these two lattice sizes were within the error of our measurements. However, while equivalent free energy calculations for a smaller system ($N_L = 1000$ lattice sites) yielded qualitatively similar results, finite-size effects were noticeable when compared to the larger systems.
For the reference free energy of a crystal without vacancies,
we use a variation on the method introduced by Frenkel and Ladd \cite{bookfrenkel}, where
particles are tied to their respective lattice sites with springs, transforming the crystal into
a non-interacting Einstein crystal for a sufficiently high spring constant $\lambda$. In this case,
we also add an aligning potential to handle the orientational degrees of freedom of
the particles \cite{noya_2007}. Using the same coupling constant $\lambda$ that attaches the
particles to their lattice sites, the aligning potential is given by
\begin{equation}
\beta U_{\mathrm{rot}}(\lambda) =
\lambda \sum_{i=1}^{N} \min_{j \ne k}
\left\{ 2-\left(\mathbf{u}_{i,j} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{x}} \right)^2-\left(\mathbf{u}_{i,k} \cdot \hat{\mathbf{y}} \right)^2 \right\}
\end{equation}
where $\hat{\mathbf{x}}(\hat{\mathbf{y}})$ is a unit vector along the $x(y)$ axis,
and $\mathbf{u}_{i,j}$, with $j=1,2,3$, are three mutually perpendicular
face normals associated with particle $i$. Also, $\beta=1/k_B T$ is the inverse thermal energy, where $k_B$ is Boltzmann's constant and $T$ the temperature.
The parameter $\lambda$ controls the strength of the external potentials;
hence for $\lambda=0$ the system reduces to pure hard cubes, and
for $\lambda=\lambda_m$ with $\lambda_m$ sufficiently large, the particles in the crystal are non-interacting.
To calculate the free energy of a system with vacancies, instead of fixing the particles to a specific lattice site,
we attach the particles to their nearest lattice site \cite{multipleoccupancy} using
\begin{equation}
U_{\mathrm{ext}}(\lambda) =
\lambda \sum_{i=1}^{N} \left(\frac{1}{\sigma^2} \left|\mathbf{r}_i - \mathbf{r}^0(\mathbf{r}_i) \right|^2 \right) + U_{\mathrm{rot}}(\lambda)
\end{equation}
where $\mathbf{r}^0(\mathbf{r}_i)$ is the position of the lattice site nearest to $\mathbf{r}_i$.
In this case, the dimensionless free energy per particle ($f=\beta F/N$) of the noninteracting system is
$f^{\mathrm{vac}}_{\mathrm{ein}}(\lambda) = f_{\mathrm{ein}}(\lambda) + f_{\mathrm{rot}}(\lambda) + f_{\mathrm{comb}}$
where the first term is the translational free energy of a normal Einstein crystal \cite{bookfrenkel}, the second term is the
rotational free energy of the crystal \cite{noya_2007}, and the third term is the
combinatorial entropy associated with placing $N$ particles on $N_L$ lattice sites:
$f_{\mathrm{comb}}=- ({1}/{N}) \log [{N_L!}/({N! (N_L - N)!})]$.
The full free energy of the crystal of hard cubes with vacancies is then given by:
\begin{equation}
f = f^{\mathrm{vac}}_{\mathrm{ein}}(\lambda_m) - \frac{\beta}{N} \int_0^{\lambda_m} \left< \frac{\partial U_\mathrm{ext}(\lambda')}{\partial \lambda'} \right>_{\lambda'} \mathrm{d}\lambda'.
\end{equation}
In contrast to the free energy calculations for systems without vacancies \cite{bookfrenkel},
the center of mass of the system is not fixed in these simulations.
To equilibrate the position of the center of mass, we introduce MC moves that collectively translate every
particle in the system \cite{multipleoccupancy}. Additionally, moves that translate a single particle by exactly one lattice
vector are introduced in order to improve sampling of different distributions of vacancies over the crystal. For a
system with full lattice site occupancy ($N = N_L$) and thus no vacancies, we obtain good agreement between the two methods.
\subsection{Diffusion constants}
To measure the long-time self-diffusion constant in the crystalline phase shown in Fig. \ref{fig:diffusion}, we performed EDMD simulations in systems of $N_L = 8000$ lattice sites, for a range of densities. The vacancy concentration was chosen to correspond to the equilibrium vacancy concentration shown in Fig. \ref{fig:defects}c. The diffusion constant was calculated from the slope of the mean squared displacement as a function of time. An example of a plot showing the mean squared displacement is shown in the supporting text.
\begin{acknowledgments}
The authors thank M. Miller and D. Frenkel for
many useful discussions. LF acknowledges support from the EPSRC, U.K. for funding (Programme Grant EP/I001352/1), FS and MD acknowledge support of a NWO-VICI grant. MM acknowledges support of the SFB-TR6 program (project D3).
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
The measurements of distances of Type Ia SNae on cosmological scales (up to $z\approx 1$; Riess et al. 1998; Perlmutter et al. 1999), when interpreted in the standard Friedmann-Lemaitre cosmological models, imply that the Universe
expansion is accelerating. When such measurements are compared with those concerning the power spectrum of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB; see Dunkley et al. 2009), the correlation length of large scale-structures (Eisenstein et al. 2005), or the abundance of galaxy clusters (Bahcall et al. 2003), they indicate that 70 \%
of the energy density in the Universe is constituted by some sort of negative pressure field (named Dark Energy DE).
Its contribution $\Omega_{DE}\approx 0.7$ (in units of the critical density) results to be
larger (but of the same order at present time) than the energy density $\Omega_M \approx 0.27$ contributed by Dark Matter (DM), and much larger than that
from ordinary baryonic matter $\Omega_b\approx 0.03$. Although such results can be accommodated
in a "Concordance Cosmology" (Spergel et al. 2007) consistent with a wide set of observations, they pose an enormous challenge for fundamental physics, when interpreted in terms of vacuum energy density (for a critical discussion see Bianchi, Rovelli, Kolb 2010 and references therein).
In fact, while the proposed extensions of the particle physics standard model provide natural candidates for the DM,
the nature of DE constitutes a real conundrum. The simplest candidate is the Einstein cosmological constant
(see Carrol, Press, Turner 1992; Weinberg 1989; Sahni, Starobinsky 2000), characterized by constant energy density $\rho$ and pressure $p$, yielding an equation of state $w\equiv p/\rho=-1$. However, when interpreted in terms of vacuum energy density,
the value required to induce the observed acceleration would be unnaturally small $\rho\approx (10^{-3}\,eV)^4$ compared to the natural energy scales in particle physics; besides, the coincidence problem of why this value is at present close to the DM energy density has no natural explanation (Zlatev, Wang, Steinhardt 1999).
The problems related to the above fine tuning have led to consider the general
case where the DE equation-of-state ratio $w(a)$ varies with time (here expressed in terms of the Universe scale factor $a$). Such a {\it dynamical} Dark Energy (DDE) is indeed expected if
the DE results from the pressure $p_{\phi}=\dot \phi-V(\phi)$ and the energy density $\rho_{\phi}=\dot \phi+V(\phi)$ of a scalar field $\phi$ (named Quintessence, see Peebles, Ratra 1988; Caldwell, Dave, Steinhardt 1998; Sahni, Wang, 2000; Copeland, Sahni, Tsujikawa, 2006; Frieman, Turner, Huterer 2008 ) evolving in a potential $V(\phi)$. A time-varying $w(a)$ also provides a phenomenological rendition of modifications in the Friedmann equations for the rate of expansion (see Linder, Jenkins 2003) due to alternative theories of gravitation.
Characterizing the DE equation of state would constitute a fundamental step toward understanding the nature of DE, with a great impact on fundamental physics, involving quantum theory, high-energy physics, gravitational physics and astrophysics. However, at present the time evolution of the equation of state is not very well constrained. Recent constraints come from: i) Type Ia Supernovae. These are based on measurements of SNae luminosity-distances up to $z\approx 1$ (see, e.g., Davis et al. 2007); ii) CMB power spectrum, based on the measurements of the angular-diameter distance corresponding to the baryonic acoustic scale at the time of recombination ($z=1089$); iii) the baryonic acoustic oscillations observed in the correlation function of galaxies at $z\approx 0.35$, providing a ruler to measure the ratio of the distances to $z=0.35$ and $z=1089$ (Eisenstein et al. 2005).
Further constraints on DDE could be provided by the weak lensing tomography, i.e., the measurement of the distortion in the images of distant source galaxies due to the inhomogeneous mass distribution of the Universe, over a range of cosmic times (Massey et al. 2007). The size of these distortions depends upon both the distances travelled, and
upon the growth function $D(a)$ which determines the amplitude of the deflector mass concentrations (Amara \& Refregier 2007; see Refregier 2003 for a review).
Combining the above measurements still leaves allowed a relatively large volume of the parameter space for the
local value and the time variation of the equation-of-state parameter (see, e.g, Linder \& Jenkins 2003; Komatsu et al. 2008; Li, Xia, Fan, Zhangm 2008; Kowalski et al. 2008); parametrizing its evolution as $w(a)=w_0+w_a(1-a)$ (an expression shown by Linder 2003 to provide an excellent approximation to a wide variety of scalar fields and other DE models), present observations yield
$w_0\approx -1.2\div -0.8$ and $w_a\approx -1\div 1$. Note that when $w$ is not restricted to be constant the fit to the observations improves dramatically (see Huterer, Cooray 2005). Indeed, the best fit is provided
by models with $w<-1$ for $z<0.2$ ($1\sigma$ evidence); such a property would violate the null energy condition so that $p+\rho<0$, and the corresponding field is usually referred to as "Phantom energy" (see Alcaniz 2004; Carrol, Hoffman, Trodden 2003; Amendola 2004). Such a form of DE would most naturally lead to a Big Rip, i.e., to an infinite energy density increase in a finite time (Caldwell, Kamionkowski, Weinberg 2003). As for the dynamical evolution, the fits to SNIa data mildly favour an evolving equation of state with $w_a>0$ (see, e.g., Feng, Wang, Zhang 2005; Upadhye, Ishak, Steinhardt 2005), implying a crossing of the value
$w=-1$ at redshift $\lesssim 1$ (this kind of evolving DDE was dubbed "Quintom", see, e.g., see Feng et al. 2005), a dynamics which differs from Quintessence and Phantom in determining the fate and the evolution of the Universe
(see Guo et al. 2005) .
One important reason why the above observational constraints to DDE still allow large regions of the parameter space is they all involve either integrals of the Hubble expansion rate
$H(a)=\dot a/ a$ over a large cosmic time (from $z\approx 1000$ to the present) or the value of $H(a)$ at relatively low redshifts $z\lesssim 1$. This would actually be sufficient to severely constrain DE if its equation of state was indeed constant, since its contribution to the energy density would become rapidly much smaller than the DM contribution (increasing like $a^{-3}$) at $z\approx 1$. However, time varying models with $w_a>0$ possess different behaviour from
the $w=$ constant cases even at high redshifts (see, e.g., Linder, Jenkins 2003) both in the expansion rate $H(a)$ and in the growth factor $D=\delta(a)/ \delta(a_i)$ of DM overdensities $\delta\equiv \Delta \rho/\rho$ present at some initial
time $a_i$.
Extending the methods discussed above to higher redshifts to provide tighter constraints on DDE is a recognized priority for astrophysical research in the next future (see the National Academy of Science report 2010), and is involving a major effort of the international community. Tighter constraints on DDE equation of state will be provided by the NASA JDEM - WFIRST space mission (see Gehrels 2010) operating a 1.5-meter wide-field-of-view near-infrared-imaging and low-resolution-spectroscopy telescope;
this will extend BAO and SNIa measurements to $z\approx 2$, yielding a reduction of a factor $\approx 5$ in the allowed area of the $w_0-w_a$ plane (see Frieman, Turner, Huterer 2008). The ESA space mission Euclid (see Laurejis et al. 2008) will
consist of a 1.2m telescope placed in L2 orbit, and is optimised for weak gravitational lensing and BAO so as to achive measurements of the DDE equation of state with $\Delta w_a\leq 0.2$. A great statistical improvement will be achieved with the ground-based 8.4m Large Synoptic Survey Telescope (LSST; Ivezic et al. 2010), that will
observe a 20 000 deg$^2$ region with a final limiting magnitude of $r\approx 27.5$, providing, e.g., an unprecedented sample of
$\approx 3$ billion lensing galaxies.
The above methods and experiments are all based either on the well-established standard Friedman-Laimaitre models
providing the dependence of distances on cosmological parameters, or on the evolution of linear density perturbations, for which we have a solid physical description to be compared with observations.
However, measuring $w(a)$ over a wide range of cosmic times could in principle be achieved through observations involving
high-contrast, non-linear cosmic structures. One example is the measurement of the redshift-space distortions, the imprint of large-scale peculiar velocities on observed galaxy maps (see Guzzo et al. 2008); since gravity-driven coherent motions are a direct consequence of the growth of structures, measurements of the redshift-space two-point correlation function can be mapped into estimates of the growth factor $D(a)$. Alternatively, a measurement of the DDE equation of state could be achieved
by comparing the observed abundance of high-contrast cosmic structures, like clusters of galaxies with given DM mass (see Borgani \& Guzzo 2001), with the abundances computed assuming different background DDE (see Wang, Steinhardt, 1998; Mota, Van Der Bruck 2004; Nunes, Mota 2006; Mota, Shaw, Silk 2008). The drawback of these methods is that the observed properties of such structures are related to their underlying DM distribution by the complex physics of gas and star formation; the uncertainties in the modelling of such processes are in general larger than the effects due to different assumed DDE cosmologies, and at present are not competitive with BAO and SNIa methods in constraining the DDE equation of state, although cluster abundances measured with the XMM XXL survey (Pierre et al. 2011) and eROSITA (Predhel et al. 2010; Cappelluti et al. 2010) are expected to provide substantial improvements in the next few years. However, these methods probe the DE equation of state at $z\leq 1$.
There are, however, objects that can be suitable for the above task, and that can probe DDE models at higher redshifts. These are the most massive Black Holes (BHs) residing in the centre of massive high-redshift galaxies, and observed (Fan et al. 2006) to shine as Quasars (QSOs) already at early cosmic times ($z\approx 6$); these are the high-redshift, high-luminosity representatives of the Active Galactic Nuclei emitting over the whole electromagnetic spectrum due to the accretion of gas onto the Supermassive Black Holes (SMBHs), observed to be hosted in the bulges of local galaxies (see, e.g., Richstone et al. 1998). They are thought to originate from seed BHs of
$\approx 100\,M_{\odot}$ produced by the collapse of PopIII stars at high redshift $z\gtrsim 20$ (see Madau \& Rees 2001),
which subsequently grow through merging and accretion. Both such processes must be physically related with the growth of their host galaxies, since the BH masses and the properties of the host (e.g., with the stellar mass) are very tightly correlated (Ferrarese \& Merrit 2000; Gebhardt et al. 2000). Besides, both processes are characterized by upper limits:
the merging rate of BHs is limited by that of their host galaxies (see Volonteri, Hardt \& Madau 2003),
which at high redshifts $z\gtrsim 6$ is smaller - but of the same order of magnitude - of the merging rate of the DM haloes collapsed from the peaks of the DM density field (see Lacey \& Cole 1993), primary related to the growth factor of DM perturbations; the accretion rate is limited by the Eddington rate $\dot M_{Edd}=(10^{47}{\rm erg\,s^{-1}}/\epsilon\,10^{9}\,M_{\odot}\,c^2)\,M_{BH}$,
where $\epsilon$ is the accretion efficiency and $M_{BH}$ is the BH mass; thus the maximal mass accretion rate
is $\dot M=(1-\epsilon)\dot M_{Edd}$ yielding an exponential mass growth $M_{BH}(t)\propto exp[(1/\epsilon-1)\,t/t_{Edd}]$
where $t_{Edd}=4.5 10^7$ yrs.
The discovery of BHs of masses $\approx 3\,10^9\,M_{\odot}$ already in place at $z\approx 6$ (Barth et al. 2003; Willott, McLure, Jarvis 2003) clearly provides
a challenge for cosmological models. Although such objects are extremely rare, with a number density $N\approx 10^{-9}\,Mpc^{-3}$,
cosmological models must allow for the building up of such massive BHs from $10^2\,M_{\odot}$ seeds at $z\approx 20$, a huge mass growth in a short lapse of cosmic time (only 600 Myrs for the Concordance Cosmology). Our scope is to investigate which DDE models provide i) a cosmic time available for BH accretion since $z=6$ and ii) a growth factor (determining the BH merging rate) large enough to allow for the early building up of the observed population of SMBHs.
Using the abundance of such objects at high redshifts $z\approx 6$ as a probe of DDE has several advantages: i) they are characterized by a {\it maximal} growth that can be easily modelled; ii) their maximal accretion rate is {\it exponentially} sensitive to the cosmic time $t$; iii) at high redshifts, the {\it maximal} merging rate of BHs is directly related to (and limited by) the growth factor of the galactic DM haloes where they reside; iv) they form on the {\it exponential} tail of the DM mass distribution, so their predicted abundance is {\it exponentially} dependent on the mass grown by redshift $z\approx 6$, making the comparison with observations an extremely sensible probe.
To pursue our goal we shall develop an analytic approach to derive robust upper limits for the growth of the BHs mass functions up to $z\approx 6$ with different DDE background cosmologies. We shall compare the predicted abundance of
BHs with masses $M_{BH}\geq 10^9\,M_{\odot}$ at such redshift with the observed number density, to derive exclusion
regions for the parameter space of DDE models which allow to reduce the regions allowed by other up-to-date observational probes (like SNIa, BAO, or CMB); in fact, we shall show that the abundance of high-redshift QSOs is able to
disfavour some of the DDE models presently providing very good fits to the combined data from the above observations ($w<-1$ and $w_a\gtrsim 0.5$), and in particular the Quintom scenario.
Our computation will provide solid constraints for DDE model provided three basic conditions are verified, at least for high BH masses $M_{BH}\geq 10^8\,M_{\odot}$ and for high redshifts $z\geq 6$. These are: 1) the BHs form from primordial seeds with mass $\approx 10^2\,M_{\odot}$ originating from the collapse of PopIII stars at $z\geq 20$; 2) the Eddington limit for the accretion rate holds at all times; 3) the average accretion efficiency verifies $\epsilon\geq 0.1$. We shall discuss the validity of such conditions in Sect. 2 and in the Conclusions.
The plan of the paper is as follows: in Sect. 2 we describe our analytical approach to derive upper limits on the
growth of the BH mass function; in Sect. 3 we shall compare the predictions for different DDE models with the
observed abundances of $z\approx 6$ SMBHs, and derive severe exclusion regions for the DDE parameters; Sect. 4
is devoted to discussion and conclusion.
\section{The Evolution of the Black Hole Mass Function}
Here we present an analytical approach to follow the evolution of the BH mass function in a cosmological framework.
In such a framework, galaxies form from the collapse of the peaks of primordial DM density field, and grow through repeated merging events. At high redshifts, the large densities of baryons collapsing in the DM haloes allow for rapid gas cooling (Rees, Ostriker 1977), so that copious cold gas reservoirs are available for both star formation and BH accretion (see, e.g., Baugh 2006 for a review).
Subsequently, BHs grow by accretion of cold galactic gas and by merging with other BHs following the coalescence of the host galaxies.
We describe below how we model the corresponding evolution of the BH mass function, maximizing the
parameters related to their accretion, for any background cosmology.
\subsection{Model Set Up}
Cosmic structures form in DM haloes collapsed from tiny overdensities ($\delta\rho/\rho\approx 10^{-5}$) of a primordial Gaussian density field (see Padmanabhan 1993; Peebles 1993, Peacock 1999, Coles and Lucchin 2002). Measurements of the CMB first with COBE (Smoot 1992) and later with BOOMERANG (De Bernardis et al. 2000), MAXIMA (Hanany et al. 2000), WMAP (Hinshaw et al. 2003) provided increasing evidence for such a scenario, and allowed for a detailed measurement of the power spectrum of the density field; complementary high-precision measurements of the power spectrum were obtained through the galaxy correlation function (Percival et al. 2006; Tegmark et al. 2006; Pope et al. 2004, Cole et al. 2005, Padmanabhan et al. 2006).
The resulting spectrum is characterized by a rms density fluctuation $\sigma (M)$ inversely dependent on the filtering mass scale $M$, so that small-scale peaks collapse earlier (on average) as they reach the threshold $\delta_c$ for non-linear evolution
(see Peebles 1993); as larger and larger regions of the density field become non-linear, the previously formed haloes merge to form progressively larger haloes. The probability ${d^{2}P(M\rightarrow M')/dM^{'}dt} $ that a DM haloes with mass $M$ is included into a larger halo $M'$ in a time step $dt$ is provided by the Extended Press \& Shechter formalism (see Bond et al. 1991; Bower 1991; Lacey \& Cole 1993)
\begin{equation}
{d^2 P(M\rightarrow M',t)\over d
M'\,dt} = \Bigg[{\sigma^2\over\sigma'^2(\sigma^2-
\sigma'^2)}\Bigg]^{3/2}
{\delta_c\,e^{-{\delta_c^2(t)\,(\sigma^2-\sigma'^2)\over 2\,D^2(t)\,\sigma^2\,\sigma'^2}} \over \sqrt{2\pi}\,D^2(t) }
\,
\Big|{d\sigma'^2\over dM'}\Big|\Big|{dD(t)\over dt}\Big|~,
\end{equation}
where $\sigma$ and $\sigma'$ are the variance of the density fluctuations corresponding to
the masses $M$ and $M'$, respectively. Note that the merging rate depends critically on the {\it growth factor}
$D(t)$ of DM density perturbations in the linear regime, which in turn is sensible to the DDE background cosmology; its expression in a flat Universe with a cosmological constant is
given in Carroll, Press, Turner (1992) as a function of $\Omega$. The critical threshold $\delta_c$ for the collapse
of density fluctuations also depends weakly on cosmology, ranging from $\delta_c=1.65$ for the Concordance Cosmology
to $\delta_c=1.68$ of a critical $\Omega=1$ cosmology (see Mainini, Maccio, Bonometto, Klypin 2003).
When two DM galactic haloes merge, the dynamical friction against the DM background and the stars, and the viscous effects from the surrounding gas drag the hosted BHs towards the centre of the most massive DM halo, where they form a binary system, loose orbital energy through the emission of gravitational waves and eventually coalesce (Volonteri, Hardt, Madau 2003; Callegari et al. 2009; see Colpi, Dotti 2009 for a review). Several processes may delay (or even inhibit) the coalescence of BHs inside merged DM haloes (Milosavlejevic \& Merritt 2001), so that the DM merging rate provides an effective {\it upper limit} to the BH merging.
Besides merging, SMBHs grow through accretion of cold galactic gas. The relation between the dynamical evolution of galaxies in the DM haloes and the fraction of gas feeding the BH accretion depends on the complex physics linking the
formation of accretion disks on sub-pc scales to the processes involving the evolution of the galactic gas.
However, an {\it upper limit} to the accretion luminosity is provided by the Eddington value $L_{Edd}=4\,\pi\,G\,M\,c/k$
(where $k$ is the electron scattering opacity) yielding for the accretion rate a maximal value $\dot M_{Edd}=L_{Edd}/\epsilon\,c^2=(10^{47}{\rm erg\,s^{-1}}/\epsilon\,10^{9}\,M_{\odot}\,c^2)\,M_{BH}$, where $\epsilon$ is the accretion efficiency, specified by the fractional binding energy of the innermost stable circular orbit about the hole. The latter in turn
ranges from $6\,r_g$ to $r_g$ (where $r_g=G\,M_{BH}/c^2$ is the gravitational radius), for non-spinning and for maximally rotating holes, respectively; thus, in principle, the accretion efficiency may range from $\epsilon\approx 0.06$ (for non-spinning holes) to $\epsilon\approx 0.45$ for maximally rotating holes.
The SMBHs maximal accretion rate is thus given by
\begin{equation}\label{medd}
$$\dot M_{BH}=(1-\epsilon)\,\dot M_{Edd}={(1-\epsilon)\over \epsilon}\,{M_{BH}\over t_{Edd}}$$
\end{equation}
where $t_{Edd}=4.5\,10^7$ yrs (the complementary accreted mass-energy $\epsilon\,\dot M_{Edd}$ being emitted as radiation).
We can describe the joint effect of merging and accretion onto the growth of SMBHs in terms of their conditional mass function $N(M_{BH},M,t)$, i.e., the number density of BHs with mass in the range $M_{BH}\div M_{BH}+\Delta M_{BH}$ hosted in DM haloes with mass in the range $M\div M+\Delta M$ at cosmic time $t$. The evolution in a time step $\Delta t$ of such quantity is given by
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq}
N(M_{BH},M,t+\Delta t)&=&p(M,t) \times N(M_{BH}-(\dot M_{BH}\Delta t),M,t)+(1-p(M,t))\times N(M_{BH},M,t)\nonumber\\\
&+&\Delta t \int_{M_{BH,inf}}^{M_{BH}} \int_{M_{inf}}^{M}N(M_{BH}^{'},M^{'},t)\, \frac{d^{2}P(M^{'}\rightarrow M)}{dM^{'}dt} \frac{N(M_{BH}-M_{BH}^{'},M-M^{'},t)}{N_{H}(M-M^{'},t)}dM_{BH}^{'} dM^{'} \\
&-&\Delta t \times N_{H}(M,t)\int_{M}^{M_{sup}} \frac{d^{2}P(M\rightarrow M^{'})}{dM^{'}dt} dM^{'} \nonumber\
\end{eqnarray}
Here $N_H(M,t)= \sqrt{2/ \pi} ({\rho\,\delta_c / M^2\,\sigma})\,
exp[- { \delta_c^2(t) / 2\,D^2(t)\,\sigma^2} ]\,|{dln \sigma/ dln M}|$ is the number density of virialized structures of mass $M$ at the cosmic time $t$ given by the Press \& Shechter (1974) formula, depending on the variance of the power spectrum $\sigma (M)$ , on the growth factor $D(t)$, and on the mean matter density of the Universe $\rho$.
The first term on the r.h.s. of eq. (\ref{eq}) accounts for the statistical effect of accretion: the function $p(M,t)$ denotes the probability that a BH hosted in a halo of mass $M$ is in an active accretion phase at time $t$: in such a case, its BH mass
$M_{BH}$ is increased by an amount $\dot M_{BH}\,\Delta t$. Of course, maximizing the accretion corresponds to assuming $p(M,t)=1$ and an Eddington accretion rate $\dot M_{BH}$ given by eq. (2).
The second term on the r.h.s. of eq. (\ref{eq}) represents the construction of BHs due to merging.
The increment in the number of BHs
with mass $M_{BH}$ in haloes with mass $M$ is given by the number of BHs with smaller mass $M'_{BH}$ in haloes with
smaller DM mass $M'$ weighted with the
halo merging probability $d^2P(M\rightarrow M')/dM'dt)\,dM'\,dt$ and with the probability $N(M_{BH}-M_{BH}^{'},M-M^{'},t)/N_{H}(M-M^{'},t)$ of finding a BH with complementary mass $M_{BH}-M'_{BH}$ in the second merging halo.
The third term on the r.h.s. of eq. (\ref{eq}) represents the desctruction of BHs of the considered mass $M_{BH}$ due to the coalescence of its host halo with mass $M'$ to form a larger DM halo.
Of course, we are again maximizing the BH merging rate because we are assuming that BH merging immediately follows the coalescence of DM haloes. Nevertheless, we expect our upper limit for the merging rate to provide a fair description of the actual rate, since at high redshifts the dynamical friction is very efficient in dragging the BHs in merging haloes toward the centre of the merger (see Bough 2006 for a review); this is a specific property of hierarchical scenarios, characterized by a two-phase growth of cosmic structures, with major merging at high redshifts $z\gtrsim 3-4$ rapidly followed by coalescence of substructures, and accretion of small clumps at low $z\gtrsim 2$, as noted by several authors (e.g., Zhao, Jing \& B\"orner 2003; Diemand, Kuhlen \& Madau 2007; Hoffman et al. 2007; Ascasibar \& Gottloeber 2008). Thus, although eq. (\ref{eq}) will yield an upper bound to the evolution of the mass function, we
expect its solutions to be close to the actual mass function at high redshifts $z\gtrsim 6$.
We now proceed to describe the strategy we adopt for solving eq. (\ref{eq}) for different background DDE cosmologies.
\subsection{Strategy and Solutions}
We aim at solving eq. (\ref{eq}) with a choice of the initial conditions and of the accretion rate and probability that maximize the
growth of SMBHs for a given background cosmology; this will allow us to exclude all DDE models which do not allow for the building up of the observed abundance of massive $M\approx 3\,10^9\,M_{\odot}$ BHs at $z=6$. We focus on the highest redshift for which observed abundances are available, since this enhances the constraints on cosmological models (their maximal accretion rate is exponentially sensitive to the cosmic time, see eq. (\ref{medd}) ) and because at such redshifts, the {\it maximal} merging rate of SMBHs is directly related to (and limited by) the growth factor of the galactic DM haloes where they reside.
Before performing an extensive study of the effects of DDE models on the evolution of the mass function, we discuss here several critical points: the initial conditions, the role of the BH spin (determining the value of the radiation efficiency $\epsilon$ entering the accretion rate in eq. (2)), and the accretion probability ($p(M,t)$ in eq. (\ref{eq}) ) related to the duty cycle of the accretion phases of the BH. Our aim is not to provide a detailed description of the above points, but rather to point out realistic upper limits for the growth of SMBHs set by the above processes.
\subsubsection{Initial conditions} \label{ic}
According to Madau \& Rees (2001), seed BHs may have formed from the very first generation of stars.
These would collapse from a metal-free gas leading to a top-heavy IMF, as suggested by several authors (Bromm, Coppi, Larson 1999, 2002; Abel et al. 2000; Yoshida et al. 2006; Gao et al. 2007) corresponding to very massive stars (VMS) with masses larger than 100 $M_{\odot}$. The stars that form with masses smaller than $\approx 300$ would end up into pair-instability SNae, and their stellar cores would be entirely disrupted leaving no remnants (Kudritzki, Puls, 2000; Fryer et al. 2001). Higher mass stars instead collapse leaving remnant BHs with mass $M_{BH}\gtrsim 150\,M_{\odot}$. Accroding to Madau \& Rees (2001), the primordial generation of stars could form at redshifts $z\gtrsim 20$ in DM haloes with virial temperatures $\approx 10^3$ K where gas can cool due to collisional excitation of $H_2$.
To set our initial condition we proceed following Madau \& Rees (2001), Volonteri, Hardt \& Madau (2003). We start populating at $z=20$ the peaks of the primordial density perturbation field, starting with the higher mass, rarer peaks. We populate progressively lower mass haloes and we compute the corresponding amount of photons produced in the Lyman-Werner (LW) band (11.2-13.6 eV) by the progenitor zero-metallicity stars; these photons easily dissociate $H_2$ molecules, so populating the DM haloes with VMS results in a UV background that suppresses molecular cooling throughout the Universe (Omukai \& Nishi 1999; Haiman, Rees, Loeb 1997), thus inhibiting the formation of a much more numerous population of VMS and hence of seed BHs; further cooling will take
place later due to atomic processes in haloes with virial temperature $T_{vir}$ $\gtrsim$ 10$^4$ K corresponding to DM halo masses $M\geq 10^{7.9}$[(1+z)/20]$^{-3/2}$ $M_\odot$. The fraction of baryons in VMS stars
is $f=300\,M_{\odot}\,F_{DM}/M\,\Omega_b$, where $F_{DM}$ is the fraction of mass in the DM density field collapsed in DM haloes populated with VMS (and hence with seed BHs), and $M$ is the minimum mass for such haloes. The VMS in such haloes produce $\gtrsim 10^5$ LW photons during a lifetime of $2\,10^6$ yrs, so that the number of LW photons per baryons will be $3\,10^7\,M_{\odot}\,F_{DM}/M\,\Omega_b$. The minimum mass $M$ corresponds, for a Gaussian DM density field, to a fraction of populated haloes $F_{DM}=erfc\big[\delta_c/\sqrt{2}\,D(t)\sigma(M)\big]$. Thus requiring the LW flux not to exceed $10^{-2}$ photons/baryon (again, we choose the value in the range $10^{-2}\div 10^{-4}$ provided by Haiman, Abel, Rees (2000) maximizing the abundance of BHs) yields for the lower mass $M$ of the DM haloes populated with BHs a value $M\geq M_{min}\approx 10^7\,M_{\odot}$ for a $\Lambda$CMD cosmology (entering the growth factor $D(t)$ in $F_{DM}$), corresponding to populating the peaks above 3$\sigma$. This corresponds to a cosmic density of VMS ( and hence seed BHs) at $z=20$ {\it larger} by about a factor of 2.5 than that usually adopted ( $\sim$1 VMS $ Mpc^{-3}$, e.g. Volonteri, Hardt, Madau 2003), so again we are {\it maximizing} the mass that BHs may later acquire from merging of the seeds.
Similar BHs densities are obtained when applying the same procedure at redshifts higher than 20, corresponding to populating lower mass haloes; a physical limit is set by the existence of a minimum redshift-dependent mass ($\approx 10^6\,M_{\odot}$ at $z=20$) below which the $H_2$ production rate is not sufficient to cool the gas efficiently
(Fuller \& Couchman 2000).
The above procedure sets the initial conditions for eq. (\ref{eq}) by determining the initial density $N(M_{BH},M,t_{in})$; this is taken to assume the Press \& Schechter value when $M_{BH}=100\,M_{\odot}$ and $M\geq M_{min}$, and to be zero elsewhere.
The above procedure for determining the initial conditions is repeated for all the different DDE background cosmologies we will consider.
We do not consider in this paper the alternative scenario envisaging the collapse of SMBHs with mass $\approx 10^5\,M_{\odot}$ directly out of dense gas (see Begelman et al. 2006; Lodato \& Natarajan 2007; see also Volonteri \& Rees 2005); this scenario would require avoiding fragmentation, i.e., high UV flux to avoid cooling and low-metallicities, conditions that may be satisfied in rare cases (Dijkstra et al. 2008; Omukai 2001; Bromm \& Loeb 2003); the metal-free condition only would be
incompatible with the presence of nearby luminous galaxies (Omukai 2008). Even if fragmentation was avoided, the cold gas flows inward at low velocities, near the sound speed of a few km $s^{-1}$ , with a correspondingly low accretion rate of
∼ 0.01 $M_{\odot}$/yr. This results in conditions nearly identical to those in the cores of lower-mass
minihalos; extensive ultra–high resolution simulations have concluded that the gas then forms a single
$\approx 150 \,M_{\odot}$ star (Abel et al. 2002; Bromm et al. 2002; Yoshida et al. 2008)
or perhaps a massive binary (Turk et al. 2009). A path toward the solution of the above models could rely on additional heating by a primordial magnetic field (Sethi et al. 2010).
\subsubsection{The role of BH spins}
The BH angular momentum $J$ is generally described in terms of the spin parameter $\hat a\equiv J\,c/G\,M_{BH}^2$ ranging from
$\hat a=0$ for non-rotating BH to $\hat a=1$ for maximally rotating BHs. It enters
the radiation efficiency $\epsilon$ in the Eddington accretion rate (eq. 2), which increases in the range $0.06-0.42$ with
$\hat a$ increasing from 0 to 1. As recalled in Sec. 2.1, larger values of $\epsilon$ suppress the Eddington accretion rate.
Observationally, a wide range of values is allowed for $\epsilon$, which is usually measured through the Soltan argument (Soltan 1982) or from synthesis models (e.g. Merloni \& Heinz 2008) relating the evolution of the AGN luminosity functions (i.e., the statistical
evolution of the BH accretion rates) to the local mass distribution of relic BH masses resulting from the accretion history. These measurements yield $\epsilon\approx 0.06\div 0.16$ (see, e.g., Elvis et al. 2002; Marconi et al. 2004; Wang et al. 2006; Treister \& Urry 2006; Hopkins, Richard \& Henquist 2007; Merloni \& Heinz 2008; Yu, Lu 2008; Shankar et al. 2008), corresponding to $\hat a= 0.05-0.9$. However, the lower limits on $\epsilon$ are derived by the above authors assuming merging to be negligible in the mass growth of BHs. While computations show that most of the final BH mass results from accretion (see below), merging is crucial in splitting the accretion history of a BH into many progenitors which can simultaneously accrete at the Eddington limit. Taking into account the enhancement in the accretion power due to such effect, the recent observational limits given by Merloni \& Heinz (2008) can be recast in the form $\epsilon\geq 0.08/\xi_0(1-\xi_m)$, where
$\xi_0$ is the present BH mass density normalized to the value $4.3\,10^5\,M_{\odot}\,Mpc^{-3}$, and
$\xi_m$ is the fraction of final BH mass density contributed by splitting the BH accretion history into many progenitors due to merging. In the framework of cosmological hierarchical growth of DM haloes considered here, $90 \%$ of the massive haloes $M\geq 10^{12}M_{\odot}$ had at least one major merging event at $z\geq 6$ (De Lucia et al. 2004; Stewart et al. 2008; see also Lacey \& Cole 1993; Gottl\"ober, Klypin, Kravtsov 2001), so that $\xi\gtrsim 0.5$ yielding values of $\epsilon$ above $0.1$ even assuming the largest value of $\xi_0=1.5$ allowed by observations. Of course, this conclusion holds only when observations are interpreted in the framework of hierarchically growing DM haloes, which constitutes one of the assumptions of our computations.
On the other hand, theoretical arguments have long been favouring large values of the spin parameter $\hat a$, close to the maximum value $\hat a=1$; in fact, even if $\hat a\approx 0$ initially, accretion can spin the BH up to $\hat a\approx 1$ (see Volonteri 2006) since the BH aligns its spin with the angular momentum of the disk due to a combination of the Lense-Thirring effect with viscous dissipation (Bardeeen \& Petterson 1975; Scheuer \& Feiler 1996; Natarajan \& Pringle 1998). However, Moderski \& Sikora (1996), King \& Pringle (2006 see also King, Pringle, Hofmann 2008) have noted that spin-down can occur when counter rotating material is accreted, a condition that can occur if the angular momentum of the disk is strongly misaligned with that of the BH and the accretion disc actually fragments due to self-gravity, breaking the accretion into a series of small uncorrelated episodes ("chaotic accretion"),
each feeding the BH with a mass $m_{acc}=\hat a\,M_{BH}\,(r_s/r_w)^{1/2}\approx 10^{-4\div -3}\,M_{BH}$ (here $r_s$ is the Shwarzschild radius, and $r_w$ is the distance of the warp produced by the Bardeen-Petterson process in the accretion disk, Bardeen \& Petterson 1975).
In such a case, the Lens-Thirring effect can actually counter-align the BH and the accretion disk angular momenta; although co-rotating and counter-rotating accretion are equally probable, chaotic accretion tends to produce a decrease of the spin since the innermost stable orbit for a retrograde orbit is at larger radii than for a prograde orbit, and the transfer of angular momentum is more efficient in the former case. BH-BH merging also affects the spin distribution; a wide exploration of the merging parameters has shown that distributions with average $\langle \hat a\rangle \approx 0.7$ (corresponding to $\epsilon=0.1$) results from merging of BHs with different masses and initial angular momenta (Berti \& Volonteri 2008), a value close to that holding for equal mass, non-spinning BHs. The combined effect of all the above processes has been investigated in recent works, where the effect of the environment during galaxy merging is also taken into account. Simulations by Dotti et al. (2006; 2007, see also Volonteri 2010) address the evolution of spin in gas-rich mergers, our assumed trigger for BH accretion, following in detail the evolution of the BH angular momentum. In gas-rich mergers, the gas settles into a dense circumnuclear disk in which the BHs relative orbit becomes
circular and corotating; the BHs then align their spins with the angular momentum of their orbit and hence with that of the large scale gaseous disc (Liu 2004; Bogdanovic, Reynolds \& Miller 2007; Dotti et al. 2010). As a result BHs acquire spins $\hat a\geq 0.7$ (Berti \& Volonteri 2008; Kesden, Sperhake \& Berti 2010); magneto-hydrodynamic simulations specifically aimed at deriving the evolution of BH spin at high redshifts support large values of $\hat a\geq 0.8$ (Shapiro et al. 2005).
Independent works (Fanidakis et al. 2010) including the evolution of BH angular momentum into a semi-analytic model of galaxy formation have shown that, even assuming gas-poor mergers, the high-mass ($M_{BH}\geq 3\,10^8\,M_{\odot}$) BHs end up with large values of $\hat a\geq 0.7$ due to the effect of BH merging, with chaotic accretion effectively acting on smaller BH undergoing minor accretion episodes at lower redshift (e.g., on the BHs harboured in local spiral galaxies), as also suggested by Sikora et al. (2007).
The above works indicate that if the BH accretion is connected to the hierarchical merging histories of DM haloes,
then $\epsilon \geq 0.1$ (corresponding $\langle \hat a\rangle=0.7$), at least for the large BH masses we are interested in. Since our model is defined in such a framework, we shall take $\epsilon=0.1$, the lower value in the range where theoretical expectations overlap with observational uncertainties.
Larger spin values would result in a slower evolution of the BH mass function, and hence in stronger exclusion constraints for DDE models.
\subsubsection{The duty cycle}
Such a quantity enters the probability of accretion $p(M,t)$ in eq. (3) . If merging triggers the BH accretion, this can be computed as the probability that a halo of mass $M$ had a major merging within
the duration of the last accretion episode. Assuming that the accretion lasts through a time $\tau$ , the probability for a halo with mass $M$ to merge with any DM halo with mass larger than $qM$ can be calculated using eq. (2.22) of Lacey \& Cole (1993); for $q=0.01$ (equivalent to considering all the mergers contributing to 99\% of the DM mass $M$) and estimating $\tau\approx r/v\approx 3.8 \times 10^7$ yrs (at $z=10$, the ratio depending only on $z$, see
Baugh et al. 2010) as the galaxy crossing time (as a typical duration of encounters), would yield probability ranging from 1 for DM haloes more massive than $10^{14}\,M_{\odot}$ (hosting the most massive BHs) down to 0.6 for haloes with mass $M=10^6\,M_{\odot}$. However, as in the previous case, we aim at maximizing the growth of BHs to obtain robust exclusion regions for DDE models, so that we will use $p(M,t)=1$ in eq. (\ref{eq}) for all $M$ and $t$. The solution obtained with this choice will be close to those obtained using the above estimates of $p(M,t)$ for large BH masses $M_{BH}\geq 5\,10^8\,M_{\odot}$, so that our exclusion regions for DDE models are not affected by uncertainties in the estimate of the duty cycle.
\subsection{The cosmological models}
We assume a spatially flat, homogeneous and isotropic universe filled by non-relativistic matter plus a dark energy component. The cosmological expansion is described by the Friedmann equation:
\begin{equation}\label{friedmann}
H^{2}=H_{0}^{2}[\Omega_{M}a^{-3}+\Omega_{\Lambda}e^{3\int_{a}^{1} (1+w(a^{'}))da^{'}/a^{'})} ]
\end{equation}
where H$_0$=100$h$ km/s/Mpc is the present value of the Hubble expansion factor, $\Omega_{M}$ is the dimensionless matter density at the present epoch, $\Omega_{\Lambda}$=1-$\Omega_{M}$ denotes the DE density parameter, and $w(a)$ is the equation of state parameter of the DE.
The growth of the cosmological matter perturbations in the linear regime for sub-Hubble scales (and for standard gravity) is governed by the equation:
\begin{equation}\label{growth}
\ddot{\delta}+2H\dot{\delta}-4\pi G\rho_m \delta=0
\end{equation}
where $\delta$=$\delta \rho$/$\rho$ is the matter density contrast, and the dot denotes derivative with respect to time. The perturbations grow according to a source term involving the amount of matter able to cluster and are restricted by a friction term (Hubble drag) arising from the expansion of the universe. In general, it is preferred to express the linear solution of eq. (\ref{growth}) as a function of the linear growth factor $D$, defined as the ratio of the perturbation amplitude at some scale factor relative to some initial scale factor: $D$=$\delta$(a)/$\delta$(a$_i$) .
The solutions to eqs. (4) and (5) depend on the equation of state through the parameter $w$ entering eq.
(\ref{friedmann}). For our analysis, we considered general DE models, in which the DE equation of state may vary with time. We use the Chevallier-Polarski-Linder parametrization (Chevallier \& Polarski 2001, Linder 2003) to describe the evolution in terms of the scale factor $a$:
\begin{equation}\label{w}
w(a)=w_0+w_a(1-a)=w_0+w_a\,{z\over 1+z}
\end{equation}
where the parameter $w_0$ represents the value of $w$ at the present epoch: $w_0$=$w(a=1)$, while $w_a$ corresponds to its look-back time variation: $w_a$=-$dw/da$; In the above parametrization, the standard $\Lambda$CDM cosmology corresponds to $w_0$=-1 and $w_a$=0. Kowalski et al. (2008), using data from SNe, CMB and BAO put constraints on these parameters corresponding to $w_0\approx -1\pm$0.2 and $w_a\approx \pm$1.
Using this parametrization eq. (\ref{friedmann}) becomes:
\begin{equation}\label{}
H^{2}=H_{0}^{2}[\Omega_{M}a^{-3}+\Omega_{\Lambda}a^{-3(1+w_0+w_a)}e^{3w_a(a-1)} ].
\end {equation}
The above equation yields the cosmic time $t$ corresponding to a given redshift $z$ in any DE model:
\begin{equation}\label{htz}
t(z)=\int_{z}^{\infty} \frac{dz'}{H(z')(1+z')}.
\end{equation}
As for the growth factor, the solution to eq. (\ref{growth}) for the $\Lambda$CDM case is given by Carroll, Press, Turner (1992) in the form :
\begin{equation}
\delta(a)=\frac{5 \Omega_M}{2a}\frac{da}{d\tau}\int_0^a \left(\frac{da^{'}}{d\tau}\right)^{-3}da^{'}
\end{equation}
where $\tau$=H$_0$t;. For the DE models we use the parametrization to the solution given in Linder (2005):
\begin{equation}\label{d_par}
\frac{\delta(a)}{a}=exp\left(\int_{0}^{a}[\Omega_M(a)^{\gamma}-1]dlna\right)
\end{equation}
where $\Omega_M(a)=\Omega_M a^{-3}/(H(a)/H_{0})^2$, and $\gamma$ is the growth index, given by the fitting formula (Linder 2005):
\begin{eqnarray} \label{gamma}
\gamma=0.55+0.05(1+w(z=1)) & w(z=1)\geq 1 \nonumber\ \\
\gamma=0.55+0.02(1+w(z=1)) & w(z=1)< 1 \,.
\end{eqnarray}
This parametrization reproduces the growth behaviour to within 0.1\%-0.5\% accuracy for a wide variety of dark energy cosmologies (Linder 2005, Linder \& Cahn 2007) and allows for a rapid scanning of the parameter space of DDE models. We have checked that the constraints we derive on $w_0$-$w_a$ with such a parametrization are indistinguishable from those obtained by integrating eq. (5).
We normalize the growth factors of the DE models to their high redshift behaviour ($D$=$\delta$(a)/$\delta$(a=0)), corresponding to WMAP normalization of the matter power spectrum.
This procedure yields different values of $\sigma_8$, the power spectrum normalization in terms of the variance of the density field smoothed over regions of 8 $h^{-1}$ Mpc, for different DE models.
For the $\Lambda$CDM cosmology this corresponds to $\sigma_8=0.8$ for the local ($z=0$) variance of the density field (Larson et al. 2011).
Both the time-redshift relation (eq. (8)) and the growth factors (eq. (10)) corresponding DE models deviate mildly from the cosmological constant case when the equation of state is negatively evolving with redshift $w_{a}$ $<$0, while models with $w_{a}$ $>$0 yield growth factors and cosmic times lower than those predicted in the $\Lambda$CDM case. This is because in the $w_{a}$ $>$0 models the influence of DE at early times is strong even at high redshift (see eq. (7)), yielding shorter ages (eq. (8)) and implying a delay in the growth of DM perturbations compared the $\Lambda$CDM case with important implications on the structure formation; both effects are illustrated in Fig. 1. Note that, since at high redhshifts $w=w_0+w_a$ in this parametrization, any model with $w_0+w_a\leq 0$ will not yield a matter dominated early Universe, altering the sound horizon in conflict with the observations (see Kowalski et al. 2008).
We use the above relations (eqs. (8), (9) (10)) in the computation of the number density of BHs at high redshifts after eq. (3);
we adopt the following set of cosmological parameters from the WMAP 7-year mission results (Larson et al. 2011): $\Omega_M$=0.27,
$\Omega_{\Lambda}$=0.73; $H_0=71\,$km$s^{-1}$Mpc; the power spectrum determining $\sigma (M)$ has
spectral index $n$=1.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8 cm]{fig1a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=8 cm]{fig1b.pdf}
\caption{The redshift evolution of the cosmic time (left) and growth factor (right), predicted by the DDE models with ($w_{0}$,$w_{a}$)=(-1,0.7) (dot-dashed line) , ($w_{0}$,$w_{a}$)=(-1,0.8) (dotted line), and ($w_{0}$,$w_{a}$)=(-1,0.9) (long-dashed line) are compared with the $\Lambda$CDM case
($w=1$ solid line) in the top panels; the lower panels show the same quantities normalized to the $\Lambda$CDM values.}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Results}
\subsection{The evolution of the BH mass function in dark energy cosmologies}
In order to compute the evolution of the number density $N(M_{BH},M,t)$ of BHs with mass $M_{BH}$ hosted in haloes with mass $M$ we integrated numerically eq. (\ref{eq}). The time step was set to $\Delta$t=3.3 10$^{-4}$ H$_0^{-1}$ and we adopted a
logarithmic grid for black hole and halo masses spanning 8 orders of magnitude from $log M_{BH}/M_{\odot}=2$ and $log M/M_{\odot}=6$
with a grid size $\Delta$log$M$=0.04. We derived the BH mass function at cosmic time $t$ by integrating $N(M_{BH},M,t)$ over the host halo mass $M$. Before solving the full eq. (3) with realistic initial conditions, we first tested our code against analytic solutions that are available for simple cases. The case $p(M,t)$=0 corresponds to ignoring the BH mass accretion; starting with
BH masses equal to a constant fraction $f$ of the halo mass $M$ in each DM halo, the BH number density at time $t$
should be given by the Press \& Schechter expression for masses $fM$, since in this case the only mode for BH growth is the merging of the host haloes (and of the hosted BHs) preserving the halo to BH mass ratio, and the halo mass distribution at any time is given
Press \& Schechter form recalled in Sect. 2.1. We have checked that in this case our numerical solution of eq. (3) remains close to the analytic Press \& Schechter form over the entire BH mass and redshift ranges explored in this work. We have also checked that
in the opposite limit of no BH merging and constant BH accretion rate $r$, the numerical solutions of eq. (3) at time $t$ correspond to a shift of the initial mass distribution by an amount $M+r\,t$.
Next, we proceeded to compute the complete evolution of $N(M_{BH},M,t)$ due to both BH merging and accretion; the initial conditions are set as described in detail in Sec. 2.2.1.The BH mass function $\Phi(M_{BH},t)$, i.e. the number density of BHs with mass in the range $M_{BH}\div M_{BH}+\Delta M_{BH}$ at cosmic time $t$, is computed by integrating $N(M_{BH},M,t)$ over the halo mass.
Since our goal is to determine the maximal abundance of BHs allowed by a given cosmology, we assumed that BH merging immediately follows the coalescence of DM haloes (Sect. 2.1), and that BHs undergo a continuous growth ($p(M,t)$=1, see sect. 2.2.3) through gas accretion at the Eddington limit (eq. (2)). Conservatively, the only physical limit to BH accretion we consider is the presence of dense, cool gas
at the centre of galaxies. This is relevant at high redshifts $z\gtrsim 20$, when the gas in the DM halos can cool due to collisional excitation of $H_2$ in DM haloes with virial temperatures $T_{vir}$ $\approx 10^3$ K. In these circumstances, we set up our initial conditions as discussed in Sect. \ref{ic}. At lower redshifts, the primordial generation of stars formed from this cold gas emits UV photons that suppress further molecular cooling throughout the Universe (as discussed in detail Sect. \ref{ic}); thus, after $z\sim$20, further cooling (and hence accretion given by eq. 2) is possible only within more massive haloes with virial temperatures 10$^4$ K $\lesssim$ $T_{vir}$ $\lesssim$ 10$^6$ K, where the gas cools via the radiative decay of collisionally excited atoms, and in haloes with higher virial temperatures where the dominant cooling mechanism is the emission of Bremmsstrahlung radiation (see e.g. Baugh 2006). We also checked that at all times the mass accreted by BHs remains smaller than the cold gas mass contained in the host DM halos. The latter is calculated by assuming an isothermal halo gas density profile and integrating out to the cooling radius, defined as the radius where the cooling time of the gas is equal to the age of the universe (White \& Frenk 1991).
The full evolution of the BH mass function for the case of constant $w=-1$ (cosmological constant) is shown for $z\leq 10$ in the left panel of Fig. 2. The relative importance of accretion and merging in the growth of BHs is illustrated in the right panel, where we compare $\Phi$ at $z$ $\simeq$ 6 (solid line), with the mass functions obtained by assuming that between $z$=10 and $z$=6 the BH growth is
only due to merging ($\Phi_{mer}$ dotted line), or to accretion ($\Phi_{acc}$ dashed line). The evolution of the mass function due to continuous Eddington-limited accretion is a strict translation of the mass function towards higher BH mass, while the effect of BH merging is to flatten the slope of the mass function, as it contributes to make high mass BHs from many smaller progenitors. Although the difference between $\Phi_{mer}$ and $\Phi_{acc}$ is huge (the maximum BH mass in the two cases differs by about three orders of magnitude), this does not mean that merging is not important in the formation of massive BHs, as it can be inferred by comparing the solid and dashed lines in Fig. 2. Indeed, the number density of BHs obtained with accretion plus merging is greater than that obtained without merging by a factor $\sim$ 20
for $M_{BH}$ $\simeq$ 10$^9$ $M_{\odot}$, and by a factor $\sim$ 100 for $M_{BH}$ $\simeq$ 3 10$^9$ $M{\odot}$. This is because merging enhances the effective accretion power by distributing the BH accretion in the progenitors of massive BHs;
thus, simultaneous Eddington-limit accretion can occur in BHs that later will assemble into a unique, larger object.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8 cm]{fig2a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=8 cm]{fig2b.pdf}
\caption{Left panel: The BH mass function at $z$=10,8 and 6 predicted by the $\Lambda$CDM cosmology. Right panel: The BH mass function at $z$=6 obtained assuming BH growth due to only merging (dotted line), BH growth due to only accretion (dashed line), and BH growth due to merging plus accretion (solid line). }\label{BHMF_evol}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The role of different DE cosmologies in the growth of BHs is illustrated in Fig. 3, where we show the comparison between the maximal abundance of massive BHs at z=6 allowed by the $\Lambda$CDM cosmology (solid line), with that allowed by three different DDE cosmologies corresponding to ($w_{0}$, $w_{a}$)=(-1, 0.9) (dashed line), ($w_{0}$, $w_{a}$)=(-1, 0.8) (dotted line), ($w_{0}$, $w_{a}$)=(-1, 0.7) (dot-dashed line).
In this figure, we only compare the $\Lambda$CDM case with DDE cosmologies with $w_a>0$. In fact, as
discussed in Sect. 2.3, DDE models with $w_{a}$ $<$0 yield linear growth factors and ages very close to the cosmological constant model at $z$=6 and therefore they predict the same BH number density at this redshift. In contrast, DE models with $w_{a}$ $>$0 predict lower values of $D$($z$=6) and $t$($z$=6) (see Fig. 1); although the differences with respect to the $\Lambda$CDM case are at most a factor of 0.9 in cosmic age and a factor of 0.7 in growth factor, the exponential sensitivity of the BH mass function to such quantities (discussed in Sect. 2.1) results in appreciably different BH number densities. In particular, for increasing values of $w_a$, the larger DE densities at high redshift entering the expansion rate (the second factor on the r.h.s. of in eq. 7) result in slower growth factors and short ages at $z=6$ (see Fig. 1): the first mechanism results into a steepening of the mass function, as it reduces the BH merging rate, while the second mechanism reduces the time available for BH accretion and results in a shift of the mass function toward lower masses.
Note that in principle also the critical threshold for the collapse of density fluctuations, $\delta_c$ depends weakly on cosmology. Several authors (e.g. Mainini, Maccio, Bonometto, Klypin 2003, Pace, Waizmann, Bartelmann 2010 ) derived $\delta_c$ for different DE scenarios, indicating that models with $w_a>0$ have values of $\delta_c$ which are at most of $\sim$1,2\% greater that the value assumed in $\Lambda$CDM cosmology ($\delta_c$=1.65). Since the larger the value of the critical density $\delta_c$, the steeper is the associated mass function, assuming a larger $\delta_c$ would imply smaller number densities of massive objects.
In order to maximize the predicted BH abundance, we conservatively assume $\delta_c$=1.65 for all models.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=10 cm]{fig3.pdf}
\caption{The SMBH mass function at $z$=6 predicted by the $\Lambda$CDM cosmology (solid line), and by three different DDE cosmologies corresponding to ($w_{0}$,$w_{a}$)=(-1,0.7) (dot-dashed line) , ($w_{0}$,$w_{a}$)=(-1,0.8) (dotted line), and ($w_{0}$,$w_{a}$)=(-1,0.9) (long-dashed line) is compared with the observed number densities (squares) derived from the SDSS QSO luminosity functions (see text).
In order to compare the predicted and observed number densities, we re-scaled the latter to each cosmology as it is indicated by the coloured squares in Fig. 3. The shift of the observational point toward lower masses and higher densities is due to the lower luminosity distances and comoving volumes predicted by the cosmological models with respect the $\Lambda$CDM case. }\label{BHMF_cosmo}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The squares in Fig. 3 represents the observed BH number density derived from the $z$ $\sim$6 Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) QSO luminosity function from
Jiang et al. (2009). We consider only the brightest luminosity bin, corresponding to the more massive objects, since this enhances the
constraints on the cosmological models. Willott et al. (2010a) also derived the $z$ $\sim$6 QSO luminosity function by combining the Canada-France high-$z$ Quasar Survey (CFHQS) with the SDSS samples. However, in both cases the bright end of the luminosity
function is sampled by the SDSS main sample described in Fan et al. (2000, 2001, 2003, 2004, 2006). As discussed in Willott et al (2010a), the differences in the bright end are due to different luminosity bin sizes and different SDSS sample (Jiang et al. included some unpublished data) used by the authors.
Deriving the BH number density from the observed luminosity function is not a trivial procedure as it requires several assumptions on the
Eddington ratio, bolometric corrections, corrections for inactive BHs and corrections for obscured quasars. However, in order to meet our goal of excluding DDE models that provide too slow evolution of the BH number density, it is sufficient to derive lower limits on the observed abundance of BHs. Thus, we assume a BH duty
cycle of 1, and we estimate the mass of the central black holes by assuming that they are emitting at the Eddington luminosity, as indicated by the Eddington ratio distribution obtained by Willott et al. (2010b).
To estimate the Eddington BH masses of these high-$z$ QSO we use the bolometric luminosities obtained by Jiang et al. (2006) by combining multiwavelength observations (from radio to X-ray) available in the literature (for details on such a procedure see, e.g.,
Fiore et al. 2011 ).
The reliability of the above BH mass estimates is supported by the comparison with independent measurements of the virial BH mass. These have been obtained from the Mg II line width and the continuum luminosity at 3000 $\AA$ of two of the brightest sources in the SDSS main sample (SDSS J114816.64+525150.3 and SDSS J083643.85+005453.3) by Willott et al. (2003) and Kurk et al. (2007). Their estimates of virial BH
masses $M_{BH}$ $\simeq$ 3$\times$ 10$^9$ $M_{\odot}$ are very close to our derivation.
The presence of dust in the high-$z$ quasar environments (e.g. Maiolino 2004, Jiang et al. 2006, Gallerani et al. 2010) constitutes another source of uncertainty in the estimate of the BH mass from the AGN luminosity. Dust could lead to underestimate the QSO number densities, since heavily obscured AGNs could be undetected by optical surveys. In detected sources, the observed luminosity could be reduced by dust exinction thus biasing the Eddington and virial BH mass estimates to lower values. Conservatively, we do not correct the observed luminosity function for the aforementioned effects, correcting for these effects would only make our constraints on the cosmological models stronger.
To derive exclusion regions for the DDE parameters $w_0$ and $w_a$ we first solved eq. (3) for a grid of cosmological DDE parameters, then we computed the corresponding BH number density at $z=6$, and compared it with the observed abundance, thereby extending the comparison illustrated in Fig. 3 to the range $-1.5\leq w_0\leq -0.5$ and $-2.5\leq w_a\leq 1.5$.
Since in our approach we maximized the computed growth of SMBHs (eq. (3)) for a given background cosmology, and we adopted conservative values for the observed abundances, we can firmly exclude all the cosmological models that predict number densities lower than the observed ones. In Fig. 4 we show the resulting exclusion regions in the $w_0$-$w_a$ plane;
the three contours (the upper diagonal stripes) correspond to $w_0$-$w_a$ combinations that produce BH number densities
{\it below} the observed value by a factor 1, 1.5, and $>$2 $\sigma$ (from bottom to top). Interestingly, our results provide constraints complementary to those obtained by combining Supernovae, CMB and BAO. These are shown by the
ellipses representing the 68.3\%, 95.4,\% and 99.7\% confidence levels on $w_0$-$w_a$ obtained by Kowalski et al. (2008, left panel), and by the more recent analysis by Amanullah et al. (2010, right panel). While the latter leave the time evolution of the state parameter $w_a$ almost unconstrained, the BH abundance provide much stronger constraints on $w_a$ than on the present value $w_0$.
Combined with the existing constraints, our results significantly restrict the allowed region in DDE parameter space, strongly disfavouring
DDE models that do not provide cosmic time and fast growth factor (Fig. 1) large enough to allow for the build-up of the observed abundance of BHs; in particular, models with $-1.2\leq w_0\leq -1$ and positive redshift evolution $w_a\gtrsim 0.8$ - consistent with previous constraints (and indeed mildly favoured according to some recent analysis, see Feng, Wang, Zhang 2005; Upadhye, Ishak, Steinhardt 2005; and the analysis of the "Gold" dataset in Perivolaropoulos 2006) - result instead disfavoured by our independent constraints from BH abundance. Such range of parameters corresponds to "Quintom" DDE models (see Introduction), with $w$ crossing $-1$ starting from larger values. For models with $w_0\gtrsim -1$, our results exclude DDE with an equation of state rapidly evolving with $z$, so that $-dw/da=w_a\geq 0.8$.
This limit has an impact on a wide class of models with a "freezing" behaviour of the DE scalar field (see Caldwell, Linder 2005; Linder 2006; see also the Summary). SUGRA inspired models (Brax \& Martin 1999), which are well fitted by $w_0\approx -0.82$ and $w_a\approx 0.58$
(Linder 2003) are disfavoured owing to the combination of our constraints with previous observational constraints (Fig. 4).
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8 cm]{fig4a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=8 cm]{fig4b.pdf}
\caption{The exclusion regions in the $w_0$-$w_a$ plane derived by our analysis (upper shaded region) with initial conditions and
parameters set as described in Sect. 2.2. The filled contours correspond to the the 1, 1.5, and $>$2 $\sigma$ exclusion (from bottom to top); an useful analytic formula for the (1-$\sigma$) exclusion region is $w_a\geq -3/2\,w_0-3/4 $
The shaded ellipses represent the 68.3\%, 95.4,\% and 99.7\% confidence level on $w_0$-$w_a$ obtained by combining Supernovae, CMB and BAO constraints, using the "Union"
(Kowalski et al. (2008, left panel) and "Union 2" (Amanullah et al. 2010, right panel) compilation of SNae Ia data. In the right panel the solid contours represent the 68.3\%, 95.4,\% and 99.7\% confidence level on $w_0$-$w_a$ when systematic errors are not included.
Values of $w_a$ above the dashed line $w_0+w_a=0$ correspond to violation of early matter domination (see Sect. 2).}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Testing the reliability of the method, and comparison with semi-analytic results}
In this section we address how uncertainties in the assumed BH and halo properties affect the constraints derived for the DDE cosmological models. First, we study how these constraints change in response to different choices of the BH seed parameters. Indeed, the abundance of SMBH at $z$=6 depends on the abundance of seed BHs imposed at some higher redshift. As described in Sect. 2.2.1 we adopted a scenario in which seed BHs are the end-product of very massive stars (VMS), formed by primordial gas due to molecular hydrogen cooling. In this context, the BH density is related to the density of the primordial stars formed in the early haloes. We calculated the VMS number density by requiring that the number of Lyman-Werner (LW) photons per baryon emitted by primordial stars is sufficient to prevent H$_2$ cooling (and hence further star formation) throughout the universe. This condition on the LW photon flux determines a minimum mass for the DM halo hosting the seed BH. Therefore, in our approach, the parameters describing the BH seed population are: i) the seed BH mass (M$_{seed}$), ii) the redshift at which BH seeds are formed ($z_{in}$) , and iii) the minimum mass of the DM halo hosting the seed BH (M$_{inf}$) ; iv) the mass distribution of the DM haloes hosting the seeds at the initial time.
The seed black hole mass depends on the mass of the VMS. Theoretical models of primordial star formation (McKee \& Tan 2008, see also Bromm et al. 2009 and reference therein) which take into account the possible feedback processes that operate during the formation of the protostar predict a final stellar mass in the range 60-300 M$_{\odot}$ for reasonable values of the entropy and angular momentum of the pre-stellar gas. This implies a population of primordial BHs with masses M$_{seed}$ $\simeq$ M$_{VMS}$/2 $\lesssim$150 M$_{\odot}$ as the expected end-product of pregalactic star formation.
We show in Fig. \ref{inc_seed} (top left panel) how the 1$\sigma$ exclusion region in the $w_0$-$w_a$ plane changes if M$_{seed}$ = 60 M$_{\odot}$ (dashed line) and M$_{seed}$=150 M$_{\odot}$ (solid line) are assumed instead of M$_{seed}$=100 M$_{\odot}$ as in our fiducial model. It is interesting to note that assuming a low massive BH seed increases significantly the number of DDE models excluded by our method, while increasing M$_{seed}$ up to the maximal value allowed by theoretical models (150 M$_{\odot}$) does not reduce the exclusion region significantly. This is due to the fact that the decrease of cosmic time and of growth factor with increasing $w_a$ is larger for high values of $w_a$ (see Fig. 1). In turn, this implies that the cosmological constraints derived in the previous section are not very sensitive to an increase of the BH seed mass because in this region of the $w_0$-$w_a$ plane the increase of M$_{seed}$ is balanced by a small increment of $w_a$. It is also to be noted that the exclusion regions mainly differ at large values of $w_0$ because the decrease of cosmic time and of growth factor with increasing $w_a$ are less prominent than at smaller values.
As for the uncertainties related to the formation redshift of seed BHs,
theoretical models and cosmological simulations predict that primordial star formation can take place in haloes at 30$\leq z_{in}\leq$20 (see Bromm et al. 2009 and reference therein). In our fiducial model we set $z_{in}$=20. Assuming that BH seeds are formed at higher redshift would not change the cosmic density of seed BHs because it corresponds to populate lower mass haloes with VMS for fixed LW photon flux (for $z_{in}$=30, M$_{inf}$ decreases by a factor of about 20).
In contrast, increasing the initial redshift affects the BH growth due to gas accretion.
Infact, gas accretion onto the BH is determined by the ability of the halo to cool the gas efficiently. For atomic cooling this holds for $M>10^{7.9}[(1+z)/20]^{-3/2} M_{\odot}$, corresponding to $M>10^{8} M_{\odot}$ at $z=$20. Increasing the initial redshift up to $z_{in}$=30 requires accounting for the growth due to accretion of BH hosted in haloes with $M>5\times 10^{7} M_{\odot}$; this slightly enhances the mass function of BHs at $z$=6 as illustrated in Fig. \ref{inc_seed} (central panel) by the small shift upwards of the 1$\sigma$ exclusion region (solid line). This analysis demonstrates that our results are insensitive to the assumed value of the initial redshift. This validates our approach assuming that the initial redshift of seed BHs formation is the same for all the DE cosmological models.
The last parameter characterizing the BH seed population is the minimum mass of the host DM halo. This is derived by a condition on the critical LW background flux ($f_{LW}$) above which the H$_2$ cooling is prevented. Haiman, Abel \& Rees (2000) calculated $f_{LW}$ as a function of the halo virial temperature and collapse redshift. They found that the higher the collapse redshift or temperature, the higher the flux needs to be to prevent star formation. For haloes with $10^{2.4}$ K $ \lesssim T_{vir} \lesssim 10^{3.8}$K, and for 10$<z<$50, they found values of the critical background flux in the range $f_{LW} $=(10$^{-4}$-10$^{-2}$) photons per baryon,
while for $T_{vir} \gtrsim 10^{4}$K the value of the flux is irrelevant because at these high temperatures cooling from neutral H always dominates over H$_2$. We conservatively adopted the upper limit of the above uncertainty range for $f_{LW}$
since lower values would yield even tighter constraints in the $w_0$-$w_a$ plane. However, even such a limit may be prone to some
uncertainty: in fact, the density profile of the gas cloud is crucial in determining $f_{LW}$ , because the formation of H$_2$ molecules can be enhanced by the accelerated chemistry inside the central, dense regions. In addition, a central condensation tends to make the clouds more self-shielding against the external UVB background, and helps to preserve the internal H$_2$ molecules. The values of the critical flux mentioned above were obtained by Haiman et al. (2000) by assuming a truncated isothermal sphere density profile and by taking into account self-shielding due to both H and H$_2$. In principle, different gas density profiles and the self-shielding within haloes could alter the estimate of the critical flux. It is difficult to quantify these effects, doing this would require computing radiative transfer across individual gas clouds exposed by an external UVB background, which is beyond the scope of this paper. However, in order to explore the possible impact of such uncertainties on the $w_0$-$w_a$ constraints we repeated our calculations (for all the examined DE models) after increasing $f_{LW}$ by a factor of 5 above the already conservative fiducial value.
The increase of the threshold of the LW flux up to $f_{LW}$=0.05 implies a lower minimum mass of the DM halo hosting primordial stars by about a factor of 2. This results in a higher number density of seed BHs present at the initial redshift, and therefore a mild reduction of the DE models excluded by our criterion ( see the solid line in the top-right panel of Fig. \ref{inc_seed}).
The final source of uncertainty related to the DM haloes hosting the seed BHs at the initial time is the halo mass distribution. In our fiducial model we assumed a Press \& Schecter form (Sect. 2.1). However, advanced N-body simulations indicate that PS may underestimate the real distribution in the high mass tail (e.g. Reed et al. 2007). Since the most massive BHs are hosted in the most massive DM haloes it is important to show how cosmological constraints change for a flatter DM halo mass function at the high-mass end . The bottom-left panel of Fig. \ref{inc_seed} shows the 1$\sigma$ exclusion region in the $w_0$-$w_a$ plane derived assuming the best-fitting formula for the halo mass function obtained by Reed et al. (2007) . Also in this case the exclusion region is reduced only by a small extent.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=5 cm]{fig5a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=5 cm]{fig5b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=5 cm]{fig5c.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=5 cm]{fig5d.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=5 cm]{fig5e.pdf}
\caption{Filled contours and shaded ellipses as in Fig 4. The lines represent the 1$\sigma$ exclusion regions in the $w_0$-$w_a$ plane derived assuming: M$_{seed}$ = 60 M$_{\odot}$ (Top Left panel, dashed line); M$_{seed}$=150 M$_{\odot}$ (Top Left panel, solid line); $z_{in}$=30 (Top Central panel); $f_{LW}$=0.05 (Top Right panel); the halo mass function obtained by Reed et al. (2007, Bottom Left Panel); a BH accretion efficiency $\epsilon$=0.09 (solid line) and $\epsilon$=0.08 (dashed line, Bottom Right Panel).
}\label{inc_seed}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We now discuss our assumptions concerning BH accretion, i.e., radiative efficiency $\epsilon\leq 0.1$, and
accretion not exceeding the Eddington value. In our fiducial model we conservatively fixed $\epsilon$=0.1, at the low end of the range where theoretical expectations overlap with observational constraints (see Sect. 2.2.2). Although the constraints are derived from observations at redshifts $z<6$ and the conditions at $z>$6 could be different, all theoretical models and simulations concur in predicting that spin-up of BHs
should occur in gas-rich mergers between galaxies of comparable mass (Volonteri 2010; Dotti et al. 2010; Shapiro et al. 2005; see also Fanidakis et al. 2009). These are indeed the conditions expected to hold at higher redshifts in hierarchical models of galaxy formation (see, e.g., the review by Baugh et al. 2006 and references therein), which constitute the basic assumed framework of our paper.
However, to investigate the change in our constraints on $w_0$-$w_a$ in response to the assumed limit on the $\epsilon$, we repeated our computation assuming
$\epsilon<0.1$ for all DDE models. The solid and dashed lines in fig. \ref{inc_seed} show the 1$\sigma$ exclusion regions in the $w_0$-$w_a$ plane derived assuming $\epsilon=0.09$ and $\epsilon=0.08$ respectively. Although a lower value of $\epsilon$ implies faster evolution of the BH mass function (and hence a smaller exclusion region for the DE cosmological models) the basic conclusions drawn in Sect. 3.1 remain valid for $\epsilon>0.08$. For $\epsilon<0.08$ our approach does not allow to improve the limits on $w_0$-$w_a$ already provided by Supernovae, CMB and BAO; note however that the observational limit $\epsilon\geq 0.08/\xi_0(1-\xi_m)$ discussed in Sect. 2.2.2
would (marginally) allow such values $\epsilon< 0.08$ only when no merging is assumed (corresponding to $\xi_m=0$), a condition which is not consistent with the hierarchical scenario of galaxy formation assumed in this work. Conversely, our constraints on $w_0$-$w_a$ shown in figs. 4 and 5 hold in all hierarchical scenarios where merging contributes to the growth of galaxies and BHs.
As for the Eddington limited accretion assumption, we note that, even if there is evidence for BH accretion above Eddington in some sources, the
effective accretion rate entering eq. (3) is the mean value (i.e., resulting from averaging the accretion rate over the statistical distribution of
rates). All existing observations are consistent with an average value below the Eddington limit both in the local (see, e.g., Netzer et al. 2009;
Kauffmann \& Heckman 2009) and in the high redshift Universe (Trakhtenbrot et al. 2011; Shemmer et al. 2004; Netzer \& Trakhtenbrot 2007, Willott et al. 2010b).
We have also checked that our constraints are not weakened by uncertainties in the values of $H_0$ and $\Omega_M$ within the ranges allowed by observations.
Indeed, for all values of $H_0$ consistent with SNe Ia at $z<$0.1 (Riess et al. 2009) ,
we obtain equal or tighter constraints on DDE models for all values of $\Omega_M$ allowed by the WMAP data for $w >-0.5$; the latter range includes all the combinations
$w_0-w_a$ for which our approach can provide significant limits (at the high redshifts $z\gg 1$ corresponding to the WMAP measurements the Chevallier-Polarski-Linder parametrization yields $w\sim const \sim w_0+w_a$).
The results shown in Fig. 5 indicate that the cosmological constraints derived in this work are robust. Indeed, we have shown that accounting for plausible uncertainties in the parameters describing the BH and DM halo populations
does not imply a significant variation of the DE model exclusion region. Furthermore, the exclusion regions are mainly altered for large values of $w_0$, which are already excluded by other cosmological probes.
Finally, we checked our results on the BH mass function from eq. (3) against a full
semi-analytic model (SAM) of galaxy formation. Such SAMs
(see, e.g., Kauffmann \& Haenhelt 2000; Monaco \& Fontanot 2005; Menci et al. 2006; Croton et al. 2006; Bower et al. 2006; Marulli et al. 2008) are {\it ab-initio} numerical models of galaxy formation
which relate the physical processes involving the
baryons (gas physics, star formation, energy feedback from Supernovae onto the gas) to the collapse and the
merging histories of the DM haloes; the haloes are provided by Monte Carlo simulations starting from
the collapse of perturbations from the primordial density field. Galaxies form from dense gas cooling in the
host DM haloes; when the latter merge to form larger haloes, the galaxies
may survive as satellites, merge to form larger galaxies, or coalesce into a central dominant galaxy; these processes take place over time scales that grow longer over
cosmic time, so the number of satellite galaxies increases as the DM host haloes
grow from groups to clusters. Recent SAMs include specific physical models
for BH accretion and hence for AGN activity. Here we compare with the SAM by Menci et al. (2005, 2006, 2008) where galaxy interactions are assumed to trigger the fueling of black holes. Indeed, gas-rich mergers between galaxies of comparable mass have long been advocated to drive quasar activity by funnelling large amounts of galactic gas toward the galactic centre (see, e.g., Barnes \& Hernquist 1996; Cattaneo et al. 1999; Cavaliere, Vittorini 2000; Kauffmann, Haenhelt 2000; Wyithe, Loeb 2003; Treister et al. 2010). Such a picture is supported by hydrodynamical N-body simulations (Springel et al. 2005, Cox et al. 2008),
which have shown that tidal torques during galaxy mergers can drive the rapid inflows of gas that are needed to fuel both the intense starbursts and rapid BH accretion associated with ULIRGS and QSOs (Hernquist 1989; Barnes 1992; Mihos \& Hernquist 1994; Barnes \& Hernquist 1996; Mihos \& Hernquist 1996; Di Matteo, Springel \& Hernquist 2005; Springel, Di Matteo \& Hernquist 2005a,b,
Cox et al. 2008). Quasar activity triggered by mergers can account for the evolution of their luminosity function and for a wide range of QSOr properties at different wavelengths (Hopkins et al. 2005, 2006). Observations also support a link between merging and quasar activity (Sanders et al. 1988; Canalizo, Stockton 2001; Guyon et al. 2006; Dasyra et al. 2007; Bennert et al. 2008).
In the Menci et al. (2005, 2006, 2008) models the interaction rate for galaxies
in a common DM halo is calculated as: $\tau_r^{-1}$=$n\,\Sigma\,V_{rel}$, where $n$ is the number density of galaxies in the same halo,
$V_{rel}$ is their relative velocity, and $\Sigma$ is the cross section for
such encounters. The amount of cold gas accreted during an accretion episode
is: $\Delta m_{acc}=f_{acc} m_{c}$, where $m_{c}$ is the amount of cold gas in
the galaxy disk (with radius $r_d$ and rotational velocity $v_d$);
$f_{acc}$ is the fraction of the cold gas destabilized in an interaction event,
which is computed in terms of the variation of the specific angular momentum
of the gas in the disk (Menci et al. 2003). The duration of an accretion
episode is assumed to be the crossing time for the destabilized cold gas
component: $\tau$=$r_d$/$v_d$. At high redshifts, large values of $m_{c}$ and $f_{acc}$ are
obtained (corresponding to effective BH accretion close to the Eddington limit).
The first stems from the rapid gas cooling owing to the low virial
temperatures and to the large densities of the haloes at early cosmic times.
The second is due to the comparable galaxy masses involved in high-$z$ interactions.
The BH mass function computed from the full SAM is compared with our solutions of eq. (3) in Fig. 5 for the
$w=1$ case (the only cosmology for which SAM results are available); note that our approach based on eq. (3) not only
assumes continuous BH accretion at the Eddington limit, but also maximizes the BH growth by assuming that the BH merging immediately follows
the halo merging, and that the BHs are always accreting at the Eddington limit.
Thus, the fact that the our solutions to eq. (3) lie always {\it above} the SAM predictions constitutes
an important consistency check for our approach, reinforcing the robustness of our constraints on the DDE models.
The different shape of the BH mass functions at the
low- and at the high-mass end has interesting physical explanations,
which enlighten how our results in Sect. 3 actually maximized the evolution of the
BH growth. For large masses $M_{BH}\gtrsim$10$^{9}$ $M_{\odot}$ the SAM predicts lower BH number
densities because: i) in the SAM, BH merging does not immediately follow the coalescence of DM haloes, since the dynamical friction times become too long in massive haloes; ii) the gas cooling is less efficient due to large halo virial temperatures,
and this reduces the amount of cold gas available for the BH accretion. At the
low-mass end $M_{BH}<$10$^{8}$ $M_{\odot}$ the lower BH number densities predicted by the
SAM are due to the feedback from Supernovae exploding in the host galaxy. Feedback expels/reheats part of the
cold gas in the shallow potential wells, thus decreasing the reservoir of cold galactic gas available for BH accretion. Note however that
for BH masses $10^8\,M_{\odot}\leq M_{BH}\leq 10^9\,M_{\odot}$ the shape of the BH mass function is insensitive to these processes.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8 cm]{fig6.pdf}
\caption{The black hole mass function at $z$=6, in the $\Lambda$CDM cosmology, derived in this work (solid line) is compared with the BH mass function predicted by the SAM developed by Menci et al. (2005, 2006, 2008) (dot-dashed line). Squares and triangles represent the the BH number densities which we derive from the SDSS and CFHQS surveys respectively; the filled circle is the point derived by Fiore et al. (2011). Open symbols indicate the region where the mass function is poorly constrained.}
\label{BHMF_SAM}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Summary \& Conclusions}
We have computed the number density of massive BH at the centre of
galaxies at $z=6$ in different DDE cosmologies; from the comparison with
existing observational lower limits we derived constraints on the DE
equation of state $w$. Our approach only assumes the
canonical scenario for structure formation from the collapse of
overdense regions of the DM dominated primordial density field on
progressively larger scales; the BH accretion and merging rate have
been {\it maximized} in the computation so as to obtain robust constraints
on the normalization and on the time evolution of $w$ that we
parametrized as $w=w_0+w_a(1-a)=w_0+w_a\,z/(1+z)$, following Linder
(2003). This expression provides an effective fitting formula for the
time evolution of the equation of state of a number of physically
motivated DE fields.
Our results shown in Fig. 4 put novel constraints on $w_0$ and $w_a$
which are remarkably complementary to previous results from combined
BAO, SNae and CMB experiments. In fact, the latter mainly involve
either integrals of the Hubble expansion rate $H(a)$ over a large
cosmic time (from $z\approx 1000$ to the present) or the value of
$H(a)$ at relatively low redshifts $z\lesssim 1$,
thus providing constraints on $w_0$ and $w_a$ which are strongly correlated.
On the contrary, our results concerning the number density of massive BH
are effective in constraining all DDE models which do not provide
cosmic ages and fast growth factor (Fig. 1 and 3) large enough to
allow for the building up of the observed abundance of massive BHs at $z=6$;
this corresponds to setting constraints mainly on the
time evolution $w_a$ {\it at high redshifts}, almost regardless of $w_0$. In
particular, models with positive values of $w_a$ (corresponding to a
positive redshift evolution of $w$) can be effectively constrained by our
approach, since the DE density in $H(a)$ (eq. 7) entering the ages
(eq. 8) increase with $w_a$ like $a^{-3(1+w_0+w_a)}e^{3w_a(a-1)}$;
larger DE densities at earlier epochs also imply a delay in the growth
of DM perturbations resulting in a slower growth factor.
On the basis of a conservative approach to
compute the {\it maximal} BH abundance at $z=6$, we strongly disfavour
models represented by the upper
area in Fig. 4; an useful fitting formula for such an exclusion region
is $w_a\gtrsim -3/2\,w_0-3/4$.
In particular, models with $-1.2\leq w_0\leq
-1$ and $w_a\gtrsim 0.8$ - completely consistent with previous
constraints (and indeed mildly favoured according to some recent
analysis, see Feng, Wang, Zhang 2005; Upadhye, Ishak, Steinhardt 2005;
and the analysis of the "Gold" dataset in Perivolaropoulos 2006) - are
excluded by our results. Such range of parameters corresponds to
"Quintom" DDE models, with $w$ crossing $-1$ starting from larger
values, a transition that cannot be fulfilled by pure Quintessence or
Phantom fields.
For Quintessence models with $w\gtrsim -1$, our results exclude DDE
with an equation of state rapidly evolving with $z$, so that
$-dw/da\gtrsim -3/2\,w_0-3/4$. Such an evolution of the equation of
state can be related to a class of dynamics of the DE field $\phi$. In
fact, the latter is given by the Klein- Gordon equation $\ddot
\phi=-V_{,\phi}-3\,H\,\dot\phi$, where the first term on the r.h.s. is
positive and represents the contribution due to the steepness of the
potential $V_{,\phi}\equiv dV/d\phi$, while the second is negative and
corresponds to the friction due to the Hubble expansion. The coasting
evolution $\ddot \phi=0$ corresponds to an unstable situation of
perfect balance between friction and the potential terms, dividing the
dynamics into a class of "thawing" solutions with $\ddot \phi>0$ and a
class of "freezing" solutions with $\ddot \phi<0$. The first
corresponds to dynamics initially dominated by the friction term, with
the field evolving away from a "cosmological constant-like" state,
while the second to DE fields decelerating as they evolve down their
potential toward the minimum, since the forcing due to the steep slope
of the potential dominates over the Hubble drag at early times; as the
minimum is approached, the flatter shape of the potential leaves the
Hubble drag dominate the dynamics, effectively freezing the field.
The coasting line $\ddot \phi=0$ separating the two behaviours
corresponds to the condition $dw_a/da=3(1-w^2)/a$ Linder (2006); thus
the number density of high-redshift BHs has an impact in excluding a
wide class of models with a "freezing" behaviour corresponding to
initially steep potentials. Indeed, SUGRA inspired models (Brax \&
Martin 1999), which are well fitted by $w_0\approx -0.82$ and
$w_a\approx 0.58$ (Linder 2003) are also highly unfavoured due to the
combination of our constraints with previous observational
constraints, as results from of Fig. 4.
The cosmological constraints we derived are based on the standard gravity theory, the same approach will be applied to modified gravity models (e.g. the Dvali, Gabadadze, Porrati 2000 model ) in the next future.
Note that the exclusion regions we derived in the $w_0-w_a$ plane are
extremely conservative, since in our computation we maximized the
effectiveness of all processes contributing to the growth of BHs. In
particular the above constraints are derived assuming: i) continuous
BH accretion (no time gap between successive accretion episodes); ii)
accretion always at the maximal Eddington limit; iii) BH merging
immediately following the merging of their host DM haloes; iv) all
baryons contained in the galaxy are available for BH accretion and no
energy feedback balancing the gas cooling in DM haloes. Such
conditions are expected to be exceedingly restrictive, as we have
shown in Sect. 4 using a semi-analytic model of galaxy formation
models based on a physical description of BH accretion.
The above conservative approach makes difficult to extend the present
method to lower redshifts, since our maximal accretion assumptions extrapolated
over a larger span of cosmic time would
yield, for all plausible $w_0$-$w_a$ combinations, upper bounds
largely exceeding the observed abundances, and thus ineffective for constraining
DDE models. Conversely, our approach is even more effective if the upper bounds
derived from eq. 3 could be compared with the measured abundances of QSOs at
higher redshifts $z>6$. In this context,
the discovery of three new quasars at $z\simeq$7 in the United Kingdom Infrared Deep Sky Survey
(UKIDSS, Mortlock et al. 2011; Venemans et al. in prep.)
indicate that the present approach will be able to
provided even tighter constraints on DDE models in the next future.
\section*{Acknowledgments} We acknowledge grants from ASI-INAF I/016/07/0 and ASI-INAF 1/009/10/0. We thank the referee for helpful comments.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec: intro}
The observed forward-backward asymmetry in rapidity $A_{FB}^t$ of top quarks~\cite{Aaltonen:2011kc, Abazov:2011rq} at the Fermilab Tevatron deviates by about two standard deviations ($2\sigma$) from standard model (SM) expectations~\cite{Kuhn:1998jr}. After corrections for detector acceptance and resolution, $A_{FB}^t$ in the center-of-mass (c.m.) frame is $15.8\pm 7.5 \%$ at CDF~\cite{Aaltonen:2011kc} and is $19.6\pm6.5 \%$ at D0~\cite{Abazov:2011rq}. In addition to $A_{FB}^t$, the D0 group also reports a positive forward-backward asymmetry of charged leptons from top quark decays of $A_{FB}^\ell=(15.2\pm 4.0)\%$ compared with the
small value $2.1\pm0.1\%$ from simulations of the SM~\cite{Abazov:2011rq}.
The definition of $A_{FB}^\ell$ is
\begin{equation}
A_{FB}^\ell = \frac{n_F -n_B}{n_F + n_B},
\label{eq:def_afbl}
\end{equation}
where $n_F$ ($n_B$) is the number of events with $q_{\ell}y_{\ell} > 0$ $ (q_{\ell}y_{\ell} < 0)$, and $q_{\ell}$ and $y_{\ell}$ are the sign and rapidity respectively of the charged lepton from the semileptonic decay of a top or anti-top quark in the $t{\bar t}$ production.
In this paper, we investigate the kinematic and dynamic relationship between the two observables
$A_{FB}^t$ and $A_{FB}^\ell$. We study quantitatively the influence of the top-quark boost on the kinematics of the
charged lepton, showing how the distribution of leptons in the laboratory frame is related to the polarization state of the top quark parent. We show that current data on the ratio of the two asymmetries favor models in which more right-handed than left-handed top quarks are produced. The fact that $A_{FB}^\ell$, $ A_{FB}^t$, and the ratio $A_{FB}^\ell/A_{FB}^t$ are larger than the SM predictions indicates that the charged lepton strongly prefers to move in the same direction as the top quark from which it originates. This result can arise if right-handed top quarks~\cite{Krohn:2011tw,Falkowski:2011zr} play a significant role in $A_{FB}^t$ or if a non-standard mechanism produces more highly boosted top quarks at the Tevatron, as we explain below.
Many new physics (NP) models have been proposed to explain the enhancement of $A_{FB}^t$, such as flavor-changing $Z^{\prime}$~\cite{Jung:2009jz}, $W^{\prime}$~\cite{wprime} and axigluon $G^{\prime}$~\cite{axi1,axi2,Cao:2010zb} models.%
~\footnote{The next-to-leading order quantum chromodynamics corrections to
the process of $q\bar{q}\to t\bar{t}$ induced by the flavor-changing $Z^\prime$ and $W^\prime$ are calculated in Ref.~\cite{Xiao:2010hm} and Ref.~\cite{Yan:2011tf},
respectively, with the result that the NP prediction at the leading order is reliable. }
The first two models produce predominantly right-handed top quarks, whereas the axigluon model generates unpolarized top-quarks.
It is important to validate these models at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and/or at the Tevatron. For example, the heavy flavor-changing $Z^{\prime}$ ($\gtrsim m_t$) model is disfavored because it predicts too much same-sign top quark pair production at the LHC~\cite{Berger:2011ua,Chatrchyan:2011dk}. In this paper, we focus on how consistently the NP models can describe both $A_{FB}^t$ and $A_{FB}^\ell$.
We begin in Sec.~\ref{sec:kin} with a discussion of the angular distribution of decay leptons, first in the rest frame of the top quark and then after the top quark is boosted in rapidity and transverse momentum. We pay particular attention to left/right polarization state of the top
quark because the final distribution of leptons in the laboratory frame, after the top quark is boosted, depends significantly on the top quark's polarization state. In Sec.~\ref{sec:scan1}, we derive the relationship of the lepton asymmetry $A_{FB}^\ell$ and the top quark asymmetry $A_{FB}^t$ separately for the left- and right-handed polarization states of the top quark. Different models of new physics produce top quarks with different proportions of left- and right-handed polarization. We use two such models, an axigluon model and a $W^{\prime}$ model, in Sec.~\ref{sec:scan2} to deduce their different expectations for the ratio of the lepton and top quark asymmetries. Our conclusions appear in Sec.~\ref{sec:con}. We emphasize the value of making measurements of both $A_{FB}^t$ and $A_{FB}^\ell$ because their ratio can be related through top quark polarization to the underlying dynamics of top quark production.
\section{Kinematics}\label{sec:kin}
The charged lepton in top quark decay is a powerful analyzer of the polarization of the top quark~\cite{Mahlon:1995zn}.
In the rest frame of a top quark, the distribution in the polar angle $\theta_{\rm hel}$ of a decay lepton $\ell^+$ is
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{\Gamma}\frac{d\Gamma}{d\cos\theta_{\rm hel}}=\frac{1+\lambda_t\cos\theta_{\rm hel}}{2},
\label{eq:spin}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_t$ denotes the top quark helicity. Here, $\lambda_t=+$ is for a right-handed
top quark ($t_R$) while $\lambda_t=-$ for a left-handed top quark ($t_L$). The angle is measured
with resect to the direction of motion of the top quark in the overall center-of-mass system of the
$t \bar{t}$ production process. The distributions are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:leprap}(a).
The charged lepton from a right-handed top quark decay prefers to move along
the top quark direction of motion, while a lepton from a left-handed top quark moves
preferentially against the top quark direction of motion. In the rest frame of the top quark,
75\% (25\%) of charged leptons from $t_R$ ($t_L$) decay follow the top quark direction
of motion, i.e. $\cos\theta_{\rm hel} > 0$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{figures/fig1a.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{figures/fig1b.eps}
\caption{(a) $\cos\theta_{\rm hel}$ distribution in the top quark rest frame for both $t_L$
and $t_R$. (b) $\cos\theta_{t\ell}$ distribution in the boosted frame for a top quark
with $E_t=200~{\rm GeV}$.}
\label{fig:leprap}
\end{figure}
Once the top quark is boosted, the angular distribution of the charged lepton relative to the
direction of motion of the top quark is sensitive to
the energy of the top quark $E_t$ (or equivalently its velocity $\beta$). We derive
\begin{equation}
\frac{d\Gamma}{\Gamma d\cos\theta_{t\ell}}=\frac{1-\beta\cos\theta_{t\ell}+\lambda_t\left(\cos\theta_{t\ell}-\beta\right)}{2\gamma^2\left(1-\beta\cos\theta_{t\ell}\right)^3}, \label{eq:lep_follow_top}
\end{equation}
where $\beta=\sqrt{1-m_t^2/E_t^2}$, $\gamma=E_t/m_t$.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:leprap}(b) we plot the distribution in $\cos\theta_{t\ell}$
of the charged lepton, where the angle $\cos\theta_{t\ell}$ is the angle between the charged
lepton and its parent top quark in the boosted frame.
As an illustration, fixing the energy of the top quark to $E_t=200~{\rm GeV}$, we find that
about $60\%$ of $\ell^+$ follow the top quark for a $t_L$, and almost $100\%$ for a $t_R$.
The distribution of charged leptons in the laboratory frame depends on the top quark kinematics,
including the top quark energy and its rapidity, and the top quark polarization. The
probability for finding a positive charged lepton
in the forward region when it originates from a top quark with a velocity $\beta$, rapidity $y_t$,
and polarization $\lambda_t$
is defined as
\begin{equation}
R_F^{\ell,~\lambda_t}(\beta, y_t)=\frac{N_F^\ell}{N_F^\ell+N_B^\ell},
\end{equation}
where $N_F^\ell$ ($N_B^\ell$) denotes the number of leptons $\ell$ in the
forward (backward) region in the laboratory. After lengthy algebra, it can be shown that
the ratio $R_F^\ell$ is
\begin{widetext}
\begin{eqnarray}
R_F^{\ell,\lambda_t}(\beta, y_t)=\begin{cases}
\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{2\left(1+\gamma^{-2}{\text{coth}}^2y_t\right)^{1/2}}+\frac{\lambda_t{\text{coth}}^2y_t}{4\beta\gamma^2\left(1+\gamma^{-2}{\text{coth}}^2y_t\right)^{3/2}}
& \displaystyle y_t \in \left[0,~~y_{\rm max}\right]\\
&\\
\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2\left(1+\gamma^{-2}{\text{coth}}^2y_t\right)^{1/2}}-\frac{\lambda_t{\text{coth}}^2y_t}{4\beta\gamma^2\left(1+\gamma^{-2}{\text{coth}}^2y_t\right)^{3/2}},
& \displaystyle y_t \in \left[-y_{\rm max},~0\right]
\end{cases}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{widetext}
where
\begin{equation}
y_{\rm max}=\frac{1}{2}\ln\frac{1+\beta}{1-\beta}.
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{figures/fig2a.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{figures/fig2b.eps}
\caption{
The ratio $R_F$ as a function of $y_t$ for a top quark with fixed energy:
(a) $E_t = 200~{\rm GeV}$ and (b) $E_t=600~{\rm GeV}$.
\label{fig:lepratio2}}
\end{figure}
To illustrate the effect of the top quark boost, we plot in Fig.~\ref{fig:lepratio2}
the fraction $R_F$ as a function of $y_t$. We choose two characteristic top quark energies,
$E_t=200~{\rm GeV}$ and 600~GeV.
The former energy represents top quarks produced around the threshold region, while the latter
pertains for highly boosted top quarks.
Note that $y_{\rm max}=0.53$ for $E_t=200~{\rm GeV}$.
When a top quark moves perpendicular to the beam line, i.e. $y_t=0$, there is an equal
number of leptons in the forward and backward regions, leading to $R_F=0.5$, independent
of $E_t$ and the polarization of the top quark.
For right-handed top quarks $t_R$, $R_F$ increases rapidly with $y_t$ in the region of $y_t > 0$
because most of the leptons move close to the direction of motion of the top quark after being
boosted to the lab frame; this result is shown by the black solid lines in Fig.~\ref{fig:leprap}. We
can also see that when $E_t$ becomes larger, i.e. the top quark is more energetic and the lepton
is more boosted, $R_F$ rapidly reaches its maximum value $1$.
On the contrary, in the case of $t_L$'s, the ratio $R_F$ does not vary significantly with $y_t$ owing
to the anti-boost effect on the charged lepton. For $E_t = 200$ GeV, the boost causes charged leptons
to distribute nearly uniformly, and $R_F$ is around $0.5$, as seen in the red-dotted curve in
Fig.~\ref{fig:lepratio2}(a). When the energy of $t_L$'s is large enough, the large boost forces most
of the charged leptons from top quark decays to move along the top quark direction of motion, even
if they move against the top quark direction of motion in the top quark rest frame. The boost yields a
large value $R_F$ in the region of large $y_t$, as shown by the red-dotted curve in
Fig.~\ref{fig:lepratio2}(b). The competing influences leave the $t_L$ curve slightly below the $t_R$ curve.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{figures/fig3a.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{figures/fig3b.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{figures/fig3c.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{figures/fig3d.eps}
\caption{The ratio of the charged lepton in the
forward and backward region as a function of the top quark rapidity
for top quarks with fixed transverse momentum $p_{T} =10, 50, 100, 300~{\rm GeV}$. For a
fixed $p_{T}= 50~\rm{GeV}$, the figures show that around the region of $y_t \sim 0.2$, the
fraction of charged leptons in the forward region is
about $75\%$ for a right-handed top quark while $45\%$ for a left-handed top quark.}
\label{fig:leprap4}
\end{figure}
In Fig.~\ref{fig:leprap4}, we show how $R_F$ varies with $p_T^t$ and $y_t$. The distributions for right-handed
top quarks $t_R$'s do not vary greatly with $p_T^t$ because most of the charged leptons follow $t_R$. However,
the shapes of the curves for left-handed top quarks, which are the focus in the discussion below, are very
different between the low $p_T^t$ and high $p_T^t$ regions, as is seen in the red-dotted lines. As the top
quark moves forward, i.e. $y_t > 0$ for fixed $p_T^t$, the boost becomes more significant as the energy of the
top quark is increased. Therefore, more leptons are forced to move along the direction of the top quark. On
the other hand, some fraction of the decay leptons which are initially in the forward/backward region
($y_\ell > 0/y_\ell <0$) will then be in the backward/forward region by definition.
In summary, there are two factors which affect $R_F$: the boost and the rearrangement of the distribution of
charged leptons in the forward ($y_\ell>0$) and backward ($y_\ell<0$) region.
The former always increases $R_F$ while the latter may increase or decrease the $R_F$ depending on how
energetic the top quark is at $y_t =0$.
Generally speaking, when the boost is not significant (low $p_T^t$ and small $y_t$), $R_F$ decreases when
$y_t$ increases from $y_t=0$, as we can see in the drop in the red-dotted curves in Fig.~\ref{fig:leprap4}(a)
and~\ref{fig:leprap4}(b). When the boost is big enough, $R_F$ always increases with $y_t$.
The platform-like behavior around $y_t\simeq 0$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:leprap4}(c) arises because the leptons accumulate
nearly uniformly around the axis of motion of the top quark when $p_T^t =m_t/\sqrt{3}\simeq 100$ GeV. Therefore the ratio $R_F$
is rather stable as the top quark changes its direction of motion direction around $y_t =0$.
\section{$A_{FB}^t$ and $A_{FB}^\ell$}
\label{sec:scan1}
The observed positive top-quark asymmetry $A_{FB}^t$ indicates more top quarks are produced in
the forward region than in the backward region of rapidity.
Both $t_R$ and $t_L$ can generate a positive lepton asymmetry $A_{FB}^\ell$.
However, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:lepratio2}, $t_L$ would need a large boost along the proton beam
line (i.e. in the large forward rapidity region) to overcome the fact that most of the charged leptons
from its decay move against it in its rest frame.
A right-handed top quark $t_R$ can yield a positive $A_{FB}^\ell$ even for top quarks near
the $t\bar{t}$ threshold region. Therefore, the large positive top quark and lepton asymmetries
$A_{FB}^t$ and $A_{FB}^\ell$ observed by the D0 collaboration indicate that
the top quark polarization may be playing a non-trivial role. In this section we present a general
analysis of the correlation between $A_{FB}^t$ and $A_{FB}^\ell$, to prepare for a better
understanding of the numerical results derived from NP models to be shown in Sec.~\ref{sec:scan2}.
The top quark asymmetry $A_{FB}^t$ can be expressed as a sum of contributions from the SM and NP
as:
\begin{equation}
A_{FB}^t = A_{FB}^{t,~{\rm NP}}\times R + A_{FB}^{t,~{\rm SM}}\times (1-R),
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
A_{FB}^{t,~{\rm SM}}=\frac{N_F^{\rm SM}-N_B^{\rm SM}}
{N_F^{\rm SM}+N_B^{\rm SM}},~~%
A_{FB}^{t,~{\rm NP}}=\frac{N_F^{\rm NP}-N_B^{\rm NP}}
{N_F^{\rm NP}+N_B^{\rm NP}},~~%
R= \frac{N_{\rm tot}^{\rm NP}}{N_{\rm tot}^{\rm SM}+N_{\rm tot}^{\rm NP}},
\end{equation}
with $N_{F(B)}^{\rm SM}$ and $N_{F(B)}^{\rm NP}$ being the numbers of events in which the
top quark moves with $y_t>0 (y_t<0)$ in the SM and induced by NP, respectively, and
$N_{\rm tot}^{\rm SM (NP)}$ is the total number of events predicted in the SM (induced by NP).
The NLO QCD contribution to the production process $q\bar{q}\to t \bar{t}$ could generate
a value $A_{FB}^{t, {\rm SM}} \sim 5\%$, which is much less than the central value of experimental
data.
To somewhat simplify the discussion of the correlation between $A_{FB}^t$ and $A_{FB}^\ell$,
we assume in this section that $A_{FB}^t$ is generated completely by NP, but all SM contributions
(including the NLO QCD effects) are retained in the numerical calculations we present.
The contributions to $A_{FB}^t$ from different polarizations of top quarks can be separated as:
\begin{equation}
A_{FB}^t \approx\left[\rho_{t_L}~A_{FB}^{t_L,~{\rm NP}} +\rho_{t_R}~A_{FB}^{t_R,~\rm NP}\right]\times R,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
A_{FB}^{\lambda_t,~\rm NP}=\left[\frac{N_F^{\lambda_t}-N_B^{\lambda_t}}
{N_F^{\lambda_t}+N_B^{\lambda_t}}\right]_{\rm NP}, \quad
\rho_{\lambda_t} = \frac{N^{\lambda_t,~\rm NP}}
{N_{\rm tot}^{\rm NP}}.
\end{equation}
Here, $A_{FB}^{\lambda_t,~\rm NP}$ denotes the forward-backward asymmetry of the top quark
with polarization $\lambda_t$ generated only by NP, while $\rho_{\lambda_t}$ is
the fraction of top quarks with polarization $\lambda_t$ in $t\bar{t}$ events induced
by NP. One advantage of decomposing $A_{FB}^t$ into different top quark polarizations
is to monitor the chirality of the couplings of NP particles to top quarks. Another advantage is to
make the connection between $A_{FB}^\ell$ and $A_{FB}^t$ more transparent.
As discussed in Sec.~\ref{sec:kin} the ratio $R_F^\ell$ depends on the top quark kinematics
($\beta$, $y_t$ and $\lambda_t$). To compute the probability for a charged lepton in the
forward region, one must convolute the top quark production cross section with $R_F^\ell$
on an event-by-event basis, i.e.
\begin{equation}
N^{t\bar{t}}\otimes R_F^{\ell,\lambda_t} = \int N^{t\bar{t}}(\beta, y_t, \lambda_t) R_F^{\ell,\lambda_t} (\beta, y_t)~d\Phi,
\end{equation}
where $N^{t\bar{t}}$ labels the $t\bar{t}$ production rate for a top quark with specific kinematics
($\beta$, $y_t$, $\lambda_t$) and $\Phi$ stands for the phase space.
The lepton asymmetry $A_{FB}^{\ell}$ generated by a top quark with polarization $\lambda_t$ is
\begin{widetext}
\begin{eqnarray}
A_{FB}^{\ell,\lambda_t}\bigg|_{\rm NP} &=&
\left.
\frac{N_F^{\lambda_t}\otimes R_F^{\ell,\lambda_t}+N_B^{\lambda_t}\otimes R_F^{\ell,\lambda_t}-N_F^{\lambda_t}\otimes R_B^{\ell,\lambda_t}
-N_B^{\lambda_t}\otimes R_B^{\ell,\lambda_t}
}{N_F^{\lambda_t}+N_B^{\lambda_t}}\right|_{\rm NP}
\nonumber \\
&=&\left.\frac{N_F^{\lambda_t}\otimes \left(2 R_F^{\ell,\lambda_t}-1\right)+
N_B^{\lambda_t}\otimes \left(2 R_F^{\ell,\lambda_t}-1\right)}{N_F^{\lambda_t}+N_B^{\lambda_t}}\right|_{\rm NP} \nonumber \\
&=& \left.\frac{(N_F^{\lambda_t}-N_B^{\lambda_t})\otimes
\left(2 R_F^{\ell,\lambda_t}-1\right)}{N_F^{\lambda_t}+N_B^{\lambda_t}}\right|_{\rm NP} .
\label{eq:correlation}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{widetext}
Here,
\begin{equation}
R_B^{\ell,\lambda_t}\left(\beta,y_t\right)\equiv \frac{N_B^\ell}{N_F^\ell+N_B^\ell}
=1-R_F^{\ell,\lambda_t}(\beta,y_t),
\end{equation}
and we use the following relation between $R_F^{\ell,\lambda_t}$ and $R_B^{\ell,\lambda_t}$ in our derivation,
\begin{equation}
R_B^{\ell,\lambda_t}(y_t) = R_F^{\ell,\lambda_t}\left(-y_t\right).
\end{equation}
The quantities $N_F^{\lambda_t}$ and $N_B^{\lambda_t}$ in the convolutions in Eq.~(\ref{eq:correlation}) should be understood
as the distributions $N^{t\bar{t}}(\beta, y_t, \lambda_t)\Theta\left(y_t\right)$
and $N^{t\bar{t}}(\beta, y_t, \lambda_t)\Theta\left(-y_t\right)$, respectively,
where $\Theta\left(x\right)$ is the Heaviside step function.
The quantity $N_F^{\lambda_t}-N_B^{\lambda_t}$ should be understood as
$\left[N^{t\bar{t}}(\beta, y_t, \lambda_t)-N^{t\bar{t}}(\beta, -y_t, \lambda_t)\right]\Theta\left(y_t\right)$.
Because $R_F^{\ell,\lambda_t}$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:correlation}) cannot
exceed 1, we have $A_{FB}^\ell \lesssim A_{FB}^t$.
When $R_F^{\ell, \lambda_t}$ is close to a constant $\mathcal{R}_C$,
e.g. $\mathcal{R}_C \sim 1/2$ around the $t\bar{t}$ threshold ($E_t\sim200{\rm GeV}$) for left-handed top quark
or $\mathcal{R}_C\sim 1$ for a highly boosted top quark,
Eq.~(\ref{eq:correlation}) can be simplified as
\begin{eqnarray}
A_{FB}^{\ell, \lambda_t}\bigg|_{\rm NP} &=&\left[\frac{N_F^{\lambda_t}-N_B^{\lambda_t}}
{N_F^{\lambda_t}+N_B^{\lambda_t}}\right]_{\rm NP}
\times \left(2\mathcal{R}_C-1\right)
=A_{FB}^{\lambda_t,~{\rm NP}} \times \left(2\mathcal{R}_C-1\right).
\label{eq:correlation2}
\end{eqnarray}
Equation~(\ref{eq:correlation2}) and Fig.~\ref{fig:lepratio2} show that:
\begin{itemize}
\item $A_{FB}^{\ell, t_L} \sim 0$ when the $t\bar{t}$ pair is produced around the threshold region;
\item $A_{FB}^{\ell, t_L} \lesssim A_{FB}^{\ell, t_R} \approx A_{FB}^{t}$ in the large $m_{t\bar{t}}$ region.
\end{itemize}
Although Eq.~(\ref{eq:correlation2}) is approximate, it helps in understanding the NP prediction obtained
from a complete numerical calculation.
\section{New physics models: axigluon and $W^\prime$}
\label{sec:scan2}
In this section we focus on two models of new physics, an axigluon model~\cite{axi1,axi2,Cao:2010zb}
and a flavor-changing $W^\prime$ model~\cite{wprime}. We examine how these NP models can accommodate
the values of both $A_{FB}^t$ and $A_{FB}^\ell$ measured by the D0 collaboration.
In the axigluon ($G^\prime$) model we assume for simplicity that the interaction of
the axigluon to the SM quarks is purely pseudo-vector-like and can be written as
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L} = g_s \left(g_l~\bar{q}\gamma^\mu \gamma_5 q
+ g_h~\bar{Q}\gamma^\mu \gamma_5 Q\right) G^{\prime}_{\mu},
\end{equation}
where $q$ denotes the first two generation quarks in the SM and $Q$ the third generation
quarks. The coupling $g_s$ is the usual strong coupling strength; $g_l$ and $g_h$ are the
coupling strength (normalized to the QCD strong coupling $g_s$) of the axigluon to
the light quark ($q$) and the heavy quark ($Q$), respectively.
The helicity amplitudes of the processes $q\bar{q} \to g \to t \bar{t}$ and
$q\bar{q}\to G^\prime \to t\bar{t}$ are written as
$M_{g}(\lambda_q,\lambda_{\bar q},\lambda_t,\lambda_{\bar t})$,
and
$M_{G^\prime}(\lambda_q,\lambda_{\bar q},\lambda_t,\lambda_{\bar t})$, where
$\lambda_i=+$ represents the right-handed helicity of particle $i$ and $\lambda_i=-$
the left-handed helicity. The total helicity amplitude is
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{M}(\lambda_q,\lambda_{\bar q},\lambda_t,\lambda_{\bar t}) =
g_s^2t^A_{ba}t^A_{cd}\biggl[\mathcal{M}_g (\lambda_q,\lambda_{\bar q},\lambda_t,\lambda_{\bar t})
+\frac{\hat{s}~(-g_lg_h)}{\hat{s}-m_{G^\prime}^2 +i m_{G^\prime} \Gamma_{G^\prime}}
\mathcal{M}_{G^\prime} (\lambda_q,\lambda_{\bar q},\lambda_t,\lambda_{\bar t})\biggr],~
\end{eqnarray}
where $t_{ij}^A$ is the generator of the color $SU(3)$ group; $a,~b,~c$ and $d$ are the color indexes of
$q,~\bar{q},~t$ and $\bar{t}$,
respectively. The non-vanishing helicity amplitudes are
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{M}_{g}(-+--) &=& -\mathcal{M}_g(+-++)=\sqrt{1-\beta^2}\sin\theta,\nonumber\\
\mathcal{M}_{g}(+---) &=& -\mathcal{M}_g(-+++)=\sqrt{1-\beta^2}\sin\theta,\nonumber\\
\mathcal{M}_{g}(-+-+) &=&~~\mathcal{M}_g(+-+-)=-(1+\cos\theta) ,\nonumber\\
\mathcal{M}_{g}(-++-) &=&~~ \mathcal{M}_g(+--+)=(1-\cos\theta) ,
\label{eq:hel_sm}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{M}_{G^\prime}(+-+-) &=& \mathcal{M}_{G^\prime}(-+-+)= \beta (1+\cos\theta),\nonumber\\
\mathcal{M}_{G^\prime}(-++-) &=& \mathcal{M}_{G^\prime}(+--+)= \beta (1-\cos\theta),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\beta=\sqrt{1-4m_t^2/\hat{s}}$ and $\theta$ is the polar angle of the top quark
in the c.m. frame of the $t\bar{t}$ pair measured relative to the initial state quark.
The absence of deviation from the SM expectation in the measured $m_{t\bar{t}}$
distribution~\cite{Aaltonen:2011kc, Abazov:2011rq}
indicates the axigluon should be heavy and broad. The axigluon's contribution to $t\bar{t}$ production is therefore
through interference with the SM channel. The interference effect becomes largest in the region of large $m_{t\bar{t}}$,
i.e. $\beta \sim 1$. Therefore, the last two equations of Eq.~(\ref{eq:hel_sm}) dominate.
When $\sqrt{\hat{s}}<m_{G^\prime}$, the denominator of the axigluon propagator is negative, and the
square of the interference term in the overall amplitude is proportional to
\begin{equation}
\left[2g_lg_h(1+\cos\theta)^2-2g_lg_h(1-\cos\theta)^2\right]\frac{\hat{s}}{\hat{s}-m_{G^\prime}^2} .
\end{equation}
The term linear in $\cos\theta$ is $4g_lg_h\hat{s}\cos\theta/(\hat{s}-m_{G^\prime}^2)$.
The product $g_l g_h$ must be negative to obtain a positive
$A_{FB}$~\cite{axi1,axi2,Cao:2010zb}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.27]{figures/fig4a.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.27]{figures/fig4b.eps}
\includegraphics[scale=0.27]{figures/fig4c.eps}
\caption{Correlation between $A_{FB}^{\ell}$ and $A_{FB}^{t}$ for (a) the axigluon
and (b) the $W^\prime$ models. The point corresponding to the D0 data is also shown.
The numbers within the parentheses label the lower and upper limits of the mass of the
NP object. The statistics for the ratio of predicted $A_{FB}^\ell$ to $A_{FB}^t$ for the $G^\prime$
and $W^\prime$ models are shown in (c). For comparison, the SM values are
$A_{FB}^t \sim 5\%$ (off the left side of the plots in (a) and (b), and
$A_{FB}^\ell \sim 2\%$. }
\label{fig:correlation}
\end{figure}
The top quarks are generated unpolarized owing to the pseudo-vector coupling of
the axigluon to the SM fermions, and
\begin{equation}
\rho_{t_L}=\rho_{t_R}=\frac{1}{2},
~~~A_{FB}^{t_L,~{\rm NP}}=A_{FB}^{t_R,~{\rm NP}}=\frac{A_{FB}^t}{R}>0.
\end{equation}
Since the $t \bar{t}$ cross section is greatest near the threshold region where
$A_{FB}^{\ell, t_L} \sim 0$ and $A_{FB}^{\ell, t_R}\sim A_{FB}^t$, the expression for
$A_{FB}^\ell$ becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
A_{FB}^{\ell} &\approx& \rho_{t_L} A_{FB}^{t_L,~{\rm NP}} \left( 2 \mathcal{R}_C-1\right)\times R
+ \rho_{t_R} A_{FB}^{t_R,~{\rm NP}} \left(2\mathcal{R}_C-1\right)\times R
\nonumber \\
&\sim & \frac{1}{2} A_{FB}^t.
\end{eqnarray}
We plot our axigluon model predictions for $A_{FB}^t$ and $A_{FB}^{\ell}$
in Fig.~\ref{fig:correlation}(a).
We first scan the theoretical parameter space ($g_l$, $g_h$ and $m_{G^\prime}$)
to fit Tevatron data on $A_{FB}^t$
and the $t\bar{t}$ total production cross section within $1~\sigma$.
These parameters are then used to calculate $A_{FB}^\ell$.
The figure shows a clear correlation between $A_{FB}^t$ and $A_{FB}^\ell$. The best fit to the
correlation is
\begin{equation}
A_{FB}^\ell \simeq 0.47 \times A_{FB}^t + 0.25\%~.
\end{equation}
To fit both $A_{FB}^t$ and $A_{FB}^\ell$ within $1\sigma$, the mass of the $G^\prime$
must be greater than $1$~TeV. For masses this great, top quarks from $G^\prime$ decays
are highly boosted and cause most of the charged leptons to move along the direction of
the top quarks.
We remark here that if the $G^\prime$ is found as a resonance in the $t{\bar t}$
mass distribution, the chirality structure of its coupling to $t{\bar t}$ can possibly be determined
at the LHC~\cite{Berger:2011hn}.
A different class of NP models to explain the $t\bar{t}$ forward-backward asymmetry is based
on $t$-channel kinematics. Such models involve large flavor-changing interactions.
A model with a non-universal massive neutral vector boson $Z^\prime$~\cite{Jung:2009jz} is
one of the possibilities. However, it is disfavored because it implies a large rate for same-sign
top quark production at the 7~TeV LHC~\cite{Berger:2011ua}, not supported by
data~\cite{Chatrchyan:2011dk}.
We consider in this paper a flavor-changing $W^\prime$ which couples an incident $d$-quark to the
produced $t$-quark~\cite{wprime},
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}=g_2 g_R \bar{d}\gamma^\mu P_R t W^\prime_{\mu} + h.c.~,
\end{equation}
where $g_2$ is the weak coupling.
In the $W^\prime$ model, in addition to the SM process $q\bar{q} \to g \to t\bar{t}$,
the $t\bar{t}$ pair can also be produced via a $t$-channel process with
a $W^\prime$ mediator. Apart from a common factor
$-i g_2^2 g_R^2 E_t^2/(\hat{t}-m_{W^\prime}^2)$, the helicity amplitude
$M_{W^\prime}^{t}(\lambda_q,\lambda_{\bar q}, \lambda_{t},\lambda_{\bar t})$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{M}_{W^\prime}^t(+---)&=&-\left[2+r_W^2\right]\sqrt{1-\beta^2} \sin\theta \nonumber \\
\mathcal{M}_{W^\prime}^t(+--+)&=&\left[2(1-\beta)+r_W^2(1+\beta)\right](1-\cos\theta) \nonumber \\
\mathcal{M}_{W^\prime}^t(+-+-)&=&\left[2(1+\beta)+r_W^2(1-\beta)\right](1+\cos\theta) \nonumber \\
\mathcal{M}_{W^\prime}^t(+-++)&=&\left[2+r_W^2\right]\sqrt{1-\beta^2} \sin\theta~,
\end{eqnarray}
where $r_W=m_t/m_{W^\prime}$.
In the region $\beta\simeq 1$, the nonzero helicity
amplitudes are
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{M}_{W^\prime}^t(+--+)&\sim&2r_W^2(1-\cos\theta), \nonumber \\
\mathcal{M}_{W^\prime}^t(+-+-)&\sim&4(1+\cos\theta)~.
\end{eqnarray}
In order to produce top quarks in the forward region, one needs
$2r_W^2<4$, which is always true for the region of $W^\prime$ masses (heavier than the top quark) considered in this paper.
At the Tevatron the $\beta$ distribution of the top quark in $t\bar{t}$ production peaks around $0.6$, and therefore most of the
top quarks are not significantly boosted. We can also easily see that more right-handed top quarks are produced compared
to left-handed ones in the $W^\prime$ model, $\rho_{t_R} > \rho_{t_L}$.
Since the $t$-channel propagator contributes a minus sign, the total forward-backward asymmetry results from
a competition between the square of the purely NP term and the interference term of NP with the SM. The
former is proportional to $g_R^4$ and the latter to $g_R^2$. We plot the correlation between $A_{FB}^t$
and $A_{FB}^{\ell}$ for the $W^\prime$ model in Fig.~\ref{fig:correlation}(b). The strong correlation is fit well
by
\begin{equation}
A_{FB}^\ell \simeq 0.75 \times A_{FB}^t - 2.1\%~.
\end{equation}
Moreover, for a relatively light $W^\prime$ ($\lesssim 600$) GeV, both $A_{FB}^t$ and $A_{FB}^\ell$ can be
consistent with the D0 data within $1~\sigma$.
For the $G^\prime$ and $W^\prime$ models, Fig.~\ref{fig:correlation}(c) shows the statistics for the ratio of the
predicted $A_{FB}^\ell$ to $A_{FB}^t$, based on the scattered points in Fig.~\ref{fig:correlation}(a) and ~\ref{fig:correlation}(b).
The total number of events is normalized to 1.
The axigluon model peaks near $50\%$ and $W^\prime $ model near $62\%$. The ratio in the SM is close to
$40\%$.
The $W^\prime$ model generates a larger $A_{FB}^\ell$ than the axigluon $G^\prime$ model because it produces
more right-handed top quarks. The comparison to the D0 point shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:correlation}(a and b) indicates
that top quark events with a large proportion of right-handed top quarks are favored. Constraints on flavor-changing
currents in the $W^\prime$ model allow only right-handed couplings to the top quark, consistent with the D0 $A_{FB}^\ell$
results. There is no direct evidence of the handedness of the coupling in the massive gluon models. The D0 result
could be interpreted as an indirect clue for the chiral couplings of the massive gluon. Improved statistics would help,
as well as a measurement of $A_{FB}^\ell$ by the CDF collaboration.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:con}
The deviation of the top quark forward-backward asymmetry $A_{FB}^t$ from its SM prediction may indicate the presence
of new physics. Based simply on the large value of $A_{FB}^t$, the charged lepton forward-backward asymmetry $A_{FB}^\ell$
should also be expected to be larger than the SM expectation. Indeed, the D0 collaboration reports
$A_{FB}^\ell = 15.2\%$, about $3\sigma$ away above the SM value. In this paper, we study the kinematic and dynamic aspects
of the relationship between the asymmetries $A_{FB}^t$ and $A_{FB}^\ell$ based on the spin correlation between charged leptons
and the top quark with different polarization states. Owing to the spin correlation in top quark decay,
$A_{FB}^\ell$ and $A_{FB}^t$ are strongly positively correlated for {\em right-handed} top quarks. However, for {\em left-handed}
top quarks, the nature of the correlation depends on how boosted the top quark is. For large enough top quark energy, left-handed
top quarks will also generate a large charged-lepton asymmetry, similar to that for right-handed quarks. However, if the
top quark is not boosted ($E_t \lesssim 200$ GeV), $A_{FB}^\ell$ from left-handed top quarks will be less than $A_{FB}^t/2$ for a
positive $A_{FB}^t$. Since most of the $t\bar{t}$ events are produced in the threshold region, one may use the large positive
values of $A_{FB}^t$ and $A_{FB}^\ell$ measured at D0 to conclude that production of left-handed top quarks is disfavored.
Confirmation of the D0 result and greater statistics are desirable. There is great value in making measurements of
both $A_{FB}^t$ and $A_{FB}^\ell$ because their correlation can be related through top quark polarization to the underlying
dynamics of top quark production.
We focus on two benchmark NP models,
an axigluon ($G^\prime$) model which produces unpolarized top quarks, i.e. an equal number of right-handed and
left-handed top quarks, and a flavor-changing $W^\prime$ model which produced dominantly right-handed top
quarks. To determine free parameters, we require that these new physics models fit $A_{FB}^t$ as well
as the $t{\bar t}$ total cross section at the Tevatron at $1\sigma$ level of accuracy. As we show, there is a
strong correlation between $A_{FB}^t$ and $A_{FB}^\ell$ in both models. The best fit to the relationship is
$A_{FB}^\ell \simeq 0.47 \times A_{FB}^t + 0.25\%$ and $A_{FB}^\ell \simeq 0.75 \times A_{FB}^t - 2.1\%$, for the axigluon model
and the $W^\prime$ model, respectively, both within $2\sigma$ of the D0 result. To generate $A_{FB}^\ell$ satisfying the data
to better than $1\sigma$ accuracy, a heavy $G^\prime$ (heavier than about $1$ TeV) is preferred, and a light $W^\prime$
(lighter than $600$ GeV) is favored.
We do not address the LHC case in this paper but may do so at a later time. Owing to the lack of definition of a forward direction
in a $p p$ collision, it is less straightforward to measure the two observables we discuss here.
\begin{acknowledgments}~The work of E.L.B., C.R.C. and H.Z. is supported in part by the U.S.
DOE under Grants No.~DE-AC02-06CH11357. H.Z. is also supported by DOE under the Grant No. DE-FG02-94ER40840.
The work of J.H.Y. is supported in part by the U.S. National Science Foundation
under Grand No. PHY-0855561.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction}
The Soft Gamma Repeaters are spectacular phenomena occurring in the
visible Universe. The giant flares detected so far show that the
peak luminosities are of order $10^{44} - 10^{46} erg/s$. One of the
most promising and widely accepted explanations are the magnetars
\cite{DT}. Magnetars are believed to be neutron stars with ultra
strong magnetic field responsible for the observed giant flares. The
huge amount of energy released in the giant flares can be explained
by the existence of ultra strong magnetic fields with strength of
the order (or larger than) $10^{14} - 10^{15}$ Gauss \cite{H, K}.
The giant flares SGR 0526-66, SGR 1900+14 and SGR 1806-20 detected
so far reveal the existence of characteristic quasi periodic
oscillations in the range of tenths of Hz to kHz \cite{SW}. These
oscillations are believed to be seismic vibrations of the magnetars.
If the hypotheses is true this will provide us with a tool to
investigate the stellar interior. That is why the quasi periodic
oscillations were intensively studied in the past years \cite{L} --
\cite{C2} (and references therein).
The study of the stelar interior by the quasi periodic oscillations
require adequate models of the internal structure of the magnetars.
In general, our understanding of magnetars as Soft Gamma Repeaters
is intimately related to the understanding their internal structure
and the construction of adequate models within General Relativity.
Clearly, the building of completely realistic magnetar models is a
formidable task. However, various simple relativistic models, more
or less realistic, could be built and these models provide us with
valuable physical insight into the internal structure of magnetars
\cite{BBGN} -- \cite{CFG}. The existing simple magnetar models are
based on Einstein-Maxwell equations coupled to the perfect fluid
hydrodynamical equations. In modeling magnetar equilibrium
configurations two main approaches have been followed so far. The
first approach is to numerically solve the coupled systems of
equations \cite{BBGN},\cite{BG}, \cite{CPL}, \cite{KY}. The second
approach is perturbative -- magnetar equilibrium configurations are
studied by using perturbative techniques, i.e. the
Einstein-Maxwell-hydrodynamic equations are solved by linearizing
them about a known static and spherically symmetric background
solution of Einstein-hydrodynamic equations and then expanding the
perturbed equations in tensor harmonics \cite{KOK1},
\cite{KOK2},\cite{IS},\cite{CFGP} -- \cite{CFG}. Due to the linear
character of the perturbative equations one can consider in a
relatively simple manner more complicated magnetic field
configurations as the simultaneous presence of poloidal and toroidal
magnetic fields.
In the present paper we also address the problem of constructing
equilibrium configurations of neutron stars with ultra strong
magnetic fields within the framework of General Relativity. Contrary
to the previous approaches mentioned above, our approach here is
fully analytical and nonperturbative and based on exact solutions.
Exact solutions provide a route to better and deeper understanding
of the inherent nonlinear character of gravity and its interaction
with matter. On the other hand, the exact solutions could serve as
tests for checking the computer codes which is important for the
advent of numerical relativity. More precisely, in this paper we
find exact interior solutions to the coupled
Einstein-Maxwell-hydrodynamic equations describing static
(nonrotating) equilibrium configurations of strongly magnetized
neutron stars. The interaction of the neutron star fluid with the
magnetic field is also taken into account to some extent.
\section{Setting of the problem and exact solutions}
Our starting point is the coupled Einstein-Maxwell-hydrodynamic
equations
\begin{eqnarray}
&&R_{\mu\nu}= 8\pi \left(T_{\mu\nu} -\frac{1}{2}Tg_{\mu\nu} \right)
+ 2 \left(F_{\mu\alpha}F_{\nu}^{\,\,\alpha} - \frac{1}{4}F^2
g_{\mu\nu}\right) \\
&&\nabla_{\nu} F^{\mu \nu}=4\pi J^{\mu}, \\
&&\nabla_{[\mu} F_{\nu\alpha]}=0
\end{eqnarray}
where $T_{\mu\nu}$ and
$T_{\mu\nu}^{EM}=\frac{1}{4\pi}\left(F_{\mu\alpha}F_{\nu}^{\,\,\alpha}
- \frac{1}{4}F^2 g_{\mu\nu} \right)$ are the energy-momentum tensors
of the neutron matter and the electromagnetic field, respectively.
$J^{\mu}$ is the current which sources the electromagnetic field.
Analytically solving of the coupled Einstein-Maxwell-hydrodynamic
equations in the general case is a desperate task and therefore we
need some simplifying assumptions. We will assume that the
configurations (and the spacetime itself) are strictly static
(nonrotating) and axially symmetric. In mathematical terms our
assumptions mean that there exist one (hypersurface orthogonal)
timelike Killing vector $\xi$ and one spacelike axial Killing vector
$\eta$, commuting with $\xi$ and with closed periodic orbits
shrinking down to zero on the axis of symmetry. In adapted
coordinates the Killing vectors can be written in the usual form
$\xi=\partial/\partial t$ and $\xi=\partial/\partial \phi$ where $t$
is the time coordinate and $\phi$ is the azimuthal angle around the
axis of symmetry. Our geometrical assumptions impose restrictions on
the possible configurations of the electromagnetic field and the
energy momentum tensor of the neutron star matter. More precisely,
they require the absence of meridional convective currents and
electric field. The geometric assumptions require also the
4-velocity of the neutron matter to be aligned with the timelike
Killing vector $\xi$.
The invariance of the Maxwell 2-form $F$ under the axial Killing
field $\eta$ and the absence of meridional currents allow us to
introduce a magnetic potential $\Phi$ defined by $d\Phi=i_{\eta}F$.
The Maxwell 2-form then is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
F= e^{-2u} \eta \wedge d\Phi,
\end{eqnarray}
where $e^{2u}=g(\eta,\eta)$. The magnetic field $B$ measured by a
comoving observer with 4-velocity $v^{\mu}$ is $B=i_{v}\star F$
where $\star$ is the Hodge dual.
In the models studied so far the neutron matter has been described
by an isotropic perfect fluid with $T_{\mu\nu}=(\rho +
p)v_{\mu}v_{\nu} + pg_{\mu\nu}$ where $\rho$, $p$ and $v^{\mu}$ are
the energy density, the pressure and the 4-velocity of the fluid.
The description of the neutron star matter as an isotropic perfect
fluid is not completely satisfactory because it neglects the
interaction of the neutron matter with the ultra strong magnetic
field. This problem is highly nontrivial and extremely difficult to
be solved completely. From first principles it is clear that the
strong magnetic field yields anisotropy in the neutron star matter
and this should be taken into account in the energy-momentum tensor
of the matter. Indeed, since the neutron has anomalous magnetic
momentum the neutron matter will react to the strong magnetic field
by polarizing itself due to the coupling of the neutron spin to the
magnetic field. The things can get even more complicated if we take
into account the possible manifestation of some quantum effects like
the spin-spin interactions which can drive the system to some kind
of feromagnetic-like state. In this context we should also note that
the origin of the ultra strong magnetar magnetic fields is not
completely clear and some sort of feromagnetic-like phase
transition could give contribution. Even more, the estimated
magnetic field on the magnetar surfaces mentioned above exceeds in
fact the QED critical magnetic field value $B_c\approx 10^{13} G$
which shows that the nonlinear Euler-Heisenberg electrodynamics
should be probably used instead of the linear Maxwell
electrodynamics. The above arguments show that the proper
description of the strong magnetic fields in the magnetars and the
properties of the neutron matter require subtle and extremely
complicated microscopic theory. The microscopic description of the
magnetars is far beyond the scope of this paper where we are
interested in the averaged macroscopic description which is
astrophysically relevant.
From a macroscopic point of view we can describe the interaction
(response) of the neutron matter with (to) the ultra strong magnetic
field by adding an anisotropic term to the energy-momentum tensor of
the isotropic perfect fluid. The anisotropy will manifest itself in
different pressures along the meridional planes of magnetic field
and in transverse direction. Indeed, according to the statistical
physics \cite{LL}, the pressure along the magnetic field is
$p=-\Omega$ while in transverse direction $p^{tr}=-\Omega -
B{\mu}=p -B{\mu}$ where $\Omega$ is the grand canonical potential
and $\mu$ is the megnetization. In general the dependences
$\Omega(B)$ and $\mu(B)$ should be highly nonlinear and can be
determined only by the microscopic theory. In ultra strong magnetic
field, as we mentioned, most of the neutron spins should be oriented
in the direction of the magnetic field which means that $\mu>0$.
This shows that $p^{tr}<p$ in ultra strong magnetic field. As we
will see later the exact solutions predict the same behaviour for
the transverse pressure for realistic equations of state.
The only anisotropic term which we can add and which is orthogonal
to the meridional planes and consistent with the geometrical
symmetries we imposed, is of the form $\sigma
e(\eta)_{\mu}e(\eta)_{\nu}$ where $\sigma$ is a scalar and
$e(\eta)^{\mu}$ is the unit vector along the axial Killing field
$\eta$. In other words we consider the following neutron star matter
energy-momentum tensor
\begin{eqnarray}\label{EMT1}
T_{\mu\nu}=(\rho + p)v_{\mu}v_{\nu} + pg_{\mu\nu} + \sigma
e(\eta)_{\mu}e(\eta)_{\nu}.
\end{eqnarray}
The energy-momentum tensor (\ref{EMT1}) can be also
written in the form
\begin{eqnarray}
T=\rho v \otimes v + (p+\sigma)e(\eta) \otimes e(\eta) + p \left[g +
v \otimes v - e(\eta)\otimes e(\eta)\right]
\end{eqnarray}
which shows that $p$ is the fluid pressure in the meridional planes
where the magnetic field lays and $p^{tr}=p+\sigma$ is the pressure
in direction orthogonal to the meridional planes and therefore
orthogonal to the magnetic field.
Armed with the energy-momentum tensor (\ref{EMT1}) we can write down
the dimensionally reduced equations. Here we will perform the
dimensional reduction with respect to the spacelike axial Killing
vector $\eta$. For this purpose we need to introduce the
3-dimensional Lorentzian metric
\begin{eqnarray}
H= e^{2u}g - \eta \otimes \eta,
\end{eqnarray}
where $e^{2u}=g(\eta,\eta)$. The covariant derivative associated
with the metric $H$ will be denoted by $D_i$. Then for the reduced
system of equations we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
&&D_{i}D^{i}u= - 4\pi e^{-2u}(\rho - p) - e^{-2u} D_i\Phi D^{i}\Phi
- 4\pi \sigma e^{-2u}, \label{equ}\\ \nonumber
\\ &&{\cal R}(H)_{ij}= 8\pi (\rho + p) v_i
v_j + 8\pi (\rho-p)e^{-2u}H_{ij} + 2D_iu D_ju + 2e^{-2u} D_{i}\Phi
D_{j}\Phi, \label{eqR}
\\ \nonumber \\
&&D_{i}\left(e^{-2u}D^{i}\Phi\right)=4\pi
e^{-4u}J_{\phi},\label{eqJ}
\end{eqnarray}
along with the contracted Bianchi identity
\begin{eqnarray}
(\rho + p)D_{i} U + D_{i}p= -e^{-2u}J_{\phi} D_{i}\Phi + \sigma
D_{i} u. \label{bianchi}
\end{eqnarray}
Here ${\cal R}(H)_{ij}$ is the Ricci tensor with respect to the
3-metric $H_{ij}$, $e^{2U}=-g(\xi,\xi)$ and
$J_{\phi}=\eta^{\mu}J_{\mu}$.
Our main task now is to solve the system of coupled partial
differential equations (\ref{equ})--(\ref{bianchi}). Our strategy
for solving (\ref{equ})--(\ref{bianchi}) is to "add nonlinearly"
magnetic field to a known static and axisymmetric solution to
Einstein-hydrodynamic equations (i.e. without magnetic field)
described by the set $\{\rho^{0},p^{0},v_i^{0},u^{0}, H_{ij}^{0}\}$.
In order to do so we partially follow \cite{Y} where a method for
generating exact charged interior solutions was developed. We shall
assume that $u$ and $\Phi$ depend on the space coordinates through
one function $\chi$, i.e. $u=u(\chi)$ and $\Phi(\chi)$. Substituting
into eq.(\ref{eqR}) we find
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal R}(H)_{ij}= 8\pi (\rho + p) v_i v_j + 8\pi
(\rho-p)e^{-2u}H_{ij} + 2 \left[\left(\frac{du}{d\chi}\right)^2 +
e^{-2u}\left(\frac{d\Phi}{d\chi}\right)^2\right] D_{i}\chi
D_{j}\chi.
\end{eqnarray}
If we impose the relations
\begin{eqnarray}\label{new1}
H_{ij}=H^{0}_{ij},\;\; \chi=u^{0},\;\; \rho=\rho^{0}
e^{2u(\chi)-2\chi}, \;\; p=p^{0} e^{2u(\chi)-2\chi}, \;\;
v_i=e^{\chi- u(\chi)} v_i^{0}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}\label{new2}
\frac{d\Phi}{d\chi} = \pm
e^{u(\chi)}\sqrt{1-\left(\frac{du(\chi)}{d\chi}\right)^2}
\end{eqnarray}
we obtain that eq.(\ref{eqR}) is automatically satisfied since
$\{\rho^{0},p^{0},v_i^{0},u^{0}, H_{ij}^{0}\}$ is a solution to the
static, axisymmetric Einstein-hydrodymanic equations by definition.
Then we can use eqs. (\ref{equ}) and (\ref{eqJ}) to find $\sigma$
and $J_{\phi}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\sigma=
-(\rho^{0}-p^{0})e^{2u(\chi)-2\chi}\left(1-\frac{du(\chi)}{d\chi}\right)
-\frac{e^{2u(\chi)}}{4\pi}\left[\frac{d^2u(\chi)}{d\chi^2} +
e^{-2u(\chi)}\left(\frac{d\Phi(\chi)}{d\chi}\right)^2 \right]
D_i\chi D^i\chi, \label{sigma_new} \nonumber \\ \\
&& J_{\phi}= - \frac{d\Phi(\chi)}{d\chi} (\rho^{0}-p^{0})
e^{2u(\chi) - 2\chi} + \frac{e^{4u(\chi)}}{4\pi}
\frac{d}{d\chi}\left[e^{-2u(\chi)}\frac{d\Phi(\chi)}{d\chi}\right]D_i\chi
D^i\chi \label{J_new}.
\end{eqnarray}
It can be checked that eq. (\ref{bianchi}) is automatically
satisfied. Let us summarize the results in the following
\medskip
\noindent
{\bf Proposition.} {\it Let $\{\rho^{0},p^{0},v_i^{0},u^{0}=\chi,
H_{ij}^{0}\}$ be a solution to the Einstein-hydrodynamic equations
with isotropic perfect fluid and $u(\chi)$ is an arbitrary function
of $\chi$ with \\$\left(\frac{du(\chi)}{d\chi}\right)<1$. Then
$\{\rho, p, \sigma, v_i, H_{ij}=H_{ij}^{0}, u(\chi), \Phi(\chi),
J_{\phi}\}$ given by (\ref{new1}), (\ref{new2}), (\ref{sigma_new})
and (\ref{J_new}) form a solution to the
Einstein-Maxwell-hydrodynamic equations
(\ref{equ})--(\ref{bianchi}).}
\medskip
\noindent
This proposition allows to construct exact interior solutions with
arbitrary equation of state for the background solution. The only
exception is the case with stiff equation of state $\rho^{0}=p^{0}$
which is very special and will not be considered here.
The 4-dimensional metric can be easily recovered form the data we
have. Namely, if
\begin{eqnarray}
ds^2_{0}= e^{2\chi}d\phi^2 + g^{0}_{ij}dx^idx^{j}
\end{eqnarray}
is the spacetime metric of the Einstein-hydrodynamic solution, then
\begin{eqnarray}
ds^2= e^{2u(\chi)}d\phi^2 + e^{-2u(\chi) +
2\chi}g^{0}_{ij}dx^idx^{j}
\end{eqnarray}
is the spacetime metric of the Einstein-Maxwell-hydrodynamic
solution, i.e of the magnetized solution.
From a physical point of view we have to impose some restrictions on
the functional dependence $u=u(\chi)$. More precisely, in order for
the new solution to possess a well defined axis of symmetry the
function $u(\chi)$ should be of the form
\begin{eqnarray}\label{form_u}
u(\chi)=\chi + f(e^{2\chi}),
\end{eqnarray}
where $f(\chi)$ is a regular function with $f(0)=0$. In this way the
new solution will inherit the axis of symmetry from the background
solution used for its generation.
\section{Explicit exact solution}
Now we consider a physically interesting and realistic explicit
solution with $\sigma$ and $J_{\phi}$ vanishing on the star surface.
The solution is obtained by requiring $u(\chi)$ and $\Phi(\chi)$ to
satisfy the equations of the affinely parameterized geodesics of the
2-dimensional metric $dl^2=du^2 + e^{-2u}d\Phi^2$, i.e. the
equations
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\frac{d^2u(\chi)}{d\chi^2} +
e^{-2u(\chi)}\left(\frac{d\Phi(\chi)}{d\chi}\right)^2 =0, \\
&&\frac{d}{d\chi}\left[e^{-2u(\chi)}\frac{d\Phi(\chi)}{d\chi}\right]=0.
\end{eqnarray}
This requirement considerably simplifies equations (\ref{sigma_new})
and (\ref{J_new}). The solution of the above equations is
\begin{eqnarray}
&&e^{2u(\chi)}= \frac{e^{2\chi}}{\left(1 + b^2 e^{2\chi}\right)^2},\\
&&\Phi(\chi)= b \frac{e^{2\chi}}{1 + b^2 e^{2\chi}},
\end{eqnarray}
where $b$ is an arbitrary parameter\footnote{The other parameter has
been appropriately chosen in order to have a well defined axis. }.
One can see that $u(\chi)$ is of the form (\ref{form_u}) and
therefore the solution has a well defined axis of symmetry. The
physical meaning of the parameter $b$ can be uncovered as follows.
For the strength of the magnetic field we have
\begin{eqnarray}
{\vec B}^2= \frac{1}{2} F^2 = e^{-2\chi}
\left(\frac{d\Phi(\chi)}{d\chi}\right)^2 g^{0\,ij}\partial_{i}\chi
\partial_{j}\chi= \frac{4b^2}{\left(1 +
b^2e^{2\chi}\right)^4} g^{0\,ij}
\partial_{i}e^{\chi}\partial_{j}e^{\chi}.
\end{eqnarray}
Taking into account the space is locally Euclidian in small
neighborhood of the axis and the fact that $e^{2\chi}|_{axis}=0$, it
is not difficult to find the strength $B_{0}$ of the magnetic field
on the axis
\begin{eqnarray}
B_{0}^2= 4b^2.
\end{eqnarray}
In fact $B_{0}$ is also the strength of the magnetic field on the
north or south pole of the star surface. So the parameter $b$ can be
interpreted as being one half of the north pole magnetic field
strength, i.e. $b=\frac{1}{2}B_{0}$.
In order to be more specific we will consider a spherically
symmetric background solution. Also we will present the background
solution in the widely used Schwarzschild coordinates $r$ and
$\theta$ with
\begin{eqnarray}
g^{0}_{\theta\theta}= r^2, \;\;
g^{0}_{\phi\phi}=e^{2\chi}=r^2\sin^2\theta.
\end{eqnarray}
Then our magnetized solution is as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
&&ds^2 = \Lambda^{2} \left(g^{0}_{tt}dt^2 + g^{0}_{rr}dr^2 +
r^{2}d\theta^2\right) + \Lambda^{-2} r^2\sin^2\theta d\phi^2, \\\nonumber \\
&&\rho= \Lambda^{-2}\rho^{0}, \;\; p= \Lambda^{-2}p^{0}, \\ \nonumber \\
&&\Phi= \frac{1}{2}\Lambda^{-1}B_{0}r^2\sin^2\theta, \\ \nonumber \\
&&\sigma = -\frac{1}{2}B^2_{0} \Lambda^{-3}(\rho^{0}-p^{0})
r^2\sin^2\theta \label{sigma_ss},\\ \nonumber \\
&&J_{\phi}= - B_{0}\Lambda^{-4} (\rho^{0}-p^{0})r^2\sin^2\theta,
\label{J_ss}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\Lambda= 1 + \frac{1}{4}B^2_{0} r^2\sin^2\theta.
\end{eqnarray}
The nonzero components of the magnetic field are
\begin{eqnarray}
&&B_{r}= -B_{0}\Lambda^{-1}\sqrt{g^{0}_{rr}} \cos\theta,\\ \nonumber \\
&&B_{\theta} =
B_{0}\Lambda^{-1}\frac{r\sin\theta}{\sqrt{g^{0}_{rr}}}.
\end{eqnarray}
We see that when the background solution has a well defined boundary
at $r=R$ corresponding to the star surface where $p^{0}(R)=0$, the
same is true for the magnetized solution, i.e. $p(R)=0$ since
$p=\Lambda^2 p^{0}$. Moreover, if $\rho^{0}$ also vanishes on the
star surface the same holds for $\sigma$ and $J_{\phi}$ according to
(\ref{sigma_ss}) and (\ref{J_ss}). As we should expect the
anisotropy pressure $\sigma$ is yielded by the magnetic field and
vanishes for zero magnetic field. Also, as we discussed in Section
2, the transverse pressure $p^{tr}=p + \sigma$ should be smaller
than $p$ in strong magnetic field. Indeed we see that for realistic
equations of state for the background solutions, i.e. for
$\rho^{0}\ge p^{0}$ we have $\sigma\le 0$.
In order to describe the way in which the magnetic field deforms the
star we consider the space metric on the star surface, namely
\begin{eqnarray}
dl^2_s= R^2 \left(\Lambda_{s}^2 d\theta^2 + \Lambda_{s}^{-2}
\sin^2\theta d\phi^2\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Lambda_s=1 + \frac{1}{4}B^2_{0}R^2\sin^2\theta$. The
circumference about the equator ($\theta=\pi/2$) is
\begin{eqnarray}
L_{e}=\int^{2\pi}_{0} \Lambda_{s}^{-1} R d\phi = \frac{2\pi R}{1 +
\frac{1}{4}B^2_{0}R^2},
\end{eqnarray}
while for the polar circumference ($\phi=const$) we have
\begin{eqnarray}
L_{p}= 2\int^{\pi}_{0} \Lambda_{s} R d\theta= 2\pi R \left (1
+\frac{1}{8}B^2_{0}R^2 \right).
\end{eqnarray}
The surface elipticity $\varepsilon_{surf}$ is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\varepsilon_{surf}= \frac{L_e - L_p}{L_p}
\end{eqnarray}
and $\varepsilon_{surf}<0$ for $B_{0}\ne 0$. Therefore, for the
solution under consideration the magnetic field elongates the star
along the magnetic field -- the star is prolate in shape\footnote{It
is worth noting that the negative surface elipticity is a
characteristic of the specific solution we consider. In principle
the more general solutions which can be generated via our
proposition may give positive elipticity. In those cases,
however,the current $J_{\phi}$ and anisotropy pressure $\sigma$ do
not vanish on the star surface}. For small $B^2_{0}R^2$ we have
$\varepsilon_{surf}\approx -\frac{3}{8}B^2_{0}R^2$. Here we should
note that the numerical and perturbative models with pure poloidal
magnetic field predict positive surface elipticity. The reason for
that discrepancy is the fact that the perturbative and numeric
models consider the neutron star matter as pure isotropic perfect
fluid without taking into account the anisotropy caused by the
interaction with magnetic field.
The next physical quantity we shall consider is the total energy $M$
concentrated in the star
\begin{eqnarray}
M= - \frac{1}{4\pi} \int_{Star} R^{t}_{t}\sqrt{-g}d^3x =
\int_{Star}\left(\rho + 3p + \sigma + \frac{1}{4\pi}{\vec B}^2
\right)\sqrt{-g}d^3x.
\end{eqnarray}
Taking into account (\ref{new1}) and $(\ref{sigma_new})$ we find
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Mass}
M= M_{0} + \frac{1}{2} B^2_{0} \int^{R}_{r=0}\int^{\pi}_{\theta=0}
\left[\Lambda^{-2}\!\left(\frac{\sin^2\theta}{g^{0}_{rr}} +
\cos^2\theta\!\right) \right. \\ \nonumber \\\left. -
2\pi\Lambda^{-1}(\rho_0 -p_{0})r^2\sin^2\theta
\right]\!\sqrt{|g^{0}_{tt}|g^{0}_{rr}}r^2\sin\theta drd\theta
\nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
M_{0}=\int_{Star}\left(\rho_{0} + 3p_{0}\right)\sqrt{-g^{0}}d^3x
\end{eqnarray}
is the total energy of the background solution. The explicit form of
$M$ depends of the background solution but we can give a good
approximation by using the interior Schwarzschild solution as a
representative example of a background solution. The interior
Schwarzschild solution is characterized by a constant energy density
$\rho_{0}=3 M_{0}/4\pi R^3$ and the metric and pressure are given by
\begin{eqnarray}
&&ds^2_{0}= -\!\left[{3\over 2}\left( 1- {2M_{0}\over R}
\right)^{1/2} \!\!- {1\over 2}\left(1 - {2M_{0}\over
R^3}r^2\right)^{1/2} \right]^2\! dt^2 + \frac{dr^2}{1 -
\frac{2M_{0}}{R^3}r^2} +
r^2 \left(d\theta^2 + \sin^2\theta d\phi^2 \right) , \nonumber \\ \\
&&p_{0} = {3M_{0}\over 4\pi R^3} \left[\left(1-
\frac{2M_{0}}{R^3}r^2\right)^{1/2} - \left(1- \frac{2M_{0}}{R}
\right)^{1/2}\over 3\left(1- \frac{2M_{0}}{R} \right)^{1/2} -
\left(1- \frac{2M_{0}}{R^3}r^2\right)^{1/2}\right]. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
The mass-radius ratio satisfies the inequality $2M_{0}/R<8/9$.
Substituting the interior Schwarzschild solution into (\ref{Mass})
and performing calculations up to terms in the order $B^2_{0}R^2$,
we find
\begin{eqnarray}
M=M_{0} + \frac{1}{3} B^2_{0} R^3\left(1-
\frac{1}{5}B_{0}^2R^2\right) \left(1- \frac{2M_{0}}{R}\right) +
{\cal O}\left((B_{0}R)^4\right).
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper we presented a simple method for generating exact
interior solutions to the static and axisymmetric
Einstein-Maxwell-hydrodynamic equations with anisotropic perfect
fluid. On this base we can build simple nonperturbative analytical
relativistic models of the magnetars. To the best of our knowledge
these are the first nonperturbative analytical relativistic models
of the magnetars with arbitrary equation of state. As an
illustration we gave an explicit realistic exact interior solution
for the magnetars and on its base we calculated the suraface
elipticity of the star and its energy.
The present work could be extended in several directions. It would
interesting and important more general configurations of the
magnetic field, i.e. a mixture of poloidal amd toroidal magnetic
fields to be investigated. The next interesting extension is to
add rotation to the star. The mentioned possible extensions are very
challenging due to the highly nonlinear character of the Einstein
equations. We hope, however, that some progress could be made.
\vspace{1.5ex}
\begin{flushleft}
\large\bf Acknowledgments
\end{flushleft}
The author would like to thank K. Kokkotas and D. Doneva for reading
the manuscript and the discussions. The author would like to thank
the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation for the support, and the
Institut f\"ur Theoretische Astrophysik T\"ubingen for its kind
hospitality. He also acknowledges partial financial support from the
Bulgarian National Science Fund under Grant DO 02-257 and by Sofia
University Research Fund under Grant 88/2011.
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:introduction}
For macroscopic systems, the second law of thermodynamics prescribes ever-increasing entropy. In fact,
decreases of entropy are permitted on short time scales. When the dynamics of small quantum systems on short time scales is studied, the flow of information between the environment and the system can be important [\cite{Waldram.1985.book}]. In a microscopic theory, there are three major effects of the environment (or bath) on the system. The first two are dissipation, which removes excess energy from the system, and fluctuations, which supply energy. These two effects are related through the fluctuation dissipation theorem, which assures that the correct finite temperature equilibrium state is reached. The third one, which is less well known outside the fields of nonlinear optics and NMR, is the presence of entanglement between system and environment states. This third effect plays a major role if the system bath interaction is strong, or if the characteristic time scale of the noise induced by the environment is slow compared to typical system time scales. It is the origin of a rephasing signal in photon echo and NMR echo measurements.
The dynamics of a quantum system in contact with a bath is described theoretically by deriving an equation of motion for the reduced density matrix, which includes only the system degrees of freedom. It is often assumed that the characteristic time scale of motion in the environment is much shorter than anything that happens in the system. This approximation is convenient, because it allows the derivation of a closed equation of motion for the reduced density matrix. In particular, no information about the history of the dynamics can be stored in the bath, and the equation of motion is local in time. The requirements that the trace of the density matrix must be preserved, and that the diagonal matrix elements must be positive in any basis then lead to a master equation in the Lindblad form [\cite{BPbook, Lidar.2001.cp.268.35}]. The dissipation operators that appear in this equation can be specified by modeling the environment and its interaction with the system. Because of the fast bath approximation, commonly used in association with secular approximations [\cite{Fassioli.2010.jcpl.1.2139}], the master equation approach does not properly include the fluctuations caused by the bath. On the other hand, stochastic Liouville equations, which do treat the fluctuations correctly, neglect the dissipation [\cite{Tanimura.2006.jpsj.75.082001}].
The restriction to an environment with much faster dynamics than the system breaks down for many systems studied in ultrafast nonlinear optics and NMR. In addition, it is not valid at low temperature, when a correct quantum mechanical description of the bath introduces additional time scales determined by the Matsubara frequencies. Obviously, the dynamics becomes more complex in this situation. Although strong system bath interaction can be included [\cite{Jang.2008.jcp.129.101104, Nazir.2009.prl.103.146404}], the key difference with the Lindblad formalism is the presence of memory. An environment which is not infinitely fast (compared to typical time scales in the system) can store information about the past. This information can subsequently flow back into the system, influencing the dynamics. Such memory effects can be included in master equations. These can, however, usually not describe a second key effect of a slower environment: the presence of correlated superpositions of the system and the environment in the initial state [\cite{Suarez.1992.jcp.97.5101}]. Because such correlations introduce a second source of memory, they cannot in general be ignored.
The idea that the flow of information from the environment back to the system can be used to quantify the extent of memory in a non-Markovian quantum process has been developed by \cite{Breuer.2009.prl.103.210401} and \cite{Laine.2010.pra.81.062115}. In a memoryless situation, two system states that are initially a certain distance apart, will only get closer during the time evolution. Therefore, when states are found that grow farther apart, the time evolution can be called non-Markovian. By introducing distance measures on the space of system states, these ideas can be made precise, resulting in a measure for non-Markovianity that depends only on system degrees of freedom.
Once such theoretical measures have been introduced, the question arises how they can be measured in experiment. In principle, quantum state tomography yields the complete quantum state of the system [\cite{Kuah.2007.pra.76.042113, Mohseni.2010.pra.81.032102}]. Once this measurement has been performed, any quantity that is a functional of the reduced density matrix can be calculated. However, this process is rather cumbersome and indirect. More straightforward methods to quantify concepts such as entanglement and non-Markovianity from experiments are welcome [\cite{Xu.2010.pra.81.044105, Cramer.2011.prl.106.020401}].
Experiments that can achieve this goal are found in the field of nonlinear optics. Observables such as the photon echo and two-dimensional optical spectroscopy depend on multiple time intervals, and are sensitive to memory effects that extend over several of these intervals [\cite{Mukamel.2009.acr.42.1207, Engel.2007.nature.446.782}].
In this paper, we show how correlations between the system and the environment are of critical importance for the non-Markovianity. In particular, for a simple model environment the dynamics is completely Markovian if the initial state does not include such correlations, while it becomes non-Markovian if correlations are allowed to be present. We describe the generation of initial correlations during a preparation time and discuss the close connection with the nonlinear optical response.
\section{Trace distance and non-Markovianity}
For a classical stochastic process, the meaning of "Markovian" is clear [\cite{VanKampen.1981.book}]: the future depends only on the present state, and not on the past. In the case of a Gaussian process, its correlation function must be exponential to have Markovianity. In the quantum case, we will define Markovianity following \cite{Laine.2010.pra.81.062115}, although other approaches have been proposed as well [\cite{Rivas.2010.prl.105.050403}]. As explained in the Introduction, the definition is based on the distance between a pair of quantum states.
A convenient measure is given by the trace distance $D$ between two density matrices $\rho^A$ and $\rho^B$, which is defined as
\begin{equation}
D(\rho^A, \rho^B) = \frac{1}{2} \ensuremath{\mathrm{Tr}}_S \sqrt{(\rho^A - \rho^B)^2},
\end{equation}
or half the sum of the square root of the eigenvalues of $(\rho^A - \rho^B)^2$. The subscript S in the trace indicates that it is taken over system degrees of freedom, in contrast with trace operations over the environment which we will encounter later.
In an ergodic system, any initial state will evolve in time until it reaches a single well-defined equilibrium. If there is no memory in the bath, the dynamics can only bring the system closer to equilibrium. Because no information can flow from the environment to the system, the distance between a pair of initial states will decrease with time. This is the case in memory-less approaches such as the Lindblad master equation. Memory in the bath means that the bath stores information about the system at a previous point in time, which affects the dynamics. The extra information opens the possibility of temporary time evolution in the unnatural direction. This suggest that non-Markovianity can be measured by studying how much two states move away from each other. In the definition given by \cite{Laine.2010.pra.81.062115}, this quantity is studied by defining the change in the trace distance
\begin{equation}
\sigma(t; \rho^A(0), \rho^B(0)) = \frac{\mathrm d}{\mathrm dt} D(\rho^A(t), \rho^B(t)),
\end{equation}
which is integrated over time to define the non-Markovianity
\begin{equation}
\mathcal N(G) = \mathrm{max} \int_{\sigma > 0} \mathrm{d}t \sigma(t; \rho^A(0), \rho^B(0)).
\end{equation}
The maximum is taken over all combinations of initial states $\rho^A(0)$ and $\rho^B(0)$. This measure is based on the distinguishability of the two trajectories.
Although the trace distance can be defined for two density matrices of any shape, it takes a particularly simple form for a two-level system. In this case, the matrix elements of a density matrix are written in a given basis as
\begin{equation}
\rho = \left( \begin{array}{cc} \rho_{11} & \rho_{12} \\ \rho_{12}^* & 1-\rho_{11} \end{array} \right).
\end{equation}
The trace distance between $\rho^A$ and $\rho^B$ is found as
\begin{equation} \label{trd2ls}
D(\rho^A, \rho^B) = \sqrt{(\rho^A_{11} - \rho^B_{11})^2 + |\rho^A_{12} - \rho^B_{12}|^2}.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Initial correlations}
Although the (statistical) state of the system's degrees of freedom at any point in time is completely described by the reduced density matrix, this is nevertheless not the complete story. During the time evolution, the system gets entangled with the environment [\cite{Lopez.2008.prl.101.080503}]. If the time scale of the environment is not very short, this will influence the state of the system at later points in time. Therefore, the presence of classical or quantum mechanical correlations between system and environment affects dynamic measures like the non-Markovianity, although they are not explicitly present in the reduced description. Although correlations are automatically produced during the time evolution, leading to non-Markovianity, they can also be present in the initial state. These initial correlations contribute to the non-Markovianity as well and should be included in a proper description. To see this explicitly, we denote the complete density matrix including all system as well as bath degrees of freedom as $R(t)$. Its matrix elements in the system subspace are still operators on the bath degrees of freedom. Because the system and bath taken together form a normal quantum system, the complete density matrix evolves coherently in time, as dictated by the complete Hamiltonian $H$. We can define a propagator $G$ which propagates the density matrix as $R(t) = G(t - t_0) R(t_0)$, which is given by $G(t - t_0) = \exp(-i H^\times (t-t_0)/\hbar)$. The notation $H^\times A = [H, A]$ denotes the commutator. The reduced density matrix, which operates only on the Hilbert space of the system, is found by taking the partial trace over the bath, $\rho(t) = \ensuremath{\mathrm{tr}}_B R(t)$. For a factorized initial state, $R(t_0) = \rho(t_0) R_B(t_0)$, the time evolution can be written as a dynamical map $\rho(t) = \Phi(t; t_0) \rho(t_0)$.
However, in the case of a slow environment, it is not clear why initial correlations between system and bath states can be neglected and the factorization assumption may break down. This means that the complete density matrix cannot be written in the form $R(0) = \rho(0) R_B(0)$, where $R_B(0)$ is a density matrix in the Hilbert space of the bath. Instead, each matrix element in the system space may depend on the bath in its own way. The difference between uncorrelated and fully correlated equilibrium density matrices, which are given by $\exp(-\beta H) / \ensuremath{\mathrm{Tr}} \exp(-\beta H)$, has been studied recently by \cite{Smirne.2010.pra.82.062114} and is readily observable in the optical response [\cite{Uchiyama.2010.pra.82.044104}].
To study the effect of more general initial correlations, we introduce a preparation time. This method allows us to interpolate between an uncorrelated state and the properly correlated equilibrium. An initially uncorrelated state is allowed to evolve for a time $t_1$, during which correlations are formed. The dynamics of the thus obtained correlated state at time zero is then followed during a time $t_2$. For $t_1 = 0$, correlations between system and bath are absent, while for a long enough preparation time maximum correlation is reached.
\section{Model}
The coherent time evolution of the system is given by a Hamiltonian $H_\mathrm{S}$. We employ a commonly used model for the environment that includes the complete quantum mechanical behaviour of bath modes, yet is flexible enough to be solved to a certain degree. In this model, the bath modes are harmonic oscillators, which couple linearly to the system. The Hamiltonian for the bath and its coupling to the system is given by
\begin{equation}
H_\mathrm{B} + H_\mathrm{SB} = \sum_\alpha \left(\frac{p_\alpha^2}{2 m_\alpha} + \frac{1}{2} m_\alpha \omega_\alpha^2 x_\alpha^2 \right) - \sum_\alpha g_\alpha x_\alpha V.
\end{equation}
Here, $\alpha$ indexes the bath modes, which have coordinates $x_\alpha$, momenta $p_\alpha$ and masses $m_\alpha$. $V$ denotes any operator on the Hilbert space of the system, which couples to the bath modes with strength $g_\alpha$. All necessary information about the system bath interaction is contained in the spectral density $J(\omega) = \frac{\pi}{2} \sum_\alpha \frac{g_\alpha^2}{m_\alpha \omega_\alpha} \delta(\omega - \omega_\alpha)$ and the temperature $T$. The correlation function can be written as the inverse Fourier transform of the spectral density as
\begin{equation} \label{cf}
L(t) = \frac{1}{\pi} \int_{0}^\infty \mathrm{d}\omega J(\omega) \left( \coth \beta \hbar \omega/2 \cos \omega t - i \sin \omega t\right).
\end{equation}
Its real part corresponds to the fluctuations, which are a function of the inverse temperature $\beta = 1/k_B T$ ($k_B$ is the Boltzmann constant), whereas the imaginary part is the dissipation.
Because the statistics for linear coupling to a harmonic bath is the same as for a Gaussian process, multi-point correlations functions are redundant (they can be evaluated using Wick's theorem), and are not necessary for the calculation of the propagator. In the classical limit, the bath can be modeled by a stochastic process. The time evolution is then given by a stochastic Liouville equation, which can include initial correlations [\cite{Ban.2010.pra.82.022111}] and is suitable for the calculation of the nonlinear response [\cite{Jansen.2004.jcp.121.10577}].
To simplify the analytical treatment, we will describe the situation where the system-bath interaction commutes with the system Hamiltonian, $[V, H_S] = 0$, such that the exact dynamics becomes second order in the system-bath interaction [\cite{Ishizaki.2008.chemphys.347.185, Nan.2009.jcp.130.134106, Ban.2010.pla.374.2324}]. For an overdamped Brownian oscillator spectral density, the non-commuting case can be handled efficiently using the hierarchy of equations of motion approach [\cite{Tanimura.2006.jpsj.75.082001, Shi.2009.jcp.130.164518}].
Although the system Hamiltonian can be chosen freely, we will for definiteness focus on a two-level system. In the basis of its eigenstates, the system Hamiltonian is diagonal, with matrix elements $0$ and $\epsilon$. The system-bath interaction causes dephasing in the excited state, and $H_\mathrm{SB}$ has matrix elements $0$ and $\delta\epsilon(X)$, where the fact that $\delta\epsilon$ is an operator on the bath degrees of freedom is indicated explicitly by the notation $(X)$.
In a linear response experiment, the system is brought out of equilibrium by an external pulse, and the subsequent time evolution is probed. Non-Markovianity during the evolution time can occur in two ways. Firstly, it can be caused by memory in the system bath interaction during the evolution time. A second source of non-Markovianity are initial correlations between the system and the environment, which are present at the time the impulsive force interacts with the system. Such correlations can be studied in detail using nonlinear experiments, involving multiple pulses.
\section{Results}
\subsection{Trace distance as a function of a single time}
When a system is initially in a factorized state, the only source of non-Markovianity is the buildup of system bath correlations during the time evolution. Suppose that two initial density matrices are given by $R^A(0)$ and $R^B(0)$. We make the usual assumption (which we want to relax later) that the system can be separated from the bath, and that the bath is in thermal equilibrium. The complete density matrix is then written as the direct product of a system part and a bath part, $R^A(0) = \rho^A(0) \exp(-\beta H_B) / \ensuremath{\mathrm{Tr}}_B \exp(-\beta H_B)$, where the reduced density matrix is $\rho^A(0) = \ensuremath{\mathrm{Tr}}_B R^A(0)$. Similar relations are written for $R^B(0)$. Such factorized initial conditions are typically found in electronic resonant spectroscopy, where the thermal energy is much smaller than the electronic excitation energy. The equilibrium density matrix then only contains population in the ground state, given by $\rho_\mathrm{eq} = |1\rangle\langle1|$. From this state, one can create any factorized initial state by applying an impulsive external interaction $\rho^{A/B}(0) = U \rho_\mathrm{eq}$, where $U$ denotes a Liouville operator.
The time evolution of the complete density matrix is given by coherent evolution
\begin{equation}
R^A(t) = \exp(-i H^\times t/\hbar) R^A(0) = \exp(-i(H_S^\times + H_B^\times + H_{SB}^\times)t/\hbar) R^A(0).
\end{equation}
We assume that the system Hamiltonian commutes with the system-bath interaction. In the interaction picture with respect to the bath Hamiltonian, the time evolution of the reduced density matrix then becomes
\begin{equation}
\rho^A(t) = \exp(-i H_S^\times t/\hbar) \langle \exp_+(-\frac{i}{\hbar} \int_0^t \mathrm{d}\tau H_{SB}^{\times I}(\tau)) \rangle \rho^A(0),
\end{equation}
where $\langle \cdots \rangle = \ensuremath{\mathrm{Tr}}_B \cdots \exp(-\beta H_B) / \ensuremath{\mathrm{Tr}}_B \exp(-\beta H_B)$ and $\exp_+$ denotes the time ordered exponential.
The evaluation of the average over the bath is a standard calculation, giving
\begin{equation}
\langle \exp_+(-\frac{i}{\hbar} \int_0^t \mathrm{d}\tau H_{SB}^{\times I}(\tau)) \rangle = \exp(-\frac{1}{\hbar^2} \int_0^t \mathrm{d}t' \int_0^{t'} \mathrm{d}t'' \langle H_{SB}^{\times I}(t') H_{SB}^{\times I}(t'')\rangle),
\end{equation}
which for the coherences reduces to $\exp(-g(t))$, while the populations are constant in time. The dephasing function is given by
\begin{equation} \label{gt}
g(t) = \frac{1}{\hbar^2} \int_0^t \mathrm{d}t' \int_0^{t'} \mathrm{d}t'' L(t''),
\end{equation}
with the correlation function $L(t)$ given by Fourier transforms of the spectral density according to equation \ref{cf} [\cite{Mukamel.1995.book}].
For a two-level system, the trace distance between two density matrices which are initially prepared as $\rho^A(0)$ and $\rho^B(0)$ can be readily evaluated using equation \ref{trd2ls}. It is found to be
\begin{equation}
D(\rho^A(t), \rho^B(t)) = \sqrt{(\rho^A_{11}(0) - \rho^B_{11}(0))^2 + |\rho^A_{12}(0) - \rho^B_{12}(0)|^2 \exp(-2 \Re g(t))}.
\end{equation}
Because we study the pure dephasing case, the populations $\rho^A_{11}$ and $\rho^B_{11}$ are constant in time, while the coherences evolve according to the dephasing function $g(t)$. While the dephasing function contains an imaginary (dissipative) part, which causes a time-dependent shift in the effective frequency, only the real part appears in the trace distance.
If two state are prepared at time zero with initial populations, the trace distance simplifies to
\begin{equation}
D(\rho^A(t), \rho^B(t)) = D(\rho^A(0), \rho^B(0)) \exp(-\Re g(t)).
\end{equation}
In this case, the trace distance is directly related to the dephasing function. It is important to notice that the non-Markovianity only depends on the fluctuation part of the bath contribution, represented by the real part of $g(t)$. Thus, one cannot reveal this effect
from Lindblad-like quantum master equations, which only includes the dissipative
part of bath contribution properly. However, stochastic Liouville equations may be useful for the study of non-Markovianity.
We are now in a position to analyse the conditions for which the dynamics is non-Markovian.
According to the definition of the non-Markovianity, the dynamics is non-Markovian only if the trace distance between two density matrices increases with time. The time derivative of the trace distance is found to be $\dot D(t) = - \Re \dot g(t) \exp(-\Re g(t))$. Because the exponential of a real number is always positive, the time derivative can be positive only if $\Re \dot g(t) < 0$. From the definition in equation \ref{gt}, the time derivative is $\dot g(t) = \int_0^t \mathrm{d}\tau L(\tau) / \hbar^2$. We see that the trace distance can only increase if the real part of the correlation function is negative, and sufficiently negative. Although the relation between the trace distance and the dephasing function is more complex in the general case where $\rho^A_{11} \neq \rho^B_{11}$, the populations do not influence the question whether the dynamics is Markovian. Non-Markovian time evolution is found if the trace distance increases at a certain point in time. Because the trace distance is a positive quantity, its derivative is given by a positive constant times $-\Re \dot g(t)$ also in the case of different populations. The previous analysis therefore applies, even though the value of the non-Markovianity will be different.
However, because we started from initial states where the system and bath are factorized, this treatment does not include initial correlations between the system and the bath. To study their effect, we next study the non-Markovianity after an initial preparation time.
\subsection{Trace distance as a function of two times}
To include initial correlations, we consider a preparation time. Starting from an state that factorizes into system and bath parts, which can be created as $\rho^0 = U \rho_\mathrm{eq} = U|1\rangle\langle 1|$ in optical experiments, the sample evolves during a time $t_1$. During this time correlations between the system and the bath form. An impulsive external force $U'$ is then applied to the system, after which time evolution takes place during an interval $t_2$. The time variables are illustrated in figure \ref{fig:schema}. The non-Markovianity during the time $t_2$ can now be caused by two effects: correlations that build up during $t_2$, as well as initial correlations present at the moment the external force interacts with the system, which are the result of the preparation.
The density matrix after evolution during two times is given by $\rho(t_1, t_2) = \ensuremath{\mathrm{Tr}}_B G(t_2) U' G(-t_1) \rho^0$, where we assume factorized conditions at time $-t_1$. $U'$ denotes a Liouville operator that models the second impulsive external force. The matrix product in the system Liouville space can be worked out explicitly by choosing a basis. We order the basis states as $|1\rangle\langle 1|$, $|1\rangle\langle 2|$, $|2\rangle \langle 1|$, $|2\rangle \langle 2|$ and denote the matrix elements of $U'$ in this basis as $U'_{ij,kl}$. Assuming that $\left[ H_S, H_{SB} \right] = 0$, we find
\begin{equation} \label{prop}
\rho(t_1, t_2) = \ensuremath{\mathrm{Tr}}_B \left( \begin{array}{llll}
U'_{11,11} & \zeta_1^* U'_{11,12} & \zeta_1 U'_{11,21} & U'_{11,22} \\
\zeta_2^* U'_{12,11} & \zeta_2^* \zeta_1^* U'_{12,12} & \zeta_2^* \zeta_1 U'_{12,21} & \zeta_2^* U'_{12,22} \\
\zeta_2 U'_{21,11} & \zeta_2 \zeta_1^* U'_{21,12} & \zeta_2 \zeta_1 U'_{21,21} & \zeta_2 U'_{21,22} \\
U'_{22,11} & \zeta_1^* U'_{22,12} & \zeta_1 U'_{21,21} & U'_{21,22}
\end{array} \right) \rho^0,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
\zeta_1 &=& \exp(-i \epsilon t_1/\hbar) \exp_+(-\frac{i}{\hbar} \int_{-t_1}^0 \mathrm{d}\tau \delta\epsilon(X(\tau))), \nonumber \\
\zeta_2 &=& \exp(-i \epsilon t_2/\hbar) \exp_+(-\frac{i}{\hbar} \int_{0}^{t_2} \mathrm{d}\tau \delta\epsilon(X(\tau)))
\end{eqnarray}
are still operators on the bath degrees of freedom.
The trace over the bath degrees of freedom can now be calculated analytically, using cumulant expansion or path integral methods. It results in dephasing functions, which depend only on a single time when the average over either $\zeta_1$ or $\zeta_2$ is taken, but explicitly on both times for the average of products of two $\zeta$ functions. Because we are interested in the effect of initial correlations, these terms, which cannot be factorized into separate contributions depending on $t_1$ and $t_2$ only, are the most relevant to our treatment. They contain the effect of memory that extends over the externally applied force. From equation \ref{prop}, we see that these interesting terms multiply the matrix elements of the external force that operate on the coherences $\rho_{12}$ and $\rho_{21}$. There are four such terms, two which leave the coherence unchanged, and two which interchange the two coherences. To focus clearly on the effect of initial correlations, we choose an operation that flips the coherence, while leaving the populations unaffected. Such a force is given by a Liouville operator with matrix elements $U'_{11,11} = U'_{22,22} = U'_{12,21} = U'_{21,12} = 1$, and all other elements zero. Writing out the matrix elements in equation \ref{prop}, the density matrix is then given by
\begin{equation}
\rho(t_1, t_2) = (\rho^0_{11}, \zeta_2^* \zeta_1 \rho^0_{21}, \zeta_2 \zeta_1^* \rho^0_{12}, \rho^0_{22}).
\end{equation}
Starting from two density matrices $\rho^A(0)$ and $\rho^B(0)$, with equal initial populations, the trace distance between them evolves in time as $D(\rho^A(t_2), \rho^B(t_2)) = D(\rho^A(-t_1), \rho^B(-t_1)) |\zeta_2^* \zeta_1|$. As in the previous case of a single time interval, the restriction to equal populations only changes the value of the trace distance, but not the question whether the dynamics is Markovian. Using the cumulant expansion, we find
\begin{equation}
|\zeta_2^* \zeta_1| = \exp\left[-2 \Re g(t_1) - 2 \Re g(t_2) + \Re g(t_1 + t_2)\right].
\end{equation}
This expression enables the straightforward evaluation of the trace distance and the non-Markovianity for any spectral density. The term $g(t_1 + t_2)$ indicates the effect of initial correlations present at the time of interaction with the impulsive force $U'$. Such correlations, which extend across the the excitation, cannot be treated by the conventional reduced equation of motion approach, which includes Redfield and Lindblad equations. This has been pointed out in the calculations of nonlinear optical observables by \cite{Ishizaki.2008.chemphys.347.185}.
\subsection{Two-level system with overdamped bath}
As a simple example, which allows a more detailed analytical treatment, we will discuss the case of an overdamped Brownian oscillator. The spectral density is given by $J(\omega) = 2 \eta \omega \gamma / (\omega^2 + \gamma^2)$,
which gives the dephasing function [\cite{Tanimura.1990.pra.41.6676, Weiss.2008.book}]
\begin{eqnarray} \label{gtbo}
g(t) &=& \frac{\eta}{\gamma} \cot(\hbar\beta\gamma/2)(\exp(-\gamma t) + \gamma t - 1) + \frac{4 \eta\gamma}{\hbar\beta}\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{\exp(-\nu_n t) + \nu_n t - 1}{\nu_n(\nu_n^2 - \gamma^2)} \nonumber \\
&-& i (\eta / \gamma)(\exp(-\gamma t) + \gamma t - 1).
\end{eqnarray}
For this model, the imaginary (dissipative) part of the correlation and dephasing functions depends only on the single time scale $\gamma$. As can be seen from the first line of equation \ref{gtbo}, the real (fluctuation) part includes additional time scales dictated by the Matsubara frequencies $\nu_n = 2\pi n / \beta \hbar$.
While the imaginary part of $g(t)$ becomes constant due to the Ohmic nature of
$J(\omega)$ for $\gamma \to \infty$, the real part is time dependent as long
as $\beta$ is small. This indicates that the fluctuation part of the bath noise cannot be delta correlated,
even if this approximation is valid for the dissipation part.
At high temperature \emph{compared to the time scale of the bath}, $\hbar\beta\gamma/2 \ll 1$, these quantum fluctuation terms can be dropped, and the dephasing function simplifies
\begin{equation}
g(t) = (2 \eta / \beta \hbar \gamma^2)(\exp(-\gamma t) + \gamma t - 1) - i (\eta / \gamma)(\exp(-\gamma t) + \gamma t - 1).
\end{equation}
In the high temperature case given above, the time derivative of the dephasing function is clearly always positive, and, consequently, the non-Markovianity vanishes for a single time interval.
However, if we account for initial correlations by allowing them to form during a preparation time, the dynamics can become non-Markovian. This can be seen explicitly using the overdamped Brownian oscillator spectral density. For $t_1 = 0$, the trace distance varies with time as $\exp(-\Re g(t_2))$, and we recover the result found earlier. Because $\Re g(t) > 0$ for all times, the trace distance is strictly decreasing. Thus, the dynamics is Markovian for an exponential correlation function, in agreement with the classical definition. On the other hand, if we allow system bath correlations to form during the preparation time $t_1$, the trace distance can increase, and the measure for non-Markovianity is nonzero. This effect is shown in figure \ref{fig:trd}, where we compare a factorized initial state, corresponding to $t_1 = 0$, to a state that contains correlations, created by setting $t_1 \neq 0$. For a nonzero preparation time, the trace distance increases during a certain time interval, which shows that the dynamics is non-Markovian. It is clear that memory in the bath that extends over the pulse is crucial for this effect. The time evolution of the system after the application of the pulse is influenced by its state before the pulse, as can be seen from the presence of the $g(t_1 + t_2)$ term. For a bath that contains memory, this term does not factorize into functions of $t_1$ and $t_2$ only. The memory effect can be seen clearly by looking at the trace distance as a function of both times, as plotted in figure \ref{fig:trd2t}.
\subsection{Nonlinear optical response functions}
The time evolution of a quantum system during two intervals, separated by an external impulsive force, is closely related to nonlinear optical experiments. In these experiments, an initial pulse excites the system out of the ground state. Correlations between the system and the bath form during the following propagation time. After applying another pulse, the effect of these correlations can be observed.
As mentioned before, the initial state $\rho^0$ can be prepared by applying a pulse on the equilibrium state, $\rho^0 = U \rho_\mathrm{eq}$. In the case of optical experiments, the excitation energy is typically much larger than the thermal energy, and the equilibrium distribution only contains population in the ground state. The optical field couples to the dipole of the system, described by the dipole operator $\hat \mu = \vec \mu (|1\rangle \langle2| + |2\rangle \langle 1|)$. If we choose the operator $U$ as the commutator of the dipole with the density matrix, $U \rho = [\hat\mu, \rho]$, and furthermore set $U' = U^2$, the time evolution operators evaluated in the previous section correspond to the standard third-order nonlinear response functions with zero population time [\cite{Mukamel.1995.book, Tanimura.1996.jcp.106.2078}]. The observable in nonlinear optical experiments is the trace of the dipole operator multiplied with the density matrix, $\ensuremath{\mathrm{Tr}}_S \hat \mu \rho(t_1, t_2) = \ensuremath{\mathrm{Tr}}_S \hat \mu \ensuremath{\mathrm{Tr}}_B G(t_2) U' G(-t_1) U \rho_\mathrm{eq}$. By choosing the wave vectors of the incident pulses properly, it is possible to select pathways that are sensitive directly to the coherence flip described in the previous section. The resulting photon echo signal is given by [\cite{Nibbering.1991.prl.66.2464}]
\begin{equation}
R(t) = \exp\left[-2 g(t_1) - 2 g(t_2) + g(t_1 + t_2)\right].
\end{equation}
Using heterodyne detection, both the real and imaginary parts of this response function are observable, while homodyne detection directly yields the absolute value. The connection with the non-Markovianity in the previous section is immediately clear: the photon echo is sensitive to exactly the memory effects that are responsible for non-Markovian dynamics. A photon echo experiment can be used to prepare a state in which the system and environment are correlated, and to subsequently probe the time evolution. Plotting the thus obtained response function directly answers the question whether the dynamics is Markovian or not, according to the definition given by \cite{Laine.2010.pra.81.062115}.
\section{Conclusion} \label{sec:conclusion}
We have studied the non-Markovianity in quantum mechanical time evolution. This concept of Markovianity can be made precise by looking for states that become more distinguishable during time evolution. If such states are present, the process is clearly non-Markovian, which is the basic idea of the measure for non-Markovianity proposed by \cite{Laine.2010.pra.81.062115}.
Non-Markovian time evolution corresponds to the presence of memory effects. Only the (temperature dependent) bath induced fluctuations, and not the dissipation, enter the non-Markovianity. We have treated the dynamics without making Markovian or rotating wave approximations, and thereby fully included the correlations between system and bath states, which influence the dynamics at a later point in time. Not only the correlations that are formed during the evolution, but also those present in the initial state can cause memory effects. By forming a correlated initial state during a preparation time, this effect can be studied for more general initial states than the equilibrium with respect to the complete Hamiltonian. We have shown that a process that is Markovian without initial correlations can become non-Markovian when such correlations are present. Conventional master equations, which cannot include the preservation of system bath entanglement across a pulse cannot be used to analyse this situation. Clearly, commonly used approximations such as a delta correlated bath or secular system-bath interaction don't hold either.
Because the procedure of preparing correlations during an initial time, and subsequently measuring their effect following an external impulse, the non-Markovianity is directly observable in nonlinear optical experiments such as the photon echo.
Future work should consider the three time photon echo, and the closely related two-dimensional optical spectra. In these experiments, population dynamics can be studied during a waiting time, allowing for more general measures of non-Markovian time evolution. Generalizations of the current work to more general system Hamiltonians, multiple baths, the case where the system Hamiltonian and the system-bath interaction do not commute and low temperature are possible using the hierarchy of equations of motion [\cite{Ishizaki.2005.jpsj.74.3131, Shi.2009.jcp.130.164518, Dijkstra.2010.prl.104.250401}].
\begin{acknowledgements}
AGD acknowledges the Japan society for the Promotion of Science for support in the form of a postdoctoral fellowship for foreign researchers. Y.T. was supported by a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research B2235006 from
the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science.
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{Introduction}
A negative correlation between the broad emission-line
equivalent width (EW) and the luminosity in active galactic nuclei (AGNs)
was discovered by \citet{Baldwin77} for the \civ\ $\lambda1549$ line.
Similar correlations (the Baldwin effect, hereafter BEff) are also observed
for other lines such as \lya$\lambda$1216, Si~IV+O IV $\lambda$1400,
He~II $\lambda$1640,4686, C~III] $\lambda$1909, Mg~II $\lambda$2800,
Fe lines in the UV and optical bands, and the Balmer lines produced
in the broad line region (BLR)
\citep[see e.g.][]{Kinney90,Zamorani92,Green2001,Kuraszkiewicz2002,Shang2003}.
This effect was also observed in single objects (e.g. NGC 5548, NGC4151),
when the intrinsic ionizing continuum is varying
\citep{Kinney90,PP92,GP2003,Kong2006}. At least some of the emission-lines
produced in the narrow line region display a BEff as well
\citep[e.g.][]{BG92,Dietrich2002,Kereme2009}.
Furthermore, an X-ray BEff in the iron K lines was detected by \citet{IT93}
and analysed by e.g. \citet{Jiang2006,Bianchi2007}.
Several physical explanations have been proposed to explain the BEff.
The most supported hypothesis is that the more luminous objects
have softer UV/X-ray spectra reducing ionization and photoelectric
heating in the BLR gas. Ipso facto the equivalent widths (EWs) of
emission-lines are reduced at higher luminosity with the strongest
effect for high-ionization lines (HILs) (see \citealt{KBF98} and
\citealt{Shields2007} for a review of the BEff).
Fundamental parameters such as the Eddington ratio
\citep{BL2004,Warner2004,Bachev2004,ZW2005,Xu2008,Dong2009},
the black hole mass \citep{Netzer92,Shields2007}, or metalicity
\citep{Warner2004} have also been suggested as the driver of the BEff.
The discovery of weak emission-line quasars (WLQs)
i.e. sources with abnormally low broad emission-lines
\citep[e.g. EW(\lya)$_{\rm WLQ} < 15.4$ \AA,][]{DS2009} provides
new constraints on the driving mechanism of the BEff.
The first WLQ object -- PG~1407+265 (with redshift z $=0.94$)
was discovered by \citet{McDowell95}.
However, up to 2009 only about 20 WLQs were known.
They mostly lie at high-redshifts ($ \mathrm{z} > 2.2$), like
SDSS~J153259.96-003944.1 \citep[][the first high-z WLQ, with
$\mathrm{z} = 4.62$]{Fan99} and were found in the Sloan Digital Sky
Survey (SDSS) \citep{Anderson2001,Schneider2003,Schneider2005,Collinge2005,
Fan2006,Schneider2007,Shemmer2009}. \citet{DS2009} recently discovered
65 new high-z WLQs, which may suggest that there is a deficit of weak line
quasars below z $< 2$. However, \citet{Plotkin2010a,Plotkin2010b}
pointed out that more intermediate- and low-redshift WLQ may also exist.
There is no generally accepted explanations for the weakness or even
absence of emission-lines in WLQ. Several hypothesis were suggested
by \citet{McDowell95}. Relativistic beaming in WLQ is not favoured as
weak line quasars, in contrast to BL Lacs, are radio-quiet
objects\footnote{The radio-loudness parameter R is defined as
the ratio of the rest-frame 6 cm to 2500 \AA\ flux densities
\citep[see][]{Jiang2007,Shen2011}. Among 70 radio detected WLQs
analysed by \citet{DS2009} there is 81\% of sources with
$\mathrm{R} \le 25$ and only 7\% of radio-loud WLQs i.e. with
$\mathrm{R} > 100$.}, show no variability or strong polarization.
Moreover, the radio spectral slopes, connecting $\lambda \sim$6 cm with
$\sim$20 cm, are significantly steeper in radio-detected WLQs than the
typical slopes for BL Lac, $\alpha_{\rm r} \sim 0.3$
\citep{Shemmer2006,Shemmer2009,DS2009,Plotkin2010a}.
The idea, that WLQs could be broad absorption line (BAL) quasars also
meet difficulties. Generally, they do not show broad absorption features
and are clasiffied as non-BAL objects \citep{DS2009,Shen2011}.
Two leading hypothesis to explain the weakness of emission-lines
in WLQ have been suggested:
(1) The first one is related to the BEff.
Weak emission-lines may be a consequence of a very soft ionizing continuum
and of a relative deficiency of high-energy UV/X-ray photons
\footnote{``the very soft ionizing continuum'' means that
a continuum in the far-UV (FUV) band is characterized by a steep spectrum.
We use the X-ray to optical luminosity ratio, \ox (see definition below).
For typical quasar \ox\ is equal to $-1.50$ \citep{Laor97} and for the
most luminous quasars with redshift 1.5-4.5 the mean \ox\ equals
to -1.80 \citep{Just2007}. We adopt $\mox < -2.0$ as a definition
of a very soft spectrum.}.
\citet{Leighly2007a}, based on observation of PHL 1811, have claimed
that its very soft spectral energy distribution (SED) (the photon index
$\mox = 2.3 \pm 0.1$)
\footnote{
$\mox = 0.3838 \log[L_{\nu}(2 \mathrm{keV})/L_{\nu}(2500 \mathrm{\AA})]$
\citep[e.g.][]{AT82,Strateva2005,Gibson2008}.}
is related to its super-Eddington nature (the estimated \LL\
lie in the range 0.9-1.6). However, it is worth noting that,
the observed UV/optical part of the continuum in WLQs looks like
these of normal quasars. \citet{Richards2003} have analysed the
spectra of 4576 SDSS quasars and they found that the
spectral indices, $\alpha_{\nu}$ (where $f_{\nu} \propto \nu^{\alpha_{\nu}}$),
lie in a wide range, with mean values from $-0.25$ to $-0.76$
(see their composites no. 1-4). The spectral indices in WLQs
also span the same interval with a median values of $\alpha_{\nu} = -0.52$
\citep{DS2009,Plotkin2010a}. Those values means that, generally,
the observed UV SED in WLQ is not particularly soft. However, these objects
may still emit more vigorously in the unobserved far-UV band.
Recently \citet{Wu2011} found a small population of X-ray weak quasars,
suggesting that these PHL 1811 analogs possess the shielding gas with
large covering factor. This gas absorbs almost all soft X-ray continuum
to prevent illumination of broad line region (BLR) by this radiation.
As a result weak emission-lines are produced although a face-on observer
see the normal X-ray continuum.
(2) The second hypothesis suggests that WLQs are normal quasars with
typical metallicities, ionizing continua, and ionization parameters,
however, with an underdeveloped BLR perhaps because of
a freshly launched accretion disc wind \citep{Hryn2010}.
The weakness/absence of emission-lines in this case is caused by
a low BLR covering factor or a deficit of line-emitting gas in the BLR
\citep{Shemmer2010}.
In this paper we analyse both hypothesis: softness of ionizing
continuum and underdevelopment of BLR. In section~\ref{sec:data}
we describe the sample of quasars that was used.
Section~\ref{sec:res} is devoted to the comparison of the observed
properties of WLQ and QSO that we discuss in section~\ref{sec:dis}.
The conclusions are presented in section~\ref{sec:con}.
We assume that $H_0 = 70$ km s$^{-1}$ Mpc$^{-1}$, $\Omega_m = 0.3$,
and $\Omega_{\Lambda} = 0.7$.
\section{The WLQ sample}
\label{sec:data}
The sample of WLQs consists of 81 high-redshift (z $> 2.2$)
and high-bolometric luminosity $(\log L_{\rm Bol} = 46.5-47.9)$
sources classified by
\citet{Anderson2001,Collinge2005,Schneider2007,Shemmer2009,DS2009,Plotkin2010a},
extended by two quasars
SDSS J094533.98+100950.1 (hereafter SDSS J094534)
and SDSS J170108.89+395443.0 (hereafter SDSS J170109).
Both sources lie at intermediate-redshift distances with z of
1.66 and 1.89, respectively.
A spectrum of SDSS J094534 was analysed extensively by \citet{Hryn2010}.
The second source (see its spectrum in Fig.~\ref{fig:J170109})
was retrieved serendipitously by us in the SDSS Data Release~7 (DR7)
quasar catalogue \citep{Shen2011}. We classified it as WLQ
because (1) the equivalent widths of the \civ\ and
Mg II measured at the rest frame are small (i.e. EW(\civ)
$= 2.09 \pm 1.83$\AA, EW(Mg II) $= 9.41 \pm 2.03$\AA,
\citealt{Shen2011}), (2) this quasar is radio-intermediate as
a dozen WLQ sources (rest-frame $f_{\rm 6cm}/f_{2500} = 45.3$,
\citealt{Shen2011}), (3) the UV continuum of SDSS~J170109 can be fit
as a power law $(f_{\nu} \propto \nu^{\alpha_{\nu}})$ with a spectral index
$\alpha_{\nu} = -0.23 \pm 0.03$\footnote{This value is equivalent to
$\alpha_{\lambda} = -1.77$ where $f_{\lambda} \propto \lambda^{\alpha_{\lambda}}$.}
identical within errors to that of the quasar composite from
\cite{Richards2003}. This value also
differs from the mean spectral index calculated for BL Lac candidates
for which we have $\langle \alpha_{\nu} \rangle = -1.15$ \citep{Plotkin2010a}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{BEffig1_J170109.eps}
\caption{The rest-frame spectrum of SDSS J170108.89+395443.0 binned
and corrected for Galactic reddening using \citet{Cardelli89} relationship.
For comparison, \citet{Richards2003} composite spectrum (no.~1) is shown.}
\label{fig:J170109}
\end{figure}
All sources were detected by the Sloan Digital Sky Survey.
In our analysis we are using the equivalent widths, EW, of
emission-lines measured in the rest-frame, fluxes of those lines,
masses of the supermasive black holes, $M_{\rm BH}$,
accretion rates in the Eddington units, \LL, and the spectral
indices, \ox. Almost all but \ox\ values, were found in
the SDSS~DR7 quasar catalogue \citep{Shen2011}.
\citet{Shen2011} point out that estimated
EW(\civ) are encumbered with large error when the signal-to-noise
ratio (S/N) of the observed WLQ spectrum is lower than 5 (see their figure~8).
Therefore, in these cases we use EW values estimated by \citet{DS2009}
which for all sources but two have EW(\civ) $> 5 \sigma$.
In other cases we use upper limits taken from the quasar
catalogue or calculate them (see Table~\ref{tab:WLQ}).
The spectral indices, \ox, of WLQs were taken from
\citet{Shemmer2006,Shemmer2009}.
All those values originate from the Chandra observations.
Additionally, we checked the Chandra Multiwavelength Project
Catalogue \citep{Green2009}. We cross-correlated this catalogue
with SDSS DR7. No new WLQs but SDSS~J170109
were found. Its \ox\ is equal to $-1.29$.
\section{Comparison of WLQs with normal quasars}
\label{sec:res}
Our aim is to compare the Baldwin effect observed in weak emission-line
quasars to that observed in normal Type 1 quasars. Fig.~\ref{fig:mC4all}
displays the EW of the \civ\ emission-line against the dimensionless
accretion rates for different types of quasars.
This figure includes 81 quasars from the Bright Quasar Survey (BQS)
with redshifts z $< 0.5$ and bolometric values $\log L_{\rm Bol} =
44.2-46.9$ analyzed by \citet{BG92}. \citet{BL2004} estimated their
EW(\civ) and \LL, respectively. Dashed line represents the best
linear fit to their data \citep{BL2004,BL2005}.
The triangles show 76 WLQs for which the EW and the accretion ratios
were calculated by \citet{Shen2011} or \citet{DS2009}.
We must notice here that in both Baskin \& Laor's and
Shen et al.'s papers the methods to estimate \LL\ are similar.
Both calculated the bolometric luminosity using relationship
$L_{\rm Bol} = \mathrm{BC_{\lambda}} \times L_{\lambda,\rm cont}$, where
$L_{\lambda, \rm cont}$ is the continuum luminosity measured at
wavelength $\lambda$ and $\mathrm{BC_{\lambda}}$ is the appropriate
bolometric correction factor. Both methods estimate the
Eddington luminosity, $L_{\rm Edd} \propto M_{\rm BH}$ using the scalling
method in order to calculate the black hole mass in AGN i.e.
$M_{\rm BH} \propto L_{\lambda, \rm cont}^{\rm b}$ FWHM$^2$(ion).
In this equation FWHM stands for the Full Width at Half Maximum of ion which
produces the emission-line. BQS quasars and high-z WLQs lie at different
distances, therefore, Baskin \& Laor and Shen et al.
used observations of different emission-lines and continuum luminosities
to calculate $M_{\rm BH}$. \citet{BL2004} used FWHM of H$\beta$ line,
$L_{\lambda, \rm cont}$ measured at 5100 \AA\ in the rest-frame of quasar
and $\mathrm{b} = 0.50$ \citep[see equation (3) in ][]{Laor98}.
The authors used H$\beta$ emission-line to estimate \LL\ because many
scientists suggest non virialize character of \civ\
\citep[e.g.][]{Risaliti2009,Fine2010,Richards2011}.
However, high-z WLQs have redshifts higher
than 2.2. Therefore, \citet{Shen2011} used \civ\ line and
continuum luminosity observed at 1350\AA. They used the relationship
determined by \citet{VP2006} between $M_{\rm BH}$,
FWHM, and $L_{\lambda, \rm cont}$ for which $\mathrm{b} = 0.53$.
\citet{BL2004} found an anti-correlation between EW(\civ) and \LL.
However, if one calculate Eddington ratios based on \civ\ emission-lines
this relationship is much weaker than the correlation
with the \LL\ estimated based on \Hb\ \citep{BL2005}.
In this paper we analyse 83 weak emission-line quasars, however,
in Fig.~\ref{fig:mC4all} only 76 of them have \civ\ emission-line
strong enough to determine their \LL\ (see Table~\ref{tab:WLQ}).
The EW of the remaining WLQs are lower than $\sim$3 to 7~\AA\
for sources with stronger or weaker UV fluxes, respectively.
It is worth noting that one object of the BQS lie in the region
dominated by WLQ. This is the radio-quiet quasar (PG~0043+039,
$z=0.384$) with EW(C IV) = $5.4 \pm 3.7$ \AA\ \citep{BL2004}.
Its H$\beta$ emission-line is strong with EW = 92 \AA,
whereas, O~[III] $\lambda 5007$ and He~II $\lambda 4686$
are weak, with EWs equal to 1 and 0~\AA, respectively \citep{BG92}.
On the contrary to PG~0043+039 several (17~from 76) WLQs
have large equivalent widths of \civ\ line and behave like
normal Type 1 quasars. Their median distance from
the Baskin \&\ Laor's linear fit is only $2.3\sigma$ when
for ``genuine'' WLQs is larger $(> 7\sigma)$.
We must mention, that \citet{Shemmer2009} decided to use EW(\civ)
$\lesssim$ 10~\AA\ as a hallmark of WLQs. However, \citet{DS2009}
decided to use EW of \lya+N~V blend as those lines are better seen in
distant weak line quasars. Therefore, we kept this definition
(i.e. EW(\lya+N~V) $< 15.4$~\AA) as a rule for our study.
We suggest that the weakness of the EW(\lya+N~V) in the sources
with prominent \civ\ emission-lines is caused by strong absorption of
the \lya\ region and that they are, in fact, normal quasars.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{BEffig2_mdotCIV.eps}
\caption{Equivalent width of C IV measured at the rest frame
plotted against accretion ratio. Filled blue squares show 81 BQS
quasars analysed by \citet{BL2004}. Filled red triangles and
upper limits refer to 76~WLQs taken from \citet{Shen2011} or \citet{DS2009}.
Points with error bars refer to objects with a significance of EW
higher than 5$\sigma$. Otherwise, upper limits are shown.
Dashed line is the best linear fit to BQS quasars
\citep{BL2004,BL2005}.
}
\label{fig:mC4all}
\end{figure}
The best linear fit to BQS quasars sample (seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:mC4all})
suggests that WLQs follow a different relationship than normal quasars
between EW and the accretion ratio. The errors of those quantities for
WLQ are large and,unfortunately, we cannot fit a correlation to
them. However, in order to statistically quantify the hypothesis
about different relations we compare the reduced chi-squares,
$\widetilde{\chi}^2$, in BQS' and WLQ's cases. We divide our WLQ
objects into two subsets. The first one consists of all 76 weak
emission-line quasars. In the second case we exclude all the upper
limits on EW(\civ) from our subset. We also assume that that
the obtained fit parameters for normal quasars are also the same
for WLQs. The estimated reduced chi-square is 27.7 in the case
of BQS quasars. That value is significantly larger than 1.
However, we must notice that there is a large spread in distribution
of normal quasars around the linear fit. If we assume that a natural
spread is less than 9 \AA\ and we calculate the fit avoiding outliers
than the reduced chi-squares decreases to $\simeq 1.3$.
The estimated $\widetilde{\chi}^2$ for WLQs are $\sim 1000$ including
and $\sim 2100$ excluding upper limits on EW, respectively.
The obtained values corroborate the hypothesis about difference
in relationships.
We must keep in mind, that \LL\ values are calculated using
the method based on the luminosity-\mbh\ relation, i.e.
$\mLL \propto \mathrm{FWHM(\civ)}^{-2}$. In many cases,
the emission-lines in WLQ objects are broad and their FWHM
equals to a few thousand km s$^{-1}$ (see Mg~II in \citealt{Hryn2010},
\Hb\ in \citealt{Shemmer2010} or \civ\ in \citealt{Shen2011}).
Nevertheless, for weak \civ\ line (e.g. EW $<$ a few \AA)
the FWHM value is underestimated thus \LL\ ratio is overestimated.
The existence of normal accretion rates in WLQs was discussed recently
by \citet{Hryn2010}. They have argued that when the Eddington ratio
increases the width of \lya, Mg II lines decreases, \civ\ emission
decreases, however, the Si IV line should become stronger,
and the UV Fe II emission decreases. As the last two behaviours
are not observed in WLQ
\citep[see e.g.][]{Schneider2010}\footnote{\texttt{http://www.sdss.org/dr7/}},
\citet{Hryn2010} claimed that the weakness of the emission-lines
in WLQs is not caused by high \LL.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{BEffig3_alphaoxCIV.eps}
\caption{Rest frame equivalent width of \civ\ emission-line versus
spectral index \ox. Solid blue and open cyan squares refers to
Type 1 non-BAL and BAL quasars, respectively. Those 155 radio-quiet
and radio-intermediate sources are taken from \citet{Green2009} paper.
Solid red triangles and upper limits show 12 WLQ objects.
Star denotes NLS1 PHL 1811. Solid line is the relationship
obtained by \citet{Wu2009}. Typical error of non-BAL
and BAL QSOs is shown in the legend.
}
\label{fig:oxC4}
\end{figure}
So far, no observations of the FUV spectra of WLQs were made.
Therefore, we analysed \ox\ which can shed light on the shapes of
the SED in the FUV/soft X-ray band (Fig.~\ref{fig:oxC4}).
Apart from the spectral indices for WLQs we analyzed
together with them 155 normal quasars.
Their \ox\ values were taken from the Chandra Multiwavelength
Project \citep{Green2009}. We cross-corellated this catalogue with
SDSS DR7 Quasar Catalogue \citep{Shen2011} to obtain the EW(\civ)
of quasars.
The solid line in Fig.~\ref{fig:oxC4} represents the best fit made
by \citet{Wu2009}. We must notice that this linear fit was made to
another sample of quasars, however, it fits very well to our sample of
normal quasars. Our study clearly shows that \ox\
values in weak emission-line quasars span the same region as seen in
non-BAL and BAL QSOs.
It points out that the UV/soft X-ray SED of WLQs is similar to
those seen in normal AGNs and proves that a soft ionizing continuum
is not the reason for the weakness of the lines. That situation is
found in PHL 1811 which is NLS1 galaxy with super-Eddington rate
(\LL $\sim$ 0.9-1.6) and steep ionizing continuum ($\mox = -2.3$)
\citep{Leighly2007b}. Therefore, PHL 1811 follows the relationship
estimated by \citet{Wu2009}.
\section{Discussion}
\label{sec:dis}
The WLQs are shifted vertically in the $\log$ EW(\civ)-$\log$\LL\ plane
relative to normal quasars (Fig.~\ref{fig:mC4all}).
This offset and the fact that QSOs and WLQs SED are almost the same,
indicate that weak emission-line quasars are normal AGNs, however,
with intrinsically weak \civ\ emission-line.
It is also clearly shown that the super-Eddington luminosities are not
required in weak line quasars contrasting with the idea that WLQs are
super-Eddington sources \citep{Leighly2007b}.
Furthermore, the accretion rates in WLQs span the same interval as normal
quasars (Fig.~\ref{fig:mC4all}).
The SEDs of weak line quasars observed in optical/UV band
(till $\sim$ 1200 \AA) does not differ from the SEDs of normal quasars
\citep[e.g. ][]{DS2009}. However, the far-UV (FUV) spectrum of AGNs
and their relative quietness in the soft X-ray band produce weak
emission-lines as supported by photoionization modeling
\citep[see e.g.][for review]{Leighly2004,LC2007}.
Due to the absent of the far-UV spectra of WLQs we analysed
the X-ray to optical luminosity ratio \ox\ of different quasars
(Fig.~\ref{fig:oxC4}). Similar analysis was carried out by
\citet{Richards2011} or \citet{Wu2011} (see their figure 9 or
figure 6, respectively). We focus on weak emission-line
quasars and enlarged our sample by adding objects with $\log$
EW(\civ) $< 0.6$. Our analysis indicates that the UV/soft X-ray
SED of WLQs is similar to those of normal AGNs and a soft ionizing
continuum is not the reason for the weakness of the lines.
\begin{table*}
\caption[]{Arithmetic means and standard deviations of the
emission-line intensity ratios. All observed line fluxes were dereddened
for the Milky Way contamination.}
\label{tab:ratios}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l c c c c c c c}
\hline
\hline
Ratio & \multicolumn{2}{c}{NGC5548} & PG QSO & non-BAL QSO & BAL QSO &
WLQ(all) & WLQ(sub) \\
(1) & (2a) & (2b) & (3) & (4) & (5) & (6) & (7) \\
\hline
C IV/Ly $\alpha$ & 1.45 &0.94 & $0.46 \pm 0.14$ &
& & $1.62\pm1.57$ & $0.59\pm0.42^{a}$ \\
C IV/Mg II &
5.80 & 4.98 & $4.38\pm1.54$ & $3.36 \pm1.47$ & $3.03\pm 1.34$& &
$0.44\pm0.21^{b}$ \\
C III]($\lambda$1909)/Mg II &
1.07 & 0.91 & $0.99\pm0.20$ & & & & $0.16\pm 0.02^{c}$ \\
Ly $\alpha$/H $\beta$ &
8.57 && $11.75\pm3.25$ &&&& $1.81\pm0.17^{d}$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\\
\begin{flushleft}
Column~(1) refers the names of intensity ratios. In the case of Seyfert 1.5
galaxy NGC~5548 those values are shown in Column~(2a) and (2b). In Column~(2a)
the \lya, \civ, and C~III] fluxes are taken from
\citet{Korista95}, the Mg~II flux from \citet{GKN2007},
and the \Hb\ flux from \citet{WP96}.
The ratios in Column~(2b) are calculated from corrected for narrow-line
fluxes and taken from \citet{KG2000}.
Column~(3) refers to sample of 18 radio quiet PG quasars \citep{Shang2007}.
Values of intensity ratio of radio-quiet and radio-intermediate
97 non-BAL and 14 BAL quasars are shown in Columns~(4) and (5),
respectively. Those sources was selected after cross-matching SDSS~DR7
Quasar Catalogue \citep{Shen2011} with \citet{Green2009} sample.
This sample is consistent with sample used in the
Fig.~\ref{fig:oxC4}.
In Column~(6) we calculate mean ratio for all WLQs which
show weak or strong \civ\ lines. Column~(7) refers to
subsample of WLQs, for which EW(\civ) $< 20$ \AA\ and EW(\lya) $< 15.4$ \AA.
The superscripts in this column correspond to the following information:
$^{a}$ mean is calculated from 59 WLQs, $^{b}$ mean from
SDSS~J094534 and SDSS~J170109, $^{c}$ value only for SDSS~J094534,
$^{d}$ mean from SDSS~J114153.34+021924.3 and
SDSS~J123743.08+630144.9.
Data for intensity of \civ\ line in WLQs are taken from \citet{Shen2011},
for \lya\ from \citet{DS2009}, for \civ/Mg~II,
and C~III]/Mg~II ratios from \citet{Hryn2010}, Hryniewicz et al.
(in preparation), and for H$\beta$ from \citet{Shemmer2010}.
\end{flushleft}
\end{table*}
The intensity of an emission-line depends on the flux of
ionizing continuum, \Lion, and on the BLR gas covering factor,
\covfac: $\mLline \sim \mLion \times \Omega/4\pi$
\citep[see][and his discussion for He II $\lambda$1640]{Ferland2004}.
The spectral index, \ox, measures by definition the ratio of the
luminosities at 2 keV and at 2500\AA. If we assume that
$L_{\nu}(2500 \mathrm{\AA})$ is roughly equal to
$L_{\nu}(1450 \mathrm{\AA})$ and assuming
that $L_{\nu}(2 \mathrm{keV}) \simeq$ \Lion, we can write
$\mox \sim \log \mLion - \log L_{\nu}(1450 \mathrm{\AA})$.
We can then express the line equivalent width as:
\begin{displaymath}
\log \mathrm{EW(line)} \approx const_1 + \log \frac{\Omega}{4\pi}
+ \frac{\mox}{const_2}
\end{displaymath}
The correlation EW(\civ)-\ox\ obtained for normal quasars by
e.g \citet{Wu2009} infers that the gas covering factor in BLR
in Type 1 quasars is relatively constant. The gas covering factor
in WLQ objects behaves differently (Fig.~\ref{fig:oxC4}),
suggesting that $\Omega_{\rm WLQ}$~is $\gtrsim 10$ times smaller
than in QSOs.
Table~\ref{tab:ratios} compares the emission-line intensity ratios
observed in Seyfert 1.5 galaxy NGC 5548, normal quasars, and WLQs.
We focus on 59 `real WLQs', i.e. our selected subsample which consists
of sources with EW(\civ) $\lesssim$ 20 \AA\ and EW(\lya) $<$ 15.4 \AA\
(see Column~(7) of Table~\ref{tab:ratios}).
We take into account line intensities
produced by high-ionization lines (HILs; such as \lya, \civ),
intermediate-ionization lines (IILs; e.g. C III]), and
low-ionization lines (LILs; such as Mg II, H $\beta$).
The \civ/\lya\ intensity ratio for different sources
are the same from a statistical point of view. The ratio of the covering
factors of the regions responsible for producing \civ\ and \lya\
are therefore similar in WLQs and QSOs. Comparing low-, intermediate-
with high-ionization lines we obtain that the ratios of the covering
factors of HIL/LIL and IIL/LIL are lower in WLQs that in normal quasars.
Even if for WLQ these ratios are based on only few sources. This suggests
that the covering factor of the BLR is smaller in WLQ.
This is in agreement with observations of the weak H$\beta$
emission-lines in SDSS J114153.34+021924.3 and SDSS J123743.08+630144.9
\citep{Shemmer2010}. There authors have explained the weakness of their
emission-lines by a deficit of the BLR.
The absence of BLR in WLQs have also been recently suggested
by \citet{LZ2011}. The existence of bright AGNs with dusty tori,
but without BLR could be understood when an anisotropic radiative pressure
is released from an accretion disc. \citeauthor{LZ2011} stated
that this is possible just before the normal
phase of an AGN. Additionally, \citet{LM2004} suggested
based on observations of the emission-line profiles of NLS1 galaxies
IRAS~13224-3809 and 1H~0707-495
that the high-ionization lines are produced in a wind
and that the intermediate- and low-ionization lines are produced
in low-velocity gas associated with the accretion disk at the base of
the wind. Both pictures are consistent with a suggestion that
the regions producing emission-lines are developed by winds
\citep{Hawkins2004,Hryn2010}. In that case, when the BLR is created
its covering factor is lower than estimated in normal AGNs.
There is an observational analogy between weak emission-line quasars
and the class of ``optical dull'' AGNs (also called XBONGs --
``X-ray bright, optically normal galaxies''). Their X-ray emission
is bright while they lack both the broad emission-lines of Type~1 AGNs
and the narrow emission-lines Type~2 AGNs
\citep{Elvis81,Comastri2002, GeorganGeorgak2005}.
There are a few hypothesis trying to answer the latent nature of XBONGs
\citep[see e.g.][]{Moran2002,Severgnini2003,Rigby2006,Civano2007,Trump2009}.
However, none of them (such as dilution their spectra by a host galaxy,
the low Eddington accretion rate) can explain WLQs.
\citet{Elvis2000} has proposed an empirically derived structure for
quasars. He suggests presence of the funnel-shaped geometrically thin
accretion outflow which contains an high ionized gas embedded
in the colder BLR clouds. According to our paper the low covering
factor of the BLR means that WLQ has got less clouds in the
outflow or equivalently the ``funnel'' wind is geometrically
thiner.
Low covering factor of the BLR in WLQs would have additional consequence
observed in the infrared (IR) band. \citet{GKN2007} have argued that
the covering factors of the BLR and of the dusty torus have to be the
same. It means that a small BLR in WLQs causes an evaporation of dust
in the torus and a reduction of its IR emissivity. \citet{DS2009}
mentioned that two weak line quasars SDSS~J140850.91+020522.7
(with EW(\civ) = 1.95 \AA) and SDSS~J144231.72+011055.2
(with EW(\civ) = 16.9 \AA) are fainter in the IR ($\sim 24 \mu$m) band
by 30-40\%. Additionally, the IR flux density of SDSS~J130216.13+003032.1
(EW(\civ) = 27.8 \AA) is also relatively low. More IR observations
of WLQs are required to confirm this hypothesis.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:con}
We have explored the Baldwin effect (BEff) in
82 high-redshift (z $>$ 2.2) and 2 intermediate-redshift
weak-line quasars (WLQs) and compared them with a set of normal
quasars.
We draw the following conclusions:
\begin{itemize}
\item The relationship between the rest-frame equivalent width for
\civ\ emission-line and the Eddington ratio
observed in WLQs has different normalization than for normal QSOs.
This shift disagrees with the super-Eddington
hypothesis \citep[e.g.][]{Shemmer2010}.
\item The weakness or even the absence of emission-lines in WLQs is likely
caused by a low covering factor of the broad line region (BLR) rather
than by a very soft ionizing continuum. The comparison of the EW(\civ)
and of the spectral indices, \ox, shows that the gas covering factor of
the BLR in WLQs is $\gtrsim 10$ times less than for normal QSOs.
\item The ratios of the covering factors of regions responsible
for producing \civ\ and \lya\ are similar in WLQs and QSOs.
\item The ratios of the covering factors $\Omega_{\rm HIL}/\Omega_{\rm LIL}$
are lower in WLQ than in QSOs showing the deficit of the BLR in WLQ.
However, this result is based on observations of only four sources.
\item The radio-intermediate quasar SDSS~J170108.89+395443.0 (z $=1.89$)
is a new intermediate-redshifted WLQ with rest-frame
EW(\civ) $= 2.09$\AA\ and EW(Mg II) $= 9.41$\AA, respectively
\citep{Shen2011}.
\item The definition of WLQ objects should take into account not only
the weakness of \lya\ or \civ\ emission-lines, separately, but both lines
together. `False WLQs' (sources with prominent \civ) are probably normal
Type~1 quasars with intervening \lya\ absorption.
\end{itemize}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We would like to thank an anonymous referee for useful comments
that improve our paper. We are grateful to Bozena Czerny, Krzysztof Hryniewicz
and Joanna Kuraszkiewicz for advices during calculation and doing our analysis.
We also thank Gary Ferland for pointing out a helpful article.
MN thanks the Scientific Exchange Programme (Sciex) NMS$^{\rm ch}$
for opportunity of working at the ISDC.
This research has been supported in part by the Polish MNiSW grants
NN203 380136, and 362/1/N-INTEGRAL/2008/09/0.
\bibliographystyle{mn2e}
|
\section{\label{}}
\section{Introduction}
The start of proton-proton collisions at the Large Hadron Collider
(LHC) in 2010 opened up a new era of exploration at the high energy
frontier. With proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$~TeV and
instantaneous luminosities higher than $10^{33}$cm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$
the LHC is a real discovery machine, in particular extending
sensitivity for new physics into mass scales above a TeV and
set to dominate the high energy physics scene for years to
come. During 2011 the LHC definitely entered real
physics running with almost routine delivery of integrated
luminosities larger than 50~pb$^{-1}$ per day and yearly total
of more than 5~fb$^{-1}$.
Both in the Standard Model and many of its possible extension,
such as Supersymmetry~\cite{susy1}-\cite{susy7}, the third
generation of quarks, i.e. the top and bottom ($b$) quarks,
play an important role due to their relatively large mass.
The $b$-quark is also important
as one of the main decay channels for the proposed
Higgs boson and top quark production is one of the major backgrounds
to many new physics physics searches.
\section{The ATLAS $b$-Jet Trigger}
The identification of jets originating from $b$-quarks ($b$-jets)
is a central piece in
the rich physics program of the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The
large (approximately 40~m long and 25~m in diameter) multi-purpose
ATLAS detector~\cite{atlas_detector}
has a hermetic design with a large muon spectrometer surrounding
electromagnetic- and hadronic calorimeters and an inner
detector using three
different technologies to track charged
particles up to $|\eta|=2.5$. Crucial for $b$-jet
identification, the innermost pixel detector provides
three space point measurements with 50$\times$400~$\mu$m pixels,
where the innermost layer is located only 5~cm from the beam.
Tracking is
extended through the large area silicon micro-strip detector with
four double-layered sensors (80~$\mu$m pitch) and the straw
tube transition radiation tracker up to a radius of about 111~cm.
A challenge for the LHC experiments is the large interaction
rate and multiplicities. The rate of events collected for further
offline analysis needs to be reduced
from the initial proton-proton bunch collision rate of 40~MHz, with more
than 10 interactions per bunch-crossing, to $<400$~Hz while keeping
the interesting events for further study. The ATLAS trigger
system~\cite{tdaq} is a 3-tiered structure built
around an initial custom made hardware trigger, Level 1 (LVL1),
and two software-based levels collectively called the
High Level Trigger (HLT), see Fig.~\ref{fig:tdaq}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=65mm]{trigger_overview.pdf}
\caption{Schematic overview of the trigger and data acquisition in ATLAS.}
\label{fig:tdaq}
\end{figure}
The LVL1 trigger builds trigger decisions using
fast analog information from hits in the three-layered muon spectrometer
and energy deposits in the calorimeter cells to identify signatures
of high-$p_{\mathrm{T}}$ muons, electrons/photons,
$\tau$-leptons and jets.
The ATLAS trigger system relies to a large extent on the so called
Regions of Interest (ROIs) which are regions in the detector identified in
the LVL1 trigger associated to a specific type of signature. These ROIs
later form the basis for a more detailed reconstruction at the HLT, effectively
restricting the amount of data needed to be shipped from the
detector readout buffers. Since the $b$-jet trigger
relies on information from the inner detector,
the identification of $b$-jets can only start at the HLT. This makes
the LVL1 jet reconstruction particularly important and an integral
part of any $b$-tagging at the trigger level as it provides the seed ROI
in which the inner detector tracking algorithms and subsequent
$b$-tagging algorithms are executed.
The LVL1 jet trigger is a fixed-size sliding
window algorithm that sums energy in projective towers of size
$\Delta\eta\times\Delta\Phi=0.4\times0.4$. The maximum event rate
accepted at LVL1 is $\sim75$~kHz and the detector readout buffers need
to receive the trigger decision no later than approximately 2.5$~\mu$s
after the relevant bunch crossing.
The HLT is a farm of mostly commercial computers and
networking technology providing a fully configurable two-tiered
trigger system seeded by the ROIs.
The Level 2 (LVL2) trigger accesses the full detector granularity
and precision from the muon system, calorimeters and inner detector
within the ROI and is optimized for speed to meet
the maximum execution time of $\sim$ 40~ms. The HLT manages and
steers the event during the LVL2 algorithm sequence execution
and assigns data from accepted events to the final event building
step. With an event building rate of about 3.5~kHz and a latency
up to several seconds
the Event Filter can run algorithms which are nearly
identical to those used in offline event reconstruction and can
limit the final output rate to below 400~Hz.
\subsection{The $b$-Jet Trigger Menu}
The $b$-jet trigger was actively selecting events during 2011.
It consists not only of physics triggers to select
signal events but also special
triggers for monitoring and calibration purposes, including
trigger efficiency measurements.
The physics triggers were designed to cover a wide range of
generic signals; a multi-jet trigger with one or
more $b$-tags and a dijet trigger with two or more $b$-tagged
jets. Typical rates at each trigger level can be seen in
Fig.~\ref{fig:rates}~\cite{btrigwiki}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=65mm]{1b-4j.pdf}
\caption{Trigger rate at each trigger level during a typical LHC fill.}
\label{fig:rates}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The $b$-Tagging Algorithm}
The most natural choice in building a
discriminating variable between $b$- and
light jets\footnote{Light jets are defined here as jets originating
from quarks from the two first generations or a gluon.}
is to exploit
the transverse impact parameter, $\mathrm{d}_{0}$, defined as the
distance of closest approach between the particle track and the
primary vertex.
The finite lifetime of $B$ hadrons ($\tau \approx 1.6$~ps,
$c\tau \approx 490~\mu m$) allow them to
typically travel a few mm before decaying. This, together with
their relatively large mass produce tracks with on average
large impact parameter compared to tracks originating from
light jets (see Fig.~\ref{fig:bjet}).
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=65mm]{b-jet-schetch.pdf}
\caption{Schematic view of the tracks in a $b$-jet. }
\label{fig:bjet}
\end{figure}
Normally also the measured uncertainty $\sigma$(d$_0$) is
used to define the impact parameter significance,
S(d$_0$)$=$d$_0/\sigma$(d$_0$),
to better judge the likelihood of the track displacement.
In 2011 the so-called {\it JetProb} algorithm was used
to select $b$-jets in ATLAS at both LVL2 and Event Filter.
This technique was first developed by the
ALEPH collaboration~\cite{jetprob_ref} and
then adopted in experiments at the Large Electron Positron
Collider and the Fermilab Tevatron.
The JetProb method computes the probability for a jet to
originate from the primary
vertex using the signed transverse impact parameter significance
of tracks associated with the jet. The sign of the impact
parameter significance is determined from whether or not
the track crosses the jet axis in front of the
primary vertex (positive) or behind it (negative).
Most of the tracks produced from decays of particles
with long lifetime, such as a $B$ hadron, are positive.
Due to finite impact parameter resolution, tracks in light
jets, even if they originate from the primary vertex,
may seem displaced but would have both signs roughly with equal
probabilities. Figure~\ref{fig:ip}
shows a comparison of the impact parameter significance for
tracks associated
to jets classified as $b$-, $c$- or light jets compared
to that measured in data~\cite{btrigwiki}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=65mm]{Sd0_dataMC_v3.pdf}
\caption{The signed impact parameter comparing simulation and data.}
\label{fig:ip}
\end{figure}
Each track is assigned a probability, $P$,
\begin{equation}
P = \int_{-\infty}^{-|\mathrm{d}_{0}/\sigma(\mathrm{d}_{0}|)}R,\label{eq:track_prob}
\end{equation}
where $R$ is the parameterization of the negative impact
parameter resolution for tracks originating from the primary vertex.
The resolution function can be determined from experimental data
using the negative side of the signed impact parameter distribution,
assuming the contribution from heavy-flavor particles is negligible.
The individual track probabilities, $P_{i}$, are then combined
into a per-jet quantity, $P_{jet}$,
\begin{equation}
P_{\mathrm{jet}} = P_{0} \sum_{\mathrm{i}=0}^{N_{\mathrm{tracks}}-1}\frac{(-\ln{P_{0}})^{\mathrm{i}}}{i!} \label{eq:jet_prob}
\end{equation}
where $P_{0}=\prod_{\mathrm{i}}P_{\mathrm{i}}$.
With the assumption that no long-lived particles
contribute to the selected tracks, $P_{\mathrm{jet}}$ has an expected
uniform distribution between zero and one
while tracks from jets with a long-lived particle decay
tend to give $P_{\mathrm{jet}}$ closer to zero.
This $b$-tagging algorithm is considered robust as it
relies only on the knowledge of the
negative transverse impact parameter distribution of
prompt tracks in multi-jet events, rather easily derived
from data.
More sophisticated algorithms, such as explicit reconstruction
of the secondary decay vertex, show promising improvements
but are not yet used to actively select events at the
trigger level.
\subsection{Primary Vertex and Beam Spot}
\label{sec:beamspot}
The primary vertex position is a vital ingredient
for good $b$-tagging performance. A measurement of the primary vertex
position depends strongly on the track multiplicity
at the vertex. When the $b$-tagging algorithm is executed
only tracks within the single ROI are available which degrades the
primary vertex resolution in the transverse
direction.
Note that in the longitudinal direction the resolution is less
critical for the JetProb algoritm as the longitudinal impact
parameter is only used to reject tracks
from additional pile-up interactions.
The solution is to exploit the online measurement of the relatively
small beam spot every few minutes during data taking.
Using special prescaled triggers, the per-event vertex position is
integrated to measure the average position and shape
(width and tilt) of the beam spot in intervals as short as a few minutes.
The width of the beam spot (typically around 25$~\mu$m at the
end of 2011) is estimated using a split vertex method~\cite{bs}
online that exploits the measured distance between
two fitted vertices, each recontructed with half of the tracks
used in the original vertex fit.
Figure~\ref{fig:BS_width} shows an example of the
distribution of primary vertices used in the extraction
of the beamspot parameters~\cite{bs}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=65mm]{Run182787_Vertex_XvsY_SiTrack.pdf}
\caption{The transverse distribution of primary vertices corresponding to
about 1~min of data taking.}
\label{fig:BS_width}
\end{figure}
The transverse beam spot position and tilt in the longitudinal direction
is used to correct the track coordinates and the measured transverse width,
$\sigma\mathrm{(BS)}$, to correct the track impact parameter
uncertainty used in Eq.~\ref{eq:track_prob}:
$\sigma'\mathrm{(d}_0\mathrm{)} = \sqrt{ \sigma\mathrm{(d}_{0}\mathrm{)}^{2} + \sigma\mathrm{(BS)}^{2} }$.
The measured beam spot parameters are continiously monitored and
updated whenever a significant change is detected.
\section{Bias On Offline $b$-Tagging}
One important aspect for physics analyses is to understand potential
biases arising from trigger inefficiencies. For the $b$-jet trigger,
the high rejection required together with
the algorithm choice induces a non-negligible bias with respect to
the offline $b$-tagging algorithms.
Figure~\ref{fig:jetprob_bias} shows the bias on the
offline JetProb weight distribution from three different
operating points of the $b$-jet
trigger corresponding to approximately
90\%, 70\% and 50\% $b$-jet efficiency (w.r.t. jets tagged offline)~\cite{btrigwiki}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=65mm]{offJetProb_EFBias_dataMC_yellow_v3.pdf}
\caption{The measured offline JetProb distribution for jets
$b$-tagged at the HLT at three different operating points.}
\label{fig:jetprob_bias}
\end{figure}
It's likely that the offline $b$-tagging algorithms will not
be able to operate where the online $b$-jet tagging is 100\%
efficient and still maintain a reasonably high combined
online and offline $b$-jet efficiency.
Since detailed tracking information is notoriously hard to simulate
this requires careful measurements of the combined online and offline
$b$-tagging efficiency and mis-tag (light jets accidently tagged)
rates in data. Such measurements are
carried out using well-tested methods that explore
muon properties from heavy flavor decays or explicit reconstruction
of $B$ hadron decay chains.
\section{Conclusions and Outlook}
The $b$-jet trigger in ATLAS has been commissioned and
actively rejecting events during 2011.
Exploiting b-tagging information at the trigger level allows
for the lowering of trigger thresholds for jets and missing energy.
This leads to an increased selection efficiency for final states
including $b$-jets, something which is used to improve the sensitivity
in many physics analyses in progress.
To use the $b$-jet triggers together with an offline $b$-tagging
requirement in physics analyses detailed measurements of the
combined trigger and offline $b$-tagging efficiency and mistag
rate are needed. This will properly take into account correlations
between the trigger and offline requirements and correct for aspects
which are not accurately described by the simulation of the
trigger and the offline reconstruction.
For 2012 many improvements are expected to be deployed to further
improve the $b$-jet trigger performance. New $b$-tagging algorithms
based on explicit reconstruction of secondary vertices will be used
to improve light jet rejection. The improved jet measurements at
the HLT compared with LVL1 will be used to refine the
ROI direction and reduce the load on the data acquisition. Studies
comparing new primary vertex algorithms at the trigger level may
allow the usage of the an event-based primary vertex instead of
the beamspot.
\bigskip
|
\section{Introduction}
While the physics of wetting and spreading on ideally smooth solid surfaces has meanwhile reached a status of mature textbook knowledge, a whole range of wetting phenomena on randomly rough substrates are still elusive. This is particularly annoying, as almost all surfaces of practical interest bear considerable roughness, be it due to weathering, wear, or on purpose as, e.g., in the case of sand-blasted surfaces. Clearly, this has substantial impact in many situations. For example, a drop of liquid deposited on a rough substrate will spread or not, depending on the morphology of the liquid film which develops in the troughs of the roughness. As it accommodates its free surface to the substrate topography, it may percolate across the sample. The drop will then gradually spread over the entire sample. On the contrary, if the film rather tends to form isolated domains, the drop will stay in place. Similarly, the redistribution of liquid within a granular pile, such as in humid soil or sand, may proceed along the grain surfaces only if the liquid wetting film on the grains forms a percolated structure. The morphology of a liquid water film deposited from humid air onto the surface of an electric isolator will strongly affect the performance of the latter, for analogous reasons.
There has been already a lot of research on the adsorption of liquids on rough surfaces
[1-15], but this was concerned either with roughness amplitudes as small as the (nanometer) range of van der Waals forces \cite{AndelRob1988,KardInd1990,Netz1997,Seemann2001} or with rather artificial substrate topographies in the context of super-hydrophobicity \cite{Herminghaus2000,BicoQuere2001,BicoThiele2002,OkuQuere2004,He2011}, or with completely wetting liquids (zero contact angle) \cite{Philip1978,ColeKrim1989,PalasKrim1993,Seemann2001}. The most frequently encountered, customary case, however, is characterized by a finite contact angle, and a random roughness with typical length scales at least in the micron range. In the present paper, we consider surfaces which exhibit a random topography on scales large as compared to molecules, and are subject to adsorption of a liquid which forms a small but finite contact angle with the substrate material. Since we consider macroscopic roughness, we adopt the view that all interfaces are infinitely sharp on the length scale of consideration (sharp kink approximation \cite{DietrichReview}). As the typical length scales considered here are still small as compared to the capillary length of the liquid (2.7 mm for water), gravity will be neglected as regards its effect on the liquid surface morphologies to be described. As opposed to earlier studies which concentrated on the macroscopic contact angle and contact line \cite{Joanny1984,Chow1998}, we will try to derive the wetting phase diagram and other characteristics connected to the adsorption of a liquid film.
The first systematic study of wetting on a randomly rough substrate at finite contact angle owes to Wenzel \cite{Wenzel1936}. He characterized the roughness by a single parameter, ${\rm r}$, which he defined as the ratio of the total substrate area divided by the projected area. Obviously, ${\rm r} \ge 1$, and ${\rm r}=1$ corresponds to a perfectly smooth surface. The free energy which is gained per unit area when the rough substrate is covered with a liquid is then given by ${\rm r} (\gamma_{sg}-\gamma_{sl})$, where $\gamma_{sl}$ and $\gamma_{sg}$ are the solid-liquid and solid-gas interfacial tension, respectively. If this is larger than the surface tension of the liquid, $\gamma$, we expect a vanishing macroscopic contact angle, because covering the substrate with liquid releases more energy than is required for the formation of a free liquid surface of the same (projected) area. More specifically, force balance at the three-phase contact line yields
\begin{equation}
\cos\theta_{macro} = \frac{{\rm r} (\gamma_{sg}-\gamma_{sl})}{\gamma} = {\rm r} \cos\theta
\label{Eq:Wenzel}
\end{equation}
for the macroscopic contact angle on the rough surface. $\theta$ is the microscopic contact angle according to Young and Dupr\'e. When the microscopic contact angle is reduced to $\theta_W = \arccos (1/{\rm r})$, which we will henceforth call Wenzel's angle, $\theta_{macro}$ vanishes, and the substrate is covered with an 'infinitely' thick liquid film. As we will see below, however, there are imprortant ramifications which are sensitive to the kind of roughness of the substrate. Furthermore, even minute deviations from liquid-vapour coexistence, as they are omnipresent in practical situations, unveil a rather complex scenario which goes well beyond eq.~(\ref{Eq:Wenzel}).
\section{Presentation of the problem}
We describe the topography of the rough solid substrate by $f(x,y)$, where $(x,y)$ is a vector in the plane. The (randomly varying) function $f$ is normalized such that $<f> = 0$, where the angular brackets denote averaging over the entire sample area, $\mathcal{S}$. It is assumed that the substrate is homogeneous and isotropic, in the sense that the statistical parameters of $f$ are the same everywhere on the sample, and independent of rotation of the sample about the normal axis of the sample.
A small amount of liquid deposited on this substrate will make an interface with the surrounding gas, which can be described by a second function, $g(x,y)$. The support of $g$ is the set $\mathcal{W} \subset \mathcal{S}$, which denotes the wetted area. Continuity of the liquid surface assures that $g = f$ on the boundary of $\mathcal{W}$, i.e., at the three-phase contact line, where the solid substrate, the liquid, and the gas phase meet. This line will henceforth be denoted by $\partial\mathcal{W}$.
Information on $g(x,y)$ can be obtained from the total free energy functional of the system, which is given by
\begin{equation}
F = \int_{\mathcal{W}}\left[(\gamma_{sl}-\gamma_{sg})\sqrt{1+(\nabla f)^2} + \gamma \sqrt{1+(\nabla g)^2} \right] \ {\rm d}x \ {\rm d}y
\label{Eq:TotalFreeEnergy}
\end{equation}
Minimization of $F$ yields two important properties of $g$. First of all, the mean curvature of the liquid surface, which can be written as \cite{DiffGeom}
\begin{equation}
H = \frac{1}{2}\nabla\left(\frac{\nabla g}{\sqrt{1+(\nabla g)^2}}\right)
\label{Eq:MeanCurvature}
\end{equation}
assumes the same value everywhere on $\mathcal{W}$. Second, the two surfaces described by $f(x,y)$ and $g(x,y)$ make the same (Young-Dupr\'e) angle $\theta$ everywhere on $\partial\mathcal{W}$. This reflects the local force balance at the three-phase contact line.
While surface roughness gives rise to substantial contact angle hysteresis on macroscopic scales, the microscopic contact angle, $\theta$, is known to be well defined on the typical (micrometer to nanometer) scale \cite{SeeBrinkPNAS,TiloPRL}. Nevertheless, we should be aware that even on small scales, equilibration will take time, be it by transport through the gas phase or through an adsorbed layer of molecular thickness \cite{DietrichReview,Seemann2001} (which we disregard in the present study).
The question we shall ask is the following. Given the substrate topography, $f(x,y)$, the equilibrium microscopic contact angle, $\theta$, and the mean curvature of the liquid surface, $H$, what can we predict on the function $g(x,y)$ and the shape of the wetted area, $\mathcal{W}$? In particular, we shall be interested whether $\mathcal{W}$ forms a percolated set in the plane.
Based on the observation that the amplitude of most natural roughness is much smaller than its dominant lateral length scale, we assume for the present study that
\begin{equation}
\mid \nabla f \mid \ll 1
\label{Eq:FlatApprox}
\end{equation}
which allows for substantial simplifications. Expanding then the mean curvature according to eq.~(\ref{Eq:MeanCurvature}), we obtain to first order in $\nabla g$
\begin{equation}
H \approx \frac{1}{2}\Delta g
\label{Eq:MeanCurvAppprox}
\end{equation}
Similarly,
the contact angle with the substrate yields the boundary condition \begin{equation}
\mid \nabla (g - f)\mid \ \approx \tan\theta
\label{Eq:YoungApprox}
\end{equation}
on $\partial\mathcal{W}$, to first order in $\nabla f$ and $\nabla g$. We can now immediately write down a useful identity concerning these quantities. Green's theorem tells us that
\begin{equation}
\int_{\partial\mathcal{W}} {\bf n}\nabla (g-f) {\rm d}s= \int_{\mathcal{W}}\Delta (g-f) {\rm d}^2{\bf x}
\label{Eq:Green}
\end{equation}
where $s$ is the distance along $\partial\mathcal{W}$, ${\bf n}$ its unit normal vector, and ${\bf x} = (x,y)$. Since $g = f$ on $\partial\mathcal{W}$,$\nabla (g-f)$ is everywhere perpendicular to $\partial\mathcal{W}$. Hence eq.~(\ref{Eq:YoungApprox}) may be written as ${\bf n}\nabla (g-f) \approx \tan\theta$, and we can rewrite eq.~(\ref{Eq:Green}) as
\begin{equation}
L\ \tan\theta + \int_{\mathcal{W}} [2 H -\Delta f] {\rm d}^2{\bf x} = 0
\label{Eq:Result}
\end{equation}
in which $L$ denotes the length of $\partial\mathcal{W}$. This equation will be the starting point of the discussion to follow.
\section{Gaussian roughness}
If we want to exploit eq.~(\ref{Eq:Result}), we have to refer to a specific roughness function, $f({\bf x})$. Following the overwhelming majority of the literature on randomly rough surfaces, we will start by considering Gaussian roughness. The height distribution is then
\begin{equation}
p(f) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi C_0}}\exp\{-f^2/2C_0\}
\label{Eq:Gauss}
\end{equation}
where $C_0$ is the mean square of $f({\bf x})$.
$f$ can be fully characterized by its lateral correlation function \cite{LongHigg1957,LongHigg1957,Nayak1973,Green1984,Ogilvy1989,Isich1992},
\begin{equation}
C(r) = <f({\bf x})f({\bf x} + {\bf r})>
\label{Eq:Correlation}
\end{equation}
with $r = \mid {\bf r}\mid$. Below we will make use of its polynomial expansion,
\begin{equation}
C(r) = C_0 - \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} C_n r^n
\label{Eq:CExpansion}
\end{equation}
where $C_0$ is the mean square amplitude of the roughness. The form of eq.~(\ref{Eq:Correlation}) reflects the isotropy of the roughness \cite{Isich1992}.
\subsection{Distribution functions}
For Gaussian roughness, the joint distributions of $f$ with other stochastic quantities can be obtained in a straightforward manner from multivariate analysis. As it is well known \cite{LongHigg1957,Green1984}, the joint distribution of two quantities $f_1$ and $f_2$ is then given by
\begin{equation}
p(f_1,f_2) = \frac{1}{2\pi\sqrt{Q}}\exp\left[-\frac{1}{2}\sum_{ij}M_{ij} f_i f_j\right]
\label{Eq:Multivariate}
\end{equation}
where $(M_{ij})$ is the inverse of the matrix $(<f_i f_j>)$ and $Q$ is the determinant of that matrix \cite{LongHigg1957}. For the joint probability of $f$ and $\nabla f$, we find \begin{equation}
p(f, \nabla f) = \frac{p(f)}{4\pi C_2}\exp\left[-\frac{(\nabla f)^2}{4C_2}\right]
\label{Eq:JointSlope}
\end{equation}
On the side, this directly yields $<(\nabla f)^2> = 4C_2$, from which we can conclude that roughness topographies fulfilling (\ref{Eq:FlatApprox}) will have $C_2 \le 0.003$.
For the joint probability of $f$ and $\Delta f$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
p(f,\Delta f) = \frac{1}{2\pi\sqrt{Q}}\exp\left[-\frac{64C_4 f^2 - 8 C_2 f \Delta f + C_0 (\Delta f)^2}{2Q}\right]
\label{Eq:JointLaplace}
\end{equation}
with $Q = \mid 64C_0C_4 - 16 C_2^2\mid$.
From these expressions, we can derive a number of useful formulae. For the length of the contour line of $f(x,y)$ at height $f=h$, we find \cite{LongHigg1957b, Nayak1973}
\begin{equation}
L(h) = \int \mid \nabla f \mid \ p(h,\nabla f) \ {\rm d}^2 (\nabla f) = \sqrt{\pi C_2}\ p (h)
\label{Eq:Contour}
\end{equation}
The fraction of the total sample area which lies within that contour is
\begin{equation}
W(h) = \int\limits_{-\infty}^h p(f) \ df = \frac{1}{2}\left[1 + {\rm erf} \left(\frac{h}{\sqrt{2C_0}}\right)\right]
\label{Eq:Area}
\end{equation}
and the total Laplace curvature of $f$ within that area is
\begin{equation}
K(h) = \int\limits_{-\infty}^h \int\limits_{-\infty}^{+\infty} \Delta f \ p(f,\Delta f) \ {\rm d}(\Delta f) \ {\rm d}f = 4 C_2 p(h)
\label{Eq:Laplace}
\end{equation}
In order to fulfill the boundary condition, eq.~(\ref{Eq:YoungApprox}), the vertical position of the three-phase contact line, which may be symbolically written as $f(\partial\mathcal{W})$, will vary along $\partial\mathcal{W}$ about an average value, $<f(\partial\mathcal{W})>$. The three-phase contact line will thus approximately follow the contour line at $f({\bf x}) = <f(\partial\mathcal{W})>$, with excursions towards both the outside and the inside of $\mathcal{W}$. These will in cases represent detours, sometimes shortcuts with respect to $\partial\mathcal{W}$. As a reasonable approximation, we may thus use $L (<f(\partial\mathcal{W})>)$ for the length of the three-phase contact line. Similarly, we set
\begin{equation}
\int_{\mathcal{W}} \ {\rm d}{\bf x} \approx W(h)
\label{Eq:MCApprox}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\int_{\mathcal{W}} \Delta f \ {\rm d}{\bf x} \approx K(h)
\label{Eq:LaplaceApprox}
\end{equation}
with $h := <f(\partial\mathcal{W})>$. Inserting these expressions in eq.~(\ref{Eq:Result}), we obtain
\begin{equation}
\tan\theta \approx \frac{K(h) - 2 H W(h)}{L(h)}
\label{Eq:Adsorption}
\end{equation}
from which $h$ can be determined. Inserting (\ref{Eq:Contour}) and (\ref{Eq:Laplace}) in eq.~(\ref{Eq:Adsorption}), we arrive at
\begin{equation}
\tan\theta \approx \sqrt{\frac{16 C_2}{\pi}} - \frac{2 H W(h)}{L(h)}
\label{Eq:Adsorption}
\end{equation}
\subsection{The phase diagram}
If the adsorbed material is at liquid-vapor coexistence, the mean curvature of the free liquid surface, $H$, vanishes everywhere on $\mathcal{W}$. In this case, eq.~(\ref{Eq:Adsorption}) is fulfilled only for a certain contact angle,
\begin{equation}
\theta_c = \arctan(\sqrt{16 C_2 / \pi})
\label{Eq:Thetac}
\end{equation}
Note that $\theta_c$ is independent of $h$. This at first glance puzzling result has its origin in a peculiar property of Gaussian roughness, namely the statistical independence of $\nabla f$ and $f$ \cite{LongHigg1957,Isich1992}. In other words, the probability of finding a certain slope at a given level, $h$, is independent of $h$. A von Neumann boundary condition such as eq.~(\ref{Eq:YoungApprox}) can thus be fulfilled equally well at all levels of Gaussian roughness. It is therefore not surprising that no particular value of $h$ is singled out here.
It is instructive to compare $\theta_c$ with $\theta_W$. For Wenzel's parameter ${\rm r}$, we have
\begin{equation}
{\rm r} = \int_{\mathcal{S}} \sqrt{1+(\nabla f)^2}\ {\rm d}^2{\bf x} \approx 1 + 2C_2 - \mathcal{O}(C_2^2)
\label{Eq:WenzelRatio}
\end{equation}
and therefore $\cos^2\theta_W \approx 1-4C_2$. For $\theta_c$ we obtain, from eq.~(\ref{Eq:Thetac}), $\cos^2\theta_c \approx 1-16C_2/\pi$. Since $16/\pi > 4$, we see that $\theta_c > \theta_W$. In other words, if the liquid does not wet the substrate well enough to fulfill the Wenzel condition, is may nevertheless well intrude the roughness topography and thus form a wetting layer. This is indicated in Fig.~\ref{PhaseDiagramGauss}, which shows the phase diagram of wetting on a surface with Gaussian roughness. States corresponding to liquid/vapour coexistence lie on the vertical axis. Along the bold solid line, which ends at $\theta_W$, the liquid surface can 'detach' from the rough substrate, such that an infinitely thick liquid film may form. For $\theta_W < \theta < \theta_c$, the liquid/vapour interface needs the support of the spikes of the roughness, to which it is attached by virtue of the boundary condition, eq.~(\ref{Eq:YoungApprox}).
Let us now discuss what happens as we move off coexistence. We first define the parameter
\begin{equation}
\lambda = \sqrt{16 C_2/\pi} - \tan \theta
\label{Eq:lambda}
\end{equation}
which only depends upon the substrate topography (through $C_2$) and $\theta$. Inserting this into eq.~(\ref{Eq:Adsorption}), we obtain
\begin{equation}
2 H \ W(h) = \lambda \ L(h)
\label{Eq:OffCoex}
\end{equation}
as an alternative form of (\ref{Eq:Adsorption}).
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width = 6.5cm]{./PhaseDiagram.jpg}
\caption{The phase diagram of wetting and spreading on a surface with Gaussian roughness. \label{PhaseDiagramGauss} }
\end{figure}
For Gaussian roughness, it is well known that percolation of the set $\mathcal{P}(h) = \{(x,y)\mid f(x,y) \leq h \}$ takes place at $h=0$ \cite{Isich1992}. From this and eq.~(\ref{Eq:Contour}), (\ref {Eq:Area}), and (\ref{Eq:OffCoex}) we can immediately derive that percolation will take place when
\begin{equation}
H = \lambda\sqrt{\frac{C_2}{2 C_0}}
\label{Eq:Percolation}
\end{equation}
This is indicated by the dashed straight line in Fig.~\ref{PhaseDiagramGauss}, which for $\theta = 0$ ends at $H_c = \sqrt{8C_2^2/\pi C_0}$. This line cuts through the whole range of contact angles below $\theta_c$. At higher angles, eq.~(\ref{Eq:YoungApprox}) cannot be fulfilled and the substrate remains dry everywhere.
\subsection{Adsorption isotherms}
We can now calculate the adsorption isotherms of the system, i.e., the amount of liquid adsorbed at pressures below saturation. This is important to discuss, as almost no practical situation corresponds exactly to liquid/gas coexistence.
Consider, for instance, the substrate to be located at a height $Z$ above a liquid reservoir with which it can exchange material. $H$ is then given by the balance with the hydrostatic pressure and reads
\begin{equation}
H = \frac{\rho g Z}{2\gamma}
\end{equation}
For the distribution of water within a soil or granular pile at height $Z$ above the water table, we find that $H$ grows to about $1/100$ nm as $Z$ increases to $10$ m. Hence the typical curvatures to expect are of the right size for our considerations up to several meters above the water table.
A more general way to look at this situation is to consider the vapour pressure, which is reduced at finite height above the liquid reservior, as well due to gravity. The curvature is then given by the Kelvin equation,
\begin{equation}
H = \ln \frac{p_s}{p} \frac{k_B T}{2 \gamma v_m}
\label{Eq:Kelvin}
\end{equation}
where $p$ is the partial pressure of the adsorbed liquid in the sorrounding gas phase, $p_s$ is its saturated vapor pressure, $v_m$ its molecular volume, and $k_B$ is Boltzmann's constant.
From eq.~(\ref{Eq:Kelvin}), with the abbreviation $\alpha = k_B T/\gamma v_m$, we can express the adsorption isotherms in terms of $h$ as
\begin{equation}
\frac{p}{p_s} = \exp \left[-\frac{\lambda L(h)}{\alpha W(h)}\right]
\label{Eq:AdsorptionIsotherm}
\end{equation}
We would, however, like to know not the position of the liquid surface, $h$, but the total volume of adsorbed liquid. The latter can be easily expressed as
\begin{equation}
V = \int\limits_{-\infty}^{h} (h-f) p(f) {\rm d}f = \frac{h}{2} \left[1+{\rm erf}\left(\frac{h}{\sqrt{2C_0}}\right)\right]+\sqrt{\frac{C_0}{2\pi}}e^{-\frac{h^2}{2C_0}}
\label{Eq:AdsorbedVolume}
\end{equation}
The volume at percolation, i.e. at $h = 0$, is $V_p = \sqrt{C_0/2\pi}$.
Combining eqs.~(\ref{Eq:AdsorptionIsotherm}) and (\ref{Eq:AdsorbedVolume}), we can directly plot the adsorption isotherms, which are displayed in Fig.~\ref{Adsorption} for three different values of $\lambda/\alpha$. If $\lambda = 0$, $V$ remains zero for all $p<p_s$, and jumps to infinity at $p=p_s$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width = 8.5cm]{./Adsorption.jpg}
\caption{Adsorption isotherms on Gaussian roughness. The parameter in the family of curves is $\lambda/\alpha$.\label{Adsorption} }
\end{figure}
It is important here to appreciate that the infinite adsorption one obtains at coexistence has two different meanings for contact angles above or below $\theta_W$. While for $\theta < \theta_W$, the liquid can detach completely from the substrate forming a bulk liquid phase, the liquid surface remains in contact with the rough substrate for $\theta > \theta_W$. The fact that even then the adsorption isotherms tend to infinity at coexistence owes to the infinite support of the Gaussian distribution, eq.~(\ref{Eq:Gauss}). We will see below that this is a peculiarity of Gaussian roughness, and not a generic feature of practically encountered roughness topographies.
\section{Non-Gaussian roughness}
As we have seen so far, it is worthwhile to study non-Gaussian roughness models as well. In fact, it has been shown that many real surfaces are distinctly non-Gaussian \cite{Adler1981,McCool1992,Wu2004,RodValve2010}, such that the freedom in adjusting the correlation function is not sufficient to describe a relevantly large class of surfaces. It seems to be widely believed that the correlation function together with the height distribution of the topography are sufficient to characterize all physically relevant properties of a surface. Most authors even seem to believe that only the first four moments of the height distribution are relevant (including skewness and kurtosis) \cite{Adler1981,McCool1992,Wu2004,Bakolas2003}. In what follows, we will introduce a simple roughness model which is general enough to describe roughness profiles with any lateral correlation function and height distribution, but is still accessible to the analysis given above. As a consequence, we will be able to derive, by purely analytic methods, quite general predictions about wetting, adsorption, and liquid percolation on a rough surface, which can be quantitatively applied to experimental data.
Let $\chi({\bf x})$ be a Gaussian random function, much like $f$ as discussed above, but with dimensionless codomain and unity root mean square. Hence its height distribution is
\begin{equation}
q(\chi ) = (2\pi )^{-\frac{1}{2}}\exp\left[-\frac{1}{2}\chi^2\right]
\label{Eq:HeightDistrChi}
\end{equation}
and the correlation function,
\begin{equation}
<\chi({\bf x})\chi({\bf x} + {\bf r})> = 1 - \sum_{m=1}^{\infty} D_m r^m
\label{Eq:CorrelationChi}
\end{equation}
We then set
\begin{equation}
f({\bf x}) = S(\chi({\bf x}))
\label{Eq:NonGauss}
\end{equation}
where $S$ has the dimension of a length and is a monotone, two times differentiable function. In this case the inverse of $S(\chi)$, $T(f) := S^{-1}(f)$, exists, and we have
\begin{equation}
p(f) = T^{\prime}(f) \ q(T(f))
\label{Eq:ProfileNonGauss}
\end{equation}
where the prime indicates the derivative with respect to the argument.
$S(\chi)$ can be directly determined from experimental topography data. If the distribution $p(f)$ has been measured, we can derive $T(f)$ by means of the simple formula
\begin{equation}
T(f) = {\rm erf}^{-1}\left[2 \int\limits_{-\infty}^{f}p(z)\ {\rm d}z - 1\right]
\label{Eq:Transform}
\end{equation}
Note that this allows to represent any height distribution function $p(f)$. The correlation function of $\chi$, and thereby the set of coefficients $D_m$, is obtained from the data as $<T(f({\rm x}))T(f({\rm x + r}))>$. Fig.~\ref{S(chi)} shows a sketch of a typical $S(\chi)$. While the support of $S$ is the whole $\chi$ axis, the codomain is bound, because neither will there be any material outside the original (unworn) surface, nor will there be infinitely deep troughs.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width = 8.5cm]{./S_chi.jpg}
\caption{Sketch of a typical $S(\chi)$, as would be obtained on a worn surface. While the support of $S$ is the whole $\chi$ axis, the codomain is bound because neither will there be any material outside the original (unworn) surface, nor will there be infinitely deep troughs. $h_{inf}$ indicates the inflection point of $S$. \label{S(chi)} }
\end{figure}
Since in eq.~(\ref{Eq:NonGauss}) we have done nothing but distorting the assignment of vertical positions to the plane, contour lines and their enclosed areas will change in level according to $S(\chi)$, but their topolgical properties, including percolation, will remain unchanged. We can therefore directly write down the contour length with help of the new quantities,
\begin{equation}
L_S(h) = \sqrt{\pi D_2}\ q\left[T(h)\right]
\label{Eq:ContourNonGauss}
\end{equation}
For the joint probability of $f$ and $\nabla f$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
p(f,\nabla f) = \frac{T^{\prime 3} q(T)}{4\pi D_2}\exp\left[- \frac{T^{\prime 2} (\nabla f)^2}{4 D_2}\right ]
\label{Eq:fsigmaNonGauss}
\end{equation}
where the prime now denotes the derivative with respect to the argument. The Laplace curvature is given by $\Delta f = S^{\prime \prime} (\nabla \chi)^2 + S^{\prime} \Delta \chi$, which leads to intimidatingly clumsy expressions when inserted into multivariate analysis. We therefore consider here the important case when $ S^{\prime \prime}$ is small, such that only the second term in $\Delta f$ contributes. This is the case if
\begin{equation}
\mid\frac{ S^{\prime \prime}}{ S^{\prime }}\mid \ll \frac{\sqrt{<(\Delta f)^2>}}{<(\nabla f)^2>} = \frac{2\sqrt{D_4}}{D_2}
\label{Eq:SppSmall}
\end{equation}
We then have
\begin{equation}
p(f,\Delta f) = \frac{T^{\prime 2}}{2\pi \sqrt{R}}\exp\left[-\frac{64 D_4 T^2 -8 D_2 T T^{\prime}\Delta f + (T^{\prime}\Delta f)^2}{2R} \right]
\label{Eq:fkappaNonGauss}
\end{equation}
with $R = \mid 64 D_0 D_4 - 16 D_2^2\mid $. Now we are in shape to express the Laplace curvature inside the wetted area. In complete analogy to the derivation above, we find
\begin{equation}
K_S(h) = \frac{4D_2}{T^{\prime}(h)}q\left[T(h)\right]
\label{Eq:KNonGauss}
\end{equation}
At coexistence, we have again
\begin{equation}
L_S(h) \tan \theta = K_S(h)
\label{Eq:Balance}
\end{equation}
In analogy to the above discussion, we define the parameter
\begin{equation}
\Lambda := \frac{4}{T^{\prime}(h)}\sqrt{\frac{D_2}{\pi}}-\tan\theta
\label{Eq:LambdaNonGauss}
\end{equation}
which this time does depend on $h$, as is sketched in Fig.~\ref{Lambda(h)}. The maximum of the curve lies at $h_{inf}$, which is the inflection point of $S(\chi)$ (cf. Fig.~\ref{S(chi)}).
\subsection{The phase diagram}
The film thickness at coexistence can be derived from the zeros of $\Lambda$, of which there are either two or none. In the latter case, the contact angle (and thereby $\tan\theta$) is too large for forming a liquid surface between the spikes and troughs which complies with the boundary condition, eq.~(\ref{Eq:YoungApprox}). If, however, $\Lambda$ intersects the $h$-axis, the slope of the zeros decides upon their stability. This can be seen by appreciating that $\Lambda$ may be interpreted as a deviation from the force balance, eq.~(\ref{Eq:Balance}), as required by eq.~(\ref{Eq:YoungApprox}). For the left zero, which is marked by an open circle in the figure, a displacement of the three-phase contact line would give rise to an imbalance of wetting forces driving it further away from the zero. The opposite is true for the right zero, marked by the closed circle. The latter is therefore stable and thus corresponds to the adsorbed film thickness which will develop. The film will be percolated if this zero lies to the right of $h_0 = S(0)$, which corresponds to the mid-plane of $\chi({\bf x})$ (cf. Fig.~\ref{S(chi)}).
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width = 8.5cm]{./Lambda_h.jpg}
\caption{Sketch of $\Lambda(h)$ corresponding to $S(\chi)$ as in Fig.~\ref{S(chi)}. The film thickness at coexistence corresponds to the zero with negative slope (closed circle). \label{Lambda(h)} }
\end{figure}
If we now again consider the system off coexistence, we have
\begin{equation}
2 H\ W_S(h) = \Lambda (h) \ L_S(h)
\label{Eq:OffCoexNonGauss}
\end{equation}
as the condition for $h$, where
\begin{equation}
W_S(h) = \frac{1}{2}\left[1+{\rm erf} \left(\frac{T(h)}{\sqrt{2}}\right)\right]
\label{Eq:WS(h)}
\end{equation}
A graphical solution of eq.~(\ref{Eq:OffCoexNonGauss}) is sketched in Fig.~\ref{LambdaL}. Again, the closed circle indicates the stable solution. The liquid film will be percolated if this point lies to the right of the dashed line at $h_0$, but form isolated patches otherwise. From eq.~(\ref{Eq:OffCoexNonGauss}), we see that percolation occurs if \begin{equation}
H = \sqrt{\frac{D_2}{2}}\Lambda (h_0)
\label{Eq:PercolationNonGauss}
\end{equation}
which represents again a straight line in the phase diagram as depicted in Fig.~\ref{PhaseDiagramNonGauss}. For Gaussian reoughness, we have $S(\chi) = \sqrt{C_0}\chi$, $D_m = C_m/C_0$, and $T^{\prime} = 1/\sqrt{C_0}$. It is readily checked that this leads again to eq.~(\ref{Eq:Percolation}) instead of (\ref{Eq:PercolationNonGaus}), and (\ref{Eq:lambda}) instead of (\ref{Eq:LambdaNonGauss}).
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width = 8.5cm]{./LambdaL.jpg}
\caption{Graphic construction for solving eq.~(\ref{Eq:OffCoexNonGauss}). The dashed line represents the l.h.s. of eq.~(\ref{Eq:OffCoexNonGauss}). \label{LambdaL} }
\end{figure}
As in the case of Gaussian roughness, $\theta_W$ generically lies below $\theta_c$. This can be seen from calculating
\begin{equation}
(\cos\theta_W)^{-2} = {\rm r} -1 \approx 4 D_2 \int q(\chi)S^{\prime 2}(\chi){\rm d}\chi
\label{Eq:WenzelNonGauss}
\end{equation}
which follows from (\ref{Eq:fsigmaNonGauss}). On the other hand,
\begin{equation}
(\cos\theta_c)^{-2} = \frac{16 D_2}{\pi} S^{\prime 2}(0)
\label{Eq:ThetacNonGauss}
\end{equation}
Since, again, $16/\pi > 4$, it is clear that whenever ${\rm argmax}(S^{\prime}) = T(h_{inf})$ lies close to $0$ (which it typically will), we have $\theta_c > \theta_W$ as for the Gaussian case (cf. Fig.~\ref{PhaseDiagramNonGauss}).
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width = 8.5cm]{./PhaseDiagramNonGauss.jpg}
\caption{The wetting phase diagram for non-Gaussian roughness. The most prominent qualitative difference with respect to Gaussian roughness is the existence of a 'Wenzel prewetting line', at which the adsorbed film thickness jumps discontinuously from zero (or, in fact, a molecularly thin adsorption layer) to a finite value.}
\label{PhaseDiagramNonGauss}
\end{figure}
Inspection of Fig.~\ref{LambdaL} shows that the two points of intersection, which are marked by the closed and open circles, will merge when the dashed and solid curves touch each other in a single point. This occurs at a certain curvature $H_p(\theta)$ of the liquid surface. For $H > H_p$, there is no liquid adsorbed, and the substrate is dry. As $H_p$ is reached, the average position of the liquid surface, $h$, jumps discontinuously to the value given by the point of contact of the two curves. As $H$ is further reduced, $h$ increases until at coexistence it reaches a value corresponding to the right zero of $\Lambda L_S$. Because of the phenomenological similarity of the jump in adsorbed film thickness to the prewetting transition encountered in standard wetting scenarios on flat substrates \cite{DietrichReview}, we hereby propose to term this transition 'Wenzel prewetting'. When the microscopic contact angle is varied, a 'Wenzel prewetting line' results, which is shown in Fig.~\ref{PhaseDiagramNonGauss} as the solid curve. As in the usual prewetting scenario, this line ends in a critical end point, when the solid and dashed curves in Fig.~\ref{LambdaL} intersect in only a single point. It is readily appreciated from the construction sketched in Figs.~\ref{Lambda(h)} and \ref{LambdaL}, however, that this can occur only for $\theta \le 0$, and thus outside the physically accessible parameter range. In principle, the Wenzel prewetting line may intersect the percolation line. The latter then follows the prewetting line down to $\theta = 0$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width = 8.5cm]{./h_theta.jpg}
\caption{ \label{h(theta)} }
\end{figure}
Let us discuss how the position of the liquid surface varies along liquid/vapour coexistence as $\theta$ is gradually decreased from above $\theta_p$. This can be directly read off Fig.~\ref{Lambda(h)}, by inverting $\Lambda(h)$ for $h > h_{inf}$, and is sketched in Fig.~\ref{h(theta)}. The liquid film first appears through a discontinuous jump as $\theta$ crosses the Wenzel prewetting line. As $\theta < \theta_W$, the liquid surface configuration which is bound to the surface topography through eq.~(\ref{Eq:YoungApprox}) becomes metastablee (dashed curve), and the global minimum of the total free energy corresponds to the 'detached' liquid surface, or bulk liquid adsorption (bold line in Fig.~\ref{h(theta)}).
It is tempting to try to calculate the macroscopic contact angle, $\theta_{macro}$, along the coexistence line for $\theta_W < \theta < \theta_p$. In that range, the fraction $W_S(h)$ of the sample is covered with liquid, while the remaining fraction, $1-W_S(h)$, still exposes the uncovered rough substrate. The liquid surface energy of the areas covered with liquid is $W_S(h) G(h)$, where $G(h) = <\sqrt{1+(\nabla g)^2}>_{\mathcal{W}}$ is the total liquid surface area over $\mathcal{W}$. With the help of (\ref{Eq:WenzelNonGauss}) we readily obtain
\begin{equation}
\cos \theta_{macro} = G(h) - \int\limits_{T(h)}^{\infty} q(\chi) \left[G(h)-4D_2 \cos \theta \ S^{\prime 2}(\chi) \right]{\rm d}\chi
\label{Eq:ContactAngleNonGauss}
\end{equation}
Unfortunately, there is no straightforward way to calculate $G(h)$. We thus content ourselves here with an upper bound for $\theta_{macro}$, which is obtained by setting $G = 1$ in the above expression. Qualitatively, we can nevertheless conclude that since the jump at the prewetting line will directly enter in the lower boundary of the integral, it is clear that this jump will as well be visible in $\theta_{macro}(\theta)$. This is in contrast to, e.g., first order wetting, where a jump in film thickness is accompanied by a continuous variation in the contact angle \cite{DietrichReview}. We mention again that $\theta_{macro}$ may be subject to significant contact angle hysteresis \cite{Joanny1984} unless long equilibration times are taken into account.
\subsection{Adsorption isotherms}
It is finally instructive to discuss the qualitative shape of the adsorption isotherms in this scenario, which are sketched in Fig.~\ref{AdsorptionNonGauss}. The curves, which are meant to correspond to different values of $\theta$, follow what one would expect for the characteristic shown in Fig.~\ref{S(chi)}. The jump from zero film thickness to a finite value is generic and occurs for all contact angles. As $\theta$ is increased, the height of the jump increases slightly, following the curvature of the maximum of $\Lambda(h)$. At the same time, the maximum film thickness (reached at coexistence) decreases, until it finally comes below the percolation threshold when $\theta > \theta_c$. When $\theta > \theta_p$, $\Lambda(h)$ has no zero anymore, and the substrate remains dry up to coexistence.
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width = 7.5cm]{./AdsorptionNonGauss.jpg}
\caption{Sketch of a family of adsorption isotherms on non-Gaussian roughness. The jump occurs at what we shall term the 'Wenzel prewetting line'. The curves correspond, from bottom to top, to $\theta_c < \theta < \theta_p$, $\theta_W < \theta < \theta_c$, $0 < \theta < \theta_W$, and $\theta = 0$. The latter curve ends at finite adsorbed volume, but with infinite slope. \label{AdsorptionNonGauss}}
\end{figure}
A few more words concerning the shape of the function $\Lambda (h)$ are in order. If $f({\bf x})$ were Gaussian, $S(\chi)$ would be just of the form $\sqrt{C_0} \chi$. In that case, $\Lambda (h)$ would in Fig.~\ref{Lambda(h)} be represented by a horizontal line above the abscissa. The solid curve in Fig.~\ref{LambdaL} would then be a Gaussian, and the adsorption isotherms would of course be the same as in Fig.~\ref{Adsorption}. However, the fact that any real roughness is bounded, as there are neither infinitely high spikes nor infinitely deep troughs, entails the boundedness of the codomain of $S(\chi)$, in contrast to the infinite codomain of $\chi$. As an immediate consequence, the derivative of $T(h)$ must finally diverge at the boundaries of its (finite!) support, which necessarily leads to $\Lambda$ bending down onto the dashed line below the abscissa in Fig.~\ref{Lambda(h)}. This leads not only naturally to a finite $h$ at coexistence ($H=0$, cf. Fig.~\ref{LambdaL}), but also to the Wenzel prewetting jump in $h(H)$ farther away from coexistence, when the dashed curve in Fig.~\ref{LambdaL} just touches the solid curve. This reveals that the shape of the adsorption isotherms we derived for Gaussian roughness above is qualitatively different from what should be expected for real roughness. In fact, it misses the whole prewetting scenario, which turned out above to be a generic feature. Once again, Gaussian roughness reveals itself as a special case, which is mathematically convenient but may be misleading when it comes to making quantitative predictions.
\section{Conclusions}
In conclusion, an analytic theory was presented which allows to calculate the wetting phase diagram, adsorption isotherms, and percolation threshold of the adsorbed liquid film for isotropic, randomly rough substrates with arbitrary lateral correlation function and height distribution. The results are found to depend only upon a few key parameters, which can be clearly identified and derived from experimental sample profile data. We have seen that wetting 'physical' roughness displays a number of features which are not present for exactly Gaussian roughness, such as a prewetting transition occurring well before the Wenzel angle is reached. This could be traced down to subtle properties of Gaussian random functions, which reveal their unphysical nature only at second glance.
Since for most quantities of interest we could come up with closed analytic expressions, these results may be particularly useful for practical applications. The range of validity of the present theory extends from a few nanomeres up to roughly a millimeter, well below the capillary length of the liquid. The field of such applications is vast, including almost all situations in which a liquid comes into contact with a naturally rough surface. In particular, ramifications of wetting phase transitions, which inherently involve small contact angles, are to be expected and can now be accounted for in closed form.
Given the potential relevance of the results presented here, it will be worthwhile to work on relaxing the five major approximations we have used:
\begin{enumerate}
\item{We have assumed the substrate to be chemically homogeneous.}
\item{We have assumed shallow profiles; eqs.~(\ref{Eq:FlatApprox}) and (\ref{Eq:MeanCurvAppprox}).}
\item{We have neglected higher correlations in the shape of $\partial\mathcal{W}$; eqs.~(\ref{Eq:MCApprox}), (\ref{Eq:LaplaceApprox}), and the paragraph before.}
\item{We have assumed the curvature of the roughness characteristic $S(\chi)$ to be small; eq.~(\ref{Eq:SppSmall}).}
\item{We have assumed isotropy of the roughness; eq.~(\ref{Eq:CExpansion}).}
\end{enumerate}
The last two are probably the simplest to tackle, while the first one appears as the most difficult to overcome. It should finally be noted that in experiments, one has to reckon with quite long relaxation times for the measured quantities, because at all levels of the roughness there are saddle points \cite{LongHigg1957,Nayak1973}, which act as effective pinning sites for $h$. Equilibration will nevertheless proceed within manageable time, either via the vapour phase or via the molecularly thin adsorbed film \cite{Seemann2001}.
Inspiring discussions with Daniel Tartakovsky, Siegfried Dietrich, Martin Brinkmann, J\"urgen Vollmer, Sabine Klapp, and Daniela Fliegner are gratefully acknowledged. The author furthermore acknowledges generous support form BP International.
|
\section{#1}}
\renewcommand{\theequation}{\arabic{section}.\arabic{equation}}
\begin{document}
\title{\bf Isothermal Plasma Wave Properties of the Schwarzschild de-Sitter Black Hole
in a Veselago Medium}
\author{M. Sharif \thanks{<EMAIL>} and Ifra Noureen
\thanks{<EMAIL>}\\
Department of Mathematics, University of the Punjab,\\
Quaid-e-Azam Campus, Lahore-54590, Pakistan.}
\date{}
\maketitle
\begin{abstract}
In this paper, we study wave properties of isothermal plasma for
the Schwarzschild de-Sitter black hole in a Veselago medium. We
use ADM $3+1$ formalism to formulate general relativistic
magnetohydrodynamical (GRMHD) equations for the Schwarzschild
de-Sitter spacetime in Rindler coordinates. Further, Fourier
analysis of the linearly perturbed GRMHD equations for the
rotating (non-magnetized and magnetized) background is taken whose
determinant leads to a dispersion relation. We investigate wave
properties by using graphical representation of the wave vector,
the refractive index, change in refractive index, phase and group
velocities. Also, the modes of wave dispersion are explored. The
results indicate the existence of the Veselago medium.
\end{abstract}
{\bf Keywords:} $3+1$ formalism; SdS black hole; Veselago medium;
GRMHD equations; Isothermal plasma; Dispersion relations.\\
{\bf PACS:} 95.30.Sf; 95.30.Qd; 04.30.Nk
\section{Introduction}
Our solar system is filled with a wide range of celestial objects.
Black hole is one of such objects, having so strong gravitational
pull that no nearby matter or radiation, not even light can escape
from its gravitational field. Astronomers are curious to extract
real life examples of black hole. The presence of matter in the
form of white dwarfs and neutron stars suggests the existence of
stellar mass black holes. The accumulated evidence for the black
hole existence is now very captivating. It is believed that
collapse of a massive star under its own gravity leads to the
formation of black hole (Das 2004). Plasmas are abundant in
nature, almost found everywhere in an interstellar medium. It is a
distinct state of matter with free electric charge carriers which
behave collectively and respond strongly to electromagnetic fields
(Raine and Thomas 2005). Black hole (in its surroundings) attracts
plasma towards the event horizon due to its strong gravitational
pull. The plasma forms an accretion disk due to interaction of
plasma field with black hole gravity.
The theory of general relativistic magnetohydrodynamics (GRMHD) is
the most reliable discipline to examine the dynamics of magnetized
plasma and effects of black hole gravity. The de-Sitter spacetime
is a vacuum solution of the Einstein field equations including a
positive cosmological constant (Rindler 2001). The Schwarzschild
de-Sitter (SdS) metric describes a black hole expressing a patch
of the de-Sitter spacetime. Since the SdS black hole is
non-rotating, so plasma in magnetosphere moves only along the
radial direction. According to the recent cosmological and
astrophysical observations, our universe is accelerating rather
than decelerating and inclusion of positive cosmological constant
reveals the expanding universe (Reiss et al.1998; Bahcall et al.
1999; Perlmutter et al. 1997). That is why our universe approaches
to de-Sitter universe in future. This motivates the study of
plasma waves in de-Sitter spacetime.
Petterson (1974) investigated the strong gravitational field close
to the surface of compact objects for the Schwarzschild black
hole. Narayan (2005) suggested that compact objects having mass
three times the solar mass can be identified as black hole
candidates. Plasma present in magnetosphere is perturbed by
gravity of black hole. Zerilli (1970a, 1970b, 1970c) used linear
perturbation to explore gravitational field of a particle falling
in the Schwarzschild black hole. Price (1972a, 1972b) discussed
dynamics of approximately spherical star by using non-spherical
perturbations. Regge and Wheeler (1957) also used non-spherical
perturbation to investigate the stability of Schwarzschild
singularity. Gleiser et al. (1972) explored the stability of black
holes by considering second order perturbations.
Arnowitt, Deser and Misner (ADM) (1962) proposed $3+1$ formalism
for an easy approach to General Relativity (GR) by separating
metric field into two parts (space and time) to characterize the
coordinate system. Smarr and York (1978) used this formulation to
explore spacetime kinematics numerically. Israel (1967, 1968)
discussed event horizons in static vacuum and static
electro-vacuum spacetimes. Thorne and Macdonald (1982a, 1982b)
explained how $3+1$ split is appropriate approach for black hole
theory. Macdonald and Suen (1985) developed a self-consistent
formalism to treat electromagnetic and gravitational fields near
black hole horizon. Sakai and Kawata (1980) analyzed wave
propagation in ultra-relativistic plasma, parallel to a constant
magnetic field in a frame of two fluid model. Holcomb (1990) and
Dettmann et al. (1993) constructed electrodynamical equations for
the universe models. Holcomb and Tajima (1989) formulated
linearized theory for relativistic plasma and found results for
matter fluctuations in the early universe.
Rezolla et al. (2003) explored dynamics of thick disks around SdS
black hole by considering the effects of cosmological constant.
Font and Daigne (2002) studied stability of thick accretion disks
around black holes. Myung (2001) developed entropy bounds for SdS
black hole. Suneeta (2003) considered quasinormal modes for scalar
field perturbations of SdS black hole. Setare (2005) obtained area
and entropy spectrum near extremal SdS black hole horizon. Zhang
(1989a) modified the stationary symmetric GRMHD black hole
configuration theory. The same author (Zhang 1989b) explored the
modes of perturbation in rotating black hole. Buzzi et al. (1995a,
1995b) determined the properties of waves propagating in two fluid
plasma for the Schwarzschild black hole. Ali and Rahman (2009)
explained transverse wave propagation in two fluid plasma around
SdS black hole. Sharif and his collaborators (Sharif and Sheikh
2007a, 2007b, 2007c, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c 2009a, 2009b; Sharif and
Mustafa 2008; Sharif and Rafique 2010) have explored wave
properties of cold, isothermal and hot plasmas with Schwarzschild
as well as Kerr spacetimes in the usual medium.
The medium with both negative permeability and permittivity has
the unusual electromagnetic properties named as Veselago medium or
negative index medium (NIM), after a Russian physicist Veselago
(1968). It is also called as double negative medium (DNM) or
negative phase velocity medium (NPV). Valanju et al. (2002)
presented treatment for refraction of electromagnetic waves in a
NIM. Ross et al. (2006) concluded that propensity of a rotating
black hole is enhanced in the presence of charge to support wave
propagation with negative phase velocity in its ergosphere.
Ziolkowski and Heyman (2001) studied wave propagation analytically
and numerically in NIM. Nagar et al. (2004) reported results from
numerical simulations of gravitational radiations emitted due to
matter accretion from non-rotating compact objects. In recent
papers, Sharif and Mukhtar (2011a, 2011b) have discussed wave
properties with non-rotating as well as rotating background
plasmas (isothermal and hot) in this unusual medium.
This paper deals with wave properties of isothermal plasma around
SdS black hole in a Veselago medium. We consider $3+1$ GRMHD
equations and determine a dispersion relation by Fourier analysis
for both magnetized and non-magnetized backgrounds. The results are
discussed by three dimensional plot of wave vector, refractive index
and change in refractive index. The paper is organized as follows:
In section \textbf{2}, linearly perturbed $3+1$ GRMHD equations for
isothermal plasma and their Fourier analysis is developed. Sections
\textbf{3} and \textbf{4} provide reduced form of the GRMHD
equations for rotating (non-magnetized and magnetized respectively)
plasmas. We summarize our results in the last section.
\section{GRMHD Equations in a Veselogo Medium With Isothermal Plasma Assumption}
The general line element in ADM $3+1$ formalism is given as
follows (Zhang 1989b)
\begin{equation}\setcounter{equation}{1}\label{1}
ds^2=-\alpha^2dt^2+\eta_{ij}(dx^i+\beta^idt)(dx^j+\beta^jdt).
\end{equation}
A natural observer associated with this spacetime is known as
fiducial observer (FIDO), $\alpha$ denotes lapse function (ratio
of FIDO proper time to universal time i.e., $\frac{d\tau}{dt}$),
$\beta^i$ is three-dimensional shift vector (which determines
change in spatial coordinates) and $\eta_{ij}~(i,j=1,2,3)$ are the
components of three-dimensional hypersurfaces. The SdS spacetime
in Rindler coordinates is given by (Ali and Rehman 2009)
\begin{equation}\label{2}
ds^2=-\alpha^2(z)dt^2+dx^2+dy^2+dz^2,
\end{equation}
where the directions $z,~y$ and $x$ are analogous to the
Schwarzschild coordinates $r,~\phi$ and $\theta$ respectively. Since
SdS black hole is non-rotating, the shift vector vanishes. On
comparing Eqs.(\ref{1}) and (\ref{2}), we have
\begin{equation}\label{3}
\alpha=\alpha(z),\quad\beta=0,\quad\eta_{ij}=1~(i=j).
\end{equation}
The $3+1$ GRMHD equations for the line element (\ref{2}) in a
Veselago medium are given by Eqs.(\ref{49})-(\ref{53}) in
Appendix. The equation of state for isothermal plasma is (Zhang
1989a)
\begin{eqnarray}\label{3}
\mu=\frac{\rho+p}{\rho_0}=constant,
\end{eqnarray}
here $\rho_0,~\rho,~p$ and $\mu$ denote rest mass density, moving
mass density, pressure and specific enthalpy respectively. The
specific enthalpy is constant while pressure $p\neq0$ for the
isothermal plasma. This equation shows that there is no energy
exchange between plasma and magnetic field of fluid. The
corresponding $3+1$ GRMHD equations ((\ref{49})-(\ref{53})) for
isothermal plasma surrounding the SdS black hole become
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{4} &&\frac{\partial \textbf{B}}{\partial
t}=-\nabla\times(\alpha \textbf{V}\times \textbf{B}),\\
\label{5}&&\nabla.\textbf{B}=0,\\
\label{6} &&\frac{\partial (\rho+p) }{\partial t}+(\rho+p)\gamma^2
\textbf{V}. \frac{\partial \textbf{V}}{\partial t}+(\alpha
\textbf{V}.\nabla)(\rho+p)+(\rho+p)\gamma^2 V.(\alpha
\textbf{V}.\nabla)
\textbf{V}\nonumber\\
&&+(\rho+p) \nabla.(\alpha\textbf{V})=0,\\
\label{7}
&&\left\{\left((\rho+p)\gamma^2+\frac{\textbf{B}^2}{4\pi}\right)\delta_{ij}
+(\rho+p)\gamma^4V_iV_j-\frac{1}{4\pi}B_iB_j\right\}
\left(\frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{\partial}{\partial
t}\right.\nonumber\\
&&\left.+\textbf{V}.\nabla\right)V^j-\left(\frac{\textbf{B}^2}{4\pi}\delta_{ij}-
\frac{1}{4\pi}B_iB_j\right)V^j_{,k}V^k\nonumber\\
&&+(\rho+p)\gamma^2a_i+p_{,i}=\frac{1}{4\pi}
(\textbf{V}\times\textbf{B})_i\nabla.(\textbf{V}\times\textbf{B})
-\frac{1}{8\pi\alpha^2}(\alpha\textbf{B})^2_{,i}\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{1}{4\pi\alpha}(\alpha B_i)_{,j}B^j-\frac{1}{4\pi\alpha}
[\textbf{B}\times\{\textbf{V}\times(\nabla\times(\alpha\textbf{V}\times\textbf{B}))\}]_i,\\
\label{8} &&(\frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{\partial}{\partial
t}+\textbf{V}.\nabla)(\rho+p)\gamma^2-\frac{1}{\alpha}\frac
{\partial p}{\partial t}+2(\rho+p)\gamma^2(\textbf{V}.\textbf{a})
+(\rho+p)\nonumber\\
&&\gamma^2(\nabla.\textbf{V})
-\frac{1}{4\pi\alpha}\left.(\textbf{V}\times\textbf{B}).(\textbf{V}\times\frac
{\partial \textbf{B}}{\partial t}\right.)
-\frac{1}{4\pi\alpha}\left.(\textbf{V}\times\textbf{B}).(\textbf{B}\times\frac{\partial
\textbf{V}}{\partial
t}\right.)\nonumber\\&&+\frac{1}{4\pi\alpha}\left(\textbf{V}\times\textbf{B}).
(\nabla\times\alpha\textbf{B}\right.)=0.
\end{eqnarray}
In rotating background, we assume that plasma flow is in two
dimensions, i.e., in $xz$-plane. Therefore FIDO's measured
velocity $\textbf{V}$ and magnetic field $\textbf{B}$ turn out to
be
\begin{eqnarray}\label{9}
\textbf{V}=V(z)\textbf{e}_x+u(z)\textbf{e}_z,\quad
\textbf{B}=B[\lambda(z)\textbf{e}_x+\textbf{e}_z],
\end{eqnarray}
here $B$ is an arbitrary constant. The relation between the
quantities $\lambda,~u$ and $V$ is given by (Sharif and Sheikh
2007a, 2007b, 2008a, 2008b, 2008c)
\begin{equation}\label{a}
V=\frac{V^F}{\alpha}+\lambda u,
\end{equation}
where $V^F$ is an integration constant. The Lorentz factor,
$\gamma=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-\textbf{V}^2}}$ becomes
\begin{equation}\label{b}
\gamma=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-u^2-V^2}}.
\end{equation}
When the plasma flow is perturbed due to black hole gravity, we
use linear perturbation. The flow variables (mass density $\rho$,
pressure $p$, velocity $\textbf{V}$ and magnetic field
$\textbf{B}$) take the form
\begin{eqnarray}\label{10}
&&\rho=\rho^0+\delta\rho=\rho^0+\rho\widetilde{\rho},\quad
p=p^0+\delta p=p^0+p\widetilde{p},\nonumber\\
&&\textbf{V}=\textbf{V}^0+\delta\textbf{V}=\textbf{V}^0+\textbf{v},~
\textbf{B}=\textbf{B}^0+\delta\textbf{B}=\textbf{B}^0+B\textbf{b},
\end{eqnarray}
where unperturbed quantities are denoted by
$\rho^0,~p,~\textbf{V}^0$ and $~\textbf{B}^0$, the linearly
perturbed quantities are represented by $\delta\rho,~\delta
p,~\delta\textbf{V}$ and $\delta\textbf{B}$. We introduce the
following dimensionless quantities
$\widetilde{\rho},~\widetilde{p},~v_x,~v_z,~b_x$ and $b_z$ for the
perturbed quantities
\begin{eqnarray}\label{11}
&&\tilde{\rho}=\tilde{\rho}(t,z),\quad
\tilde{p}=\tilde{p}(t,z),\quad\textbf{v}=\delta\textbf{V}=v_x(t,z)\textbf{e}_x
+v_z(t,z)\textbf{e}_z,\nonumber\\
&&\textbf{b}=\frac{\delta\textbf{B}}{B}=b_x(t,z)\textbf{e}_x
+b_z(t,z)\textbf{e}_z.
\end{eqnarray}
When we insert these linear perturbations in the perfect GRMHD
equations (Eqs.(\ref{4})-(\ref{8})) along with Eq.(\ref{11}), the
component form of these equations will be (Sharif and Mukthar
2011a, 2011b)
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{17}&&\frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{\partial b_x}{\partial
t}-ub_{x,z}=(ub_x-Vb_z-v_x+\lambda v_z)\nabla
\ln\alpha\nonumber\\
&&-(v_{x,z}-\lambda
v_{z,z}-\lambda'v_z+V'b_z+Vb_{z,z}-u'b_x),\\\label{18}
&&\frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{\partial b_z}{\partial t}=0,\\\label{19}
&&b_{z,z}=0,
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{20} &&\rho\frac{\partial\tilde{\rho}}{\partial
t}+p\frac{\partial\tilde{p}}{\partial
t}+(\rho+p)\gamma^2(V\frac{\partial v_x}{\partial
t}+u\frac{\partial v_z}{\partial t})+\alpha u\rho\rho_{,z}+\alpha
upp_{,z}\nonumber\\
&&+\alpha(\rho+p)\{\gamma^2uVv_{x,z}+(1+\gamma^2u^2)v_{z,z}\}-\frac{1}{\gamma}
(\tilde{\rho}-\tilde{p})(\alpha u\gamma p)_{,z}\nonumber\\
&&+\alpha(\rho+p)\gamma^2u
\{(1+2\gamma^2V^2)V'+2\gamma^2uVu'\}v_x-\alpha(\rho+p)\nonumber\\
&&\times\{(1-2\gamma^2u^2)(1+\gamma^2u^2)\frac{u'}{u}\}
-2\gamma^4u^2VV'\}v_z=0,\\\label{21}
&&\left\{(\rho+p)\gamma^2(1+\gamma^2V^2)
+\frac{B^2}{4\pi}\right\}\frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{\partial
v_x}{\partial t}+\left\{(\rho+p)\gamma^4uV-\frac{\lambda B
^2}{4\pi}\right\}\nonumber\\
&&\times\frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{\partial v_z}{\partial
t}+\left\{(\rho+p)\gamma^2(1+\gamma^2V^2)
+\frac{B^2}{4\pi}\right\}uv_{x,z}+\left\{(\rho+p)\gamma^4uV\right.\nonumber\\
&&\left.-\frac{\lambda B^2}{4\pi}\right\}uv_{z,z}
-\frac{B^2}{4\pi}(1+u^2)b_{x,z}-\frac{B^2}{4\pi\alpha}\left\{\alpha'(1+u^2)+\alpha
uu'\right\}b_x\nonumber\\
&&+\gamma^2u(\rho\tilde{\rho}+p\tilde{p})\left\{(1+\gamma^2V^2)V'+\gamma^2uVu'\right\}
+[(\rho+p)\gamma^4u\{(1\nonumber\\
&&+4\gamma^2V^2)uu'+4VV'(1+\gamma^2V^2)\}+\frac{B^2u\alpha'}{4\pi\alpha}]v_x+[(\rho+p)
\gamma^2\{(1\nonumber\\
&&+2\gamma^2u^2)(1+2\gamma^2V^2)V'-\gamma^2V^2V'
+2\gamma^2(1+2\gamma^2u^2)uVu'\}\nonumber\\
&&-\frac{B^2u} {4\pi\alpha}(\lambda\alpha)']v_z=0,\\\label{22}
&&\left\{(\rho+p)\gamma^2(1+\gamma^2u^2)
+\frac{\lambda^2B^2}{4\pi}\right\}\frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{\partial
v_z}{\partial t}+\left\{(\rho+p)\gamma^4uV -\frac{\lambda B
^2}{4\pi}\right\}\nonumber\\
&&\times\frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{\partial v_x}{\partial t}
+\left\{(\rho+p)\gamma^2(1+\gamma^2u^2)+\frac{\lambda^2B^2}{4\pi}\right\}
uv_{z,z}+\{(\rho+p)\gamma^4u\nonumber\\
&&\times V-\frac{\lambda B^2}{4\pi}\}uv_{x,z}+\frac{\lambda
B^2}{4\pi}(1+u^2)b_{x,z}+\frac{B^2}{4\pi\alpha}\{\alpha'\lambda-(\alpha\lambda)'
+u\lambda\nonumber\\
&&\times(u\alpha'+u'\alpha)\}b_x+(\rho\tilde{\rho}+p\tilde{p})\gamma^2\{a_z
+u u'(1+\gamma^2u^2)+\gamma^2u^2VV'\}\nonumber\\
&&+[(\rho+p)\gamma^4\{u^2V'(1+4\gamma^2V^2)+2V(a_z+uu'(1+2\gamma^2u^2))\}-\lambda
B^2\nonumber\\&&\times\frac{u\alpha'}{4\pi\alpha}]v_x+[(\rho+p)
\gamma^2\{u'(1+\gamma^2u^2)(1+4\gamma^2u^2)+2u\gamma^2(a_z+(1\nonumber\\
&&+2\gamma^2u^2)V V')\}+\frac{\lambda
B^2u}{4\pi\alpha}(\alpha\lambda)']v_z+(p'\tilde{p}+p\tilde{p}')=0,
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{23} &&\frac{1}{\alpha}\gamma^2\rho\frac{\partial
\tilde{\rho}}{\partial t}+\frac{1}{\alpha}\gamma^2p\frac{\partial
\tilde{p}}{\partial
t}+\gamma^2(\rho'+p')v_z+u\gamma^2(\rho\tilde{\rho}_{,z}+p\tilde{p}_{,z}+\rho'\tilde{\rho}\nonumber\\
&&+p'\tilde{p})-\frac{1}{\alpha}p\frac{\partial
\tilde{p}}{\partial
t}+2\gamma^2u(\rho\tilde{\rho}+p\tilde{p})a_z+\gamma^2u'(\rho\tilde{\rho}+p\tilde{p})+2(\rho\nonumber\\
&&+p)\gamma^4(uV'+2uVa_z+u'V)v_x+2(\rho+p)\gamma^2(2\gamma^2uu'+a_z\gamma^4\nonumber\\
&&+2\gamma^2u^2a_z)v_z+2(\rho+p)\gamma^4uVv_{x,z}+(\rho+p)\gamma^2(1+2\gamma^2u^2)\nonumber
v_{z,z}\\ &&-\frac{B^2}{4\pi\alpha}[(V^2+u^2)\lambda
\frac{\partial b_x}{\partial t}+(V^2+u^2)\frac{\partial
b_z}{\partial t}-V(\lambda V\nonumber+u)\frac{\partial
b_x}{\partial t}\\ &&-u(\lambda V+u)\frac{\partial b_z}{\partial
t}]+\frac{B^2}{4\pi\alpha}[(V-\lambda
u)v_{x,t}+\lambda(u\lambda\nonumber-V)v_{z,t}]\nonumber\\
&&-\frac{B^2} {4\pi}(\lambda\lambda'v_z-\lambda'v_x-\lambda'Vb_z+
\lambda'ub_x-V b_{x,z}+u\lambda b_{x,z})=0.
\end{eqnarray}
The following harmonic spacetime dependence of perturbation is
assumed for the Fourier analysis,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{24}
\widetilde{\rho}(t,z)=c_1e^{-\iota(\omega t-kz)},&\quad&
\widetilde{p}(t,z)=c_2e^{-\iota(\omega t-kz)},\nonumber\\
v_z(t,z)=c_3e^{-\iota(\omega t-kz)},&\quad&
v_x(t,z)=c_4e^{-\iota(\omega t-kz)},\nonumber\\
b_z(t,z)=c_5e^{-\iota(\omega t-kz)},&\quad&
b_x(t,z)=c_6e^{-\iota(\omega t-kz)},
\end{eqnarray}
here $\omega$ and $k$ represent the angular frequency and
$z$-component of the wave vector $(0,0,k)$, respectively. The wave
vector can be used to determine refractive index and the
properties of plasma near the event horizon.
The ratio of speed of light when it travels from one medium to
another is said to be refractive index. Frequency dependence
effects in wave propagation refers to dispersion. This describes
relations between wave properties like wave length, angular
frequency, refractive index etc. (Das 2004). Dispersion is said to
be normal if change in the refractive index with respect to
angular frequency is positive, otherwise anomalous. Using
Eq.(\ref{24}) in Eqs.(\ref{17})-(\ref{23}), we get their Fourier
analyzed form
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{25}&&c_{4}(\alpha'+\iota k\alpha)-c_3\
\left\{(\alpha\lambda)'+\iota k\alpha\lambda\ \right\}-c_5(\alpha
V)'+c_6\{(\alpha
u)'+\iota\omega\nonumber\\
&&+\iota ku\alpha\}=0,
\\\label{26}
&&c_5(\frac{-\iota\omega}{\alpha})=0,\\\label{27} &&c_5\iota k=0,
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{28} &&c_1\{(-\iota\omega+\iota k\alpha
u)\rho-p\gamma^2\alpha u(VV'+u u')-\alpha'up-\alpha u'p-\alpha
up'\}\nonumber\\
&&+c_2\{(-\iota\omega+\iota k\alpha u)p+\alpha'up+\alpha
u'p+\alpha
up'+p\gamma^2\alpha u(VV'+u u')\}\nonumber\\
&&+c_3(\rho+p)[-\iota\omega\gamma^2u+\iota
k\alpha(1+\gamma^2u^2)-\alpha\{(1-2\gamma^2u^2)(1+\gamma^2u^2)
\nonumber\\
&&\times\frac{u'}{u}-2\gamma^4u^2VV'\}]+c_4(\rho+p)[\gamma^2V(-\iota\omega+\iota
k\alpha
u)+\alpha\gamma^2u\{(1\nonumber\\
&&+2\gamma^2V^2)V'+2\gamma^2uVu'\}]=0,
\\\label{29}
&&c_1\rho\gamma^2u\{(1+\gamma^2V^2)V'+\gamma^2uVu'\}+c_2p\gamma^2u\{(1+\gamma^2V^2)V'\nonumber\\
&&+\gamma^2uVu'\}+c_3[-\{(\rho+p)\gamma^4uV-\frac{\lambda\
B^2}{4\pi}\}\frac{\iota\omega}{\alpha}+\{(\rho+p)\gamma^4uV\nonumber\\
&&-\frac{\lambda\ B^2}{4\pi}\}\iota ku+(\rho+p)\gamma^2\{(1+2\gamma^2u^2)(1+2\gamma^2V^2)
-\gamma^2V^2\}V'\nonumber\\
&&+2\gamma^4(\rho+p)uVu'(1+2\gamma^2u^2)-\frac{B^2u}{4\pi\alpha}(\alpha\lambda)']+c_4[-\{(\rho+p)
\gamma^2\nonumber\\
&&(1+\gamma^2V^2)+\frac{B^2}{4\pi}\}\frac{\iota\omega}{\alpha}
+\{(\rho+p)\gamma^2(1+\gamma^2V^2)+\frac{B^2}{4\pi}\}\iota ku\nonumber\\
&&+(\rho+p)\gamma^4u\{(1+4\gamma^2V^2)u
u'+4VV'(1+\gamma^2V^2)\}+\frac{B^2u\alpha'}{4\pi\alpha}]\nonumber\\
&&-c_6\frac{B^2}{4\pi}\{(1+u^2)\iota
k+(1+u^2)\frac{\alpha'}{\alpha}+uu'\}=0,
\\\label{30}
&&c_1\rho\gamma^2\{a_z+uu'(1+\gamma^2u^2)+\gamma^2u^2VV'\}+c_2[p\gamma^2\{a_z+uu'\nonumber\\
&&(1+\gamma^2u^2)+\gamma^2u^2VV'\}+p'+\iota k
p]+c_3[-\{(\rho+p)\gamma^2(1+\gamma^2u^2)\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{\lambda
^2B^2}{4\pi}\}\frac{\iota\omega}{\alpha}+\{(\rho+p)\gamma^2(1+\gamma^2u^2)+\frac{\lambda
^2B^2}{4\pi}\}\iota ku+\{(\rho+p)\gamma^2\nonumber\\
&&\times \{u'(1+\gamma^2u^2)(1+4\gamma^2u^2)+2u\gamma^2\{a_z+(1+2\gamma^2u^2)\}VV'\}\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{\lambda
B^2u}{4\pi\alpha}(\alpha\lambda)']+c_4[-\{(\rho+p)\gamma^4u
V-\frac{\lambda
B^2}{4\pi}\}\frac{\iota\omega}{\alpha}+\{(\rho+p)\gamma^4uV\nonumber\\
&&-\frac{\lambda B^2}{4\pi}\}\iota
ku+\{(\rho+p)\gamma^4\{u^2V'(1+4\gamma^2V^2)+2V
\{(1+2\gamma^2u^2)uu'\nonumber\\
&&+a_z-\frac{\lambda B^2\alpha'
u}{4\pi\alpha}\}]+c_6[\frac{B^2}{4\pi\alpha}\{-(\alpha\lambda)'
+\alpha'\lambda-u\lambda(u\alpha'+u'\alpha)\}\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{\lambda B^2}{4\pi}(1+u^2)\iota k]=0,
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{31}&&c_1\{(\frac{-\iota\omega}{\alpha}\gamma^2+\iota ku
\gamma^2+2u\gamma^2a_z+\gamma^2u')\rho+u\rho'\gamma^2\}
+c_2\{(\frac{\iota\omega}{\alpha}(1-\gamma^2)\nonumber\\
&&+\iota ku\gamma^2+2\gamma^2ua_z+\gamma^2u')p+u\gamma^2p'\}+c_3\gamma^2\{(\rho'+p')+2\nonumber\\
&&\times(2\gamma^2uu'+a_z+2\gamma^2u^2a_z)(\rho+p)+(1+2\gamma^2u^2)(\rho+p)\iota
k+\frac{\lambda B^2}{4\pi\alpha}\nonumber\\
&&\times(\lambda
u-V)\iota\omega+\alpha\lambda'\}+c_4[2(\rho+p)\gamma^4\{(u
V'+2uVa_z+u'V)+uV\iota
k\}\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{B^2}{4\pi\alpha}(V-u\lambda)\iota\omega-\alpha\lambda']
+c_6[\frac{-B^2}{4\pi\alpha}\{(V^2+u^2)\lambda+
V(\lambda V+u)\iota\omega\}\nonumber\\
&&-\alpha\lambda'u+\iota k\alpha(V-u\lambda)]=0.
\end{eqnarray}
\section{Rotating Non-Magnetized Flow}
For the rotating non-magnetized background of plasma flow, we
substitute $B=0=\lambda$ and $c_5=0=c_6$ in the Fourier analyzed
perturbed GRMHD equations ((\ref{28})-(\ref{31})) (Sharif and
Mukhtar 2011a, 2011b).
\subsection{Numerical Solutions}
For the rotating non-magnetized plasma, we use the following assumptions
to find out the numerical solutions
\begin{enumerate}
\item Specific enthalpy: $\mu=1$,
\item Time lapse: $\alpha=\frac{z}{2r_h}$,
\item Velocity components: $u=V,~x$ and $z$-components of velocity
yield $u=V=-\frac{1}{\sqrt{z^{2}+2}}$,
\item Stiff fluid: $\rho=p=-\frac{1}{2u}$,
\item Lorentz factor: $ \gamma=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-u^2-V^2}}=
\frac{\sqrt{z^{2}+2}}{z}$,
\end{enumerate}
where $r_h$ is the SdS event horizon greater than that of the
Schwarzschild event horizon and $r_h\thickapprox
2M\left(1+\frac{4M^{2}}{l^{2}}+...\right)\backsimeq\zeta0.2948km$,
$1\leqslant\zeta\leqslant1.5$ for a black hole mass
$M\thicksim1M_{\bigodot}$. The value of $\zeta$ corresponding to
extremal SdS black hole is $1.5$ (Ali and Rehman 2009).
We consider the region $-5\leq z\leq5$ for wave analysis assuming
that event horizon is at $z=0$. We take this region to explain
waves near horizon only for convenience. Since the flow variables
exhibit large variations in the region $-1\leq z\leq1$, we ignore
it and solve dispersion relation for two meshes, i.e., $-5\leq
z\leq-1$ and $1\leq z\leq5$ (corresponding to near and far
electromagnetic radiation zone). A complex dispersion relation (
Das 2004) is obtained by solving the determinant of the
coefficients of constants of the corresponding equations of the
rotating non-magnetized plasma. The real part of the determinant
yields a quartic equation in $k$
\begin{equation}\label{36}
A_1(z)k^4+A_2(z,\omega)k^3+A_3(z,\omega)k^2+A_4(z,\omega)k+A_5(z,\omega)=0
\end{equation}
which gives four real roots. A cubic equation in $k$ is obtained
from the imaginary part
\begin{equation}\label{37}
B_1(z)k^3+B_2(z,\omega)k^2+B_3(z,\omega)k+B_4(z,\omega)=0
\end{equation}
which yields three real roots. The first and second root of the real
part show wave propagation only in the region $-5\leq z\leq-1$ while
the third and fourth root exhibit waves in the region $1\leq
z\leq5$. The roots of the imaginary part indicate wave propagation
in both meshes $-5\leq z\leq-1$ and $1\leq z\leq5$, i.e., region
near the event horizon and outer end of magnetosphere respectively.
The wave vector, refractive index, its change with respect to
angular frequency, group velocity and phase velocity lead to the
wave properties of the SdS black hole and properties of Veselago
medium. These are shown in Figures \textbf{1-10} by using real
values of $k$ in Eqs.(\ref{36}) and (\ref{37}).
It is given that dispersion is normal if phase velocity is greater
than the group velocity, otherwise anomalous (Achenbach 1973) or
equivalently dispersion is normal if change in refractive index is
positive, anomalous otherwise. We see from figures that some waves
move towards the event horizon and some move away from the
horizon. The dispersion is normal in Figures \textbf{5-7} and
\textbf{10} while it is anomalous in the whole region of Figure
\textbf{8}. The following table classifies the regions of normal
and anomalous dispersion in Figures \textbf{1}-\textbf{4} and
\textbf{9}.
\newpage
\par\noindent
The results deduced from these figures can be expressed in the
following table.
\begin{center}
Table I. Direction and refractive index of waves
\end{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline\textbf{Fig.} & \textbf{Direction of Waves} &
\textbf{Refractive Index} ($n$)\\ \hline
& & $n<1$ and decreases in the region \\
\textbf{1} & Move towards the event horizon & $-5\leq z\leq
-1.4,0\leq\omega\leq 2.6$\\&& with the decrease in $z$ \\
\hline
& & $n<1$ and increases in the region\\
\textbf{2} & Move away from the event horizon & $-2.94\leq z\leq
-1.1, 0\leq\omega\leq
3.5$\\&&with the decrease in $z$ \\
\hline
& & $n<1$ and increases in the region\\
\textbf{3} & Move towards the event horizon & $1\leq z\leq1.9,1.6\leq\omega\leq 2.7$\\
& &with the decrease in $z$ \\
\hline
& & $n<1$ and decreases in the region\\
\textbf{4} & Move outwards from the event horizon & $1\leq z\leq5,0\leq\omega\leq 3.8$\\
& &with the decrease in $z$ \\
\hline
& & $n<1$ and decreases in the region\\
\textbf{5} & Move towards the event horizon & $-5\leq z\leq-4,5\leq\omega\leq 8$\\
& &with the decrease in $z$ \\
\hline& & $n<1$ and decreases in the region\\
\textbf{6} & Move away from the event horizon & $1.8\leq z\leq5,5.9\leq\omega\leq 10$\\
& &with the decrease in $z$ \\
\hline& & $n<1$ and decreases in the region\\
\textbf{7} & Move away from the event horizon & $-5\leq z\leq-2.6,0\leq\omega\leq 4.7$\\
& &with the decrease in $z$ \\
\hline& & $n<1$ and decreases in the region\\
\textbf{8} & Move away from the event horizon & $1\leq z\leq5,6.3\leq\omega\leq 10$\\
& &with the decrease in $z$ \\
\hline& & $n<1$ and decreases in the region\\
\textbf{9} & Move towards the event horizon & $-5\leq z\leq-3.4,8.1\leq\omega\leq 10$\\
& &with the decrease in $z$ \\
\hline& & $n<1$ and decreases in the region\\
\textbf{10} & Move toward the event horizon & $1.4\leq z\leq5,0.8\leq\omega\leq 5.4$\\
& &with the decrease in $z$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\begin{figure}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\epsfig{file=f1.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f2.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\epsfig{file=f3.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f4.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f5.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Dispersion is normal and anomalous in the region}
\begin{tabular}{cc}\\
\epsfig{file=f6.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f7.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\epsfig{file=f8.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f9.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f10.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Normal as wells as anomalous dispersion occur at random
points in the region.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\epsfig{file=f11.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f12.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\epsfig{file=f13.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f14.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f15.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Normal and anomalous dispersion of waves is observed.}
\begin{tabular}{cc}\\
\epsfig{file=f16.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f17.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\epsfig{file=f18.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f19.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f20.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Random points of normal and anomalous dispersion are
found in the region.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\epsfig{file=f21.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f22.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\epsfig{file=f23.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f24.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f25.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Whole region admits normal dispersion.}
\begin{tabular}{cc}\\
\epsfig{file=f26.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f27.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\epsfig{file=f28.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f29.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f30.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Dispersion of waves is normal throughout the region.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\epsfig{file=f31.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f32.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\epsfig{file=f33.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f34.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f35.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Waves disperse normally in the whole region.}
\begin{tabular}{cc}\\
\epsfig{file=f36.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f37.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\epsfig{file=f38.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f39.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f40.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Region shows anomalous dispersion.}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\epsfig{file=f41.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f42.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\epsfig{file=f43.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f44.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f45.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Waves exhibit both normal and anomalous dispersion.}
\begin{tabular}{cc}\\
\epsfig{file=f46.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f47.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\epsfig{file=f48.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f49.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f50.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Dispersion is found to be normal in the whole region.}
\end{figure}
\begin{center}
\newpage
\par\noindent
Table II. Regions of dispersion
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline \textbf{Fig.}& \textbf{ Normal dispersion} &
\textbf{Anomalous dispersion}
\\\hline & $-5\leq z\leq -1.3, 0\leq\omega\leq 10$ &
$-1.28\leq z\leq -1.2, 3\leq\omega\leq 5$ \\
\textbf{1} & $-1.2\leq z\leq -1, 0\leq\omega\leq 1$ & $-1.28\leq
z\leq -1.2, 7\leq\omega\leq 10$
\\\hline & $-5\leq z\leq -4, 0\leq\omega\leq 10$ &
$-3\leq z\leq -2.5, 7\leq\omega\leq 8.5$ \\
\textbf{2} & $-4\leq z\leq -3, 0\leq\omega\leq 1$ & $-2.5\leq z\leq
-2, 7\leq\omega\leq 8.4$ \\& $-1.5\leq z\leq -1, 0\leq\omega\leq
1$ & $-2\leq z\leq -1.5, 2.5\leq\omega\leq 3$
\\\hline \textbf{3}& $3.9\leq z\leq 5, 0\leq\omega\leq 10$ &
$1.2\leq z\leq 3.6, 0\leq\omega\leq 10$
\\\hline & $1.5\leq z\leq
5, 0\leq\omega\leq 10$ &
$1\leq z\leq 1.1, 3\leq\omega\leq 4$ \\
\textbf{4} & $1\leq z\leq 1.5, 0\leq\omega\leq 2$ & $1.1\leq
z\leq 1.3, 5\leq\omega\leq 7$
\\\hline & $-5\leq z\leq -1, 0\leq\omega\leq 4.5$ &
$-5\leq z\leq -4, 8.2\leq\omega\leq 10$ \\
\textbf{9} & $-4\leq z\leq -3, 4.7\leq\omega\leq 5$ & $-4\leq
z\leq -3, 8.5\leq\omega\leq 10$
\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\section{Plasma Flow With Rotating Magnetized Background}
Here plasma is supposed to be rotating and magnetized. The
magnetic field and velocity of fluid are assumed to lie in
$xz$-plane. The corresponding perturbed Fourier analyzed GRMHD
equations, i.e., Eqs.(\ref{25})-(\ref{31}) are given in Section
$2$.
\subsection{Numerical Solutions}
We take the same assumptions for the lapse function, velocity and
specific enthalpy as in the previous section. Further, we assume
$\frac{B^{2}}{4\pi}=2$ with $u=V$ and $V^F=1$ in Eq.(\ref{a}) so
that $\lambda=1+\frac{\sqrt{2+z^{2}}}{z}$.
Here we also consider the region $-5\leq z\leq5,~ 0\leq\omega\leq
10$ and investigate the wave properties in meshes $-5\leq z\leq-1$
and $1\leq z\leq5$ From Eqs.(\ref{26})-(\ref{27}), it follows that
$c_{5}=0$. Consequently, we obtain dispersion relation whose real
part is
\begin{equation}{\setcounter{equation}{1}}\label{38}
A_1(z)k^4+A_2(z,\omega)k^3+A_3(z,\omega)k^2+A_4(z,\omega)k+A_5(z,\omega)=0
\end{equation}
giving four imaginary roots. The imaginary part of the dispersion
relation
\begin{eqnarray}\label{39}
&&B_1(z)k^5+B_2(z,\omega)k^4+B_3(z,\omega)k^3+B_4(z,\omega)k^2+B_5(z,\omega)k\nonumber\\
&&+B_6(z,\omega)=0
\end{eqnarray}
yields five roots of $k$ out of which one is real and four roots
are complex. The real root indicates wave propagation in both
meshes, i.e., $-5\leq z\leq-1$ and $1\leq z\leq5$ shown in Figures
\textbf{11}-\textbf{12}. This shows that waves move towards the
event horizon. Also, it is obvious from figures that dispersion is
normal as well as anomalous at random points.
The following tables show the results obtained from these figures.
\begin{center}
Table III. Direction and refractive index of waves
\end{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline\textbf{Fig.} & \textbf{Direction of Waves} &
\textbf{Refractive Index} ($n$)\\ \hline
& & $n<1$ and decreases in the region \\
\textbf{11} & Move towards the event horizon & $-5\leq z\leq
-2.1,0\leq\omega\leq 10$\\&& with the decrease in $z$ \\
\hline
& & $n<1$ and increases in the region\\
\textbf{12} & Move towards the event horizon & $1\leq z\leq 1.8,
1.5\leq\omega\leq
4$\\&&with the decrease in $z$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}\\
\begin{center}
\begin{figure}
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\epsfig{file=f51.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f52.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\epsfig{file=f53.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f54.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f55.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Normal and anomalous dispersion at random points.}
\begin{tabular}{cc}\\
\epsfig{file=f56.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f57.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\epsfig{file=f58.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f59.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}
\epsfig{file=f60.eps,width=0.34\linewidth}\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{Dispersion is normal as well as anomalous at random
points.}
\end{figure}
Table IV. Regions of dispersion
\end{center}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline \textbf{Fig.} & \textbf{ Normal dispersion} &
\textbf{Anomalous dispersion}
\\\hline & $-5\leq z\leq -4.9, 1\leq\omega\leq 10$ &
$-4\leq z\leq -3.6, 1\leq\omega\leq 1.5$ \\
\textbf{11} & $-4\leq z\leq -3, 2.5\leq\omega\leq 10$ &
$-3.7\leq z\leq -3.5, 1.9\leq\omega\leq 2.1$ \\
& $-3\leq z\leq -1, 2.8\leq\omega\leq 10$ & $-3.5\leq z\leq
-3.35, 1.8\leq\omega\leq 2.2$
\\\hline
& $1\leq z\leq 2, 2\leq\omega\leq 10$ &
$1\leq z\leq 2, 0.8\leq\omega\leq 1.1$ \\
\textbf{12}& $2\leq z\leq 4.5, 5\leq\omega\leq 10$ &
$4\leq z\leq 4.5, 1.4\leq\omega\leq 4$ \\
& $4.1\leq z\leq 4.5, 5.1\leq\omega\leq 10$ & $4\leq z\leq 4.5,
1.4\leq\omega\leq 4.5$
\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\section{Summary}
This paper deals with the study of isothermal plasma wave properties
in magnetosphere of SdS black hole in a Veselago medium. The ADM
$3+1$ formalism has been used to formulate the GRMHD equations for
this unusual medium. We have applied linear perturbations to the
GRMHD equations and have obtained their component form with the
assumption that plasma flows in two dimensions. Finally, we have
obtained dispersion relations for the rotating (non-magnetized and
magnetized) background.
For the rotating non-magnetized background, waves move towards the
event horizon shown in Figures \textbf{1}, \textbf{3}, \textbf{5},
\textbf{9} and \textbf{10} while waves are directed away from the
event horizon in Figures \textbf{2}, \textbf{4}, \textbf{6},
\textbf{7} and \textbf{8}. The dispersion is found to be normal as
well as anomalous at random points in Figures \textbf{1},
\textbf{2}, \textbf{3}, \textbf{4} and \textbf{9}. The Figures
\textbf{5}, \textbf{6}, \textbf{7} and \textbf{10} show normal
dispersion while \textbf{8} admits anomalous dispersion in the whole
region. The Figures \textbf{11} and \textbf{12} indicate that waves
are directed towards the event horizon for rotating magnetized
plasma. It is clear from these figures that region admits normal and
anomalous dispersion at random points.
We know that the refractive index is always greater than one in
the usual medium, while it is less than one for the Veselago
medium. Here we have found that the refractive index is less than
one and increases in small regions. The phase velocity is greater
than group velocity for both non-magnetized and magnetized
backgrounds. These are prominent aspects of the Veselago medium
which confirms the presence of this unusual medium for both
rotating (non-magnetized and magnetized) plasma in SdS black hole.
It is interesting to mention here that in a recent work (Sharif
and Mukthar 2011a, 2011b) for isothermal plasma on Schwarzschild
black hole, there does not exist waves for the rotating magnetized
plasma. However, we have seen wave propagation in SdS black hole
for this case. Here waves admit normal dispersion at most of
points while for the schwarzschild black hole, most of the waves
disperse anomalously. Thus it can be concluded that more
information can be extracted from magnetosphere by inclusion of
the de-Sitter patch in the Schwarzschild spacetime. It would be
interesting to extend this analysis for hot plasma which is in
progress.
\renewcommand{\theequation}{A\arabic{equation}}
\section*{Appendix}
The Maxwell equations, the $3+1$ GRMHD equations for the SdS
spacetime are given in this appendix. The Maxwell equations for such
a medium are
\begin{eqnarray}{\setcounter{equation}{1}}
\label{40}&&\nabla.\textbf{B}=0,\\
\label{41}&&\nabla\times\textbf{E}+\frac{\partial\textbf{B}}{\partial
t}=0,\\
\label{42}&&\nabla\cdot\textbf{E}=-\frac{\rho_e}{\epsilon},\\
\label{43}&&\nabla\times\textbf{B}=-\mu\textbf{j}+\frac{\partial\textbf{E}}{\partial
t}=0.
\end{eqnarray}
The GRMHD equations for the SdS spacetime in Rindler coordinates
turn out to be (Sharif and Mukthar 2011a, 2011b)
\begin{eqnarray}\label{49}
&&\frac{\partial\textbf{B}}{\partial t}=-\nabla \times(\alpha
\textbf{V}\times\textbf{B}),\\\label{50}
&&\nabla.\textbf{B}=0,\\\label{51}
&&\frac{\partial\rho_0}{\partial
t}+(\alpha\textbf{V}.\nabla)\rho_0+\rho_0\gamma^2
\textbf{V}.\frac{\partial\textbf{V}}{\partial
t}+\rho_0\gamma^2\textbf{V}.(\alpha\textbf{V}.\nabla)\textbf{V}\nonumber\\
&&+\rho_0{\nabla.(\alpha\textbf{V})}=0, \\\label{52}
&&\{(\rho_0\mu\gamma^2+\frac{\textbf{B}^2}{4\pi})\delta_{ij}
+\rho_0\mu\gamma^4V_iV_j
-\frac{1}{4\pi}B_iB_j\}(\frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{\partial}{\partial
t}+\textbf{V}.\nabla)V^j\nonumber\\
&&-(\frac{\textbf{B}^2}{4\pi}\delta_{ij}-\frac{1}{4\pi}B_iB_j)
V^j,_kV^k+\rho_0\gamma^2V_i\{\frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{\partial
\mu}{\partial t}+(\textbf{V}.\nabla)\mu\}\nonumber\\
&&=-\rho_0\mu\gamma^2a_i-p,_i+
\frac{1}{4\pi}(\textbf{V}\times\textbf{B})_i\nabla.(\textbf{V}\times\textbf{B})
-\frac{1}{8\pi\alpha^2}(\alpha\textbf{B})^2,_i\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{1}{4\pi\alpha}(\alpha B_i),_jB^j-\frac{1}{4\pi\alpha}
[\textbf{B}\times\{\textbf{V}\times(\nabla\times(\alpha\textbf{V}
\times\textbf{B}))\}]_i,
\\\label{53}
&&(\frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{\partial}{\partial
t}+\textbf{V}.\nabla)(\mu\rho_0\gamma^2)-\frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{\partial
p }{\partial
t}+2\mu\rho_0\gamma^2(\textbf{V}.\textbf{a})+\mu\rho_0\gamma^2
(\nabla.\textbf{V})\nonumber\\&&-\frac{1}{4\pi}
(\textbf{V}\times\textbf{B}).(\textbf{V}\times\frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{\partial
\textbf{B}}{\partial t})-\frac{1}{4\pi}
(\textbf{V}\times\textbf{B}).(\textbf{B}\times\frac{1}{\alpha}\frac{\partial
\textbf{V}}{\partial
t})\nonumber\\&&+\frac{1}{4\pi\alpha}\left(\textbf{V}\times\textbf{B}).
(\nabla\times\alpha\textbf{B}\right.)=0.
\end{eqnarray}
|
\section{Introduction: recipe for generating mass}
\vspace{0.50cm}
In order to become a reliable candidate as a mechanism to generate
mass, there are three indispensable conditions that such mechanism
has to fulfil, to wit:
\begin{itemize}
\item{There must exist a universal field that interacts with
all kinds of particles;}
\item{There must exist a free parameter such that different bodies
can acquire distinct values for their corresponding mass (the
spectrum of mass);}
\item{This field must be such that its interaction with matter
breaks explicitly some symmetry that only massless particles
exhibit, e.g. the gauge freedom for vector fields or the chirality
for fermions.}
\end{itemize}
There are only two fashionable candidates that fulfill the
first condition:
\begin{itemize}
\item{A scalar field $ \varphi;$}
\item{The gravitational field.}
\end{itemize}
The Higgs boson $ \varphi$ was postulated to couple universally with
all kinds of matter. However, still to this day there is no evidence
of its universality, put aside its own existence\footnote{See \cite{Evans}
for alternative exotic scenarios suggested to take the place of Higgs
mechanism in case discovery of Higgs boson fails.}. The other one,
gravity, is known to couple with all forms of matter and energy; its
universality is recognized as a scientific truth. We note that after
accepting either one of these two fields as a good candidate that
fulfills the first requirement, it is not a hard job to elaborate
scenarios such that the other two conditions are satisfied too.
In this work we will limit our analysis to the gravitational process \cite{novelloCQG}, \cite{novello}
once in the realm of high-energy physics, the Higgs model produced a
well-known alternative scenario for generating mass for all massive
particles except the Higgs boson itself \cite{self}. Let us just point out a
remarkable property of the Higgs mechanism that within its scenario
was not sufficiently emphasized. It concerns the property that the self-interacting scalar field
in order to generate the mass of the particles must be in its fundamental
state. Its energy distribution is described as
$$ T_{\mu\nu} = V(\varphi_{0}) \, g_{\mu\nu}$$
defining a cosmological constant $ V(\varphi_{0}).$ However, in this
mechanism, this fact is no further analyzed, since at the realm of
microphysics gravity is ignored. So much for this structure. Let us
turn now to the new mechanism.
\section{Numerical results}
Before entering in the details of the gravitational mechanism let us point out
some of its observational consequences. We start by recalling that the
inverse Compton length of any particle is given in terms of its mass $ M $, the Planck constant $ \hbar $ and light velocity $ c $
yielding
$$ \mu = \frac{c}{\hbar} \, M. $$
For latter use we re-write it in an equivalent way in terms
of gravitational variables using the Newton constant $ G_{N}$ or
equivalently the Einstein constant $ \kappa = 8\pi\, G_{N} / c^{4}.
$ The Schwarzschild solution of the gravitational field of a static
compact object has an horizon -- that is a one-way membrane --
characterized by its Schwarzschild radius
$$ r_{s} = \frac{1}{4\pi} \, \kappa \, M \, c^{2}$$
Using the definition of the Planck length
$$ L_{Pl}^{2} \equiv \frac{1}{8 \pi} \, \kappa \, \hbar \, c $$
it follows that inverse Compton length may be written under the
equivalent form as the ratio between the corresponding Schwarzschild radius and
the square of Planck length:
\begin{equation}
\mu = \frac{1}{2} \, \frac{r_{s}}{L_{Pl}^{2}}.
\label{28jun2}
\end{equation}
The formula of the mass we obtained in \cite{novelloCQG} (and which we will review in the
next section) from the non-minimal coupling of a spinor field $ \Psi$ with
gravity is expressed in terms of the cosmological constant $ \Lambda
,$ the Planck length and parameter $ \sigma $ of the non-minimal
coupling yielding the expression
\begin{equation}
\mu = \frac{1}{8 \pi} \, \frac{\sigma \, \Lambda}{ L_{Pl}^{2}} \label{28jun1}
\end{equation}
This expression relates two parameters: the mass $ M $ and the
associated non-minimal coupling constant with gravity $ \sigma$
that has the dimensionality of a volume. The knowledge of one of
these two parameters ( $ M $ and $ \sigma$ ) allows the knowledge of
its companion. By comparison of the above two expressions of $ \mu,
$ that is, Compton definition eq. (\ref{28jun2}) and our formula for
the mass eq. (\ref{28jun1}) yields the expression of $ \sigma: $
\begin{equation}
\sigma = 4 \, \pi \, \frac{r_{s}}{\Lambda} \label{28jun3}
\end{equation}
Thus different fermion particles that have different masses have different
values of $ \sigma.$ We note furthermore that the ratio $ M / \sigma
$ which has the meaning of a density of mass is a universal constant
given only in terms of $\kappa$ and $ \Lambda.$ How to interpret
such universality? There is a direct and simple way that is the
following. We re-write this formula as a density of energy, that is
\begin{equation}
\frac{M \, c^{2}}{\sigma} = \frac{\Lambda}{\kappa}
\label{16nov}
\end{equation}
The right-hand side is nothing but the density of energy of the
vacuum. Thus we can say that $ \sigma $ is the volume in which an
homogeneous distribution of the particle energy spreads having the
same value of the vacuum energy density provided by the cosmological
constant, that is, $ \Lambda / \kappa.$
Once our formula of mass for fermions contains gravitational quantities which are
well-known to be extremely small, let us compare it with actual
numbers that we can get, for instance, from the simplest example of the electron.
The main question is: should the coupling constant $\sigma$
become an enormously big value in order to compensate the weakness
of the gravitational field? A direct calculation for the known
elementary particles show that this is not the case. This is a direct consequence, as we shall see in the next section, of the
fact that, in the process of give mass, gravity enters only as a catalyst. Indeed, for the
simple stable lepton, the electron we find that
$$ r_{s} \approx 1.35 \times 10^{- 55} cm, $$
which implies\footnote{All the values used here were taken from the \textit{Particle Data Group} \cite{pdg}.} that
$$ \sigma_{e} \approx 125 \, cm^{3}.$$
The substance that we call electron is tremendously concentrated
within its Compton wavelength $ \lambda_{c}. $ Indeed if we compare the
density of energy $ M_{e} \, c^{2} / r^{3} $ for $ r = \lambda_{c} $ and $
\sigma, $ it follows that all of the electron is concentrated in its
Compton interior:
$$ \frac{\varrho_{c}}{\varrho_{\sigma}} \approx 10^{31}. $$
Before ending this section let us make a remark in order to test the coherence of our formula (\ref{16nov}) in the cosmological scenario.
Indeed, suppose the extremal case identifying $\sigma$ with the total volume of the Universe. Assuming that
the universe is roughly made by protons, we can estimate the total number of protons $ N_{p}$ in the universe. A direct
calculation using equation (\ref{16nov}) for $\sigma\approx(10^{28}cm)^{3}$, yields
\begin{equation}
\nonumber
N_{p}\approx 10^{80}\, \mbox{protons}.
\end{equation}
We note that this number is precisely Eddington number.
\section{Minimal mass value}
The present method of evaluating the mass takes into account only classical gravitational aspects.
Thus, in principle it stops to be applied at the quantum level. Indeed, quantum effects become non negligible at least at the
Compton wavelength of a given particle. This means that there is a threshold of applicability of our mechanism. In other words the value of the
length associated to the gravitational mechanism must be higher than the corresponding Compton wavelength of the particle. This
led naturally to the minimum value of the mass of any fermion - call it $ M_{q}$ - that can be generated by the gravitational procedure. In
other words we must have $\sigma \geq \lambda_{c}^{3}, $ that is
$$ M_{q} c^2 \geq \frac{\Lambda}{\kappa} \, \frac{\hbar^3}{M^3_{q} c^3}, $$
from which we obtain that the minimum possible value for the mass is
$$ M_{q} \geq 2.36 \times 10^{-3} \, eV.$$
Thus there is no possibility of having a fermion which has a mass lower than $M_{q}.$
\section{From Mach principle to the new gravity mechanism}
Although a widespread formulation --- identified as Mach\rq s
principle -- that the mass of a body may depend on the overall
properties of the rest-of-the-universe and consequently to gravity,
the association of this dependence to the smallness of gravitational
phenomena was at the origin of the general attitude of disregarding
any possibility to attribute to gravity an important role in the
generation of mass for all bodies (see however \cite{irina}).
This apparent difficulty is eliminated by two steps:
\begin{itemize}
\item{A direct coupling of matter to the curvature of space-time;}
\item{The existence of a vacuum distribution or cosmological
constant $\Lambda.$}
\end{itemize}
This idea was developed recently \cite{novelloCQG} thus providing a reliable mechanism
by means of which gravity is presented as truly responsible for the
generation of the mass. As a result of such procedure, the final
expression of mass depends neither on the intensity nor on the
specific properties of the gravitational field. This circumvents all
previous criticism against the major role of gravity in the origin
of mass.
The model uses a slight modification of Mach\rq s principle. Let us
remind that, following Einstein \cite{Einstein}, we can understand
by this principle the statement according to which the entire
inertia of a massive body is the effect of the presence of all other
masses, deriving from a kind of interaction with the latter or, in
other words, the inertial properties of a body $\mathbb{A }$ are
determined by the energy throughout all space. The simplest way to
implement this idea is to consider the state that takes into account
the whole contribution of the rest-of-the-universe onto $\mathbb{A
}$ as the most homogeneous one. Thus it is natural to relate it to
what Einstein attributed to the cosmological constant or, in modern
language, the vacuum of all remaining bodies. This means to describe
the energy-momentum distribution of all complementary bodies of
$\mathbb{A }$ in the Universe under the form
\begin{equation}
T_{\mu\nu}(U) = \frac{\Lambda}{\kappa} \, g_{\mu\nu} \label{17abril}
\end{equation}
Note that this distribution of the energy content of the environment
of the body $\mathbb{A }$ is similar to the Higgs case, although
there is an important distinction concerning the role of this
homogeneous distribution of energy on the generation of mass: as we
pointed out above, Higgs\rq proposal does not go further to explore
the consequences of this distribution of energy, since it is not
followed by the analysis relating such energy to gravitational
processes. We consider the very fundamental framework dealing with
the basic constituents of matter, the true building blocks, and
treat matter generically as representations of the Lorentz group. In
the present paper we limit our description to the case in which body
$\mathbb{A }$ is identified with fermions.
\subsection{The case of fermions}
The massless
theory for a spinor field is given by Dirac equation:
\begin{equation} i\gamma^{\mu} \partial_{\mu} \, \Psi = 0 \label{221}
\end{equation}
This equation is invariant under $\gamma^{5} $ transformation. In
order to have mass for the fermion this symmetry must be broken. Who
is the responsible for this? Electrodynamics appears in gauge theory
as a mechanism that preserves a symmetry when one pass from a global
transformation to a local one (space-time dependent map). Nothing
similar with gravity. Following \cite{novelloCQG} we assume the idea
that gravity is the true responsible to break the symmetry.
In the framework of General Relativity the non-minimal gravitational
interaction of the fermion is driven by the Lagrangian
$$ L = L_{D} + L_{int} + L_{\Lambda} + L_{ct}$$
that is
\begin{eqnarray}
L &=& \frac{i}{2} \bar{\Psi} \gamma^{\mu} \nabla_{\mu} \Psi -
\frac{i}{2} \nabla_{\mu} \bar{\Psi} \gamma^{\mu} \Psi \nonumber \\
&+& \frac{1}{\kappa} \, (1 + \frac{\sigma}{4} \, \Phi)^{-2} \, R -
\frac{1}{\kappa}
\, \Lambda \nonumber
\\ &-& \, \frac{3}{8 \kappa} \, \sigma^{2} \, (1 + \frac{\sigma}{4} \, \Phi)^{-4} \, \partial_{\mu} \Phi \, \partial^{\mu} \Phi,
\label{29junho3}
\end{eqnarray}
where the non-minimal coupling of the spinor field with gravity is
contained in the term $ V(\Phi) = 1 + \sigma \, \Phi/4 $ that depends
on the scalar $$ \Phi \equiv \bar{\Psi} \, \Psi, $$
which preserves the gauge invariance of the theory under the map $
\Psi \rightarrow \exp(i \, \theta) \, \Psi.$ Note that the
dependence on $ \Phi$ on the dynamics of $ \Psi$ breaks the chiral
invariance of the mass-less fermion, a condition that is necessary
for a mass to appear. The constant $
\sigma$ which has dimensionality $(length)^{3}$ given by
(\ref{28jun3}) is the responsible for the non-minimal coupling and
the presence of the self-interacting term.
This dynamics represents a massless spinor field coupled
non-minimally with gravity. The cosmological constant represents the
influence of the rest-of-the-universe on $\Psi.$
Independent variation of $\Psi$ and $g_{\mu\nu}$ yields
\begin{equation}
i\gamma^{\mu} \nabla_{\mu} \, \Psi + \Sigma \, \Psi = 0, \label{223}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\alpha_{0} \, ( R_{\mu\nu} - \frac{1}{2} \, R \, g_{\mu\nu} ) = -
T_{\mu\nu},
\label{224}
\end{equation}
where $ \Sigma$ depends on the curvature scalar $ R $ and on $
\Phi.$
The energy-momentum tensor is defined by
$$T_{\mu\nu} = \frac{2}{\sqrt{- g}} \, \frac{\delta ( \sqrt{-g} \,
L)}{\delta g^{\mu\nu}}. $$
Taking the trace of equation (\ref{224}) and inserting it on the expression $\Sigma$ one obtains after some
algebraic manipulation\footnote{See \cite{novelloCQG} for details.} that the equation for the spinor becomes
\begin{equation} i\gamma^{\mu} \nabla_{\mu} \, \Psi - M \Psi= 0, \label{15}
\end{equation}
where \begin{equation}
M = \frac{\sigma \, \Lambda}{\kappa \, c^{2}}.
\label{30julho13}
\end{equation}
Thus as a result of the above process the spinor field acquires a
mass $ M $ that depends crucially on the existence of $ \Lambda.$ If
$ \Lambda $ vanishes then the mass of the field vanishes. The
non-minimal coupling of gravity with the spinor field corresponds to
a specific self-interaction. The mass of the field appears only if
we take into account the existence of all remaining bodies in the
universe --- represented by the cosmological constant. The values of
different masses for different fields are contemplated in the
parameter $ \sigma.$
This procedure allows us to state that the mechanism proposed here is to be
understood as a realization of Mach principle according to which the
inertia of a body depends on the background of the
rest-of-the-universe. This strategy can be applied in a more general
context in support of the idea that (local) properties of
microphysics may depend on the (global) properties of the universe. In the case $ \sigma = 0 $ the Lagrangian reduces to a massless
fermion satisfying Dirac\rq s dynamics plus the gravitational field
described by General Relativity.
\subsection{A new interpretation of the non-minimal coupling}
There is another interpretation of
the Lagrangian (\ref{29junho3}) that is worth to point out here because it shows that the non-minimal
coupling described by (\ref{29junho3}) can be interpreted as the conformal coupling of a
scalar field with gravity. Let
us define the non dimensional scalar field $ X $ by setting
$$ X = \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}} (1 + \frac{\sigma}{4} \, \Phi)^{-1} $$
Then, in terms of this new quantity the dynamics (\ref{29junho3}) can be re-written
as
\begin{equation}
L = L_{D} - \frac{\Lambda}{\kappa} - \frac{1}{\kappa} \, (
\partial_{\mu} X \, \partial^{\mu} X - \frac{1}{6} \, R \, X^{2}
), \label{29junho1}
\end{equation}
which is nothing but Dirac dynamics plus the equation of a scalar field $ X $ coupled
in a conformal way to the curvature of space-time. We recognize here the standard procedure of
conformal coupling a scalar field with gravity. When the field $ X $ is identified with the chiral
dependent term constructed with the spinor field through the above definition then the net effect of gravity through the existence of a cosmological constant appears and provides mass for $ \Psi.$
\section{Modified Mach Principle}
The various steps of our mechanism driven by Lagrangian (\ref{29junho3})
are synthesized as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item{The dynamics of a massless spinor field $ \Psi$ interacting to gravity in a conformal way is contained in
the Lagrangian
$$ L = L_{D} - \frac{\Lambda}{\kappa} - \frac{1}{\kappa} \, (
\partial_{\mu} X \, \partial^{\mu} X - \frac{1}{6} \, R \, X^{2}
) ; $$}
\item{Gravity is described by General Relativity;}
\item{The action of the rest-of-the-universe on the spinor field,
through the gravitational intermediary, is contained in the form
of an additional constant term on the Lagrangian noted as $ \Lambda
;$ }
\item{As a result of this process, the field $ \Psi$ acquires a mass
$ M $ given by expression (\ref{30julho13}) and is zero only if the
cosmological constant vanishes;}
\item{This process is completely independent from the intensity and the specific
configuration of the gravitational field.}
\end{itemize}
The generalization of this procedure for all other kinds of matter
which are representations of the Lorentz group (scalar or
tensor fields) can be made straightforwardly through the same lines
as in the present case.
The mechanism presented in this paper allows us to interpret the
mass of any body as being nothing but a local property originated by
the influence of the whole universe intermediated by the
gravitational interaction. In other words, to explain the origin of
mass for all bodies, there is no need to introduce extra fields as,
for instance, the Higgs boson.
\vspace{0.50cm}
\textbf{Acknowledgements}
\vspace{0.50cm}
MN would like to thank FINEP, CNPq and Faperj for financial support and EB thanks CNPq.
We would like also to thank J. M. Salim for many enthusiastic conversations on the subject
of this paper. We acknowledge the staff of ICRANet at Pescara were this paper was done.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Let $l_{\rm fin}(\mathbb{N})$ be the linear space of complex sequences with a
finite number of non-zero elements. In the Hilbert space
$l_2(\mathbb{N})$, consider the operator $J_0$ defined for every
$f=\{f_k\}_{k=1}^\infty$ in $l_{\rm fin}(\mathbb{N})$ by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:initial-spectral}
(J_0f)_1&:= q_1 f_1 + b_1 f_2\,,\\
\label{eq:recurrence-spectral}
(J_0f)_k&:= b_{k-1}f_{k-1} + q_k f_k + b_kf_{k+1}\,,
\quad k \in \mathbb{N} \setminus \{1\},
\end{align}
where $q_n\in\mathbb{R}$ and $b_n>0$ for any $n\in\mathbb{N}$. The operator
$J_0$ is symmetric and has deficiency indices $(1,1)$ or $(0,0)$
\cite[Chap.\,4,\,Sec.\,1.2]{MR0184042}. Fix a self-adjoint extension
of $J_0$ and denote it by $J$. Thus, either $J\varsupsetneq \overline{J_0}$
or $J=\overline{J_0}$. According to the definition of the matrix
representation for an unbounded symmetric operator
\cite[Sec. 47]{MR1255973}, $\overline{J_0}$ is the operator whose matrix
representation with respect to the canonical basis
$\{\delta_n\}_{n=1}^\infty$ in $l_2(\mathbb{N})$ is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:jm-0}
\begin{pmatrix}
q_1 & b_1 & 0 & 0 & \cdots
\\[1mm] b_1 & q_2 & b_2 & 0 & \cdots \\[1mm] 0 & b_2 & q_3 &
b_3 & \\
0 & 0 & b_3 & q_4 & \ddots\\ \vdots & \vdots & & \ddots
& \ddots
\end{pmatrix}\,.
\end{equation}
Along with $J$, we consider the operator
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:def-tilde-j}
\begin{split}
\widetilde{J}=J &+
[q_1(\theta^2-1)+\theta^2h]\inner{\delta_1}{\cdot}\delta_1 \\
&+ b_1(\theta-1)(\inner{\delta_1}{\cdot}\delta_2 +
\inner{\delta_2}{\cdot}\delta_1)\,,\quad \theta>0\,,
\quad h\in\mathbb{R}\,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
which is a self-adjoint extension of the operator whose matrix
representation with respect to the canonical basis in
$l_2(\mathbb{N})$ is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:jm-1}
\begin{pmatrix}
\theta^2(q_1+h) & \theta b_1 & 0 & 0 & \cdots
\\[1mm] \theta b_1 & q_2 & b_2 & 0 & \cdots \\[1mm] 0 & b_2 & q_3 &
b_3 & \\
0 & 0 & b_3 & q_4 & \ddots\\ \vdots & \vdots & & \ddots
& \ddots
\end{pmatrix}\,.
\end{equation}
Note that $\widetilde{J}$ is obtained from $J$ by a particular kind of
rank-two perturbation.
Under the assumption that $J$ has discrete spectrum (as explained in
Section~2, when $J_0$ has deficiency indices $(1,1)$, this is always
the case), this work treats the inverse spectral problem of
reconstructing, from the spectra of $J$ and $\widetilde{J}$, the
matrix (\ref{eq:jm-0}) and the ``boundary condition at infinity''
defining the self-adjoint extension $J$ if necessary (i.\,e. if $J_0$
is not essentially self-adjoint,
cf. \cite[Sec.\,2]{delrio-kudryavtsev-II}). To solve this inverse
problem, one should elucidate the distribution of the perturbed
spectrum relative to the unperturbed one and determine the necessary
input data for recovering the matrix. An important point to note is
that this work provides necessary and sufficient conditions for two
sequences to be the spectra of $J$ and $\widetilde{J}$. Also, we
discuss (the lack of) uniqueness of the reconstruction.
Although the two spectra inverse problem for the rank-one perturbation
family of Jacobi operators has been thoroughly studied (see for
instance \cite{MR49:9676,MR0221315,weder-silva,MR1643529} and
\cite{Chu-Golub,deBoor-Golub,MR1616422,MR2102477} for the case of
finite matrices), there is scarce literature dealing with inverse
problems of other kind of perturbations
(cf. \cite{delrio-kudryavtsev-II}).
The motivation for this work is the inverse spectral problem studied in
\cite{Ram} and \cite{delrio-kudryavtsev} which is in its turn related
with the physical problem of measuring micro-masses with the help of
micro-cantilevers
\cite{spletzer-et-al1,spletzer-et-al2}. Micro-cantilevers are modeled
by spring-mass systems whose masses and spring constants are
determined by the mechanical parameters of the micro-cantilevers.
In this work we consider the semi-infinite mass-spring system given in
Fig. 1. with masses $\{m_j\}_{j=1}^\infty$ and spring constants
$\{k_j\}_{j=1}^\infty$. This system is modeled by the Jacobi matrix
(\ref{eq:jm-0}) with
\begin{equation*}
q_j = -\frac{k_{j+1}+k_j}{m_j}\,, \qquad
b_j=\frac{k_{j+1}}{\sqrt{m_j m_{j+1}}}\,,
\qquad j\in\mathbb{N}\,.
\end{equation*}
In \cite{MR2102477,mono-marchenko} it is explained how to deduce these
formulae. Since $J$ is considered to have discrete spectrum, the
movement of the system is a superposition of harmonic oscillations
whose frequencies are the square roots of the modules of the
eigenvalues.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}
[mass1/.style={rectangle,draw=black!80,fill=black!13,thick,inner sep=0pt,
minimum size=7mm},
mass2/.style={rectangle,draw=black!80,fill=black!13,thick,inner sep=0pt,
minimum size=5.7mm},
mass3/.style={rectangle,draw=black!80,fill=black!13,thick,inner sep=0pt,
minimum size=7.7mm},
wall/.style={postaction={draw,decorate,decoration={border,angle=-45,
amplitude=0.3cm,segment length=1.5mm}}}]
\node (mass3) at (7.1,1) [mass3] {\footnotesize$m_3$};
\node (mass2) at (4.25,1) [mass2] {\footnotesize$\,m_2$};
\node (mass1) at (2.2,1) [mass1] {\footnotesize$m_1$};
\draw[decorate,decoration={coil,aspect=0.4,segment
length=2.1mm,amplitude=1.8mm}] (0,1) -- node[below=4pt]
{\footnotesize$k_1$} (mass1);
\draw[decorate,decoration={coil,aspect=0.4,segment
length=1.5mm,amplitude=1.8mm}] (mass1) -- node[below=4pt]
{\footnotesize$k_2$} (mass2);
\draw[decorate,decoration={coil,aspect=0.4,segment
length=2.5mm,amplitude=1.8mm}] (mass2) -- node[below=4pt]
{\footnotesize$k_3$} (mass3);
\draw[decorate,decoration={coil,aspect=0.4,segment
length=2.1mm,amplitude=1.8mm}] (mass3) -- node[below=4pt]
{\footnotesize$k_4$} (9.3,1);
\draw[line width=.8pt,loosely dotted] (9.4,1) -- (9.8,1);
\draw[line width=.5pt,wall](0,1.7)--(0,0.3);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Semi-infinite mass-spring system}\label{fig:1}
\end{figure}
The modified mass-spring system corresponding to the perturbed
operator $\widetilde{J}$ is obtained by changing the first mass by
$\Delta m=m_1(\theta^{-2}-1)$ and the first spring by $\Delta
k=-hm_1$ (see Fig. 2). Here we also consider negative values of
$\Delta m$ and $\Delta k$ which correspond to $\theta>1$ and $h<0$,
respectively.
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}
[mass1/.style={rectangle,draw=black!80,fill=black!13,thick,inner sep=0pt,
minimum size=7mm},
mass2/.style={rectangle,draw=black!80,fill=black!13,thick,inner sep=0pt,
minimum size=5.7mm},
mass3/.style={rectangle,draw=black!80,fill=black!13,thick,inner sep=0pt,
minimum size=7.7mm},
dmass/.style={rectangle,draw=black!80,fill=black!13,thick,inner sep=0pt,
minimum size=5mm},
wall/.style={postaction={draw,decorate,decoration={border,angle=-45,
amplitude=0.3cm,segment length=1.5mm}}}]
\node (mass3) at (7.1,1) [mass3] {\footnotesize$m_3$};
\node (mass2) at (4.25,1) [mass2] {\footnotesize$\,m_2$};
\node (mass1) at (2.2,1) [mass1] {\footnotesize$m_1$};
\node (dmass) at (2.2,1.6) [dmass] {\scriptsize$\,\Delta m\,$};
\draw[decorate,decoration={coil,aspect=0.4,segment
length=1.9mm,amplitude=1.8mm}] (0,1.6) -- node[above=4pt]
{\footnotesize$\Delta k$} (dmass);
\draw[decorate,decoration={coil,aspect=0.4,segment
length=2.1mm,amplitude=1.8mm}] (0,1) -- node[below=4pt]
{\footnotesize$k_1$} (mass1);
\draw[decorate,decoration={coil,aspect=0.4,segment
length=1.5mm,amplitude=1.8mm}] (mass1) -- node[below=4pt]
{\footnotesize$k_2$} (mass2);
\draw[decorate,decoration={coil,aspect=0.4,segment
length=2.5mm,amplitude=1.8mm}] (mass2) -- node[below=4pt]
{\footnotesize$k_3$} (mass3);
\draw[decorate,decoration={coil,aspect=0.4,segment
length=2.1mm,amplitude=1.8mm}] (mass3) -- node[below=4pt]
{\footnotesize$k_4$} (9.3,1);
\draw[line width=.8pt,loosely dotted] (9.4,1) -- (9.8,1);
\draw[line width=.5pt,wall](0,2.1)--(0,0.7);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Perturbed semi-infinite mass-spring system}\label{fig:2}
\end{figure}
Note that the perturbation involved here is the result of the combined
effect of a rank-one perturbation (studied thoroughly in
\cite{weder-silva}) and the particular rank-two perturbation studied
in \cite{delrio-kudryavtsev-II}. However, most of the results obtained
here cannot be found from the results in \cite{weder-silva} and
\cite{delrio-kudryavtsev-II}, and require their own proof. Moreover,
it turns out that one can single-out classes of isospectral operators
within the two parameter perturbation family considered in this work
that were not studied before.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we fix the notation,
lay down a convention for enumerating sequences and recall some
results of the inverse spectral theory for Jacobi operators. Section 3
gives a detailed spectral analysis of the family of perturbed Jacobi
operators. The solution of the two spectra inverse problem for $J$ and
$\widetilde{J}$ is given in Section 4. This section also discusses the
non-uniqueness of the reconstruction and gives some characterization of
isospectral operators in the perturbation family under consideration.
\section{A review on inverse spectral theory for Jacobi operators}
\label{sec:preliminaries}
Let us denote by $\sigma(J)$ the spectrum of $J$ and consider the
spectral resolution of the identity $E$ for $J$ given by the spectral
theorem. Then the spectral function $\rho$ of $J$ is defined by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:rho-def}
\rho(t):=\inner{\delta_1}{E(t)\delta_1}\,.
\end{equation}
All the moments of $\rho$ exist \cite[Thm.\,4.1.3]{MR0184042}, that
is, for all $k\in\mathbb{N}\cup\{0\}$,
\begin{equation*}
s_k=\int_{\mathbb{R}} t^kd\rho(t)\in\mathbb{R}\,.
\end{equation*}
Moreover, since $J$ turns out to be simple with $\delta_1$ being a
cyclic vector, the operator of multiplication by the independent
variable in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho)$ (defined on the maximal domain) is
unitarily equivalent to $J$.
Alongside the spectral function we consider the corresponding
Weyl $m$-function given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:weyl-function}
m(\zeta):=\inner{\delta_1}{(J-\zeta I)^{-1}\delta_1}=\int_{\mathbb{R}}
\frac{d\rho(t)}{t-\zeta}\,,\qquad \zeta\not\in\sigma(J)\,.
\end{equation}
Because of the inverse Stieltjes transform one uniquely recovers
$\rho$ from $m$, so $\rho$ and $m$ are in one-to-one correspondence.
The Weyl $m$-function has the following asymptotic behavior
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:m-asympt}
m(\zeta)=-\frac{1}{\zeta}-\frac{q_1}{\zeta^2}
-\frac{b_1^2+q_1^2}{\zeta^3}
+O(\zeta^{-4})\,,
\end{equation}
as $\zeta\to\infty$ with $\im \zeta\ge \epsilon$, $\epsilon>0$
(see \cite[Eq.\,1.5]{MR1616422} and \cite[Eq.\,2.10]{weder-silva}).
The inverse spectral theory for the Jacobi operator $J$ is centered on
the fact that the Weyl $m$-function (or, equivalently, $\rho$) uniquely
determines the matrix (\ref{eq:jm-0}) and the boundary condition at
infinity that defines the self-adjoint extension if necessary. Indeed,
for recovering the matrix one may use a method based on a discrete
Riccati equation (see \cite[Eq.\,2.15]{MR1616422},
\cite[Eq.\,2.23]{MR1643529}) or the method of orthonormalization of
the polynomial sequence $\{t^k\}_{k=0}^\infty$ in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho)$
\cite[Chap.\,7,\,Sec.\,1.5]{MR0222718}. If (\ref{eq:jm-0}) is the
matrix representation of a non-self-adjoint operator, then the
condition at infinity may be found by the method exposed in
\cite[Sec.\,2]{weder-silva}.
In this work we restrict our considerations to the case of $\sigma(J)$
being discrete, viz., $\sigma_{\rm ess}(J)=\emptyset$. It is well
known that this is always the case when $J_0$ is not essentially
self-adjoint \cite[Thm.\,4.11]{MR1627806},
\cite[Lem.\,2.19]{MR1711536}. The discreteness of $\sigma(J)$ implies
that (\ref{eq:rho-def}) can be written as follows
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:rho-discrete}
\rho(t)=\sum_{\lambda_k< t}\frac{1}{\alpha_k}\,,
\end{equation}
where the coefficients $\{\alpha_k\}_k$ are called the normalizing
constants. From (\ref{eq:weyl-function}) and (\ref{eq:rho-discrete})
it follows that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:m-discrete}
m(\zeta)=\sum_{k}\frac{1}{\alpha_k(\lambda_k-\zeta)}\,.
\end{equation}
The function $m$ is meromorphic, and, since it is also Herglotz, its
zeros and poles interlace, i.\,e., between two contiguous zeros there
is only one pole and between two contiguous poles there is only one
zero (see the proof of \cite[Chap.\,7,\,Thm.\,1]{MR589888}).
Now, in the subspace $\delta_1^\perp$ of $l_2(\mathbb{N})$, consider the
operator $J_{\rm T}$ which is the restriction of $J$ to
$\dom(J)\cap\delta_1^\perp$. Note that $J_T$ is a self-adjoint
extension of the operator whose matrix representation with respect to
the basis $\{\delta_k\}_{k=2}^\infty$ of
the space $\delta_1^\perp$ is (\ref{eq:jm-0}) with the first
column and row removed. The following proposition is well known (see
for instance \cite{weder-silva}).
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:interlace-truncated}
Under the assumption that $\sigma(J)$ is discrete, $\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(J_{\rm T})$ interlace. Moreover $\sigma(J)$ coincides with
the set of poles of the function $m$ and $\sigma(J_{\rm T})$ is the
set of its zeros.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Clearly, one should only establish that the zeros and poles of $m$
are as stated in the proposition. But this is a straightforward
conclusion from the definition of the Weyl $m$-function and the
formula
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:first-riccati}
b_1^2m_{\rm T}(\zeta)=q_1-\zeta-\frac{1}{m(\zeta)}\,,
\end{equation}
where $m_{\rm T}$ is the Weyl $m$-function corresponding to $J_{\rm
T}$. Equation (\ref{eq:first-riccati}) is a particular case of
\cite[Eq.\,2.15]{MR1616422} or \cite[Eq.\,2.23]{MR1643529}.
\end{proof}
\noindent\textbf{(C1) Convention for enumerating a sequence.} Let $S$ be
an infinite countable set of real numbers without finite points of
accumulation and $M$ an infinite subset of consecutive integers such
that there is a strictly increasing function $f:M\to S$ such that
$f^{-1}(0)=0$. We write $S=\{\lambda_k\}_{k\in M}$, where
$\lambda_k=f(k)$. Note that $M$ is semi-bounded from above (below) if
and only if the same holds for $S$ and that in $\{\lambda_k\}_{k\in
M}$ only $\lambda_0$ is allowed to be zero.
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:true-interlacing}
Clearly, if two real sequences $S$, $S'$ without finite accumulation
points interlace, then one always can find $M$ and functions $f:M\to
S$ and $f':M\to S'$ with the properties given in our convention (C1) such
that, for any $k\in M$, either
\begin{equation*}
\lambda_k<\lambda_k'<\lambda_{k+1}\quad\text{ or }\quad
\lambda_k'<\lambda_k<\lambda_{k+1}'\,,
\end{equation*}
where $\lambda_k=f(k)$ and $\lambda_k'=f'(k)$. If $S$ is not
semi-bounded, then both possibilities hold simultaneously.
\end{remark}
The proof of the following proposition can be found in
\cite[Lem.\,4.1]{delrio-kudryavtsev-II} and
\cite[Sec.\,4]{weder-silva} and the starting point for it is
\cite[Chap.\,7,\,Thm.\,1]{MR589888}.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:m-weyl-krein-representation}
Let $J$ have discrete spectrum and assume that
$\sigma(J)=\{\lambda_k\}_{k\in M}$, and
$\sigma(J_{\rm T})=\{\eta_k\}_{k\in M}$. Then
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:levin-herglotz-gen}
m(\zeta)=C \frac{\zeta-\eta_0}{\zeta-\lambda_0}
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\k\ne 0}} \left(1-\frac{\zeta}{\eta_k}\right)
\left(1-\frac{\zeta}{\lambda_k}\right)^{-1}\,,
\end{equation}
Moreover, $C<0$ and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:enum-zeros-poles-alt}
\eta_k<\lambda_k<\eta_{k+1}\,,\quad\forall k\in M\,,
\end{equation}
if $\sigma(J)$ is semi-bounded from above,
while, $C>0$ and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:enum-zeros-poles}
\lambda_k<\eta_k<\lambda_{k+1}\,,\quad\forall k\in M\,,
\end{equation}
otherwise.
\end{proposition}
\section{Direct spectral analysis for $J$ and $\widetilde{J}$}
\label{sec:direct-spectral-analysis-general-case}
Let $J$ and $\widetilde{J}$ be the operators defined in the
Introduction. Since $J_{\rm T}=\widetilde{J}_{\rm T}$, where
$\widetilde{J}_{\rm T}$ is the operator in the space $\delta_1^\perp$
obtained by restricting $\widetilde{J}$ to
$\dom(\widetilde{J})\cap\delta_1^\perp$, one obtains from
(\ref{eq:first-riccati}) that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:aux-m-m-theta2}
\theta^2\left(\zeta+\frac{1}{m(\zeta)}+h\right)=
\zeta+\frac{1}{\widetilde{m}(\zeta)}\,,
\end{equation}
where $\widetilde{m}$ is the Weyl $m$-function corresponding to
$\widetilde{J}$. Let us define the function
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:m-goth-def2}
\mathfrak{m}(\zeta):=\frac{m(\zeta)}{\widetilde{m}(\zeta)}\,
\end{equation}
Immediately from (\ref{eq:aux-m-m-theta2}) one proves the following
proposition. Prior to stating it, in order to simplify the writing of
some expressions, let us introduce a constant that will be used
recurrently throughout the paper.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:gamma-def}
\gamma:=\frac{\theta^2h}{1-\theta^2}\,.
\end{equation}
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:zeros-poles2}
Consider the Jacobi operator $J$ and the operator $\widetilde{J}$ as
given in (\ref{eq:def-tilde-j})
with $\theta\ne 1$. If
$J$ has discrete spectrum, then
\begin{enumerate}[i)]
\item the set of poles of
$\mathfrak{m}$ is a subset of $\sigma(J)$ and the set of zeros is
contained in $\sigma(\widetilde{J})$,
\item $\displaystyle\gamma\in\sigma(J)$ if and only if
$\displaystyle\gamma\in\sigma(\widetilde{J})$,
\item the sets $\sigma(J)$ and $\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ can
intersect only at $\displaystyle\gamma$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
The following alternative expression for $\mathfrak{m}$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:m-through-m2}
\mathfrak{m}(\zeta)=
(\theta^2-1)\left(\zeta-\gamma\right)
m(\zeta)+\theta^2\,,
\end{equation}
which is obtained by combining (\ref{eq:aux-m-m-theta2}) and
(\ref{eq:m-goth-def2}), is the main ingredient in the proof of the
following proposition.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:interlacing2}
Consider the Jacobi operator $J$ and the operator $\widetilde{J}$ as
given in (\ref{eq:def-tilde-j})
with $\theta\ne 1$. If $J$ has discrete
spectrum, then the spectra
$\sigma(J)$, $\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ interlace in the intervals
$(\gamma,+\infty)$ and
$(-\infty,\gamma)$. Moreover,
$\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ in the interval
$(\gamma,+\infty)$, respectively
$(-\infty,\gamma)$, is shifted with respect to
$\sigma(J)$ to the left, respectively right, when $\theta<1$ and to
the right, respectively left, when $\theta>1$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:semi-intervals-cases}
The set $\sigma(J)\cap(\gamma,+\infty)$,
respectively $\sigma(J)\cap(-\infty,\gamma)$,
may be empty and, then, there is no spectrum of $\widetilde{J}$ in
$(\gamma,+\infty)$, respectively
$(-\infty,\gamma)$. If $\lambda$ is the only
element in $\sigma(J)\cap(\gamma,+\infty)$,
respectively $\sigma(J)\cap(-\infty,\gamma)$,
then there is exactly one element of $\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ in
$(\gamma,+\infty)$, respectively
$(-\infty,\gamma)$.
\end{remark}
\begin{proof}
Let us first prove that between two contiguous eigenvalues of $J$
there is exactly one eigenvalue of $\widetilde{J}$. Assume that
$\theta>1$ and consider two contiguous eigenvalues
$\lambda,\widehat{\lambda}$ of $J$ such that
$\gamma<\lambda<\widehat{\lambda}$. Then, by
(\ref{eq:m-discrete}) and (\ref{eq:m-through-m2}), one
has
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{\substack{t\to\widehat{\lambda}^- \\
t\in\mathbb{R}}}\mathfrak{m}(t)
=+\infty\qquad
\lim_{\substack{t\to\lambda^+ \\ t\in\mathbb{R}}}\mathfrak{m}(t)=-\infty\,.
\end{equation*}
The function $\mathfrak{m}\upharpoonright_{\mathbb{R}}$, should
cross the 0-axis in $(\lambda,\widehat{\lambda})$ an odd number of
times. Actually, it crosses the 0-axis only once. Indeed, if one
assumes that $\mathfrak{m}\upharpoonright_{\mathbb{R}}$ crosses the
0-axis three or more times as in Fig. 3 (a), then, in view of
Propositions \ref{prop:interlace-truncated} and
\ref{prop:zeros-poles2}, there would be at least two elements of
$\sigma(J_{\rm T})$ in $(\lambda,\widehat{\lambda})$. Note that one
crossing of the 0-axis and a tangential touch of it as in Fig. 3 (b)
and (c) is also impossible since the poles of $\widetilde{m}$ are
simple. Analogously, between two contiguous eigenvalues of
$\widetilde{J}$, $1/\mathfrak{m}\upharpoonright_{\mathbb{R}}$ crosses
the 0-axis exactly once. Thus, by means of Proposition
\ref{prop:zeros-poles2}, the interlacing of $\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ in $(\gamma,+\infty)$ has been proven.
\begin{figure}[h]
\vspace*{-30pt}
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[yshift=-15] (-.7,-.5) .. controls (0,3) and (.65,-1.9)
.. (1.5,1.7);
\draw[->] (-1,0) -- (2,0);
\path (0.5,-1.2) node {$a$};
\draw[xshift=110,yshift=-8.3] (-.7,-.5) .. controls (0,3) and (.65,-1.9)
.. (1.5,1.7);
\draw[->,xshift=110] (-1,0) -- (2,0);
\path[xshift=110] (0.5,-1.2) node {$b$};
\draw[xshift=220,yshift=-24] (-.7,-.5) .. controls (0,3) and (.65,-1.9)
.. (1.5,1.7);
\draw[->,xshift=220] (-1,0) -- (2,0);
\path[xshift=220] (0.5,-1.2) node {$c$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\vspace*{-30pt}
\caption{Impossible crossings of the 0-axis by $\mathfrak{m}$}\label{fig:3}
\end{figure}
When $\theta<1$, one has
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{\substack{t\to\widehat{\lambda}^- \\
t\in\mathbb{R}}}\mathfrak{m}(t)
=-\infty\qquad
\lim_{\substack{t\to\lambda^+ \\ t\in\mathbb{R}}}\mathfrak{m}(t)=+\infty\,.
\end{equation*}
and by the same reasoning used above the interlacing of the spectra
in $(\gamma,+\infty)$ is established. The
interlacing in $(-\infty,\gamma)$ is proven
analogously.
Let us now prove the second assertion of the proposition. To this
end suppose first that
$\gamma\not\in\sigma(J)$ and observe that,
under this assumption, (\ref{eq:m-through-m2}) implies that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:n-goth-at-0}
\mathfrak{m}\left(\gamma\right)=\theta^2\,.
\end{equation}
Let us now assume that the contiguous eigenvalues
$\lambda,\widehat{\lambda}$ of $J$ are such that
\begin{equation*}
\lambda<\gamma <\widehat{\lambda}\,.
\end{equation*}
Under the premise that $\theta>1$, we have
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:n-goth-asympt-+}
\lim_{\substack{t\to\widehat{\lambda}^- \\
t\in\mathbb{R}}}\mathfrak{m}(t)
=+\infty\qquad
\lim_{\substack{t\to\lambda^+ \\ t\in\mathbb{R}}}\mathfrak{m}(t)=+\infty\,.
\end{equation}
In view of (\ref{eq:n-goth-at-0}) and (\ref{eq:n-goth-asympt-+}), if
$\mathfrak{m}\upharpoonright_{\mathbb{R}}$ crosses the 0-axis one time in
the interval $(\lambda,\gamma)$, it should
cross it in $(\lambda,\gamma)$ at least
twice. The same is true for the interval
$(\gamma,\widehat{\lambda})$. Note that
$\mathfrak{m}\upharpoonright_{\mathbb{R}}$ cannot tangentially touch the
0-axis due to the simplicity of its zeros. So, the assumption that
$\mathfrak{m}\upharpoonright_{\mathbb{R}}$ crosses the 0-axis, from what
has already been proven above, would imply that in
$(\lambda,\gamma)$, respectively
$(\gamma,\widehat{\lambda})$, there is at
least one eigenvalue of $J$, which contradicts the fact that
$\lambda$ and $\widehat{\lambda}$ are contiguous. Thus, there is no
crossing of the 0-axis by $\mathfrak{m}\upharpoonright_{\mathbb{R}}$ in
the interval $(\lambda,\widehat{\lambda})$, which means the
absence of eigenvalues of $\widetilde{J}$ in
$(\lambda,\widehat{\lambda})$. If now $\theta<1$, instead of
(\ref{eq:n-goth-asympt-+}), one has
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{\substack{t\to\widehat{\lambda}^- \\
t\in\mathbb{R}}}\mathfrak{m}(t)
=-\infty\qquad
\lim_{\substack{t\to\lambda^+ \\ t\in\mathbb{R}}}\mathfrak{m}(t)=-\infty\,.
\end{equation*}
From this asymptotic behavior, together with (\ref{eq:n-goth-at-0}) and a
similar reasoning as the one given above, it follows that
$\mathfrak{m}\upharpoonright_{\mathbb{R}}$ crosses the 0-axis exactly once
in $(\lambda,\gamma)$ and once in
$(\gamma,\widehat{\lambda})$.
The case when $\gamma$ is in $\sigma(J)$ is
treated analogously. Here one only has to take into account two
things: firstly that now
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:n-goth-at-0-special-case}
\mathfrak{m}\left(\gamma\right)=
\theta^2+(\theta^2-1)\res_{\zeta=\gamma}m(\zeta)
\end{equation}
and secondly, that, since
$-\left[\res_{\zeta=\gamma}m(\zeta)\right]^{-1}$
is the normalizing constant of $J$ corresponding to the eigenvalue
$\gamma$ (see (\ref{eq:m-discrete})), one has
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{m}\left(\gamma\right)>0
\end{equation*}
either when $\theta>1$ or $\theta<1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Although, the case $\theta=1$ reduces to an additive rank-one
perturbation, the well known interlacing property (see for instance
the proof of \cite[Thm.\,3.3]{weder-silva}) cannot be obtained from
Proposition \ref{prop:interlacing2} by a limiting procedure since
the limit of $\gamma(\theta)$ when $\theta\to 1$ does not exist (see
(\ref{eq:gamma-def})).
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:special-interlace}
Let the positive number $\theta\ne 1$ and $h\in\mathbb{R}$. It is
straightforward to verify that, for $\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J})$, there exist a set $M$ and functions
$f:M\to\sigma(J)$ and $\widetilde{f}:M\to\sigma(\widetilde{J})$, with
the properties given in our convention (C1) for enumerating sequences,
such that the following conditions hold under the assumption that
$\lambda_k=f(k)$ and $\mu_k=\widetilde{f}(k)$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:interlacing-theta-big}
\lambda_k<\mu_k<\lambda_{k+1} \quad\text{in}
\ \left(\gamma,+\infty\right)\,,
\qquad
\lambda_{k-1}<\mu_k<\lambda_k \quad\text{in}
\ \left(-\infty,\gamma\right)\,,
\end{equation}
when $\theta>1$, and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:interlacing-theta-small}
\mu_k<\lambda_k<\mu_{k+1}\quad\text{in}
\ \left(\gamma,+\infty\right)\,,
\qquad
\mu_{k-1}<\lambda_k<\mu_k \quad\text{in}
\ \left(-\infty,\gamma\right)\,,
\end{equation}
if $\theta<1$. Here, implicitly, the intersection of $\sigma(J)$ with
the semi-infinite intervals is not empty, but we are also considering
the case when the intersection with one of the semi-infinite
intervals is empty (see Remark~\ref{rem:semi-intervals-cases}). Also,
we are not excluding the case when $\gamma$ is
in $\sigma(J)$ for which there is $k_0\in M$ such that
$\lambda_{k_0}=\mu_{k_0}=\gamma$.
\end{remark}
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:convergence-eigenvalues2}
Suppose that $h\in\mathbb{R}$ is such that if $\theta=1$ then $h\ne
0$. Let $J$ have discrete spectrum and assume that
$\sigma(J)=\{\lambda_k\}_{k\in M}$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J})=\{\mu_k\}_{k\in M}$, where the sequences have
been arranged according to Remark \ref{rem:special-interlace} if
$\theta\ne 1$ and according to Remark~\ref{rem:true-interlacing}
otherwise. Then
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:convergence-eigenvalues}
\sum_{k\in M}(\mu_k-\lambda_k)=h+q_1(\theta^2-1)
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Consider the sequence
$\{\eta_k\}_{k\in M}$ being the spectrum of $\widehat{J}$, where
\begin{equation*}
\widehat{J}:=J+h\inner{\delta_1}{\cdot}\delta_1\,.
\end{equation*}
In the proof of \cite[Thm.\,3.4]{weder-silva} it is shown that
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k\in M}(\eta_k-\lambda_k)=h\,,
\end{equation*}
where $\eta_k>\lambda_k$ for all $k\in M$ when $h>0$ and
$\eta_k\le\lambda_k$ for all $k\in M$ otherwise. On the other hand, by
\cite[Prop.\,4.1]{delrio-kudryavtsev-II}, one has
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k\in M}(\mu_k-\eta_k)=q_1(\theta^2-1)\,,
\end{equation*}
where the enumeration obeys \cite[Remark
5]{delrio-kudryavtsev-II} if $\theta\ne 1$.
Consider a sequence $\{M_n\}_{n=1}^\infty$
of subsets of $M$, such that $M_n\subset M_{n+1}$ and $\cup_nM_n=M$.
Then the assertion follows from the
linearity of the limit
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{n\to\infty}\left[\sum_{k\in M_n}(\mu_k-\eta_k)+
\sum_{k\in M_n}(\eta_k-\lambda_k)\right]\,,
\end{equation*}
as soon as one notices that the enumeration has
been done
according to Remark~\ref{rem:special-interlace} when $\theta\ne 1$.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:m-goth-actual-form2}
Suppose that $h\in\mathbb{R}$ is such that if $\theta=1$ then $h\ne
0$. Let the Jacobi operator $J$ have discrete spectrum and assume that
$\sigma(J)=\{\lambda_k\}_{k\in M}$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J})=\{\mu_k\}_{k\in M}$, where $\widetilde{J}$ is
given by (\ref{eq:def-tilde-j}), and the sequences have
been arranged according to Remark \ref{rem:special-interlace} if
$\theta\ne 1$ and according to Remark~\ref{rem:true-interlacing}
otherwise. Then,
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{m}(\zeta)=
\prod\limits_{k\in M}\frac{\zeta-\mu_k}{\zeta-\lambda_k}\,.
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
When $\theta=1$ the assertion follows from the proof of
\cite[Thm.\,3.4]{weder-silva} If $\theta\ne 1$, the proof repeats
the one of \cite[Prop.\,4.2]{delrio-kudryavtsev-II}, so we omit some
details that the reader can reestablish from
\cite[Prop.\,4.2]{delrio-kudryavtsev-II} if necessary.
From Proposition~\ref{prop:m-weyl-krein-representation} and
(\ref{eq:m-goth-def2}) it follows that
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{m}(\zeta)=C\frac{\zeta-\mu_0}{\zeta-\lambda_0}
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\k\ne 0}}
\left(1-\frac{\zeta}{\mu_k}\right)
\left(1-\frac{\zeta}{\lambda_k}\right)^{-1}\,.
\end{equation*}
By Proposition \ref{prop:convergence-eigenvalues2}, one actually has
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:m-goth-two-products}
\mathfrak{m}(\zeta)=C\frac{\zeta-\mu_0}{\zeta-\lambda_0}
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\k\ne 0}}\frac{\lambda_k}{\mu_k}
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\k\ne 0}}\frac{\zeta-\mu_k}{\zeta-\lambda_k}
\end{equation}
Indeed, (\ref{eq:convergence-eigenvalues}) implies the convergence of
the products in (\ref{eq:m-goth-two-products}).
Now, the assertion of the proposition follows from
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:limits-of-m-goth}
\lim_{\substack{\zeta\to\infty \\ \im \zeta\ge\epsilon>0}}
\mathfrak{m}(\zeta)=1\quad\text{ and }\quad
\lim_{\substack{\zeta\to\infty \\
\im \zeta\ge\epsilon}}
\prod_{k\in M}
\frac{\zeta-\mu_k}{\zeta-\lambda_k}=1\,.
\end{equation}
The first limit is obtained from (\ref{eq:m-asympt}) and
(\ref{eq:m-through-m2}). The second one is a consequence of the
uniform convergence of
\begin{equation*}
\prod_{k\in M}
\frac{\zeta-\mu_k}{\zeta-\lambda_k}
\end{equation*}
in compacts of $\mathbb{C}\setminus\mathbb{R}$, which, in its turn, can be
proven on the basis of (\ref{eq:convergence-eigenvalues}).
\end{proof}
\section{Inverse spectral analysis for $J$ and $\widetilde{J}$}
\label{sec:reconstruction}
In this section we give results on reconstruction of the operator $J$
from its spectrum and the one of $\widetilde{J}$. Additionally, we
provide necessary and sufficient conditions for two sequences to be
the spectra of the operators $J$ and $\widetilde{J}$. Finally, we
discuss isospectral operators within the perturbed family of Jacobi
operators.
\begin{theorem}
\label{prop:reconstruction2}
Let the Jacobi operator $J$ have discrete spectrum and
$\widetilde{J}$ be as in (\ref{eq:def-tilde-j}) with $\theta\ne
1$. If $\gamma$ is not in $\sigma(J)$, then the sets $\sigma(J)$,
$\sigma(\widetilde{J})$, and the constant $\gamma$ uniquely
determine the matrix (\ref{eq:jm-0}), the parameters $\theta$ and
$h$, and the boundary condition at infinity if necessary
(i.\,e. if $J_0$ turns out to be non-essentially self-adjoint).
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
In view of what has been said in Section~\ref{sec:preliminaries}, it
suffices to show that the input data uniquely determine the Weyl
$m$-function of $J$, and the parameters $\theta$ and $h$.
On the basis of Proposition~\ref{prop:m-goth-actual-form2}, one
construct $\mathfrak{m}$ from the sets $\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J})$. Then, since $\gamma\not\in\sigma(J)$, it follows
from (\ref{eq:m-through-m2}) that $\mathfrak{m}(\gamma)=\theta^2$. Now,
the constants $\gamma$ and $\theta$ allow to find $h$. Finally, by means
of (\ref{eq:m-through-m2}), one determines the function $m$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\label{prop:reconstruction3}
Let the Jacobi operator $J$ have discrete spectrum and
$\widetilde{J}$ be as in (\ref{eq:def-tilde-j}) with $\theta\ne
1$. Assuming that $\gamma$ is in $\sigma(J)$, suppose that one is
given the sets $\sigma(J)$, $\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ and one of the
following constants
\begin{equation*}
\text{(a)}\ \theta,\qquad\text{(b) the normalizing constant
corresponding to}\ \gamma,\qquad\text{(c)}\ h,
\end{equation*}
then one recovers uniquely the matrix (\ref{eq:jm-0}), the
constant $h$ in case (a), $\theta$ and $h$ in case (b), $\theta$
in case (c), and the boundary condition at infinity if necessary
(i.\,e. if $J_0$ turns out to be non-essentially self-adjoint).
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The proof is similar to the one of
Theorem~\ref{prop:reconstruction2}. The sets $\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ determine $\mathfrak{m}$ and, then, one
should obtain from it the function $m$ using either the constant
$\theta$ or the normalizing constant corresponding to $\gamma$. From
Proposition~\ref{prop:zeros-poles2} it follows that
\begin{equation*}
\sigma(J)\cap\sigma(\widetilde{J})=\{\gamma\}\,.
\end{equation*}
Thus $\theta$ or $h$ determine $\theta$ and $h$. On the other hand,
from (\ref{eq:m-through-m2}) and taking into account that
$\gamma\in\sigma(J)$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:m-gamma-case-in-spectrum}
\mathfrak{m}(\gamma)=\theta^2-\alpha^{-1}(\theta^2-1)\,,
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ is the normalizing constant corresponding to the
eigenvalue $\gamma$.
\end{proof}
Suppose now that we are required to enumerate the sequences
$\sigma(J)$ and $\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ according to
Remark~\ref{rem:special-interlace}, but no information is given about
the constant $\gamma$ other than it is not in $\sigma(J)$. Clearly, one does not need this number for accomplishing
this task, as is stated in the following remark.
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:special-interlace-no-k}
Assuming that $J$ has discrete spectrum, let $S=\sigma(J)$,
$\widetilde{S}=\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ be disjoint, and take any
$\theta\ne 1$ and $h\in\mathbb{R}$. It follows from Proposition
\ref{prop:interlacing2} that one can find a set $M$ and functions
$f:M\to S$, $\widetilde{f}:M\to\widetilde{S}$, with the properties
given in our convention for enumerating sequences (C1), such that there
exists a unique $k_0\in M$ for which the following conditions hold
under the assumption that $\lambda_k=f(k)$ and
$\mu_k=\widetilde{f}(k)$ for $k\in M$:
\begin{enumerate}[a)]
\item
$\widetilde{S}\cap(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})=\emptyset$,
\item $\lambda_k<\mu_k<\lambda_{k+1}\,,\ \forall k\ge k_0$,
\item $\lambda_{k-1}<\mu_k<\lambda_k\,,\ \forall k<k_0$,
\end{enumerate}
if $\theta>1$, and
\begin{enumerate}[a$'$)]
\item $\widetilde{S}\cap(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})
=\{\mu_{k_0-1},\mu_{k_0}\}$,
\item $\lambda_k<\mu_{k+1}<\lambda_{k+1}\,,\ \forall k\ge k_0$,
\item $\lambda_{k-1}<\mu_{k-1}<\lambda_k\,,\ \forall k< k_0$.
\end{enumerate}
if $\theta<1$
\end{remark}
Before we state the necessary and sufficient conditions for two
sequences to be the spectra of a Jacobi operator $J$ and its
perturbation $\widetilde{J}$, let us introduce the following
parameterized sequence. Suppose that two sequences $\{\lambda_k\}_{k\in
M}$ and $\{\mu_k\}_{k\in M}$ are given and enumerated by the set $M$
as convened before. Whenever the series
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k\in M}(\mu_k-\lambda_k)
\end{equation*}
converges, the sequence
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:tau-def-1}
\tau_n(\omega):=
\frac{(\mu_n-\lambda_n)
\displaystyle\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\k\ne n}}
\frac{\lambda_n-\mu_k}{\lambda_n-\lambda_k}
}{(\lambda_n-\omega)\left(\displaystyle\prod_{k\in M}
\frac{\omega-\mu_k}{\omega-\lambda_k}-1\right)}\,,
\quad \forall n\in M\,.
\end{equation}
is well defined for any $\omega\in\mathbb{R}$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{prop:sufficient-1}
Let $S$ and $\widetilde{S}$ be two disjoint infinite real sequences
without finite points of accumulation. There exist
$\theta>1$, $h\in\mathbb{R}$, and a matrix (\ref{eq:jm-0})
such that $S=\sigma(J)\not\ni\gamma$ and
$\widetilde{S}=\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ if and only if the following
conditions hold:
\begin{enumerate}[i)]
\item There exist a set $M$ and functions $h:M\to S$,
$\widetilde{h}:M\to\widetilde{S}$ with the properties given in our
convention for enumerating sequences (C1) such that one can find a
unique $k_0\in M$ for which a),b),c) of
Remark~\ref{rem:special-interlace-no-k} take place with
$\lambda_k=h(k)$ and $\mu_k=\widetilde{h}(k)$.
\label{interlace-sufficient}
\item The series $\sum_{k\in M}(\mu_k-\lambda_k)$ is convergent.
\label{convergence-sufficient}
\item There exists $\widehat{\omega}\in (\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$ such
that
\begin{enumerate}[a)]
\item For $m=0,1,2,\dots$, the series
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k\in M}\lambda_k^{2m}\tau_k(\widehat{\omega})
\quad\text{converges.}
\end{equation*}
\label{finite-moments-sufficient}
\item If a sequence of complex numbers $\{\beta_k\}_{k\in M}$
is such that the series
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k\in
M}\abs{\beta_k}^2\tau_k(\widehat{\omega})
\quad\text{converges}
\end{equation*}
and, for $m=0,1,2,\dots$,
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k\in
M}\beta_k\lambda_k^m\tau_k(\widehat{\omega})=0\,,
\end{equation*}
then $\beta_k=0$ for all $k\in M$.
\label{density-poly-sufficient}
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Due to Propositions~\ref{prop:interlacing2} and
\ref{prop:convergence-eigenvalues2}, for proving the necessity of
the conditions, it only remains to show the existence of
$\widehat{\omega}$ in $(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$ such that
$\tau_n(\widehat{\omega})=\alpha_n^{-1}$
for all $n\in M$. Indeed
\emph{\ref{finite-moments-sufficient}}) and
\emph{\ref{density-poly-sufficient}}) will follow from the fact that
all moments of the spectral measure (\ref{eq:rho-discrete}) exist
and that the polynomials are dense in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho)$.
Clearly, $\gamma\in(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$, so let
$\widehat{\omega}=\gamma$. Then, from
(\ref{eq:m-discrete}),(\ref{eq:m-through-m2}), and
Proposition~\ref{prop:m-goth-actual-form2}, it follows that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:expression-for-normalizing-constants}
\begin{split}
\alpha_n^{-1}&=\frac{1}{\theta^2-1}\lim_{\zeta\to\lambda_n}
\frac{\lambda_n-\zeta}{\zeta-\gamma}\mathfrak{m}(\zeta)\\
&=\frac{\mu_n-\lambda_n}{(\lambda_n-\gamma)(\theta^2-1)}
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\k\ne n}}
\frac{\lambda_n-\mu_k}{\lambda_n-\lambda_k}\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Hence, taking into account (\ref{eq:n-goth-at-0}), one verifies that
$\tau_n(\widehat{\omega})=\alpha_n^{-1}$.
We now prove that conditions
\emph{\ref{interlace-sufficient}}),
\emph{\ref{convergence-sufficient}}),
\emph{\ref{finite-moments-sufficient}}), and
\emph{\ref{density-poly-sufficient}}) are sufficient.
The condition \emph{\ref{interlace-sufficient}}) implies that
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\lambda_n-\mu_k}{\lambda_n-\lambda_k}>0\qquad
\forall k\in M\,,\ k\ne n
\end{equation*}
On the other hand, by \emph{\ref{convergence-sufficient}}) one can
define the number
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:kappa-def}
\vartheta=+\sqrt{\prod_{k\in M}
\frac{\widehat{\omega}-\mu_k}{\widehat{\omega}-\lambda_k}}
\end{equation}
which is clearly strictly greater than $1$ since if
$\widehat{\omega}\in(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$, then
$\abs{\widehat{\omega}-\mu_k}>\abs{\widehat{\omega}-\lambda_k}$ for
all $k\in M$. Thus,
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\mu_n-\lambda_n}{(\lambda_n-\widehat{\omega})(\vartheta^2-1)}>0
\qquad
\forall n\in M
\end{equation*}
Hence, for all $n\in M$, $\tau_n(\widehat{\omega})>0$, so define the function
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:rho-fro-proof}
\rho(t):=\sum_{\lambda_k<t}\tau_k(\widehat{\omega})\,.
\end{equation}
It follows from \emph{\ref{finite-moments-sufficient}}) that the
moments of the measure corresponding to $\rho$ are finite.
Now, on the basis of \emph{\ref{interlace-sufficient}}) and
\emph{\ref{convergence-sufficient}}), define the meromorphic functions
\begin{equation*}
\check{\mathfrak{m}}(\zeta):=
\prod_{k\in M}\frac{\zeta-\mu_k}{\zeta-\lambda_k}
\end{equation*}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:definition-m-tilde}
\check{m}(\zeta):=
\frac{\check{\mathfrak{m}}(\zeta)-
\vartheta^2}
{(\zeta-\widehat{\omega})\left(\vartheta^2-1\right)}\,.
\end{equation}
Thus, taking into account (\ref{eq:tau-def-1}), one has
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:residue-tilde}
\res_{\zeta=\lambda_n}\check{m}(\zeta)=
\left(\vartheta^2-1\right)^{-1}\lim_{\zeta\to\lambda_n}
\frac{\zeta-\lambda_n}{\zeta-\widehat{\omega}}\check{\mathfrak{m}}(\zeta)
=-\tau_n(\widehat{\omega})\,.
\end{equation}
Therefore, on the basis of the second equality in
(\ref{eq:limits-of-m-goth}),
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:limit-tilde}
\lim_{\substack{\zeta\to\infty \\ \im \zeta\ge\epsilon>0}}
\check{m}(\zeta)=\left(\vartheta^2-1\right)^{-1}
\lim_{\substack{\zeta\to\infty \\ \im \zeta\ge\epsilon>0}}
\frac{\check{\mathfrak{m}}(\zeta)}
{\zeta-\widehat{\omega}}=0
\end{equation}
By (\ref{eq:residue-tilde}) and (\ref{eq:limit-tilde}),
\cite[Chap. VII, Sec.1 Theorem 2]{MR589888} implies that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:m-tilde-as-sum}
\check{m}(\zeta)=
\sum_{k\in M}\frac{\tau_k(\widehat{\omega})}{\lambda_k-\zeta}\,.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, using again the first equality in
(\ref{eq:limits-of-m-goth}), one obtains
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{\substack{\zeta\to\infty \\ \im \zeta\ge\epsilon>0}}
\zeta\check{m}(\zeta)=
\left(\vartheta^2-1\right)^{-1}
\lim_{\substack{\zeta\to\infty \\ \im \zeta\ge\epsilon>0}}
\frac{1}{1-\widehat{\omega}/\zeta}
\left(\check{\mathfrak{m}}(\zeta)-
\vartheta^2\right)=-1\,.
\end{equation*}
But
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{\substack{\zeta\to\infty \\ \im \zeta\ge\epsilon>0}}
\zeta\check{m}(\zeta)=-\sum_{k\in M}\tau_k(\widehat{\omega})\,,
\end{equation*}
so it has been proven that, for the function given in
(\ref{eq:rho-fro-proof}),
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\mathbb{R}} d\rho(t)=1\,.
\end{equation*}
Thus the measure corresponding to $\rho$ is appropriately normalized
and, because of \emph{\ref{finite-moments-sufficient}}), all the
moments exist, so in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho)$ apply the Gram-Schmidt
procedure of orthonormalization to the sequence $\{t^k\}_{k=0}^\infty$
to obtain a Jacobi matrix as was explained in the
Section~\ref{sec:preliminaries}. Consider the operator $J_0$ with
domain $l_{\rm fin}(\mathbb{N})$ generated by this Jacobi matrix as
explained in the Introduction. Now, as a consequence of condition
\emph{\ref{density-poly-sufficient}}), which means that the
polynomials are dense in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho)$, $\rho$ corresponds to the
resolution of the identity of a self-adjoint extension $J$ of $J_0$
\cite[Prop.\,4.15]{MR1627806}.
Finally, consider
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:perturbed-family}
\widetilde{J}=J+
[q_1(\theta^2-1)+\theta^2h]\inner{\delta_1}{\cdot}\delta_1 +
b_1(\theta-1)(\inner{\delta_1}{\cdot}\delta_2 +
\inner{\delta_2}{\cdot}\delta_1)\,,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation*}
\theta=\vartheta\,,\qquad
h=\widehat{\omega}\frac{1-\vartheta^2}
{\vartheta^2}\,.
\end{equation*}
By construction
the sequence $\{\lambda_k\}_{k\in M}$ is the spectrum of
$J$. For the proof to be complete it only remains to show that
$\{\mu_k\}_{k\in M}$ is the spectrum of $\widetilde{J}$. For the
function given in (\ref{eq:m-goth-def2}), taking into account
(\ref{eq:m-discrete}) and (\ref{eq:m-through-m2}), one has
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{m}(\zeta)=\theta^2+(\zeta-\widehat{\omega})\left(\theta^2-1\right)
\sum_{k\in M}\frac{1}{\alpha_k(\lambda_k-\zeta)}\,.
\end{equation*}
On the other hand, from (\ref{eq:definition-m-tilde}) and
(\ref{eq:m-tilde-as-sum}), it follows that
\begin{equation*}
\check{\mathfrak{m}}(\zeta)=\vartheta^2+(\zeta-\widehat{\omega})\left(\vartheta^2-1\right)
\sum_{k\in M}\frac{\tau_k(\widehat{\omega})}{\lambda_k-\zeta}\,.
\end{equation*}
But $\theta=\vartheta$ and we have already proven that
$\alpha_k^{-1}=\tau_k(\widehat{\omega})$ for $k\in M$. Thus
$\mathfrak{m}=\check{\mathfrak{m}}$, meaning that the zeros of
$\mathfrak{m}$ are given by the sequence $\{\mu_k\}_{k\in M}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:uniqueness}
In accordance with Theorem \ref{prop:reconstruction2}, the proof of
Theorem~\ref{prop:sufficient-1} shows that the sequences $S$,
$\widetilde{S}$, and the parameter $\widehat{\omega}$ satisfying
\emph{\ref{interlace-sufficient})},
\emph{\ref{convergence-sufficient})}, and \emph{iii)}, uniquely
determine the perturbation parameters $\theta$ and $h$, and the
matrix (\ref{eq:jm-0}) with the boundary condition at infinity if
necessary. Thus, $S$, $\widetilde{S}$, and $\widehat{\omega}$ amount
to the complete input data for solving uniquely the inverse spectral
problem.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:abc-prime}
Clearly, the assertion of Theorem~\ref{prop:sufficient-1} holds true
if one substitutes $\theta>1$ by $\theta<1$, conditions a), b), c)
by a$'$), b$'$), c$'$), and $\widehat{\omega}\in(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$ by
$\widehat{\omega}\in(\mu_{k_0-1},\mu_{k_0})$.
\end{remark}
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:other-gammas}
Let $S$ and $\widetilde{S}$ be two infinite real sequences without
finite points of accumulation that satisfy
\ref{interlace-sufficient}) and \ref{convergence-sufficient}) of
Theorem~\ref{prop:sufficient-1}. Suppose that there is
$\widehat{\omega}\in(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$ so that the
sequence $\{\tau_n(\widehat{\omega})\}_{n\in M}$ satisfies
\ref{finite-moments-sufficient}) and \ref{density-poly-sufficient})
of Theorem~\ref{prop:sufficient-1}, then $\{\tau_n(\omega)\}_{n\in
M}$ also satisfies \ref{finite-moments-sufficient}) and
\ref{density-poly-sufficient}) for all
$\omega\in(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Let
\begin{equation*}
\rho_\omega(t):=\sum_{\lambda_k<t}\tau_k(\omega)\,.
\end{equation*}
As in the proof of Theorem~\ref{prop:sufficient-1} one verifies that
if $\omega\in(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$, $\rho_\omega$ is a
positive non-decreasing function and that
\begin{equation*}
\int_{\mathbb{R}}
d\rho_\omega(t)=1\,,\qquad\forall \omega\in(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0}).
\end{equation*}
By hypothesis all the moments of the measure
$\rho_{\widehat{\omega}}$ are finite and the polynomials are dense
in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho_{\widehat{\omega}})$. For the proposition to be
proven, one needs to show that this implies that all the moments of
the measure $\rho_\omega$ are finite and the polynomials are dense
in $L_2(\mathbb{R},\rho_\omega)$ for all
$\omega\in(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$. But, since the support
of the measure is the same for all
$\omega\in(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$, this implication will
indeed take place if for any fixed
$\omega\in(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$ there are positive
constants $C_1,C_2$ such that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:ineq-to-proof}
C_1\tau_n(\widehat{\omega})\le\tau_n(\omega)\le
C_2\tau_n(\widehat{\omega})\,,\quad\forall n\in M\,.
\end{equation}
Fix $\omega\in(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$. From
(\ref{eq:tau-def-1}), it follows that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:relation-gammas}
\tau_n(\omega)=C
\frac{\lambda_n-\widehat{\omega}}
{\lambda_n-\omega}\tau_n(\widehat{\omega})\,,
\end{equation}
where $C=\abs{\prod_{k\in M}
\frac{\omega-\mu_k}{\omega-\lambda_k}-1}^{-1}\abs{\prod_{k\in M}
\frac{\widehat{\omega}-\mu_k}{\widehat{\omega}-\lambda_k}-1}$. By
elementary estimates of $\abs{\frac{\lambda_n-\widehat{\omega}}
{\lambda_n-\omega}}$, one verifies from (\ref{eq:relation-gammas})
that if
\begin{equation*}
C_1:=\frac{\min\{\abs{\lambda_{k_0}-\widehat{\omega}},
\abs{\lambda_{k_0-1}-\widehat{\omega}}\}}{
\max\{\abs{\lambda_{k_0}-\omega},
\abs{\lambda_{k_0-1}-\omega}\}}\quad
C_2:=1+\frac{\max\{\abs{\lambda_{k_0}-\widehat{\omega}},
\abs{\lambda_{k_0-1}-\widehat{\omega}}\}}{\min\{\abs{\lambda_{k_0}-\omega},
\abs{\lambda_{k_0-1}-\omega}\}}\,,
\end{equation*}
then (\ref{eq:ineq-to-proof}) holds.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:abc-prime2}
As in Remark~\ref{rem:abc-prime}, the assertion of
Proposition~\ref{prop:other-gammas} holds true if one assumes that
i) is satisfied with a$'$), b$'$),c$'$) instead of a), b), c) and
substitute the interval $(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$ by
$(\mu_{k_0-1},\mu_{k_0})$.
\end{remark}
\begin{theorem}
\label{prop:other-matrices-same-spectra}
Let $\theta\ne 1$ and assume that the disjoint sets $\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ are enumerated according to
Remark~\ref{rem:special-interlace-no-k} with a), b), c) if
$\theta>1$, and with a$'$), b$'$), c$'$) otherwise. Then, for any
$\omega\in(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$ when $\theta>1$ and for
any $\omega\in(\mu_{k_0-1},\mu_{k_0})$ when $\theta<1$, there is a
matrix
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:jm-other}
\begin{pmatrix}
q_1' & b_1' & 0 & 0 & \cdots
\\[1mm] b_1' & q_2' & b_2' & 0 & \cdots \\[1mm] 0 & b_2' & q_3' &
b_3' & \\
0 & 0 & b_3' & q_4' & \ddots\\ \vdots & \vdots & & \ddots
& \ddots
\end{pmatrix}\,,
\end{equation}
where $q_n'\in\mathbb{R}$ and $b_n'>0$ for all $n\in\mathbb{N}$,
and a self-adjoint
extension $J'$ of the operator whose matrix representation is
(\ref{eq:jm-other}),
such that $\sigma(J')=\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J'})=\sigma(\widetilde{J})$, where
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:j-prime-tilde}
\widetilde{J'}:=J'+
[q_1'((\theta')^2-1)+(\theta')^2h']\inner{\delta_1}{\cdot}\delta_1 +
b_1'(\theta'-1)(\inner{\delta_1}{\cdot}\delta_2 +
\inner{\delta_2}{\cdot}\delta_1)
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation*}
\theta':=+\sqrt{\mathfrak{m}(\omega)}\,,\qquad
h':=\omega\frac{1-\mathfrak{m}(\omega)}{\mathfrak{m}(\omega)}\,.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We prove the assertion for $\theta>1$. The other case is completely
analogous, one only has to take into account
Remarks~\ref{rem:abc-prime} and \ref{rem:abc-prime2}. By
Theorem~\ref{prop:sufficient-1}, it follows that $\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ satisfy i), ii),
\ref{finite-moments-sufficient}), and
\ref{density-poly-sufficient}). Then, from
Proposition~\ref{prop:other-gammas},
\ref{finite-moments-sufficient}) and \ref{density-poly-sufficient})
are satisfied for any
$\omega\in(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$. Now, again by
Theorem~\ref{prop:sufficient-1}, there are operators $J'$ and
$\widetilde{J'}$ such that their spectra coincide with $\sigma(J)$
and $\sigma(\widetilde{J})$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:m-theta-solutions}
Let $\theta\ne 1$ and assume that the disjoint sets $\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ are enumerated according to
Remark~\ref{rem:special-interlace-no-k} with a), b), c) if $\theta>1$,
and with a'), b'), c') otherwise. Then, the equation
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:theta-equation}
\mathfrak{m}\upharpoonright_{(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})}(s)=\theta^2
\end{equation}
has only the solutions $s=\gamma$ and $s=\widehat{\gamma}$, where
$\widehat{\gamma}$ is the only point in $\sigma(J_{\rm
T})\cap(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$. Moreover, if
$\gamma=\widehat{\gamma}$, then $\gamma$ is a local extremum of
$\mathfrak{m}\upharpoonright_{(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First notice that $\gamma$ is in $(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$
if $\theta>1$ and in $(\mu{}_{k_0-1},\mu{}_{k_0})$ otherwise. By
Proposition~\ref{prop:interlace-truncated} the set $\sigma(J_{\rm
T})\cap(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$, has only one element. If
$\theta<1$, since $J_{\rm T}=\widetilde{J}_{\rm T}$, this only
element is actually in $(\mu_{k_0-1},\mu_{k_0})$. Moreover, when
$\theta<1$, by what was said in the proof of
Proposition~\ref{prop:interlacing2}, $m\upharpoonright_{\mathbb{R}}$
takes negative values outside $(\mu_{k_0-1},\mu_{k_0})$. Now, from
(\ref{eq:m-through-m2}), the solutions of (\ref{eq:theta-equation})
are the zeros of $(\zeta -\gamma)m(\zeta)$ which are $\gamma$ and
$\widehat{\gamma}$. Clearly, if $\gamma=\widehat{\gamma}$, the
function $(\zeta -\gamma)m(\zeta)$ has a zero of multiplicity two
which implies the second assertion.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:one-extremum}
Let $\theta\ne 1$ and assume that the disjoint sets $\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ are enumerated according to
Remark~\ref{rem:special-interlace-no-k} with a), b), c) if
$\theta>1$, and with a'), b'), c') otherwise. Then, the function
$\mathfrak{m}\upharpoonright_{(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})}$ has only one
local extremum in $(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$ when $\theta>1$,
and in $(\mu_{k_0-1},\mu_{k_0})$ when $\theta<1$, which turns out to
be a global minimum greater than 1 if $\theta>1$, and a global
maximum less that 1 if $\theta<1$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose that $\theta>1$ and that
$\mathfrak{m}\upharpoonright_{(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})}$ has
more than one local extremum. Then one verifies that there are three
different points $\omega_1,\omega_2,\omega_3$ in
$(\lambda_{k_0-1},\break\lambda_{k_0})$ such that
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{m}(\omega_1)=\mathfrak{m}(\omega_2)=
\mathfrak{m}(\omega_3)\,.
\end{equation*}
By Theorem
\ref{prop:other-matrices-same-spectra}, for $\omega_1$ there are
Jacobi operators $J'$ and $\widetilde{J'}$ such that
$\sigma(J')=\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J'})=\sigma(\widetilde{J})$. Let $\mathfrak{n}$
be the quotient of the Weyl $m$-function of $J'$ and the Weyl
$m$-function of $\widetilde{J'}$. By
Proposition~\ref{prop:m-goth-actual-form2},
$\mathfrak{m}=\mathfrak{n}$. Hence, on the basis of Theorem
\ref{prop:other-matrices-same-spectra}, it follows that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:contradiction}
\mathfrak{n}(\omega_1)=\mathfrak{n}(\omega_2)=
\mathfrak{n}(\omega_3)=(\theta')^2\,.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, Lemma~\ref{lem:m-theta-solutions} tells us that the equation
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{n}\upharpoonright_{(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})}(s)
=(\theta')^2\,,
\end{equation*}
where $\theta'=+\sqrt{\mathfrak{m}(\omega_1)}$, has only the solutions
$\omega_1$ and the only element of $\sigma(J_{\rm T}')$ in
$(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$. This is in contradiction with
(\ref{eq:contradiction}).
Thus there is only one extremum of
$\mathfrak{m}\upharpoonright_{(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})}$ when
$\theta>1$. The same reasoning given above, but replacing all
appearances of the interval $(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$ by
$(\mu_{k_0-1},\mu_{k_0})$, works for the case $\theta<1$.
Now, on the basis of the behavior of $\mathfrak{m}$ in the
interval $(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})$ if $\theta>1$, and in
$(\mu_{k_0-1},\mu_{k_0})$ if $\theta<1$, given in the proof of
Proposition~\ref{prop:interlacing2}, one completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\label{prop:two-systems-same-theta}
Under the assumptions of Lemma~\ref{lem:m-theta-solutions}, if
$\gamma\ne\widehat{\gamma}$, then there are exactly two different
matrices (\ref{eq:jm-0}) and (\ref{eq:jm-other}) such that
$\sigma(J')=\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J'})=\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ with
$\theta=\theta'$. If $\gamma=\widehat{\gamma}$, then for all
operators $J'\ne J$ for which $\sigma(J')=\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J'})=\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ it turns out that
$\theta\ne\theta'$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Due to Theorem~\ref{prop:other-matrices-same-spectra} and
Lemmas~\ref{lem:m-theta-solutions} and \ref{lem:one-extremum}, the
proof is straightforward.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:max-min-last}
Clearly, the condition $\gamma=\widehat{\gamma}$ is equivalent to
$\gamma$ being equal to the minimum of
$\mathfrak{m}\upharpoonright_{(\lambda_{k_0-1},\lambda_{k_0})}$ if $\theta>1$,
and being equal to the maximum of
$\mathfrak{m}\upharpoonright_{(\mu_{k_0-1},\mu_{k_0})}$ if $\theta<1$.
\end{remark}
Let us now reformulate and summarize some of our results in terms of
the mass-spring systems mentioned in the Introduction.
Suppose that one knows the spectrum of the Jacobi operator
corresponding to the mass-spring system given in Fig. 1, and then,
after carrying out a mass-spring perturbation on the system as
illustrated in Fig. 2, one is given the new spectrum, which does not
intersect with the first one. Clearly, by the spectra alone, one
determines if $\Delta m$ is positive or negative (see
Proposition~\ref{prop:interlacing2}). For definiteness, suppose that
$\Delta m>0$. If no more information is given, then for any value of
the ratio of masses
$\theta\in(0,\max_{t\in(\mu_{k_0-1},\mu_{k_0})}\mathfrak{m}(t)]$ there
are mass-spring systems corresponding to Figs. 1 and 2 having the
measured spectra (see
Theorem~\ref{prop:other-matrices-same-spectra}). However, when one
knows the ratio of masses $\theta$ then, in general, there are only
two mass-spring systems corresponding to Fig. 1 that comply with the
conditions after the corresponding perturbation (see
Theorem~\ref{prop:two-systems-same-theta}). Moreover, if
\begin{equation*}
\theta=\max_{t\in(\mu_{k_0-1},\mu_{k_0})}\mathfrak{m}(t)\,,
\end{equation*}
there is only one system with the required properties (see
Theorem~\ref{prop:two-systems-same-theta}).
Let us now turn to the case when $\gamma\in\sigma(J)$ or,
equivalently, when the spectra of $J$ and $\widetilde{J}$ intersect.
Thus, according to Remark~\ref{rem:special-interlace}, consider the
sequences $\{\lambda_k\}_{k\in M}$ and $\{\mu_k\}_{k\in M}$ such that
$\lambda_{k_0}=\mu_{k_0}=\gamma$. If
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k\in M}(\mu_k-\lambda_k)
\end{equation*}
converges, then, for any
$\omega\in\mathbb{R}$ and $n\in M$, one defines
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:upsilon-def-1}
\upsilon_n(\omega):=
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle
\frac{(\mu_n-\lambda_n)}{(\lambda_n-\gamma)(\omega-1)}
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\k\ne n}}
\frac{\lambda_n-\mu_k}{\lambda_n-\lambda_k}\,,
& n\ne k_0\\
\displaystyle
(\omega-1)^{-1}\left(\omega-\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\mu_k}{\gamma-\lambda_k}\right) & n= k_0
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\begin{theorem}
\label{prop:sufficient-2}
Let $S$ and $\widetilde{S}$ be two infinite real sequences without
finite points of accumulation such that
$S\cap\widetilde{S}=\{\gamma\}$. There exist $\theta>1$,
$h\in\mathbb{R}$, and a matrix (\ref{eq:jm-0}) such that
$S=\sigma(J)$ and $\widetilde{S}=\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ if and only
if the following conditions hold:
\begin{enumerate}[I)]
\item There exist a set $M$ and functions $h:M\to S$,
$\widetilde{h}:M\to\widetilde{S}$ with the properties given in
Remark~\ref{rem:special-interlace} such that
(\ref{eq:interlacing-theta-big}) holds and there is a $k_0\in M$
such that $\lambda_{k_0}=\mu_{k_0}=\gamma$.
\label{interlace-sufficient-2}
\item The series $\sum_{k\in M}(\mu_k-\lambda_k)$ is convergent.
\label{convergence-sufficient-2}
\item There exists $\widehat{\omega}>\displaystyle
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\mu_k}{\gamma-\lambda_k}$ such
that
\begin{enumerate}[a)]
\item For $m=0,1,2,\dots$, the series
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k\in M}\lambda_k^{2m}\upsilon_k(\widehat{\omega})
\quad\text{converges.}
\end{equation*}
\label{finite-moments-sufficient-2}
\item If a sequence of complex numbers $\{\beta_k\}_{k\in M}$
is such that the series
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k\in
M}\abs{\beta_k}^2\upsilon_k(\widehat{\omega})
\quad\text{converges}
\end{equation*}
and, for $m=0,1,2,\dots$,
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k\in
M}\beta_k\lambda_k^m\upsilon_k(\widehat{\omega})=0\,,
\end{equation*}
then $\beta_k=0$ for all $k\in M$.
\label{density-poly-sufficient-2}
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
For proving the necessity of the conditions, in view of
Propositions~\ref{prop:interlacing2} and
\ref{prop:convergence-eigenvalues2}, one only needs to show the
existence of $\widehat{\omega}$ strictly greater than
$\mathfrak{m}(\gamma)$ such that
$\upsilon_k(\widehat{\omega})=\alpha_k^{-1}$ for all $k\in M$. From
(\ref{eq:m-gamma-case-in-spectrum}) and the properties of the
normalizing constants, it follows that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:strange-estimate}
1<\mathfrak{m}(\gamma)<\theta^2\,.
\end{equation}
Let $\widehat{\omega}=\theta^2$, then
(\ref{eq:expression-for-normalizing-constants}) yields
$\upsilon_k(\widehat{\omega})=\alpha_k^{-1}$ for $k\in M$, $k\ne
k_0$. Moreover, (\ref{eq:m-gamma-case-in-spectrum}) implies that
$\upsilon_{k_0}(\widehat{\omega})=\alpha_{k_0}^{-1}$.
Let us now prove that \emph{\ref{interlace-sufficient-2}}),
\emph{\ref{convergence-sufficient-2}}),
\emph{\ref{finite-moments-sufficient-2}}), and
\emph{\ref{density-poly-sufficient-2}}) are sufficient.
It follows from (\ref{eq:interlacing-theta-big}) that
$\abs{\gamma-\mu_k}>\abs{\gamma-\lambda_k}$ for any $k\in
M\setminus\{k_0\}$. Since $\gamma-\mu_k$ and $\gamma-\lambda_k$ have
the same sign,
\begin{equation*}
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\mu_k}{\gamma-\lambda_k}>1\,.
\end{equation*}
Thus $\widehat{\omega}>1$ and
$\upsilon_{k_0}(\widehat{\omega})>0$. Now fix $n\in\mathbb{N}$, $n\ne
k_0$. By \emph{\ref{interlace-sufficient-2}}) one has
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\lambda_n-\mu_k}{\lambda_n-\lambda_k}>0\qquad
\forall k\in M\,,\ k\ne n\,.
\end{equation*}
Since $\mu_n-\lambda_n$ and $\lambda_n-\gamma$ are positive or
negative simultaneously, we
conclude that
\begin{equation*}
\upsilon_n(\widehat{\omega})>0\,,\qquad\forall n\in M\,.
\end{equation*}
Define the function
\begin{equation*}
\rho(t):=\sum_{\lambda_k<t}\upsilon_k(\widehat{\omega})\,.
\end{equation*}
It follows from \emph{\ref{finite-moments-sufficient-2}}) that all
the moments of the measure corresponding to $\rho$ are finite.
On the basis of \emph{\ref{interlace-sufficient-2}}) and
\emph{\ref{convergence-sufficient-2}}), define the meromorphic functions
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:definition-m-frak-tilde-2}
\check{\mathfrak{m}}(\zeta):=
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\k\ne k_0}}\frac{\zeta-\mu_k}{\zeta-\lambda_k}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:definition-m-tilde-2}
\check{m}(\zeta):=
\frac{\check{\mathfrak{m}}(\zeta)-
\widehat{\omega}}
{(\zeta-\gamma)\left(\widehat{\omega}-1\right)}\,.
\end{equation}
As it was shown in the proof of Theorem~\ref{prop:sufficient-1}, one
verifies that
\begin{equation*}
\res_{\zeta=\lambda_n}\check{m}(\zeta)=-\upsilon_n(\widehat{\omega})\,,
\qquad n\ne k_0\,.
\end{equation*}
It is also straightforward to show that
\begin{equation*}
\res_{\zeta=\gamma}\check{m}(\zeta)=
\frac{\check{\mathfrak{m}}(\gamma)-\widehat{\omega}}{\widehat{\omega}-1}\,.
\end{equation*}
Thus, since the function $\check{m}(\zeta)$ vanishes as
$\zeta\to\infty$ along curves in the upper complex half plane, according to
\cite[Chap. VII, Sec.1 Theorem 2]{MR589888}, one can
write
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:m-tilde-as-sum-2}
\check{m}(\zeta)=
\sum_{k\in M}\frac{\upsilon_k(\widehat{\omega})}{\lambda_k-\zeta}\,.
\end{equation}
From (\ref{eq:m-tilde-as-sum-2}) and the fact that
$\lim_{\substack{\zeta\to\infty \\ \im \zeta\ge\epsilon>0}}
\zeta\check{m}(\zeta)=-1$, it follows that
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k\in M}\upsilon_k(\widehat{\omega})=1\quad
\text{or, equivalently,}\quad\int_{\mathbb{R}} d\rho(t)=1\,.
\end{equation*}
On the other hand, by \emph{\ref{finite-moments-sufficient-2}}), all the
moments of $\rho$ exist. Hence, using the method explained in Section
~\ref{sec:preliminaries}, one obtains a Jacobi matrix and the operator
$J_0$ generated by it (see the Introduction). Condition
\emph{\ref{density-poly-sufficient-2}}) implies that $\rho$ is the
spectral function of a self-adjoint extension $J$ of $J_0$
\cite[Prop.\,4.15]{MR1627806}. Now, consider (\ref{eq:perturbed-family}),
where now
\begin{equation*}
\theta=+\sqrt{\widehat{\omega}}\,,\qquad
h=\gamma\left(\frac{1}{\widehat{\omega}}-1\right)\,.
\end{equation*}
By construction
the sequence $\{\lambda_k\}_{k\in M}$ is the spectrum of
$J$. For the proof to be complete it only remains to show that
$\{\mu_k\}_{k\in M}$ is the spectrum of $\widetilde{J}$. For the
function given in (\ref{eq:m-goth-def2}), taking into account
(\ref{eq:m-discrete}) and (\ref{eq:m-through-m2}), one has
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{m}(\zeta)=\theta^2+(\zeta-\gamma)\left(\theta^2-1\right)
\sum_{k\in M}\frac{1}{\alpha_k(\lambda_k-\zeta)}\,.
\end{equation*}
In view of (\ref{eq:definition-m-tilde-2}) and
(\ref{eq:m-tilde-as-sum-2}), one has
\begin{equation*}
\check{\mathfrak{m}}(\zeta)=\widehat{\omega}+(\zeta-\gamma)
\left(\widehat{\omega}-1\right)
\sum_{k\in M}\frac{\upsilon_k(\widehat{\omega})}{\lambda_k-\zeta}\,.
\end{equation*}
But, since $\theta=\widehat{\omega}$ and the fact that
$\alpha_k^{-1}=\upsilon_k(\widehat{\omega})$ for $k\in M$, it follows
that $\mathfrak{m}=\check{\mathfrak{m}}$. In its turn, this means
that the zeros of $\mathfrak{m}$ are given by the sequence
$\{\mu_k\}_{k\in M}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
By repeating the reasoning of the proof of
Theorem~\ref{prop:sufficient-2}, it is straightforward to verify
that Theorem~\ref{prop:sufficient-2} remains true if one substitutes
$\theta>1$ by $\theta<1$, (\ref{eq:interlacing-theta-big}) by
(\ref{eq:interlacing-theta-small}) in
\emph{\ref{interlace-sufficient-2})}, and
\begin{equation*}
\widehat{\omega}>
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\mu_k}{\gamma-\lambda_k}\quad\text{by}\quad
\widehat{\omega}<
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\mu_k}{\gamma-\lambda_k}\,.
\end{equation*}
\end{remark}
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:other-gammas-2}
Let $S$ and $\widetilde{S}$ be two infinite real sequences without
finite points of accumulation such that $S\cap
\widetilde{S}=\{\gamma\}$ and
\ref{interlace-sufficient-2}) and \ref{convergence-sufficient-2}) of
Theorem~\ref{prop:sufficient-2} hold. Suppose that there is
\begin{equation*}
\widehat{\omega}>
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\mu_k}{\gamma-\lambda_k}
\end{equation*}
so that the
sequence $\{\upsilon_n(\widehat{\omega})\}_{n\in M}$ satisfies
\ref{finite-moments-sufficient-2}) and
\ref{density-poly-sufficient-2}) of Theorem~\ref{prop:sufficient-2},
then $\{\upsilon_n(\omega)\}_{n\in M}$ also satisfies
\ref{finite-moments-sufficient-2}) and
\ref{density-poly-sufficient-2}) for all
\begin{equation*}
\omega>
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\mu_k}{\gamma-\lambda_k}
\end{equation*}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
For proving the claim one repeats the reasoning of the proof of
Proposition~\ref{prop:other-gammas}. Here we observe that, for $n\in
M$, $n\ne k_0$,
\begin{equation*}
\upsilon_n(\omega)=C\upsilon_n(\widehat{\omega})\,,
\end{equation*}
where $C=\frac{\widehat{\omega}-1}{\omega-1}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:other-gammas-other-theta}
If, in Proposition~\ref{prop:other-gammas-2}, one substitutes (\ref{eq:interlacing-theta-big}) by
(\ref{eq:interlacing-theta-small}) in
\emph{\ref{interlace-sufficient-2})} and
\begin{equation*}
\widehat{\omega}>
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\mu_k}{\gamma-\lambda_k}\,,\qquad
\omega>
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\mu_k}{\gamma-\lambda_k}
\end{equation*}
by
\begin{equation*}
\widehat{\omega}<
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\mu_k}{\gamma-\lambda_k}\,,\qquad
\omega<
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\mu_k}{\gamma-\lambda_k}\,,
\end{equation*}
then the new assertion holds true.
\end{remark}
By repeating the proof of
Theorem~\ref{prop:other-matrices-same-spectra} with a minor
modification one arrives at the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}
\label{prop:other-matrices-same-spectra2}
Let $\theta\ne 1$ and assume that the intersecting sets $\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ are enumerated according to
Remark~\ref{rem:special-interlace} with
(\ref{eq:interlacing-theta-big}) if $\theta>1$ and
(\ref{eq:interlacing-theta-small}) if $\theta<1$. Then, for any
$\omega>\mathfrak{m}(\gamma)$ when $\theta>1$ and for
any $\omega<\mathfrak{m}(\gamma)$ when $\theta<1$, there is a
matrix (\ref{eq:jm-other}) and
a self-adjoint
extension $J'$ of the operator whose matrix representation is
(\ref{eq:jm-other}),
such that $\sigma(J')=\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J'})=\sigma(\widetilde{J})$, where $\widetilde{J'}$
is given by (\ref{eq:j-prime-tilde}) with
\begin{equation*}
\theta':=+\sqrt{\omega}\,,\qquad
h':=\gamma\left(\frac{1}{\omega}-1\right)\,.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
Let us now comment on the last results in terms of the perturbed
mass-spring systems.
Assume that the spectra of the mass-spring system given in Fig.\,1 and
Fig.\,2 are given and they intersect. By
Proposition~\ref{prop:interlacing2}, these input data determine the
sign of $\Delta m$. Let us suppose that $\Delta m>0$. Due to
Theorem~\ref{prop:other-matrices-same-spectra2}, for any value of the
ratio of masses $\theta<\mathfrak{m}(\gamma)$ there are mass-spring
systems corresponding to Figs. 1 and 2 having the measured
spectra. The knowledge of the ratio of masses completely
determines the mass-spring systems.
We have given above the ratio of masses as a parameter of the system
when the spectra intersect (see Theorems \ref{prop:sufficient-2} and
\ref{prop:other-gammas-2} where $\omega$ and $\widehat{\omega}$ play
the role of the ratio of masses). This is a ``natural'' choice because
the parameter used in the case when the spectra are disjoint, namely
$\gamma$, is now given with the spectra. There is also another choice
for the parameter: the spring constant $h$. Below we briefly discuss
this parameterization where now the role of the spring constant is
played by $\omega$ and $\widehat{\omega}$. We begin by defining
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:upsilon-def-2}
\widetilde{\upsilon}_n(\omega):=
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle
\frac{(\mu_n-\lambda_n)(\omega+\gamma)}{(\gamma-\lambda_n)\omega}
\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\k\ne n}}
\frac{\lambda_n-\mu_k}{\lambda_n-\lambda_k}\,,
& n\in M\,,\quad n\ne k_0\\
\displaystyle
\frac{\omega+\gamma}{\omega}\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\mu_k}{\gamma-\lambda_k}-\frac{\gamma}{\omega}
& n= k_0
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\begin{theorem}
\label{prop:sufficient-3}
Let $S$ and $\widetilde{S}$ be two infinite real sequences without
finite points of accumulation such that
$S\cap\widetilde{S}=\{\gamma\}$. There exist $\theta>1$,
$h\in\mathbb{R}$, and a matrix (\ref{eq:jm-0}) such that $S=\sigma(J)$
and $\widetilde{S}=\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ if and only if the
conditions \ref{interlace-sufficient-2} and
\ref{convergence-sufficient-2} of Theorem \ref{prop:sufficient-2}
hold along with
\begin{enumerate}[I')]
\setcounter{enumi}{2}
\item There exists a real number $\widehat{\omega}$ satisfying
\begin{equation*}
\widehat{\omega}\,\,
\begin{cases}
=0 & \text{ if } \gamma=0\\
<\gamma\left(\displaystyle\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\lambda_k}{\gamma-\mu_k}-1\right) & \text{ if }\gamma>0\\
>\gamma\left(\displaystyle\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\lambda_k}{\gamma-\mu_k}-1\right) & \text{ if }\gamma<0
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
such
that
\begin{enumerate}[a)]
\item For $m=0,1,2,\dots$, the series
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k\in M}\lambda_k^{2m}\widetilde{\upsilon}_k(\widehat{\omega})
\quad\text{converges.}
\end{equation*}
\label{finite-moments-sufficient-3}
\item If a sequence of complex numbers $\{\beta_k\}_{k\in M}$
is such that the series
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k\in
M}\abs{\beta_k}^2\widetilde{\upsilon}_k(\widehat{\omega})
\quad\text{converges}
\end{equation*}
and, for $m=0,1,2,\dots$,
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{k\in
M}\beta_k\lambda_k^m\widetilde{\upsilon}_k(\widehat{\omega})=0\,,
\end{equation*}
then $\beta_k=0$ for all $k\in M$.
\label{density-poly-sufficient-3}
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The proof is similar to the one of
Theorem~\ref{prop:sufficient-2} and we restrict ourselves to the
case when $\gamma>0$. The other cases are proven analogously.
Thus, for the necessity of the
conditions to be proven, one only should establish that there is
\begin{equation*}
\widehat{\omega}<
\gamma\left(\displaystyle\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\lambda_k}{\gamma-\mu_k}-1\right)
\end{equation*}
such that $\widetilde{\upsilon}_k(\widehat{\omega})=\alpha_k^{-1}$
for all $k\in M$. On the basis of (\ref{eq:gamma-def}) and
(\ref{eq:strange-estimate}), one has
\begin{equation*}
1<\mathfrak{m}(\gamma)<\frac{\gamma}{\gamma+h}\,.
\end{equation*}
Note that $\gamma+h\ne 0$. Since $\gamma$ and $\gamma+h$ have always
the same sign and we are assuming that $\gamma>0$, the inequality
\begin{equation*}
h<\gamma\left(\frac{1}{\mathfrak{m}(\gamma)}-1\right)
\end{equation*}
holds. So let $\widehat{\omega}=h$, then
(\ref{eq:expression-for-normalizing-constants}) yields
$\widetilde{\upsilon}_k(\widehat{\omega})=\alpha_k^{-1}$ for $k\in M$, $k\ne
k_0$. Moreover, (\ref{eq:m-gamma-case-in-spectrum}) implies that
$\widetilde{\upsilon}_{k_0}(\widehat{\omega})=\alpha_{k_0}^{-1}$.
Let us now prove that \emph{\ref{interlace-sufficient-2}}),
\emph{\ref{convergence-sufficient-2}}),
\emph{\ref{finite-moments-sufficient-3}}), and
\emph{\ref{density-poly-sufficient-3}}) are sufficient.
Reasoning as before, one verifies that
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{\upsilon}_n(\widehat{\omega})>0\,,\forall n\in M\,.
\end{equation*}
Now, instead of
(\ref{eq:definition-m-tilde-2}) one defines
\begin{equation*}
\check{m}(\zeta):=\frac{(\widehat{\omega}-\gamma)
\check{\mathfrak{m}}(\zeta)-\gamma}
{(\zeta-\gamma)(2\gamma-\widehat{\omega})}\,,
\end{equation*}
where $\check{\mathfrak{m}}$ is given in
(\ref{eq:definition-m-frak-tilde-2}). Then it is shown that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:res-upsilon-tilde}
\res_{\zeta=\lambda_n}\check{m}(\zeta)=
-\widetilde{\upsilon}_n(\widehat{\omega})\quad\forall n\in M\,.
\end{equation}
Having defined
\begin{equation*}
\rho(t):=\sum_{\lambda_k<t}\widetilde{\upsilon}_k(\widehat{\omega})\,,
\end{equation*}
the asymptotic behavior of $\zeta\check{m}(\zeta)$ and
(\ref{eq:res-upsilon-tilde}) imply that $\int_{\mathbb{R}} d\rho(t)=1$. Furthermore,
by
\emph{\ref{finite-moments-sufficient-3}}), all the moments exist, so
one constructs the operator $J_0$ as was done before and, by
\emph{\ref{density-poly-sufficient-3}}) $\rho$ corresponds to a
self-adjoint extension $J$ of $J_0$. Let us now consider
(\ref{eq:perturbed-family}) with
\begin{equation*}
\theta=+\sqrt{\frac{\gamma}{\widehat{\omega}+\gamma}}\,,\qquad
h=\widehat{\omega}\,.
\end{equation*}
Clearly, $\sigma(J)=\{\lambda_k\}_{k\in M}$. Hence it only remains to
show that $\sigma(\widetilde{J})=\{\mu_k\}_{k\in M}$. By
(\ref{eq:m-discrete}) and (\ref{eq:m-through-m2}), one has
\begin{equation*}
\mathfrak{m}(\zeta)=\theta^2+(\zeta-\gamma)\left(\theta^2-1\right)
\sum_{k\in M}\frac{1}{\alpha_k(\lambda_k-\zeta)}\,.
\end{equation*}
On the other hand (\ref{eq:definition-m-tilde-2}) and
(\ref{eq:m-tilde-as-sum-2}) imply that
\begin{equation*}
\check{\mathfrak{m}}(\zeta)=\frac{\gamma}{\widehat{\omega}+\gamma}
+(\gamma-\zeta)
\frac{\widehat{\omega}}{\widehat{\omega}+\gamma}
\sum_{k\in M}\frac{\widetilde{\upsilon}_k(\widehat{\omega})}{\lambda_k-\zeta}\,.
\end{equation*}
Since $\theta^2=\gamma/(\widehat{\omega}+\gamma)$, we conclude that
$\mathfrak{m}=\check{\mathfrak{m}}$. In its turn, this means that
the zeros of $\mathfrak{m}$ are given by the sequence $\{\mu_k\}_{k\in
M}$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Theorem~\ref{prop:sufficient-3} holds true after substituting
$\theta>1$ by $\theta<1$ and instead of
\begin{equation*}
\widehat{\omega}\,\,
\begin{cases}
=0 & \text{ if } \gamma=0\\
<\gamma\left(\displaystyle\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\lambda_k}{\gamma-\mu_k}-1\right) & \text{ if }\gamma>0\\
>\gamma\left(\displaystyle\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\lambda_k}{\gamma-\mu_k}-1\right) & \text{ if }\gamma<0
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
one writes
\begin{equation*}
\widehat{\omega}\,\,
\begin{cases}
=0 & \text{ if } \gamma=0\\
>\gamma\left(\displaystyle\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\lambda_k}{\gamma-\mu_k}-1\right) & \text{ if }\gamma>0\\
<\gamma\left(\displaystyle\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\lambda_k}{\gamma-\mu_k}-1\right) & \text{ if }\gamma<0
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
The proof of this claim proceeds in exactly the same way as the proof
of Theorem~\ref{prop:sufficient-3}.
\end{remark}
Since assertions analogous to Proposition~\ref{prop:other-gammas-2}
and Remark~\ref{rem:other-gammas-other-theta} hold when one considers
the sequence (\ref{eq:upsilon-def-2}) instead of
(\ref{eq:upsilon-def-1}), the proof of the following statement can be
done by repeating, with just minor modifications, the proof of
Theorem~\ref{prop:other-matrices-same-spectra2}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{prop:other-matrices-same-spectra3}
Let $\theta\ne 1$ and assume that the intersecting sets $\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J})$ are enumerated according to
Remark~\ref{rem:special-interlace} with
(\ref{eq:interlacing-theta-big}) if $\theta>1$ and
(\ref{eq:interlacing-theta-small}) if $\theta<1$. Assume that
$\gamma>0$, then, for any
\begin{equation*}
\omega<\gamma\left(\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\lambda_k}{\gamma-\mu_k}-1\right)
\end{equation*}
when $\theta>1$, and for any
\begin{equation*}
\omega>\gamma\left(\prod_{\substack{k\in M\\ k\ne k_0}}
\frac{\gamma-\lambda_k}{\gamma-\mu_k}-1\right)
\end{equation*}
when $\theta<1$, there is a
matrix (\ref{eq:jm-other}) and
a self-adjoint
extension $J'$ of the operator whose matrix representation is
(\ref{eq:jm-other}) such that $\sigma(J')=\sigma(J)$ and
$\sigma(\widetilde{J'})=\sigma(\widetilde{J})$, where $\widetilde{J'}$
is given by (\ref{eq:j-prime-tilde}) with
\begin{equation*}
\theta':=+\sqrt{\frac{\gamma}{\omega+\gamma}}\,,\qquad
h':=\omega\,.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\vspace*{6pt}
|
\section{Introduction}
It is now well established that the molecules composing the primordial universe, that contained neutral or singly-ionised hydrogen (H), deuterium (D), helium ($^4$He) and lithium ($^7$Li), were out of thermodynamic equilibrium \citep{coppola2011, coppola2013, coppola2016}. In other words, the populations in their rovibrational levels did not follow a Maxwell-Boltzman distribution. Therefore, in order to understand the physical and chemical evolution of the primordial gas, which led in particular to the formation of the first stars, it is necessary to have quantitative information about the chemical reactions involving different rovibrational levels of the reactants and the products, so-called \textit{state-to-state} reactions \citep{galli2013, bovino2018}. In particular, rate coefficients are needed on a wide range of temperatures, up to a few thousand kelvin (K). Theoretical calculations of rate coefficients are welcome, since they allow for covering such a wide range, in a more accessible way than experimental measurements.
In this context, the molecules H$_2$ and HD play a central role, as they act as coolants of the primordial gas, through the mechanism of collisional excitation to higher rovibrational levels followed by the spontaneous emission of a photon. This cooling process has a strong influence on the gravitational collapse leading to the first structures. Below 500~K, HD is the main coolant, due to its electric dipole moment (about $10^{-3}$ debye) and its smaller rovibrational spacings compared to H$_2$ (see for instance \citet{galli2002, ripamonti2007, kreckel2010}). Therefore, it is crucial to investigate the chemical reactions involving HD, especially with neutral and ionised atoms, in order to characterise the cooling dynamics. If the reaction with the most abundant species H has been widely studied (see for instance \citep{flower1999, ely2016, desrousseaux2018}), very little is known about its ionic counterpart $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}$, which is the subject of the present article.
In the literature, the scarce results given on the $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD} \to \mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2$ reaction \citep{henchman1981, smith1982, millar1989, gerlich2002, jambrina2012} generally belong to articles focused on the inverse reaction $\mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2 \to \mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}$ \citep{fehsenfeld1974, gerlich1992, jambrina2009, honvault2013, gonzalez-lezana2013, sahoo2014, sahoo2015, lara2015, bhowmick2018}. In Refs~\citep{henchman1981, smith1982}, thermal rates of $1.1 \pm 0.2$ and $1.7\pm 0.2 \times 10^{-10}$~\cms~are measured at 205 and 295~K respectively using the selected ion flow tube (SIFT) technique. \citet{millar1989} derived an Arrhenius-type formula from those measurements. Later, \citet{gerlich2002} also gave an Arrhenius-type formula fitted from most dynamically biased (MDB) statistical calculations between 30 and 130~K. Finally, \citet{jambrina2012} give thermal rate coefficients calculated both with a time-independent quantum-mechanical (TIQM) method and with variants of the quasi-classical trajectory (QCT) method on the so-called ARTSM potential-energy surface (PES) by \citet{aguado2000}. The agreement of the TIQM results with the above-mentioned experiments is good, even if the latter are better reproduced by the statistical QCT calculations at 295~K. It is worthwhile noting that the reactive collision between Rydberg hydrogen atoms and HD has been investigated experimentally \citep{yu2014}.
The weak interest to the $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD} \to \mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2$ reaction is probably due to its endothermiciity (for HD and H$_2$ in their ground rovibrational levels $(v,j)=(0,0)$ and $(v',j')=(0,0)$). This endoothermicity, equal to 39.5 meV, mainly comes from the difference in zero-point energies between H$_2$ and HD (35.8~meV), but also from the difference in ionisation potentials of H and D (3.7~meV). But firstly, this activation energy is widely overcome at the temperatures that we consider here; and secondly, the title reaction becomes exothermic for HD in rovibrational levels higher than $(v=0,j=3)$. On the other hand, for electronic energies larger than 1.83~eV above the dissociation limit $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2(X^1\Sigma_g^+)$, charge transfer becomes possible towards the channel $\mathrm{H}(^2S) + \mathrm{H}_2^+(X^2\Sigma_g^+)$. However, time-dependent wave-packet (TDWP) calculations for $\mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2$ \citep{ghosh2015} and $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2$ \citep{ghosh2017} on the three lowest diabatic PESs of H$_3^+$ \citep{viegas2007} have shown that the charge transfer processes are much less probable than the reactive one without charge transfer.
In this article, we compute the cross sections and the rate coefficients characterizing the reaction $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(v,j) \to \mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2(v',j')$, with HD in the lowest vibrational level $v=0$ and rotational levels $j=0$ to 4, and H$_2$ in vibrational levels $v'=0$ to 3 and rotational levels $j'=0$ to 9. Our calculations are performed with the TIQM method for reactive collisions, based on hyperspherical coordinates, which take into account the indistinguishability of the two H nuclei. Within the framework of the Born-Oppenheimer approximation, we characterize the motion of the two H and the D nuclei on the so-called VLABP ground state global PES of H$_3^+$ calculated by \citet{velilla2008}, an improved version of the ARTSM PES \citep{aguado2000} that cautiously takes into account long-range interactions. Because we ignore the hyperfine interactions, we do not account for the difference in ionisation potentials between H and D, which introduces an uncertainty of 3~meV on collisional energy. But in this study, we are more interested in large collision energies, up to 1.8~eV above the lowest channel $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(0,0)$, for which we can ignore charge transfer. Because our cross sections are very low at 1.8~eV, we can give converged rate coefficients for temperatures up to 10000~K for the lowest rovibrational levels of H$_2$.
We also calculate thermal rate coefficients, assuming HD rovibrational levels in thermodynamic equilibrium, in order to compare our results with literature, and find larger rates. We possibly attribute the discrepancies with previous TIQM results to differences in the asymptotic region of the underlying PESs. Regarding previous experimental results, rate coefficients are given at only two temperatures, and so we think that additional measurements would be particularly relevant.
This article is organised as follows. Section \ref{sec:meth} describes our TIQM method, giving in particular the expressions of the cross section and rate coefficient. Section \ref{sec:res} presents our results, dealing with HD in the rovibrational ground level (Sec.~\ref{sub:j0}), in rotationally-excited levels (Sec.~\ref{sub:j1}), and in thermodynamic equilibrium (Sec.~\ref{sub:therm-eq}), to allow comparison with literature results. Section \ref{sec:ccl} contains concluding remarks.
\section{Method}
\label{sec:meth}
In this article, we focus on two quantities characterizing the reactive collision $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(v,j) \to \mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2(v',j')$: the state-to-state cross section $\sigma_{vj,v'j'}$ given as a function of the total energy $E$,
\begin{equation}
\sigma_{vj,v'j'}(E) = \frac{\pi\hbar^2}{2\mu(E-E_{vj})(2j+1)}
\sum_{J} (2J+1)\left|S_{vj,v'j'}^J(E)\right|^2
\label{eq:xs}
\end{equation}
and the state-to-state rate coefficient $k_{vj,v'j'}$ given as a function of temperature $T$,
\begin{equation}
k_{vj,v'j'}(T) = \sqrt{\frac{8}{\pi\mu\left(k_B T\right)^3}}
\int_{0}^{+\infty} dE_c \sigma_{vj,v'j'}(E_c)\,E_ce^{-E_c/k_BT} \,,
\label{eq:rate}
\end{equation}
where $\hbar$ is the reduced Planck's constant, $k_B$ is Boltzman's constant, $\mu$ is the reduced mass of the reactants, $J$ is the total angular momentum of the H$_2$D$^+$ system, $S_{vj,v'j'}^J(E)$ are the elements of the scattering matrix, and $E_c=E-E_{vj}$ is the collision energy in the entrance channel $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(v,j)$.
The scattering matrix is calculated for a given total energy $E$ and total angular momentum $J$ using a fully Coriolis-coupled TIQM method based on the body-fixed democratic hyperspherical coordinates, and described in details in \citep{honvault2004}. At each hyperradius $\rho$, the scattering wave function is expanded on a set of appropriate hyperangular basis functions. The $\rho$-dependent coefficients are solutions of a set of coupled second-order differential equations, which are solved using the Johson-Manolopoulos log-derivative propagator \citep{manolopoulos1986}. The scattering wave function is computed up to the hyperradius $\rho_\mathrm{max} = 17.5\,a_0$, where the $S_{vj,v'j'}^J(E)$ matrix elements are extracted for many rovibrational levels of the reactant HD and the product H$_2$.
This method has been successfully applied to the isotopic variants $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2$ \citep{honvault2011, honvault2011b, rao2014, gonzalez-lezana2014, gonzalez-lezana2017}, $\mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2$ \citep{honvault2013, gonzalez-lezana2013, gonzalez-lezana2014, lara2015} and $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{D}_2$ \citep{gonzalez-lezana2009}. Here we use the VLABP PES calculated by \citet{velilla2008}, and which accurately describes the long-range interactions between H$^+$ and H$_2$.
\begin{table}
\caption{Parameters of the intervals into which the energy grid is split: minimum $E_\mathrm{min}$, maximum $E_\mathrm{max}$ and increment $\Delta E$ in eV, as well as the maximum total angular momentum $J_\mathrm{max}$. \label{tab:ener}}
%
\begin{tabular}{clllr}
$(v,j)$ & $E_\mathrm{min}$ & $E_\mathrm{max}$ & $\Delta E$ & $J_\mathrm{max}$ \\
\hline
$(0,0)$ & 0.031 & 0.1 & 0.003 & 28 \\
$(0,0)$ & 0.11 & 0.3 & 0.01 & 42 \\
$(0,0)$ & 0.31 & 1 & 0.03 & 62 \\
$(0,0)$ & 1.1 & 1.8 & 0.1 & 75 \\
$(0,j\ge 2)$ & 0.0034 & 0.01 & $6\times 10^{-4}$ & 24 \\
$(0,j\ge 2)$ & 0.011 & 0.03 & 0.001 & 28 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Because the charge-transfer channel $\mathrm{H} + \mathrm{H}_2^+$ is located at an electronic energy of 1.83~eV above $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2$, we perform our scattering calculations up to 1.8~eV above the lowest entrance channel $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(v=0,j=0)$. Our energy grid, which contains about 80 points, is denser for low collision energies. The energy grid is split into intervals inside which we take the same maximum total angular momentum $J_\mathrm{max}$ (see Table \ref{tab:ener}). Regarding the ground rovibrational level of HD, the lowest collision energy that we take is 0.031~eV, for which the reaction is impossible, but we see the opening of the reactive channel at 0.037~eV. For each excited rotational level $J\ge 2$, we also consider collision energies down to 0.003~eV, a value below which our matching distance $\rho_{\mathrm{max}} = 17.5\,a_0$ does not allow for a satisfactory convergence.
On the other hand, to get a good convergence for an energy of 1.8~eV above the $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(v=0,j=0)$, we need to include 252 and 98 (open and closed) rovibrational levels for HD and H$_2$. In the case of HD, $j$ ranges from 0 to 29 for $v=0$, and $v$ ranges from 0 to 11 for $j=0$. As a consequence, we get 350, 2875 and 3892 coupled channels for $J=0$, 10 and 20, respectively.
\section{Results}
\label{sec:res}
In this section, we present cross sections and rate coefficients for selected initial (HD) and final (H$_2$) rovibrational levels. The collision energies are expressed in electron-volts (eV), cross sections in units of squared Bohr radius $a_0^2$, temperature in kelvin (K), and rate coefficients in \cms{.}
\subsection{HD in $(v=0,j=0)$}
\label{sub:j0}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig1.eps}
%
\caption{Cross sections as functions of the collision energy, for the reactions $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(v=0,j=0) \to \mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2(v'=0,j')$, with (a) $j'=0$ to 4, and (b) $j'=5$ to 9. \label{fig:xs_00}}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:xs_00} shows the cross sections of the reactions $(v=0,j=0) \to (v'=0,j')$ for $j'=0$ to 9, as functions of the collision energy. For all those endothermic reactions, the logarithmic scale enables us to see the opening of the reactive channel associated with each rotational level $j'$ of H$_2$. For energies slightly above that threshold, the cross sections abruptly increase, while they slowly decrease at high energies, down to values smaller than 2~$a_0^2$ at 1.8 eV. In addition, the curves present resonant peaks for energies lower than 0.5 eV. Those peaks are higher and more numerous for the low rotational levels of H$_2$: for instance, the highest peak is observed for $j'=1$ (54~$a_0^2$ at 0.085 eV). The curve with $j'=0$ also presents a narrow and high resonance (49~$a_0^2$ at 0.094 eV); but that curve is generally below the $j'=1$ one.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig2.eps}
%
\caption{Rate coefficients as functions of the temperature, for the reactions $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(v=0,j=0) \to \mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2(v'=0,j')$, with (a) $j'=0$ to 4, and (b) $j'=5$ to 9. The inset in panel (a) shows a zoom between 100 and 500~K. \label{fig:rt_00}}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:rt_00} shows the rate constants as functions of the temperature between 100 and 10000~K, for the same reactions as Fig.~\ref{fig:xs_00}. All the curves evolve in a similar way with temperature, showing a fast increase, a maximum, and then a slow decrease. The low-temperature increase is faster with smaller $j'$, due to the lower energy thresholds observed on Figure \ref{fig:xs_00}. Moreover, as $j'$ increases, the high-temperature decrease in $k(T)$ is less pronounced; for example for $j'=9$, the bump is hardly visible since the maximum rate coefficient is equal to $6.06 \times 10^{-11}$~\cms{} (at 8700~K), while it is equal to $5.98 \times 10^{-11}$~\cms{} at 10000~K.
For levels $j'=5$ to 9, the rate coefficients are smaller on the whole range of temperatures of Fig.~\ref{fig:rt_00}(b) when $j'$ increases. But for lower values of $j'$, the hierarchy is less clear. Except for $T<300$~K, the reaction towards $j'=0$ is never the dominant one, as expected with cross sections (see Fig.~\ref{fig:xs_00}). The highest rate is obtained for $j'=1$ ($3.33 \times 10^{-10}$~\cms at 1450~K), but for higher temperatures, this rate becomes smaller than those for $j'=2$ to 5. At the temperature of 6000~K for instance, the dominant reactions are toward $j'=3$, 2 and 4.
It is important to stress that the high-temperature decrease of Fig.~ \ref{fig:rt_00} is not due to a bad convergence of the integral in Eq.~\eqref{eq:rate}. To check it, we have removed the last two cross sections (at 1.7 and 1.8 eV) in the calculation of rate coefficients. At 10000~K, we found a relative difference of 0.7, 1.2 and 8.7~\% for $j'=0$, 3 and 9, respectively. The convergence is less good for $j'=9$ because the cross section at 1.8 eV, equal to 1.46~$a_0^2$ represents one third of its maximum value (4.30~$a_0^2$ at 0.91 eV); its removal has thus a sizeable influence on the integral \eqref{eq:rate}.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig3.eps}
%
\caption{Cross sections as functions of the collision energy, for the reactions $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(v=0,j=0) \to \mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2(v'=1,j')$, with (a) $j'=0$ to 4, and (b) $j'=5$ to 9. \label{fig:xs_01}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig4.eps}
%
\caption{Rate coefficients as functions of the temperature, for the reactions $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(v=0,j=0) \to \mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2(v'=1,j')$, with (a) $j'=0$ to 4, and (b) $j'=5$ to 9. \label{fig:rt_01}}
\end{figure}
Now we consider the product H$_2$ in its first excited vibrational level $v'=1$. The cross sections are plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:xs_01}, in an energy range between 0.5 and 1.8 eV and in linear scale. In that range, the energy resolution does not allow for distinguishing the thresholds of the reactions $(0,0) \to (1,0)$ and $(0,0) \to (1,1)$; but it is sufficient in order to understand the overall evolution of the cross section, which is relevant for the calculation of rate coefficients. Globally, the cross sections for $v'=1$ are much smaller than for $v'=0$ (see Fig.~\ref{fig:xs_00}. This trend is also visible for the rate coefficients, plotted in Fig.~\ref{fig:rt_01}. For example at 1000~K, the rate coefficients for $v'=1$ are on the order of $10^{-13}$~\cms or below, that is three orders of magnitude lower than those for $v'=0$. This gap decreases with temperature, and at 10000~K, there is approximately a one-order-of-magnitude difference between $v'=0$ and $v'=1$. As for the $j'$-dependence of the rates, at 6000~K, the dominant reactions involve intermediate $j'$-values (3, 4 then 5), while $j'=0$ has the second smallest rate.
We have also checked the convergence of the rate coefficients given in fig.~\ref{fig:rt_01} by removing the last two cross sections of Fig.~\ref{fig:xs_01}. This reduces the rate coefficients by 5.9~\% and 42~\% for $j'=0$ and 9 respectively. The latter value is thus less accurate, but one should keep in mind that corresponding reaction is by far not the dominant one driving to the destruction of HD($v=0,j=0)$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig5.eps}
%
\caption{Rate coefficients as functions of the temperature, for the reactions $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(v=0,j=0) \to \mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2(v',j'=0)$, with $v'=0$ to 3. \label{fig:rt_02}}
\end{figure}
When $v'=2$ and 3, the rate coefficients are even smaller, as shown in fig.~\ref{fig:rt_02}: at 6000~K, the rates lose one order of magnitude when $v'$ increases by one unity. Regarding the convergence of equation \eqref{eq:rate}, for $v'=3$, there are only five non-zero cross sections, from 1.4 to 1.8~eV; removing the last value decreases the rate coefficients by 38~\%.
\subsection{HD in excited rotational levels $(v=0,j)$}
\label{sub:j1}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig6.eps}
%
\caption{Cross sections as functions of the collision energy, for the reactions $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(v=0,j=2) \to \mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2(v'=0,j')$, with (a) $j'=0$ to 4, and (b) $j'=5$ to 9. \label{fig:xs_20}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig7.eps}
%
\caption{Rate coefficients as functions of the temperature, for the reactions $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(v=0,j=2) \to \mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2(v'=0,j')$, with (a) $j'=0$ to 4, and (b) $j'=5$ to 9. The inset of panel (a) shows the ratio between rate coefficients $k_{02,0j'}(T) / k_{00,0j'}(T)$. \label{fig:rt_20}}
\end{figure}
For the first rotationally excited level $j=1$, the results, very similar to the previous ones, are given in the supplementary material. In particular, at 6000~K, the largest reactions rate involve $j'=3$, 4 then 2. The case $j=2$ is a little particular, since the reaction $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(v=0,j=2) \to \mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2(v'=0,j'=0)$ is endothermic by only 3.4~meV (neglecting the difference in ionisation energies between H and D). So for a given $j'$-value, the energy thresholds for $(0,2) \to (0,j')$, see Fig.~\ref{fig:xs_20}, are lower than for $(0,0) \to (0,j')$, see Fig.~\ref{fig:xs_00}, and the maximum of the curve has a smaller energy and a larger cross section. The consequence on the rate coefficients can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:rt_20}: they are all larger for the reaction $(0,2) \to (0,j')$ at low temperatures; but as $T$ increases, the ratio $k_{02,0j'}(T) / k_{00,0j'}(T)$ decreases, and becomes smaller than unity for the lowest $j'$-values (see insets of Fig.~\ref{fig:rt_20}).
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig8.eps}
%
\caption{Cross sections as functions of the collision energy, for the reactions $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(v=0,j=3) \to \mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2(v'=0,j')$, with (a) $j'=0$ to 4, and (b) $j'=5$ to 9. \label{fig:xs_30}}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fig9.eps}
%
\caption{Rate coefficients as functions of the temperature, for the reactions $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(v=0,j=3) \to \mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2(v'=0,j')$, with (a) $j'=0$ to 4, and (b) $j'=5$ to 9. \label{fig:rt_30}}
\end{figure}
The case $j=3$ is particularly interesting, since the reactions $(0,3) \to (0,0)$ and $(0,3) \to (0,1)$ are exothermic by 0.029 and 0.015~eV. Figure \ref{fig:xs_30} shows the corresponding cross sections down to an energy of 3~meV, a value below which our value of $\rho_{\mathrm{max}} = 17.5~a_0$ does not allow for a full convergence of the cross section. The reaction $(0,3) \to (0,1)$ strongly dominates over $(0,3) \to (0,0)$, for instance by a factor of 3 at 3~meV. This predominance is also visible on rate coefficients, see Fig.~\ref{fig:rt_30}. On the whole range of temperature, $k_{03,01}$ is larger than $k_{03,00}$ by a factor of $\simeq 3$; but is exceeded by $k_{03,02}$ for $T\ge 400$~K and then by other rates. At large temperatures, the results are similar to other $j$-values: the rates slowly decrease, and at 6000~K, the dominant reactions are towards $j'=4$, 3 and 5.
In order to check the convergence at low temperature, we have compared the previous rates with those calculated by removing the first two cross sections (at 3 et 3.4~meV) in equation \eqref{eq:rate}. At 100~K, the rates $k_{03,00}$ and $k_{03,01}$ decrease by 6.5~\% and 6.9~\% respectively. At large temperature, the convergence is very similar to the one of $k_{00,00}$.
In the case $j=4$, there are three exothermic reactions, for $j'=0$, 1 and 2. The cross sections and rate coefficients, which are given in the supplementary material, look like Figs.~\ref{fig:xs_30} and \ref{fig:rt_30}. At low energies, the cross section $\sigma_{04,02}$ is the largest ($169~a_0^2$ at 3~meV), followed by $\sigma_{04,01}$ ($128~a_0^2$) and $\sigma_{04,00}$ ($36~a_0^2$). This trend shows up on low-temperature rates, while the high-temperature rates are similar to the other $j$-values: at 6000~K, the largest rates are towards $j'=4$, 3 and 5.
\subsection{HD in thermodynamic equilibrium}
\label{sub:therm-eq}
In order to compare our results with literature, we have computed the thermal rate coefficient $k(T)$ of the title reaction, assuming that the rovibrational levels of HD are populated according to a Maxwell-Boltzman distribution. Since we deal with rather low temperatures in this paragraph, we can assume that only the five lowest rotational levels $(v=0,j\in[0;4])$ are significantly populated. For instance at 295~K, the population in $(0,0)$ is equal to 20.1~\%, that of $(0,1)$ is 39.1~\%, while those of $(0,4)$ and $(0,5)$ are 2.4~\% and 0.4~\% respectively. Moreover, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:rt_20}, the reactions producing vibrationally excited H$_2$ can safely be ignored. Therefore, our thermal rate coefficient is given by
\begin{equation}
k(T) = \frac{1}{Z_\mathrm{rot}} \sum_{j=0}^4 (2j+1)
e^{-E_{vj}/k_BT} \sum_{j'=0}^9 k_{0j,0j'}(T)
\label{eq:therm}
\end{equation}
where $Z_\mathrm{rot} = \sum_{j=0}^4 (2j+1) e^{-E_{vj}/k_BT}$ is the rotational partition function restricted to the five lowest rotational levels of HD.
By doing so, we find a thermal rate coefficient that can be very well fitted with an Arrhenius formula $A\times\exp(-B/T)$, between 100 and 400~K, with $A=1.84 \times 10^{-9}$~\cms{} and $B=416$~K. More specifically, we obtain $k(T=205~K) = 2.4$ and $k(T=295~K) = 4.5 \times 10^{-10}$~\cms{,} which are approximately twice as large as the measurements of Refs.~\citep{henchman1981, smith1982}, and also significantly larger the rates calculated by \citet{jambrina2012}. In view of these discrepancies, we have checked the quality of our scattering matrices, by using them to calculate cross sections and rate coefficients of the reverse reaction $\mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2 \to \mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}$: our results are in very good agreement with former calculations \citep{honvault2013}, themselves in very good agreement with experiments for collision energies larger than 0.01~eV \citep{gerlich1992}.
The discrepancies obtained with the TIQM calculations of \citet{jambrina2012} may come from the PESs employed. Indeed, \citet{rao2014} have shown that the cross sections and rate coefficients of the $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2$ reaction are always significantly larger with the VLABP PES than with the KBNNPES by \citet{kamisaka2002}. But as shown in \citep{gonzalez-lezana2009} on the $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{D}_2$ reaction, there is not such a heavy trend between the KBNN and ARTSM PESs. Extending those results to the title reaction thus suggests that the ARTSM and VLABP PESs are likely to give significantly different cross sections and rate coefficients. Because the calculations of \citet{jambrina2012} were performed with the ARTSM PES, this may explain why our rate coefficients overcome those of \citet{jambrina2012}. In any case, additional measurements, with more collision energies or temperatures, would be necessary.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:ccl}
We have computed cross sections and rate coefficients of the state-to-state $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD}(v,j) \to \mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2(v',j')$ reaction, where HD is in the vibrational ground level. The rate coefficients are computed for temperatures from 100 to 10000~K. They are significantly smaller for vibrationally excited H$_2$ molecules, approximately losing one order of magnitude when $v'$ increases by one. For temperature below 4000~K, rate coefficients also strongly depend on the initial rotational level, as a function of which the reaction is endothermic or exothermic. Investing state-to-state $\mathrm{H}^+ + \mathrm{HD} \to \mathrm{D}^+ + \mathrm{H}_2$ reactions is therefore crucial to model the chemical evolution of the primordial gas. In a future work, we will consider HD in excited vibrational levels, for which the reaction is exothermic for all rotational levels.
In order to compare our results with the few literature ones, we have also calculated thermal rate coefficients, assuming the HD rovibrational levels in thermodynamic equilibrium. We find rate coefficients roughly twice as large as published values. Regarding previous theoretical results, we possibly attribute those discrepancies to differences in the asymptotic region of the potential-energy surfaces used for the calculations. In any case, more experimental results are necessary, since thermal rate coefficients have only been measured for two temperatures.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
M.L. acknowledges the financial support of {}``R{\'e}gion Bourgogne Franche Comt{\'e}'' under the projet 2018Y.07063 {}``Th{\'e}CUP''. This work was supported by the Programme National {}``Physique et Chimie du Milieu Interstellaire'' (PCMI) of CNRS/INSU with INC/INP co-funded by CEA and CNES.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec;introduction}
Large-scale quadratic problems are ubiquitous in Linear stability analysis, Model order reduction, Dissipative acoustics, and Constraint least
squares problems; See \cite{ahuja,femqep,gnad,sima},
and \cite{huit}. We suggest the readers refer \cite{tiss} for other applications.
Two approaches are well-known to solve quadratic eigenvalue problems and quadratic system of equations. One approach finds an appropriate linearization that results in linear eigenvalue problems or a linear system of equations. Another approach projects larger sparse quadratic problem onto a lower dimensional subspace, and subsequently produce a small, dense QEP or a system of equations.
The first approach has a drawback that it increases the condition number due to linear problems of double the size; see, e.g., \cite{hwang}. The popular methods such as Residual inverse iteration, Second-Order Arnoldi (SOAR), and Two-level orthogonal Arnoldi (TOAR) methods follow the second approach;
See \cite{soar,neum,lock}, and \cite{stabtoar}.
For the given quadratic problem, The SOAR method constructs an orthonormal basis of a second-order Krylov subspace using a recurrence relation an analog to that in the Arnoldi method. It also generates a non-orthonormal basis of a Krylov subspace associated with the corresponding linear problem. To do this, SOAR requires a solution of a triangular linear system, ill-conditioned, in general. Though this causes numerical instability, the SOAR method found applications in Quadratic eigenvalue problems, Structural acoustics analysis, and Model order reduction of second-order
dynamical systems, etc. (see \cite{yang}, \cite{puri}, and \cite{baisu} for further information).
\cite{zhu} and \cite{su} proposed the \emph{Two-Level orthogonal Arnoldi(TOAR) method} to overcome the instability problem in SOAR. As the name suggests, the Gram-Schmidt orthonormalization procedure involved in the two levels of TOAR; in the first and the second levels to construct orthonormal bases for the second-order Krylov subspace and the associated linear Krylov subspace, respectively.
\cite{stabtoar} proved under some mild assumptions that TOAR with partial reorthogonalization is backward stable to compute an orthonormal basis of associated linear Krylov subspace. However,
similar stability analysis for the second-order Krylov subspace with respect to the coefficient matrices of a quadratic problem left open; see the Concluding Remarks in \cite{stabtoar}.
In this paper, we are proposing the Improved TOAR(I-TOAR) method. The I-TOAR method improves TOAR in constructing an orthonormal basis of a second-order Krylov subspace. The proposed improvement is necessary in the TOAR method to solve the said open problem. Using I-TOAR, this paper does the stability analysis for the second-order Krylov subspace with respect to the coefficient matrices of a quadratic problem.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section-2 we briefly discuss the SOAR and TOAR methods and establish relations between the matrix $Q_k$ and submatrices of $U_k$ those generated by the TOAR method.
Then, Section-3 presents theoretical results those motivated to
improve TOAR. Section-4 proposes the I-TOAR(Improved
TOAR) algorithm and discusses its implementation details.
Section-5 does rigorous backward error analysis of I-TOAR in terms of coefficient matrices in quadratic problems for
computing an orthonormal basis of a second-order Krylov
subspace. Section-6 compares the results of numerical experiments
with an application of the TOAR and I-TOAR methods in the Model Order
Reduction of second-order dynamical systems. Section-7 concludes the
paper.
\section{SOAR and TOAR methods}
Let $A$ and $B$ be matrices of order $n,$ and $r_{-1},$ $r_{0}$
be vectors of length $n.$ Then, a sequence of vectors $r_{1},
r_{2}, r_{3},\cdots, $ satisfying the following recurrence relation,
\begin{equation}\label{eq2.1}\relax
r_j = Ar_{j-1}+Br_{j-2}~~\mbox{for}~ j \geq 1
\end{equation}
is called a \textit{second-order Krylov sequence}. The
subspace
\begin{equation}\label{eq2.2}\relax
{G}_k(A,B;r_{-1},r_0) \equiv \mbox{span}\{r_{-1},r_0,r_1,\cdots,
r_{k-1}\}
\end{equation}
is called a \textit{kth second-order Krylov subspace}. A second-order Krylov subspace can be embedded in the linear Krylov subspace $K_k(L,v_0),$ for
\begin{equation}\label{eq2.3}\relax
L=\begin{bmatrix}A~&B\\I~& 0 \end{bmatrix} ~~\mbox{and}~~
v_0=\begin{pmatrix} r_0\\r_{-1} \end{pmatrix},
\end{equation}
where $I$ is an Identity matrix of order $n,$ for details refer to \cite{stabtoar}.
Let a vector $q_1$ be a linear combination of $r_{-1},$ $r_0,$ and $\|q_1\|=1.$ If a vector $q_{k+1}$ at $k^{th}$ iteration of SOAR is non-zero then it is
orthogonal to the
set of unit vectors
generated in previous iterations. Further, $\|q_{k+1}\|=1.$ The
non-zero column vectors of
$Q_{k+1}\equiv[q_1~q_2~\cdots~q_k~q_{k+1}]$
form an orthonormal basis for the second-order Krylov subspace
$G_k(A,B;r_{-1},r_0).$
In SOAR,
$P_k:=[p_1,p_2,\cdots p_k]$ is the matrix
satisfying the following relations
$$AQ_k+BP_k=Q_kT_k+t_{k+1,k}q_{k+1}e_k^\ast,$$
and
$$Q_k= P_kT_k+t_{k+1,k}p_{k+1}e_k^\ast,$$
where $T_k$ is an upper Hessenberg matrix of
order $k.$
In compact form these relations can be written as
follows:
$$\begin{bmatrix}A~&B\\I~& 0 \end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix}Q_k\\P_k \end{bmatrix}= \begin{bmatrix}Q_k\\P_k \end{bmatrix}H_k+t_{k+1,k} \begin{pmatrix}q_{k+1}\\p_{k+1}\end{pmatrix}e_k^\ast.$$
Observe that the above equation is similar to the Arnoldi decomposition for
the matrix $L$ and the initial vector $v_0.$ However, column vectors
of a matrix $\begin{bmatrix}Q_k\\P_k
\end{bmatrix}$ are non-orthonormal even though they form a basis for the linear Krylov subspace $K_k(L,v_0).$
The SOAR method requires the solution of ill-conditioned triangular linear system in order to avoid explicit computation of $P_k.$
Consequently, this makes the SOAR procedure numerically instable. To circumvent the instability an alternative method proposed in \cite{stabtoar}, the Two-level orthogonalization Arnoldi(TOAR) method.
The TOAR method starts with
randomly chosen non-zero initial vector $v_0:=\begin{pmatrix}
r_0\\r_{-1}\end{pmatrix}.$ Then, it finds a rank revealing QR
decomposition of the matrix $[r_{-1}~~r_0]$:
$$[r_{-1}~~r_0]= Q_1 X,$$
where $Q_1$ and $X$ are matrices of order $n \times \eta_1$ and
$\eta_1 \times 2,$ respectively. If the vectors $r_{-1}$ and $r_0$ are
linearly independent then $\eta_1=2,$ otherwise $\eta_1=1.$ Following the MATLAB notation define $$U_{1,1}:=X(:,2)/\|v_0\|~\mbox{and}~U_{1,2}:= X(:,1)/\|v_0\|.$$
In TOAR the vector $\begin{pmatrix}Q_1 U_{1,1}\\Q_1
U_{1,2} \end{pmatrix}$ forms an orthonormal basis for $K_1(L,v_0).$ Henceforth, TOAR recursively computes the matrices $Q_k,$ $U_{k,1},$ and $U_{k,2}$ using the relations in the following lemma; the Lemma-3.1 in \cite{stabtoar}.
\noindent\begin{lem}\label{lem1}\relax
Let column vectors of $V_j \equiv \begin{bmatrix}Q_j U_{j,1}\\Q_j
U_{j,2} \end{bmatrix}$
form an orthonormal
basis for
$K_j(L,v_0),$ for $j=k,k+1.$ Assume that the matrices $V_k$ and $V_{k+1}$ are governed by the following
Arnoldi decomposition of order $k:$
\begin{equation}\label{eq2.4}\relax
LV_k=V_{k+1}\underline{H_{k+1}},
\end{equation}
where $V_{k+1}$ is a matrix consisting $V_k$ in its first $k$ columns, and
$\underline{H_{k+1}}$ is an upper Hessenberg matrix of order $(k+1)
\times k.$
Then,
$$\mbox{span}\{Q_{k+1}\}=\mbox{span}\{Q_{k},r\},$$
where $r= AQ_{k}U_{k,1}(:,k)+BQ_{k}U_{k,2}(:,k).$ Furthermore,
\\ (a)
if $r \in \mbox{span}\{Q_{k}\},$ then there exist vectors $x_k$ and
$y_k$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq5}\relax
Q_{k+1}=Q_{k},~~~U_{k+1,1}=[U_{k,1}~ x_k],~~~and~~U_{k+1,2}=[U_{k,2}~y_k];
\end{equation}
(b) otherwise, there exist vectors $x_k,$ $y_k,$ and a scalar $\beta_k \neq 0$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq6}\relax
Q_{k+1}=[Q_{k}~~q_{k+1}],~~~U_{k+1,1}=
\begin{bmatrix}U_{k,1}~&x_k\\0~&\beta_k \end{bmatrix}, ~~~and~~~U_{k+1,2}=
\begin{bmatrix}U_{k,2}~&y_k\\0~&0 \end{bmatrix}.
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
Observe from the Lemma-\ref{lem1} that the column vectors of $\begin{bmatrix}
U_{k,1}\\ U_{k,2} \end{bmatrix}$ are orthonormal as $Q_k$ have orthonormal columns, and
$$\begin{bmatrix}Q_k
U_{k,1}\\Q_k U_{k,2} \end{bmatrix}= \begin{bmatrix}Q_k &~~\\~~&Q_k
\end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix}
U_{k,1}\\U_{k,2} \end{bmatrix}.$$
Also observe
from the Lemma-\ref{lem1} that $U_{k,1}$ is an upper Hessenberg matrix if the first column of $U_{k,1}$ has non-zero elements in the rows $1$ and $2.$
But, it need not be an
unreduced matrix. On the other hand, $U_{k,1}$ is an upper triangular matrix when the order of a matrix $U_{1,1}$ is $1.$ Similarly, it is easy to see that $U_{k,2}$ is an upper triangular
matrix as $U_{1,2}$ is either a matrix of order $1$ or a matrix of order $2 \times 1$ with a zero element at the bottom. The following lines state this discussion in the form of a lemma.
\begin{lem}\label{lem2}\relax
If the vectors $r_{-1}$ and $r_0$ are linearly independent, then
$U_{k,1}$ is an upper Hessenberg matrix. Otherwise, it is an upper
triangular matrix. $U_{k,2}$ is always an upper triangular matrix.
\end{lem}
Next, by using the equation (\ref{eq2.4}), the following lemma proves that
$U_{k,1}^\ast Q_k^\ast
(AQ_KU_{k,1}+BQ_kU_{k,2})+U_{k,2}^\ast U_{k,1}$ is an upper
Hessenberg matrix.
\begin{lem}\label{lem3}\relax
Let $Q_k,$ $U_{k,1},$ and $U_{k,2}$ be the same as in the
Lemma-\ref{lem1}. Then, the matrix $U_{k,1}^\ast Q_k^\ast
(AQ_KU_{k,1}+BQ_kU_{k,2})+U_{k,2}^\ast U_{k,1}$ is an upper
Hessenberg matrix.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
By considering the equation~(\ref{eq2.4}), we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq7}\relax
\begin{bmatrix}A~&B\\I~&0 \end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix}Q_k
U_{k,1}\\Q_k U_{k,2} \end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix}Q_{k+1}
U_{k+1,1}\\Q_{k+1} U_{k+1,2} \end{bmatrix} \underline{H_{k+1}}.
\end{equation}
Now, apply an inner product on both the sides with the matrix
$\begin{bmatrix}Q_k U_{k,1}\\Q_k U_{k,2}
\end{bmatrix}.$ Furthermore, use the fact from the Lemma-
\ref{lem1} that column vectors of $V_j \equiv \begin{bmatrix}Q_j U_{j,1}\\Q_j
U_{j,2} \end{bmatrix}$ are orthonormal for $j=k,k+1$ to get the following:
\begin{equation}\label{2.8}\relax
U_{k,1}^\ast Q_k^\ast (AQ_kU_{k,1}+BQ_kU_{k,2})+U_{k,2}^\ast (Q_k^\ast Q_k)
U_{k,1} =H_k,
\end{equation}
where $H_k$ is a principal submatrix of order $k$ from the top left corner of $\underline{H_{k+1}},$ and is also an upper Hessenberg matrix. Since coulmn vectors of $Q_k$ are orthonormal, the above equation proves the lemma.
Hence the proof is over
\end{proof}
The following lemma will be helpful later. It derives a relation between the
matrices $U_{k,1},$ $U_{k,2},$ and the vectors $x_k,$ $y_k.$
\begin{lem}\label{lem4}\relax
Let $U_{i,1}$ and $U_{i,2}$ for $i=k,~k+1$ be the same as
in the Lemma-1. Then, $U_{k,1}^\ast x_k= -U_{k,2}^\ast y_k.$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Comparing the last $n$ rows of both the sides of the
equation~(\ref{eq7}) gives
\begin{equation}\label{vig1}\relax
Q_kU_{k,1}= Q_{k+1}U_{k+1,2}\underline{H_{k+1}}.
\end{equation}
Multiply both the sides of the above equation with $Q_k^\ast.$
Since the columns of $Q_k$ are orthonormal, this gives
$$U_{k,1} = [I~~0]U_{k+1,2}\underline{H_{k+1}}.$$
Moreover, by using the structure of $U_{k+1,2}$ from the
equation (\ref{eq6}),
this implies
$$U_{k,1}= U_{k,2}H_k+h_{k+1,k}y_ke_k^\ast$$
Thus,
\begin{equation}\label{new1}\relax
U_{k,2}^\ast U_{k,1} = U_{k,2}^\ast U_{k,2}H_k+h_{k+1,k}U_{k,2}^\ast
y_ke_k^\ast.
\end{equation}
Consequently, substituting this relation in the equation (\ref{2.8}) gives the following:
$$U_{k,1}^\ast Q_k^\ast (AQ_kU_{k,1}+BQ_kU_{k,2})+ U_{k,2}^\ast U_{k,2}H_k+h_{k+1,k}U_{k,2}^\ast
y_ke_k^\ast = H_k.$$ Further, by using $U_{k,2}^\ast U_{k,2}=
I-U_{k,1}^\ast U_{k,1},$ the above equation becomes as follows:
$$U_{k,1}^\ast Q_k^\ast (AQ_kU_{k,1}+BQ_kU_{k,2})-U_{k,1}^\ast U_{k,1}H_k =
-h_{k+1,k}U_{k,2}^\ast y_k e_k^\ast.$$ Now, compare the first $n$
rows of both sides of the equation~(\ref{eq2.4}) to observe
$(AQ_kU_{k,1}+BQ_kU_{k,2})= Q_{k+1}U_{k+1,1}\underline{H_{k+1}}.$ By using this, the above equation gives
$$U_{k,1}^\ast Q_k^\ast Q_{k+1}U_{k+1,1}\underline{H_{k+1}}-U_{k,1}^\ast U_{k,1}H_k =
-h_{k+1,k}U_{k,2}^\ast y_k e_k^\ast.$$ As the column vectors of $Q_k$ are
orthonormal, this implies
$$U_{k,1}^\ast [I~~0]U_{k+1,1}\underline{H_{k+1}}-U_{k,1}^\ast U_{k,1}H_k =
-h_{k+1,k}U_{k,2}^\ast y_k e_k^\ast.$$ Because of the structure of
$U_{k+1,1}$ in Lemma-1, the above equation gives
$$U_{k,1}^\ast [U_{k,1}~~x_k]\underline{H_{k+1}}-U_{k,1}^\ast U_{k,1}H_k =
-h_{k+1,k}U_{k,2}^\ast y_k e_k^\ast.$$ Finally, use
$\underline{H_{k+1}}
=\begin{bmatrix}H_k\\h_{k+1,k}e_k^\ast\end{bmatrix} $ to get
$$U_{k,1}^\ast U_{k,1}H_k+h_{k+1,k}U_{k,1}^\ast x_ke_k^\ast -U_{k,1}^\ast U_{k,1}H_k =
-h_{k+1,k}U_{k,2}^\ast y_k e_k^\ast.$$ Therefore,we have proved the
lemma, since $h_{k+1,k} \neq 0.$
\end{proof}
\section{Improved TOAR method}
In this section, we present a few results which are the ground for
proposing the new algorithm, I-TOAR. In I-ToAR, the computation of an
orthonormal basis of a second-order Krylov subspace remains same as
in TOAR, except I-TOAR imposes an additional condition of
orthogonality on the matrix $U_{k,1}.$ In the following
Lemmas, we will prove that imposing such a condition on $U_{k,1}$ prompts
$U_{k,2}$ to be a diagonal matrix.
\noindent\begin{lem}\label{lem6}\relax Let the matrix $Q_kU_{k,1}$ have
orthogonal columns, and the columns of $Q_k U_{k,2}$ are $B-$
orthogonal. If $A$ is symmetric, and $U_{k,1}^\ast U_{k,1}+U_{k,2}^\ast Q_k^\ast BQ_k U_{k,2}$ is an identity matrix, then a
matrix $H_k$ also symmetric.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
From the equation (\ref{eq7})
we have
$$Q_k^\ast (AQ_kU_{k,1}+BQ_kU_{k,2}) =
U_{k,1}H_k+h_{k+1,k}x_ke_k^\ast.$$ Since the columns of $Q_k$ are
orthonormal, the orthogonality of columns of $Q_kU_{k,1}$ force
the columns of $U_{k,1}$ to be orthogonal. Now, multiply both the
sides of the previous equation from the right with $U_{k,1}^\ast$ to
get
$$U_{k,1}^\ast Q_k^\ast (AQ_kU_{k,1}+BQ_kU_{k,2}) =
U_{k,1}^\ast U_{k,1}H_k.$$ From the equation (\ref{vig1}) note that $Q_kU_{k,1}= Q_{k+1}U_{k+1,2}\underline{H_{k+1}}.$ On substituting this the above equation gives:
$$U_{k,1}^\ast Q_k^\ast AQ_kU_{k,1}+\underline{H_{k+1}}^\ast U_{k+1,2}^\ast Q_{k+1}^\ast BQ_kU_{k,2} =
U_{k,1}^\ast U_{k,1}H_k.$$ Since the columns of $Q_kU_{k,2}$ are
$B-$ orthogonal, It satisfies the relation:
$$\underline{H_{k+1}}^\ast U_{k+1,2}^\ast Q_{k+1}^\ast BQ_kU_{k,2}
=H_k^\ast U_{k,2}^\ast Q_{k}^\ast BQ_kU_{k,2}.$$ Thus, the two
previous equations together gives the following:
$$U_{k,1}^\ast Q_k^\ast AQ_kU_{k,1}
=U_{k,1}^\ast U_{k,1}H_k-H_k^\ast U_{k,2}^\ast Q_{k}^\ast
BQ_kU_{k,2}.$$ Since $A$ is symmetric, $U_{k,1}^\ast Q_k^\ast
AQ_kU_{k,1}$ also symmetric.
This implies
$$(U_{k,1}^\ast U_{k,1}+U_{k,2}^\ast Q_{k}^\ast
BQ_kU_{k,2})H_k-H_K^\ast (U_{k,1}^\ast U_{k,1}+U_{k,2}^\ast
Q_{k}^\ast BQ_kU_{k,2}) =0.$$ Now, use the fact that $U_{k,1}^\ast
U_{k,1}+U_{k,2}^\ast Q_k^\ast BQ_k U_{k,2}$ is an Identity matrix to
conclude $H_k$ is symmetric. Hence, the proof over.
\end{proof}
The Lemma-\ref{lem6} envisages parallelizing the Symmetric TOAR (STOAR) procedure in \cite{camp}, by parallelly orthogonalizing columns of $U_{k,1}$ and $B-$ orthogonalizing
columns of $Q_k U_{k,2},$
such that
$U_{k,1}^\ast U_{k,1}+U_{k,2}^\ast Q_k^\ast BQ_k U_{k,2}$ is an Identity matrix. Though this discussion is interesting, we do not elongate it as latter distracts our attention from the paper.
The following lemma generalizes the Lemma-\ref{lem6} for non-symmetric QEP.
\begin{lem}\label{lem7}\relax
Follow the notation of the Lemma-\ref{lem1}.
If $U_{k+1,1}$ is an orthogonal
matrix then
$U_{k,2}$ is a diagonal
matrix.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
As $U_{k+1,1}$ is an orthogonal matrix, its principal
submatrix $U_{k,1}$ also orthogonal. Further, orthonormality of the column vectors of $\begin{bmatrix} U_{k,1}\\U_{k,2} \end{bmatrix}$ implies $U_{k,2}^\ast U_{k,2}$ is a diagonal matrix. Recall from the equation (\ref{new1}) that $U_{k,2}^\ast U_{k,1} = U_{k,2}^ \ast U_{k,2}H_k,$ provided
$U_{k,2}^\ast y_k= 0.$ Observe that $U_{k,2}^\ast y_k= 0$ follows from the Lemma-\ref{lem4}, and the equations (\ref{eq5}), (\ref{eq6}) on using the hypothesis that column vectors of $U_{k+1,1}$ are orthogonal.
Now, $U_{k,2}^\ast U_{k,1}$ is an upper Hessenberg matrix as $H_k$ and $U_{k,2}^\ast U_{k,2}$ are upper Hessenberg and diagonal matrices, respectively.
Further, as $U_{k,1}$ is an upper
Hessenberg matrix from the Lemma-1, this is possible only when $U_{k,2}$ is a diagonal matrix. Therefore, the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
The above lemma is a base to propose I-TOAR method in the next section for
constructing an orthonormal basis of a linear Krylov subspace
associated with the given quadratic problem.
\section{Implementation}
This section includes two subsections. The first subsection derives relations between entries of the matrices those involved in the two successive iterations of I-TOAR. The second subsection will discuss the Improved TOAR procedure to compute the compact Arnoldi factorization for the given QEP.
\subsection{Matrices in two successive iterations of I-TOAR} Assume that the
initial vectors $r_{-1}~\mbox{and}~ r_0$ are chosen randomly such that
$v_0:=\begin{bmatrix}r_0\\r_{-1}\end{bmatrix} \neq 0.$
The I-TOAR method computes a $QR$ decomposition of the $n
\times 2$ matrix $[r_{-1}~~r_0]:$
$$[r_{-1}~~r_0]=Q_1X,$$
where $Q_1$ is an orthonormal matrix of order $n \times \alpha$ and
$X$ is a matrix of size $\alpha \times 2.$ Here, $\alpha = 2,$ when the
vectors $r_{-1}$ and $r_0$ are linearly independent, otherwise
$\alpha=1.$ Now, define a matrix $V_1$ as follows:
$$V_1 = \frac{1}{\gamma}
\begin{bmatrix}r_0\\r_{-1}\end{bmatrix}= \frac{1}{\gamma} \begin{bmatrix}Q_1X( :
, 2) \\Q_1X( : , 1)\end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix} Q_1&\\ & Q_1
\end{bmatrix} \begin{bmatrix} U_{1,1}\\ U_{1,2} \end{bmatrix} \equiv Q_{[1]}U_1,$$ where $\gamma = \|v_0\|_2,$ $U_{1,1} = X( : ,
2)/\gamma,$ and $U_{1,2} = X( : , 1)/\gamma$. After the
initialization, we have $Q_1, U_1$, and an empty $1 \times 0$
Hessenberg matrix $H_1 = [ ~~].$
\noindent Assume that we have the compact Arnoldi decomposition
for $k=j,~j\geq 1.$ Similar to the TOAR method, I-TOAR enlarges this
decomposition for $k=j+1$ by
computing an orthogonal matrix
$Q_{j+1}=[Q_j~~q_{j+1}]$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{new3}\relax
span\{Q_j,q_{j+1}\}=span\{Q_j,r\},~\mbox{where}~r=
AQ_jU_{j,1}(:,j)+BQ_jU_{j,2}(:,j).
\end{equation}
Thus, a vector $q_{j+1}$ is given by:
\begin{equation}\label{eq8}\relax
q_{j+1}= (r-Q_js)/\beta~~\mbox{ with}~ s = Q_j^*r,~ \beta = \|r -
Q_js\|_2.
\end{equation}
Here, it is assumed that $\beta \neq 0.$ Note that, if
$\beta =0,$ then deflation occurs and $r \in span\{Q_j\}.$ We state
this discussion in the form of the following lemma.
\begin{lem}\label{lem8}\relax
Let for $i=j,j+1,$ column vectors of a matrix $Q_i$ form an orthonormal basis of a second-order Krylov subspace at the $i^{th}$ iteration of I-TOAR. Then, In case of no deflation, $Q_{j+1}=[Q_j~~q_{j+1}],$ where $q_{j+1}$ is given by the equation (\ref{eq8}). Otherwise $Q_{j+1}=Q_j.$
\end{lem}
The following lemma establishes relations between the matrices $U_i,~i=j,j+1$ in the I-TOAR method.
\begin{lem}\label{lem9}\relax
Let $U_{i,1},~U_{i,2},~i=j,j+1$ be matrices at the
iterations $j,j+1$ of I-TOAR and of the form described in the
equation (\ref{eq6}). Then, entries of an upper Hessenberg matrix
$\underline{H_{j+1}}$ in I-TOAR satisfies the following relations:
\begin{equation}\label{eq9}\relax
h_j=(U_{j,1}^\ast U_{j,1})^{-1}U_{j,1}^\ast s= (U_{j,2}^\ast U_{j,2})^{-1}U_{j,2}^\ast u=U_{j,1}^\ast s+U_{j,2}^\ast u,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq10}\relax
h_{j+1,j}^2=\|s-U_{j,1}h_j\|^2+\|u-U_{j,2}h_j\|^2+\beta^2.
\end{equation}
where $u= U_{j,1}(:,j).$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
\noindent As column vectors of the matrix $Q_{k+1}$ are orthonormal, observe the following relation from the equations (\ref{eq7}) and (\ref{new3}):
\begin{equation}\label{eq11}\relax
\begin{bmatrix}Q_{j+1}^\ast r\\Q_{j+1}^\ast Q_j U_{j,1}(;,j)
\end{bmatrix}= \begin{bmatrix} U_{j+1,1}\\U_{j+1,2}
\end{bmatrix}\underline{H_{j+1}}(:,j).
\end{equation}
The I-TOAR method uses this relation
to compute the matrices $U_{j+1,1}$ and $U_{j+1,2},$
which are of the following form:
$$U_{j+1,1}=\begin{bmatrix} U_{j,1}&x_{j}\\0&\beta_{j}
\end{bmatrix} ~\mbox{and}~U_{j+1,2}=\begin{bmatrix}U_{j,2}&y_{j}\\0&0\end{bmatrix}.$$
From the previous two equations, it is clear that matrix $U_{j,1},$
$x_{j},$ and $\beta_{j}$ satisfy the following equation:
\begin{equation}\label{eq11a}\relax
Q_{j+1}^\ast r := \begin{bmatrix}s \\ \beta \end{bmatrix} =
\begin{bmatrix} U_{j,1}h_j+h_{j+1,j}x_{j}\\h_{j+1,j} \beta_{j}
\end{bmatrix},
\end{equation}
where $h_j={H}_{j+1}(1:j,j)$ and $h_{j+1,j}={H}_{j+1}(j+1,j).$
Since the matrix $U_{j+1,1}$ is orthogonal in I-TOAR, the two previous equations together implies $U_{j,1}^\ast x_{j}=0,$ and
\begin{equation}\label{eq12}\relax
U_{j,1}^\ast s = U_{j,1}^\ast U_{j,1}h_j.
\end{equation}
Similarly, comparing the last
row of the equation (\ref{eq11}) gives the following using an orthonormal property of the matrix $Q_{j+1},$ and the structure of $U_{j+1,2}:$
\begin{equation}\label{eq12a}\relax
\begin{bmatrix} u\\0\end{bmatrix}=\begin{bmatrix}
U_{j,2}h_j+h_{j+1,j}y_{j}\\0\end{bmatrix},
\end{equation}
where $u\equiv
U_{j,1}(:,j).$ By using the Lemma-\ref{lem4} and $U_{j,1}^\ast x_{j}=0,$
this gives
\begin{equation}\label{eq13}\relax
U_{j,2}^\ast u = U_{j,2}^\ast U_{j,2}h_j.
\end{equation}
Now adding the equations (\ref{eq12}) and (\ref{eq13}) based on the fact that column vectors of $\begin{bmatrix}U_{j,1}\\U_{j,2}\end{bmatrix}$ are orthonormal gives the following relation:
\begin{equation}\label{eq13b}\relax
h_j= U_{j,1}^\ast s+U_{j,2}^\ast u.
\end{equation}
Similarly, recall the following from the equations
(\ref{eq11a}) and (\ref{eq12a}):
\begin{equation}\label{eq13a}\relax
s-U_{j,1}h_j = h_{j+1,j}x_{j+1}~~ \mbox{and}~~ u-U_{j,2}h_j=
h_{j+1,j}y_{j+1}.
\end{equation}
By using the fact that $(x_{j+1}~\beta_{j+1}~y_{j+1}~0)'$ is a column vector of an orthonormal matrix $\begin{bmatrix}U_{j+1,1}\\U_{j+1,2} \end{bmatrix},$ It gives the following:
$$ \|s-U_{j,1}h_j\|^2+\|u-U_{j,2}h_j\|^2+h_{j+1,j}^2 \beta_{j+1}^2=h_{j+1,j}^2.$$
Hence, the equation (\ref{eq10}) is proved by observing from the equation
(\ref{eq11a}) that $h_{j+1,j}\beta_{j+1} =\beta.$
Similarly, observe that the equation (\ref{eq9}) follows from the equations
(\ref{eq12}), (\ref{eq13}), and (\ref{eq13b}). Therefore, the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
The Lemma-\ref{lem9} gives the relations to transit from $j^{th}$ to $(j+1)^{th}$ iteration in I-TOAR, provided there is no deflation at the $(j+1)^{th}$ iteration. In the following, we derive similar expressions for computing the matrix $\underline{H_{j+1}}$ in
I-TOAR, in case of deflation.
\begin{lem}\label{lem10}\relax
Let $\mbox{for}~i=j,j+1,$ $U_{i,1}$ and $U_{i,2}$ be matrices same as in the
Lemma-\ref{lem9}, but of the form described in the equation (\ref{eq5}). Then,
entries of an upper Hessenberg matrix $\underline{H_{j+1}}$ in I-TOAR satisfies the equation (\ref{eq9}), and also the following one:
\begin{equation}\label{new4}\relax
h_{j+1,j}^2 = \|s-U_{j,1}h_j\|^2+\|u-U_{j,2}h_j\|^2 = \|(I-U_{j,1}U_{j,1}^\dag) s\|^2+\|(I-U_{j,2}U_{j,2}^\dag)u\|^2.
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Recall from the Lemma-\ref{lem1} that in the case of deflation, $Q_{j+1}=Q_j,$ and $U_{j+1,1,}$ $U_{j+1,2}$ are of the following form:
$$U_{j+1,1}= [ U_{j,1}~~x_{j} ]~~\mbox{and}~~U_{j+1,2} = [U_{j,2}~~y_{j}].$$
These equations together with the equation (\ref{eq11}) gives the following relations:
\begin{equation}\label{eq14a}\relax
Q_{j+1}^\ast r = Q_j^\ast r = s=U_{j,1}h_j+h_{j+1,j}x_{j},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq15a}\relax
U_{j,1}(:,j)=u=U_{j,2}h_j+h_{j+1,j}y_{j}.
\end{equation}
These relations are similar to the equations (\ref{eq11a}) and (\ref{eq12a}) in the previous lemma. As $\begin{pmatrix} x_{j+1}\\y_{j+1} \end{pmatrix}$ is a column vector of an orthonormal matrix $\begin{bmatrix}U_{j+1,1}\\U_{j+1,2} \end{bmatrix},$ we have $\|x_{j+1}\|^2+\|y_{j+1}\|^2=1.$ Using this, the previous two equations gives:
$h_{j+1,j}^2 = \|s-U_{j,1}h_j\|^2+\|u-U_{j,2}h_j\|^2.$ Now, see the following relations to observe this is equal to $\|(I-U_{j,1}U_{j,1}^\dag) s\|^2+\|(I-U_{j,2}U_{j,2}^\dag)u\|^2.$
\begin{equation}\label{eq14}\relax
U_{j,1}^\ast s = U_{j,1}^\ast U_{j,1}h_j~~\mbox{and}~~U_{j,2}^\ast u = U_{j,2}^\ast U_{j,2}h_j.
\end{equation}
The above equation follows from the equations (\ref{eq14a}) and (\ref{eq15a}) by using the identities $U_{j,1}^\ast x_j=0=U_{j,2}^\ast y_j.$ These identities follows from the fact that the matrix $U_{j+1,1}$ is orthogonal, and the Lemma-\ref{lem4}. Therefore, we proved (\ref{new4}). Now, it is required to prove the equation (\ref{eq9}).
\noindent As the matrix $\begin{bmatrix}U_{j,1}\\U_{j,2}
\end{bmatrix}$ has orthonormal columns, $U_{j,1}^\ast U_{j,1}+U_{j,2}^\ast U_{j,2}$ is an Identity matrix. Using this, the equation
(\ref{eq14}) gives
$U_{j,1}^\ast s+U_{j,2}^\ast u= h_j.$ In turn, this equation together with (\ref{eq14}) proves the equation (\ref{eq9}). Hence, the proof is over.
\end{proof}
The equation (\ref{new4}) in the Lemma-\ref{lem10} shows that $h_{j+1,j}^2=0,$ that means, the I-TOAR algorithm break down when the vectors $s=Q_j^\ast r$ and $u$ are in the range space of
matrices $U_{j,1}$ and $U_{j,2},$ respectively. Otherwise, since the column vectors of $Q_j$ are orthonormal, the equation (\ref{eq14}) shows that the vector $h_j$ is the least squares approximation to the vectors $s$ and $u$ from the range space of $Q_jU_{j,1}$ and $Q_jU_{j,2},$ respectively.
\subsection{I-TOAR implementation}
This subsection uses the results of the subsection-4.1 to discuss computational details of I-TOAR. Then, it proposes the I-TOAR algorithm.
Though I-TOAR follows the TOAR for
constructing an orthonormal basis of the second-order Krylov
subspace,
I-TOAR can build an
orthonormal basis for the associated linear Krylov subspace in various
ways. For example, the following is the one which requires
the least computation compared to all other procedures.
\noindent \textbf{Procedure-1:} Use the second equality relation of the equation (\ref{eq9}) to compute the vector $h_j.$ It requires at most $3(j+1)$ flops. Now, use first relation in the equation
(\ref{eq13a}) to compute the vector $h_{j+1,j}x_{j+1},$ and then comparing only the last element in the second relation of the equation (\ref{eq13a}) gives the vector $h_{j+1,j}y_{j+1}.$ Note that, $y_{j+1}$ is a column vector of a diagonal matrix $U_{j+1,2}$ and has only one non-zero entry. This approach takes at most $(j+1)^2+2(j+1)$ flops to compute $h_{j+1,j}x_{j+1},$ and $h_{j+1,j}y_{j+1}.$ After that, as already $\beta$ is known from the equation (\ref{eq11a}), it requires
another $2(j+1)$ flops to compute $h_{j+1,j}.$ Then, scaling of the vectors $h_{j+1,j}x_{j+1},$ and $h_{j+1,j}y_{j+1}$ require $2(j+1)$ flops. Thus, overall computational cost is at most $(j+1)^2+9(j+1)$ flops for this procedure.
However, when diagonal elements of $U_{j,2}$ are smaller in
magnitude, the division operation in the equation
(\ref{eq13}) introduce large floating point arithmetic errors into this procedure.
\noindent \textbf{Procedure-2:} Instead of the second relation as in the Procedure-1, use the first relation of the equation (\ref{eq9}) for computing $h_j.$ Then, follow the Procedure-1 to compute $x_{j+1}, y_{j+1},$ and $h_{j+1,j}.$ The computational cost of this procedure is equal to that of the Procedure-1.
Observe that the Procedures- 1 and 2 requires the
less computation compared to $6(j+1)^2+3(k+1)$ flops required by TOAR to complete the same task(See, \cite{stabtoar}). However, the computed column vectors of $U_{j,1}$ are may not orthogonal, as both the procedures do not orthogonalize these vectors explicitly.
The following algorithm uses the Modified Gram-Schmidt(MGS) process to do explicit orthogonalization. In the
steps (k)-(n), it orthogonalizes the vector $s=Q_j^\ast r$ against
all the columns of $U_{j,1}$ to compute the vector $x_{j+1}.$ Though MGS increase the computation cost, the overall computation cost in the following algorithm to perform the task that of the Procedure-1 is $5(j+1)^2+4(j+1)$ flops. Still, it is less compared to the TOAR method.
\begin{algorithm}[!htb]
\caption{I-TOAR} \label{Improved TOAR method}
\begin{enumerate}
\item [1.] {\em Start:}Matrices $A$, $B$ and initial length n-vectors
$r_{-1}$ and $r_0$ with $\begin{pmatrix}r_{-1}\\r_0 \end{pmatrix}
\neq 0.$
\item [2.] {\em Output:} $Q_k \in \mathbb{R}^{n \times \alpha_k}$,
$U_{k,1},U_{k,2} \in \mathbb{R}^{\alpha_k \times n},$ and
$\underline{H_k}=\{h_{i,j}\}\in \mathbb{R}^{k \times k-1}.$
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item rank revealing QR: $[r_{-1} ~r_0]=QX$ with $\alpha_1$ being the
rank.
\item Initialize $Q_1=Q,$ $U_{1,1}=X(:,2)/\gamma$ and $U_{1,2}=X(:,1)/\gamma.$
\item for j=1,2,\ldots,k-1 do
\item $r=A(Q_jU_{j,1}(:,j))+B(Q_jU_{j,2}(:,j))$
\item for i= 1,\ldots,$\alpha_j$ do
\item $~~~s_i=q_i^\ast r$
\item $~~~r=r-s_iq_i$
\item end for
\item $\beta = \|r\|_2$
\item Set $s= x:=[s_1 \cdots s_{\alpha_j}]^T$ and $u=U_{j,1}(:,j)$
\item for t=1,2, \ldots,i
\item $ \gamma_1(t) = U_{j,1}(:,t)^*s/\|U_{j,1}(:,t)\|^2;$
\item $s= s-\gamma_1(t) s$
\item end for
\item $h= U_{j,1}^\ast (s-x)+U_{j,2}^\ast U_{j,1}(:,j);~~u(\alpha_j)= u(\alpha_j)-e_{\alpha_j}^\ast U_{j,2}h;$
\item for t=1, 2, \ldots, $\alpha_{j}-1$
\item u(t)=0
\item end for
\item $h_{j+1,j}=(\beta^2+\|s\|_2^2+\|u\|_2^2)^{1/2}$
\item if $h_{j+1,j}=0$ then stop(breakdown) end if
\item if $\beta =0$ then
$\alpha_{j+1}=\alpha_j $ (deflation)
\item $Q_{j+1}=Q_j;$ $U_{j+1,1} = [U_{j,1}~~s/h_{j+1,j}];$
$U_{j+1,2} =[U_{j,2}~~u/h_{j+1,j}]$
\item else
$\alpha_{j+1}=\alpha_j+1$
\item $Q_{j+1}=[Q_j~\frac{r}{ \beta}];\\
U_{j+1,1}=\begin{bmatrix} U_{j,1}&s/h_{j+1,j}\\0&\beta/h_{j+1,j}
\end{bmatrix};$ $U_{j+1,2}=\begin{bmatrix} U_{j,2}&u/h_{j+1,j}\\0&0
\end{bmatrix};$
\item end if
\item end for
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
\end{algorithm}
Similar to the TOAR algorithm in \cite{stabtoar}, the Algorithm-\ref{Improved
TOAR method} also uses the MGS process to maintain orthonormality of the matrix $Q_j.$ The computed $Q_j$ may not orthonormal up to machine precision. To keep the level of orthonormality of $Q_j$ as close to machine precision as possible it is required to reorthogonalize a vector $r$ in the step-(g) against the columns of $Q_j$ by inserting the following code segments between the steps (e) and (h) of the Algorithm-\ref{Improved TOAR method}.
\begin{center}
for i = 0, . . . , $\eta_j$ \\
$\tilde{s}_i = q^\ast_i r~~~~$\\
$r = r-\tilde{s}_i q_i$\\ $s_i=\tilde{s}_i + s_i ~$\\
end for~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\
$\alpha=\|r\|_2~.$
\end{center}
To end this section, note that it would be possible to apply a similar reorthogonalization procedure between the steps (k) and (n) of the Algorithm-1, to keep the orthogonality of columns of the matrix $U_{j,1},$ close to machine precision. In the next section, we provide a rigorous backward error analysis of the
Algorithm-\ref{Improved TOAR method}.
\section{Backward Error Analysis}
This section provides backward error analysis of the I-TOAR
algorithm, in the presence of finite precision arithmetic.
The backward error analysis for the associated linear Krylov
subspace in TOAR presented in \cite{stabtoar}, is also valid for I-TOAR with insignificant changes. So, this section provides backward error
analysis only for the second-order Krylov subspace in I-TOAR, in terms of the matrix pair $(A,B).$ That means, this section proves that the
computed basis $\hat{Q}_j$ in I-TOAR is an exact basis matrix of
${G}_k(A+\triangle A,B+\triangle B;r_{-1},r_0)$ with small
$\|[\triangle A~\triangle B]\|_2.$ Note that, for TOAR this is an open problem; See \cite{stabtoar}.
Let us assume that by taking the floating point errors into account, the Compact Arnoldi decomposition computed by I-TOAR satisfies the following:
$$\begin{bmatrix}A&B\\I&0\end{bmatrix}\begin{bmatrix}\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1}\\\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2}\end{bmatrix}=\begin{bmatrix}\bm\hat{Q}_{k}\bm\hat{U}_{k,1}\\\bm\hat{Q}_{k}\bm\hat{U}_{k,2}\end{bmatrix}\bm\hat{\underline{H_k}}+E,$$
where matrices with $~~\bm\hat{}~~$ on the top are the computed
matrices counterpart to the matrices in the exact arithmetic, and $E$
is the error matrix. Now,
we introduce two
matrices $F_{mv}$ and $F$ that represent floating point error of matrix-vector product and orthogonalization process, respectively.
\begin{equation}\label{eq16}\relax
F_{mv}=A(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1})+B(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2})-\bm\hat{R}_{k-1},
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{eq17}\relax
F:= \begin{bmatrix} F_1\\F_2\end{bmatrix} = \begin{bmatrix}
\bm\hat{R}_{k-1}
\\\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1}\end{bmatrix}-\begin{bmatrix}\bm\hat{Q}_{k}\bm\hat{U}_{k,1}\\\bm\hat{Q}_{k}\bm\hat{U}_{k,2}\end{bmatrix}\bm\hat{\underline{H_k}},
\end{equation}
where $\bm\hat{R}_{k-1}=[\hat{r}_1,\hat{r}_2,\cdots,\hat{r}_{k-1}],$
and $\hat{r}_j =
fl(A\bm\hat{Q}_{j}\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}(:,j))+B\bm\hat{Q}_{j}\bm\hat{U}_{j,2}(:,j)).$
Note that the matrices $\triangle A_1:= -F_{mv}\alpha (\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1})^\dag$ and $\triangle B_1:=-F_{mv} (1-\alpha)(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2})^\dag$ satisfy the relation
$$(A+\triangle A_1)(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1})+(B+\triangle B_1)(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2})=\bm\hat{R}_{k-1},$$
where $\alpha$ is some non-zero scalar.
Then, using the equations (\ref{eq16}) and (\ref{eq17}) the matrices $\triangle A_1$ and $\triangle B_1$ satisfy the following relations, respectively:
$$\triangle A_1(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1})+\triangle B_1
(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2}) = -F_{mv},$$
and
$$(A+\triangle A_1)(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1})+(B+\triangle B_1)(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2})-\bm\hat{Q}_{k}\bm\hat{U}_{k,1}\hat{\underline{H_k}}=F_1.$$
Thus, from these two equations, it is easy to see that
$F_1+F_{mv}$ is the overall error matrix in the orthogonalization
process. Furthermore, on the introduction of two matrices $\triangle
A_2:= F_{1}\alpha (\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1})^\dag$ and
$\triangle B_2:=
F_{1}(1-\alpha)(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2})^\dag,$ the previous
equation becomes as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{eq17c}\relax
(A+\triangle A_1+\triangle
A_2)(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1})+(B+\triangle B_1+\triangle
B_2)(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2})=\bm\hat{Q}_{k}\bm\hat{U}_{k,1}\hat{\underline{H_k}}.
\end{equation}
Now, define $[\triangle A~~\triangle
B]:=[\triangle A_1+\triangle A_2~~\triangle B_1+\triangle B_2].$
Then, the equation (\ref{eq17c}) shows that the basis matrix $\bm\hat{Q}_k$ computed in the I-TOAR algorithm is an exact basis matrix of a second-order Krylov subspace ${G}_k(A+\triangle A,B+\triangle B;r_{-1},r_0).$
Next, to prove the I-TOAR algorithm is backward stable, it is
required that the relative backward error
$\frac{\|[\triangle A~~\triangle B]\|}{\|[A~~B]\|}$ is of the order
of the machine precision $\varepsilon.$ To verify this, we need to derive
upper bounds for $\|F_{mv}\|_F$ and $\|F_1\|_F.$
We adopt the following standard model for rounding errors in the floating point arithmetic. Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be any two real scalars. Then,
$$fl(\alpha~~op~~\beta) =(\alpha ~~op~~\beta)(1+\delta)~~\mbox{with}~~|\delta| \leq \varepsilon~~\mbox{for}~~op=+,-,*,/, $$
where $fl(x)$ denotes the computed quantity, and $\varepsilon$
denotes the machine precision. We will use the following lemma also in the backward error analysis.
\begin{lem}\label{lem4.1}\relax
(a). For $x,y \in \mathcal{R}^n,~fl(x+y)~=~x+y+f,$ where $\|f\|_2
\leq (\|x\|_2+\|y\|_2).$\\
(b). For $X \in \mathcal{R}^{n \times k}$ and $y \in \mathcal{R}^k$,
$fl(Xy)~=~Xy+w,$ where $\|w\|_2
\leq k\|X\|_F\|y\|_2 \varepsilon+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2).$\\
(c). For $X \in \mathcal{R}^{n \times k},$ $y \in \mathcal{R}^k,~b
\in \mathcal{R}^n,$ and $\beta \in \mathcal{R},$ $\hat{c} \equiv
fl((b-Xy)/\beta)$ satisfies
$$\beta \hat{c} = b-Xy+g, ~~ \|g\|_2 \leq (k+1)\|[X~~\hat{c}]\|_F \Big\|\begin{bmatrix}y \\ \beta \end{bmatrix}\Big\|_2 \varepsilon+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2). $$
\end{lem}
For the Proof of the Lemma-\ref{lem4.1}, see the Lemma-4.1 in \cite{stabtoar}. This lemma holds true for I-TOAR as well. Next, the following lemma derives an upper bound for $\|F_{mv}\|_F,$
where $F_{mv}$ is a matrix defined as in the equation (\ref{eq16}).
\begin{lem}\label{lem11}\relax
Let $\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}$ and $\bm\hat{U}_{k-1}$ be orthonormal matrices computed by the I-TOAR procedure. Then,
$$\|F_{mv}\|_F \leq 4k^2n
\|[A~~B]\|_F\|\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\|_2 \|\bm\hat{U}_{k-1}\|_2
\varepsilon + \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2).$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
From the definition of $F_{mv}$ in the equation (\ref{eq16}), we have
$$F_{mv}(;,j)= [A~~B]\begin{bmatrix}\bm\hat{Q}_{j}\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}(:,j)\\ \hat{Q}_{j}\bm\hat{U}_{j,2}(:,j)
\end{bmatrix}-\bm \hat{r}_j,$$
where $\bm\hat{r}_j \equiv fl \Big([A~~B]\begin{bmatrix}\bm\hat{Q}_{j}\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}(:,j)\\
\hat{Q}_{j}\bm\hat{U}_{j,2}(:,j)\end{bmatrix}\Big).$ Here, we used the
fact that $\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1},$ and $\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2}$ are upper Hessenberg and diagonal matrices, respectively and $j \leq k-1$. Now, by the repeated application of the Lemma-\ref{lem4.1}, we have
$$\bm\hat{r}_j = [A~~B]fl \Big(\begin{bmatrix}\bm\hat{Q}_{j}\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}(:,j)\\ \hat{Q}_{j}\bm\hat{U}_{j,2}(:,j) \end{bmatrix}\Big)+w_j$$
$$~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~=[A~~B]\begin{bmatrix}\bm\hat{Q}_{j}\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}(:,j)\\ \hat{Q}_{j}\bm\hat{U}_{j,2}(:,j)
\end{bmatrix}+w_j^{(1)}+w_j^{(2)}+w_j,$$
where $w_j^{(1)},$ $w_j^{(2)},$ and $w_j$ are the floating point
error vectors satisfying the following relations, respectively.
$$\|w_j^{(1)} \|_2 \leq k \| \bm\hat{Q}_{j}\|_F\|\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}(:,j)\|_2 \varepsilon + \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2), $$
$$\|w_j^{(2)} \|_2 \leq k \| \bm\hat{Q}_{j}\|_F\|\bm\hat{U}_{j,2}(:,j)\|_2 \varepsilon + \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2), $$
and
$$\|w_j\|_2 \leq 2nk \|[A~~B]\|_F \Big\|\begin{bmatrix}\bm\hat{Q}_{j}\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}(:,j)\\ \hat{Q}_{j}\bm\hat{U}_{j,2}(:,j) \end{bmatrix} \Big\|_2 \varepsilon + \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2) \leq 4nk \|[A~~B]\|_F \|\bm\hat{Q}_{j}\|_F \Big\|\begin{bmatrix}\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}(:,j)\\ \bm\hat{U}_{j,2}(:,j) \end{bmatrix} \Big\|_2 \varepsilon + \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2).$$
Now, combine all the three previous inequalities, and use the facts $\bm\hat{U}_{j} = \begin{bmatrix}
\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}\\\bm\hat{U}_{j,2}
\end{bmatrix},$ and $\|\bm\hat{U}_{j,i}(:,j)\|_2 \leq \|\bm\hat{U}_{j}(:,j)\|_2,~\mbox{for}~i=1,2.$ It gives
$$\|F_{mv}(:,j)\|_2 \leq (4nk \|[A~~B]\|_F +2k)\|\bm\hat{Q}_{j}\|_F \Big \|\begin{bmatrix}\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}(:,j)\\ \bm\hat{U}_{j,2}(:,j) \end{bmatrix} \Big\|_2 \varepsilon + \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2).$$
Then, using $\|\bm\hat{Q}_{j}\|_F \leq
\|\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\|_F$ for $j \leq k-1,$ the above inequality gives the following:
$$\|F_{mv}(:,j)\|_2 \leq 2k(2n \|[A~~B]\|_F +1)\|\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\|_F \|\bm\hat{U}_j(:,j )\|_2 \varepsilon + \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2).$$
Observe that in matrix terms this equation can be written as follows:
$$\|F_{mv}\|_F = \Big(\displaystyle \sum_{j=1}^{k-1}
\|F_{mv}(:,j)\|_2^2 \Big)^{1/2} \leq 2k(2n
\|[A~~B]\|_F+1)\|\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\|_F \|\bm\hat{U}_{k-1}\|_F
\varepsilon + \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2).$$
Further, using the inequalities $\|\bm\hat{Q}_{j}\|_F \leq \|\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\|_F \leq
\sqrt k \|\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\|_2,$ and $\|\bm\hat{U}_{k-1}\|_F \leq
\sqrt k \|\bm\hat{U}_{k-1}\|_2$ this gives
$$\|F_{mv}\|_F \leq 2k^2(2n
\|[A~~B]\|_F+1)\|\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\|_2 \|\bm\hat{U}_{k-1}\|_2
\varepsilon + \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2).$$ Since the I-TOAR Algorithm uses the MGS process to
generate orthonormal matrices $\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}$ and $\bm\hat{U}_{k-1}$,
we have $\|\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\|_2=
\|\bm\hat{U}_{k-1}\|_2=1+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon).$ Therefore,
neglecting the term $2k^2\|\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\|_2
\|\bm\hat{U}_{k-1}\|_2 \varepsilon$ in the above equation completes the proof of the lemma.
\end{proof}
\\\\\noindent Next, to derive an upper bound for $\|F_1\|_F,$ the following lemma is required.
\begin{lem}\label{lem12}\relax
Let $f$ be an error vector resulting from the computation in the
steps (k)-(n) of the Algorithm-\ref{Improved TOAR method}. Then
$$\|\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}\|_F\|f\|_2 \leq 2(j+1)^3
\mathcal{K}_2(\bm\hat{U}_{j,1})^2 \varepsilon.$$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
The elements of computed vector $\alpha_1$ in the step-(l) of the Algorithm-\ref{Improved TOAR method} satisfy the relation:
$$\gamma_1(i)= \bm\hat{U}_{j,1}(:,i)^\ast
s/\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}^\ast \bm\hat{U}_{j,1}(i,i)+f_i,$$ where $f_i$
is the error resulting from the computation of an inner product in
the numerator and the
division.
By using the fact that $\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}^\ast \bm\hat{U}_{j,1}$ is a diagonal matrix, the above element-wise computation can be written in the vector form as follows:
$$\gamma_1 = (\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}^\ast \bm\hat{U}_{j,1})^{-1} \bm\hat{U}_{j,1}^\ast s+f,$$
where an error vector $f$ satisfies the following relation:
$$\|f\|_2 \leq 2(j+1) \|\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}^\ast\|_F\|\bm\hat{s}\|\|_2(\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}^\ast \bm\hat{U}_{j,1})^{-1}\|_F\varepsilon.$$
Therefore, using $ \|\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}\|_F =
\|\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}^\ast\|_F,$ this gives the inequality
$$ \|\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}\|_F \|f\|_2 \leq 2(j+1)\|\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}\|_F^2 \|\bm\hat{s}\|_2\|(\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}^\ast \bm\hat{U}_{j,1})^{-1}\|_F\varepsilon. $$
Let $\sigma_{max}$ and $\sigma_{min}$ be the largest and the
smallest singular values of $\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}^\ast,$ respectively.
Then, we have $\|\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}\|_F^2 \leq (j+1)\sigma_{max}^2$ and $
\|(\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}^\ast \bm\hat{U}_{j,1})^{-1}\|_F \leq
\frac{j+1}{\sigma_{min}^2}.$ Substitute these inequalities in
the previous equation and use $\mathcal{K}_2(\bm\hat{U}_{j,1})^2=\frac{\sigma_{max}^2}{\sigma_{min}^2}$ to complete the proof.
\end{proof}
\noindent In the next lemma, we use the Lemma-\ref{lem12} to bound the
norm of error vector in the second orthogonalization process in the
steps (k)~-~(n) of the Algorithm-\ref{Improved TOAR method}.
Moreover, we are assuming that $\mathcal{K}_2(\bm\hat{U}_{j,1})$ is
moderately small.
\begin{lem}\label{lem13}\relax
Let $g_{1,j}$ be a overall floating point error vector resulting
from the second level orthogonalization process in the steps
(k)-(n) of the Algorithm-\ref{Improved TOAR method}. Then
\begin{equation}\label{eq17b}\relax
\|g_{1,j} \|_2 \leq (j+1) \|\bm\hat{U}_{j+1,1}\|_F\|\underline{
\bm\hat{H}_k}(1:j+1,j)\|_2 \varepsilon+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon)^2
\end{equation}
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
On applying Lemma-\ref{lem4.1}(c) to the second orthogonalization
process in the steps (k)~-~(n), the computed $(j+1)$th column of
$U_{k+1,1}$ satisfies,
\begin{equation}\label{eq17a}\relax
\bm\hat{h}_{j+1,j} \bm \hat{U}_{j+1,1}(1:j,j+1)=\bm\hat{s}-
\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}(\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}^\ast
\bm\hat{U}_{j,1})^{-1}\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}^\ast\bm\hat{s}+g_{1,j}
=\bm\hat{s}- \bm\hat{U}_{j,1}\bm\hat{h}_j+g_{1,j}
\end{equation}
where $g_{1,j} $ is a floating point error vector
satisfying the inequality,
$$\|g_{1,j} \|_2 \leq (j+1) \|\bm\hat{U}_{j+1,1}\|_F\|\underline{ \bm\hat{H}_k}(1:j+1,j)\|_2 \varepsilon+ \varphi_2 \|\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}\|_F \|f\|_2 \varepsilon +\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2),$$
where $f$ is the error vector same as in the previous lemma.
In the above equation, we used the fact $h=
\gamma_1=(\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}^\ast
\bm\hat{U}_{j,1})^{-1}\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}^\ast\bm\hat{s}.$
Therefore, the proof is complete by using the fact from the
Lemma-\ref{lem12} that $\|\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}\|_F\|f\|_2 \varepsilon$ in the above
inequality is of $\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2).$
\end{proof}
\\\\\noindent In the
following, we use the Lemma-\ref{lem13} to derive an upper bound for $\|F_1\|_F^2.$
\begin{lem}\label{lem14}\relax
Let $\bm\hat{Q}_{k},$ $\bm\hat{U}_{k}$ and $\underline{\hat{H}_k}$
be computed in the k-step of the I-TOAR procedure. Then
\begin{equation}\label{eq18b}\relax
\|F_1\|_F \leq
\varphi\|\bm\hat{Q}_{k}\|_2\|\bm\hat{U}_{k,1}\|_2\|\bm\hat{\underline{H_k}}\|_F\varepsilon+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2)
\end{equation}
where $\varphi= (k+1)(2k+1).$
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Note that, in the $j$th iteration of I-TOAR, the computed quantity
at step-(d) is
$$\bm\hat{r}_j = fl \Big([A~~B]\begin{bmatrix}\bm\hat{Q}_{j}\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}(:,j)\\ \hat{Q}_{j}\bm\hat{U}_{j,2}(:,j) \end{bmatrix}\Big)$$
Now, apply the Lemma-\ref{lem4.1}(c) to the orthogonalization and
normalization processes in the steps (e)~-~(h) and (x) of the
Algorithm-\ref{Improved TOAR method}. Then, the computed column
$\bm\hat{q}_{j+1}$ of $Q_k$ and $\bm\hat{s},$ $\bm\hat{\beta}$ computed in the steps (m) and (i) satisfy the following equation
\begin{equation}\label{eq18a}\relax
\bm\hat{\beta} \bm\hat{q}_{j+1}=\bm\hat{r}_j
-\bm\hat{Q}_{j}\bm\hat{s}- \tilde{f}_j,
\end{equation}
where
$\tilde{f}_j$ is the error vector, which satisfies the
following:
\begin{equation}\label{eq18lc}\relax
\|\tilde{f}_j\|_2 \leq (j+2) \| \bm\hat{Q}_{j+1}\|_F
\Big\|\begin{bmatrix} \bm\hat{s}\\\bm\hat{\beta}\end{bmatrix}
\Big\|\varepsilon + \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2).
\end{equation}
Now, from the equation (\ref{eq17}), consider the
$j$th column of $F_1,$
\begin{equation}\label{eq19}\relax
f_{j,1} = \bm
\hat{r}_j-\bm\hat{Q}_k\bm\hat{U}_{k,1}(:,1:j)\bm\hat{h}_j-\bm\hat{h}_{j+1,j}\bm\hat{Q}_k
\bm\hat{U}_{k,1}(:,j+1)\\
=\bm\hat{r}_j
-\bm\hat{Q}_j\bm\hat{U}_{j,1}\bm\hat{h}_j-\bm\hat{h}_{j+1,j}\bm\hat{Q}_{j+1}\bm\hat{U}_{j+1,1}(:,j+1),
\end{equation}
where, for the second equality, we exploited the upper Hessenberg
structure of $\bm\hat{H}_k.$ Moreover, from the equation
(\ref{eq6}), we have
$$\bm\hat{h}_{j+1,j}\bm\hat{Q}_{j+1}\bm\hat{U}_{j+1,1}(:,j+1)= \bm\hat{h}_{j+1,j} \bm\hat{Q}_{j}\bm \hat{U}_{j+1,1}(1:j,j+1)+\bm\hat{q}_{j+1}\bm\hat{\beta}$$
Further, on left multiplying the equation (\ref{eq17a}) with
$\bm\hat{Q}_j,$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq19a}\relax
\bm\hat{h}_{j+1,j} \bm\hat{Q}_{j}\bm
\hat{U}_{j+1,1}(1:j,j+1)=\bm\hat{Q}_{j}\bm\hat{s}-\bm\hat{Q}_{j}\bm
\hat{U}_{j,1}\bm\hat{h}_{j}+\bm\hat{Q}_{j}g_{1,j}
\end{equation}
Hence, the substitution of the equations (\ref{eq18a}) and
(\ref{eq19a}) in the equation (\ref{eq19}) will give
$$f_{j,1}=\bm\hat{r}_j-\bm\hat{Q}_j\bm\hat{s}+\bm\hat{q}_{j+1}\bm\hat{\beta}+\bm\hat{Q}_{j}g_{1,j}\\
= \tilde{f}_j+\bm\hat{Q}_{j}g_{1,j}.$$ Thus,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq20}\relax
\nonumber \|f_{j,1}\|_2 \leq
\|\tilde{f}_j\|_2+\|\bm\hat{Q}_{j}\|_F\|g_{1,j}\|_2,
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\
\nonumber
\leq \Big((j+2)\Big\|\begin{bmatrix}\bm\hat{s}\\\bm\hat{\beta}
\end{bmatrix}\Big\|_2+\|g_{1,j}\|_2\big)\|\bm
\hat{Q}_{j+1}\|_F+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2),~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\
\nonumber
\leq \Big((j+2)
\|\bm\hat{U}_{j+1,1}\|_2\|\bm\hat{\underline{ H_k}}(1:j+1,j)\|_2
\varepsilon+\|g_{1,j}\|_2\Big)\|\bm
\hat{Q}_{j+1}\|_F+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2),~\\
\nonumber
\leq
(2j+3)\|\bm\hat{Q}_{j+1}\|_F\|\bm\hat{U}_{j+1,1}\|_F\|\bm\hat{\underline{H_k}}(1:j+1,j)\|_2\varepsilon+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2),~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\
\leq
(2k+1)\|\bm\hat{Q}_{k}\|_F\|\bm\hat{U}_{k,1}\|_F\|\bm\hat{\underline{H_k}}(1:j+1,j)\|_2\varepsilon+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2).~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\end{eqnarray}
In the second, third and fourth inequalities, we used the
equations (\ref{eq18lc}), (\ref{eq17a}) and (\ref{eq17b}),
respectively, whereas the following were used to obtain the last inequation:
$$\|\bm\hat{Q}_{j+1}\|_F \leq \|\bm\hat{Q}_{k}\|_F, ~~ \|\bm\hat{U}_{j+1,1}\|_F\|\leq \|\bm\hat{U}_{k,1}\|_F\|, ~\mbox{and} ~~j+1 \leq k.$$
Now, from the equation (\ref{eq20}), $\|F_1\|_F$ is given by
$$\|F_1\|_F^2 =\displaystyle \sum \limits_{j=1}^{k-1}\|f_{j,1}\|_2^2 \leq (2k+1)^2 \displaystyle \sum \limits_{j=1}^{k-1}\|\bm\hat{Q}_{k}\|_F^2\|\bm\hat{U}_{k,1}\|_F^2\|\bm\hat{\underline{H_k}}(1:j+1,j)\|_2^2\varepsilon^2+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^3) $$
$$ = (2k+1)^2\|\bm\hat{Q}_{k}\|_F^2\|\bm\hat{U}_{k,1}\|_F^2\|\bm\hat{\underline{H_k}}\|_F^2\varepsilon^2+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^3)$$
Therefore, the proof will be complete by converting the Frobenius
norm to 2-norm.
\end{proof}
\noindent \textit{Remark-1:}
When the complete reorthogonalization has applied, the above result holds true with little change in the coefficients. In this case, following a similar procedure as in the remark-1 in \cite{stabtoar}, it is easy to see
that the norm of the error vector $\tilde{f}_j$ satisfies the
following relation:
$$\|\tilde{f}_j\|_2 \leq (2c(j+1)+1)\|\bm\hat{Q}_{j+1}\|_2 \|[\bm\hat{s}^T~\bm\hat{\beta}]\|_2\varepsilon+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2),$$
where $c$ is a small constant.\\
We now present the main theorem for an upper bound of relative backward error in the I-TOAR procedure. Moreover, we are using the following assumption in the proof:
\begin{equation}\label{eq21}\relax
\Big\| \begin{bmatrix}|\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1})^\dag
\\\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2})^\dag \end{bmatrix} \Big\|_2
\leq \zeta_1
\|(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1})^\dag\|_2~~\mbox{and}~~
\sigma_{min}({\bm\hat{U}_{k,1}}) =\zeta_2
\sigma_{min}({\bm\hat{U}_{k}}),
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_{min}(X)$ denotes the smallest singular value of
a matrix $X.$
\begin{thm}\label{thm1}\relax
Let $\bm\hat{Q}_k,~\bm\hat{U}_{k,1}$ and $\bm\hat{U}_{k,2}$ be matrices of
full column rank. Let
$$\mathcal{K} =
max\{\mathcal{K}_2(\bm\hat{Q}_k),\mathcal{K}_2(\bm\hat{U}_{k})\},$$
where for any matrix $X,$ $\mathcal{K}_2(X)$ denotes its 2-norm condition number.
If $(k+1)(2k+1)\mathcal{K}^4 (\zeta_1)/\zeta_2
\varepsilon <1,$ then
$$\frac{\|[\triangle A~~\triangle B]\|_F}{\|[A~~B]\|_F} \leq (2\zeta_1 nk^2+(\varphi_2/2)\mathcal{K}^2)\mathcal{K}^2 \varepsilon,$$
where $\varphi_2 =(k+1)(2k+1)\zeta_1/\zeta_2.$
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
We have
$$\|[\triangle A~~\triangle B]\|_F = \|[\triangle A_1+\triangle A_2~~\triangle B_1+\triangle
B_2]\|_F \leq \|[\triangle A_1~~\triangle B_1]\|_F+\|[\triangle
A_2~~\triangle B_2]\|_F.$$ Using the definition of $\triangle A_1$
and $\triangle B_1$, we have the following for $\alpha=1/2.$
$$\|[\triangle A_1~~\triangle B_1]\|_F \leq 1/2 \|F_{mv}\|_F \Big\|\begin{bmatrix}(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1})^\dag \\ (\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2})^\dag\end{bmatrix}\Big\|_2$$
Similarly, using the definition of $\triangle A_2$ and $\triangle
B_2,$ we have
$$\|[\triangle A_2~~\triangle B_2]\|_F \leq 1/2 \|F_1\|_F \Big\|\begin{bmatrix}(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1})^\dag \\ (\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2})^\dag\end{bmatrix}\Big\|_2.$$
Further, by using the equation (\ref{eq21})
we have the following inequality:
$$\Big\|\begin{bmatrix}(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1})^\dag \\
(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2})^\dag\end{bmatrix}\Big\|_2 \leq
\zeta_1\|(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1})^\dag\|_2 \equiv
\frac{\zeta_1}{\sigma_{min}(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1})}$$
$$~~~~~~\leq \frac{\zeta_1}{\sigma_{min}(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1})\sigma_{min}( \bm\hat{U}_{k-1})} $$
In addition, with the bound for $\|F_{mv}\|_F$ in Lemma-\ref{lem11},
this gives the following upper bound for $\|[\triangle
A_1~~\triangle B_1]\|_F.$
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq22}\relax
\nonumber |[\triangle A_1~~\triangle B_1]\|_F \leq
\frac{\zeta_12k^2n \|[A~~B]\|_F\|\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\|_2
\|\bm\hat{U}_{k-1}\|_2 }{
\sigma_{min}(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1})\sigma_{min}(
\bm\hat{U}_{k-1})}\varepsilon + \mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2)\\
\leq \zeta_1 2k^2n
\|[A~~B]\|_F \mathcal{K}^2
\varepsilon+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~.
\end{eqnarray}
Now, recall from the equation (\ref{eq17c}) that
$$\bm\hat{\underline{H_k}} = (\bm\hat{Q}_{k}\bm\hat{U}_{k,1})^\dag
([A~~B]+[\triangle A~~\triangle
B])\begin{bmatrix}\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1}\\\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2}\end{bmatrix},$$
and repeatedly apply the inequality, $\|XY\|_F \leq \|X\|_2\|Y\|_F$
to obtain the following:
$$\|\bm\hat{\underline{H_k}}\|_F \leq
\|(\bm\hat{Q}_{k}\bm\hat{U}_{k,1})^\dag\|_2\Big\|\begin{bmatrix}\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1}\\\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2}\end{bmatrix}\Big\|_2(\|[A~~B]\|_F+\|[\triangle
A~~\triangle B]\|_F).$$
Then, use the following inequalities in the
above equation,
$$\|(\bm\hat{Q}_{k}\bm\hat{U}_{k,1})^\dag\|_2 \leq \frac{1}{\sigma_{min}(\bm\hat{Q}_{k})\sigma_{min}(\bm\hat{U}_{k,1}) }~~\mbox{and}~~\Big\|\begin{bmatrix}\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1}\\\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2}\end{bmatrix}\Big\|_2 \leq
\|\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\|_2\|\bm\hat{U}_{k-1}\|_2,$$ to get the
following:
$$\|\bm\hat{\underline{H_k}}\|_F \leq \frac{\|\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\|_2\|\bm\hat{U}_{k-1}\|_2}{\sigma_{min}(\bm\hat{Q}_{k})\sigma_{min}(\bm\hat{U}_{k,1}) }(\|[A~~B]\|_F+\|[\triangle
A~~\triangle B]\|_F).$$
By using this equation and the result in the
Lemma-\ref{lem14}, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq23}\relax
\nonumber\|F_1\|_F\Big\|\begin{bmatrix}(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,1})^\dag \\
(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\bm\hat{U}_{k-1,2})^\dag\end{bmatrix}\Big\|_2
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\\ \nonumber \leq
\varphi \frac{\zeta_1
\|\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1}\|_2\|\bm\hat{U}_{k-1}\|_2}{\sigma_{min}(\bm\hat{Q}_{k})\sigma_{min}(\bm\hat{U}_{k,1})
}\frac{\|\bm\hat{Q}_{k}\|_2\|\bm\hat{U}_{k}\|_2}{\sigma_{min}(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1})\sigma_{min}(\bm\hat{U}_{k-1})
} (\|[A~~B]\|_F+\|[\triangle A~~\triangle B]\|_F)\varepsilon +
\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~\\ \nonumber \leq \varphi
(\zeta_1/\zeta_2)
\mathcal{K}_2(\bm\hat{Q}_k)\mathcal{K}_2(\bm\hat{U}_{k})\mathcal{K}_2(\bm\hat{Q}_{k-1})\mathcal{K}_2(\bm\hat{U}_{k-1})(\|[A~~B]\|_F+\|[\triangle
A~~\triangle B]\|_F)\varepsilon +
\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2))~~~~~~~~~~~\\
\leq \varphi_2 \mathcal{K}^4 (\|[A~~B]\|_F+\|[\triangle A~~\triangle
B]\|_F)\varepsilon +\mathcal{O}\varepsilon^2)~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
\end{eqnarray}
where $\varphi_2=
(2k+1)(k+1)\zeta_1/\zeta_2.$ The two inequalities in the
equation (\ref{eq21}) were used for the first and second
inequalities, respectively . Now, by combining the
equations (\ref{eq22}) and (\ref{eq23}), we have
$$\|[\triangle A~~\triangle B]\|_F \leq \frac{(2\zeta_1 n k^2+(\varphi_2/2) \mathcal{K}^2)\mathcal{K}^2 }{(1-(\varphi_2/2) \mathcal{K}^4 \varepsilon)}\|[A~~B]\|_F \varepsilon+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2). $$
As we assumed $(\varphi_2/2)\mathcal{K}^4 \varepsilon < 1,$ the
theorem is proven by omitting the denominator, since it can be
covered by the term $\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon^2).$
\end{proof}
\noindent\textit{Remark-2:} Similar to the Theorem-2.5 in \cite{stabtoar}, the previous lemmas were assumed that the matrices A and B are known explicitly so that the standard error bound for the matrix-vector multiplication applicable. The stability analysis of the Arnoldi method in \citep[Theorem-2.5]{31} also used the same assumption. Otherwise, an error bound for matrix-vector multiplication depends on the specific formulation of $A$ and $B.$
\section{Numerical examples}
In this section, we apply the I-TOAR procedure to the application of
Model order reduction of second-order dynamical systems. A continuous time invariant dynamical system is of the following form:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{N1}\relax
\nonumber M\ddot{x}(t)=-D\dot{x}(t)-Kx(t)+Fu(t)\\
y(t)= C_px(t)+C_v \dot{x}(t)
\end{eqnarray}
where $M,~D,~K \in \mathcal{R}^{n \times n}$ are mass, damping, and
stiffness matrices, respectively. $F \in \mathcal{R}^{n \times m},$
$C_p, ~C_v \in \mathcal{R}^{q \times n}$ are constant matrices. In
this paper, we are assuming $C_v=0$ and $m=q=1.$ Thus, we considering the following single input-single output dynamical
system of the form:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{N2}\relax
\nonumber M\ddot{x}(t)=-D\dot{x}(t)-K x(t)+fu(t)\\
y(t)= c x(t),
\end{eqnarray}
where $x(t)$ is the state vector, $u(t)$ is the input vector and
$y(t)$ is the output vector. Here, $f$ is a input distribution array
and $c$ is the outer measurement array. Moreover, for the convenience, we are
assuming that $x(0)= \dot{x}(0)=0.$
Applying the Laplace transform
on both sides of the previous equation will give
\begin{eqnarray}\label{N4}\relax
\nonumber s^2 M X(s)+s DX(s)+K X(s)=fU(s)\\
Y(s)= c X(s).
\end{eqnarray}
where $X(s),Y(s),$ and $U(s)$ are Laplace transforms of $x(t),y(t),$
and $u(t),$ respectively. Thus, we have
$$Y(s) = c (s^2M+sD+K)^{-1}f U(s) .$$
$h(s):=c(s^2M+sD+K)^{-1}f$ is called as the \emph{Transfer function}. Using
the definition of $h(s),$ the previous equation can be written as
$$Y(s) = h(s)X(s).$$
The Model order reduction method produces a lower order dynamical
system that closely resembles the characteristics of the original system.
Though model order reduction is possible in many ways, in this paper, we are using the Galerkin projection based
reduction method. This method defines a projection operator
using an orthonormal basis of a subspace generated by the mass,
damping and stiffness matrices. Then, it projects the system
(\ref{N4}) onto a subspace of smaller dimension.
The following is the resulting reduced model of a system in the equation (\ref{N4}):
\begin{eqnarray}\label{new5}\relax
V^\ast (s^2 M V X_k(s)+s D V X_k(s)+K V X_k(s))=V^\ast f U(s)
\end{eqnarray}
The above system will be solved for $X_k(s).$ Note that $X_k(s)$ has a
lesser number of elements compared to $X(s)$ in (\ref{N4}). Now, the
approximation to $Y(s)$ is given by $$Y_k(s):= h_k(s)X_k(s).$$ Here,
$h_k(s)$ is an approximation to the Transfer function $h(s)$ and is
given by
$$h_k(s):= c_k (s^2M_k+sD_k+K_k)^{-1}V^\ast f,$$
where $c_k=cV,~M_k=V^\ast MV,~D_k=V^\ast DV $ and $K_k= V^\ast KV.$
The main objective of model order reduction techniques is to compute
$h_k(s),$ as an accurate approximation of $h(s)$ over a wide range
of frequency intervals around a prescribed shift $s_0.$ As in
\cite{stabtoar}, to meet this objective, we rewrite the transfer
function $h(s)$ by including the shift $s_0$ as follows:
$$h(s)= c\big((s-s_0)^2 M+(s-s_0)\tilde{D}+\tilde{K})^{-1}f$$
Using I-TOAR, we compute an orthonormal basis matrix $Q_k \in
\mathcal{R}^{n \times \eta_k}$ of the second order Krylov subspace
$${G}_k(-\tilde{K}^{-1}\tilde{D},-\tilde{K}^{-1}M;0,r_0=\tilde{K}^{-1}f)$$
where $\tilde{D} = 2s_0M+D$ and $\tilde{K}= s_0^2M+s_0D+K.$ Then, we
used $Q_k$ in place of $V$ in the equation (\ref{new5}) for computing $h_k(s),$
an approximation to $h(s).$
Our numerical experiments compare the accuracy of reduced dynamical systems defined using the orthonormal basis matrices in the TOAR and I-TOAR methods. In both the TOAR and I-TOAR methods, we apply the reorthogonalization to ensure that the computed basis is orthonormal up to the machine precision.
For I-TOAR, we used the complete reorthogonalization whereas, for the TOAR method
we used the same setup as in \cite{stabtoar}. All algorithms are implemented using MATLAB and were run on a machine Intel(R) Core(TM)i7-4770
[email protected] with 8GB RAM. For the convenience,
we use the same examples as in \cite{stabtoar}. The author
would acknowledge D.LU, an author of \cite{stabtoar} for
providing the data of these examples.
\begin{eg}
This example is a finite element model of a shaft on bearing supports with a
damper in MSC/NASTRAN. It is a second-order system and of dimension
400. The mass, damping matrices are symmetric, and the stiffness matrix
is symmetric positive definite. We use the expansion point $s_0=150\times 2\pi$ to approximate the Transfer function $h(s)$ over the frequency interval $[0,3000].$
\end{eg}
\vspace{-0.75cm}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = 5.2in,height=2.7in]{example1-Mallannaravi.eps}
\vspace{-1cm}
\caption{Magnitudes of transfer functions h(s) and $h_k(s)$ with $k
= 40$ (left). Relative errors $|h(s) - h_k(s)|/|h(s)|$ for $k = 10,
20, 40 $(middle and right).}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.5cm}
\end{figure}
The left plot of Figure-1 shows the magnitudes of the transfer
function $h(s)$ of the full-order system, and the transfer functions
$h_k(s)$ of the reduced systems generated by the I-TOAR and TOAR
procedures for $k=40.$ The relative errors of the transfer functions
in the I-TOAR and TOAR procedures for $k=10,20$ and $40$ are shown in
the middle and right plots of the Figure-1 respectively. As we can
see that, the transfer functions $h_k(s)$ in the I-TOAR and TOAR methods
produces almost the same accuracy in the frequency interval
$[0,2000],$ for $k=10,20,$ and $40.$ In the frequency interval
$[2000,3000],$ the transfer function $h_k(s)$ by I-TOAR is a more
accurate approximation than the one produced by the TOAR method. Like the
TOAR method, in the I-TOAR method also, the approximation accuracy of
$h_k(s)$ is improved, when increasing $k$ from $10$ to $40.$
\begin{eg}
This example is the butterfly gyroscope problem from the Oberwolfach
collection. The full dynamical system is of the order $n=17361.$ The
mass and stiffness matrices $M$ and $K$ are symmetric. The damping matrix is of the form $D=\alpha M+\beta K.$ This second-order system
have 1 input vector and 12 output vectors. Following the experiments in \cite{stabtoar}, we considered the first output vector as the output
vector 'c.' The damping parameters $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are chosen
same as in \cite{stabtoar,li}, $\alpha = 0$ and $\beta = 10^{-7}.$
The expansion point $s_0$ also same as in \cite{stabtoar}, $s_0=1.05
\times 10^5.$
\end{eg}
\begin{figure}[!htb]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = 5.2in,height=2.3in]{example2-Mallannaravi.eps}
\vspace{0.5cm}\caption{Fig. 2. Magnitudes of transfer functions h(s) and
$h_k(s)$ with $k = 200$ (left). Relative errors $|h(s) -
h_k(s)|/|h(s)|$ for $k = 20, 30, 90,$ and $200$ (middle and right).}
\end{center}
\vspace{-0.7cm}
\end{figure}
The magnitudes of the transfer functions shown in the left plot
of the Figure-2. The relative errors of transfer functions in I-TOAR and
TOAR show in the middle and right plots of the Figure-2. From
the figure, it is easy to observe the advantage of I-TOAR over
TOAR for the frequency range of $10^5-10^6 Hz$ for $k=90$ and $200.$
For $k=20$ and $30$, both I-TOAR and TOAR produced nearly the
same accuracy. We have observed the stagnation in both TOAR and
I-TOAR from $k=200$ onwards. From the middle and right plots of the
Figure-2, it is clear that the transfer function in I-TOAR is more
accurate than the transfer function in the TOAR procedure. Moreover, for
this example, we found that the quantity $\zeta_1$ of
Theorem-\ref{thm1} is of order $10^{11}$ and $\zeta_2=
1.000000000001526e+000.$ Further, found that condition number of the
computed matrices $\bm\hat{Q}_k$ and $\bm\hat{U}_k$ are equal to
$1+\mathcal{O}(\varepsilon),$ and these quantities satisfy the
condition $(\varphi_2 /2)\mathcal{K}^4 \varepsilon < 1.$
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we have proposed a new TOAR procedure. It imposes an extra condition on the orthogonality of the matrices in the second-level orthogonalization of TOAR. Imposing the new condition gives
orthonormal basis of an associated linear Krylov subspace without any extra computation. A rigorous stability analysis has done on the proposed method. The backward analysis is in terms of the matrix $[A~~B]$ of the quadratic problem. It has shown that in the proposed method the second-order Krylov subspace of $[A~~B]$ embedded in that of $[A+\triangle A~~B+\triangle B]$ for sufficiently small $\| [\triangle A~~\triangle B]\|.$ This
problem was left open for TOAR in \cite{stabtoar}. Numerical experiments have shown that the basis matrices in I-TOAR are as accurate as ones in TOAR in the application of dimension reduction in second-order dynamical systems. The method proposed in this paper may help us to improve the methods for solving polynomial eigenvalue problems.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The author
would like to acknowledge D.LU, author of \cite{stabtoar} for
providing the data used in the numerical examples. Further, this work was
supported by the National Board of Higher Mathematics, India under
Grant number 2/40(3)/2016/R\&D-II/9602.
\bibliographystyle{IMANUM-BIB}
|
\section{Introduction}
\IEEEPARstart{I}{n} the past decades, much research effort has been directed towards developing remotely operated unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), which stand as a potential candidate of aerial base station (BS) to provide access services to wireless devices located on the ground~\cite{UAV_zeng} or in the sky~\cite{Saad_D2D_UAV}. UAV communications are also an effective approach to provide connectivity during temporary events and after disasters in the remote areas that lack cellular infrastructure~\cite{UAV_zeng}.
As compared to conventional terrestrial communications, one distinct feature of UAV communication is that the existence of line-of-sight (LoS) is capable of offering stronger small-scale fading between UAVs and ground users because of the high altitude of UAVs, which brings both opportunities and challenges in the design of UAV cellular networks~\cite{3GPP_36.777}.
Due to the limited energy resources on board of a UAV, achieving higher spectrum efficiency and energy efficiency is of paramount importance to reap maximum benefits from UAV based communication networks.
To exploit both the spectrum efficiency and energy efficiency in the next generation wireless networks and beyond, especially in the UAV communication networks, non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) is considered to be a promising technique~\cite{NOMA_mag_Ding,wireless_sparse}.
More specifically, in contrast to the conventional OMA techniques, NOMA is capable of exploiting the available resources more efficiently by opportunistically capitalizing on the users’ specific channel conditions on both single cell networks and cellular networks~\cite{PairingDING2016,Massive_NOMA_Cellular_IoT}, and it is capable of serving multiple users at different quality-of-service (QoS) requirements in the same resource block~\cite{NOMA_5G_beyond_Liu,Resource_allo_Islam,Islam_NOMA_survey}. To be more clear, NOMA technique sends the composite signal to multiple users simultaneously by power domain multiplexing within the same frequency, time and code block. The basic principles of NOMA techniques rely on the employment of superposition coding (SC) at the transmitter and successive interference cancelation (SIC) techniques at the receiver~\cite{NOMA_mag_Ding,heterNOMA_Qin}, and hence multiple accessed users can be realized in the power domain via different power levels for users in the same resource block\footnote{In this paper, we use “NOMA” to refer to “power-domain NOMA” for simplicity.}. Therefore, UAV networks can serve multiple users simultaneously by utilizing NOMA techniques for enhancing the achievable spectrum efficiency and energy efficiency.
\subsection{Prior Work and Motivation}
Regarding the literature of UAV networks, early research contributions have studied the performance of single UAV or multiple UAVs networks. Mozaffari {\em et al.}~\cite{Saad_D2D_UAV} proposed a UAV assisted underlaid D2D network with LoS probability, which depends on the height of the UAV, the horizontal distance between the UAV and users, the carrier frequency and type of environment. In the case that LoS exists, a fixed LoS coefficient, e.g., an extra 20dB attenuation, is the dominant component of small-scale fading channels.
Note that the proposed model in~\cite{3GPP_36.777,Saad_D2D_UAV} is a practical model for implementation. For mathematically tractable, the distinctive channel characteristics for UAV networks were investigated in~\cite{UAV_Channel}, where different types of small-scale fading channels, i.e., Loo model, Rayleigh model, Nakagami-$m$ model, Rician model and Werbull model, were summarized to demonstrate the channel propagation of UAV networks.
The air-to-air channel characterization in~\cite{A2A_UAV_Rice}, studied the influence of the altitude–-dependent Rician K factor. This work indicated that the impact of the ground reflected multi-path fading reduces with increasing UAV altitude. Jiang~{\em et al.}~\cite{Rayleigh_UAV} proposed a UAV assisted ground-to-air network, where Rician channels are used for evaluating strong LoS components between UAV and ground users. It is also worth noting that Rayleigh fading channel, which is a well-known model in scattering environment, can be also used to model the UAV channel characteristics in the case of large elevation angles in the mixed–-urban environment. Chetlur {\em et al.}~\cite{UAV_finite_downlink} proposed a downlink UAV network over Nakagami-$m$ fading channels, where UAVs are distributed in a finite 3-D network. An uniform binomial point process was invoked to model the proposed network. Generally speaking, Nakagami-$m$ distribution and Rician distribution are used to approximate the fluctuations in the fading channel with LoS propagations. It is also worth noting that the fading parameter of Nakagami-$m$ fading $m=\frac{(K+1)^2}{2K+1}$, the distribution of Nakagami-$m$ is approximately Rician fading with parameter $K$~\cite[eq. (3.38)]{wireless_communication_goldsmith}. Zhang~{\em et al.}~\cite{UAV_Trajectory_shuowen} proposed two possible paradigms for UAV assisted cellular communications, namely, cellular-enabled UAV communication and UAV-assisted cellular communication. The trajectory of the UAV was optimized under connectivity-constrained. Lyu~{\em et al.}~\cite{Lyu_UAV_hotspots} proposed a UAV assisted cellular hotspot scenario, where UAV flies cyclically along the cell edge for offloading actions.
In order to improve the spectrum efficiency and energy efficiency of UAV communications, new research on UAV under emerging next generation network architectures is needed.
Recently, the use of NOMA in wireless communication has attracted great interest in single cell or cellular networks~\cite{Islam_NOMA_survey,Dai_NOMA_survey,Shin_NOMA_cellular}. Ding {\em et al.}~\cite{Randomly_ding} evaluated the performance of NOMA enhanced single cell networks with randomly deployed users, where order statistics and stochastic geometry tools were invoked to evaluate the performance of paired NOMA users. Some application scenarios of NOMA have been investigated in the previous literature. More particularly, Liu {\em et al.}~\cite{Liu_Coop_NOMA_SWIPT} proposed an innovative model of cooperative NOMA with simultaneous wireless information and power transfer (SWIPT), where a NOMA cluster consists of two NOMA users, one that is located in a small disk and the other is in a ring with a larger external radius.
Ding {\em et al.}~\cite{PairingDING2016} evaluated the performance of NOMA with fixed power allocation (F-NOMA) and cognitive radio inspired NOMA (CR-NOMA), and the user pairing strategies were carefully discussed. The analytical results show that it is more preferable to pair users whose channel gains are more distinctive to improve the diversity order in F-NOMA, whereas CR-NOMA prefers to pair the users with the best channel conditions.
Recently, an imperfect SIC scenario has attracted great interest. Due to the fact that SIC techniques are deployed at the receivers, the residues of the multiplexed signal detected by SIC technique cannot be ignored~\cite{Yue_ISIC_2018}. Once an error occurs for carrying out SIC at the user with better channel gain, the NOMA systems will suffer from the residual interference signal. Hence it is significant to examine the detrimental impacts of imperfect SIC for NOMA system. Hou {\em et al.}~\cite{Nakagami_Hou} evaluated the outage performance of NOMA downlink transmission in both LoS and NLoS scenarios.
A potential future research direction for NOMA, called Rate-Splitting multiple access, has been proposed by Mao {\em et al.}~\cite{Clerckx_RSMA}. The analytical results in~\cite{Clerckx_RSMA} demonstrated that RSMA can outperform SDMA and NOMA in the multi-antenna system and comes with a lower complexity than NOMA. RSMA assisted multi-cell networks and multi-antenna assisted RSMA were also proposed in~\cite{Clerckx_RSMA_MIMO}. The results derived concluded that RSMA can provide rate, robustness and QoS enhancements over SDMA and NOMA. With the goal of enhancing the physical layer security of NOMA networks, Liu \emph{et al.}~\cite{Liu_physical_scurity_NOMA} proposed a NOMA assisted physical layer security framework in large-scale networks, where both single antenna and multiple antenna aided transmission scenarios were considered.
In UAV-enabled wireless communications, the total UAV energy is limited, which includes propulsion energy and communication related energy~\cite{energy_consumption_UAV}. Therefore, integrating UAVs and NOMA into cellular networks is considered to be a promising technique to significantly enhance the performance of terrestrial users in the next generation wireless system and beyond, where the energy efficiency and spectrum efficiency can be greatly enhanced in downlink transmission to minimize communication related energy~\cite{Cellular-UAV_mag}. A general introduction of UAV communications has been proposed by Liu {\em et al.}~\cite{UAV_general_Liu}. Three case studies, i.e., performance evaluation, joint trajectory design, and machine learning assisted UAV deployment~\cite{Liuxiao_Trajectory_multi-UAV}, were carried out in order to better understand NOMA enabled UAV networks. Some challenges were concluded for future research directions. Zhao~{\em et al.}~\cite{UAV_NOMA_Trajectory} proposed a UAV-assisted NOMA network, where UAV and BS are cooperated to provide access services to ground users simultaneously. The trajectory of UAV and precoding matrix of BS were jointly optimized. Nguyen~{\em et al.}~\cite{UAV_relay} proposed a cooperative multi-UAV network, where a fixed number of UAVs are used as flying relays in wireless backhaul networks, and the small-scale fading follows Rician distributions. Hou {\em et al.}~\cite{Hou_Single_UAV} proposed a multiple-input multiple-output (MIMO)-NOMA assisted UAV network, where the closed-form expressions of outage performance and ergodic rate were evaluated in the downlink scenario. A NOMA assisted uplink scenario of UAV assisted cellular communication was proposed by Mei~{\em et al.}~\cite{Uplink_NOMA_UAV}, where two special cases, i.e., egoistic and altruistic transmission strategies of the UAV, were considered to derive the optimized solutions. Liu~{\em et al.}~\cite{UAV_multibeam_liangliu} proposed a MIMO-NOMA assisted UAV network for uplink transmission, where the cellular-connected UAV communication with air-to-ground interference was investigated by utilizing multi-beam techniques. Han {\em et al.}~\cite{Han_millimeter_UAV} proposed a UAV assisted millimeter-wave air-to-everything networks, where aerial access points provide access services to users located on the ground, air, and tower. The buildings were modeled as a Boolean line-segment process with the fixed height.
The previous contributions~\cite{Satellite_UAV_network,Hou_Single_UAV,UAV_general_Liu,Uplink_NOMA_UAV,UAV_multibeam_liangliu,UAV_relay,Han_millimeter_UAV} mainly consider NOMA in single UAV cell or NOMA assisted uplink transmission, and thus do not account for NOMA assisted downlink transmission in UAV assisted cellular networks. The research contributions in terms of conducting on multi-UAV aided NOMA networks are still in their infancy, particularly with the focus of potential association strategies. NOMA enhanced UAV networks design poses three additional challenges: i) NOMA technology brings additional intra-cell interference from the connected UAV to the served users; ii) UAV communication requires different fading channels to evaluate the channel gain of LoS/NLoS propagation. iii) the user association policy requires to be reconsidered in NOMA assisted UAV networks.
In this article, aiming at tackling the aforementioned issues, by proposing two potential association strategies, namely UAV-centric strategy and user-centric strategy, for intelligently investigating the effect of NOMA assisted UAV network performance is desired.
The motivation of proposing two strategies is that the user-centric strategy is a promising solution for providing access services after disasters in the remote areas, where all of terrestrial users located in the Voronoi cell can be served by UAVs. On the contrary, the UAV-centric strategy can be perfectly deployed in the dense networks, i.e., concerts or football matches, to provide supplementary access services for offloading actions, where terrestrial users are located in a regular disc. Note that one other non-negligible difference between the two strategies is that user association is decided by individual user or UAV for the user-centric strategy or the UAV-centric strategy, respectively. Stochastic geometry tools are invoked to provide the mathematical paradigm to model the spatial randomness of both UAVs and users in UAV cellular networks. In contrast to the conventional terrestrial communication structure, where the locations of BSs are fixed, stochastic geometry is more suitable for analyzing the average performance of the mobility and flexibility of the UAV networks.
\subsection{Contributions}
In contract to most existing research contributions in context of UAV communications~\cite{Satellite_UAV_network,Hou_Single_UAV,UAV_general_Liu,Uplink_NOMA_UAV,UAV_multibeam_liangliu,UAV_relay,Han_millimeter_UAV}, we consider a multi-cell set-up in this paper. We propose two new NOMA assisted UAV cellular strategies, namely user-centric strategy and UAV-centric strategy.
Based on the proposed strategies, the primary theoretical contributions can be summarized as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item We develop two potential association strategies to address the impact of NOMA on the UAV communications, namely user-centric strategy and UAV-centric strategy, where stochastic geometry approaches are invoked to model the locations of both UAVs and users.
\item For the user-centric strategy: we derive the exact analytical expressions of a typical user in the NOMA enhanced user-centric strategy in terms of coverage probability. Additionally, we derive the exact expressions in terms of coverage probability for the OMA assisted user-centric strategy. Our analytical results illustrate that the distance of the fixed user has effect on the coverage probability of the typical user. Furthermore, for the case of poor SIC quality, a hybrid NOMA/OMA assisted UAV framework may be a good solution.
\item For the UAV-centric strategy: we derive the exact analytical expressions of paired NOMA users in the NOMA enhanced UAV-centric strategy in terms of coverage probability. The exact expressions in terms of coverage probability for the OMA case are derived. Our analytical results indicates that the UAV-centric strategy is more susceptible to ipSIC factor than the user-centric strategy.
\item Simulation results confirm our analysis, and illustrate that by setting power allocation factors and targeted rate properly, NOMA assisted UAV cellular frameworks has superior performance over OMA assisted UAV cellular frameworks in terms of coverage probability, which demonstrates the benefits of the proposed strategies. Our analytical results also illustrate that the coverage probability can be greatly enhanced by LoS links.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Organization}
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. In Section \uppercase\expandafter{\romannumeral2}, the NOMA assisted user-centric strategy is investigated for UAV cellular frameworks, where the UAV provides access services to all the users. In Section \uppercase\expandafter{\romannumeral3}, the NOMA assisted UAV-centric strategy is investigated, where the UAV only provides access services to the restricted areas. Our numerical results are demonstrated in Section~\uppercase\expandafter{\romannumeral4} for verifying our analysis, which is followed by the conclusion in Section \uppercase\expandafter{\romannumeral5}.
\section{User-centric Strategy for Emergency Communications}
We first focus our attention on a scenario, where all the terrestrial users are needed to be served equally for emergency communications, e.g., after disasters, in the remote areas or in the rural areas~\cite{UAV_emergency_disasters}. Motivated by this purpose, we propose the user-centric strategy for providing emergency access services to all the terrestrial users.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\subfigure[Illustration of the system model.]{\label{system model}
\includegraphics[width =2.5in]{Fig1.eps}}
\subfigure[Top view of the user-centric strategy cellular networks.]{\label{user-centric example}
\includegraphics[width= 2.5in]{Fig2UserCentric.eps}}
\caption{Illustration of NOMA assisted user-centric strategy model.}
\label{Example of User-Centric}
\vspace{-0.3in}
\end{figure*}
Focusing on downlink transmission scenarios, we consider the user-centric strategy as shown in Fig.~\ref{system model}. In this article, the UAV equipped with a single antenna communicates with multiple users equipped with a single antenna each.
In the user-centric strategy, the locations of terrestrial users are totally random for emergency services, and there are no further information for UAVs to properly organize their trajectory. In order to serve all the terrestrial users equally, multiple UAVs should be distributed uniformly, which conforms the definition of homogeneous poisson point process (HPPP). Thereby, the UAVs are distributed according to a HPPP $\Psi$ with density $\lambda$.
For the simplicity of theoretical analysis, as shown in Fig.~\ref{user-centric example}, an user is located at the original point in the user-centric strategy, which becomes the typical user. The user-centric strategy is a useful model for the large-scale networks, i.e., rural area, where users are uniformly located in the Voronoi cell according to a HPPP $\Phi_u$ with density $\lambda_u$. It is worth mentioning that in the case that the density of user $\lambda_u$ is low, the user-centric performs much better than the UAV-centric strategy.
Without loss of generality, we consider that there is one user, namely fixed user, is already connected to the UAV in the previous round of user association process\footnote{In practice, multiple users are connected to the transmitter (UAV) one by one.}. For simplicity, we assume that the horizontal distances between the fixed user and the connected UAV is $r_k$, which can be any arbitrary values, and the horizontal distance between the typical user and the connected UAV is random, denoted by $r$. In the user-centric strategy, we consider that two users, fixed user and typical user, are paired to perform NOMA technique, where paired NOMA users share the same frequency, time and code resource blocks.
\subsection{Channel Model}
Consider the use of a composite channel model with two parts, large-scale fading and small-scale fading. It is assumed that the horizontal distance $r$ and the height of the UAV $h$ are independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.). In this article, large-scale fading represents the path loss between the UAV and users\footnote{A log-normal distributed random variable for shadowing on both the desired and interference signals was considered in~\cite{no_shadowing}, which indicates that Lognormal shadowing on both the desired and interfering signals does not significantly affect the accuracy of numerical analysis. Thus, we neglect it in this article for simplicity.}.
In order to better illustrate the LoS propagation between the UAV and user, the small-scale fading is defined by Nakagami-\emph{m} fading, and the probability density function (PDF) can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{channel matrix,eq3}
{f}(x) = \frac{{m^m {x^{{m} - 1}}}}{{\Gamma ({m})}}{e^{ - {{mx}}}},
\end{equation}
where $m$ denotes the fading parameter, and $\Gamma ({m})$ denotes Gamma function. Note that $\Gamma ({m})=(m-1)!$ when $m$ is an integer. The serving distance between the connected UAV to the typical user can be written as
\begin{equation}\label{projective_distance,eq4}
{r_t} = \sqrt {{h^2} + {r^2}},
\end{equation}
where $r$ is the nearest horizontal distance allowed between a typical user and its connected UAV.
In order to avoid infinite received power, it is assumed that the height of the UAV is greater than 1m to simplify the analytical results.
Therefore, the large-scale fading can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{large-scale fading}
L_t={r_t^{ - \alpha }} ,
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ denotes the path loss exponent between the typical user and the connected UAV. Thus, the received power from the associated UAV for the user at origin is given by
\begin{equation}\label{received user power}
{P_t} = {P_u}{L_t}{\left| {{{h_t}}} \right|^2},
\end{equation}
where $P_u$ denotes the transmit power of the UAV, and $h_{t}$ denotes the channel coefficients for the typical user and its associated UAV.
In downlink transmission, paired NOMA users also detect interference from neighboring UAVs. Therefore, the co-channel interference ${I}$ can be further expressed as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{interference,eq7}
{I} \buildrel \Delta \over = \sum\limits_{j \in \Psi, d_j>{r_{t}} } {\left| {{{g_j}}} \right|^2} {{P _u}d_{j}^{ - \alpha_I }} ,
\end{equation}
where $d_{j}$ and ${\left| {{{g_j}}} \right|^2}$ denote the distance and the small-scale fading between the user and the $j$-th interfering UAV, $\alpha_I$ denotes the path loss exponent between interfering UAV and the typical user.
Besides, in practical wireless communication systems, obtaining the channel state information (CSI) at the transmitter or receiver is not a trivial problem, which requires the classic pilot-based training process. Therefore, in order to provide more engineering insights, it is assumed that the CSI of UAVs is partly known at the typical user, where only distance information between UAVs and the typical user is required. The signal-to-interference-plus-noise ratio (SINR) of the user-centric strategy will be derived in the following subsection.
\subsection{SINR Analysis}
For the user-centric strategy, since the distance of typical user and its associated UAV is not pre-determined. Therefore, focusing on the typical user, there are two potential cases, namely far user case and near user case, where 1) far user case, i.e., ${r}>r_k$; and 2) near user case, i.e., ${r}<r_k$. We then turn our attention on the SINR analysis of two potential cases.
\emph{(1) Far user case:}
For the far user case, where the serving distance of the typical user is greater than that of the fixed user, the typical user treats the signal from the fixed user as noise, and thus the SINR can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{SINR_t far}
SIN{R_{t,far}} = \frac{{{{\left| {{h_{t}}} \right|}^2}r_{t}^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _{{v}}^2}}{{{\sigma ^2} + {{\left| {{h_{t}}} \right|}^2}r_{t}^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _w^2 + \sum\limits_{j \in \Psi, d_j>r_t} {{{\left| {{g_{j}}} \right|}^2}{P_u}d_{j}^{ - \alpha_I }} }},
\end{equation}
where ${\sigma ^2}$ denotes the additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) power, $\alpha _{{v}}^2$ and $\alpha _{{w}}^2$ denote the power allocation factors for the far user and the near user, respectively. Note that $\alpha _{{v}}^2 + \alpha _{{w}}^2=1$ in NOMA communication.
For the far user case, SIC technique is deployed at the fixed user, thereby the fixed user needs to decode the information from the typical user with the following SINR
\begin{equation}\label{SINR_f to t, f near}
SIN{R_{f \to t,far}} = \frac{{{{\left| {{h_{f}}} \right|}^2}R_{k}^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _{{v}}^2}}{{{\sigma ^2} + {{\left| {{h_{f}}} \right|}^2}R_{k}^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _w^2 + \sum\limits_{j \in \Psi, d_j>r_t} {{{\left| {{g_{j}}} \right|}^2}{P_u}d_{j}^{ - \alpha_I }} }},
\end{equation}
where $R_k=\sqrt{r_k^2+h^2}$, and $h_{f}$ denotes the channel coefficients for the fixed user.
Once it is decoded successfully, the fixed user will decode its own signal with imperfect SIC coefficient, and the SINR can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{SINR_f, f near}
SIN{R_{f,far}} = \frac{{{{\left| {{h_{f}}} \right|}^2}R_{k}^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _{{w}}^2}}{{{\sigma ^2} + \beta{{\left| {{h_{f}}} \right|}^2}R_{k}^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _v^2 + \sum\limits_{j \in \Psi, d_j>r_t } {{{\left| {{g_{j}}} \right|}^2}{P_u}d_{j}^{ - \alpha_I }} }},
\end{equation}
where $\beta$ denotes the imperfect SIC coefficient. Since in practice that SIC is not perfect, a fraction $0<\beta<1$ is considered in our model for the user with better channel gain. On the one hand, $\beta=0$ when perfect SIC is assumed, and the near user can perfectly decode the signal intended for the far user. On the other hand, when SIC is failed or there is no corresponding SIC, $\beta=1$.
\emph{(2) Near user case:}
For the near user case, when the typical user has smaller serving distance to the UAV than that of the fixed user, the signal of the typical user can be treated as noise at the fixed user, and thus the SINR of the fixed user can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{SINR_f, f far}
SIN{R_{f,near}} = \frac{{{{\left| {{h_{f}}} \right|}^2}R_{k}^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _{{v}}^2}}{{{\sigma ^2} + {{\left| {{h_{f}}} \right|}^2}R_{k}^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _w^2 + \sum\limits_{j \in \Psi, d_j> r_t } {{{\left| {{g_{j}}} \right|}^2}{P_u}d_{j}^{ - \alpha_I }} }}.
\end{equation}
The SIC technique can be deployed at the typical user for decoding the signal from the fixed user, and the SINR at the typical user for the near user case can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{SINR_t, decode f, t near}
SIN{R_{t \to f,near}} = \frac{{{{\left| {{h_{t}}} \right|}^2}r_{t}^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _{{v}}^2}}{{{\sigma ^2} + {{\left| {{h_{t}}} \right|}^2}r_{t}^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _w^2 + \sum\limits_{j \in \Psi, d_j> r_t } {{{\left| {{g_{j}}} \right|}^2}{P_u}d_{j}^{ - \alpha_I }} }}.
\end{equation}
Once the typical user decodes the information from the fixed user successfully, the typical user can decode its own signal with the SINR
\begin{equation}\label{SINR_t, t near}
SIN{R_{t,near}} = \frac{{{{\left| {{h_{t}}} \right|}^2}r_{t}^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _{{w}}^2}}{{{\sigma ^2} + \beta{{\left| {{h_{t}}} \right|}^2}r_{t}^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _v^2 + \sum\limits_{j \in \Psi, d_j> r_t } {{{\left| {{g_{j}}} \right|}^2}{P_u}d_{j}^{ - \alpha_I }} }}.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Coverage Probability of the User-centric Strategy}
In the networks considered, we first focus on analyzing the PDF of user distance distributions for paired NOMA users, which will be used for both user-centric strategy and UAV-centric strategy.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma1:distance distributions}
The UAVs are distributed according to a HPPP with density $\lambda$. It is assumed that the typical user is located at the origin of the disc in the user-centric strategy, or the typical UAV is located at the origin of the disc in the UAV-centric strategy, which is under expectation over HPPP. Thus, the horizontal distance $r$ between the origin and UAVs, follows the distribution
\begin{equation}\label{PDF of serving distance}
{f_r}\left( r \right) = 2\pi \lambda r{e^{ - \pi \lambda {r^2}}},r \ge 0.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
Then, we focus on analyzing the user-centric strategy of the proposed framework in order to increase the system fairness. In the user-centric strategy, the user association is based on connecting the nearest UAV to the typical user. As such, the first step is to derive the Laplace transform of interference for the typical user.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma2:Lapalace transform of interference of typical user}
For the user-centric strategy, and based on the characteristic of stochastic geometry, the interference received at both typical user and fixed user can be recognized as the same. Therefore, the Laplace transform of interference distribution for the paired NOMA users is given by
\begin{equation}\label{laplace transform of typical user in lemma}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}_t \left( {s} \right) &=
\exp \left( { - \frac{{2\pi {\lambda}}}{\alpha_I }\sum\limits_{i{\rm{ = 1}}}^{m_I} {
{m_I} \choose
i} {{\left( {\frac{{s{P_u}}}{{m_I}}} \right)}^{\delta_I }} {{\left( -1 \right)}^{\delta_I-i }} B\left( {\frac{-{s{P_u}}}{{m_I}r_{t}^{\alpha_I }};i - \delta_I,1 - {m_I}} \right)} \right),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\delta_I = \frac{2}{\alpha_I }$, $m_I$ denotes the fading parameters between a typical user and interfering UAVs, and $B(;)$ denotes incomplete Beta function.
\begin{proof}
Please refer to Appendix A.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
In the case of large-scale networks, the existence of LoS propagations between interfering UAVs at infinity and users is not reasonable. Thus, the minimum received power of inter-cell interference for cellular UAV networks is worth estimating, where the fading parameters between ground users and interfering UAVs equal to one. It is also assumed that the path loss exponent $\alpha_I=4$ because that path loss exponent is normally in the range of 2 to 4, where 2 is for propagation in free space, 4 is for relatively lossy environments and in the case of full specular reflection from the earth surface.
\begin{corollary}\label{coro1:Lapalace transform of interference of typical user in Rayleigh and alpha4}
For the special case that the small scale fading channels between interfering UAVs and users follow Rayleigh fading, thereby $m_I=1$ and $\alpha_I=4$ for the user-centric strategy, the Laplace transform of interference distribution for the both paired NOMA users can be transformed into
\begin{equation}\label{laplace transform of typical user in lemma in Rayleigh}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}_t \left( {s} \right) & \overset{(a)}{=}
\exp \left( { - \frac{{2\pi {\lambda}{P_u}r_{t}^{2 - \alpha_I }}}{{\alpha_I \left( {1{ - }\delta_I} \right)}}{}_2{F_1}\left( {1,1 - \delta_I;2 - \delta_I; - s{P_u}r_{t}^{ - \alpha_I }} \right)} \right)\\
& \overset{(b)}{=}\exp \left( { - \pi {\lambda } \sqrt{s{P_u}} {\rm{tan}}^{-1}\left( {\frac{\sqrt{s{P_u}}}{r_{t}^{2 }}} \right) } \right),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $(a)$ is resulted from applying $m_I=1$, $(b)$ is obtained by substituting $\alpha_I=4$, and ${}_2{F_1}(;;)$ denotes Gauss hypergeometric function.
\end{corollary}
Then, we focus on the coverage behavior of the user-centric strategy. The fixed power allocation strategy is deployed at the UAV, where the power allocation factors $\alpha_w^2$ and $\alpha_{v}^2$ are constant during transmission. It is assumed that the target rates of the typical user and the fixed user are $R_{t}$ and $R_f$, respectively.
Based on SINR analysis in~\eqref{SINR_t far},~\eqref{SINR_t, decode f, t near} and~\eqref{SINR_t, t near}, the coverage probability of the typical user can be expressed as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{SINR before compare}
\begin{aligned}
&{P_t}(r) = {P_{t,near}}(r)P(r < {r_k}) + {P_{t,far}}(r)P(r > {r_k})\\
& = \Pr \left( {SIN{R_{t \to f,near}} > {\varepsilon _f}, SIN{R_{t,near}} > {\varepsilon _t}} \right) \Pr (r < {r_k}) + \Pr \left( {SIN{R_{t,far}} > {\varepsilon _t}} \right)\Pr (r > {r_k}),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where ${\varepsilon _t} = {2^{{R_t}}} - 1$, ${\varepsilon _f} = {2^{{R_f}}} - 1$, ${P_{t,near}}(r)$ and ${P_{t,far}}(r)$ denote the coverage probability of the typical user for the near user case and the far user case, respectively. $P(r > {r_k})$ and $P(r < {r_k})$ denote the probability of far user case and near user case, respectively.
Therefore, the coverage probability of the typical user for the near user case and far user case is given in following two Lemmas.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma3:outage of the typical user near user case}
\emph{The coverage probability conditioned on the serving distance of a typical user for the near user case in the user-centric strategy is expressed in closed-form as}
\begin{equation}\label{coverage probability typical user near Lemma}
\begin{aligned}
{P_{t,near}}(r) &= \sum\limits_{n = 0}^{m - 1} {\sum\limits_{p = 0}^n { {
{n} \choose
p}} \frac{{{{( - 1)}^n}}}{{n!}}} {\Lambda _4^n}{\Lambda _5^n}\exp \left( { - m{M_{t*}}{\sigma ^2}r_t^\alpha - {\Lambda _3} r_t^{2+(\alpha-\alpha_I)(i+a)}} \right) \\
& \times r_{t}^{\alpha (1 - j){q_j} + (2 +(\alpha-\alpha_I)(i+a)- \alpha b){q_b} + \alpha n},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where ${M_t^n} = \frac{{{\varepsilon _t}}}{{{P_u}\left( {\alpha _w^2 - \beta {{\varepsilon _t}}\alpha _v^2} \right)}}$, ${M_{t \to f}} = \frac{{{\varepsilon _f}}}{{{P_u}\left( {\alpha _v^2 - {{\varepsilon _f}}\alpha _w^2} \right)}}$, ${M_{t*}}=max \left\{ {{{M_t^n},{M_{t \to f}}}} \right\} $, $r_{t}=\sqrt{r^2+h^2}$,\\
${\Lambda _3} = \frac{{2\pi m \lambda }}{\alpha_I }\sum\limits_{a = 0}^\infty {\frac{{{{\left( {{m_I}} \right)}_a}}}{{a!\left( {i - \delta_I + a} \right)}}} \sum\limits_{i{\rm{ = 1}}}^{{m_I}} {
{m_I} \choose
i} {\left( {\frac{{{M_{t*}}{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}} \right)^{i + a}}{\left( { - 1} \right)^a}$,
${\Lambda _4^n} = \sum {p!} \prod\limits_{j = 1}^p {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - m{M_{t*}}{\sigma ^2}} \right)\prod\limits_{k = 0}^{j - 1} {\left( {1 - k} \right)} } \right)}^{{q_j}}}}}{{{q_j}!{{\left( {j!} \right)}^{{q_j}}}}}}$, and
${\Lambda _5^n} = \sum {(n - p)!} \prod\limits_{b = 1}^{n - p} {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - {\Lambda _3}} \right)\prod\limits_{k = 0}^{b - 1} {\left( {\delta_I - k} \right)} } \right)}^{{q_b}}}}}{{{q_b}!{{\left( {b!} \right)}^{{q_b}}}}}}$.
\begin{proof}
Please refer to Appendix B.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
For the far user case, note that decoding will succeed if the typical user can decode its own message by treating the signal from the fixed user as noise. The coverage probability conditioned on the serving distance of a typical user for the far user case is calculated in the following Lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma4:outage of the typical user far user case}
\emph{The coverage probability conditioned on the serving distance of a typical user for the far user case in the user-centric strategy is expressed in closed-form as}
\begin{equation}\label{coverage probability typical user far Lemma}
\begin{aligned}
{P_{t,far}}(r) &= \sum\limits_{n = 0}^{m - 1} {\sum\limits_{p = 0}^n { {
{n} \choose
p}} \frac{{{{( - 1)}^n}}}{{n!}}} {\Lambda _4^f}{\Lambda _5^f}\exp \left( { - m{M_t^f}{\sigma ^2}r_t^\alpha - {\Lambda _3^f}r_t^{2 +(\alpha-\alpha_I)(i+a) }} \right)\\
& \times r_{t}^{\alpha (1 - j){q_j} + (2 +(\alpha-\alpha_I)(i+a) - \alpha b){q_b} + \alpha n},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where ${M_{t}^f} = \frac{{{\varepsilon _t}}}{{{P_u}\left( {\alpha _v^2 - {{\varepsilon _t}}\alpha _w^2} \right)}}$,
${\Lambda _3^f} = \frac{{2\pi m \lambda }}{\alpha_I }\sum\limits_{a = 0}^\infty {\frac{{{{\left( {{m_I}} \right)}_a}}}{{a!\left( {i - \delta_I + a} \right)}}} \sum\limits_{i{\rm{ = 1}}}^{{m_I}} { {
{m_I} \choose
i} } {\left( {\frac{{{M_t^f}{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}} \right)^{i + a}}{\left( { - 1} \right)^a}$,\\
${\Lambda _4^f} = \sum {p!} \prod\limits_{j = 1}^p {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - m{M_t^f}}{\sigma ^2} \right)\prod\limits_{k = 0}^{j - 1} {\left( {1 - k} \right)} } \right)}^{{q_j}}}}}{{{q_j}!{{\left( {j!} \right)}^{{q_j}}}}}}$, and
${\Lambda _5^f} = \sum {(n - p)!} \prod\limits_{b = 1}^{n - p} {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - {\Lambda _3^f}} \right)\prod\limits_{k = 0}^{b - 1} {\left( {\delta - k} \right)} } \right)}^{{q_b}}}}}{{{q_b}!{{\left( {b!} \right)}^{{q_b}}}}}}$.
\begin{proof}
Based on the SINR analysis in \eqref{SINR_t far}, and following the similar procedure in Appendix~B, with interchanging ${M_{t*}}$ with ${M_{t}^f}$, we can obtain the desired result in \eqref{coverage probability typical user far Lemma}. Thus, the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
\begin{remark}\label{user-centric}
The derived results in \eqref{coverage probability typical user near Lemma} and \eqref{coverage probability typical user far Lemma} demonstrate that the coverage probability of a typical user is determined by imperfect SIC coefficient, the target rate of itself, fading parameter $m$ of the small scale fading channels and the distance of the fixed user served by the same UAV.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}\label{user-centric power allocation}
Inappropriate power allocation such as, $\alpha _v^2 - {{\varepsilon _t}}\alpha _w^2<0$ and ${\alpha _w^2 - \beta {{\varepsilon _t}}\alpha _v^2}<0$, will lead to the coverage probability always being zero.
\end{remark}
Based on {\bf{Lemma \ref{lemma3:outage of the typical user near user case}}} and {\bf{Lemma \ref{lemma4:outage of the typical user far user case}}}, the coverage probability of the typical user in the user-centric strategy can be calculated in the following Theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem 1 coverage probability of typical user UserCentric}
\emph{The exact expression of the coverage probability for the typical user is expressed as}
\begin{equation}\label{coverage of typical user expression}
\begin{aligned}
{P_{t}} = \int\limits_0^{r_k} {P_{t,near}}(r) {f_r}\left( r \right)dr+ \int\limits_{r_k}^{\infty} {P_{t,far}}(r) {f_r}\left( r \right)dr,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where ${P_{t,near}}(r)$ is given in \eqref{coverage probability typical user near Lemma}, ${P_{t,far}}(r)$ is given in \eqref{coverage probability typical user far Lemma}, and ${f}\left( r \right)$ is given in \eqref{PDF of serving distance}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}\label{remark 3: typical user coverage}
Based on the result in~\eqref{coverage of typical user expression}, the coverage probability of the typical user is dependent on the distance of the fixed user in the user-centric strategy.
\end{remark}
In order to provide more insights for UAV assisted cellular networks, the coverage probability of the typical user is also derived in the OMA assisted UAV cellular networks, i.e., TDMA. The typical user and fixed user follow the same distance distributions and small-scale fading channels in the OMA assisted cellular UAV networks. The OMA benchmark adopted in this article is that by dividing the two users in equal time/frequency slots.
\begin{corollary}\label{corollary2: typical user OMA case}
\emph{The coverage probability conditioned on the serving distance of a typical user for the OMA assisted UAV cellular networks in the user-centric strategy is expressed in closed-form as}
\begin{equation}\label{coverage probability typical user far Lemma OMA case}
\begin{aligned}
{P_{cov,t,o}}(r) &= \sum\limits_{n = 0}^{m - 1} {\sum\limits_{p = 0}^n { {
{n} \choose
p}} \frac{{{{( - 1)}^n}}}{{n!}}} {\Lambda _4^o}{\Lambda _5^o}\exp \left( { - m{M_t^o}{\sigma ^2}r_t^\alpha - {\Lambda _3^o}r_t^{2+(\alpha-\alpha_I)(i+a)}} \right) \\
&\times r_{t}^{\alpha (1 - j){q_j} + (2 +(\alpha-\alpha_I)(i+a) - \alpha b){q_b} + \alpha n},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where ${M_t^o} = \frac{{{\varepsilon _t^o}}}{{{P_u}}}$, ${\varepsilon _t^o} = {2^{{2R_t}}} - 1$, ${\Lambda _3^o} = \frac{{2\pi m \lambda }}{\alpha_I }\sum\limits_{a = 0}^\infty {\frac{{{{\left( {{m_I}} \right)}_a}}}{{a!\left( {i - \delta_I + a} \right)}}} \sum\limits_{i{\rm{ = 1}}}^{{m_I}} { {
{m_I} \choose
i} } {\left( {\frac{{{M_t^o}{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}} \right)^{i + a}}{\left( { - 1} \right)^a}$,\\
${\Lambda _4^o} = \sum {p!} \prod\limits_{j = 1}^p {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - m{M_t^o}}{\sigma ^2} \right)\prod\limits_{k = 0}^{j - 1} {\left( {1 - k} \right)} } \right)}^{{q_j}}}}}{{{q_j}!{{\left( {j!} \right)}^{{q_j}}}}}}$, and
${\Lambda _5^o} = \sum {(n - p)!} \prod\limits_{b = 1}^{n - p} {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - {\Lambda _3}} \right)\prod\limits_{k = 0}^{b - 1} {\left( {\delta_I - k} \right)} } \right)}^{{q_b}}}}}{{{q_b}!{{\left( {b!} \right)}^{{q_b}}}}}}$.
\begin{proof}
Following the similar procedure in Appendix B, with interchanging ${M_{t}^f}$ with ${M_{t}^o}$, we can obtain the desired result in \eqref{coverage probability typical user far Lemma OMA case}. Thus, the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\end{corollary}
\section{UAV-centric Strategy for Offloading Actions}
In conventional BS communications, the BSs are distributed in order to cover all the ground, whereas UAV communications mainly focus on providing access services to support BSs in the hotspot areas of the dense networks, i.e., airports or resorts, where most users are located in the lounge~\cite{Lyu_UAV_hotspots}. Based on the insights of~\cite{NOMA_downlink_cellular}, where the serving area can be considered as a regular disc, another strategy considered in this article is the UAV-centric strategy, where paired NOMA users are located inside the coverage disc as shown in Fig.~\ref{Example of UAV-Centric}. It is also worth noting that the locations of UAVs are properly selected to serve terrestrial users in the hotspot areas based on user density in the UAV-centric strategy. Based on the insights of poisson cluster process (PCP), the users are located in multiple small clusters in practice.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width =3in]{Fig2new.eps}
\caption{Top view of the UAV-centric strategy cellular networks.}
\label{Example of UAV-Centric}
\vspace{-0.3in}
\end{figure*}
For the UAV-centric strategy, a UAV is located at the original point, which becomes the typical UAV serving users in the typical cell. Therefore, it is assumed that the distance between the UAV at the origin and the nearest UAV is $R$, and the potential paired NOMA users are located in the coverage area within the radius $R/2$. In the UAV-centric strategy, user pairing strategy is determined by the connected UAV, where all the users in the coverage disc are connected to the UAV.
In the user association, for simplicity, we assume that there are two users, near user $w$ and far user $v$, have accessed to the UAV at the origin to perform NOMA. It is assumed that the users are uniformly located, which is according to HPPP, denoted by $\Psi_u$ and it is associated with the density $\lambda_u$, within large ring and small disc with radius $R/2$ and $R/4$, respectively. By doing so, NOMA technique can be performed without accurate CSI.
\subsection{SINR Analysis}
For the UAV-centric strategy, the distances between the interfering UAVs and the users are more complicated. For notational simplicity, the location of the $j$-th interfering UAV is denoted by $y_j$, where ${y_j} \in \Psi$. The locations of the users are conditioned on the locations of their cluster heads (UAVs). As such,
the SINR of the far user $v$ can be derived as
\begin{equation}\label{SINR_v}
SIN{R_{v}} = \frac{{{{\left| {{h_{v}}} \right|}^2}d_{v}^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _{{v}}^2}}{{{\sigma ^2} + {{\left| {{h_{v}}} \right|}^2}d_{v}^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _w^2 + \sum\limits_{j \in \Psi } {{{\left| {{g_{j}}} \right|}^2}{P_u}d_{j}^{ - \alpha_I }} }},
\end{equation}
where ${{\left| {{h_{v}}} \right|}^2}$ and $d_{v}$ denote the small scale fading coefficient and the distance between the far user and the UAV, ${{\left| {{g_{j}}} \right|}^2}$ and $d_{j}$ denote the small scale fading coefficient and the distance between $j$-th interfering UAV and the user, respectively.
The near user $w$ will first decode the signal of the far user $v$ with the following SINR
\begin{equation}\label{SINR_w tov}
SIN{R_{w \to v}} = \frac{{{{\left| {{h_w}} \right|}^2}d_w^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _{v}^2}}{{{\sigma ^2} + \beta {{\left| {{h_w}} \right|}^2}d_w^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _{w}^2 + \sum\limits_{j \in \Psi } {{{\left| {{g_{j}}} \right|}^2}{P_u}d_{j}^{ - \alpha_I }} }},
\end{equation}
where ${{\left| {{h_{w}}} \right|}^2}$ and $d_{w}$ denote the small scale fading coefficient and the distance between the near user and the UAV.
If the signal of the $v$-th user can be decoded successfully, the $w$-th user then decodes its own signal. As such, the SINR at the $w$-th user can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{SINR_w}
SIN{R_w} = \frac{{{{\left| {{h_w}} \right|}^2}d_w^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _{w}^2}}{{{\sigma ^2} + \beta {{\left| {{h_w}} \right|}^2}d_w^{ - \alpha }{P_u}\alpha _{v}^2 + \sum\limits_{j \in \Psi } {{{\left| {{g_{j}}} \right|}^2}{P_u}d_{j}^{ - \alpha_I }} }}.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Coverage Probability of the UAV-centric Strategy}
Consider a disk centered at the origin with the radius $R/2$, which has shown in Fig.~\ref{Example of UAV-Centric}. In order to deploy NOMA protocol, we separate the disc to two parts equally, the small disc with radius $R/4$ and the ring with radius from $R/4$ to $R/2$, to serve paired NOMA users. It is assumed that the near users and the far users are located in the small disc and ring, respectively. Focusing on the typical cell, where a UAV is located at the origin, the PDF of distance for the near users conditioned on serving distance $R$, follows
\begin{equation}\label{condition pdf near user}
{f_w} \left( {r\left| R \right.} \right) = \frac{{32r}}{{{R^2}}},0 \le r \le l_1,
\end{equation}
where ${l_1} = { {\frac{R}{4}} } $.
The PDF of far users can be obtained by
\begin{equation}\label{condition pdf far user}
{f_v} \left( {r\left| R \right.} \right) = \frac{{32r}}{{3{R^2}}}, l_1 \le r \le l_2,
\end{equation}
where ${l_2} = { {\frac{R}{2}}} $.
In order to derive the system performance, the Laplace transform of UAV interferences needs to be derived. We calculate the Laplace transform of inter-cell interference for the paired users in the following Lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{Lapalace transform of interference of near user}
For the UAV-centric strategy, the Laplace transform of interference distribution conditioned on the serving distance $R$ for paired user is given by
\begin{equation}\label{laplace transform of UAV in lemma}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}_U \left( {s\left| R \right.} \right) &= \exp \left({ - \frac{{{l_I}}}{R}\left( {1 - {{\left( {1 + \frac{{S{P_u}}}{{{m_I}l_I^{\alpha_I} }}} \right)}^{ - {m_I}}}} \right) }\right) \\
& \times \exp \left( { - \frac{{2\pi {\lambda }}}{\alpha_I }\sum\limits_{i{\rm{ = 1}}}^{m_I} {{
{m_I} \choose
i}} {{\left( {\frac{{s{P_u}}}{{m_I}}} \right)}^{\delta_I}}(-1)^{(\delta_I-i)}B\left( {\frac{{-s{P_u}l_I^{ - \alpha_I }}}{{m_I}};i - \delta_I,1-{m_I}} \right)} \right).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where ${l_I} = \sqrt {{R^2} + {h^2}}$.
\begin{proof}
Please refer to Appendix C.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
It is also worth noting that for the NLoS case, the small-scale fading between users and interfering UAVs can be considered as Rayleigh fading. Thus, the Laplace transform can be further obtained in the following Corollary.
\begin{corollary}\label{Lapalace transform Rayleigh of near user}
For the NLoS scenario, the Laplace transform of interference distribution conditioned on the serving distance $R$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{laplace transform of near user in lemma of Rayleigh}
\mathcal{L}_U \left( {s\left| R \right.} \right) = \exp \left( { - \frac{{{l_I}}}{R}\left( {\frac{{S{P_u}}}{{l_I^{\alpha_I} + S{P_u}}}} \right) } \right) \exp \left( { - \frac{{2\pi {\lambda }{P_u}l_I^{2 - \alpha_I }}}{{\alpha_I \left( {1{\rm{ - }}\delta_I } \right)}}{}_2{F_1}\left( {1,1 - \delta_I ;2 - \delta_I ; - s{P_u}l_I^{ - \alpha_I }} \right)} \right).
\end{equation}
\end{corollary}
Then, we focus on the coverage behavior of paired NOMA users in the UAV-centric strategy. In the UAV-centric strategy, the coverage probability is more complicated than the user-centric strategy due to the fact that the interfering UAV located at distance $R$ is necessary to evaluate separately.
It is assumed that the target rates of user $w$ and user $v$ are $R_{w}$ and $R_{v}$, respectively. Therefore, the coverage probability of the $w$-th user is given in the following Lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma5:outage of the near user conditioned on radius}
\emph{ The closed-form expression of the coverage probability conditioned on serving distance for the near user is expressed as}
\begin{equation}\label{coverage probability conditioned on radius Lemma near user UAV-centric}
\begin{aligned}
&{P_{cov,w}}\left( {r\left| R \right.} \right) = \sum\limits_{n = 0}^{m - 1} {\sum\limits_{k = 0}^n {\sum\limits_{l = 0}^k {\frac{{{{( - 1)}^n}r_w^{\alpha n}}}{{l!(k - l)!(n - k)!}}} } } {\Theta _3}{\Theta _4}{\Theta _5}\\
&\times \exp \left( { - m{M_{w*}}{\sigma ^2}r_w^\alpha - {\Theta _1}r_w^{\alpha (i + a)} - \frac{{m{l_I}}}{R} + {\Theta _2}r_w^{\alpha U}} \right) r_w^{\alpha (1 - j){q_j} + \alpha (i + a - g){q_g} + \alpha n + \alpha (U - b){q_u}},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where ${M_w} = \frac{{{\varepsilon _w}}}{{{P_u}\left( {\alpha _w^2 - \beta {\varepsilon _w}\alpha _v^2} \right)}}$, ${M_v} = \frac{{{\varepsilon _v}}}{{{P_u}\left( {\alpha _v^2 - {\varepsilon _v}\alpha _w^2} \right)}}$, ${\varepsilon _w} = {2^{{R_w}}} - 1$, ${\varepsilon _v} = {2^{{R_v}}} - 1$, ${M_{w*}} = \max \left\{ {{M_w},{M_v}} \right\}$, $r_w=\sqrt{r^2+h^2}$,
${\Theta _1} = \pi m \delta_I {\lambda}\sum\limits_{i{\rm{ = 1}}}^{{m_I}} { {
{m_I} \choose
i} } {\left( { - 1} \right)^{\delta_I - 1}}\sum\limits_{a = 0}^\infty {\frac{{{{\left( {{m_I}} \right)}_a}}}{{a!\left( {i - \delta_I + a} \right)}}} {\left( {\frac{{{M_{w*}}{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}} \right)^{i + a}}l_I^{{\rm{ - }}\alpha_I \left( {i - \delta_I + a} \right)}$, \\
${\Theta _2} = \frac{{m{l_I}}}{R}\sum\limits_{U = 0}^\infty {{{( - 1)}^U}C_{{m_I} + U + 1}^U} {\left( {\frac{{{M_{w*}}{P_u}}}{{l_I^{\alpha_I} {m_I}}}} \right)^U}$,
${\Theta _3} = \sum {(n - k)!} \prod\limits_{j = 1}^{n - k} {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - m{M_{w*}}{\sigma ^2}} \right)\prod\limits_{p = 0}^{j - 1} {\left( {1 - p} \right)} } \right)}^{{q_j}}}}}{{{q_j}!{{\left( {j!} \right)}^{{q_j}}}}}}$, \\
${\Theta _4} = \sum {(k - l)!} \prod\limits_{b = 1}^{k - l} {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - {\Theta _2}} \right)\prod\limits_{p = 0}^{b - 1} {\left( {U - p} \right)} } \right)}^{{q_u}}}}}{{{q_u}!{{\left( {j!} \right)}^{{q_u}}}}}} $, and ${\Theta _5} = \sum {l!} \prod\limits_{g = 1}^{l} {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - {\Theta _1}} \right)\prod\limits_{p = 0}^{g - 1} {\left( {i+a-g} \right)} } \right)}^{{q_g}}}}}{{{q_g}!{{\left( {j!} \right)}^{{q_g}}}}}} $.
\begin{proof}
Please refer to Appendix D.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
Similar to \textbf{Lemma~\ref{lemma5:outage of the near user conditioned on radius}}, the coverage probability of the far user can be derived in the following Lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma7:outage of the far user conditioned on radius}
\emph{ The closed-form expression of the coverage probability conditioned on serving distance for the far user is expressed as}
\begin{equation}\label{coverage probability conditioned on radius Lemma_far_UAV-centric}
\begin{aligned}
&{P_{cov,v}}\left( {r\left| R \right.} \right) = \sum\limits_{n = 0}^{m - 1} {\sum\limits_{k = 0}^n {\sum\limits_{l = 0}^k {\frac{{{{( - 1)}^n}r_v^{\alpha n}}}{{l!(k - l)!(n - k)!}}} } } {\Theta _{3,v}}{\Theta _{4,v}}{\Theta _{5,v}}\\
&\times \exp \left( { - m{M_{v}}{\sigma ^2}r_v^\alpha - {\Theta _{1,v}}r_v^{\alpha (i + a)} - \frac{{m{l_I}}}{R} + {\Theta _{2,v}}r_v^{\alpha U}} \right) r_v^{\alpha (1 - j){q_j} + \alpha (i + a - g){q_g} + \alpha n + \alpha (U - b){q_u}},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $r_v=\sqrt{r^2+h^2}$, ${\Theta _{1,v}} = \pi m \delta_I {\lambda}\sum\limits_{i{\rm{ = 1}}}^{{m_I}} { {
{m_I} \choose
i} } {\left( { - 1} \right)^{\delta_I - 1}}\sum\limits_{a = 0}^\infty {\frac{{{{\left( {{m_I}} \right)}_a}}}{{a!\left( {i - \delta_I + a} \right)}}} {\left( {\frac{{{M_{v}}{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}} \right)^{i + a}}l_I^{{\rm{ - }}\alpha_I \left( {i - \delta_I + a} \right)}$, \\
${\Theta _{2,v}} = \frac{{m{l_I}}}{R}\sum\limits_{U = 0}^\infty {{{( - 1)}^U}C_{{m_I} + U + 1}^U} {\left( {\frac{{{M_{v}}{P_u}}}{{l_I^{\alpha_I} {m_I}}}} \right)^U}$,
${\Theta _{3,v}} = \sum {(n - k)!} \prod\limits_{j = 1}^{n - k} {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - m{M_{v}}{\sigma ^2}} \right)\prod\limits_{p = 0}^{j - 1} {\left( {1 - p} \right)} } \right)}^{{q_j}}}}}{{{q_j}!{{\left( {j!} \right)}^{{q_j}}}}}}$, \\
${\Theta _{4,v}} = \sum {(k - l)!} \prod\limits_{b = 1}^{k - l} {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - {\Theta _{2,v}}} \right)\prod\limits_{p = 0}^{b - 1} {\left( {U - p} \right)} } \right)}^{{q_u}}}}}{{{q_u}!{{\left( {j!} \right)}^{{q_u}}}}}} $, and ${\Theta _{5,v}} = \sum {l!} \prod\limits_{g = 1}^{l} {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - {\Theta _{1,v}}} \right)\prod\limits_{p = 0}^{g - 1} {\left( {i+a-g} \right)} } \right)}^{{q_g}}}}}{{{q_g}!{{\left( {j!} \right)}^{{q_g}}}}}} $.
\begin{proof}
Similar to Appendix D, the derivation in \eqref{coverage probability conditioned on radius Lemma_far_UAV-centric} can be readily proved.
\end{proof}
\end{lemma}
Then, the coverage probability of paired NOMA users in the UAV-centric strategy can be derived in the following Theorem.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem 1 coverage probability}
\emph{Based on {\bf{Lemma \ref{lemma5:outage of the near user conditioned on radius}}} and {\bf{Lemma \ref{lemma7:outage of the far user conditioned on radius}}}, the exact expressions of the coverage probability for the paired NOMA users can be expressed as}
\begin{equation}\label{coverage of near user expression}
\begin{aligned}
{P_{cov,w}} = \int\limits_0^\infty {\int\limits_0^{{l_1}} {{P_{cov,w}}} \left( {\left. r \right|R} \right){f_w}\left( {r\left| R \right.} \right)dr} {f_r}\left( R \right)dR,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{coverage of far user expression}
\begin{aligned}
{P_{cov,v}} = \int\limits_0^\infty {\int\limits_{{l_1}}^{{l_2}} {{P_{cov,v}}} \left( {\left. r \right|R} \right){f_v}\left( {r\left| R \right.} \right)dr} {f_r}\left( R \right)dR,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $l_1=\frac{R}{4}$, $l_2=\frac{R}{2}$, ${P_{cov,w}} \left( {\left. r \right|R} \right)$ is given in \eqref{coverage probability conditioned on radius Lemma near user UAV-centric}, ${P_{cov,w}} \left( {\left. r \right|R} \right)$ is given in \eqref{coverage probability conditioned on radius Lemma_far_UAV-centric}, ${{f_w}\left( {r\left| R \right.} \right)}$ is given in \eqref{condition pdf near user}, ${{f_v}\left( {r\left| R \right.} \right)}$ is given in~\eqref{condition pdf far user}, and ${f_r}\left( R \right)$ is given in \eqref{PDF of serving distance}.
\begin{proof}
By utilizing the PDF in~\eqref{condition pdf near user}, the coverage probability of the near user conditioned on the serving distance can be obtained by
\begin{equation}\label{outage second expression appendix B}
\begin{aligned}
{P_{cov,w}(R)} = {\int\limits_0^{{l_1}} {{P_{cov,w}}} \left( {\left. r \right|R} \right){f_w}\left( {r\left| R \right.} \right)dr},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The overall coverage probability can be derived by the serving distance of UAV assisted cellular networks, which can be expressed as
\begin{equation}\label{overall coverage probability expression}
{P_{cov,w}} = \int\limits_0^\infty {{P_{cov,w}(R)}} {f_r}\left( R \right)dR,
\end{equation}
Plugging \eqref{PDF of serving distance} into \eqref{overall coverage probability expression}, and after some mathematical manipulations, the coverage probability of the near user can be obtained. Thus, the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\end{theorem}
In order to provide more engineering insights, the coverage probability for the near user in the OMA assisted UAV-centric strategy is also derived in the following Corollary. Similar to \textbf{Corollary~\ref{corollary2: typical user OMA case}}, we also use TDMA to illustrate the coverage performance for OMA assisted UAV-centric strategy.
\begin{corollary}\label{corollary4: near user OMA case}
\emph{The coverage probability conditioned on the serving distance of the near user for the OMA enhanced UAV-centric strategy is expressed in closed-form as}
\begin{equation}\label{UAVCentric OMA}
\begin{aligned}
&{P_{cov,w}^o}\left( {r\left| R \right.} \right) = \sum\limits_{n = 0}^{m - 1} {\sum\limits_{k = 0}^n {\sum\limits_{l = 0}^k {\frac{{{{( - 1)}^n}r_w^{\alpha n}}}{{l!(k - l)!(n - k)!}}} } } {\Theta _3^o}{\Theta _4^o}{\Theta _5^o}\\
&\times \exp \left( { - m{M_{w}^o}{\sigma ^2}r_w^\alpha - {\Theta _1}r_w^{\alpha (i + a)} - \frac{{m{l_I}}}{R} + {\Theta _2}r_w^{\alpha U}} \right) r_w^{\alpha (1 - j){q_j} + \alpha (i + a - g){q_g} + \alpha n + \alpha (U - b){q_u}},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where ${M_w^o} = \frac{{{\varepsilon _w^o}}}{{{P_u}}}$, ${\varepsilon _w^o} = {2^{{2R_w}}} - 1$, ${\Theta _1^o} = \pi m \delta_I {\lambda}\sum\limits_{i{\rm{ = 1}}}^{{m_I}} { {
{m_I} \choose
i} } {\left( { - 1} \right)^{\delta_I - 1}}\sum\limits_{a = 0}^\infty {\frac{{{{\left( {{m_I}} \right)}_a}}}{{a!\left( {i - \delta_I + a} \right)}}} {\left( {\frac{{{M_{w}^o}{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}} \right)^{i + a}}l_I^{{\rm{ - }}\alpha_I \left( {i - \delta_I + a} \right)}$, \\
${\Theta _2^o} = \frac{{m{l_I}}}{R}\sum\limits_{U = 0}^\infty {{{( - 1)}^U}C_{{m_I} + U + 1}^U} {\left( {\frac{{{M_{w}^o}{P_u}}}{{l_I^{\alpha_I} {m_I}}}} \right)^U}$,
${\Theta _3^o} = \sum {(n - k)!} \prod\limits_{j = 1}^{n - k} {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - m{M_{w}^o}{\sigma ^2}} \right)\prod\limits_{p = 0}^{j - 1} {\left( {1 - p} \right)} } \right)}^{{q_j}}}}}{{{q_j}!{{\left( {j!} \right)}^{{q_j}}}}}}$, \\
${\Theta _4^o} = \sum {(k - l)!} \prod\limits_{b = 1}^{k - l} {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - {\Theta _2^o}} \right)\prod\limits_{p = 0}^{b - 1} {\left( {U - p} \right)} } \right)}^{{q_u}}}}}{{{q_u}!{{\left( {j!} \right)}^{{q_u}}}}}} $, and ${\Theta _5^o} = \sum {l!} \prod\limits_{g = 1}^{l} {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - {\Theta _1^o}} \right)\prod\limits_{p = 0}^{g - 1} {\left( {i+a-g} \right)} } \right)}^{{q_g}}}}}{{{q_g}!{{\left( {j!} \right)}^{{q_g}}}}}} $.
\begin{proof}
Following the similar procedure in Appendix D, with interchanging ${M_{w}^f}$ with ${M_{w}^o}$, we can obtain the desired result in~\eqref{UAVCentric OMA}. Thus, the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\end{corollary}
\section{Numerical Studies}
In this section, numerical results are provided to facilitate the performance evaluation of NOMA assisted UAV cellular networks. Monte Carlo simulations are conducted to verify analytical results. In the considered network, it is assumed that the power allocation factors are $\alpha_{v}^2=0.6$ for the far user and $\alpha_{w}^2=0.4$ for the near user. The path loss exponent of interference links $\alpha_I$ is set to 4, and the path loss exponent of the desired transmission is smaller than 4. The height of the UAV is fixed to 100 meters. In Monte Carlo simulations, it is not possible to simulate a real infinite distribution for UAVs. Hence, the UAVs are distributed in a disc, and the radius of the disc is $10000$m. The bandwidth of the downlink transmission is set as $BW=300$ kHz, and the power of AWGN noise is set as $\sigma^2= −-174+ 10 {\rm{log}}_{10}(BW)$ dBm. The UAV density $\lambda=\frac{1}{500^2\pi}$. It is also worth noting that LoS and NLoS scenarios are indicated by the Nakagami fading parameter $m$, where $m = 1$ for NLoS scenarios (Rayleigh fading) and $m >1$ for LoS scenarios. Without loss of generality, we use $m=2$ to represent LoS scenario in Section IV.
\subsection{User-centric strategy}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\subfigure[Coverage probability of user-centric NOMA versus transmit power in NLoS scenario with different path loss exponent, where the fading parameters $m=1$ and $m_I=1$.]{\label{Outage_UserCentric with m=1}
\includegraphics[width =2.8in]{Outage_UserCentric_NLoS_h50Rk300_final.eps}}
\subfigure[Coverage probability of user-centric NOMA versus transmit power in both NLoS and LoS scenarios, where the fading parameters $m=2$ and $m_I=1$. The path loss exponent of desire link is set to be $\alpha=3$.]{\label{Outage_UserCentric with m=2}
\includegraphics[width= 2.8in]{outage_prob_LoS_NLoS_final.eps}}
\caption{Coverage probability of paired NOMA users versus the power of UAV in the user-centric strategy, with target rate $R_{t}=1$ BPCU and $R_f=0.5$ BPCU. The horizontal distance of the fixed user is 300m. The exact results of NOMA are calculated from \eqref{coverage of typical user expression}.}
\label{Fig1:Outage_UserCetric}
\vspace{-0.3in}
\end{figure*}
First, we evaluate the coverage performance of downlink NOMA users in the user-centric strategy. In Fig.~\ref{Outage_UserCentric with m=1}, for a given set of the distance of fixed users, the solid curves and dashed curves are the coverage probability for typical users and fixed users, respectively. We can see that, as the power of UAV increases, the coverage ceilings, which are the maximum coverage probability for the proposed networks, of both typical users and fixed NOMA users occur. This is due to the fact that, as the higher power level of interfering UAVs is deployed, the received SINR decreases dramatically. It is observed that as imperfect SIC coefficient $\beta$ increases, the coverage probability of typical users decreases, which indicates that the performance of NOMA assisted UAV communication can be effectively improved by decreasing the imperfect SIC coefficient. For example, in the case of $\beta=\frac{2}{3}$, the power residual from imperfect SIC is greater than the power of near users, i.e., $\alpha_w^2<\alpha_v^2\beta$. We can also see that in the case of $\beta=0, 0.1, 0.3, 0.5$, the coverage probabilities of fixed users are the same. This is due to the fact that the imperfect SIC is the critical component of typical users, whereas the imperfect SIC has no effect for fixed users in the case $R_f=0.5$ bits per channel use (BPCU). As we can see in the figure, the outage of typical users occurs more frequently than fixed users. This is due to the fact that the choice of power allocation factors and the distance of fixed users. Note that the simulation results and analytical results match perfectly in Fig.~\ref{Outage_UserCentric with m=1}, which demonstrate the accuracy of the developed analytical results.
Fig. \ref{Outage_UserCentric with m=2} shows the coverage probability achieved by typical users in both NLoS and LoS scenario. In order to better illustrate the performance affected by the LoS transmission, the NLoS case is also shown in the figure as a benchmark for comparison. In Fig.~\ref{Outage_UserCentric with m=2}, we can see that higher fading parameter $m$ would result in reduced outage probability for different UAV power levels and different imperfect SIC coefficients. This is because that the LoS link between the UAV and users provides higher received power
level. It is also worth noting that for the UAV cellular networks, the proposed network is not in need of a larger UAV power for increasing the coverage probability due to the fact that the coverage ceiling occurs in the high SNR regime.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width =2.8in]{outage_prob_diffRk.eps}
\caption{Coverage probability of user-centric NOMA versus the distance of fixed users, with target rate $R_{t}=1$ BPCU and $R_f=0.5$ BPCU. The path loss exponent is fixed to $\alpha=3$, and the power of UAV is fixed to -30dBm.}
\label{UserCentric_diffRk}
\vspace{-0.3in}
\end{figure*}
In Fig.~\ref{UserCentric_diffRk}, the impact of different choices of UAV density and the distance of fixed users is studied. As can be observed from the figure, increasing the distance of fixed users will decrease the coverage probability for fixed users, whereas the coverage probability of typical users increases. This is due to the fact that the distance of fixed users has affect on user association for typical users. For fixed users, the received power decreases dramatically when the distance increases. On the other hand, for the dashed curve and star curve, where the density of UAV is 10 times greater than the solid curve and dotted curves, the coverage probability of typical NOMA users in the case of high UAV density is much greater than the case of low UAV density. This is because that the number of UAVs is increased, which leads to the decrease of the distance of connected UAV.
It is also worth noting that there are two crosses of fixed users, which mean that there exists an optimal distance of fixed users for the given UAV density.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width =2.8in]{Coverage_UserCentric_3D.eps}
\caption{Coverage probability of typical users versus targeted rate $R_{t}=R$ BPCU, and power allocation factor $\alpha_v$, with the imperfect SIC coefficient $\beta=0, 0.15$. The target rate of fixed users $R_f=0.5$ BPCU, and the horizontal distance of the fixed user is 300m. The transmit power of UAVs is fixed to -30dBm with path loss exponent $\alpha=3$. The fading parameters $m=3$ and $m_I=2$.}
\label{UserCentric_3D}
\vspace{-0.3in}
\end{figure*}
Next, Fig.~\ref{UserCentric_3D} plots the coverage probability of paired NOMA users in the user-centric strategy versus target rate $R$ and power allocation factor $\alpha_v$. It is observed that the coverage probability is zero in the case of inappropriate target rates and power allocation factors, which verifies the insights from {\bf Remark~\ref{user-centric power allocation}}.
The coverage probability of typical users in OMA is also plotted, which indicates that NOMA is capable for outperforming OMA for the appropriate power allocation factors and target rates of paired users.
One can also observe that NOMA cannot outperform OMA in the case of $\beta=0.15$ for the user-centric strategy. This indicates that hybrid NOMA/OMA assisted UAV framework may be a good solution in the case of poor SIC quality. The UAV could intelligently choose the access techniques for improving the system coverage probability.
\subsection{UAV-centric strategy}
In the UAV-centric strategy, $\varepsilon=0.1$m to evaluate the interference received from the UAV located at the distance $R$.
Then, we evaluate the performance of the downlink users in the UAV-centric strategy. In Figs.~\ref{Outage_UAVCentric with m=1} and~\ref{Outage_UAVCentric with m=2}, the impact of the NOMA assisted UAV-centric strategy in terms of the coverage probability is studied. The target rates of near users and far users are set as $R_{w}=1.5$ BPCU and $R_v=1$ BPCU, respectively. Solid curves and dashed curve are the coverage probability of near users and far users, respectively. An interesting phenomenon occurs in the UAV-centric strategy that in the case $\beta=0.5$, the coverage probability of near users is all zero, which indicates that the transmission is failed. This is again due to the fact that $\alpha_w^2- \beta\alpha_v^2\varepsilon_w<0$, which verifies our obtained insights in {\bf{Remark \ref{user-centric power allocation}}}.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\subfigure[Coverage probability of the UAV-centric NOMA versus the transmit power in NLoS scenario, where the fading parameters $m=1$, $m_I=1$.]{\label{Outage_UAVCentric with m=1}
\includegraphics[width =2.8in]{Outage_UAVCentric_NLoS_h100.eps}}
\subfigure[Coverage probability of the UAV-centric NOMA versus the transmit power in both NLoS and LoS scenarios with path loss exponent $\alpha=3.5$, where the fading parameters $m=2$, $m_I=1$.]{\label{Outage_UAVCentric with m=2}
\includegraphics[width= 2.8in]{PCP_LoSandNLoS.eps}}
\caption{Coverage probability of paired NOMA users versus the transmit power, with target rate $R_{w}=1.5$ and $R_v=1$ BPCU, respectively. The exact results of NOMA are calculated from \eqref{coverage of near user expression}.}
\label{Fig5:Outage_UAVCetric}
\vspace{-0.3in}
\end{figure*}
Comparing Fig. \ref{Outage_UAVCentric with m=1} with Fig. \ref{Outage_UAVCentric with m=2}, one can observe that the impact of fading parameter $m$ on the coverage probability is also significant, which is due to the fact that the received power level is greater in the case of larger $m$. Again, we can see that the coverage probability is also one of near users in the case of $\beta=0.5$, which indicates that the LoS propagation has no effect on {\bf{Remark \ref{user-centric power allocation}}}. It is also worth noting that the coverage probability of the user-centric strategy is much greater than the UAV-centric strategy in the case of $\beta=0.5$, which indicates that the UAV-centric strategy is more susceptible to ipSIC factor than the user-centric strategy.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width =2.8in]{outage_prob_3D.eps}
\caption{Coverage probability of the near user versus the target rate. The transmit power of UAVs is fixed to -40dBm. The fading parameters $m=3$ and $m_I=2$.}
\label{UAV_3D}
\vspace{-0.3in}
\end{figure*}
Fig.~\ref{UAV_3D} plots the coverage probability for near users in the UAV-centric strategy in the cases of $\beta=0$, $\beta=0.1$, and $\beta=0.5$. One can obtain that on the one hand, inappropriate power allocation will lead to the coverage probability always being zero, which also verified {\bf Remark~\ref{user-centric power allocation}}. On the other hand, we can see that in the case of $\beta>0$, the coverage probability decreases dramatically when increasing target rate, which verified that the SIC residue is the dominant interference in NOMA. In order to provide more insights, the coverage performance of OMA in the UAV-centric strategy is also provided. We can see that in the case of $\beta=0$, NOMA performs better than OMA, which indicates that the proposed frameworks are analytically shown to be applicable for UAV communications. We can also see that in the case of~$\beta=0.1$, the coverage performance of NOMA and OMA assisted UAV cellular networks show closed agreement, which also indicates that hybrid NOMA/OMA assisted UAV framework may be a good solution for the UAV-centric strategy.
\section{Conclusions}
In this article, we first proposed an overview on a pair of important new paradigms in UAV assisted cellular communications, namely, user-centric strategy and UAV-centric strategy.
The user-centric strategy is applicable in the case when all the users located in the Voronoi cell are needed to be served by the UAV simultaneously. The derived results provide the benchmark for the NOMA assisted UAV cellular networks. The UAV-centric strategy is motivated by the fact that, in practice, it is more applicable to serve users in the dense networks. The key idea of the UAV-centric strategy is to provide services for the hotspot areas only, i.e., airports or resorts.
Then, the performance of proposed framework were evaluated, where multiple UAVs are distributed in the sky to serve multiple users on the terrestrial. Additionally, new analytical expressions for interference and coverage probability were derived for characterizing the performance in NOMA assisted UAV cellular frameworks.
An important future direction is to extend the 3-D distribution of interference sources to include other interfering UAVs located on the different heights.
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\section*{Appendix~A: Proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma2:Lapalace transform of interference of typical user}} \label{Appendix:A}
\renewcommand{\theequation}{A.\arabic{equation}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
Consider a HPPP $\Psi$ with density $\lambda$, the Laplace transform of the interference for the typical user can be expressed as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{laplace transform of typical user_user_centric in appendix}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}_t \left( {s} \right) &= {{\mathbb E}}\left\{ {\exp \left( { - s{I_{t,\Psi} }} \right)} \right\}
={\mathbb E}\left\{ { \exp \left( { - s\sum\limits_{j \in \Psi,{d_j} > {r_{t}} } {{{\left| {{g_j}} \right|}^2}{\frac{{{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}}d_{j}^{ - \alpha_I }} } \right) } \right\}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Using the moment generating function (MGF) of Gamma random variable ${\left| {{g_j}} \right|}$, the Laplace transform can be rewritten to
\begin{equation}\label{laplace transform of typical user in appendix I2}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}_t \left( {s} \right) = \exp \left( { - 2\pi {\lambda}\int\limits_{{{r_{t}} }}^\infty {\left( {1 - {{{\mathbb E}}_g}\left\{ {\exp \left( { - s{{\left| {{g_j}} \right|}^2}{\frac{{{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}}r^{ - \alpha_I }} \right)} \right\}} \right)rdr} } \right).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
With the aid of Laplace transform for the Nakagami-$m$ distribution with fading parameter $m_I$, we can obtain ${{{\mathbb E}}_g}\left\{ {s{{\left| {{g_j}} \right|}^2}{{\frac{{{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}}}r^{ - \alpha_I}} \right\} = {\left( {1 + \frac{{s{P_u}{r^{ - \alpha_I }}}}{m_I}} \right)^{ - m_I}}$. As such, by applying binomial expansion, the Laplace transform of the interference at the typical user can be rewritten to
\begin{equation}\label{laplace transform of typical user in appendix bionomial after}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}_t \left( {s} \right) &= \exp \left( { - 2\pi {\lambda}\int\limits_{{{r_{t}}}}^\infty {\left( {1 - {{\left( {1 + \frac{{s{P_u}{r^{ - \alpha_I }}}}{{m_I}}} \right)}^{ - {{m_I}}}}} \right)}rdr } \right) \\
& = \exp \left( { - 2\pi {\lambda}\int\limits_{{r_{t}}}^\infty {{\frac{{\sum\limits_{i{\rm{ = 0}}}^{{m_I}} { {
{m_I} \choose
i}} {{\left( {\frac{{s{P_u}}}{{{{r^{\alpha_I} }}{m_I}}}} \right)}^i} - 1}}{{{\left( {1 + \frac{{s{P_u}{r^{ - \alpha_I }}}}{{{m_I}}}} \right)}^{{m_I}}}}} } rdr} \right).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Then, after some algebraic manipulations, we have
\begin{equation}\label{Laplace transform of the typical expression after bonomial in appendix}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}_t \left( {s} \right) &= \exp \left( { - 2\pi {\lambda}\sum\limits_{i{\rm{ = 1}}}^{m_I} { {
{m_I} \choose
i} } {{\left( {\frac{{s{P_u}}}{{m_I}}} \right)}^i} \int\limits_{{{r_{t}}}}^\infty {\frac{{{r^{ - \alpha_I i + 1}}}}{{{{\left( {1 + \frac{{s{P_u}{r^{ - \alpha_I }}}}{{m_I}}} \right)}^{m_I}}}}dr} } \right)\\
&\mathop {(a)}\limits_ = \exp \left( { - \frac{{2\pi {\lambda}}}{\alpha_I }\sum\limits_{i{\rm{ = 1}}}^{{m_I}} { {
{m_I} \choose
i} } {{\left( {\frac{{s{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}} \right)}^{\delta_I} }{{\left( { - 1} \right)}^{\delta_I - 1}}\int\limits_0^{ - \frac{{s{P_u}}}{{r_{t}^{\alpha_I} {m_I}}}} {\frac{{{t^{i - \delta_I - 1}}}}{{{{\left( {1 - t} \right)}^{{m_I}}}}}dt} } \right),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $(a)$ is obtained by using $t={ - \frac{{s{P_u}}}{{r^{\alpha_I} {m_I}}}}$. Based on \cite[eq. (8.391)]{Table_of_integrals}, we can finally obtain the Laplace transform of the interference in the user-centric strategy in~\eqref{laplace transform of typical user in lemma}.
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\section*{Appendix~B: Proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma3:outage of the typical user near user case}} \label{Appendix:B}
\renewcommand{\theequation}{B.\arabic{equation}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
Then, we derive the coverage probability of the typical user as
\begin{equation}\label{outage first expression appendix C}
\begin{aligned}
&{P_{t,near}}\left( r \right) = {{\mathbb E}_{{I_\Psi }}}\left\{ {{\rm{Pr}} \left( {{{\left| {{h_w}} \right|}^2} < {M_{t*}}\left( {{\sigma ^2} + {I_\Psi }} \right)r_t^\alpha } \right)} \right\}\\
& = \exp \left( { - m{M_{t*}}{\sigma ^2}r_t^\alpha } \right){{\mathbb E}_{{I_{\Psi }}}}\left\{ {\exp \left( { - m{M_{t*}}{I_\Psi }r_t^\alpha } \right)} \right\}\sum\limits_{n = 0}^{m - 1} {\frac{{{{\left( {m{M_{t*}}\left( {{\sigma ^2} + {I_\Psi }} \right)r_t^\alpha } \right)}^n}}}{{n!}}} \\
&= \sum\limits_{n = 0}^{m - 1} {\sum\limits_{p = 0}^n { {
{n} \choose
p}} \frac{{r_t^{\alpha n}}{{{( - 1)}^n}}}{{n!}}} \underbrace {\exp \left( { - m{M_{t*}}{\sigma ^2}r_t^\alpha } \right){{\left( {-m{M_{t*}}{\sigma ^2}} \right)}^p}}_{{\Lambda _1}}\underbrace {{{\mathbb E}_{{I_{\Psi }}}}\left\{ {\exp \left( { - m{M_{t*}}{I_\Psi }r_t^\alpha } \right)} \right\}{{\left( {-m{M_t}{I_\Psi }} \right)}^{n - p}}}_{{\Lambda _2}}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Using the fact that
\begin{equation}\label{faadi prepare}
{\left. {\frac{{{d^p}\left( {\exp \left( { - m{M_{t*}}{\sigma ^2}y} \right)} \right)}}{{d{y^p}}}} \right|_{y = r_t^\alpha }} = \exp \left( { - m{M_{t*}}{\sigma ^2}r_t^\alpha } \right){\left( {-m{M_{t*}}{\sigma ^2}} \right)^p},
\end{equation}
we can have
\begin{equation}\label{faadi expression}
{\Lambda _1}{\rm{ = }} {\left. {\frac{{{d^p}\left( {\exp \left( { - m{M_{t*}}{\sigma ^2}y} \right)} \right)}}{{d{y^p}}}} \right|_{y = r_t^\alpha }}.
\end{equation}
Now, we apply the Fa \`{a} di Bruno's formula to solve the derivative of $p$-th order as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{faadi fomular for 1 in appendix}
{\Lambda _1} = \exp \left( { - m{M_{t*}}{\sigma ^2}r_t^\alpha } \right)\sum {p!} \prod\limits_{j = 1}^p {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - m{M_{t*}}{\sigma ^2}} \right)\prod\limits_{k = 0}^{j-1} {\left( {1 - k} \right)r_t^{\alpha (1 - j)}} } \right)}^{{q_j}}}}}{{{q_j}!{{\left( {j!} \right)}^{{q_j}}}}}},
\end{equation}
where the sum ${q_j}$ is over all p-tuples of nonnegative integers satisfying the constraint
\begin{equation}\label{qj constraint}
1 \cdot {q_1} + 2 \cdot {q_2} + \cdots + p \cdot {q_p} = p.
\end{equation}
Similar to the steps from \eqref{faadi prepare} to \eqref{faadi fomular for 1 in appendix}, ${\Lambda _2}$ can be expressed to
\begin{equation}\label{lamda 2 faadi prepare}
\begin{aligned}
&{\Lambda _2}{\rm{ = }}{{\mathbb E}_{{I_{\Psi }}}}\left\{ {\exp \left( { - m{M_{t*}}{I_\Psi }r_t^\alpha } \right){{\left( {-m{M_{t*}}{I_\Psi }} \right)}^{n - p}}} \right\}\\
& = {{\mathbb E}_{{I_{\Psi }}}}\left\{ {{{\left. {\frac{{{d^{n - p}}\left( {\exp \left( { - m{M_{t*}}{I_\Psi }y} \right)} \right)}}{{d{y^{n - p}}}}} \right|}_{y = r_t^\alpha }}} \right\}\\
& = {\left. {\frac{{{d^{n - p}}\left( {m{\mathcal{L}_t}\left( {{M_{t*}}y } \right)} \right)}}{{d{y^{n - p}}}}} \right|_{y = r_t^\alpha }}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
It is challenging to derive ($n-p$)-th order derivation of incomplete Beta function directly. Thus, the derived incomplete Beta function in \eqref{laplace transform of typical user in lemma} can be written to
\begin{equation}\label{beta function expansiong}
\begin{aligned}
B\left( {\frac{{-s{P_u}}}{{{m_I}r_{t}^{\alpha_I} }};i - \delta_I ,1 - {m_I}} \right) &= {\left( {\frac{{-s{P_u}}}{{{m_I}r_{t}^{\alpha_I} }}} \right)^{\left( {i - \delta_I} \right)}}\frac{1}{{i - \delta_I}}{}_2{F_1}\left( {1 - \delta_I,{m_I};2 - \delta_I;\left( {\frac{{-s{P_u}}}{{{m_I}r_{t}^{\alpha_I} }}} \right)} \right) \\
& = {\left( {\frac{{-s{P_u}}}{{{m_I}r_{t}^{\alpha_I} }}} \right)^{\left( {i - \delta_I + a} \right)}}\sum\limits_{a = 0}^\infty {\frac{{{{\left( {{m_I}} \right)}_a}}}{{a!\left( {i - \delta_I + a} \right)}}},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where ${\left( {{m_I}} \right)_a}$ denotes rising Pochhammer symbol, which can be calculated as $\frac{{\Gamma \left( {{m_I} + a} \right)}}{{\Gamma \left( {{m_I}} \right)}}$.
Thus, the Laplace transform can be rewritten to
\begin{equation}\label{lambda 2 before faadi}
\begin{aligned}
{{\cal L}_t}\left( s \right) = \exp \left( { - \frac{{2\pi \lambda }}{\alpha_I }\sum\limits_{a = 0}^\infty {\frac{{{{\left( {{m_I}} \right)}_a}}}{{a!\left( {i - \delta_I + a} \right)}}} \sum\limits_{i{\rm{ = 1}}}^{{m_I}} { {
{m_I} \choose
i} } {{\left( {\frac{{s{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}} \right)}^{i + a}}{{\left( { - 1} \right)}^a}r_t^{ - \alpha_I \left( {i - \delta_I + a} \right)}} \right).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Then, substituting \eqref{lambda 2 before faadi} into \eqref{lamda 2 faadi prepare}, and using Fa \`{a} di Bruno's formula, \eqref{lamda 2 faadi prepare} can be transformed into
\begin{equation}\label{faadi trans lambda 2}
\begin{aligned}
&{\Lambda _2}={\left. {\frac{{{d^{n - p}}\left( {\exp \left( { - {\Lambda _3}{y^{\delta}}} \right)} \right)}}{{d{y^{n - p}}}}} \right|_{y = r_t^\alpha }}\\
&=\exp \left( { - {\Lambda _3}r_t^{2+ (\alpha-\alpha_I)(i+a) }} \right)\sum {(n - p)!} \prod\limits_{b = 1}^{n - p} {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - {\Lambda _3}} \right)\prod\limits_{k = 0}^{b - 1} {\left( {\delta - k} \right)r_t^{2 +(\alpha-\alpha_I)(i+a) - \alpha b}} } \right)}^{{q_b}}}}}{{{q_b}!{{\left( {b!} \right)}^{{q_b}}}}}},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where ${\Lambda _3} = \frac{{2\pi \lambda }}{\alpha_I }\sum\limits_{a = 0}^\infty {\frac{{{{\left( {{m_I}} \right)}_a}}}{{a!\left( {i - \delta_I + a} \right)}}} \sum\limits_{i{\rm{ = 1}}}^{{m_I}} {{
{m_I} \choose
i} } {\left( {\frac{{{M_{t*}}{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}} \right)^{i + a}}{\left( { - 1} \right)^a}$, and ${q_b}$ is over all $(n-p)$-tuples of nonnegative integers satisfying the constraint $1 \cdot {q_1} + 2 \cdot {q_2} + \cdots + (n - p) \cdot {q_b} = (n - p)$.
Substituting \eqref{faadi fomular for 1 in appendix} and \eqref{faadi trans lambda 2} into \eqref{outage first expression appendix C}, we can derive the coverage probability conditioned on the distance for the typical user in the near user case, as given in \eqref{coverage probability typical user near Lemma}. The proof is complete.
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\section*{Appendix~C: Proof of Lemma~\ref{Lapalace transform of interference of near user}} \label{Appendix:C}
\renewcommand{\theequation}{C.\arabic{equation}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
Unlike the user-centric strategy, the interfering UAV located at the distance $R$ is necessary to evaluate separately in the UAV-centric strategy.
In this section, we evaluate the Laplace transform of inter-cell interference of the near user in the UAV-centric strategy, where the inter-cell interference experience at the near user can be given by
\begin{equation}\label{intercell interference}
{I_{w,\Psi} } = \underbrace {\sum\limits_{j \in \Psi ,{d_j} > R} {{{\left| {{g_j}} \right|}^2}{P_u}} d_j^{ - \alpha_I }}_{{I_2}} + \underbrace {{{\left| {{g_1}} \right|}^2}{P_u}{R^{ - \alpha_I }}}_{{I_1}},
\end{equation}
where ${I_1}$ denotes the received power from the interfering UAV located at the distance $R$, and ${I_2}$ denotes the received power from all other interfering UAVs except the one located at the distance $R$.
For the near user at the typical cell, the Laplace transform of interference power distribution conditioned on the serving distance $R$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{laplace transform of near user in appendix}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{L}_w \left( {s\left| R \right.} \right) &= {{\mathbb E}}\left\{ {\exp \left( { - s{I_{w,\Psi} }} \right)\left| R \right.} \right\}
={\mathbb E}\left\{ {\left. \exp \left( { - s\sum\limits_{j \in \Psi,{d_j} > R } {{{\left| {{g_j}} \right|}^2}{\frac{{{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}}d_{j}^{ - \alpha_I }} } - s{{{\left| {{g_1}} \right|}^2}{\frac{{{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}}R^{ - \alpha_I }} \right) \right|} R \right\} \\
&= {{ {{\mathbb E}}}}\left\{ {\exp \left. {\left( { - s\sum\limits_{j \in \Psi, d_j>R } {{{ {{\mathbb E}}}_g}\left\{ {{{\left| {{g_j}} \right|}^2}} \right\}{\frac{{{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}}d_{j}^{ - \alpha_I }} } - s{{{\mathbb E}_g}\left\{ {{{\left| {{g_1}} \right|}^2}} \right\}{\frac{{{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}}R^{ - \alpha_I }} \right)} \right|R} \right\}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
We first evaluate the Laplace transform of $I_2$. Using the MGF of Gamma random variable ${\left| {{g_j}} \right|}$, and after some algebraic manipulations, $I_2$ can be rewritten to
\begin{equation}\label{laplace transform of near user in appendix I2}
\begin{aligned}
I_2 = \exp \left( { - 2\pi {\lambda }\int\limits_{{l_I}}^\infty {\left( {1 - {{{\mathbb E}}_g}\left\{ {\exp \left( { - s{{\left| {{g_j}} \right|}^2}{\frac{{{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}}r^{ - \alpha_I }} \right)} \right\}} \right)rdr} } \right),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where ${l_I} = \sqrt {{R ^2} + {h^2}}$.
Similar to the arguments from \eqref{laplace transform of typical user in appendix I2} to \eqref{Laplace transform of the typical expression after bonomial in appendix}, the Laplace transform of $I_2$ can be obtained as
\begin{equation}\label{laplace transform of near user in appendix I2}
\begin{aligned}
I_2 = \exp \left( { - \frac{{2\pi {\lambda }}}{\alpha_I }\sum\limits_{i{\rm{ = 1}}}^{m_I} {{
{m_I} \choose
i}} {{\left( {\frac{{s{P_u}}}{{m_I}}} \right)}^{\delta_I}}(-1)^{(\delta_I-i)}B\left( {\frac{{-s{P_u}}}{{l_I^{\alpha_I }m_I}};i - \delta_I,1-{m_I}} \right)} \right).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Note that the MGF derived in \eqref{laplace transform of near user in appendix I2} does not include the interfering UAV located at the distance $R$ strictly, which is actually the largest interference source. Therefore, using Poisson Hole Process (PHP), the first interference located at distance $R$ can be derived as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{first interferece_in appendix_I1}
I_1=\exp \left( {\frac{{ - 2\pi }}{{\pi {{\left( {R + \varepsilon } \right)}^2} - \pi {{\left( {R - \varepsilon } \right)}^2}}}\int\limits_{{l_I} - \varepsilon }^{{l_I} + \varepsilon } {\left( {1 - {{{\mathbb E}}_g}\left\{ {\exp \left( { - s{{\left| {{g_1}} \right|}^2}\frac{{{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}{{l_I^ {- \alpha_I }}}} \right)} \right\}} \right)rdr} } \right),
\end{equation}
where $\varepsilon$ is a small distance to evaluate the first interfering UAV.
With the aid of Laplace transform for the Nakagami-$m$ distribution with fading parameter $m_I$, we can obtain ${{{\mathbb E}}_g}\left\{ {{{\left| {{g_1}} \right|}^2}{{\frac{{{P_u}}}{{{m_I}}}}}d_1^{ - \alpha_I }} \right\} = {\left( {1 + \frac{{s{P_u}{l_I^{ - \alpha_I }}}}{m_I}} \right)^{ - m_I}}$. As such, the Laplace transform of the first interfering UAV can be rewritten to
\begin{equation}\label{Laplace transform of near expression I1 in appendix}
\begin{aligned}
I_1 &= \exp \left( {\frac{{ - 1}}{{2R\varepsilon }}\int\limits_{{l_I} - \varepsilon }^{{l_I} + \varepsilon } {\left( {1 - {{\left( {1 + \frac{{s{P_u}}}{{{m_I}{l_I^ { \alpha_I }}}}} \right)}^{ - {m_I}}}} \right)rdr} } \right)\\
& = \exp \left( { - \frac{{{l_I}}}{R} + \frac{{{l_I}}}{R}{{\left( {1 + \frac{{s{P_u}}}{{{l_I^{\alpha_I} }{m_I}}}} \right)}^{ - {m_I}}}} \right).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Based on \eqref{laplace transform of near user in appendix I2} and \eqref{Laplace transform of near expression I1 in appendix}, we can obtain the Laplace transform of the near user for the UAV-Centric strategy as given in \eqref{laplace transform of UAV in lemma}. The proof is complete.
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\section*{Appendix~D: Proof of Lemma~\ref{lemma5:outage of the near user conditioned on radius}} \label{Appendix:D}
\renewcommand{\theequation}{D.\arabic{equation}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
In order to prove the desired result, and according to Newton's Generalization of the binomial theorem \cite{Mathematics}, we first transform \eqref{Laplace transform of near expression I1 in appendix} into
\begin{equation}\label{Newton's Generalization}
{I_1} = \exp \left( { - \frac{{{l_I}}}{R} + \frac{{{l_I}}}{R}\sum\limits_{U = 0}^\infty {{{( - 1)}^U}C_{{m_I} + U + 1}^U} {{\left( {\frac{{s{P_u}}}{{l_I^\alpha {m_I}}}} \right)}^U}} \right),
\end{equation}
where $C_{{m_I} + U + 1}^U = \frac{{({m_I} + U + 1)({m_I} + U) + \cdots ({m_I} + 2)}}{{k!}}$.
According to the SINR expressions in \eqref{SINR_w tov} and \eqref{SINR_w}, and similar to Appendix B, we can derive the coverage probability conditioned on the serving distance $R$ of the near user in the UAV-centric strategy to
\begin{equation}\label{UAV-Centric_cover_first of near in appendix}
\begin{aligned}
{P_{cov,w}}\left( {r\left| R \right.} \right) = \exp \left( { - m{M_{w*}}\left( {{\sigma ^2} + {I_1} + {I_2}} \right)r_w^\alpha } \right)\sum\limits_{n = 0}^{m - 1} {\frac{{{{\left( {m{M_{w*}}\left( {{\sigma ^2} + {I_1} + {I_2}} \right)r_w^\alpha } \right)}^n}}}{{n!}}} .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
By applying polynomial expansion to \eqref{UAV-Centric_cover_first of near in appendix}, the coverage probability can be rewritten to
\begin{equation}\label{UAV-Centric_cover_after polynomial in appendix}
\begin{aligned}
{P_{cov,w}}\left( {r\left| R \right.} \right)& = \sum\limits_{n = 0}^{m - 1} {\sum\limits_{k = 0}^n {\sum\limits_{l = 0}^k {\frac{{{{( - 1)}^n}r_w^{\alpha n}}}{{l!(k - l)!(n - k)!}}} } } \exp \left( { - m{M_{w*}}{\sigma ^2}r_w^\alpha } \right){\left( { - m{M_{w*}}{\sigma ^2}} \right)^{n - k}} \\
& \times {{\mathbb E}_{{I_1}}}\left\{ {\exp \left( { - m{M_{w*}}{I_1}r_w^\alpha } \right){{\left( { - m{M_{w*}}{I_1}} \right)}^{k - l}}} \right\}{{\mathbb E}_{{I_2}}}\left\{ {\exp \left( { - m{M_{w*}}{I_2}r_w^\alpha } \right){{\left( { - m{M_{w*}}{I_2}} \right)}^l}} \right\}.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Following the similar steps from \eqref{outage first expression appendix C} to \eqref{faadi trans lambda 2}, and according to Fa \`{a} di Bruno's formula,
we can readily derive that the first interference $I_1$ to
\begin{equation}\label{UAV-Centric I1 appendix last}
\begin{aligned}
{\left. {\frac{{{d^{k - l}} {\mathcal{L}} ({M_{w*}}x)}}{{d{x^{k - l}}}}} \right|_{x = r_w^\alpha }} = \exp \left( { - \frac{{{l_I}}m}{R} + {\Theta _2}r_w^{\alpha U}} \right)\sum {(k - l)!} \prod\limits_{j = 1}^{k - l} {\frac{{{{\left( {\left( { - {\Theta _2}} \right)\prod\limits_{p = 0}^{j - 1} {\left( {u - p} \right)r_w^{\alpha (U - j)}} } \right)}^{{q_u}}}}}{{{q_u}!{{\left( {j!} \right)}^{{q_u}}}}}},
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where ${\Theta _2} = \frac{{{l_I}}m}{R}\sum\limits_{U = 0}^\infty {{{( - 1)}^U}C_{{m_I} + U + 1}^u} {\left( {\frac{{{M_{w*}}{P_u}}}{{l_I^{\alpha_I} {m_I}}}} \right)^U}$.
Then, the closed-form expression of the coverage probability for the near user in \eqref{coverage probability conditioned on radius Lemma near user UAV-centric} can be obtained. Thus, the Lemma is proved.
\begin{spacing}{1}
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}%
|
\section*{Introduction}
Let $X$ be a complex Banach space with open unit ball $B_X$ and unit sphere $S_X.$ Using standard notation, $\mathcal A_u(B_X)$ denotes the Banach
algebra of holomorphic (complex-analytic) functions $f\colon B_X \to \mathbb{C}$ that are uniformly continuous on $B_X.$ This algebra is clearly
a subalgebra of $\mathcal H^\infty(B_X),$ the Banach algebra of all bounded holomorphic mappings on $B_X$ both endowed with the supremum norm $\|f\|=\sup\{|f(x)|\ |\ \|x\|<1\}$. Also each
function in $\mathcal A_u(B_X)$ extends continuously to $\overline{B}_X$. Then, the {\em maximal ideal space} (the {\em spectrum} for short) of $\mathcal A_u(B_X),$ that is the set of all nonzero $\mathbb{C}-$valued homomorphisms $\mathcal M(\mathcal A_u(B_X))$
on $\mathcal A_u(B_X),$ contains the point evaluations $\delta_x$ for all $x \in X, \ \|x\| \leq 1.$ Our primary interest here
will be in the structure of the set of such homomorphisms, and our specific focus will be on the Gleason parts of $\mathcal M(\mathcal A_u(B_X))$ and $\mathcal M(\mathcal H^\infty(B_X))$ when $X = c_0.$ Classically, in the case of Banach algebras of holomorphic functions on a finite dimensional space, the study of Gleason parts was motivated by the search for analytic structure in the spectrum. That remains true in our case, in which the holomorphic functions have as their domain the (infinite dimensional) ball of $X.$ However, in infinite dimensions the situation is more complicated and more interesting. For instance, in this case, we will exhibit non-trivial examples of Gleason parts intersecting more than one fiber; this phenomenon holds in the finite dimensional case in only simple, uninteresting cases.
Unlike the situation when dim $X < \infty,$
it is well-known (see, e.g., \cite{aron-cole-gamelin}) that $\mathcal M(\mathcal A_u(B_X))$ usually contains much more than
mere evaluations at points of $\overline{B}_X$. As we will see, the study of Gleason parts of
$\mathcal M(\mathcal A_u(B_X))$ in the case of an infinite dimensional $X$ is considerably more difficult than in the easy, finite dimensional situation. Now, when the algebra considered is $\mathcal H^\infty(\mathbb{D})$ the seminal paper of Hoffman \cite{hoffman} evidences the complicated nature of the Gleason parts for its spectrum (see also \cite{gorkin, suarez, mortini}). So, it is not surprising that our results when $\mathbb{D}$ is replaced by
$B_X$ are incomplete. However, as we will see, much information about Gleason parts for both the $\mathcal A_u$ and $\mathcal H^\infty$ cases can be obtained when $X = c_0.$
\\
As just mentioned, we will concentrate on the case $X=c_0$, which is the natural extension of the polydisc $\mathbb{D}^n$. After a review in Section 1 of necessary background and some general
results, the description of Gleason parts for $\mathcal M(\mathcal{A}_u(B_{c_0}))$ will constitute Section 2. Finally, in Section 3 we will discuss what we have learned about Gleason parts for $\mathcal M(\mathcal H^\infty(B_{c_0})).$
\\
For general theory of holomorphic functions we refer the reader to the monograph of Dineen~\cite{dineen} and for further information on uniform algebras and Gleason parts we suggest the books of Bear~\cite{bear}, Gamelin~\cite{gamelin}, Garnett~\cite{garnett} and Stout~\cite{stout}.
\vspace{1cm}
\section{Background and general results}
In this section, we will discuss some simple results concerning Gleason parts for $\mathcal M(\mathcal A)$ where $\mathcal{A}$ is an algebra of holomorphic functions defined on the open unit ball of a general Banach space $X$.
Namely, $\mathcal A$ will denote either $\mathcal A_u(B_X)$ or $\mathcal H^\infty(B_X)$.
For a Banach space $X$, as usual $X^*$ and $X^{**}$ denote the dual and the bidual spaces, respectively. We begin with very short reviews of:\\ (i) Gleason parts (\cite{bear}, \cite{gamelin}) and\\ (ii) the particular Banach algebras of holomorphic functions that we are interested in.
\\
\indent (i) Let $\mathcal A$ be a uniform algebra and let
$\mathcal M(\mathcal A)$ denote the compact set of non-trivial homomorphisms $\varphi\colon \mathcal A \to \mathbb{C}$ endowed with the $w(\mathcal A^*,\mathcal A)$ topology ($w^*$ for short).
For $\varphi, \psi \in \mathcal M(\mathcal A),$ we set the {\em pseudo-hyperbolic distance}
$$
\rho(\varphi, \psi) :=
\sup\{|\varphi(f)| \ | \ f \in \mathcal A, \|f\| \leq 1, \psi(f) = 0 \}.
$$
Recall that when $\mathcal{A} = \mathcal{A}(\mathbb{D})$ or $\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{H}^\infty(\mathbb{D})$, the pseudo-hyperbolic metric for $\lambda$ and $\mu$ in the unit disc $\mathbb{D}$ is given by
$$
\rho(\delta_\lambda, \delta_\mu) = \Big| \frac{\lambda - \mu}{1 - \overline{\lambda}\mu}\Big|.
$$
Also, the formula given above remains true if $\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{A}(\mathbb{D})$ for $\lambda, \mu\in \overline{\mathbb{D}}$, if $|\lambda|=1$ and $\lambda \ne \mu$. Clearly, in this case, $\rho(\delta_\lambda, \delta_\mu) =1$.
The following very useful relation is well known (see, for instance, \cite[Theorem~2.8]{bear}):
\begin{equation}\label{Gleason-metric}
\|\varphi - \psi\| = \frac{2 - 2\sqrt{1 - \rho(\varphi, \psi)^2}}{\rho(\varphi,\psi)}.
\end{equation}
Noting that it is always the case that $\|\varphi - \psi\| \ (\equiv \sup_{\|f\| \leq 1}
|\varphi(f) - \psi(f)|) \leq 2,$ the main point here being that $\|\varphi - \psi\| < 2 $
if and only if $\rho(\varphi, \psi) <1.$ From this (with some work), it follows that by defining $\varphi \sim \psi$
to mean that $\rho(\varphi, \psi) < 1$ leads to a partition of $\mathcal M(\mathcal A)$ into equivalence classes, called {\em Gleason parts}. Specifically,
for each $\varphi \in \mathcal M(\mathcal A),$ the Gleason part containing $\varphi$ is
the set
$$
\mathcal {GP}(\varphi) := \{ \psi \ | \ \rho(\varphi,\psi) < 1\}.
$$
We remark that it was perhaps K\"onig \cite{konig} who coined the phrase {\em Gleason metric} for the metric $\|\varphi - \psi\|.$ \\
\indent (ii) We first recall \cite{davie-gamelin} that any $f \in \mathcal{H}^\infty(B_X)$ can be extended in a canonical way to $\tilde f \in \mathcal H^\infty(B_{X^{\ast\ast}}).$ Moreover,
the extension $f \leadsto \tilde f$ is a homomorphism of Banach algebras. A standard
argument shows that the canonical extension
takes functions in $\mathcal A_u(B_X)$ to functions in $\mathcal A_u(B_{X^{\ast\ast}}).$ Consequently, each point $z_0 \in
B_{X^{\ast\ast}}$ (resp. $\overline{B}_{X^{\ast\ast}}$) gives rise to an element $\tilde{\delta}_{z_0}\in \mathcal M(\mathcal H^\infty (B_X))$ (resp.
$\mathcal M(\mathcal A_u(B_{X}))).$ Here, for a given function $f, \tilde{\delta}_{z_0}(f) =
\tilde{f}(z_0).$ Note that for $f\in \mathcal A_u(B_{X})$ and $z_0\in X^{**}$, with $\|z_0\|=1$, we are allowed to compute $\tilde f(z_0)$ and we will use this fact without further mention. Also, in order to avoid unwieldy notation we will omit the tilde over the $\delta$, simply writing $\delta_{z_0}(f).$ We recall that either for $\mathcal{A}=\mathcal A_u(B_X)$ or $\mathcal{A}=\mathcal H^\infty(B_X)$ there is a mapping $\pi\colon\mathcal M(\mathcal A) \to \overline{B}_{X^{\ast\ast}}$ given by $\pi(\varphi) := \varphi|_{X^\ast}.$ Note that this makes sense since $X^\ast \subset \mathcal A.$ It is not difficult to see
that $\pi$ is surjective \cite{aron-cole-gamelin}. As usual, for any $z \in \overline{B}_{X^{\ast\ast}},$ the {\em fiber over $z,$}\ will be denoted by
$$
\mathcal M_z := \{ \varphi \in \mathcal M(\mathcal A) \ | \
\pi(\varphi) = z\}.
$$
As we will see, knowledge of the fiber structure is useful in the study of Gleason parts, in the context of the Banach algebras $\mathcal A_u(B_X)$ and $\mathcal H^\infty(B_X).$
The first instance of this occurs in part (b) of Proposition~\ref{basic 1} below.
\vskip .5cm
\begin{proposition}{\label{basic 1}}
Let $X$ be a Banach space and $\mathcal M = \mathcal M(\mathcal A)$ be as above.
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape (a)]
\item The set $\{\delta_z\colon z\in B_{X^{\ast\ast}}\}$ is contained in $\mathcal{GP}(\delta_0)$. In fact, $\rho(\delta_0,\delta_z) = \|z\|$ for each $z \in B_{X^{\ast\ast}}.$
\item Let $z \in S_{X^{\ast\ast}}$ and $w\in B_{X^{\ast\ast}}$. Then, for any $\varphi \in \mathcal M_z$ and $\psi \in \mathcal M_w$, $\rho(\varphi, \psi) = 1.$ That is, $\varphi$ and $\psi$ lie in different Gleason parts.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
\indent (a) Fix $z \in B_{X^{\ast\ast}}, z \neq 0,$ and $f \in \mathcal A,$ such that $\| f\| \leq 1$ and $f(0) = \delta_0(f) = 0.$
By an application of the Schwarz lemma to $\tilde f \in \mathcal A(X^{\ast\ast}),$ we see that $|\delta_z(f)| = |\tilde{f}(z)|
\leq \|z\|.$ Therefore $\rho(\delta_0, \delta_z) \leq \|z\| < 1,$ or in other words $\delta_z$ is in the same
Gleason part as $\delta_0.$ In addition, if we apply the definition of $\rho$ to a sequence $(x^*_n) \subset \overline{B}_{X^{\ast}} \subset
\mathcal A$ such that $|z(x^*_n)| \to \|z\|,$ we get that $\rho(\delta_0, \delta_z) \geq \|z\|.$
\indent (b) As in part (a) and using that $\varphi\in \mathcal{M}_z$, we may choose a sequence $(x_n^*)$ of norm one functionals on $X$ such that $\varphi(x^*_n) = z(x^*_n) \to \|z\| = 1.$ Observe
that $| \psi(x^*_n) | = |w(x^*_n)| \leq \| w\| < 1.$ For each $n, m \in \mathbb{N},$ the function $g_{n,m}\colon B_X\to\mathbb{C}$ defined as
$$
g_{n,m}(\cdot) = \frac{(x^*_n(\cdot))^m - w(x^*_n)^m}{\| (x^*_n)^m - w(x^*_n)^m \|}
$$
is in $\mathcal A = \mathcal A_u(B_X)$ or $\mathcal H^\infty(B_X).$ Evidently, $\| g_{n,m} \| = 1$ and $\psi(g_{n,m}) = 0.$ In addition,
$$
|\varphi(g_{n,m})| \geq \frac{ |z(x^*_n)|^m - \|w\|^m}{1 + \|w\|^m},
$$
which approaches $1$ with $n$ and $m$. Then, $\rho(\psi, \varphi) = 1$ and $\psi$ and $\varphi$ are in different parts.
\end{proof}
In the classical situation of $\mathcal M(\mathcal H^\infty(\mathbb{D})),$ the Gleason part containing the evaluation at the origin, $\delta_0,$
consists of the set $\{ \delta_z \ | \ z \in \mathbb{D}\}.$ This known fact is made evident in view of Proposition \ref{basic 1} and the fact that fibers over points in $\mathbb{D}$ are singletons. In the case of an infinite dimensional space $X$, it can happen that fibers (over interior points) are bigger than single evaluations and also the Gleason part of $\delta_0$ could properly contain $B_{X^{**}}$.
The following, which uses part (a) of Proposition~\ref{basic 1},
gives a glimpse at this situation.\\
\begin{proposition}{\label{gp-at-0}} Let $X$ be a Banach space. Fix $r$, $0 < r < 1$ and consider $B_{X^{\ast\ast}}(0,r) \approx\{ \delta_z \ | \ z \in X^{\ast\ast}, \|z\| < r\} \subset \mathcal M(\mathcal A).$
Then the closure of $B_{X^{\ast\ast}}(0,r)$ in $\mathcal M(\mathcal A)$ is contained in $\mathcal {GP}(\delta_0).$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Fix $\varphi \in \mathcal M(\mathcal A)$, $\varphi $ in the closure of $B_{X^{\ast\ast}}(0,r)$, and choose any $f \in \mathcal A, f(0)=0, \|f\| = 1.$ By definition, for fixed $\varepsilon>0$ such that $r + \varepsilon <1$ there is $z \in B_{X^{\ast\ast}}(0,r)$ such that $| \varphi(f) - \delta_z(f)| < \varepsilon.$
Then, $$|\varphi(f) - \delta_0(f)| \leq \varepsilon + |\delta_0(f) - \delta_z(f)|\le \varepsilon + \rho(\delta_0, \delta_z) < \varepsilon + r.$$ Thus, $\rho(\varphi,\delta_0) < 1,$ which concludes the proof.
\end{proof}
In many common situations, there are norm-continuous polynomials $P$ acting on the Banach space $X$ whose restriction to $B_X$ is not weakly continuous. To give
one very easy example, the $2-$homogeneous polynomial $P\colon \ell_2 \to \mathbb{C}, \ P(x) = \sum_n x_n^2$ is such that $1 = P(\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}[e_1 + e_n]) \neq 1/2 = P(\frac{\sqrt{2}}{2}e_1).$
In these cases, the following corollary shows that the exact composition of $\mathcal {GP}(\delta_0)$ is somewhat more complicated.
\begin{corollary}{\label{not-wkly-conts}}
Let $X$ be a Banach space which admits a (norm) continuous polynomial that is not weakly continuous when restricted to the unit ball. Then $B_{X^{\ast\ast}} \subsetneqq \mathcal {GP}(\delta_0).$
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof} Combining~\cite[Corollary~2]{boyd-ryan} and~\cite[Proposition~3]{boyd-ryan} if $X$ admits a polynomial which is not weakly continuous when restricted to the unit ball, then there is a homogeneous polynomial $P$ on $X$ whose canonical extension $\tilde{P}$ to $X^{\ast\ast}$ is not weak-star continuous at $0$ when restricted to any ball $B_{X^{\ast\ast}}(0,r),\ 0<r<1.$ Fix any $r$ and choose a net $(z_\alpha) \subset B_{X^{\ast\ast}}(0,r)$ that is
weak-star convergent to $0$ and $\tilde{P}(z_\alpha) \nrightarrow 0.$ Choosing a subnet if necessary, we may assume that $\tilde{P}(z_\alpha) \to b \neq 0.$ Applying
Proposition~\ref{gp-at-0}, if $\varphi \in \mathcal M(\mathcal A)$ is a limit point of $\{\delta_{z_\alpha}\},$ then $\varphi \in \mathcal {GP}(\delta_0).$ Note that
$\delta_0(P) = 0 \neq b = \varphi(P),$ so that $\delta_0 \neq \varphi.$ Finally, $\varphi \in \mathcal M_0,$ since $\pi(\varphi) = \varphi|_{X^\ast},$ which shows
that $\varphi \in \mathcal {GP}(\delta_0) \backslash B_{X^{\ast\ast}}.$
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Note that, under the hypothesis of the above result, by Proposition~\ref{basic 1}, each homomorphism $\varphi\in\mathcal {GP}(\delta_0)\backslash B_{X^{\ast\ast}}$ should be in some fiber over points in $B_{X^{\ast\ast}}$.
\end{remark}
\vspace{.5cm}
In the rest of this section, we will focus on the calculation of the pseudo-hyperbolic distance in some special, albeit important, situations. Here, we will have
to distinguish between the cases $\mathcal A = \mathcal A_u(B_X)$ and $\mathcal A = \mathcal H^\infty(B_X).$
\begin{proposition}{\label{automorphisms}} Let $X$ be a Banach space and
$\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{A}_u(B_X)$ or $\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_X)$. Suppose that there exists an automorphism $\Phi\colon B_X \to B_X$ and in addition for the case of $\mathcal{A}_u(B_X)$, assume $\Phi$ is uniformly continuous. Then, given $x\in B_X$ such that $\Phi(x)=0$, for any $y\in B_X$ we have
$$
\rho(\delta_x,\delta_y) = \|\Phi(y)\|.
$$
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We only prove the case $\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{A}_u(B_X)$. Let $f \in \mathcal A_u(B_X), \|f\| \leq 1,$ such that $\delta_x(f) = f(x) = 0.$ As $f
\circ \Phi^{-1}$ is in $\mathcal H^\infty(B_X)$, we can apply the Schwarz lemma to obtain
$$
|\delta_y(f)| = |f(y)| = |f \circ \Phi^{-1}(\Phi(y))| \leq \|\Phi(y)\|.
$$
Thus, from the definition of $\rho,$ we see that $\rho(\delta_x,\delta_y) \leq \|\Phi(y)\|.$
\par
For the reverse inequality, choose a norm one functional $x^\ast \in X^\ast$ such that $x^\ast(\Phi(y)) = \|\Phi(y)\|,$
and set
$f = x^\ast \circ \Phi.$ Since $f \in \mathcal A_u(B_X)$ has norm at most $1$ and satisfies $f(x) = 0,$ we get that
$$
\rho(\delta_x, \delta_y) \geq |\delta_y(f)| = \|\Phi(y)\|.
$$
\end{proof}
Note that the proof of Proposition~\ref{automorphisms} shows that $\rho(\delta_x,\delta_y)$ is independent of the particular choice of the automorphism $\Phi.$
For subsequent embedding results, for a Banach space $X$ and $\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{A}_u(B_X)$ or $\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_X)$ we will use the Gleason metric on $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})$. As we have already noted in (i) at the beginning of this section, this metric is the restriction of the usual distance given by the norm on $\mathcal{A}^*$. When we refer to the Gleason metric for elements of $B_{X^{**}}$, the open unit ball $B_{X^{**}}$ will be regarded as a subset of $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})$. As we will see in the next proposition, under certain conditions, the automorphism $\Phi$ of Proposition \ref{automorphisms} induces an isometry (for the Gleason metric) in the spectrum that sends some fibers onto different fibers. This type of isometry allows us to transfer information relative to Gleason parts intersecting one fiber to other fibers. Recall that a \textit{finite type polynomial} on $X$ is a function in the algebra generated by $X^*$. Also, a Banach space $X$ is said to be {\em symmetrically regular} if every continuous linear mapping $T\colon X\to X^*$ which is symmetric (i. e. $T(x_1)(x_2)=T(x_2)(x_1)$ for all $x_1, x_2\in X$) turns out to be weakly compact.
\begin{proposition}{\label{Gleason-isometry}}
Let $X$ be a Banach space and $\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{A}_u(B_X)$ or $\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_X)$. Suppose that there exists an automorphism $\Phi\colon B_X \to B_X$ and in addition for the case of $\mathcal{A}_u(B_X)$, assume $\Phi$ and $\Phi^{-1}$ are uniformly continuous.
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape (i)]
\item The mapping $\Phi$ induces a composition operator $C_\Phi\colon \mathcal{A}\to \mathcal{A}$, $C_\Phi(f)=f\circ \Phi$ such that $\Lambda_\Phi:= C_\Phi^t|_{\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})}\colon \mathcal M(\mathcal{A})\to \mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})$,
the restriction of its transpose to $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})$, is an onto isometry for the Gleason metric with inverse $\Lambda_\Phi^{-1}=\Lambda_{\Phi^{-1}}$.
\item If for every $x^*\in X^*$, $x^*\circ\Phi$ and $x^*\circ\Phi^{-1}$ are uniform limits of finite type polynomials then for any $x\in \overline B_{X}$, $\Lambda_\Phi(\mathcal{M}_x)= \mathcal{M}_{\Phi(x)}$. If in addition $X$ is symmetrically regular, then, for any $z\in \overline B_{X^{**}}$, $\Lambda_\Phi(\mathcal{M}_z)= \mathcal{M}_{\widetilde\Phi(z)}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
To prove (i), just notice that for $f\in\mathcal{A}$ and $\varphi\in\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})$,
$$
\Lambda_{\Phi^{-1}}(\Lambda_\Phi(\varphi))(f)=\Lambda_\Phi(\varphi)\big(f\circ \Phi^{-1}\big)=\varphi(f).
$$
Through this equality it is easily seen that $\|\Lambda_\Phi(\varphi)-\Lambda_\Phi(\psi)\|=\|\varphi-\psi\|$, for all $\varphi, \psi\in\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})$.
It is enough to prove (ii) in the case $X$ is symmetrically regular. Fix $z\in \overline B_{X^{**}}$ and take $\varphi\in \mathcal{M}_z$. Given $x_1^*, \ldots, x_n^*$ in $X^*$ as $\varphi$ is multiplicative, we have that
$$ \varphi(x_1^*\cdots x_n^*)=\varphi(x_1^*)\cdots \varphi(x_n^*)=z(x_1^*)\cdots z(x_n^*).$$
Thus, since any polynomial $Q$ of finite type is a linear combination of elements as above, we have
$$ \varphi(Q)=\widetilde Q(z).$$
By hypothesis, for any $x^*\in X^*$ there exists a sequence $(Q_k)$ of polynomials of finite type that converges uniformly to $x^*\circ \Phi$ on $B_X$. Hence, the sequence $(\widetilde Q_k)$ converges to $\widetilde x^*\circ \widetilde\Phi$ uniformly on $ B_{X^{**}}$ and $\widetilde \Phi$ admits a unique extension to $\overline B_{X^{**}}$ through weak-star continuity. Thus,
$$\Lambda_\Phi(\varphi)(x^*)= \varphi(x^*\circ \Phi)= \lim_k \varphi(Q_k)=\lim_k \widetilde Q_k(z)=(\widetilde\Phi (z))(x^*).$$
Consequently, $\Lambda_{\Phi}(\mathcal{M}_z)\subset \mathcal{M}_{\widetilde\Phi(z)}$. Now, the reverse inclusion follows from (i) because, since $X$ is symmetrically regular and arguing as in the proof of \cite[Corollary 2.2]{choi-garcia-kim-maestre}, we know that $\widetilde{\Phi^{-1}}\circ \widetilde\Phi=Id$. Therefore,
$\Lambda_{\Phi}(\mathcal{M}_z)= \mathcal{M}_{\widetilde\Phi(z)}$.
\end{proof}
To conclude this section, we give three examples of these results.
\begin{example}{\label{ex: c0}}
Let $X = c_0$ and fix a point $x=(x_n) \in B_{c_0}$. Define the mapping $\Phi_x\colon B_{c_0} \to B_{c_0}$ as follows:
$$
\Phi_x(y) = (\eta_{x_1}(y_1), \eta_{x_2}(y_2),\dots ),
$$
where $\eta_\alpha(\lambda) = \frac{\alpha - \lambda}{1 - \overline{\alpha}\lambda}, \ \alpha, \lambda \in \mathbb{D}.$ In this case $\Phi_x$ is a uniformly continuous automorphism ($\Phi_x^{-1} = \Phi_x$) with $\Phi_x(x)=0$ and so, for any $y\in B_{c_0}$, $$\rho(\delta_x,\delta_y) = \| \Phi_x(y)\| = \sup_{n \geq 1 }\Big| \frac{x_n - y_n}{1 - \overline{x_n}y_n}\Big| = \sup_{n \geq 1} \rho(\delta_{x_n},\delta_{y_n}).$$\\
Also, $\Lambda_{\Phi_x}$ is an onto isometry for the Gleason metric in $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})$ both for $\mathcal{A}= \mathcal{A}_u(B_{c_0})$ or $\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0})$. Moreover, $\Lambda_{\Phi_x}(\mathcal{M}_z)=\mathcal{M}_{\widetilde\Phi_x(z)}$ for any $z\in \overline B_{\ell_\infty}$.
\end{example}
In the next section, we will discuss the more complicated, more interesting extension of the previous example to $z\in\overline{B}_{\ell_\infty}$; see Theorem~\ref{thm:delta-rho}.
\begin{example}{\label{ex: ell-2-ball}} (\cite[Lemma 4.4]{aron-carando-gamelin-lassalle-maestre})
Let $X = \ell_2$ and fix a point $x \in B_{\ell_2}.$ Define the mapping $\beta_x\colon B_{\ell_2}\to B_{\ell_2}$ as follows:
$$
\beta_x(y) = \frac{1}{1 + \sqrt{1 - \|x\|^2}} \langle\frac{x - y}{1 - \langle y,x\rangle}, x\rangle x + \sqrt{1 - \|x\|^2} \frac{x-y}{1 - \langle y,x\rangle}
$$
$(y \in B_{\ell_2}).$ From~\cite[Proposition 1, p.132]{renaud}, we know that $\beta_x$ is an automorphism from $B_{\ell_2}$ onto itself, with inverse map $\beta_x^{-1} = \beta_x$ and $\beta_x(x)=0$.\\
Also, by expanding $1/[1-\langle y,x\rangle]$ as a geometric series $\sum \langle y,x\rangle ^n$ and noting that the series converges uniformly on $\overline{B}_{\ell_2}$, we see that
$\beta_x(y) = g(y)x+h(y)y$, where the functions $g$ and $h$ are in
$\mathcal A_u(B_{\ell_2})$. Thus, $\beta_x$ is uniformly continuous.
Applying Proposition~\ref{automorphisms}, we see that for all $x, y \in B_{\ell_2}, \
\rho(\delta_x,\delta_y) = \|\beta_x(y)\|.$ Also, by Proposition~\ref{Gleason-isometry}, $\Lambda_{\beta_x}$ is an onto isometry for the Gleason metric in $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})$, both for $\mathcal{A}= \mathcal{A}_u(B_{\ell_2})$ or $\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{\ell_2})$. Moreover, as Proposition~\ref{Gleason-isometry} (ii) holds (see \cite[Lemma 4.3]{aron-carando-gamelin-lassalle-maestre}) $\Lambda_{\beta_x}(\mathcal{M}_y)=\mathcal{M}_{\beta_x(y)}$ for all $y\in\overline B_{\ell_2}$.
\end{example}
\begin{example}{\label{ex:L(H)}}
Let $H$ be an infinite dimensional Hilbert space and let $X = \mathcal L(H)$ be the Banach space of all bounded linear operators from $H$ into itself. Fix $R\in B_{\mathcal L(H)}$ and denote by $R^*$ its adjoint operator. Define the mapping $\Phi_R$ on $B_{\mathcal L(H)}$ as follows:
$$
\Phi_R(T)=(I-RR^*)^{\frac 12}(T - R)(I - R^*T)^{-1}(I-R^*R)^{\frac 12},
$$
($T\in B_{\mathcal L(H)}$). Note that $\Phi_R\colon B_{\mathcal L(H)}\to B_{\mathcal L(H)}$ is an automorphism with inverse map $\Phi_{-R}$ and $\Phi_R(R)=0$. As in the example above, it can be seen that $\Phi_R$ is uniformly continuous. Then, by Proposition~\ref{automorphisms}, for $R, S\in B_{\mathcal L(H)}$ we obtain $\rho(\delta_R,\delta_S) = \|\Phi_R(S)\|.$ Again, by Proposition~\ref{Gleason-isometry}, $\Lambda_{\Phi_R}$ is an onto isometry for the Gleason metric in $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})$, both for $\mathcal{A}= \mathcal{A}_u(B_{\mathcal L(H)})$ or $\mathcal{A}=\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{\mathcal L(H)})$.
\end{example}
\smallskip
\section{Gleason parts for $\mathcal M(\mathcal A_u(B_{c_0})).$}
Compared to other infinite dimensional Banach spaces, what is unusual about $X = c_0$ is that, in relative terms, there are very few continuous polynomials $P\colon c_0 \to \mathbb{C}.$ All
such polynomials are norm limits of finite linear combinations of elements of $c_0^\ast = \ell_1.$ As a consequence, there are very few holomorphic functions on $c_0$ \cite{dineen}. In
particular, every $f \in \mathcal A_u(B_{c_0})$ is a uniform limit of such polynomials.
Thus, since any homomorphism is automatically continuous, its action on $\mathcal A_u(B_{c_0})$ is completely determined by
its action on $c_0^\ast.$ In other words, $\mathcal M(\mathcal A_u(B_{c_0}))$
is precisely $\{ \delta_{z} \ | \ \ z \in \overline{B}_{\ell_\infty} \}.$ Note that if $c_0$ were replaced by $\ell_p,$ this
approximation result would be false, and in fact $\mathcal M(\mathcal A_u(B_{\ell_p}))$ is considerably larger and more complicated than
$\overline B_{\ell_p} \approx \{\delta_z \ | \ z \in \overline B_{\ell_p}\}$ (see, e.g., \cite{farmer}).\\
Our aim here will be to get a reasonably complete description of the Gleason parts of $\mathcal M(\mathcal A_u(B_{c_0})).$ As just mentioned, our work is
greatly helped by the fact that we know exactly what $\mathcal M(\mathcal A_u(B_{c_0}))$ is, namely that it can be associated with
$\overline{B}_{\ell_\infty}.$ A special role is played by homomorphisms $\delta_z$ where $z$ belongs to the distinguished boundary $\mathbb{T}^\mathbb{N}$, the set of all elements $z=(z_n)$ such that $|z_n|=1$ for all $n$. Also, notice that compared with the finite dimensional situation, there is a new and interesting ``wrinkle'' here
in that there are unit vectors $z = (z_n)_n\in\overline B_{\ell_\infty}$ all of whose coordinates have absolute value smaller than $1.$ We begin with
a straightforward lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{restriction} For any $\varnothing \neq \mathbb{N}_0 \subset \mathbb{N},$ let $\Gamma\colon\ell_\infty \to \ell_\infty(\mathbb{N}_0)$ be the projection mapping taking $z = (z_j)_{j \in \mathbb{N}} \mapsto
\Gamma(z) = (z_j)_{j \in \mathbb{N}_0}.$ Then for all $z, w \in \overline{B}_{\ell_\infty},$ the following inequality holds:
$$\|\delta_{\Gamma(z)} - \delta_{\Gamma(w)}\| \leq \|\delta_z - \delta_w\|.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Clearly, $\Gamma$ is a linear operator having norm 1, and $\Gamma(c_0) = c_0(\mathbb{N}_0).$ Thus each $f \in \mathcal A_u(B_{c_0(\mathbb{N}_0)})$
generates a function $g \in \mathcal A_u(B_{c_0})$ given by $g = f \circ \Gamma|_{c_0}$ having the same norm as $f$. An easy verification shows that
the extension of $g$ to $\mathcal A_u(B_{\ell_\infty})$ is given by $\tilde{g} = \tilde f \circ \Gamma.$ Therefore for all $z, w \in \ell_\infty, \|z\|, \|w\| \leq 1,$
$$\|\delta_{\Gamma(z)} - \delta_{\Gamma(w)}\| = \sup \{| \tilde{f}(\Gamma(z)) - \tilde{f}(\Gamma(w))| \ | \ f \in \mathcal A_u(B_{c_0(\mathbb{N}_0)}), \ \|f\| \leq 1\}$$
$$\leq \sup \{ | \tilde{g}(z) - \tilde{g}(w)| \ | \ g \in \mathcal A_u(B_{c_0}),\ \|g\| \leq 1\} = \| \delta_z - \delta_w\|. $$
\end{proof}
\bigskip
Another way to restate Lemma~\ref{restriction} is as follows: if $\delta_z \in \mathcal{GP}(\delta_w),$ then $\delta_{\Gamma(z)} \in \mathcal {GP}(\delta_{\Gamma(w)}).$ Since $\mathbb{N}_0$ is allowed to be finite, say of cardinal $k$, if $\delta_z$ and $\delta_w$ are in the same Gleason part, then their projections onto finite coordinates (viewed as being in $\mathbb{D}^k$) are also in the same Gleason part. Our next result examines the situation: Suppose that $z, w \in \overline{B}_{\ell_{\infty}}$ are such that $\delta_z$ and $\delta_w$ are in the same Gleason part. What can we say about the coordinates where these points differ and where these points are identical?
\begin{lemma}\label{differ}
For $z, w \in \overline{B}_{\ell_\infty}$, let $\mathbb{N}_0 = \{n \in \mathbb{N} \ | \ z_n \neq w_n\}$ and $\Gamma\colon\ell_\infty \to \ell_\infty(\mathbb{N}_0)$ be the projection as in Lemma~\ref{restriction}. Then $$\|\delta_z - \delta_w\|=\|\delta_{\Gamma(z)} - \delta_{\Gamma(w)}\|.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Fix $z\in \overline B_{\ell_\infty}$ and define $\Theta_z\colon\ell_\infty(\mathbb{N}_0) \to \ell_\infty$ by:
$$
(\Theta_z(u))_n = \begin{cases} u_n & {\rm \ if \ } n \in \mathbb{N}_0,\\
z_n & {\rm \ if \ } n \notin \mathbb{N}_0.
\end{cases}
$$
Given $g \in \mathcal A_u(B_{c_0}), \ \|g\| \leq 1,$ let $f = \tilde{g} \circ \Theta_z|_{c_0(\mathbb{N}_0)}.$ Note that $f$ is well-defined since
whenever $u \in \overline{B}_{\ell_\infty(\mathbb{N}_0)}$ then $\Theta_z(u) \in \overline{B}_{\ell_\infty}.$ It is easy to check that $f \in \mathcal A_u(B_{c_0(\mathbb{N}_0)}),$
$\|f\| \leq 1, $ and that $\tilde{f} = \tilde{g} \circ \Theta_z \in \mathcal A_u(B_{\ell_\infty(\mathbb{N}_0)}).$ From the definition of $\mathbb{N}_0,$ we see that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|\delta_z - \delta_w\| & = & \sup \{ |\tilde{g}(z) - \tilde{g}(w)| \ | \ g \in \mathcal A_u(B_{c_0}), \|g\| \leq 1\}\\
& = & \sup \{ |\tilde{g}(\Theta_z \circ \Gamma(z)) - \tilde{g}(\Theta_z \circ \Gamma(w))| \ | \ g \in \mathcal A_u(B_{c_0}), \|g\| \leq 1\}\\
& \leq & \sup \{ | \tilde{f}(\Gamma(z)) - \tilde{f}(\Gamma(w))| \ | \ f \in \mathcal A_u(B_{c_0(\mathbb{N}_0)}), \|f\| \leq 1\}\\
& = & \|\delta_{\Gamma(z)} - \delta_{\Gamma(w)}\|,
\end{eqnarray*}
and this, with the previous lemma, completes the proof.
\end{proof}
One consequence of this result is that if $z\in \overline{B}_{\ell_\infty}$ with $|z_n| < 1$, for some $n$, then any $w\in \overline{B}_{\ell_\infty}$ such that $w_j = z_j,$ for all $j \neq n$, and $|w_n| < 1$, satisfies that $\delta_z$ and $\delta_w$ are in the same Gleason part. In particular, the only Gleason parts that are singleton points are the evaluations at points in the distinguished boundary $\mathbb{T}^\mathbb{N}$ of $\overline{B}_{\ell_\infty},$ i.e. the points in the Shilov boundary of $\mathcal M(\mathcal A_u(B_{c_0})).$\\
\begin{lemma}\label{cor-restriction}
For each $n \in \mathbb{N},$ let $\Gamma_n\colon \ell_\infty \to \ell_{\infty}(\{1,2,\dots,n\})$ be the natural projection. If $z$ and $w$ are both in $\overline{B}_{\ell_\infty},$ then
$$
\|\delta_z - \delta_w\| = \lim_{n \to \infty} \|\delta_{\Gamma_n(z)} - \delta_{\Gamma_n(w)}\| = \sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \|\delta_{\Gamma_n(z)} - \delta_{\Gamma_n(w)}\|.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, Lemma~\ref{restriction} implies that the sequence $(\|\delta_{\Gamma_n(z)} - \delta_{\Gamma_n(w)}\|)$ is increasing and bounded by $\|\delta_z - \delta_w\|.$ Note also that for each $u \in \overline{B}_{\ell_\infty}, \ \Gamma_n(u) \overset{w(\ell_\infty,\ell_1)}{\longrightarrow} u$, and if $f$ is in $\mathcal A_u(B_{c_0}),$ it follows that $\tilde{f} \in \mathcal A_u(B_{\ell_\infty})$ is weak-star continuous. Consequently,
$\tilde{f}(\Gamma_n(u)) \to \tilde{f}(u)$ as $n \to \infty.$ Therefore, for any $\varepsilon > 0$ take $f \in \mathcal A_u(B_{c_0}), \|f\| \leq 1,$ such that $|\tilde{f}(z) - \tilde{f}(w)|>\|\delta_z -\delta_w\|-\frac{\varepsilon}{2}$. Then,
we can find $n_0 \in \mathbb{N}$ such that both of the following hold:
$$
|\tilde{f}(\Gamma_{n_0}(z)) - \tilde{f}(z)| < \frac{\varepsilon}{4} \quad {\rm and }\quad |\tilde{f}(\Gamma_{n_0}(w)) - \tilde{f}(w)| < \frac{\varepsilon}{4}.
$$
Hence, we see that
$$|\tilde{f}(z) - \tilde{f}(w)| \leq \frac{\varepsilon}{4} + |\tilde{f}(\Gamma_{n_0}(z)) - \tilde{f}(\Gamma_{n_0}(w))| + \frac{\varepsilon}{4} \leq \|\delta_{\Gamma_{n_0}(z)} - \delta_{\Gamma_{n_0}(w)}\| + \frac{\varepsilon}{2}.$$
From this, we obtain that $ \|\delta_z - \delta_w\| \leq \|\delta_{\Gamma_{n_0}(z)} - \delta_{\Gamma_{n_0}(w)}\| + \varepsilon,$ and the lemma follows.
\end{proof}
For the subsequent description of the Gleason parts for $\mathcal M(\mathcal A_u(B_{c_0}))$ we introduce the following notation.
For each $\lambda\in \mathbb{D}$ and $0<r<1$, we denote the {\it pseudo-hyperbolic $r$-disc} centered at $\lambda$ by
$$
\mathcal D_r(\lambda)=\Big\{\mu\in\mathbb{D}\ |\ \rho(\delta_\lambda, \delta_\mu) = \Big| \frac{\lambda - \mu}{1 - \overline{\lambda}\mu}\Big| < r\Big\}.
$$
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:delta-rho}
Let $z = (z_n)$ and $w = (w_n)$ be vectors in $\overline{B}_{\ell_\infty}.$ Then
\begin{equation}\label{(6.1):Cole-Gamelin-Johnson}
\|\delta_z - \delta_w\| = \sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \|\delta_{z_n} - \delta_{w_n}\|.
\end{equation}
Moreover, if $\mathbb{N}_0=\{n \in \mathbb{N} \ | \ z_n \neq w_n\}$ then
\begin{equation}\label{ro=sup}
\rho(\delta_z, \delta_w) = \sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \rho(\delta_{z_n}, \delta_{w_n})=\sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}_0} \Big|\frac{z_n - w_n}{1 - \overline{z_n}w_n}\Big|.
\end{equation}
Hence, given $z = (z_n)\in\overline{B}_{\ell_\infty}$ we have
$$
\mathcal{GP}(\delta_z)=\bigcup_{0<r<1}\{\delta_w\ |\ w_n=z_n \ \textrm{if}\ |z_n|=1 \ \textrm{and}\ w_n\in\mathcal D_r(z_n)\ \textrm{if}\ |z_n|<1\,\}.
$$\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} By Lemma~\ref{cor-restriction}, it is enough to see that $\|\delta_{\Gamma_n(z)} - \delta_{\Gamma_n(w)}\|=\sup_{1\le k \le n}\|\delta_{z_k}- \delta_{w_k}\|$ for all $n$, where $\Gamma_n\colon \ell_\infty \to \ell_{\infty}(\{1,2,\dots,n\})$ is the natural projection. By Lemma~\ref{differ}, we may also assume that $z_k\ne w_k$ for $k=1,\ldots, n$.
First, suppose that there exists $k$, $1\le k\le n$, such that $|z_k|=1$ or $|w_k|=1$. Then, $\|\delta_{z_k}- \delta_{w_k}\|=2$ and Lemma~\ref{restriction} gives the equality. Now, assume that $|z_k|, |w_k| <1$ for all $1\le k\le n$. Note that~\eqref{Gleason-metric} describes $\|\delta_{\Gamma_n(z)} - \delta_{\Gamma_n(w)}\|$ in terms of $\rho(\delta_{\Gamma_n(z)}, \delta_{\Gamma_n(w)})$ by an increasing function. Using Example~\ref{ex: c0} we see that $\rho(\delta_{\Gamma_n(z)}, \delta_{\Gamma_n(w)})=\sup_{1\le k \le n} \rho(\delta_{z_k}, \delta_{w_k})$ and both equalities \eqref{(6.1):Cole-Gamelin-Johnson} and \eqref{ro=sup} follow from this.
Now, from $\rho(\delta_z, \delta_w) = \sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \rho(\delta_{z_n}, \delta_{w_n})$, we have
$$\mathcal{GP}(\delta_z)=\bigcup_{0<r<1} \{\delta_w\ |\ \rho(\delta_{z_n}, \delta_{w_n})<r, \textrm{ for all } n\}.$$
The conclusion trivially holds.
\end{proof}
Notice that if the algebra is $\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0})$ and the vectors $z, w$ belong to the open unit ball $B_{\ell_\infty}$, equation \eqref{(6.1):Cole-Gamelin-Johnson} coincides with equation (6.1) of~\cite[Theorem 6.6]{cole-gamelin-johnson}. The next example illustrates how Theorem~\ref{thm:delta-rho} can be used.
\begin{example}\label{norm-one}
Consider the following points in the sphere of $\ell_\infty:$ $z = (1 - \frac{1}{n})_n,
w = (1 - \frac{1}{n^2})_n,$ and $u = (1 - \frac{1}{2n})_n.$ Then $\delta_z$ and $\delta_w$
are in different Gleason parts, while $\delta_z$ and $\delta_u$ are in the same part.\\
\vspace{.1cm}
To see this, observe that
$$
\rho(\delta_z, \delta_w) = \sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \rho(\delta_{z_n},\delta_{w_n}) =
\sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \left|\frac{z_n - w_n}{1 - \overline{z_n}w_n}\right| = \sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \left|\frac{n - n^2}{n^2 + n - 1}\right| = 1,
$$
which shows the first assertion. Similarly,
$$
\rho(\delta_z, \delta_u) =\sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \rho(\delta_{z_n},\delta_{u_n}) = \sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \left| \frac{z_n - u_n}
{1 - \overline{z_n}u_n}\right| =\sup_{n \in \mathbb{N}} \frac{n}{3n - 1} = \frac{1}{2}.
$$
Thus, $\delta_z$ and $\delta_u$ belong to the same Gleason part.
\end{example}
In order to give a more descriptive insight of the size of the Gleason parts, let us introduce some notation.
Given $z= (z_n)\in\overline B_{\ell_\infty}$, let $\mathbb{N}_1$ be the (possibly empty) set $\mathbb{N}_1=\{n\in\mathbb{N}\ |\ |z_n|=1\}$. Now, $\mathbb{N}\setminus\mathbb{N}_1$ can be split into two disjoint sets $\mathbb{N}_2\cup \mathbb{N}_3$ such that
$$
\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}_2} |z_n|<1 \qquad \textrm{ and }\qquad \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}_3} |z_n|=1.
$$
Note that $\mathbb{N}_2$ and $\mathbb{N}_3$ could be empty and that they are not uniquely determined. For instance, if $\mathbb{N}_3$ is infinite and $\mathbb{N}_2$ is finite, we may redefine $\mathbb{N}_3$ as the union of $\mathbb{N}_3$ and $\mathbb{N}_2$ and redefine $\mathbb{N}_2$ to be empty. Also, $\mathbb{N}_3$ cannot be finite.
In this way we write $\mathbb{N}$ as a disjoint union satisfying the above conditions: $\mathbb{N}=\mathbb{N}_1\cup \mathbb{N}_2\cup \mathbb{N}_3$ and, therefore, the Gleason part containing $\delta_z$ satisfies:
$$
\mathcal{GP}(\delta_z)=\left\{\delta_w\ |\ w_n=z_n\ \text{if}\ n\in\mathbb{N}_1,\ \sup_{n\in\mathbb{N}_2}|w_n|<1 \ \text{and}\ \sup_{n\in\mathbb{N}_3}\left|\frac{z_n-w_n}{1-\overline{z}_nw_n}\right|<1 \,\right\}.
$$
Now, taking into account all the possibilities for the sets $\mathbb{N}_1$, $\mathbb{N}_2$ and $\mathbb{N}_3$ we obtain a more specific description of the different Gleason parts.
\begin{corollary}\label{cor:summary}
Given $z\in\overline B_{\ell_\infty}$ and $\mathbb{N}_1$, $\mathbb{N}_2$, $\mathbb{N}_3$ defined as above, the Gleason part $\mathcal{GP}(\delta_z)$ satisfies one of the following:
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape (i)]
\item If $\mathbb{N}=\mathbb{N}_2$ then $z\in B_{\ell_\infty}$ and $\mathcal{GP}(\delta_z)=\mathcal{GP}(\delta_0)=\{\delta_w\ |\ w \in B_{\ell_\infty} \}$. This produces the identification $\mathcal {GP}(\delta_z) \thickapprox B_{\ell_\infty}.$
\item If $\mathbb{N}=\mathbb{N}_1$ then $z = (z_n)\in\mathbb{T}^\mathbb{N}$. So, $\mathcal {GP}(\delta_z)=\{\delta_z\}.$
\item If $\mathbb{N}_3=\varnothing$ and $\mathbb{N}_1,\,\mathbb{N}_2\not=\varnothing$ then $\mathcal{GP}(\delta_z)=\{\delta_w\ |\ w_n=z_n \ \text{if}\ n\in\mathbb{N}_1 \ \text{and}\ \sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}_2} |w_n| < 1\,\}$. So,
\begin{itemize}
\item if $\#(\mathbb{N}_2)=k$ then $\mathcal {GP}(\delta_z) \thickapprox \mathbb D^k$,
\item if $\mathbb{N}_2$ is infinite, $\mathcal {GP}(\delta_z) \thickapprox B_{\ell_\infty}$.
\end{itemize}
Both identifications are isometries with respect to the Gleason metric.
\item If $\mathbb{N}_3$ is infinite and $\mathbb{N}_2=\varnothing$, then $\mathcal {GP}(\delta_z)$ contains $\mathbb{D}^k$ for every $k\in\mathbb{N}$ and this inclusion is an isometry for the Gleason metric. There is also a continuous injection of $B_{\ell_\infty}$ into $\mathcal {GP}(\delta_z)$.
\item If both $\mathbb{N}_2$ and $\mathbb{N}_3$ are infinite, then $\mathcal {GP}(\delta_z)$
contains an isometric copy of $B_{\ell_\infty}$, for the Gleason metric.
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof} The results concerning isometries follow from Lemma~\ref{cor-restriction} and Theorem \ref{thm:delta-rho}. We only have to show the continuous injection of $B_{\ell_\infty}$ in item (iv).
If we write $\mathbb{N}_3=\{n_k\}_k$, for each $k$ there exists $r_k>0$ such that whenever $|z_{n_k}-w_{n_k}|<r_k$ we have $w_{n_k}\in\mathbb D$ and
$$
\left|\frac{z_{n_k} - w_{n_k}}{1 - \overline{z_{n_k}}w_{n_k}}\right|<\frac{1}{2}.
$$
Then, denoting $C_{n_k}=r_k\mathbb{D}$ and $C_n=\{0\}$ for $n\not\in \mathbb{N}_3$ we obtain that if $w\in z+ \prod_{n=1}^\infty C_n$ then $\delta_w\in\mathcal {GP}(\delta_z)$. Since it is clear how to inject $B_{\ell_\infty}$ onto the set $z+ \prod_{n=1}^\infty C_n$, we derive the injection of $B_{\ell_\infty}$ into $\mathcal {GP}(\delta_z)$.
\end{proof}
\medskip
\section{Gleason parts for $\mathcal M(\mathcal H^\infty(B_{c_0}))$}
Some of our knowledge about the Gleason parts of $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A}_u(B_{X}))$ passes to $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal H^\infty(B_{X}))$ if we consider the restriction mapping $\Upsilon_u\colon \mathcal{M}_{\mathcal H^\infty(B_X)}\to \mathcal{M}_{\mathcal{A}_u(B_X)}$. With obvious notation, it is clear that for any $\varphi, \psi\in \mathcal{M}_{\mathcal H^\infty(B_X)}$,
$$
\rho(\varphi, \psi)\ge \rho_u(\Upsilon_u(\varphi), \Upsilon_u(\psi)).
$$
Therefore, if $\mathcal{GP}_{\mathcal{A}_u}(\Upsilon_u(\varphi))\not=\mathcal{GP}_{\mathcal{A}_u}(\Upsilon_u(\psi))$ we also have $\mathcal{GP}_{\mathcal{H}^\infty}(\varphi)\not= \mathcal{GP}_{\mathcal{H}^\infty}(\psi)$.
\begin{remark} \label{rem:GP in a fiber}
Let $X=c_0$ and consider $z,w\in S_{\ell_\infty}$ such that $\mathcal{GP}_{\mathcal{A}_u}(\delta_z)\not= \mathcal{GP}_{\mathcal{A}_u}(\delta_w)$. Then, for any $\varphi \in \mathcal{M}_z(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$ and $\psi \in \mathcal{M}_w(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$, as $\Upsilon_u(\varphi)=\delta_z$ and $\Upsilon_u(\psi)=\delta_w$, we also have $\mathcal{GP}_{\mathcal{H}^\infty}(\varphi)\not= \mathcal{GP}_{\mathcal{H}^\infty}(\psi)$. In particular, if $z\in \overline B_{\ell_\infty}$ belongs to the distinguished boundary $\mathbb{T}^\mathbb{N}$, every $\varphi \in \mathcal{M}_z(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$ satisfies $\mathcal{GP}_{\mathcal{H}^\infty}(\varphi)\subset \mathcal{M}_z(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$. That is, the Gleason part of $\varphi$ is contained in the fiber over $z$.
\end{remark}
The following is somehow a counterpart to the above remark.
\begin{proposition}\label{reciproca} Let $z,w\in S_{\ell_\infty}$ be such that $\mathcal{GP}_{\mathcal{A}_u}(\delta_z)= \mathcal{GP}_{\mathcal{A}_u}(\delta_w)$.
Then there exist $\varphi \in \mathcal{M}_z(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$ and $\psi \in \mathcal{M}_w(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$ satisfying $\mathcal{GP}_{\mathcal{H}^\infty}(\varphi)= \mathcal{GP}_{\mathcal{H}^\infty}(\psi)$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof} Fix real numbers $(r_k)$, with $|r_k|<1$ and $r_k\nearrow 1$. Consider the sequences in $B_{\ell_\infty}$:
$$
x^k=r_k z\to z\quad\textrm{ and }\quad y^k=r_k w\to w.
$$
Now, as $\mathcal{M}_z(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$ is $w^*$-compact, both $(\delta_{x^k})$ and $(\delta_{y^k})$
admit $w^*$-convergent subnets $(\delta_{x^{k(\alpha)}})_\alpha$, $(\delta_{y^{k(\alpha)}})_\alpha$ in $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$. Say
$$
\delta_{x^{k(\alpha)}}{\longrightarrow}\varphi;
\qquad \qquad \delta_{y^{k(\alpha)}} {\longrightarrow}\psi.
$$
It is clear that $\varphi \in \mathcal{M}_z(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$ and $\psi \in \mathcal{M}_w(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$. Now, as $\mathcal{GP}_{\mathcal{A}_u}(\delta_z)= \mathcal{GP}_{\mathcal{A}_u}(\delta_w)$, by Theorem~\ref{thm:delta-rho} we have
$$
C = \sup_n \|\delta_{z_n}-\delta_{w_n}\|_{\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A}_u(\mathbb D))} =\|\delta_z-\delta_w\|_{\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A}_u(B_{c_0}))} < 2.
$$
Then, given $f\in \mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0})$, $\|f\|\le 1$, we can find $\alpha_0$ so that for any $\alpha\ge\alpha_0$,
$$
\left|\delta_{x^{k(\alpha)}}(f)-\varphi(f)\right| <\frac{2-C}{4}\quad \textrm{ and }\quad \left|\delta_{y^{k(\alpha)}}(f)-\psi(f)\right| <\frac{2-C}{4}.
$$
Therefore,
\begin{eqnarray*}
|\varphi(f)-\psi(f)| & \le & \frac{2-C}{2} + \left|\delta_{x^{k(\alpha)}}(f)-\delta_{y^{k(\alpha)}}(f)\right| \\
& \le & \frac{2-C}{2} + \left\|\delta_{x^{k(\alpha)}}-\delta_{y^{k(\alpha)}}\right\|_{\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))}\\
& = & \frac{2-C}{2} + \sup_n \left\|\delta_{x_n^{k(\alpha)}}-\delta_{y_n^{k(\alpha)}}\right\|,
\end{eqnarray*}
where the last equality, which is a version of the statement of Theorem \ref{thm:delta-rho} for the spectrum $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$, appears in the proof of \cite[Theorem~6.5]{cole-gamelin-johnson}. Now, using the pseudo-hyperbolic distance for the unit disc $\mathbb D$ and the Schwarz--Pick theorem applied to the function $f(z)=r_{k(\alpha)}z$, for each fixed $n$ such that $z_n\not= w_n$ we have
\begin{eqnarray*}
\rho(\delta_{x_n^{k(\alpha)}},\delta_{y_n^{k(\alpha)}}) & = & \left| \frac{x_n^{k(\alpha)}-y_n^{k(\alpha)}}{1-\overline{x_n^{k(\alpha)}}y_n^{k(\alpha)}}\right| = \left| \frac{r_{k(\alpha)}(z_n-w_n)}{1-r_{k(\alpha)}^2\overline{z_n}w_n}\right|\\
&\le & \left| \frac{z_n-w_n}{1-\overline{z_n}w_n}\right|\le \rho_u (\delta_z,\delta_w).
\end{eqnarray*}
Then, $\left\|\delta_{x^{k(\alpha)}}-\delta_{y^{k(\alpha)}}\right\|_{\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))} \le \|\delta_z-\delta_w\|_{\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A}_u(B_{c_0}))} =C$.
Finally, $|\varphi(f)-\psi(f)|\le \frac{2-C}{2} + C= \frac{2+C}{2}$, for any $f\in \mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0})$ with $\|f\|\le 1$. Therefore, $\|\varphi - \psi\|_{\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))}\le \frac{2+C}{2}<2$ and the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
\bigskip
We next prove a kind of extension of the previous proposition. In \cite[Lemma 2.9]{aron-falco-garcia-maestre} it is shown that for $w\in \overline{B}_{\ell_\infty}$ and $b\in\mathbb{D}$ the fibers over $w$ and $(b,w)$ are homeomorphic. To recall the homeomorphism let us consider
$\Lambda_b\colon B_{c_0}\to B_{c_0}$ given by $\Lambda_b(z)=(b,z)$ and let us denote by $S\colon B_{c_0}\to B_{c_0}$, the shift mapping $S(z)=(z_2, z_3,\dots)$. Now, the homomorphism between the fibers is given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
R_b\colon \mathcal{M}_w &\to &\mathcal{M}_{(b,w)}\\
\varphi &\mapsto & (f\in\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0})\mapsto \varphi(f\circ \Lambda_b))
\end{eqnarray*}
Since both $\Lambda_b$ and $S$ map the unit ball into the unit ball and $S\circ \Lambda_b=Id$ it is easy to see that $R_b$ is an isometry for the Gleason metric. Therefore, the fiber over $w$ and the fiber over $(b,w)$ (for any $w\in \overline{B}_{\ell_\infty}$) intersect the same ``number'' of Gleason parts.
From Remark \ref{rem:GP in a fiber} we know that if $z\in \mathbb{T}^{\mathbb N}$, then every $\varphi \in \mathcal{M}_z(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$ satisfies that the Gleason part of $\varphi$ is contained in the fiber over $z$. The next proposition will show us not only that this does not hold for the fibers over points outside $\mathbb{T}^{\mathbb N}$, but also that any Gleason part outside $\mathbb{T}^{\mathbb N}$ must have elements from different fibers (in fact, at least from a \textit{disc} of fibers).
\begin{proposition} \label{R_b}
Given $b\in\mathbb D$, there exists $r_b>0$ such that if $|c-b|<r_b$ then, for all $\varphi\in\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$, $R_b(\varphi)$ and $R_c(\varphi)$ are in the same Gleason part.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
By the Cauchy integral formula, $\overline B_{\mathcal{H}^\infty(\mathbb D)}$ is an equicontinuous set of functions. Therefore, there exists $r_b>0$ such that, if $|c-b|<r_b$ then $c\in \mathbb D$ and $|g(b)-g(c)|<1$, for all $g\in B_{\mathcal{H}^\infty(\mathbb D)}$.
Hence, for $f\in \mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0})$ with $\|f\|\le 1$ we have
$$
|f(b,z)-f(c,z)|<1, \qquad\textrm{ if } |c-b|<r_b,\ z\in B_{c_0}.
$$
Therefore, for every $\varphi\in\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$,
\begin{eqnarray*}
\|R_b(\varphi) - R_c(\varphi)\| & = & \sup_{ \|f\|\le 1} |R_b(\varphi)(f) - R_c(\varphi)(f)|\\
& = & \sup_{ \|f\|\le 1} |\varphi(f\circ\Lambda_b - f\circ\Lambda_c)| \\
&\le & \sup_{ \|f\|\le 1} \|f\circ\Lambda_b - f\circ\Lambda_c \|\\
&=& \sup_{ \|f\|\le 1} \sup_{z\in B_{c_0}} |f(b,z) - f(c,z)| \le 1.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proof}
\bigskip
It is clear that the previous result is also valid between the fibers of $w$ and $(w_1, b, w_2,\dots)$ or $(w_1, w_2, b, w_3,\dots)$ and so on. That means that the Gleason part of any morphism in the fiber over a point outside $\mathbb{T}^{\mathbb N}$, must have elements from other fibers. In particular, there cannot be singleton Gleason parts outside the fibers over the points in $\mathbb{T}^{\mathbb N}$.
\bigskip
Thus far, the above results show that in $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$ there are Gleason parts intersecting different fibers (Propositions~\ref{reciproca} and \ref{R_b}) and there are Gleason parts completely contained in a fiber (Remark~\ref{rem:GP in a fiber}). These results do not provide information on the size of the Gleason parts. In order to understand this feature we appeal to the following result whose statement covers several versions appearing for instance in \cite[Lemma 1.1, p. 393]{garnett}, \cite[Lemma 2.1]{hoffman} and \cite[p. 162]{stout}.
\begin{proposition}
Let $X, Y$ be Banach spaces and $\Omega_X\subset X, \Omega_Y\subset Y$ be open convex subsets. Let $\mathcal{A}$ be a uniform algebra of analytic functions defined on $\Omega_X$. Suppose that $\Phi\colon\Omega_Y\to \mathcal{M}(\mathcal{A})$ is an analytic inclusion. Then $\Phi(\Omega_Y)$ is contained in only one Gleason part.
\end{proposition}
\medskip
\begin{remark}
Combining the above proposition with results of \cite{aron-falco-garcia-maestre} and \cite{cole-gamelin-johnson} we derive that \textit{most} of the fibers of $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$ contain analytic copies of $B_{\ell_\infty}$ (or $\mathbb{D}$) and each of these copies should be in a single Gleason part. Specifically, we have the following:
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape (i)]
\item By \cite[Theorem 6.7]{cole-gamelin-johnson}, for each $z\in B_{\ell_\infty}$ the fiber over $z$ contains a copy of $B_{\ell_\infty}$. Hence, there is a \textit{thick} intersection of the fiber over $z$ with a Gleason part. This result can be extended to the case of the fibers over $z\in S_{\ell_\infty}$ such that $|z_n|=1$ for $n$ in a finite set $\mathbb N_1$ and $\sup_{n\not\in\mathbb N_1}|z_n|<1$ (see~\cite{dimant-singer}).
\item By \cite[Theorem 2.2]{aron-falco-garcia-maestre}, for each $z\in S_{\ell_\infty}$ with $|z_n|=1$ for all $n$ (or for infinitely many $n$'s \cite{dimant-singer}) the fiber over $z$ contains a copy of $B_{\ell_\infty}$. Hence, there is a \textit{thick} intersection of the fiber over $z$ with a Gleason part.
\item By \cite[Proposition 2.1]{aron-falco-garcia-maestre}, for each $z\in S_{\ell_\infty}$ that attains its norm in $B_{\ell_1}$ the fiber over $z$ contains an analytic copy of the disc $\mathbb{D}$ (which clearly is inside a single Gleason part).
\end{enumerate}
Note that the only case not covered by the previous items corresponds with that of those $z\in S_{\ell_\infty}$ with $|z_n|<1$ for all $n$.
\end{remark}
\medskip
Recall that given a compact set $K$ and a uniform algebra $\mathcal{A}$ contained in $C(K)$ a point $x\in K$ is called a {\em strong boundary point} for $\mathcal{A}$ if for every neighborhood $V$ of $x$ there exists $f\in \mathcal{A}$ such that $\|f\|=f(x)=1$ and $|f(y)|<1$ if $y\in K\setminus V$. We see in the next result that in the fiber over each $z\in \mathbb{T}^{\mathbb N}$ there is a strong boundary point. Since the Gleason part of a strong boundary point is just a singleton set, by (ii) of the above remark, we derive that the fiber over any $z\in \mathbb{T}^{\mathbb N}$ intersects a thick Gleason part and also a singleton Gleason part.
\medskip
\begin{proposition}
If $\mathcal S$ is the set of strong boundary points of $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$ then $\pi(\mathcal S)=\mathbb{T}^{\mathbb N}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Denoting by $\mathcal{SB}$ the Shilov boundary of $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$, we have that $\mathcal S\subset \mathcal{SB}$ (see, e.g., \cite[Corollary 7.24]{stout}) and thus $\pi(\mathcal S)\subset \pi(\mathcal{SB})$. Therefore, in order to prove $\pi(\mathcal S)=\mathbb{T}^{\mathbb N}$ it is enough to see $\pi(\mathcal{SB})\subset\mathbb{T}^{\mathbb N}$ and $\mathbb{T}^{\mathbb N}\subset \pi(\mathcal S)$.
To prove the first inclusion, for each $n\in\mathbb N$, let us consider the map $j_n\colon \overline B_{\ell_\infty}\to\overline{\mathbb D}$ given by $j_n(z)=z_n$. Then, $P_n=j_n\circ\pi$ is a weak-star continuous mapping from $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$ into $\overline{\mathbb D}$.
Given $a\in\overline B_{\ell_\infty}\setminus\mathbb{T}^{\mathbb N}$, we want to show that $a\not\in\pi(\mathcal{SB})$. Since $a\not\in\mathbb{T}^{\mathbb N}$, there is $n$ such that $|a_n|<1$. The set $C_n=\overline{\mathbb D}\setminus\mathbb D(a_n, \frac{1-|a_n|}{2})$ is a closed subset of $\mathbb C$, so $P_n^{-1}(C_n)$ is weak-star closed in $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$. Also, since $C_n$ contains spheres of radius $r$, with $r$ approaching to 1, for each $f\in \mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0})$ we should have
$$
\sup_{z\in B_{c_0}}|f(z)| = \sup_{\varphi\in P_n^{-1}(C_n)}|\varphi(f)|.
$$
Hence, $P_n^{-1}(C_n)$ is a boundary, which implies that $\mathcal{SB}\subset P_n^{-1}(C_n)$. Thus, $\pi(\mathcal{SB})\subset \pi(P_n^{-1}(C_n))$. Since $a\not\in \pi(P_n^{-1}(C_n))$, we obtain that $a\not\in\pi(\mathcal{SB})$.
For the second inclusion, let $a=(a_n)\in\mathbb{T}^{\mathbb N}$ be given by $a_n=e^{i\theta_n}$, for all $n$. As $(\frac{e^{-i\theta_n}}{2^n})\in \ell_1$ its associated function
$$
x^\ast(x)=\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{e^{-i\theta_n}}{2^n}x_n
$$
belongs to $c_0^\ast$. Hence $f(x)=1+x^\ast(x)$ is holomorphic on $c_0$, bounded and uniformly continuous when restricted to $\overline B_{\ell_\infty}$. Observe that
$$
| f(a)|=2;\qquad\textrm{ while }\qquad | f(z)|<2,\ \textrm{ for all }z\in \overline B_{\ell_\infty}, \ z\not= a.
$$ Associating $f$ with its Gelfand transform $\widehat f$ and noting that $\widehat f$ attains its norm at a strong boundary point \cite[Theorem 7.21]{stout}, there is $\varphi\in \mathcal S$ such that $|\widehat f(\varphi)|=|\varphi(f)|=2$.
Finally
$$
\varphi(f)= \varphi(1)+\varphi(x^\ast)=1+x^\ast(\pi(\varphi))=f(\pi(\varphi)).
$$
Therefore, $\pi(\varphi)=a$, and so $a\in\pi(\mathcal S)$.
\end{proof}
\medskip
Up to now our study about the relationships between fibers and Gleason parts gives information about in which fibers there are singleton Gleason parts, which fibers intersect \textit{thick} Gleason parts and which Gleason parts contain elements of different fibers. To complete this picture we now wonder about how many Gleason parts intersect a particular fiber. Should it always be more than one?
With respect to this question note that we have already seen that in the fiber over any $z\in\mathbb{T}^\mathbb{N}$ there is a singleton Gleason part and also a copy of $B_{\ell_\infty}$. So, at least two Gleason parts are inside each of these fibers. By translations through mappings $R_b$ (as in Proposition \ref{R_b} and the subsequent comment) we also obtain that there are at least two Gleason parts intersecting the fiber over $z$ for each $z\in S_{\ell_\infty}$ with all but finitely many coordinates of modulus 1.
\vspace{1cm}
The following results show that the fiber over any $z\in B_{\ell_\infty}$ intersects $2^c$ Gleason parts.
First, relying on the proof of~\cite[Theorem~5.1]{cole-gamelin-johnson} (see also \cite[Corollary~5.2]{cole-gamelin-johnson}) we obtain the desired result for the fiber over $0$. For our purposes, we use the construction and notation given in \cite{cole-gamelin-johnson}.
\medskip
\begin{theorem}\label{theo:betaN GP en M0(Hinf BX)} Let $X$ be an infinite dimensional Banach space. Then there is an embedding $\Psi\colon (\beta(\mathbb{N})\setminus \mathbb{N})\times \mathbb{D} \to \mathcal{M}_0$ that is analytic on each slice $\{\theta\}\times\mathbb{D}$ and satisfies:
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape (a)]
\item $\Psi(\theta,\lambda)\not\in \mathcal{GP}(\delta_0)$ for each $(\theta,\lambda)$.
\item $\mathcal{GP}(\Psi(\theta, \lambda))\cap \mathcal{GP}(\Psi(\tilde \theta, \tilde \lambda))=\varnothing$ for each $\theta, \tilde \theta\in \beta(\mathbb{N})\setminus \mathbb{N}$ with $\theta\ne \tilde \theta$ and any $\lambda, \tilde \lambda\in \mathbb{D}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} The existence of the analytic embedding $\Psi\colon (\beta(\mathbb{N})\setminus \mathbb{N})\times \mathbb{D} \to \mathcal{M}_0$ is given in~\cite[Theorem~5.1]{cole-gamelin-johnson}. Below, we summarize the main ingredients used in its construction.
\begin{itemize}
\item There exists a sequence $(z_k)\subset B_{X^{**}}$ such that $\|z_k\| < \|z_{k+1}\| $ and $\|z_k\|$ is convergent to 1.
\item The sequence of norms $(\|z_k\|)$ increases so rapidly that there exists an increasing sequence $(r_k)$, such that $0<r_k <\|z_k\|$ and $\sum (1-r_k)$ is finite.
\item For a fixed sequence $(a_k)$ so that $0<a_k<1$ and $(a_k)\in \ell_1$, there exists $(L_k)\subset X^*$ such that $\|L_k\|<1$ and
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\cdot$] $L_k(z_k)=r_k$,\quad for all $k$,
\item[$\cdot$] $L_j(z_k)=0$, \quad $1<k<j$,
\item[$\cdot$] $|L_j(z_k)| < a_j$,\quad for all $k>j$.
\end{itemize}
\item There exists $0<r<1$ such that for all $k$, if $w_k\colon \mathbb{D}\to X$ is defined as $w_k(\lambda)=\big(\frac{r_k-\lambda}{1-r_k\,\lambda}\big)\frac{z_k}{r_k}$, then $\|w_k(\lambda)\|<1$ for all $|\lambda| < r$.
\item The Blaschke product $G\colon B_{X^{**}}\to \mathbb C$, given by $G(z)=\prod_{j=1}^\infty \frac{r_j-L_j(z)}{1-r_j\,L_j(z)}$ belongs to $\mathcal{H}^\infty( B_{X^{**}})$ and $|G(z)| <1$ if $\|z\|<1$.
\item For $|\lambda|< r/2$ and each $k$ there exists a unique $\xi_k(\lambda)$ such that $|\xi_k(\lambda)|<r$ and $G(w_k(\xi_k(\lambda)))=\lambda$ for all $|\lambda|< r/2$.
\item For every $k$ the function $z_k(\lambda)\colon =w_k(\xi_k(\lambda))$ for $|\lambda|<r/2$ is a multiple of $z_k$, depends analytically on $\lambda$ and satisfies $\|z_k(\lambda)\|<1$ if $|\lambda|<r/2$ with $z_k(0)=z_k$.
\end{itemize}
Note that replacing $\mathbb{D}$ by $D=\{\lambda \in\mathbb{C}\ |\ \ |\lambda|<r/2 \}$, it is enough to show the result for $\beta(\mathbb{N})\setminus \mathbb{N}\times D$. The function $\Psi\colon \mathbb{N}\times D\to \mathcal{M}$ defined by $\Psi(k, \lambda)=\delta_{z_k(\lambda)}$ extends to a map $\Psi\colon \beta(\mathbb{N})\times D\to \mathcal{M}$ which is continuous on $\beta(\mathbb{N})$ for each fixed $\lambda$. Moreover, by \cite[Theorem~5.1]{cole-gamelin-johnson}, we know that $\Psi(\beta(\mathbb{N})\setminus \mathbb{N}\times D)$ lies in the fiber over $0$, $\mathcal{M}_0$.
\bigskip
Now, let us prove that (a) holds. As $\Psi$ is analytic on each slice, to show that $\Psi(\theta,\lambda)\not\in \mathcal{GP}(\delta_0)$ for each $(\theta,\lambda)$ it is enough to see that $\Psi(\theta, 0)\not\in \mathcal{GP}(\delta_0)$, for any $\theta$.
Given $N\in\mathbb{N}$, consider $f_N\in \mathcal{H}^\infty( B_{X^{**}})$ defined by
$$
f_N(z)\colon= \prod_{j>N}^\infty \frac{r_j-L_j(z)}{1-r_j\,L_j(z)}.
$$
Then, $\delta_0(f_N)=\prod_{j>N} r_j \to 1$ as $N\to\infty$. On the other hand, as $\Psi(k,0)=\delta_{z_k}$, for $k>N$,
$$
\Psi(k,0)(f_N)=\prod_{j>N}^\infty \frac{r_j-L_j(z_k)}{1-r_j\,L_j(z_k)}=0.
$$
Now, take $\theta\in \beta(\mathbb{N})\setminus \mathbb{N}$. Then, there is a net $(j(\alpha))\subset \mathbb{N}$, such that $\theta=\lim_\alpha j(\alpha)$. Thus,
$$
\Psi(\theta, 0)(f_N)=\lim_\alpha \Psi(j(\alpha),0)(f_N)=0.
$$
Therefore,
$$
\rho(\delta_0, \Psi(\theta, 0)) \ge \sup_N \{|\delta_0(f_N)|\} =\sup_N \{\, \textstyle{\prod}_{j>N} r_j\, \}=1,
$$
which shows that $\Psi(\theta, 0)\not\in \mathcal{GP}(\delta_0)$. \\
To prove (b) let us see that if $\theta\ne \tilde \theta$ then $\mathcal{GP}(\Psi(\theta, D))\cap \mathcal{GP}(\Psi(\tilde \theta, D))=\varnothing$. Indeed, for $\theta\ne \tilde \theta$ there exists an infinite set $J\subset \mathbb{N}$ such that $\mathbb{N}\setminus J$ is also infinite and $\theta\in \overline{\{j\colon j\in J\}}$, $\tilde\theta \in \overline{\{j\colon j\in \mathbb{N}\setminus J\}}$.
Here, for $N\in \mathbb{N}$ consider $f_{(J,N)}\in \mathcal{H}^\infty( B_{X^{**}})$ given by
$$
f_{(J,N)}(z)\colon= \prod_{\underset {j> N}{j \in J}}\, \frac{r_j-L_j(z)}{1-r_j\,L_j(z)}.
$$
Then, $\|f_{(J,N)}\|\le 1$ and $f_{(J,N)}(z_k)=0$ for all $k\in J, k>N$. Hence, as before, we obtain that $\Psi(\theta,0)(f_{(J,N)})=0$.
On the other hand, $\tilde\theta =\lim_{\tilde \alpha} k(\tilde\alpha)$. For these indexes $k(\tilde\alpha)\not\in J$ with $k(\tilde\alpha)>N$, the corresponding factor does not appear in $f_{(J,N)}$ and
$$
\Psi(k(\tilde\alpha),0)(f_{(J,N)})=
\prod_{\underset {N<j<k(\tilde\alpha)}{j \in J}}\frac{r_j-L_j(z_{k(\tilde\alpha)})}{1-r_j\,L_j(z_{k(\tilde\alpha)})} \cdot \prod_{\underset {j> k(\tilde\alpha)}{j \in J}} r_j.
$$
Notice that $\Big| \frac{r_j-L_j(z_{ k(\tilde\alpha)})}{1-r_jL_j(z_{k(\tilde\alpha)})}\Big| >\frac{r_j-a_j}{1+r_ja_j}$, for $k(\alpha)>j$.
Since $1 -\frac{r_j-a_j}{1+ r_j\,a_j } < (1-r_j) + 2a_j$, the series
$\sum_{j\ge 1} (1 -\frac{r_j-a_j}{1+ r_j\,a_j})$ converges, implying that the infinite product $\prod_{j\ge 1} \frac{r_j-a_j}{1+ r_j\,a_j}$ is convergent as well as the infinite product over $\{j\in J\}$.
Now, given $0<\varepsilon<1$ we can find $k_0\in \mathbb N$ such that for all $k\ge k_0$,
$$
\prod_{\underset{j>k}{j \in J}} r_j>1-\varepsilon \qquad\textrm{ and }\qquad \prod_{\underset{j>k}{j \in J}} \frac{r_j-a_j}{1+ r_j\,a_j} >1-\varepsilon.
$$
Then, for $N>k_0$ and $\tilde\alpha$ such that $ k(\tilde\alpha)>k_0$,
we have
$$
\prod_ {\underset{N< j < k(\tilde\alpha)}{j \in J}} \Big|\frac{r_j-L_j(z_{k(\tilde\alpha)})}{1-r_jL_j(z_{k(\tilde\alpha)})}\Big| >
\prod_ {\underset{N< j < k(\tilde\alpha)}{j \in J}} \frac{r_j-a_j}{1+r_ja_j} > \prod_ {\underset{j>N}{j \in J}} \frac{r_j-a_j}{1+r_ja_j} > 1 -\varepsilon.
$$
Hence,
$$
|\Psi(k(\tilde\alpha),0)(f_{(J,N)})| > (1 -\varepsilon)^2,
$$
and $|\Psi(\tilde\theta,0)(f_{(J,N)})| \ge (1 -\varepsilon)^2$.
Finally, for any $0<\varepsilon<1$
$$
\rho(\Psi(\theta,0)), \Psi(\tilde\theta,0)) \ge \sup_N \{| \Psi(\tilde\theta,0)(f_{(J,N)})|\} \ge (1 -\varepsilon)^2,
$$
and the result follows.
\end{proof}
Next, we will see that there is a bijective biholomorphic mapping from $B_{\ell_\infty}$ into $B_{\ell_\infty}$ which is an isometry for the Gleason metric and transfers each fiber over an interior point to a different fiber. We use this fact to extend the conclusions in Theorem~\ref{theo:betaN GP en M0(Hinf BX)} to the fiber $\mathcal{M}_z(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$ for any $z\in B_{\ell_\infty}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{ControlandoMoebius}
Let $\alpha\in\mathbb{D}$ and let $\eta_\alpha\colon \mathbb{D}\to\mathbb{D}$ be the Moebius transformation,
\[
\eta_\alpha(\lambda)=\frac{\alpha-\lambda}{1-\bar{\alpha}\lambda}.
\]
Given $|\alpha|\leq s<1$, for any $\lambda\in \mathbb{D}$ with $|\lambda|\leq s$ the following inequality holds:
\[
|\eta_\alpha(\lambda)|\leq \frac{2s}{1+s^2}.
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Notice that
$$
1-\Big|\frac{\alpha -\lambda}{1-\bar{\alpha} \lambda}\Big|^2 =\frac{|1-\bar{\alpha}\lambda|^2-|\alpha -\lambda|^2}{|1-\bar{\alpha}\lambda|^2} = \frac{(1-|\lambda|^2)(1-|\alpha|^2)}{|1-\bar{\alpha}\lambda|^2}.
$$
Hence, the result follows for any $|\lambda|\leq s$ since
$$ 1- \Big|\frac{\alpha -\lambda}{1-\bar{\alpha}\lambda}\Big|^2\geq \Big(\frac{1-s^2}{1+s^2}\Big)^2\ \textrm{ and }\ \sqrt{1- \Big(\frac{1-s^2}{1+s^2}\Big)^2}=\frac{2s}{1+s^2}.
$$
\end{proof}
\bigskip
\begin{proposition}\label{Phi_a} Fix $a=(a_n)\in B_{\ell_\infty}$. The mapping $\Phi_a \colon B_{\ell_\infty} \to B_{\ell_\infty}$, defined by
$$
\Phi_a(z)=(\eta_{a_n}(z_n))
$$
is bijective and biholomorphic. Moreover, for any $x^*\in\ell_1$, the function $x^*\circ \Phi_a$ is uniformly continuous.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
First, let us check that $\Phi_a(B_{\ell_\infty})\subset B_{\ell_\infty}$. Fix $z=(z_n)\in B_{\ell_\infty}$ and take $s=\max\{\|a\|,\|z\|\} <1$.
Using Lemma~\ref{ControlandoMoebius} we obtain
\[
\|\Phi_a(z)\|=\sup_{n} |\eta_{a_n}(z_n)|\leq \frac{2s}{1+s^2}<1.
\]
To check that $\Phi_a$ is holomorphic, by Dunford's theorem it is enough to check that $\Phi_a$ is weak-star holomorphic, i.e. that $x^*\circ \Phi_a\in \mathcal{H}(B_{\ell_\infty})$ for every $x^*=(b_n)\in \ell_1$. Notice that
$x^*\circ \Phi_a(z)=\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}b_n\eta_{a_n}(z_n)$, and
\[
|b_n \eta_{a_n}(z_n)|\leq |b_n|,
\]
for every $z\in B_{\ell_\infty}$ and every $n$. By the Weierstrass $M$-test, the series $\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}b_n\eta_{a_n}(z_n)$ converges absolutely and uniformly on $\overline{B}_{\ell_\infty}$ and as each $z\mapsto \eta_{a_n}(z_n)$ belongs to $\mathcal{A}_u(B_{\ell_\infty})$ we have actually proved that $x^*\circ \Phi_a\in \mathcal{A}_u(B_{\ell_\infty})$, for every $x^*\in \ell_1$. Thus $\Phi_a\in \mathcal{H}(B_{\ell_\infty},B_{\ell_\infty})$.
Finally as $\Phi_a\circ \Phi_{a}(z)=z$ for every $z\in B_{\ell_\infty}$, we obtain that $\Phi_a$ has inverse $\Phi_a^{-1}=\Phi_{a}$ and $\Phi_a$ is biholomorphic.
\end{proof}
\medskip
\begin{remark}
Observe that if we consider $a\in B_{c_0}$ and we restrict $\Phi_a$ to $z\in B_{c_0}$, then we obtain the biholomorphic mapping of Example \ref{ex: c0}.
\end{remark}
Given $a\in B_{\ell_\infty }$ the restriction of $\Phi_a$ to $ B_{c_0}$ will be denoted by ${\Phi_a}\big|_{c_0}$.
\begin{theorem}
Given $a\in B_{\ell_\infty}$, the mapping $C_{\Phi_a}\colon \mathcal{H}^\infty( B_{c_0})\to \mathcal{H}^\infty( B_{c_0})$ defined by
\[C_{\Phi_a}(f)=\tilde{f}\circ {\Phi_a}\big|_{c_0},
\]
where $\tilde{f}\colon B_{\ell_\infty}\to \mathbb{C}$ is the canonical extension of each $f\in \mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0})$, is an isometric isomorphism of Banach algebras.
Moreover, $\Lambda_{\Phi_a}:= C_{\Phi_a}^t|_{\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty( B_{c_0}))}\colon \mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty( B_{c_0}))\to \mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty( B_{c_0}))$,
the restriction of its transpose to $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty( B_{c_0}))$, is a surjective isometry for the Gleason metric with inverse $\Lambda_{\Phi_a}^{-1}=\Lambda_{\Phi_a}$ that satisfies
\[
\Lambda_{\Phi_a}(\mathcal{M}_z)= \mathcal{M}_{\Phi_a(z)},
\]
for every $z\in B_{\ell_\infty}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Clearly $C_{\Phi_a}$ is well-defined, $\|C_{\Phi_a}\|\leq 1$ and it is an algebra homomorphism.
Next we claim that given $f\in \mathcal{H}^\infty( B_{c_0})$,
\begin{equation}\label{regularity}
\widetilde{\tilde{f}\circ {\Phi_a}\big|_{c_0}}=\tilde{f}\circ \Phi_a.
\end{equation}
Let us observe that $\ell_\infty=C(\beta\mathbb{N})$ is a symmetrically regular space. Moreover, by Lemma \ref{ControlandoMoebius}, if $0<s<1$, then $m=\sup_{\|z\|\leq s}\|\Phi_a(z)\|<1$. With this in mind, by the method of proof of \cite[Corollary 2.2]{choi-garcia-kim-maestre}, we have
\begin{equation*}
\widetilde{\tilde{f}\circ {\Phi_a}\big|_{c_0}}=\tilde{\tilde{f}}\circ \widetilde{ {\Phi_a}\big|_{c_0}}= \tilde{f}\circ \widetilde{ {\Phi_a}\big|_{c_0}} .
\end{equation*}
By Proposition \ref{Phi_a}, $ {\Phi_a}\big|_{c_0}$ is $w(c_0,\ell_1)$-uniformly continuous on $B_{c_0}$. Hence it has a unique extension to $B_{\ell_\infty}$ that is $w(\ell_\infty,\ell_1)$-uniformly continuous on $B_{\ell_\infty}$ and it coincides with its canonical extension $\widetilde{ {\Phi_a}\big|_{c_0}}$. On the other hand, also by Proposition \ref{Phi_a}, $\Phi_a$ is $w(\ell_\infty,\ell_1)$-uniformly continuous on $B_{\ell_\infty}$ and it is obviously an extension of $ {\Phi_a}\big|_{c_0}$ to $B_{\ell_\infty}$. Thus, $\widetilde{ {\Phi_a}\big|_{c_0}}(z)=\Phi_a(z)$, for all $z\in B_{\ell_\infty}$.
From this equality we derive that $C_{\Phi_a}\circ C_{\Phi_a}(f)=f$ for every $f \in \mathcal{H}^\infty( B_{c_0})$. Indeed,
$$
C_{\Phi_a}\big( C_{\Phi_a}(f)\big)(z)=\left(\widetilde{\tilde{f}\circ {\Phi_a}\big|_{c_0}}\circ \Phi_{a}{\big|_{c_0}}\right)(z)={\tilde{f}}\circ \widetilde{ {\Phi_a}\big|_{c_0}} \circ \Phi_a(z)={\tilde{f}}(z)=f(z),
$$
for every $z\in B_{c_0}$. As a consequence $C_{\Phi_a}$ is an isomorphism of algebras. Also we have $\|f\|\leq \|C_{\Phi_a}\|\| C_{\Phi_a}(f)\|\leq \| C_{\Phi_a}(f)\|$ for every $f$, and therefore $C_{\Phi_a}$ is an isometry.
Hence its transpose $C_{\Phi_a}^t$ when restricted to $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty( B_{c_0}))$ is well-defined and its range is again in $\mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty( B_{c_0}))$.
Moreover, $\Lambda_{\Phi_a}\circ \Lambda_{\Phi_a}(\varphi)=\varphi$ for every $\varphi \in \mathcal{M}(\mathcal{H}^\infty( B_{c_0}))$. Finally, for each $x^*\in \ell_1$, the function $\widetilde{x^*}\circ {\Phi_a}\big|_{c_0}$ belongs to $\mathcal{A}_u(B_{c_0})$ (as we have already observed) and so it is a uniform limit of finite type polynomials. Hence, as in the proof of Proposition \ref{Gleason-isometry}, we obtain that $\Lambda_{\Phi_a}(\mathcal{M}_z)= \mathcal{M}_{\Phi_a(z)}$,
for every $z\in B_{\ell_\infty}$.
\end{proof}
Combining this last theorem with Theorem \ref{theo:betaN GP en M0(Hinf BX)} we obtain that for each $z\in B_{\ell_\infty}$, the fiber $\mathcal{M}_z(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$ contains $2^c$ \textit{discs} lying in different Gleason parts.
\begin{corollary}
Let $z\in B_{\ell_\infty}$. Then, there is an embedding of $\Psi\colon (\beta(\mathbb{N})\setminus \mathbb{N})\times \mathbb{D} \to \mathcal{M}_z(\mathcal{H}^\infty(B_{c_0}))$ that is analytic on each slice $\{\theta\}\times\mathbb{D}$ and satisfies:
\begin{enumerate}[\upshape (a)]
\item $\Psi(\theta,\lambda)\not\in \mathcal{GP}(\delta_z)$ for each $(\theta,\lambda)$.
\item $\mathcal{GP}(\Psi(\theta, \lambda))\cap \mathcal{GP}(\Psi(\tilde \theta, \tilde \lambda))=\varnothing$ for each $\theta, \tilde \theta\in \beta(\mathbb{N})\setminus \mathbb{N}$ with $\theta\ne \tilde \theta$ and any $\lambda, \tilde \lambda\in \mathbb{D}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}
\textbf{Acknowledgements.} This work was initiated while the first and fourth
authors visited the Departamento de Matem\'atica, Universidad de San Andr\'es during September of 2016. Both of them wish to thank the hospitality they received during their visit.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Fires pose great danger in open and large spaces. Flames may spread fast and cause substantial damages to properties and human life. Hence, immediate and accurate flame detection plays instrumental role in fighting fires.
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{flame_full_framework.png}
\caption{The architecture of DCGAN: (a) generator network, (b) discriminator network, (c) the first stage of training, and (d) the second stage of training.}
\label{fig:flame_full_framework}
\end{figure*}
Among different approaches, the use of visible-range video captured by surveillance cameras are particularly convenient for fire detection, as they can be deployed and operated in a cost-effective manner~\cite{ccetin2013video}. One of the main challenges is to provide a robust vision based detection system with negligible false positive rates, while securing rapid response. If the flames are visible, this may be achieved by analyzing the motion and color clues of a video in wavelet domain~\cite{dedeoglu2005real},~\cite{toreyin2006computer}. Similarly, wavelet based contour analysis~\cite{toreyin2006contour} can be used for detection of possible smoke regions. Modeling various spatio-temporal features such as color and flickering, and dynamic texture analysis~\cite{dimitropoulos2015spatio} have been shown to be able to detect fire, as well. In the literature, there are several computer vision algorithms for smoke and flame detection using wavelets, support vector machines,
Markov models, region covariance, and co-difference matrices~\cite{ccetin2016methods}. An important number of fire detection algorithms in the literature not only employ spatial information, but also use the temporal information~\cite{ccetin2016methods},~\cite{habibouglu2012covariance},~\cite{toreyin2007online}.
Deep convolutional neural networks (DCNN) achieve superb recognition results on a wide range of computer vision problems~\cite{goodfellow2014generative},~\cite{lecun2015deep}. Deep neural network based fire detection algorithms using regular cameras have been developed by many researchers in recent years~\cite{gunay2012entropy},~\cite{zhao2018saliency},~\cite{gunay2015real}. As opposed to earlier computer vision based fire detection algorithms, in all of the existing DCNN based methods, temporal nature of flames are not utilized. Instead, flames are recognized from image frames.
In this paper, we utilize the temporal behavior of flames to recognize uncontrolled fires.
Uncontrolled flames flicker randomly. The bandwidth of spectrum of flame flicker can be as high as 10Hz~\cite{erden2012wavelet}. To detect such behavior, we group the video frames and obtain temporal slice images. We process the temporal slices using deep convolutional networks.
Radford et al.~\cite{radford2015unsupervised} demonstrate that a class of convolutional neural networks, namely, Deep Convolutional Generative Adversarial Networks (DCGANs), can learn general image representations on various image datasets.
We propose a two-stage training approach for a DCGAN in such a way that the discriminator is utilized to distinguish ordinary image sequences without flame from those with flame. Our contribution is the development of a discriminator network classifying regular images from images with flame. We employ the discriminator network of the DCGAN as a classifier.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. In section~2, the proposed flame detection method is described. Experimental results are presented in Section~3. The paper is concluded in the last section.
\section{Method}
\label{sec:method}
The proposed flame detection method is presented in this section. The method is based on grouping the video frames to obtain temporal slice images and processing the temporal slices using a DCGAN structure accepting input with size 64$\times$128$\times$384~px. We use a densely-connected layer followed by five transposed convolutional layers for the generator, and five convolutional layers with a densely-connected layer for the discriminator. The architecture of DCGAN and the training framework are given in Figure~\ref{fig:flame_full_framework}.
We first train the DCGAN using images that contain flame and noise distribution $z$. The discriminator part of the DCGAN learns a representation for the temporal nature of flames and distinguishes non-flame videos, because those are not in the training set. Then, we refine and retrain the discriminator without generator network, where actual non-flame video images obtained from the cameras constitute the ``generated'' training data and regular flame images correspond to ``real'' data as usual. Compared to a generic CNN structure, training the DCGAN using the flame data, noise vector $z$, and the actual non-flame data makes the recognition system more robust.
In our model, for the training of the networks, we use batch normalization~\cite{ioffe2015batch} and dropout ~\cite{srivastava2014dropout} layers after each layer in the generator network, except the last layer. Similarly, for the discriminator network, apart from the last layer, we add Gaussian noise to the inputs and apply dropout after each layer. Convolution layers in the discriminator are initialized according to the ``MSRA'' initialization~\cite{he2015delving}. Finally, we use the Adam optimizer for stochastic optimization~\cite{kingma2014adam}. The representations of algorithms are supported by TensorFlow system~\cite{abadi2016tensorflow}.
\subsection{Temporal Slice Images}
\label{sec:temporalslice}
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{12_display.jpg}
\caption{(a) Example frame from the input video. (b) Temporal slice image of column corresponding to the green line in (a), where the leftmost column contains pixels from the initial frame, namely, the frame at time index $t=1$, and the rightmost column contains pixels from the final frame, namely, the frame at time index $t=64$ of the block. (c) Visualization of all 128 slice images.}
\label{fig:temporalsliceexamples}
\end{figure*}
Exploiting the evolution of flames in time, we obtain slice images from video frames. We first split the videos into blocks containing 64 consecutive frames with size 128$\times$128~px. Then, for each column, we extract the pixels along the time dimension, resulting in 128 different 128$\times$64~px images (see Figure~\ref{fig:temporalsliceexamples}).
In order to feed the slice image data to the DCGAN model, we stack all 128 slices on top of each other. Thus, we obtain an RGB image cube of shape 64$\times$128$\times$384, because slice images have 3 channels each. Figure~\ref{fig:temporaldata} shows an example of an image cube.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=8.5cm]{temporal_data_diagram.png}
\caption{Example of an image cube obtained from the input video.}
\label{fig:temporaldata}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Proposed GAN-type Discriminator Network}
\label{sec:format}
Flames, by their nature, has no particular shape or specific feature as human faces, cars, and so on. Therefore, it is more suitable to focus on the temporal behavior of flame instead of the spatial information.
The DCGAN structure is utilized to distinguish regular camera views from flame videos. The discriminator part of the GAN produces probability values above 0.5 for real temporal flame slices and below 0.5 for slices that do not contain flame, because non-flame slices are not in the initial training set. In the second stage of training, we refine and retrain the GAN using the gradient given in \eqref{refine}.
In standard GAN training, the discriminator $D$ which outputs a probability value is updated using the stochastic gradient
\begin{equation}
SG_1= \nabla_{\theta_d} \frac{1}{M} \sum_{i=1}^M (\log D (x_i) + \log (1-D(G(z_i)))),
\end{equation}
\noindent where $x_i$ and $z_i$ are the $i$-th temporal slice and noise vector, respectively, and $G$ represents the generator which generates a "fake slice" according to the input noise vector $z_i$; the vector $\theta_d$ contains the parameters of the discriminator. After this stage, the generator network $G$ is ``adversarially'' trained, as in~\cite{goodfellow2014generative}. During the first round of training we do not include any flame-less video. This GAN is able to distinguish flame, because regular camera views are not in the training set. To increase the recognition accuracy, we perform a second round of training by fine-tuning the discriminator using the stochastic gradient
\begin{equation}
SG_2 = \nabla_{\theta_d} \frac{1}{L} \sum_{i=1}^L (\log D (x_i) + \log (1-D(y_i)),
\label{refine}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $y_i$ represents the $i$-th image containing regular camera views. The number of non-flame slice samples, $L$, is smaller than the size of the initial training set, $M$, containing flame videos. In the refinement stage characterized by \eqref{refine},
we do not update the parameters of the generator network of GAN, because we do not need to generate any artificial images at this stage of training.
\section{Experimental Results}
\label{sec:experimentalresults}
In our experiments, we use 112 video clips containing flame frames, and 72 video clips without any flame frames. Flame videos contain various events, such as burning buildings, fire explosions, fireplaces, campfires, forest fires, and burning vehicles.
Throughout the experiments, we first obtain the temporal slice images for both flame and non-flame videos. For that purpose, at every second, we sample 10 previous frames at equal intervals, to be included in a block. Since blocks contain 64 frames, they capture the motion for almost six and a half seconds. Video clips are partitioned into non-overlapping temporal slices. Each video clip has a duration of one minute. Consequently, the dataset is composed of over 210 thousand slices from over 1600 blocks in total.
After this procedure, we split the data into training, validation, and test sets with a ratio of 3:1:1. We pick the parameters and stop training the network based on its performance on the validation set, then report the final results obtained on the test set.
We evaluate the proposed method, namely, DCGAN with Temporal
Slices, in terms of frame-based results. Since all the other deep learning methods are essentially based on CNNs, we compare the CNN with Temporal Slices, DCGAN with Video Frames (no temporal information) and DCGAN without refinement stage based approaches to our CNN implementation. It should be also noted that, researchers use different fire datasets, therefore the recognition results are not comparable.
Our approach targets at reducing the false positive rate, while keeping the hit-rate, as high as possible. Results indicate that, our methode achieves the best results on the test set (cf. Table~\ref{table:framebasedcomparison}), where a false-positive rate of 3.91\% is obtained corresponding to a hit-rate of 92.19\%. We show that the adversarial training in DCGAN structure yields more robust results when compared to a CNN (same architecture as the discriminator). As for the utilization of temporal slices to exploit flame evolution, it can be seen that, utilizing the temporal information of the flames results in much lower false positive rates.
Some examples for false negative and false positive temporal slices are presented in Figure~\ref{fig:falseclassify}.
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\centering
\vspace{0.8cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{combined_f.png}
\caption{Examples of false negative temporal slices on the left and false positive temporal slices on the right.}
\label{fig:falseclassify}
\end{figure*}
\begin{table}[htb]
\centering
\caption{Obtained true negative rate (TNR) and true positive rate (TPR) values on test set for frame-based evaluation.}
\label{table:framebasedcomparison}
\begin{tabular}{|p{4.2cm}|c|c|}
\hline
\textbf{Method}&\textbf{TNR}&\textbf{TPR}\\
\textbf{}&\textbf{(\%)}&\textbf{(\%)}\\ \hline
DCGAN with Temporal Slices (Our method)&96.09&92.19\\ \hline
CNN with Temporal Slices&87.39&93.23\\ \hline
DCGAN with Video Frames (no temporal information)&92.55&92.39\\ \hline
DCGAN without refinement stage&86.61&90.10\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:conclusion}
We propose a fire detection method using DCGANs exploiting spatio-temporal evolution of flames. We develop a two-stage DCGAN training approach in order to classify flame and non-flame image sequences. Spatio-temporal dynamics of flames are acquired using temporal slice images obtained from consecutive frames.
Results suggest that the proposed method achieves low false alarm rates while keeping the detection rate high, as opposed to the other deep learning approaches.
{\small
\bibliographystyle{ieee}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Solar models and their comparisons with observations are a powerful tool for probing the solar interiors with high accuracy, describing the trend of the sound speed and predicting how neutrinos are distributed among the various channels \citep[see e.g.][ for a review]{bahc01}.
Solar neutrino measurements, in particular those from the $^8$B channel \citep{ahar13,abe16} yielded information on fundamental neutrino properties; nowadays these properties are measured with an increasing accuracy and detailed knowledge of neutrino fluxes maintains its importance also for this aim.
Very recently the Borexino collaboration presented the first global analysis of three individual neutrino components of the proton-proton (pp) chain, namely pp, $^7$Be and pep neutrinos, putting also an upper limit to those from CNO, over an energy range from 0.19 MeV to 2.93 MeV \citep{agos18}.
These new data on neutrino fluxes can be used to improve our knowledge of the solar interiors \citep{viny17}, which is still beset with problems; among them, of special relevance are those raised by the compilations of solar abundances based on 3D atmospheric models \citep{asplund05}, which lead to disagreements with the measured sound speed \citep{bahc05b}.
Standard solar model predictions for neutrino fluxes are then very sensitive to the reaction rates adopted, obviously including electron-captures in the plasma (which are also of great importance for several other astrophysical problems). The electron-capture rate on $^7$Be itself is strongly dependent on the density and temperature distribution in the stellar structure \citep{simo13}; in solar conditions, in particular, this destruction channel of $^7$Be dominates over proton captures \citep{adel98}. From this latter branching, through $^8$B-decays, further neutrinos are emitted and can be detected by experiments like Super-Kamiokande, SNO and KamLand. The observed flux of $^8$B neutrinos is expected to be inversely proportional to the electron-capture rate on $^7$Be, being the counting rate in experiments determined by the number of proton-capture reactions occurring per
unit of time \citep{bahc69}.
Despite many different estimates presented \citep{bahc62,bahc69,john92,gruz97}, the accuracy in our knowledge of the relative importance of these two channels in not yet satisfactory and improvements have been limited over the years.
In this work we make a step forward by using a new estimate of the electron-capture rate on $^7$Be \citep[][ hereafter STPB13]{simo13} to compute SSMs.
The results are then compared with those obtained by the widely used rate by \citet{adel11} (hereafter ADE11), focusing our attention on the solar neutrino fluxes.
We make use of a tabulated version of the decay rate by STPB13. The aforementioned table, available at the CDS, contains the following information. Column 1 lists the density over the mean molecular weight for electrons in units of ${\rm g \, cm^{-3}}$, Column 2 gives the temperature in units of ${\rm K}$ and Column 3 provides the value of the electron-capture rate in units of ${\rm s^{-1}}$. All the quantities are expressed in logarithmic scale.
We also present an analytical approximation to it (see section \ref{sec:capture}).
Our work is organized as follows. In Section \ref{sec:ssm} the main features of the adopted stellar evolutionary code and of SSMs are described.
Section \ref{sec:capture} illustrates the calculation of the electron-capture rate on $^7$Be and presents a comparison with the previous estimate.
In Section \ref{sec:fluxes} we analyze the main characteristics of the ensuing SSM, while in Section \ref{sec:impact} the impact of the adopted rate on neutrinos from the $^8$B channel is discussed.
We summarize our results in Section \ref{sec:concl}.
\section{The Standard Solar Model}
\label{sec:ssm}
A SSM represents the mathematical way of fitting the present-day Sun status, provided some boundary conditions as luminosity, radius, mass and composition are available. Other important features such as temperature, pressure, sound-speed profiles, solar photospheric abundances and neutrino fluxes can then be predicted. Each of these quantities strictly depends on the nuclear reactions at work in the Sun's interiors, whose main outcome is helium production by hydrogen burning. This occurs through the pp-chain ($\sim$99$\%$) and, to a much lesser extent, through the CN-cycle ($\sim$1$\%$). Although the latter is not very important for the energy production in our Sun, it is relevant for the details of the neutrino production and as a test of the correctness of the predictions.
Other ingredients of the input physics, such as equation of state (EoS), opacity, chemical composition, etc. are also crucial to predict the solar quantities mentioned above.
The essentials of a SSM include the full evolution of a 1 $M_{\sun}$ star from the pre-main sequence to the present solar age $t_\sun$ = 4.566 Gyr, usually by considering that mass-loss is negligible. In addition, a SSM is required to reproduce, once the presolar composition is fixed, the present-day solar mass $M_{\sun}$, age, radius $R_{\sun}$, and luminosity $L_{\sun}$ as well as the observed metal-to-hydrogen ratio $(Z/X)_\sun$ at the surface of the Sun.
In order to do this, in our models we calibrated accordingly, with an iterative procedure, the initial helium and the metal mass fractions $Y_{\rm ini}$ and $Z_{\rm ini}$, respectively) as well as the mixing-length parameter ($\alpha_{\rm MLT}$).
Our solar models have been calculated with the FUNS stellar evolutionary code \citep{stra06,pier07,cris11}.
All the models assume a present solar luminosity of $L_{\sun} = 3.8418 \times 10^{33}$ erg s$^{-1}$, a present solar radius $R_{\sun} = 6.9598 \times 10^{10}$ cm and a solar mass $M_{\sun} = 1.989 \times 10^{33}$ g \citep{alle63,bahc05a}.
The input physics is basically the same adopted by \citet{pier07}, but includes a few recent updates as listed below.
We adopted the nuclear reaction rates presented in Table \ref{tab:rates}, except for the case of the $^7$Be electron-captures, for which we used either the rate suggested by \citet{adel11} or the one computed by \citet{simo13}.
Concerning the mean energy loss in the individual branches of neutrino production, we used the experimental values
suggested by \citet{viss18} (see their Table 2).
For electron screening effects in the solar plasma we adopted the Salpeter formula for the weak-screening, as recommended by \citet{gruz98} and \citet{bahc02}.
The EoS is the same as the one described by \citet{stra88} for fully ionized matter, in the form updated by \citet{prad02} for log\textit{T} [K] $\geq$ 6.0 and a Saha equation for log\textit{T} [K] $<$ 6.0.
Atomic diffusion has been included, taking into account the effects of gravitational settling and thermal diffusion, by inverting the coupled set of Burgers equations \citep{thou94,pier07}.
For radiative opacities, we used the OPAL tables \citep{igle96} for high temperatures (log\textit{T} [K] $\geq$ 4.0) and the \citet{ferg05} molecular opacities for low temperatures (log\textit{T} [K] $<$ 4.0), corresponding to the scaled-solar composition given either by \citet{grev98} or by \citet{palm14} (hereafter GS98 and PLJ14, respectively). Different choices of $(Z/X)_\sun$ correspond to different metal distributions in the solar structure, which, in their turn, change the calculated depth of the convective zone. Indeed, it was pointed out that SSMs with low metal abundances (i.e. with low $(Z/X)_\sun$ values) disagree with the helioseismologically measured sound speed, the depth of the convective zone, and the surface helium abundance \citep[see e.g.][]{bahc04}. Solving this disagreement, known as the ``solar abundance problem'', is an issue not related to $^7$Be decay and is therefore beyond the scope of this work. Here we show that the effects of using the new rate are independent from the solar mixture assumed and can be stated in a quite general way.
Finally, we have to mention that all the analyses presented in the various cases of this work have been performed by keeping all the physical parameters fixed, except for the $^7$Be electron-capture rate, to evaluate the specific role of this rate and to minimize the effects related to other inputs. The results obtained with the updated estimate of the $^7$Be electron-capture rate given by STPB13 have been compared with those obtained with the evaluation given by ADE11 for the two mentioned stellar choices of the chemical composition.
In principle, different assumptions for the composition, i.e. for the metal abundances, may lead to differences in the solar core temperature, hence also in the solar structure and in neutrino fluxes: see Section \ref{sec:fluxes} for a quantitative discussion.
\begin{table} [t!]
\begin{center}
\caption{Major reaction rates included in the Standard Solar Models presented in this paper.}
\label{tab:rates}
\begin{tabular}{c c}
\hline
\hline
Reaction & Reference \\
\hline
$^{1}$H(p, $\beta^+\nu_{\rm e}$)$^2$H & 1 \\
$^{1}$H(e$^-$p, $\nu_{\rm e}$)$^2$H & 2 \\
$^{2}$H(p, $\gamma$)$^3$He & 2 \\
$^{3}$He(p, $\beta^+\nu_{\rm e}$)$^4$He & 2 \\
$^{3}$He($^{3}$He, $\alpha$)2H & 2 \\
$^{3}$He($\alpha$, $\gamma$)$^7$Be & 2 \\
$^{7}$Li(p, $\alpha$)$^4$He & 3 \\
$^{7}$Be(p, $\gamma$)$^8$B & 4 \\
$^{7}$Be(e$^-$, $\nu_{\rm e}$)$^7$Be & 2, 5 \\
$^{12}$C(p, $\gamma$)$^{13}$N & 2 \\
$^{13}$C(p, $\gamma$)$^{14}$N & 2 \\
$^{14}$N(p, $\gamma$)$^{15}$O & 6 \\
$^{15}$N(p, $\gamma$)$^{16}$O & 2 \\
$^{15}$N(p, $\alpha$)$^{12}$C & 2 \\
$^{16}$O(p, $\gamma$)$^{17}$F & 2 \\
$^{17}$O(p, $\gamma$)$^{18}$F & 7 \\
$^{17}$O(p, $\alpha$)$^{14}$N & 8 \\
$^{14}$C(p, $\gamma$)$^{15}$N & 9 \\
$^{18}$O(p, $\gamma$)$^{19}$F & 10 \\
$^{18}$O(p, $\alpha$)$^{15}$N & 11 \\
$^{19}$F(p, $\gamma$)$^{20}$Ne & 12 \\
$^{19}$F(p, $\alpha$)$^{16}$O & 13 \\
$^{6}$Li(p, $\gamma$)$^{7}$Be & 12 \\
$^{6}$Li(p, $^3$He)$^{4}$He & 12 \\
$^{9}$Be(p, $\gamma$)$^{10}$B & 12 \\
$^{9}$B(p, $\alpha$)$^{6}$Li & 14 \\
$^{10}$B(p, $\gamma$)$^{11}$C & 12 \\
$^{10}$B(p, $\alpha$)$^{7}$Be & 14 \\
$^{11}$B(p, $\gamma$)$^{12}$C & 12 \\
$^{11}$B(p, $\alpha \alpha$)$^{4}$He & 12 \\
$^{14}$C($\beta^-$, $\bar{\nu}_{\rm e}$)$^{14}$N & 15 \\
$^{18}$F($\beta^+$, $\nu_{\rm e}$)$^{18}$O & 16 \\
$^{18}$O($\beta^-$, $\bar{\nu}_{\rm e}$)$^{18}$F & 16 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\tablebib{
(1) \citet{marc13}; (2) \citet{adel11}; (3) \citet{lami12}; (4) \citet{zhan15}; (5) \citet{simo13}; (6) \citet{mart11}; (7) \citet{dile14}; (8) \citet{brun16}; (9) \citet{ilia10}; (10) \citet{buck12}; (11) \citet{laco10}; (12) \citet{angu99}; (13) \citet{inde17}; (14) \citet{lami15}; (15) \citet{raus00}; (16) \citet{oda94}.}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Electron-capture on $^7$Be}
\label{sec:capture}
The deep stellar interiors are characterized by high densities and high temperatures. This implies that atoms are almost completely ionized; therefore, when describing the stellar core matter, it is necessary to apply the methods of plasma physics. The radioactive decay of a particular radioisotope (and its mean lifetime $\tau$) is strongly dependent, in such plasma conditions, on the density $\rho$ and the temperature $T$ of the plasma itself. In short, in order to provide an estimate of decay rates in stellar conditions one has to rely on accurate models for the plasma.
Many contributions, developed between the 60's and the 80's, considered a ionized plasma, whose degree of ionization is described through the Saha equation. Free electrons, acting as a screen inside the Debye radius, are treated as a Maxwellian gas \citep{taka87}. Concerning the specific case of $^7$Be electron-captures, the first detailed calculation from continuum states was done by \citet{bahc62}. Subsequently, estimates of the bound-electron contributions were also made \citep{iben67,bahc69,bahc94}.
A recommended resulting rate, based on all these calculations, was proposed by \citet{adel98} and \citet{adel11}. More general treatments have also been developed over the years \citep{gruz97,brow97,sawy11}, but always referring to solar core conditions and maintaining an approach resembling the Born-Oppenheimer (BO) one. In addition to this, it was recognized that the major uncertainty affecting the decay rate arises from possible deviations from a pure Debye screening. Indeed, \citet{john92} estimated these possible corrections to the Debye-H\"uckel (DB) approximation by means of self-consistent thermal Hartree calculations, concluding that the proposed rate was correct within an accuracy of about 2$\%$.
In this regard, it has to be remarked that temperature at the
centre of the Sun ($T\simeq 15.5 \, {\rm MK}$) is too high for electron degeneracy to set in. Hence, the classical approximation used e.g. by Bahcall to derive his rate is well founded for the solar conditions.
Quite recently \citet{simo13} developed a first-principles approach to derive the ${^{7}}$Be electron-capture rate, by modeling the electron-capture as a two-body scattering process ${^{7}}$Be-e${^{-}}$. To this aim, the e${^{-}}$-capture process is assumed to be proportional to the electronic density at the nucleus $\rho_e(0)$, which is screened and modified by the presence of the surrounding particles.
We notice in passing that the DB approximation used by Bahcall represents the high-temperature classical limit of the approach developed by \citet{simo13}, which provides the e${^{-}}$-capture rate on ${^{7}}$Be over a range of plasma densities and temperatures definitively larger than that in the solar core conditions.
In this approach, the plasma is assumed hot and is modeled as a homogeneous Fermi gas made by ${^{7}}$Be atoms, surrounded by $N_p$ protons (hydrogen nuclei) and $N_e$ electrons, at various temperatures $T$ and densities $\rho$. The motion of quantum Fermi gases is ruled by the Schr\"odinger equation and described in a reference frame fixed on the Be nucleus. Due to the adopted non-inertial frame, the Hamiltonian of the system contains non-inertial terms, coupling the motion of particles of the different species. As Be is definitively more massive, all these terms can be safely neglected, so that a factorization of the eigenfunctions can be performed and separable eigensolutions can be found. This procedure is reminiscent of the conditions for the adiabatic theorem, and thus it represents an ``adiabatic'' approximation. In this way the many-body scattering problem is reduced to a screened two-body problem, so that $\rho_e(0)$ is computed by solving a coupled Hartree-Fock (HF) self-consistent system of equations for both protons and electrons, in the electric field generated by the ${^{7}}$Be nucleus located at the origin of the reference frame. The HF treatment of the Coulomb repulsion is satisfactory and accurate enough to comply with the electron correlation in stellar conditions \citep[see ][]{simo13}.
The mean lifetime, resulting from this method, is in general compatible with estimates by \citet{bahc62,bahc69,bahc94,adel98,adel11}; however, it has values that, in solar conditions, are smaller by $\sim 3-4\%$ with respect to those estimated in the mentioned works. Far from these conditions, the differences can be much more pronounced (see Figure \ref{fig:rates1}).
We refer the reader to \citet{simo13} for the details of the calculations.
The total reaction rate $\lambda$ for $^7$Be(e$^-$,$\nu_{\rm e}$)$^7$Li by STPB13 can also be expressed analytically in an approximate formula, as a function of temperature, density, and composition.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{difference-rates.pdf}
\caption{The fractional variation of the $^7$Be electron-capture rate, $\Delta \lambda / \lambda \left[ \% \right]$ = $100\cdot(R_{\rm STPB13}-R_{\rm ADE11})/ R_{\rm ADE11}$, as a function of $\rho/{\mu_{\rm e}}$ and $T$, adopting the \citet{simo13} rate, as compared to the \citet{adel11} one, for the PLJ14 solar composition (see Section \ref{sec:ssm}). The solar core conditions are highlighted with the common solar symbol.
A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.}
\label{fig:rates1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
An expression that agrees with an accuracy of 2\% to the tabulated results for the rate $\lambda$ $[{\rm s}^{-1}]$, in the region of relevance for solar physics, i.e.
$35 \lesssim \rho/\mu_e$ ${\rm [g \, cm^{-3}]} \lesssim 105$ and $10\le T_6$ ${\rm [MK]} \le 16$, is:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:formula}
\lambda(\frac{\rho}{\mu_{\rm e}},T_6)= \frac{\rho}{\mu_{\rm e}} \frac{\kappa}{\sqrt{T_{6}}} \Big[ 1+ \alpha\, (T_6-16) + \beta\, \frac{\rho}{\mu_{\rm e}} \, \Big(1 + \gamma\, (T_6-16)\Big) \Big] \, .
\end{equation}
Here $\mu_e$ is the mean molecular weight per electron, $T_6$ is the temperature in units of $10^6$ K, and $\rho$ is the density in units of ${\rm [g \, cm^{-3}]}$.
Thus, the electron density is $n_e$ = $\rho /(m_p \mu_e)$, where $m_p$ is the proton mass.
The values of the four coefficients $\kappa, \alpha, \beta,\gamma$, whose units ensure the correct dimension of Eq. (\ref{eq:formula}), are reported in Table \ref{tab:coef}. We notice that a non-linear term in the density is present, while it was absent in Bahcall's calculations. In fact, this term is due to the Coulomb repulsion (electron screening) acted upon the electrons, which modifies the density close to the nucleus. Taking into account such a non-linearity requires the introduction of a higher number of polynomial terms.
We recall, however, that in this work we make use of a tabulated version of the decay rate by STPB13: in fact, the adopted fine resolution allows us to compute highly accurate solar models without adding further uncertainties deriving from the use of an analytical formula.
Notice that in our discussion, none of the nuclear reaction rates relevant for the standard solar model has been modified, so that expected variations are entirely due to the new approach adopted in computing $^7$Be electron-capture rate. Nevertheless, the change in the electron density, due to the formalism introduced by \citet{simo13} to describe e$^-$-capture on $^7$Be might be relevant also for other charged-particle interactions, leading to a correction in the screening factor. An investigation of this possibility and the quantitative estimation of this effect deserves dedicated analyses and future work.
\begin{table*}\label{tab:coef}
\begin{center}
\caption{Coefficients for the analytical approximation to the STPB13 and ADE11 electron-capture rates.}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c}
& $\kappa$ & $\alpha$ & $\beta$ & $\gamma$ \\ \hline \hline
this paper &
$ 5.9065\times 10^{-9}$ &
$ -1.3614\times 10^{-2}$ &
$ -9.2042\times 10^{-4}$ &
$ -1.5334\times 10^{-1}$ \\ \hline
ADE11 & $5.6 \times10^{-9}$ & $+4\times 10^{-3}$ &$ 0$ & $ 0$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\section{Solar Neutrino Fluxes}
\label{sec:fluxes}
Stars with initial mass $M \lesssim$ 1.2 $M_{\sun}$ primarily burn hydrogen through the pp-chain. The latter has three main branches, namely the ppI-, ppII-, and ppIII-cycles.
The pp, $^8$B $\beta$-decay and hep reactions produce neutrino spectra with characteristic shapes and with energies from zero up to a maximum energy $q$. In particular, the neutrinos coming from the weak hep branch are the most energetic ones produced by the Sun ($q$ $\leq$ 18.773 MeV) and, thus, are observed in the SNO and Super-Kamiokande event distributions because they populate energy bins above the $^8$B neutrino endpoint. The electron-capture reactions p + e$^-$ + p and $^7{\rm Be}+{\rm e}^{-}$ produce, on the contrary, emission lines, possibly broadened by thermal effects. Concerning the $^7$Be neutrinos, they form two distinct lines, corresponding to population of both the ground state (89.5$\%$) and the first excited state (10.5$\%$) in $^7$Li \citep{viss18}.
The ppI, ppII, and ppIII contributions to solar energy generation can be determined from measurements of the pp/pep, $^7$Be, and $^8$B neutrino fluxes. Being the relative rates very sensitive to the solar core temperature $T_c$, one can infer from neutrino fluxes important information about the physics of the solar interior. Nowadays the pp, $^7$Be and $^8$B fluxes are quite well known, while the measured pep neutrino flux is strongly model-dependent. In particular, it depends on the metallicity assumed for estimating the competing CNO neutrinos \citep{agos18}. The solar core physics is sensitive to metallicity effects because of the free-bound/bound-free transitions in metals, which are important contributors to the opacity. This means that metallicity variations alter the solar core temperature and, in turn, the fluxes of temperature-sensitive neutrinos, such as those from $^8$B $\beta$-decay.
Heavier metals (Mg, Si, and Fe) also affect the predicted neutrino fluxes \citep[see][]{bahc82}. Even if not very abundant, they are important opacity sources at the Sun center, as they are highly ionized. Instead, in the region just below the convective zone, at temperatures of a few millions kelvins, they are small contributors to the opacity. On the contrary, abundant, lighter, volatile heavy elemements (C, N, O, Ne, and Ar) are partially ionized there and significantly affect the radiative opacities. This is the origin of discrepancies between helioseismological measurements and the predictions made using solar compositions with low (Z/X), as discussed in \citet{bahc05b,bahc05c}. As a matter of fact, abundance variations of different metals influence different regions in the solar interior. Moreover, different CNO abundances imply an effect also on CNO burning efficiency (and corresponding neutrino fluxes) and a minor effect on the mean molecular weight and, in turn, on the thermodynamical quantities.
The net effect is that models using the GS98 compilation of abundances exhibit higher temperatures and higher densities with respect to those using the PLJ14 one (see Table \ref{tab:models}).
On the other hand, while pp and pep fluxes are only slightly modified, $^7$Be, $^8$B, $^{13}$N, $^{15}$O, and $^{17}$F neutrino fluxes are rather enhanced. Their fluxes are indeed strongly dependent on the central temperature $T_{\rm c}$, with a power law of the form $\Phi \propto T_{\rm c}^m$, with $m$ = 10.0, 24.0, 24.4, 27.1 and 27.8, respectively \citep[see][]{bahc96}.
CNO neutrino fluxes are enhanced also due to the increased burning efficiency caused by the higher CNO abundances in the GS98 compilation.
As was already mentioned, using modern solar compositions like the PLJ14 one, with low surface metal abundances, one gets solar models in disagreement with helioseismological measurements \citep[see][]{bahc04,basu04,bahc05a,sere11,haxt13,viny17}.
We have checked that the predicted sound speed profiles of our computed SSMs are in agreement with others in the literature. We found that for the PLJ14 abundance choice the prediction disagrees with the measured one \citep{scho98}. Instead, the choice of the older GS98 composition gives a better match.
We recall however that this work is not aimed at giving the best prediction for the total neutrino fluxes nor at
probing the solar metallicity problem; rather, we want to probe the effects induced on solar neutrino fluxes by varying the $^7$Be electron-capture rate only, in the light of the mentioned evaluation by STPB13.
\begin{table}[t!]
\begin{center}
\caption{The main relevant quantities for the solar models adopting the ADE11 rate, as defined in the text. The models using the STPB13 rate show negligible variations for the same quantities. Here $R_{\rm CE}$ is the radius at the base of the convective envelope, $T_{\rm c}$ and $\rho_{\rm c}$ are the central temperature and density, $ \alpha_{MLT}$ is the value of the mixing-length parameter. $X_{\rm ini}$, $Y_{\rm ini}$, $Z_{\rm ini}$ and $(Z/X)_{\rm ini}$ are the initial hydrogen, helium and metal abundances by mass and the initial metal-to-hydrogen ratio, while $X_{\sun}$, $Y_{\sun}$, $Z_{\sun}$ and $(Z/X)_{\sun}$ are the corresponding present-day photospheric values.}
\label{tab:models}
\begin{tabular}{c c c}
\hline
\hline
& GS98 & PLJ14\\
\hline
$R_{\rm CE}/R_{\sun}$ & 0.71628 & 0.72294\\
$T_{\rm c}$ $[10^7 \rm{K}]$ & 1.55031 & 1.54286\\
$\rho_{\rm c}$ ${\rm [g \, cm^{-3}]}$ & 149.377 & 148.325\\
$\alpha_{\rm MLT}$ & 2.31832 & 2.30317\\
$X_{\rm ini}$ & 0.70428 & 0.71092\\
$Y_{\rm ini}$ & 0.27703 & 0.27256\\
$Z_{\rm ini}$ & 0.01868 & 0.01653\\
$(Z/X)_{\rm ini}$ & 0.02653 & 0.02325\\
$X_{\sun}$ & 0.73656 & 0.74412\\
$Y_{\sun}$ & 0.24656 & 0.24103\\
$Z_{\sun}$ & 0.01688 & 0.01485\\
$(Z/X)_{\sun}$ & 0.02292 & 0.01995\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\section{Impact of a revised $^7$Be + e$^-$ on the $^8$B neutrino flux}
\label{sec:impact}
In this section we want to evaluate the impact of using a revised rate for the $^7$Be electron-capture, computed following the approach suggested by \citet{simo13}, on the $^8$B neutrino flux.
While pp neutrinos
originate in a wide range of the Sun, corresponding to the main energy-producing region, $^7$Be and $^8$B neutrinos are produced in a hotter and narrower zone, ranging from the solar centre to about 0.15-0.2 R$_\sun$.
The quantities $R_{\rm STPB13}$ and $R_{\rm ADE11}$ represent the electron-capture rate given by STPB13 and by ADE11, respectively.
The top panel of Fig. \ref{fig:rates2} shows the ratio between the STPB13 decay rate and ADE11's one in the production region of $^8$B neutrinos, both computed on the solar structure resulting from the ADE11 SSM, with a PLJ14 composition. As shown, there is an appreciable variation: the new rate is lower with respect to the ADE11 choice in solar core conditions, meaning that the $^7$Be neutrino production channel is slightly suppressed
in favor of all other channels.
In particular, both the solar neutrino fluxes from $^7$Be and $^8$B, $\Phi(^7{\rm Be})$ and $\Phi(^8{\rm B})$, are proportional to the local density of $^7$Be ions. The $\Phi(^7{\rm Be})$ flux depends on both the electron-capture ($R_{\rm ec}$) and the proton-capture rate ($R_{\rm pc}$) through:
\begin{equation}
\Phi(^7{\rm Be}) \propto \frac{R_{\rm ec}}{R_{\rm ec}+R_{\rm pc}} \; ,
\end{equation}
with $R_{\rm pc}$ $\approx$ 10$^{-3}$ $R_{\rm ec}$ \citep[see][]{adel98}. The flux $\Phi(^7{\rm Be})$ is therefore basically independent from the rates and dependent only upon the branching ratio between the reactions $^{3}$He+$^{3}$He e $^{3}$He+$^{4}$He.
On the contrary, $\Phi(^8{\rm B})$ can be written as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:ratio}
\Phi(^8{\rm B}) \propto \frac{R_{\rm pc}}{R_{\rm ec}+R_{\rm pc}} \simeq \frac{R_{\rm pc}}{R_{\rm ec}} \; ,
\end{equation}
meaning that it is inversely proportional to the electron-capture rate $R_{\rm ec}$. This means that a variation of the $R_{\rm ec}$ should have a linear effect on neutrino flux of $^8$B and negligible effects on other channels. Indeed, the STPB13 models present exactly the same physical and chemical features of the ADE11 models (see Table \ref{tab:models}).
If we take into account neutrinos that originate in each fraction of the solar radius (Figure \ref{fig:rates2}, middle panel), we thus deduce that, due to the less efficient electron-capture on $^7$Be rate, the $^8$B neutrino production channel becomes more efficient and so $\Phi(^8{\rm B})$ is increased.
It is also possible to see that, in correspondence of a change from negative to positive values of the variations in the electron-capture rate, the neutrino flux variation shifts from positive to negative values, thus corroborating the hypothesis of linearity between the electron-capture rate on $^7$Be and the $^8$B neutrino flux.
Furthermore, if relation (\ref{eq:ratio}) holds, then we see that:
\begin{equation}
\dfrac{n_{\nu}(^8{\rm B})_{\rm STPB13}}{n_{\nu}(^8{\rm B})_{\rm ADE11}} = \dfrac{\Phi(^8{\rm B})_{\rm STPB13}}{\Phi(^8{\rm B})_{\rm ADE11}} \simeq \dfrac{R_{\rm ADE11}}{R_{\rm STPB13}} \; ,
\end{equation}
or, alternatively,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:one}
\dfrac{n_{\nu}(^8{\rm B})_{\rm STPB13}}{n_{\nu}(^8{\rm B})_{\rm ADE11}} \dfrac{R_{\rm STPB13}}{R_{\rm ADE11}} \simeq 1 \; ,
\end{equation}
where $n_{\nu}(^8{\rm B})$ is the number of neutrinos coming from the $^8{\rm B}$ decay. Bottom panel of Fig. \ref{fig:rates2} shows the product in the left-hand side of relation (\ref{eq:one}). Its value is consistent with unity at the sub-per mill level, meaning that relation (\ref{eq:ratio}) is indeed valid and that an increase of the $R_{\rm ec}$ has the effect of linearly decreasing the flux of $^8$B neutrinos.
Finally, variations by +2.6$\%$ and +2.7$\%$ in $\Phi(^8{\rm B})$ are obtained for SSMs, using a PLJ14 or a GS98 compositions, respectively (see Table \ref{tab:fluxes}). The adoption of the STPB13 rate for electron-captures on $^7$Be has negligible effects on all other neutrino fluxes, because it induces no variation on the physics and the chemistry of the SSM itself (see Table \ref{tab:models}).
\begin{table*}[t!!]
\begin{center}
\caption{This table presents the predicted fluxes, in units of 10$^{10}$ (pp), 10$^{9}$ ($^7$Be), 10$^{8}$ (pep, $^{13}$N, $^{15}$O), 10$^{6}$ ($^{8}$B, $^{17}$F), and 10$^{3}$ (hep) cm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$ for the reference ADE11 models, presented in Table \ref{tab:models}, for the STPB13 models and relative differences.
.}
\begin{tabular}{c c c c c c c}
\hline
\hline
& \multicolumn{2}{c}{GS98} & & \multicolumn{2}{c}{PLJ14} & \\
\cline{2-3} \cline{5-6}
& ADE11 & STPB13 & relative & ADE11 & STPB13 & relative\\
& & & differences & & & differences \\
\hline
$\Phi$(pp)& 5.99 & 5.99 & +0.20\textperthousand & 6.01 & 6.01 & +0.01\textperthousand \\
$\Phi$(pep)& 1.42 & 1.42 & +0.25\textperthousand & 1.43 & 1.43 & +0.01\textperthousand \\
$\Phi$(hep)& 8.09 & 8.09 & +0.15\textperthousand & 8.22 & 8.22 &+0.01\textperthousand \\
$\Phi$($^7$Be)& 4.74 & 4.74 & +0.38\textperthousand & 4.54 & 4.54 & -0.01\textperthousand \\
$\Phi$($^{8}$B)& 5.28 & 5.42 & +2.70\% & 4.82 & 4.95 & +2.60\% \\
$\Phi$($^{13}$N)& 2.82 & 2.82 & +0.67\textperthousand & 2.55 & 2.55 & +0.06\textperthousand\\
$\Phi$($^{15}$O)& 2.07 & 2.07 & +0.71\textperthousand & 1.82 & 1.82 & +0.07\textperthousand\\
$\Phi$($^{17}$F)& 5.35 & 5.35 & +0.80\textperthousand & 3.95 & 3.95 & +0.07\textperthousand\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:fluxes}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{rates2.pdf}
\caption{Top panel shows the ratio between the STPB13 electron-capture rate and ADE11's one in the production region of $^8$B neutrinos, both computed on the solar structure resulting from the ADE11 SSM, with a PLJ14 composition. Middle panel shows the ratio between the neutrinos fraction produced in STPB13 SSM and a ADE11 one, both computed with a PLJ14 composition.
On the bottom panel the product $n_{\nu}(^8{\rm B})_{\rm STPB13} \cdot R_{\rm STPB13} / \left( n_{\nu}(^8{\rm B})_{\rm ADE11} \cdot R_{\rm STPB13} \right) $ is shown; note, in comparison with the other two panels, the much finer vertical scale. The consistency of this value with the unity means that there is practically no difference in computing a SSM with the revised STPB13 rate or apply it directly on the solar structure of a ADE11 SSM.
}
\label{fig:rates2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Comparison with Solar neutrino fluxes}
At the present moment we cannot tag our predicted fluxes with well defined uncertainty estimates: we should construct Monte Carlo (MC) simulations of SSMs in order to provide statistical errors to our results \citep[see][]{bahc06,sere11,viny17}. Still we can estimate these uncertainties starting from known literature. Concerning the predicted $^8$B neutrino flux, \citet{bahc06} found that the 1$\sigma$ theoretical uncertainty varies from 17\% to 11\%, depending on the adopted composition (see their Table 15 and Figure 6). Similar but smaller values were also found by \citet{sere11} and \citet{viny17}. Then we can choose, in a conservative way, the larger value of 17\% as our uncertainty on the predicted $^8$B neutrino flux.
Similarly we can adopt an error of 10\% 1$\sigma$ on the $^7$Be neutrino flux, as predicted by \citet{bahc06}, which is the highest found in the literature.
We also use, as correlation coefficient of the $^7$Be -$^8$B neutrino fluxes, the one given by \citet{bahc06} for the GS98 composition.
In this way we only give a rough, but still reliable, estimate of the uncertainties affecting our neutrino flux predictions, to be compared with the measured values.
The final joint fit to all SNO data gave a total flux of neutrino from $^8$B decays in the Sun of $\Phi(^8{\rm B})$ = 5.25(1 $\pm$ 0.04) $\times$ 10$^6$ cm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$ \citep{ahar13}. The latest results of the Borexino collaboration \citep{agos18} provided a total flux of $^7$Be neutrino flux of $\Phi(^7{\rm Be})$ = 4.99(1 $\pm$ 0.03) $\times$ 10$^9$ cm$^{-2}$s$^{-1}$. Such a value is somehow model-dependent, being obtained, from the measured rates, assuming a specific mechanism of neutrino oscillations \citep[see][for details]{agos18}. In fact, elastic scattering measurements, like the ones performed by Borexino, are mainly sensitive to $\nu_{\rm e}$ Charged-Current interactions. On the contrary, the Neutral-Current detection channel in SNO is sensitive to all neutrino flavours and so it is a direct model-independent observation of the $^8$B solar neutrino flux.
Figure \ref{fig:comparative} shows that adopting either the GS98 or the PLJ14 compositions, leads to a fair agreement with the total $^8$B neutrino flux measured by the SNO neutral current experiments. The use of the revised electron-capture rate $R_{\rm STPB13}$ increases the old values of the predicted $^8$B neutrino fluxes with respect to the measured value.
The measured value of the $^8$B neutrino flux is compatible with the solar model predictions for each of the two adopted solar compositions.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{fluxes.pdf}
\caption{$\Phi$($^{8}$B) and $\Phi$($^{7}$Be) fluxes compared to solar values \citep{ahar13,agos18}. Black dot and error bars indicate solar values, while squares and circles indicate the results obtained with the ADE11 electron-capture rate (older) and the STPB13 (current) one, respectively. Ellipses denote theoretical 1$\sigma$ Confidence Level (C.L.) for 2 degrees of freedom.
A color version of this figure is available in the online journal.}
\label{fig:comparative}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}\label{sec:concl}
We have presented new SSMs for two different mixtures of solar abundances, GS98 and PLJ14. Simulations have been performed with the FUNS code suite. We used recent values for the cross sections in our nuclear reaction network.
In particular, we adopt the e$^-$-capture rate on $^7$Be provided by \citet{simo13} based on a description of the physical conditions in the solar interior more accurate than previous works (eg. ADE11) and applicable also for more general stellar environments.
A tabulated version of this rate is available in the online material.
The comparison with models computed with the ADE11 widely adopted electron-capture rate shows maximum differences of about 3-4\% in solar conditions. The effects on the standard solar model calculations, along with the effects on neutrino fluxes, have been discussed. We found that variations in the Solar structure and in neutrino fluxes are negligible, except for the $^8$B neutrino flux. The estimated increase is 2.6-2.7\%, depending on the composition assumed. Finally, we have also shown that the solar $^8$B neutrino flux
is reproduced rather well, both using the GS98 and the PLJ14 abundance sets.
\begin{acknowledgements}
We warmly thank the referee, S. Degl'Innocenti, for the insightful comments and suggestions that helped us to improve the manuscript.
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{aa}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sect:intro}}
\else
\section{Introduction}
\label{sect:intro}
\fi
Fisher et al.~\cite{interactions-with-big-data-analytics} defines software analytics as a workflow that distills large quantities of low-value
data into smaller sets of higher value data.
Such analytics aims at generating insights and building predictors for software systems.
Due to the complexities and computational cost of SE
analytics, Fisher et al warn that ``the luxuries of interactivity, direct manipulation, and fast system response are gone''.
In fact, they characterize modern cloud-based analytics as a throwback to the 1960s- batch processing mainframes where
jobs are submitted and then analysts wait long for results with ``little insight into what’s really going
on behind the scenes, how long it will take, or how much it’s going to cost''.
Fisher et al. document
issues seen by industrial data scientists, one who says
{\em ``Fast iteration is key, but incompatible
with jobs ... in the cloud. It’s frustrating to wait for hours, only to realize
you need a slight tweak...''}
One impediment to fast iterations are
{\em hyperparameter optimizers}
that automatically tune control options for data mining.
Off-the-shelf
learners come
with defaults for control parameters, which may be sub-optimal. For example,
in the distance function $d(x,y,p)=\left(\sum_i (x_i-y_i)^p\right)^{1/p}$,
a standard default is $p=2$.
Yet Agrawal et al.~\cite{agrawal2018better} found that
$p>2$ worked much better for their processing.
Hyperparameter optimizers automatically find better control parameters
by experimenting with adjustments to the control parameters of a learner~\cite{biedenkapp2018hyperparameter}~\cite{franceschi2017forward}.
When done using 21st century optimizers (e.g., NSGA-2~\cite{deb00afast}, IBEA~\cite{Zitzler04indicator-basedselection}, MOEA/D~\cite{zhang07}, FLASH~\cite{nair18}), it is now possible to optimize for multiple goals (even when they are competing).
\tbl{options} lists some
tuning options for data pre-processing and machine learning for two
well-studied
SE tasks:
\begin{itemize}
\item
{\em Software defect prediction}
(classifying modules into ``buggy'' or otherwise~\cite{agrawal2018better,chen2018applications,fu2016tuning,tantithamthavorn2016automated,8263202,menzies2007data,ghotra2015revisiting});
\item
{\em Software bug report text mining} (to find severity~\cite{agrawal2018better,oliveira2010ga}).
\end{itemize}
\textcolor{black}{ \tbl{options} is a partial
list of some of the tunings that might be explored.
Even this incomplete sample includes billions of configuration options.}
With enough CPU, automatic hyperparameter optimizers
can prune those options to
find tunings that improve the performance
of software quality predictors~\cite{agrawal2018better,fu2016tuning,liu2010evolutionary,sarro2012further,8263202,tantithamthavorn2016automated,zhong2004,treude2018per,oliveira2010ga}.
For example, Tantithamthavorn et al.~\cite{tantithamthavorn2016automated,8263202} showed that
tuning can convert bad learners into very good ones.
The problem with hyperparameter optimization is finding enough CPU.
The cost of running a data miner through all those options is very high, requiring days to weeks to decades of CPU~\cite{abs-1807-11112,8263202,tantithamthavorn2016automated,wang2013searching,treude2018per,xia18}.
For many years, we have addressed these long CPU times via cloud-based CPU farms.
Fisher et al.~\cite{interactions-with-big-data-analytics} warn that cloud computation is a heavily monetized environment that charges for all their services (storage, uploads, downloads, and CPU time). While each small part of that service is cheap, the total annual cost to an organization can be exorbitant.
\input{choices}
Recently it was discovered how to (a)~save most of that CPU cost while at the same time
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{1.3in}
~~~~\includegraphics[width=1in]{grid.png}
\caption{For \ \mbox{$\mathcal{E}=0.2$},
outputs have 25 cells. Green
cells are preferred (high recall
and low false alarms). }\label{fig:grid}
\end{wrapfigure}
(b)~find better tunings.
\textcolor{black}{As discussed later,
a method called ``FFtrees''~\cite{phillips2017FFtrees} (which
just selects a best model within a small
forest of shallow decision trees)
generates much better predictions than supposed state-of-the-art results obtained
after CPU intensive tuning~\cite{chen2018applications}.} This is strange
since standard tuning tries thousands of options, but FFtrees tries just a dozen.
\textcolor{black}{To explain these FFtree results~\cite{chen2018applications}, we observe
that (a)~a learner assessed by $p$ performance scores has a $p$ dimensional output space;
and (b)~there is some variation $\mathcal{E}$ where a learner's performance appears in that space.}
As shown in \fig{grid}, if
\mbox{$\mathcal{E}=0.2$} then the 2 performance scores ($p=2$) output space divides into
\textcolor{black}{$1/\mathcal{E}^p=1/{0.2}^2=25$ cells}.
That is,
if we explored more than 25 tunings, certain
pairs of tunings would be {\em redundant} (i.e., would have very similar outcomes).
It turns out there are better ways to avoid redundant tunings than FFtrees.
Our method {\IT*} learns to ignore redundant tunings (parameter settings including which classifier and preprocessor to use)
those that fall within $\mathcal{E}$ of other results.
When tested on defect
prediction and text mining,
{\IT*} terminated after fewer evaluations than standard optimizers.
Also, it produced better performance scores than state-of-the art research articles (for the two well-studied SE tasks listed before~\cite{fu2016tuning,agrawal2018better,chen2018applications,agrawal2018wrong,Panichella:2013,ghotra2015revisiting}).
We conjecture that other methods perform relatively worse since they do not appreciate just how small
the output space is. Hence, those other methods waste CPU as they
struggle to cover billions of redundant tuning options like \tbl{options} (most of which yield indistinguishable results).
This article introduces and evaluates {\IT*}. \tion{fft}
describes how FFtrees lead to
the design of {\IT*} (in \tion{dodge}).
\tion{rq} then answers the following research questions.
{\bf RQ1: Is {\IT*} too complicated? How to find appropriate value of $\mathcal{E}$?}
We can not recommend a method
if it is too complex to use.
Fortunately, we show that it is easy to find {\IT*}'s parameters since
its success is
not altered by large
changes to $\mathcal{E}$.
\textcolor{black}{{\bf RQ2: How does {\IT*} compare to recent prominent
defect prediction and hyperparameter optimization results?}
When compared to recent tuning papers at IST'16, ICSE'18 and FSE'18 results~\cite{fu2016tuning,ghotra2015revisiting,chen2018applications},
{\IT*} explored a much larger parameter search space and exhibited much faster termination.
Also, in terms of goal performance:
\begin{itemize}
\item
{\IT*} out-performed
an ICSE'15 article exploring different learners for
defect prediction~\cite{ghotra2015revisiting} by around 50\% and 40\% for {\em d2h} and {\em Popt(20)} respectively\footnote{
{\em d2h} scores highest for models with high recalls and low false alarms while
{\em Popt(20)} scores highest when many defects are localized to a small part of the code.
For full details on these measures, and why we use them, see \tion{goals}.}.
\item
{\IT*} also did better than the IST'16 journal article that demonstrated
the value of tuning
for learners~\cite{fu2016tuning} by about 30\% and 10\% (for {\em d2h} and {\em Popt(20)}).
\item
This approach also does better than
the ICSE'18 article that advocated to tune data pre-preprocessors~\cite{agrawal2018better} by about 10\% and 5\% on an average (for {\em d2h} and {\em Popt(20)}).
\item
Further, {\IT*} also does better by 10\% and 5\% (for {\em d2h} and {\em Popt(20)}) than
the FSE'18 article mentioned earlier
that reported FFtrees~\cite{chen2018applications}.
\end{itemize}
}
{\bf RQ3: Is {\IT*} only useful for defect prediction?}
In order to stress test our methods, we must apply {\IT*}
to some harder task than defect prediction.
Software bug report text mining is a
harder task than defect prediction since
the
latter only process a few dozen attributes while former
task have tens of thousands of attributes.
\textcolor{black}{For text mining, we show
{\IT*} performs better than
the IST'18 journal article that showed the value
of tuning for SE text mining applications~\cite{agrawal2018wrong} by about 20\% on an average for {\em d2h}.
Also {\IT*}
performs better than
the ICSE'13 article that applied genetic algorithms to
learn the settings for a text miner~\cite{Panichella:2013} by about 20\% on an average for {\em d2h}.
As with the defect prediction studies,
for both these IST'18 and ICSE'13 papers,
{\IT*} explored a much larger parameter search space and exhibited much faster termination.}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{evals.png}
\captionsetup{font=footnotesize}
\caption{\textcolor{black}{Comparisons of the computational cost of the different methods studied in the paper. Here, the computational cost is
measured in terms of the number of evaluations required to find a model. The y-axis shows various methods, discussed later in this paper.
The essential point of this figure is that methods that know how
to avoid redundant tunings (i.e. FFT and {\IT*}) cost orders of magnitude
less than otherwise. }
}\label{fig:timings}
\end{figure}
\textcolor{black}{From our findings, we could recommend FFtrees if the goal
is only to produce succinct, approximate summaries of the factors
that matter in the data. Also, as shown in \fig{timings}, FFtrees are slightly faster than
{\IT*}.}
\textcolor{black}{That said, if the goal is maximizing predictive prowess
then we must caution that FFtree's faster generation of smaller models comes at a price-
FFtrees usually generates significantly weaker predictions than {\IT*} (see the RQ2 and RQ3 results, discussed later).}
Another reason to recommend {\IT*} is that it
generates better predictors than numerous recent SE state-of-the-art research articles~\cite{fu2016tuning,agrawal2018better,chen2018applications,agrawal2018wrong,Panichella:2013,ghotra2015revisiting}.
But more fundamentally, the other reason to explore {\IT*} is that it tests the theory that much better hyperparameter optimizers can be built by assuming the output space divides into just
a few regions of size
$\mathcal{E}$. {\IT*} is one way to exploit this effect.
We believe that further research could be performed in many others ways
(e.g., different learners, better visualizations and/or explanations of analytics, faster implementations of other tools).
\subsection{Relation to Prior Work}\label{sect:prior}
\textcolor{black}{All the {\IT*} work is novel for this paper (this research team invented {\IT*} and this is the first
publication to discuss it). As to the work on FFtrees, for defect prediction, this paper includes
the prior results with that of Chen et al. results~\cite{chen2018applications}. The application of FFtrees to text mining (in this paper) is
a novel result.}
\input{data.tex}
\section{Background}\label{sect:background}
This section describes the background on defect prediction, and text mining and the corresponding data and methods which are considered baselines.
\subsection{Text Mining}
\label{sect:tm}
\textcolor{black}{
Many SE project artifacts come in the form of {\em unstructured text} such as
word processing files, slide presentations, comments,
Github issue reports, etc.
According to White~\cite{white05}, 80\% of business is conducted on unstructured data, 85\% of all data stored is held in an unstructured format and unstructured data doubles every three months.
Nadkarni and Yezhkova~\cite{nadkarni2014structured}
say that 1,600 Exabytes of data appears
in unstructured sources and that
each year, humans generate more unstructured artifacts than structured.}
\textcolor{black}{Lately, there have been much interest in SE text mining~\cite{menzies2008improving,menzies2008automated,Panichella:2013,agrawal2018wrong,xu2016predicting,majumder18}
since it covers a much wider range of SE activities.
Text mining is harder than other case studies (like defect prediction) due to presence of free form natural language which is semantically very complex and may not conform to any known grammar.
In practice, text documents require tens of thousands of attributes (one for each word).
For example, consider NASA's software
project and issue tracking systems (or PITS)~\cite{menzies2008improving, menzies2008automated} that contain text
discussing
bugs and changes in source code. As shown in \tbl{data_text}, our text data contains tens to hundreds of thousands
of words (even when reduced to unique words, there are still 10,000+ unique words).
}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Dataset statistics. Data comes from the SEACRAFT repository: \url{http://tiny.cc/seacraft}}
\label{tbl:data_text}
\begin{tabular}{c@{~}|r@{~}|r@{~}|r@{~}}
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}} \textbf{Dataset} \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}} \textbf{No. of Documents}\end{tabular} & \textbf{No. of Unique Words} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}} \textbf{Severe \%}\end{tabular} \\ \hline
PitsA & 965 & 155,165 & 39 \\
PitsB & 1650 & 104,052 & 40 \\
PitsC & 323 & 23,799 & 56 \\
PitsD & 182 & 15,517 & 92 \\
PitsE & 825 & 93,750 & 63 \\
PitsF & 744 & 28,620 & 64 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Data and Algorithms for Text Mining}
\textcolor{black}{\tbl{data_text} describes our
PITS data, which comes from six different NASA systems (which we label PitsA, PitsB,...etc).
For this study, all datasets were preprocessed using the usual text mining filters~\cite{feldman2006j}.
We implemented stop words removal using NLTK toolkit~\cite{bird2006nltk}
(to ignore very common short words such as ``and'' or ``the'').
Next,
Porter's stemming filter~\cite{Porter1980} was used to delete uninformative word endings
(e.g., after performing stemming, all the following words would be rewritten
to ``connect'': ``connection'', ``connections'',
``connective'',
``connected'',
``connecting'').
After that, {\IT*} selected other pre-processors using the space of options from \tbl{options}. }
\textcolor{black}{A standard text mining learner is SVM (support vector machine).
A drawback with SVM is that its models may not be human comprehensible.
Finding insights among unstructured text
is difficult unless we can search, characterize, and classify the
textual data in a meaningful way. One of the common techniques for
finding related topics within unstructured text (an area called
topic modeling) is the Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA)~\cite{blei2003latent}.
LDA clusters text into ``topics'' defined by the high-frequency words in that cluster.
For example, the topics found by LDA for one of our PITS data sets are shown in \tbl{topics}.
We studied LDA since it is a widely-used technique in prominent SE research articles~\cite{agrawal2018wrong}.}
\begin{table}[!t]
\begin{center}
\caption{Top 10 topics found by LDA for PitsA dataset from\tbl{data_text}. Within
each topic, the weight of words decreases exponentially left to right across the order shown here.
The words here are truncated (e.g., ``software'' becomes ``softwar'') due to stemming.}
\label{tbl:topics}
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{r@{=~}l}
Topics & Top words in topic\\\hline
01 & command engcntrl section spacecraft unit icd tabl point referenc indic \\
02 & softwar command test flight srobc srup memori script telemetri link \\
03 & file variabl line defin messag code macro initi use redund \\
04 & file includ section obc issu fsw code number matrix src \\
05 & mode safe control state error power attitud obc reset boot \\
06 & function eeprom send non uplink srup control load chang support \\
07 & valu function cmd return list ptr curr tss line code \\
08 & tabl command valu data tlm load rang line count type \\
09 & flight sequenc link capabl spacecraft softwar provid time srvml trace \\
10 & line messag locat column access symbol file referenc code bld
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[!t]
\begin{center}
\caption{Document Topic distribution found by LDA for PitsA dataset}
\label{tbl:features}
\begin{tabular}{r|r@{~~~}r@{~~~}r@{~~~}r@{~~~}r@{~~~}r@{~~~}r@{~~~}r@{~~~}r@{~~~}r|c}
Issue & \multicolumn{10}{c|}{10 Topics} & Severe? \\\hline
01 & .60 & .10 &.00& .15 & .00& .05 & .03 & .04 & .03 &.00& y \\
02 & .10 & .03 & .02 &.00& .03 & .02 & .15 & .65 &.00&.00& n \\
03 &.00& .20 & .05 & .05 &.00& .60 & .02 & .03 & .03 & .02 & n \\
04 & .03 & .01 & .01 & .10 & .15 &.00& .70 &.00&.00&.00& y \\
etc &
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\textcolor{black}{LDA is controlled by various parameters (see \tbl{options}).
At ICSE'13,
Panichella et al.~\cite{Panichella:2013} used a genetic algorithm to tune their LDA
text miners.
More recently, in the IST'18 journal article,
Agrawal et al.~\cite{agrawal2018wrong} saw that differential evolution can out-perform genetic algorithms
for tuning LDA.}
\textcolor{black}{A standard pre-processor for text mining is {\em vectorization}; i.e., replace the raw observations
of wordX appearing in documentY with some more informative statistic.
For example, Agrawal et al. converted the PITS text data into the vectors
of \tbl{features}. The cells in that table shows how much
each issue report matches each topic (and the final column shows the issue severity of that report).
\tbl{options} lists the options for the LDA vectorization, plus three other vectorization methods.}
\subsection{Defect Prediction}\label{sect:dp}
\textcolor{black}{Software developers are smart, but sometimes make mistakes. Hence, it is essential to test software before the deployment ~\cite{orso2014software,barr2015oracle,yoo2012regression, myers2011art}.
\textcolor{black}{Software quality assurance budgets are finite but increasing assessment effectiveness by some
linear amount can take exponentially more effort}~\cite{fu2016tuning}. Therefore, standard practice is to apply the best available methods on code sections that seem most critical and bug-prone.
Software bugs are not evenly distributed across the project~\cite{hamill2009common,koru2009investigation, ostrand2004bugs,misirli2011ai}. Hence,
a useful way to perform software testing is to allocate most assessment budgets to
the more defect-prone parts in software projects.
Software defect predictors are never 100\% correct. But
they can be used to suggest where to focus more expensive methods. }
\textcolor{black}{There is much commercial interest in defect prediction. In a survey of 395 practitioners from 33 countries and five continents,
Wan et al.~\cite{wan18} found that over 90\% of
the respondents were willing to adopt defect prediction
techniques.
When Misirli et al.~\cite{misirli2011ai} built a defect prediction model for a telecommunications company, those models
could predict 87\% of files with defects.
Those models also decreased inspection efforts by 72\%, and hence reduced post-release defects by 44\%. }
Software defect predictors not only save labor compared with traditional manual methods, but they are also competitive with certain automatic methods.
A recent study at ICSE'14, Rahman et al. ~\cite{rahman2014comparing} compared (a) static code analysis tools FindBugs, Jlint, and PMD and (b) static code defect predictors (which they called ``statistical defect prediction'') built using logistic regression.
They found no significant differences in the cost-effectiveness of these approaches.
Given this equivalence, it is significant to
note that static code defect prediction can be quickly adapted to new languages by building lightweight parsers to extract static code metrics such as \tbl{ck}. The same is not true for static code analyzers - these need extensive modification before they can be used in new languages.
\input{algo.tex}
\begin{table}[!b]
\footnotesize
\caption{OO code metrics used for the defect prediction studies of this article. \textcolor{black}{For definitions on code metrics, please refer table 1 of \cite{agrawal2018better}.}
Last line, shown in \colorbox{lightgray}{gray}, denotes the dependent variable.}\label{tbl:ck}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c|l}\hline
amc & average method complexity \\\hline
avg\, cc & average McCabe \\\hline
ca & afferent couplings \\\hline
cam & cohesion among classes \\\hline
cbm & coupling between methods \\\hline
cbo & coupling between objects \\\hline
ce & efferent couplings \\\hline
dam & data access\\\hline
dit & depth of inheritance tree\\\hline
ic & inheritance coupling\\\hline
lcom (lcom3) & 2 measures of lack of cohesion in methods \\\hline
loc & lines of code \\\hline
max\, cc & maximum McCabe\\\hline
mfa & functional abstraction\\\hline
moa & aggregation\\\hline
noc & number of children\\\hline
npm & number of public methods\\\hline
rfc & response for a class\\\hline
wmc & weighted methods per class\\\hline
\rowcolor{lightgray}
defects & Boolean: where defects found in bug-tracking\\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Data and Algorithms for Defect Prediction}\label{sect:daa}
Our defect predictors where applied to the data described in
\tbl{versions}.
As shown in \tbl{versions},
this data is available for multiple software versions (from http://tiny.cc/seacraft).
This is important since, an important principle of data mining is not to test on the data used in training.
There are many ways to design a experiment that satisfies this principle.
Some of the methods where we do not test data mining on training data itself have limitations too; e.g., leave-one-out is too slow for
large data sets and cross-validation mixes up older and newer data~
(such that data from the past may be used to test on future data). In
this work, for each project data, we set the latest version of project data
as the testing data and all the older data as the training data.
For example, we use $\mathit{poi1.5, poi2.0, poi2.5}$ data for training predictors,
and the newer data, $\mathit{ poi3.0}$ is left for testing.
\tbl{versions} illustrates the variability of SE data.
The data can be observed to have
imbalanced class frequencies.
If the target class is not common (as in the camel, ivy, etc test data in \tbl{versions}), it is difficult to generate a model that can locate it.
A standard trick for class imbalance is SMOTE~\cite{Chawla:2002} that synthetically
create members of the minority class.
\tbl{options} show controlled parameters of SMOTE.
\input{versions.tex}
As to machine learning algorithms, there are many and varied.
At ICSE'15, Ghotra et al.~\cite{ghotra2015revisiting} applied 32 different machine learning algorithms to defect prediction.
In a result consistent with the theme of this article, they found that those 32 algorithms formed into four groups
of Table 9 in \cite{ghotra2015revisiting}
(and the performance of two learners in any one group
were statistically indistinguishable from each other).
\subsection{Evaluation}\label{sect:goals}
\subsubsection{Measures of Performance}\label{sect:easures}
We eschew precision and accuracy since these can be inaccurate for data sets where the target class is rare (which is common
in defect prediction data sets)~\cite{Menzies:2007prec}.
\textcolor{black}{For
example, consider a test data set with 20\% defective examples.
A learner could be 80\% accurate for that data set, while still
missing 100\% of the defective examples. As to why we deprecate precision,
we refer the interested reader to a prior work~\cite{Menzies:2007prec}.}
Instead, we will evaluate our predictors on metrics
that aggregate multiple metrics.
{\em D2h}, or ``distance to heaven'', shows how close scores fall to ``heaven'' (where recall=1 and false alarms (FPR)=0)~\cite{chen2018applications}. {\em D2h} was used to evaluate both defect predictors as well as text mining.
{\footnotesize\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:recall}
\mathit{Recall} & = & \frac{\mathit{True Positives}}{\mathit{True Positives + False Negatives}} \\
\mathit{FPR} & = & \frac{\mathit{False Positives}}{\mathit{False Positives + True Negatives}} \\
\mathit{d2h} & = & \frac{ \sqrt{ (1-\mathit{Recall})^2 + (0-\mathit{FPR })^2}}{ \sqrt{2}}\label{eq:d2h}
\end{eqnarray}}
{\noindent}Here, the $\sqrt{2}$ term normalizes {\em d2h} to the range zero to one.
For defect prediction, {\em Popt(20)} comments on the effort required {\em after} a defect predictor triggers and humans have to read code, looking
for errors. {\em Popt(20)} is a specialized metric which can be used only with defect predictor.
$Popt(20)=1- \Delta_{opt}$, where $\Delta_{opt}$ is the area
between the effort~(code-churn-based) cumulative lift charts of the optimal
learner and the proposed learner. To calculate {\em Popt(20)}, we divide all the code modules into those predicted to be defective ($D$) or not ($N$). Both sets are then sorted in ascending order of lines of code. The two sorted sets are
then laid out across the
x-axis,
with $D$ before $N$. This layout means that
the x-axis extends from 0 to 100\% where lower values of $x$ are predicted to be more defective than $x$ higher values.
On such a chart, the y-axis shows what percent of the defects would be recalled if we traverse the code sorted that x-axis order.
Following from the recommendations of Ostrand et al.~\cite{ostrand2004bugs}, {\em Popt} is reported at the 20\% point; show how many bugs are find if we inspect a small portion of the code (20\%).
Kamei, Yang et al. ~\cite{yang2016effort,kamei2013large,monden2013assessing} normalized {\em Popt} using:
{\footnotesize\begin{eqnarray}
P_{opt}(m) = 1- \frac{S(optimal)-S(m)}{S(optimal)-S(worst)}\label{eq:popt}
\end{eqnarray}}
\noindent
where $S(optimal)$, $S(m)$ and $S(worst)$ represent the area of curve under the optimal learner, proposed learner, and worst learner.
Note that the worst model is built by sorting all the changes according to the actual defect density in ascending order.
After normalization, {\em Popt(20)} (like {\em d2h}) has the range zero to one.
Please note two important points. Firstly, unlike the defect prediction data of \tbl{versions}, the data for text mining task is
not conveniently divided into versions. Hence, to generate separate train and test
data sets, we use a $x*y$ cross-validation study where, $x=5$ times, we randomize the order of the data
then divide into $y=5$ bins. Then, we test on that bin after training on all the others.
Secondly:
\textcolor{black}{
\begin{itemize}
\item
{\em larger} values of {\em Popt(20)} are {\em better};
\item
{\em smaller} values of {\em d2h} are {\em better}.
\end{itemize}
}
\subsubsection{Statistical Analysis}
\label{sect:sample}
As to statistical methods, the following results use two approaches.
Firstly, when comparing one result to a sample of $N$ others, we will sometime see ``small effects'' (which can be ignored). To define ``small effect'',
we use Cohen's delta~\cite{cohen1988statistical}:
{\footnotesize \begin{equation}\label{eq:cohen}
d=\mathit{small\; effect} = 0.2*\sqrt{\frac{\sum_i^x(x_i- ({\sum}x_i/n))^2}{n-1}}\end{equation}}
i.e., 20\% of the standard deviation.
Secondly, other statistical tests are required
when comparing results from two samples; e.g., when
two variants of some stochastic process are applied, many
times, to a population.
For this second kind of comparison, we need a statistical
significance test (to certify that the distributions are indeed different) and an effect size test
(to check that the differences are more than a ``small effect'').
There
are many ways to implement second kind of test.
Here, we used those which have been past peer reviewed in the literature~\cite{agrawal2018better,agrawal2018wrong}. Specifically, we use Efron's 95\% confidence bootstrap procedure~\cite{efron93bootstrap} and the A12 test~\cite{Arcuri:2011}.
In this second test, to say that
one sample $S_1$ is ``{\em worse}'' than another sample $S_2$
is to say: 1) The mean {\em Popt(20)} values of $S_1$ are less than $S_2$; 2) The mean {\em D2h} values of $S_1$ are more than $S_2$; and 3) The populations are not statistically similar; i.e., (a)~their mean difference is larger than a small effect (using A12)
and that
(b)~a statistical significance test (bootstrapping) has not rejected the hypothesis that
they are different (at 95\% confidence).
Note we do not use A12 or bootstrap
for the first kind of test, since those statistics
are not defined for comparisons of
individuals to a sample.
\section{Motivation for new work: Surprising Results from FFtrees}\label{sect:fft}
This section describes the FFtrees results published by Chen et al. in FSE'18~\cite{chen2018applications} that (a)~motivated this article and (b)~lead to our hypothesis that
``redundant parameter choices might be leading to indistinguishable results''.
This will in turn lead to (next section)
a new method called {\IT*} that deprioritizes choices that lead to redundant results.
Fast and Frugal Trees (FFtrees)
were developed by psychological scientists~\cite{martignon2008categorization}
trying
to generate succinct, easily comprehensible models.
FFtrees are binary trees that
return a binary classification (e.g., true, false).
Unlike standard decision trees,
each level of an FFtree
must have at least one leaf node.
For example,
\tbl{three} shows an FFTtree generated from
the log4j JAVA system of \tbl{versions}.
The goal of this tree is to classify a software module as ``defective=true'' or ``defective=false''.
The four nodes in the \tbl{three} FFTree reference four attributes \emph{cbo,\ rfc,\ dam,\ amc} (defined in
\tbl{ck}).
\begin{table}[!t]
\caption{An example FFtree generated from \tbl{versions} data sets. Attributes come from \tbl{ck}.
``True'' means ``predicted to be defective''.}\label{tbl:three}
{
\begin{verbatim}
if cbo <= 4 then false
else if rfc > 32 then true
else if dam > 0 then true
else if amc < 32.25 then true
else false
\end{verbatim}}
\end{table}
Following the advice of~\cite{phillips2017FFtrees,chen2018applications}, we generate trees of depth of $d=4$.
This means that
FFtrees make their decisions using at most four attributes (where numeric ranges have been binarized by splitting at the median point).
Standard rule learners select
ranges that best select for some goal (e.g., selecting for the ``true'' examples). This can lead to overfitting.
To avoid overfitting, FFtrees use a somewhat unique strategy:
at each level of the tree,
FFtrees builds two trees using the ranges that {\em most} and {\em least} satisfy some goal; e.g., {\em d2h} or {\em Popt20}.
That is, half the time, FFtrees will try to avoid the target class by building a leaf node that exits to ``false''.
Assuming a maximum tree depth of \mbox{$d=4$} and two choices at each level,
then FFtree builds $2^d=16$ trees then prunes away all but one, as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item
Firstly, select
a goal predicate; e.g., {\em d2h} or {\em Popt20}.
\item
Next, while {\em building one tree}, at each level of the tree, FFtree scores
each range according to how well that range \{does, does not\} satisfy that goal.
These selected range becomes a leaf note. FFtree then calls itself
recursively on all examples that do not fall into that range.
\item
Finally, while {\em assessing 16 trees}, the training data is run through each tree to find what examples
are selected by that tree. Each tree is scored by passing the selected examples through the goal predicate.
\item
The tree with the best score is applied to the test data.
\end{itemize}
In summary, FFtrees {\em explore around} a few dozen times, trying different options for how to best model the data (i.e., what exit
node to use at each level of the tree).
After a few {\em explorations}, FFtrees deletes the worst models, and uses the remaining model on the test data.
\begin{figure}[!t]
{\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{cc}
{\em D2h}: {\em less} is {\em better}.
&
{\em Popt(20)}: {\em more} is {\em better}. \\
``small effect'' $= 5.1$
&
``small effect'' $=5.2$\\
\includegraphics[width=1.6in]{d2huntuned.png}&\includegraphics[width=1.6in]{pot20untuned.png}\\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{ \includegraphics[width=2in]{keyuntuned.png}}
\end{tabular}}
\captionsetup{font=footnotesize}
\caption{Defect prediction results for FFtree vs untuned learners. From~\cite{chen2018applications}.
FFtrees is almost never beaten by other methods (by more than a ``small effect'').
Exception: see the synapse+EM results in the left column.
}\label{fig:chen}
\end{figure}
\fig{chen} shows results from Chen et al.~\cite{chen2018applications} that compared
FFtrees to standard defect predictors.
In that comparison, Ghotra et al.~\cite{ghotra2015revisiting} was used to guide learner selection.
They found
that 32 defect predictors group together into just four ranks from best to worse. (Please look for all four groups in Table 9 of \cite{ghotra2015revisiting}).
We picked at random from each of their ranks to select SL=Simple Logistic, NB=Naive Bayes, EM=Expectation Maximization,
SMO=Sequential Minimal Optimization (a kind of support vector machine). We call these learners ``standard'' since, in \fig{chen}, we use them
with their defaults from Scikit-learn~\cite{pedregosa2011scikit}.
In \fig{chen}:
\begin{itemize}
\item Performance is evaluated using metrics from \tion{goals}.
\item Data comes from \tbl{versions}.
\item This data has the attributes of \tbl{ck}.
\item For data with multiple versions, we test on the latest version and train on a combination of all the rest.
\item
If FFtrees perform worse than any other learner by more than a ``small effect''
(defined using \eq{cohen}), then that result is highlighted in red (see the synapse d2h results of \fig{chen}).
For each column, the size of a ``small effect'' is listed at top.
\end{itemize}
As shown in \fig{chen}, FFtrees nearly always performs as well, or better, than anything else.
\section{Research Method: The {\IT*} Algorithm}\label{sect:dodge}
It is very surprising that something as simple as FFtree perform so well (see
\fig{chen}), especially since:
\begin{itemize}
\item
FFtrees explores very few alternate
models (only 16).
\item
Each model
references only four attributes.
\item
To handle numeric variables,
a very basic discretization policy is applied at each level of tree
(numerics are separated at the median value).
\item
Strange to say, half the time, FFtree's overfitting mechanism will try to {\em avoid} the target class
when it selects a leaf node that exits to ``false''.
\end{itemize}
Under what conditions would something
that simple work as well as the other methods shown in \fig{chen}?
One possible answer was offered in the introduction. If the data
has large $\mathcal{E}$
in its output space, then:
\begin{itemize}
\item
The output/objective space has just a few cells; so
\item If there are $c$ cells and $t$ tunings, and when $t>c$, then some of those will be {\em redundant};
i.e., they achieve results within $\mathcal{E}$ of other results.
\item Which means that {\em exploring around} $c$ times will cover much of the output space.
\end{itemize}
If that is true, then to do better than FFtrees:
\begin{itemize}
\item Try {\em exploring around} across a {\em wider range of options}.
\item If some options result in a performance score $\alpha$, then we will {\em deprecate
options} that lead to $\alpha \pm\mathcal{E}$.
\end{itemize}
To find a {\em wider range of options},
{\IT*} uses the \tbl{options} tree of options. Leaves in that tree are either:
\begin{itemize}
\item Single choices; e.g., {\em DecisionTree}, ``splitter=random''; or
\item Numeric ranges; e.g., {\em Normalizer}, ``norm=l2''.
\end{itemize}
Each node in the tree is assigned a weight $w=0$.
When {\em evaluating} a branch,
the options in that branch
configure, then executes, a pre-processor/learner.
Each evaluation selects one leaf from the learner sub-tree and
one from the pre-processing tree (and defect prediction and text mining
explores different pre-processing sub-trees, see \tbl{options}).
If the evaluation score
is more than $\mathcal{E}$ of prior scores, then all nodes in that branch are endorsed ($w=w+1$).
Otherwise, {\IT*} deprecates ($w=w-1$).
{\IT*} uses these weights to select options via a recursive {\em weighted descent} where, at each level,
it selects sub-trees whose root has the largest weight (i.e., those most
endorsed).
The design conjecture
of {\IT*} is that exploring some tuning options matters but, given
a large $\mathcal{E}$ output space, the details of those
options are not so important. Hence, a limited number of
$N_1$ times, we pick some options at random. Having selected
those options, for further $N_2$ samples, we learn
which of the $N_1$ options should be most deprecated
or endorsed.
When a parameter range is initially evaluated, a random number \mbox{$r=random(\mathit{lo}, \mathit{hi})$} is selected and its weight $w(r)$ is set to zero.
Subsequently, this
weight is endorsed/deprecated technique as described above, with
one refinement. When a new value is required
(i.e., when the branch is evaluated again) then {\IT*} restricts
the $\{\mathit{lo}, \mathit{hi}\}$ range as follows.
If the best,worst weights seen so far (in this range)
are associated with $b,w$ (respectively) then use
$\mathit{lo}=b$ and $\mathit{hi}=\frac{b+w}{2}$.
Important point: {\em endorse} and {\em deprecate} is done each time a branch is evaluated
within each $N_1$ and $N_2$ steps. Figure~\ref{fig:tabu_pseudo} provides a summarized procedure on how \IT* works.
In summary, {\IT*} is a method for learning what tunings are {\em redundant}; i.e., lead to results that are very similar to other tunings~\cite{agrawal2019nature}.
It is controlled by two meta-parameters:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathcal{E}$: results are ``similar'' if they differ by less than $\mathcal{E}$;
\item $N$: the number of sampled tunings.
\end{itemize}
Recall that $N=N_1+N_2$ where
\begin{itemize}
\item
The first $N_1$ times, the set of tuning options grows;
\item
For the remaining $N_2$ times, that set is frozen while we refine our understanding of what tunings to avoid.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[!tbp]
\captionsetup{justification=centering}
\small \begin{tabular}{|p{.95\linewidth}|}\hline
INPUT:
\begin{itemize}
\item A dataset
\item $\mathcal{E} \in \{0.05, 0.1, 0.2\}$
\item A goal predicate $p$; e.g., ${P_{\mathit{opt}}}$ or $\mathit{d2h}$;
\item Objective, either to maximize or minimize $p$.
\end{itemize}
OUTPUT:
\begin{itemize}\item Optimal choices of preprocessor and learner with corresponding parameter settings.
\end{itemize}
PROCEDURE:
\begin{itemize}
\item Separate the data into train and test
\item Choose set of preprocessors, data miners with different parameter settings from Table~\ref{tbl:options}.
\item Build a tree of options for preprocessing and learning. Initialize all nodes with a weight of 0.
\item Sample at random from the tree to create random combinations of preprocessors and learners.
\item Evaluate $N_1$ (in our case $N_1=12$) random samples on training set and reweigh the choices as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item Deprecate ($w=w-1$) those options that result in the similar region of the performance score $\alpha$ ($\alpha \pm\mathcal{E}$)
\item Otherwise endorse those choices ($w=w+1$)
\end{itemize}
\item Now, for $N_2$ ($ N_2 \in \{30, 100, 1000\}$) evaluations
\begin{itemize}
\item Pick the learner and preprocessor choices with the highest weight and mutate its parameter settings. Mutation is done, using some basic rules, for numeric ranges of attribute (look for a random value between $(best, (best+worst)/2)$ seen so far in $N_1+ N_2$). For categorical values, we look for the highest weight.
\end{itemize}
\item For $N_1+ N_2$ evaluations, track optimal settings (those that lead to best results on training data).
\item Return the optimal setting and apply these to test data.
\end{itemize}
\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Pseudocode of \IT*}
\label{fig:tabu_pseudo}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{ivy_iqr_popt.png}
\caption{\IT* for $P_{opt}$ on ivy dataset
(for results
on other datasets,
\href{http://tiny.cc/rq1a_tabu}{http://tiny.cc/rq1a\_tabu}).
Here the X-axis represents number of samples needed
and the Y-axis represents the Max value of $P_{opt}$ seen until that sample. On the y-axis, {\em larger} values are {\em better}. Note that the performance seen after 50 samples is nearly the same as seen after 500 or 1000 samples. }
\label{fig:motivate_quickly}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
{\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{cc}
{\em D2h}: {\em less} is {\em better}.
&
{\em Popt(20)}: {\em more} is {\em better}. \\
``small effect'' $=4.4$
&
``small effect'' $=6.1$\\
\includegraphics[width=1.6in]{d2hContatnN,IncreasingE.png}&\includegraphics[width=1.6in]{PoptContatnN,IncreasingE.png}\\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{ \includegraphics[width=1.3in]{legendContatnN,IncreasingE.png}}
\end{tabular}}
\caption{{\bf RQ1} results. Defect prediction with \IT{$\mathcal{E} \in \{0.2, 0.1, 0.05\}$}, terminating \IT* at $N=30$ evaluations.
As before, changing $\mathcal{E}$ does not change learner performance any more than a ``small effect''.
This figure was generated using the
same experimental set up as \fig{varN}.}
\label{fig:varE}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
{\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{cc}
{\em D2h}: {\em less} is {\em better}.
&
{\em Popt(20)}: {\em more} is {\em better}. \\
``small effect'' $=4.0$
&
``small effect'' $=4.9$\\
\includegraphics[width=1.6in,height=2.1in]{d2hConstatntE,increasingN.png}&\includegraphics[width=1.6in,height=2.1in]{pOptConstantE,increasingN.png}\\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{ \includegraphics[width=1.7in]{legendConstantE,increasingN.png}}
\end{tabular}}
\caption{More {\bf RQ1} results. Defect prediction with {\IT{.2}}, varying samples $N$.
Note that for any data set, all these results are very similar; i.e., changing the number of evaluations does not change learner performance any more than a ``small effect''.
This figure was generated using the
same experimental set up as \fig{chen} (where tuning options taken from \tbl{options}).
}\label{fig:varN}
\end{figure}
\section{Experimental Results}\label{sect:rq}
Using {\IT*}, we can now answer the research questions asked in this article's introduction.
\subsection{RQ1: Is \IT* too complicated? How to find appropriate value of $\mathcal{E}$?}\label{sect:rq1}
\textcolor{black}{
Firstly, we wanted to verify whether our hypothesis of "redundant options (similar region defined within $\mathcal{E}$) might be leading to indistinguishable results". To test this,
we use
Figure~\ref{fig:motivate_quickly} to see how quickly
(i.e., after how many
evaluations $N$)
the
performance of
\IT* plateaus.
In figure~\ref{fig:motivate_quickly}, the X-axis represents number of samples ($N$)
and the Y-axis represents the max value of $P_{opt}$ seen until that sample
(and for that measure,
{\em larger} values are {\em better}). We used $\mathcal{E}$ of 0.05, 0.1, and 0.2 values, and looked
for the number of samples needed before the performance plateaus. We also show the performance
variability measured in terms
of the interquartile
range (IQR) (which is
the (75-25)th percentile).
These IQR values
are very small; i.e.,
\IT*'s performance is very stable.}
\textcolor{black}{In Figure~\ref{fig:motivate_quickly},
we observe
that most change in improvement
happens after just few
tens of evaluations.
This supports our hypothesis that there are "redundant options which lead to indistinguishable results".}
\noindent
\fig{varE} and \fig{varN} explore different settings
of $\{N,\mathcal{E}\}$.
\textcolor{black}{
\begin{itemize}
\item \fig{varE} varies $\mathcal{E}$ but keeps $N$ constant.
In this treatment,
we check how much improvement do we miss on when we try to find the right $\mathcal{E}$ value. Let's say we cut the Figure~\ref{fig:motivate_quickly} at $N=30$ line on x-axis, we report the values of $\mathcal{E}$ for 0.05, 0.1 and 0.2.
\item \fig{varN} varies $N$ but keeps $\mathcal{E}$ constant. Please note, when we say $\mathcal{E}$ constant, we wanted to see how much improvement do we miss on when we try to find the right $N$ value. Let's say we look at $\mathcal{E}=0.2$ line, we report the values of $N$ for 30, 100 and 1000.
\end{itemize}
As shown in these figures, changes to $\{N,\mathcal{E}\}$ alter the performance of \IT* by less than a ``small effect''.}
That is,
(a)~the output space for this data falls into a very small number of regions so
(b)~a large number of samples across a fine-grained division of the output space
performs just as well as a few samples over a coarse-grained division.
In summary, our answer to {\bf RQ1} is that the values of $\{N,\mathcal{E}\}$ can be set very easily. Based on the results of \fig{varE} and \fig{varN}, for the rest of this article
we will use $\mathcal{E}=0.2$ while taking $N=30$ samples of the options from Table~\ref{tbl:options}. We observed that there is no significant loss in performance if we move $\mathcal{E}$ to different values or $N$ provided in figures~\ref{fig:varE} and~\ref{fig:varN}. We picked $\mathcal{E}=0.2$ as we are looking for larger redundant region in data at the same time faster evaluations of $N=30$.
\subsection{RQ2: How does {\IT*} compare to recent prominent defect prediction and hyperparamter optimization results?}
SMOTUNED is
Agrawal et al. ICSE'18~\cite{agrawal2018better}'s hyperparamater optimizer that tunes SMOTE, a data pre-processor
(recall that
SMOTE is a tool for addressing class imbalance and was described in \tion{daa}).
Agrawal et al. reported that SMOTUNED's tunings
greatly improved classifier
performance. SMOTUNED uses differential evolutionary algorithm~\cite{storn1997differential} and tunes the
control parameters of SMOTE (see \tbl{options}).
DE+RF is a hyperparameter optimizer proposed by Fu et al.~\cite{fu2016differential}
that uses differential evolution to tune the control parameters of random forests.
The premise of RF (which is short for random forests) is ``if one tree is useful, why not a hundred?''.
RF quickly builds many trees, each time using a random selection of the attributes and examples. The final conclusion is then generated by polling across all the trees in the forest. RF's control parameters are listed in \tbl{options}.
SMOTUNED and
DE+RF used DE since
(a)~DE can handle numeric and discrete options; and
(b)~it has proven useful in prior SE
studies~\cite{fu2016tuning}.
Further,
other evolutionary algorithms (genetic algorithms~\cite{goldberg2006genetic}, simulated annealing~\cite{kirkpatrick1983optimization}) mutate each attribute in isolation. When two attributes are correlated, those algorithms can mutate variables inappropriately in different directions. DE, on the other hand, mutates attributes
in tandem along known data trends.
Hence, DE's tandem search can outperform other optimizers such as
(a)~particle swarm optimization~\cite{vesterstrom2004comparative}; (b)~the grid search used by Tantithamthavorn et al.
to tune their defect predictors~\cite{tantithamthavorn2016automated,8263202}; or (c)~the genetic algorithm
used by Panichella et al. ~\cite{Panichella:2013} to tune a text miner (see below).
\begin{figure}[!t]
{\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{cc}
\textcolor{black}{{\em D2h}: {\em less} is {\em better}. }
&
\textcolor{black}{{\em Popt(20)}: {\em more} is {\em better}.} \\
Mean results from 25 runs
&
Mean results from 25 runs \\
\includegraphics[width=1.6in]{d2hdefectAll.png}&\includegraphics[height=2.8in,width=1.6in]{popt20defectAll.png}\\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{ \includegraphics[width=2.5in]{legenDdefectAll.png}}
\end{tabular}}
\caption{{\bf RQ2} results. Defect prediction results for {\IT{.2}, $N=30$} vs (FFtrees, SMOTUNED, DE+RF, RANDOM).
In only a few cases (those highlighted in red) is {\IT{.2}}'s performance worse than anything else (where ``worse''
is defined using the statistics of \tion{sample}.) }\label{fig:smote}
\end{figure}
\fig{smote} compares hyperparameter optimizers with {\IT{.2}}, FFtrees and (just for completeness) a random search method that picks 30 random options (equivalent N as of \IT*) from \tbl{options}. These experiments make extensive use of stochastic algorithms
whose behavior can significantly differ between each run (DE and Random30).
Hence, \fig{smote} shows mean results from 25 runs using 25 different seeds. In those results:
\begin{itemize}
\item
Usually, random performs badly and never defeats {\IT*}. This result tells us that the reweighing scheme within {\IT*} is useful.
\item
In 16/20 cases combining the \textit{d2h} and \textit{Popt20} datasets, {\IT{.2}} is no worse than anything else
(where ``worse'' is defined as per \tion{sample}).
\item
In two cases, {\IT{.2}} is beaten by FFtrees (see the {\em d2h} results for jedit and log4j).
That is, in 90\% of these results, methods that explore a little around the results space do no worse than methods that try to
extensively explore the space of tuning options.
\end{itemize}
In summary, our answer to {\bf RQ2} is that {\IT*} often performs
much better than recent prominent standard hyperparameter optimization results.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
{\footnotesize \textcolor{black}{{\em D2h}: {\em less} is {\em better}}.
Mean results from 25 runs.
\vspace{1mm}
}
\includegraphics[width=2.4in]{pitsd2h.png}
\end{center}
\caption{{\bf RQ3} results. Mean text mining prediction results using {\IT{.2}} and $N=30$.
In only one case (PitsB), \IT*'s performance is worse than anything else
(where ``worse'' is defined as per \tion{sample}).
Same experimental set up as \fig{chen} except here,
we use Efron's 95\% confidence bootstrap procedure~\cite{efron93bootstrap} (to demonstrate
significant differences), then the A12 effect size test~\cite{Arcuri:2011} (to demonstrate
that the observed delta is bigger than a ``small effect'').
}\label{fig:text}
\end{figure}
\subsection{RQ3: Is {\IT*} only useful for defect prediction?}
\label{sect:text}
{\IT*} was designed in the context of defect prediction. This section checks if that design applies to a very
different software analytics; i.e., SE text mining.
Note that, as with defect prediction, hyperparameter optimizers (like {\IT*}) adjust
the control parameters of Table~1.
\textcolor{black}{In the particular case of text mining,
we adjust the Table~1 text mining data pre-processing options (used to generate data sets like
\tbl{features}). We also adjust the Table~1 learner options.}
\fig{text} shows our text mining results. As before, for completeness sake,
we include results by RANDOMly selecting tuning and learning options.
As seen in \fig{text}, in only one case
{\IT*}'s performance is worse than anything else
(where ``worse'' is defined as per \tion{sample}).
The LDA-FFT results for PitsF is 2\% better than {\IT*}, but
difference was deemed insignificant by our statistical tests.
And, just as with the \fig{smote} results, when {\IT*} fails, it is beaten by a treatment that uses FFtree (see the PitsB LDA-FFT results).
That is, in 100\% of these results, methods that explore a little around the results space do no worse than methods that try to extensively explore the space of tuning options (e.g., genetic algorithms and differential evolution).
In summary, our answer to {\bf RQ3} is that {\IT*} is not just a defect prediction method. Its success with text mining make it an interesting
candidate for further experimentation with other SE tasks.
\section{Threats to Validity}
\label{sect:threats}
\textcolor{black}{This paper is not about how to generate good predictors, per se. Instead, it is more about an instrument ({\IT*}) that probes the nature of the
space options associated with AI tools applied to SE. We show that when prior work has tried to generate good predictors, their algorithms have been much slower
than necessary since they waste much time exploring a large number of redundant options.}
\textcolor{black}{Nevertheless, our experimental rig repeats numerous prior studies (this time adding in {\IT*}).
Such is the nature of repeated studies that our
work shares the same threats to validity as that of prior work (discussed below).}
\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Sampling Bias:}
This article shares the same sampling bias problem as every other data mining paper. Sampling bias threatens any classification experiment (since what matters in one data set may or may not hold in another). For example, one of our sampling biases is that all our data comes
from open source projects.}
\textcolor{black}{Having said that, our sample bias is somewhat smaller than other papers since, we applied our frameworks to 16 SE data sets giving us more conclusive results.
Also, we showed that there exists more than one
domain where {\IT*} is a useful approach.}
\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Learner Bias:}
For building different classifiers in this study, we used many preprocessors (13) and learners (6). We chose these learners because past studies have shown that, these have been extensively used~\cite{ghotra2015revisiting,agrawal2018better,tantithamthavorn2016automated,8263202}. Thus they are selected as the state-of-the-art learners to be compared with \IT*.
In theory, there exists
other learners (which we have not explored) and could change our results.}
One important class of learners not studied
here are those that use numerous
hyperparameters.
All the learners explored here by DODGE have less than
dozen hyperparameters.
In the future, it would be worth
studying the value of DODGE on more complex machine learning algorithms such as neural networks.
\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Evaluation Bias:}
This paper uses two performance measures, i.e., $P_{opt}$ and $dist2heaven$. Other quality measures are often
used in software engineering to quantify the effectiveness of prediction ~\cite{Menzies:2007prec, menzies2005simple, jorgensen2004realism}.
We used these measures since we wanted to show the success of \IT* for multi-goals and these two measures are more prominent in the literature.}
\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Order Bias:} For the performance evaluation part, the order that
the data trained and predicted can affect the results.
Also,
for the defect prediction datasets,
we deliberately choose an ordering that mimics
how our software projects releases versions so, for those experiments, we would say that bias was required and needed.
Further,
for the other text mining datasets, to
mitigate this order bias, we ran our rig in a 5-bin cross validation 5 times, randomly changing the order of the data each time.}
\textcolor{black}{\textbf{Construct Validity:} At various stages of data collection by different researchers, they must have made engineering decisions about what object-oriented metrics need to be extracted. Though all
these decisions have been verified and evaluated by past researchers~\cite{agrawal2018better,agrawal2018wrong} to make sure the dataset collection do not suffer from any construct validity.}
\textbf{External Validity:}
{\IT*} self-selects
the tunings used in the pre-processors and data miners. Hence, by its very nature, this
article avoids one threat to external validity
(i.e., important control parameter settings are explored).
This paper
reports results from two tasks (defect prediction and text mining)
to show that the same effect holds in both tasks; i.e.,
algorithms can be remarkably effective
when they assume the output space seems to
divide into a very small number of regions.
Most software analytics papers report results from one task;
i.e., either defect prediction {\em or} text mining. In that sense, the external validity of this paper is greater than most analytics papers.
On the other hand, this paper {\em only} reports results
from two tasks. There
are many more kinds of SE tasks that should be explored
before it can be conclusively stated that {\IT*} is widely
applicable and useful.
Another threat to external validity is that
this article compares {\IT*} against
existing hyperparameter optimization in the software analytics literature. We do not compare our new approach
against the kinds of optimizers we might find
in search-based SE literature~\cite{petke2018guest}.
There are two reasons for this.
Firstly, search-based SE methods are typically CPU intensive and so do not address our faster termination goal.
Secondly, the main point of this article is
to document a previous unobserved feature of the output
space of software analytics.
In order
to motivate the community to explore that space, some article
must demonstrate its existence and offer an initial results showing that, using
the knowledge of output space, it is possible to do better than past work.
\section{Related Work}\label{sect:related}
\begin{redish}
{\IT*} is a novel
hyperparameter optimizer. This section offers some brief notes on other research into hyperparameter optimizers.
Note that applications of hyperparameter optimization to software engineering is a very
large topic.
Elsewhere~\cite{Agrawal19z} we offer an extensive literature review on hyperparameter
optimization and its applications in software engineering. Here, we offer some overview notes.
Apart from {\IT*}, there are many ways to implement hyperparameter optimizers.
For example, \textit{grid search}~\cite{bergstra2012random}
creates
$C$ nested for-loops to explore $C$ control parameters. Bergstra et al. deprecate grid search arguing that (a)~the best hyperparameters are usually found within a very small region of the total space; and (b)~a grid search that is fine-grained enough to find that region for any learner and any data set would be very slow indeed~\cite{bergstra2012random}.
Despite this, some SE researchers persist in using grid search~\cite{tantithamthavorn2016automated,8263202}.
Another way to implement hyperparamter optimization is \textit{random search}~\cite{bergstra2012random}.
This approach sets up ranges of hyperparameter values and select random combinations to train the model and evaluate.
There are many other ways to implement this kind of optimization
including those that use some form of genetic algorithm
like differential evolution~\cite{storn1997differential},
NSGA-2~\cite{deb00afast}, IBEA~\cite{Zitzler04indicator-basedselection}, or MOEA/D~\cite{zhang07}.
In this paper, we have already seen examples of the these standard hyperparameter optimizers.
For example, LDA-GA SVM used its own genetic algorithm while
LDADE FFT and LDADE SVM both used differential evolution~\cite{storn1997differential}.
As shown in \fig{timings}, those algorithms took (much) longer to execute and (measured in terms of {\em d2h}, usually perform worse than
as {\IT*}).
The slowness of standard hyperparameter optimizers restricts the space of hyperparameters that can be explored.
For example, Arcuri \& Fraser~\cite{Arcuri2013} warn that ``the possible number of parameter combinations is exponential in the number of parameters, so only a limited number of parameters and values could be used.''.
We conjecture that if they used {\IT*}, then they could have explored more parameters and possibly reversed
their conclusion that hyperparameter optimization adds little extra value. Since
Arcuri \& Fraser's
2013 study, other researchers in that research sub-area (test case generation) have found hyperparameter tuning
very useful; e.g., see the 2015 study by Panichella et al.~\cite{7102604}.
The Panichella et al. study is
very relevant to this paper since their 12,800 experiments (each with a give-up time of 600 seconds),
required 12.7 weeks of CPU to terminate.
We conjecture that with tools like {\IT*},
more studies like Panichella et al.
could be completed, much quicker, with far fewer resources.
More generally, {\IT*} could speed up standard
hyperparameter optimization. We conjecture that those optimizers could run much faster
if they pruned away redundant evaluations using {\IT*}.
If that were true then {\IT*} could have a very large impact over a very wide range of research.
There is another way that {\IT*} comments on standard optimization methods.
{\em Landscape analysis} is the process of exploring a large complex problem/solution space
in order to learn its shape. Once that is learned, then different search strategies
could be proposed to better survey that particular shape. One drawback with landscape analysis
is that it can be extremely computationally expensive. To learn the landscape associated with the
test suites of 19 software programs,
30 times,
Aleti et al.~\cite{Aleti2017} evaluated 1,000,000 test suites.
The lesson of {\IT*} is that, sometimes, landscapes can be mapped without requiring
19*30*1,000,000=570 million evaluations. For example, in this paper, we assumed a particular ``landscape'' (see Figure~1)
then designed a search method, {\IT*}, that would succeed quickly if that landscape existed,
or fail badly otherwise. Perhaps this strategy could be used in future research to reduce the cost
of landscape analysis.
\end{redish}
\section{Conclusion}
This article has discussed ways to reduce the CPU cost associated with
hyperparameter optimization for software analytics.
Tools like FFtrees or {\IT*} were shown to work as well, or better, than numerous
recent SE results:
\begin{redish}
\begin{itemize}
\item
FFtrees work so well since the output space looks like Figure~1 (i.e., it contains only a few regions
where results can be distinguished from each other).
In that space, FFtree's limited probing serves to sample the space.
\item
{\IT*} works better than FFtrees since the deprecation strategy of \fig{tabu_pseudo}
is a better way to sample Figure~1 than FFtree's random probes.
\item
Other methods (used in prior SE research) perform worse than {\IT*} since they do not appreciate the simplicity of
the output space (where ``simplicity'' means that it only contains a few
distinct results). Hence, those other methods waste much CPU as they
struggle to cover billions of tuning options like \tbl{options} (most of which yield indistinguishably different results).
\end{itemize}
\end{redish}
\noindent
Generalizing from our results,
perhaps it is time for a new characterization of software analytics:
\begin{quote}
{\em
Software analytics is that branch of machine learning
that studies problems with large
$\mathcal{E}$ outputs. }
\end{quote}
This new characterization is interesting since it means that a machine learning algorithm developed in the AI
community might not apply to SE.
\textcolor{black}{A similar conclusion has recently been offered by Binkley et al. who
argue for SE-specific information retrieval methods~\cite{binkley2018need}.}
We suspect that understanding SE is a different problem to understanding
other problems that are more precisely retrained. Perhaps, it is time to design new
machine learning algorithms (like {\IT*}) that are better
suited to large $\mathcal{E}$ SE problems.
As shown in this article, such new algorithms can exploit the peculiarities of SE data to dramatically improve software analytics.
We hope that this article inspires much future work on
a next generation of SE data miners. For example,
tools like {\IT*} need to be applied to more SE tasks to check the external validity of these results. Another useful extension to this work
would be to explore problems with three or more goals
(e.g., reduce false alarms while at the same time
improving precision and recall).
\textcolor{black}{Further, as discussed in the Related Work section, there are research opportunities where (a)~{\IT*} is used to repeat and improve prior work
or
(b)~speed up a wide range of other search-based SE algorithms (by using redundancy pruning to reduce the space of candidate mutations).}
Lastly, there are many ways in which {\IT*} could be improved. Right now we only deprecate tunings that lead to similar results. Another approach would be to deprecate
tunings that lead to similar {\em and worse} results (perhaps to rule out parts of the output space, sooner).
Also, it would be useful if the \tbl{options} list could be reduced to a smaller, faster to run, set of learners. That is, here we could select learners which can terminate faster while generating the most variable kinds of models.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This work was partially funded by an NSF Grant \#1703487.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtranS}
\newpage
\input{main.bbl}
\newpage
\vskip -2\baselineskip
\begin{IEEEbiography}[{\includegraphics[width=0.7in,keepaspectratio]{amrit.png}}]{Amritanshu Agrawal}
holds a Ph.D. in Computer Science from North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC.
He explored better and faster hyperparameter optimizers for software analytics. He works as a Data Scientist at Wayfair, Boston. For more, see
\url{http://www.amritanshu.us}.
\end{IEEEbiography}
\vskip -4\baselineskip
\begin{IEEEbiography}[{\includegraphics[width=0.8in,clip,keepaspectratio]{wei.jpg}}]{Wei Fu} holds a Ph.D. from CS, NC State University. He now works at Landing.ai in Palo Alto. \url{http://fuwei.us}
\end{IEEEbiography}
\vskip -4\baselineskip
\begin{IEEEbiography}[{\includegraphics[width=0.8in,clip,keepaspectratio]{dichen.jpg}}]{Di Chen} holds a master in CS from NC State University where
he explored crowdsourcing and Machine learning. Mr Chen now works at
Facebook, California.
\end{IEEEbiography}
\vskip -4\baselineskip
\begin{IEEEbiography}[{\includegraphics[width=0.8in,clip,keepaspectratio]{xipeng.jpg}}]{Xipeng Shen}
is a Professor in CS at NC State. His research interests are data mining, programming
languages and optimization.
Prof. Shen is an ACM Distinguished Member and a senior member of IEEE.
\url{https://people.engr.ncsu.edu/xshen5/}
\end{IEEEbiography}
\vskip -4\baselineskip
\begin{IEEEbiography}[{\includegraphics[width=0.8in,clip,keepaspectratio]{tim.png}}]{Tim Menzies}
is a Professor in CS at NC State His research interests include software engineering (SE), data mining, artificial intelligence, and search-based SE, open access science.
Prof. Menzies is an IEEE Fellow. \url{http://menzies.us}
\end{IEEEbiography}
\end{document}
\section*{Response to Reviewers}
Please see our replies to reviewer comments, below. Note that anything in \begin{com}
blue
\end{com} is from the reviewers. Our replies are in \textbf{black} text.
\subsection*{Associate Editor}
\label{sec:AE}
\begin{com}
Comments to the Author:
Thank you for your revision. The reviewers are largely satisfied, but some lingering concerns remain. Once you make this minor revision, I will review the changes myself, and decide if the manuscript is yet ready for acceptance.
\end{com}
We would like to thank all our reviewers for their support. Please see our responses to their reviews below.
\subsection*{Reviewer 1}
\label{sec:Reviewer1}
\renewcommand*{\theenumi}{1.\arabic{enumi}}
\renewcommand*{\theenumii}{\theenumi.\arabic{enumii}}
\begin{enumerate}
\item \begin{com}
Thanks authors for carefully addressing my comments. After my careful read on this revision and responses, this is an excellent work and I'm happy to recommend acceptance.
\end{com}
Thank you very much for your careful review
and all your great advice! Much appreciated!
We are very excited
about this result. We think it changes the nature
of hyperparameter optimization in the field of SE--
makes it something that is now so easy that everyone
can do it, routinely.
\item \begin{com}
Please include the response in the paper where appropriate (e.g., 1.11).
In addition to \cite{tantithamthavorn2016automated}, please include \url{https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/8263202} as well.
\end{com}
Added! Now, throughout the paper, every place we reference ~\cite{tantithamthavorn2016automated} we also reference~\cite{8263202}
\item \begin{com}
1.1 - 1.6) Thanks
1.7) Actually, Accuracy of predictions means precision, recall, F-measure, d2h. As you argued that DODGE gets higher performance with faster termination. I'm fine with that.
1.8 - 1.10) Thanks
1.12 - 1.21) Thanks
1.11) Please include the justification in the paper as well.
\end{com}
We have done so... please see the new caption of Table~6.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection*{Reviewer 2}
\label{sec:Reviewer2}
\renewcommand*{\theenumi}{2.\arabic{enumi}}
\renewcommand*{\theenumii}{\theenumi.\arabic{enumii}}
\begin{enumerate}
\item \begin{com}
I thank the authors for considering my comments. The revised structure of the article is better and the clarifications to support the understanding of DODGE and FFTrees are valuable. I am particularly happy to see the new related work section as it clearly positions the DODGE contribution and outlines future work. To help other researchers explore DODGE, perhaps a next step could be to organize a tutorial at some major conference?
\end{com}
Thank you very much for your careful review
and all your great advice! Much appreciated!
Regarding your suggestion of a tutorial... that is a very interesting idea. Perhaps we could team up with
some of the other people doing SE
hyperparameter optimization and make it a bit
of a festival.
\item \begin{com}
The new abstract is much better, but I still think the authors should reconsider the use of parentheses. If text is peripheral enough to end up within parentheses, then it should perhaps not be in the abstract at all? In the revised abstract, 30\% of the words are still within parentheses.
\end{com}
This is very good advice. We have removed
all parentheses from the abstract.
\begin{com}
My other comments have all been properly addressed, and my points below are all related to language/typos.
[list of typos]
\end{com}
Thank you for your careful proofread and
that list of typos. All fixed now.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection*{Reviewer 3}
\label{sec:Reviewer3}
\renewcommand*{\theenumi}{3.\arabic{enumi}}
\renewcommand*{\theenumii}{\theenumi.\arabic{enumii}}
\begin{enumerate}
\item \begin{com}
I am satisfied with the work of the authors to improve their manuscript. They managed to address each of my comments in the best possible way.
\end{com}
Thank you very much for your careful review
and all your great advice! Much appreciated!
\item \begin{com}
There are, however, some minor changes that have to be addressed.
1.My first concern is about the generalizability of DODGE. The author describes DODGE as a hyper-parameter tuning framework independent of the learning algorithm it was applied on. However, the learners which DODGE chose are most elementary learning algorithms with a small number of hyper-parameters. It is worth studying the effect of DODGE on more complex machine learning algorithms like neural networks.
\end{com}
You raise an important point. We have added
text on this matter in our threats to validity section
(under {\bf Learner Bias}):
\begin{quote}
{\em One important class of learners not studied
here are those that use numerous
hyperparameters.
All the learners explored here by DODGE have less than
dozen hyperparameters.
In the future, it would be worth
studying the value of DODGE on more complex machine learning algorithms such as neural networks. }
\end{quote}
\item \begin{com}
2.There is a concern on the figure 2, which task is used to evaluate the computation cost of different methods? And the authors mentioned that DODGE is faster than others, what does “faster” mean (less cost or less time)?
\end{com}
In this figure, it represents the number of evaluations taken by each method to identify an optimal model. Cost and Time can be interchangeable terms, here, we say reduction in time by finding less number of evaluations. But at the same time, we would require lesser costlier resources like CPU and GPU since number of evaluations taken are less.
\item \begin{com}
3.For the comparison between DODGE and other tuning techniques, did you keep the learners of those baselines same as DODGE?
\end{com}
We used the same learners for DODGE and other tuning techniques as well as, they appeared in prior
state of the art papers. We would say that
this is an appropriate, even respectful,
way to comapre prior work with the results of this paper
\item \begin{com}
4.RQ3 aims to study whether DODGE is useful for tasks other than defect prediction, but the authors only use one task (text mining) to prove their hypothesis. Maybe the RQ should be changed to “is DODGE useful for software text mining?”
\end{com}
We will take the advice of the associate editor
on this point. As we read this comment, this seems like an optional point for you. Our view is that we can leave it as is, (but will certainly
work as directed on this point).
\item \begin{com}
5.The reason why DODGE perform worse than all baselines in several datasets are not well-explained. Particularly, on the text mining task, since the size of pitsB is larger than other datasets, I believe this issue is worth further studying and may lead to some weaknesses of DODGE.
\end{com}
This is a very important point. We agree that this
matter is worth further exploring. FYI- we have some preliminary results on this issue: it turns out
that the size of the target class is an important factor.
Specifically,
when the target class becomes less frequent, then:
it is harder to find the target; and
the larger the observed $\epsilon$
in the results;
and the greater the number of redundant tunings;
and the more likely that DODGE will work.
That said, at this time, those new results need some further work and we would be nervous placing them into this article.
\item \begin{com}
6.Page 1. Table 1 was explained twice. The author should merge those two descriptions.
\end{com}
You are right. We have modified the second explanation to point out an important aspect of that table:
\begin{quote}
{\em \tbl{options} is a partial
list of some of the tunings that might be explored.
Even this incomplete sample includes billions of configuration options.}
\end{quote}
\item \begin{com}
7.Page 6. Figure 3 is redundant. I believe these results were already shown in [16]?
\end{com}
Your make a good point. To address this issue,
just so that the reader knows that the result
of this one table is {\bf NOT} new work,
we have added "From~\cite{chen2018applications}." in the caption of that figure.
\ee
\section*{Response to Reviewers}
Please see our replies to reviewer comments, below. Note that anything in \begin{com}
blue
\end{com} is from the reviewers. Our replies are in \textbf{black} text.
\subsection*{Associate Editor}
\label{sec:AE}
\begin{com}
All reviewers agreed that your work has potential but raised significant concerns, in terms of definition, presentation, and evaluation data. Please see detailed comments below.
\end{com}
We would like to thank all our reviewers for their extensive feedback. As part of major revision, these are some of the changes which can be observed in our paper. We have formatted our structure to make it look like an empirical study on the recommendation of Reviewer 2. We have added another figure for our RQ1 to address the concerns of Reviewer 1. Please look at our replies to them below. As for Reviewer 3, their comment were insightful and lead to significant changes
throughout the paper.
\subsection*{Reviewer 1}
\label{sec:Reviewer1}
\renewcommand*{\theenumi}{1.\arabic{enumi}}
\renewcommand*{\theenumii}{\theenumi.\arabic{enumii}}
\begin{enumerate}
\item \begin{com}
$>>$ Summary $<<$
This paper aims to reduce the complexity of hyperparameter optimization for software analytics by focusing on 2 tasks (defect prediction and bug report text mining).
This paper proposed an approach by discretizing the spaces of exploration into $1/(\mathcal{E}^2)$ groups to avoid exploring any redundant parameter settings. The results show that \IT* outperforms many baselines algorithms for 2 SE tasks.
$>>$ Evaluation $<<$
I enjoy reading the manuscript. The paper addresses an important topic in software engineering where the goal is to make software analytics algorithms faster. Please kindly consider addressing my detailed feedback. Most of them are clarification questions, not a critical concern. I hope that my feedback will greatly improve the manuscript prior to recommending acceptance.
\end{com}
Thank you for your support to our work. We have provided a detailed feedback to your concerns below.
\item \begin{com}
$>>$ Detailed Feedback $<<$
- I find the ``complexity / simpler'' terms that are used in the paper are a bit slightly misleading. When referring to the complexity, I was thinking about the complexity of defect models (which can be measured in terms of \#variables used in the model). However, this paper seems to focus on the speed of the model building.
- Later on, the authors stated that ``simpler means less CPU is required to build better software quality prediction models". Should the keyword be changed or not in order to ensure that the paper is properly scoped? E.g., changing ``simpler" to ``faster"? Less claim and more straightforward.
\end{com}
We agree to your suggestion, by changing "simpler" to more precise
terms (e.g. ``faster''), we have now focused more on how \IT* makes software analytics easier.
\item \begin{com}
- In Introduction, ``Software analytics is becoming increasingly complicated.''. Please be more explicit and specific in what aspect that it is more complicated (e.g., modelling design, parameter settings, data cleaning, infra, mining, execution time)?. And what aspect that this paper is focusing on.
\end{com}
We agree that that first sentence lacked definition. We have deleted it.
Now we motivate out work as per the Fisher et al quote (i.e. we want to make things faster).
With this in mind, faster iteration is important. Here we focused on exploring billions of parameter settings to find optimal settings faster.
\item \begin{com}
- ``FFtrees [42] outperforms the supposed state-of-the-art SE tuning algorithms''. I read this sentence like FFtrees are an optimization algorithm (e.g., DE, random search), but I do believe it is not.
\end{com}
Good point. We have significantly modified that sentence
(see the new introduction).
\item \begin{com}
- In Introduction (RQ2) (and throughout the paper), when saying outperforms, could you please elaborate more about the magnitude of the (absolute, not relative) improvement?
- ``\IT* generates better quality predictors than ...''. Again, could you please elaborate more how they are better, what aspects that DODGE is better (accuracy, speed, F-measure), and how much.
\end{com}
Excellent point. We have fixed- See updated RQ2 text in the introduction.
\item \begin{com}
- When endorsing DODGE over FFTrees, I'm concerned that the authors miss the key aspects of FFTrees (interpretable and comprehensible). Should these 2 aspects be considered when strongly recommending DODGE over FFTrees?
\end{com}
You raise an important point and we added a note to that effect,
third last para of introduction.
That said, more fundamentally, the other reason to explore {\IT*} is that it tests the theory that much better hyperparameter optimizers can be built by assuming the output space divides into just
a few regions of size
$\mathcal{E}$. {\IT*} is one way to exploit this effect.
We believe that further research could be done to supercharge {\IT*} by incorporating other information inside, for e.g., preferences on few learners over others; better visualizations and/or explanations of analytics.
\item \begin{com}
- When the authors argued that DODGE is simpler (which is faster) than FFTrees, I'm curious if DODGE gives a higher accuracy in terms of predictions or not. Simpler but lower accuracy might not be a good predictor. More clarification with a stronger statement would be appreciated.
\end{com}
We are not clear on this point.
Most SE analytics papers do not report accuracy since it can be very uninformative
on SE datasets. A predictor for a data set where
20\% of its rows contain the target class can be 80\% accurate while missing all the target. Our preferred measures
for such data sets are things like d2h, or something that captures the business
case for the analytics such as Popt(20).
And measured on this values \IT* gets higher performance with faster terminations. Please look at our reply for 1.5.
\item \begin{com}- In Introduction, ``our approach needs to be tested using more SE tasks'' -$>$ and more SE datasets as well. I have a big concern about the current defect datasets (e.g., Log4J 1.2 has a 92\% defective ratio, Xalan 2.7 has a 99\% defective ratio). Would a simple Zero Rule algorithm outperforms DODGE or FFTree in the context of transfer learning or cross-project defect prediction?
\end{com}
ZeroR is ``too blunt an axe'' for this work. FYI, We originally included
it in the Table~\ref{tbl:options} learners list but it performed so poorly that we took it out.
You can see why it performed so badly, looking at the training/test columns of Table~\ref{tbl:versions}:
\begin{itemize}
\item
Observe
how, in that table, two of the data sets have defect densities higher than 50\%.
\item
For those data sets (Lucene and Velocity)
hyperparameter optimization (optimizing for d2h) would select for ZeroR.
\item
Such a selection would
lead to poor results
half the time. In their testing dataset versions, Lucene and Velocity have 60\% and 34\%
defects which means that, for that data,
ZeroR would have incorrectly classified 40\% of Lucene and 66\% of Velocity.
\end{itemize}
\vspace{2mm}
Also, note that ZeroR does not address the core business case of defect prediction.
In safety or mission-critical software, it is ok to demand the engineers to
inspect all the code. But most software is not mission/safety critical
so engineers seek heuristics to reduce their inspection effort.
As stated by
Ostrand and Weyeuker in 2004~\cite{ostrand2004bugs},
Arisholm and Briand in 2006~\cite{Arisholm:2006},
Menzies in 2007~\cite{menzies2007data},
the
business goal of defect prediction is to avoid inspecting everything. So
we use defect predictors to
find the smallest part of the code containing
most errors.
In fact, when researchers report the industrial impact of defect
prediction, that impact is usually expressed in financial terms
of reduced inspection effort.
Tosun et al. (2011) reported that defect prediction reduced inspection efforts by 72 percent~\cite{mirirli11} (without damaging defect detection rate).
Kim et al. (2015) also found that defect predictions
reduces the resources required for tests, again without damaging defect
prediction~\cite{Kim:2015}.
\vspace{2mm}
Well (you may ask), if reducing inspection effort is so important, why isn't that including in the evaluation metrics? Well (we reply), it is. Popt(20) reports
what happens when you let the defect predictor guide you to a small portion
(20\%) of the code.
\item \begin{com}
- Section 2.2, ``Our defect predictors use static code measurements from Table 2 (now table 5) and Table 3 (now table 6).'' Table 3 is not defect predictors. Please revise to ``Statistics of the studied data sets.''
\end{com}
Fixed! Thanks for point that out.
\item \begin{com}
- "For example, we use poi1.5,poi2.0,poi2.5 data for training predictors". I'm concerned if this will introduce any biases to the learning algorithms due to duplicate signals or not. For example, File A.java appears in poi1.5, poi2.0, and poi2.5 but they have 3 rows in the training data where some of them could be either defective or clean. I would like to see your view/rationale/discussion on this. Would this be a threat to construct validity?
\end{com}
You make an important point since it speaks to the nature of machine
learning (and while early progress was so slow and why
later work was so successful). A learner watches the environment
and receives signals from artifacts in the field. Early work in machine
learning performed very poorly since it obsessed too much on
single examples. Later, new better work know how to handle noise
and how to average out its conclusions
over multiple samples. To return to your example, if FileA was defective, not defective, defective in poi1.5 and poi2.0 and poi2.5 (respectively)
then a leaner would know not to use the attributes ranges seen in those entries to make its conclusions.
\item \begin{com}
- Table 3 (now table 6), the 3rd column, please be specific whether they are a defective ratio of which software version? There are 3 software versions but the authors report only one ratio.
\end{com}
Thank you for asking that question. We have fixed the caption of that
figure to clarify that point.
And to answer your question:
the defective ratio represents the combination of total defective ratio after combining all the software versions used for training. That is why we reported only one ratio.
\item \begin{com}
- "This tells us that software analytics will forever be an imprecise science (and one of the lessons of this paper is that imprecision can be used to simplify complex tasks like hyperparameter optimization)." Is this argument necessary? I have a big concern with the "Imprecise Science" term. I do not see how the higher defective ratios in later software releases lead to the conclusion of "imprecise science". They are just the dynamism in software development projects without any relationship to imprecise science.
\end{com}
Thanks for picking up on that. That was a silly sentence which we have deleted.
\item \begin{com}
- "Table 5 FFTree reference four attributes cbo, rfc, dam, amc (defined in Table 2)." Do the four attributes are selected by FFTree or subjectively selected by the authors? Is the number of attributes a part of parameter setting for FFTree? What is the impact when varying this parameter?
\end{com}
They are selected automatically by FFtrees.
These 4 attributes were selected by FFTree. FFTree has a parameter which represents the depth of the tree, whatever the depth would be that many attributes would be selected. In our case it is 4. We did explore the depth equal to 5, and 6 but we did not find any improvement against the depth of 4. So, we consistently used this parameter to compare our other frameworks. Also, Chen et al.~\cite{chen2018applications} also found that depth of 4 works as best as other settings.
\item \begin{com}
- In Section 2.3.1, the d2h measure is proposed by the authors. Could you please provide the rationale behind the d2h measure? What does it directly measure? Why combining these 2 measures instead of the others? Please include AUROC or MCC as well, as they are less susceptible to skew/imbalanced data.
\end{com}
(Aside for your information, $d2h$ is not proposed by this paper-- it has been a standard measure since first introduced in 2007.)
Your question raises an interesting point.
We use recall and false alarm (summarized via $d2h$) exactly
{\em because of} the skew/imbalance problem you mention.
We use recall and false alarm
since they have few problems with
skewed/imbalanced data\footnote{In 2007 we published a mathematical and empirical
study on the skew/imbalance problem. We found that accuracy and precision have
certain undesirable properties~\cite{Menzies:2007prec} (very steep partial differentials across goal space) that leads to conclusion
instability in certain
cases that are common in SE
(the skew/imbalanced data that you mentioned).}.
And the same has not been shown (yet) for other measures.
As to what $d2h$ means, an ideal predictor would have perfect recall (it would find all the target)
and have no false alarms (it would make no mistakes).
In terms of a recall/false alarm trade-off, that would be the ``heaven''
point of recall=1 and false alarm=0. That is, distance to heaven
measures how close you are coming to perfection.
As to why not MCC, well, that comes for a private comment Martin Shepperd shared with us-- MCC has a strange double-hump non-Gaussian property that is worthy of a paper all itself (something like~\cite{Menzies:2007prec}).
\item \begin{com}
- "We call these learners "standard"" -$>$ Should the authors call 'baseline learners' instead?
\end{com}
Recently in TOSEM'18, Federica Sarro proposed a nine-point
definition of baselines (see table1 of http://bit.ly/2IXWxQl).
That is "baseline" has become a reserved term which we might not be to apply in the ways you suggest.
In fact, we have taken care to remove the word ``baseline'' entirely from this paper.
\item \begin{com}
- Fig 4, "keeping samples constant at N = 30.". What does it mean? I do not follow.
- Fig 4, why "small effect = 4.4? What does it mean?
- Fig 4, what is the X-axis?
\end{com}
Keeping N=30 means we never evaluated options within {\IT*} more than 30 times. Fig 4 is now Fig~\ref{fig:varE} where (in the caption) now we say "evaluations".
(Aside: and to answer the question ``why did we pick N=30'', we refer you to \fig{varN} were we found no value in increasing $N$ to much larger values.)
Fig 4 is now Fig~\ref{fig:varE} where X-axis represents $d2h$ and $P_{opt}$ values.
When we say small effect, we used stats test of Cohen's delta~\cite{cohen1988statistical} defined in Equation~\ref{eq:cohen} defined in section 2.3.2.
The cohen's delta for different $\mathcal{E}$ values understudy give us a value of 4.4 and statistically it means the difference is of small effect or insignificant.
\item \begin{com}
- Section 4.1, please clearly describe what settings that are explored for {N, e}. I'm missing this part. The authors only explore different e, while keeping N constant, or explore the variations of both parameters.
- It would be nice if the authors combine Figure 4 and 5 as a trade-off analysis plot where the plots truly demonstrate which parameters are the best. At the moment, it seems like they are individually assessed.
\end{com}
We have modified our text in \tion{rq1} explaining these 2 figures more in detail. Please see the explanation of both figures below as well:
\begin{itemize}
\item \fig{varE} varies $\mathcal{E}$ but keeps $N$ constant. Please note, when we say $N$ constant, we wanted to see how much improvement do we miss on when we try to find the right $\mathcal{E}$ value. Let's say we cut the Figure~\ref{fig:motivate_quickly} at $N=30$ line on x-axis, we report the values of $\mathcal{E}$ for 0.05, 0.1 and 0.2.
\item \fig{varN} varies $N$ but keeps $\mathcal{E}$ constant. Please note, when we say $\mathcal{E}$ constant, we wanted to see how much improvement do we miss on when we try to find the right $N$ value. Let's say we look at $\mathcal{E}=0.2$ line, we report the values of $N$ for 30, 100 and 1000.
\end{itemize}
These 2 parameters are actually not assessed individually. In another outlook, we provided another Figure~\ref{fig:motivate_quickly} in the text showing how the values of Figures~\ref{fig:varE} and~\ref{fig:varN} are derived from Figure~\ref{fig:motivate_quickly} while assessing them at the same time. If you look at figure~\ref{fig:motivate_quickly}, we observed that there is not significant loss in performance if we move $\mathcal{E}$ to different values or $N$ provided in figures~\ref{fig:varE} and~\ref{fig:varN}. At the end of RQ1, we picked $\mathcal{E}=0.2$ as we are looking for larger redundant region in data at the same time faster evaluations of $N=30$.
\item \begin{com}
- Is \IT* specific to FFtrees or any classification techniques? I had a perception that DODGE is for any learning algorithms, but in Section 4.1 I read like DODGE is only for FFTree (e.g., "while taking N = 30 samples of the options tree.").
This question is really important if DODGE is at the foundational role of software analytics or DODGE is limited to one specific single classification algorithm (i.e., FFTree).
Now, I will interpret DODGE as FFtree+Optimizer, which is just one classification technique. If so, please clearly specify at the beginning as I'm not too clear about what DODGE is when reading the introduction section.
\end{com}
Your initial perception is right. \IT* is for any learning algorithm. It finds the optimal learning algorithm with its parameter settings all simultaneously from bunch of options as shown in Table~\ref{tbl:options}. When we said, "while taking N = 30 samples of the options tree.", we wanted to say options from Table~\ref{tbl:options}. We have modified the text in the paper.
\item \begin{com}
- There are some threats to the internal validity that can be discussed .
\end{com}
At your suggestion we have extended the threats to validity section Section~\ref{sect:threats}.
\item \begin{com}
- "machine learning algorithm developed in the AI community might not apply to SE." It would be nice to add an example as this argument has been raised in prior work (Fig 1) where they find that RF that is the top-performing in the ML area, but sometimes they are not for some SE datasets.
\end{com}
Thank you for your suggestion, we have added the example in the paper (see last page
of conclusion).
\item \begin{com}
$>>$ Typo $<<$
(numerous typos listed).
\end{com}
We have fixed the above typos and any other typos which we could have identified.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection*{Reviewer 2}
\label{sec:Reviewer2}
\renewcommand*{\theenumi}{2.\arabic{enumi}}
\renewcommand*{\theenumii}{\theenumi.\arabic{enumii}}
Thank you for your close reading of the text, and your excellent suggestions. As you can see, based on your remarks,
we have made major changes to the overall
structure of the paper as well as numerous other (smaller scale) changes around the paper.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \begin{com}
Finding a good tuning for software analytics can be a big challenge. Analytics tools often make use of machine learning with plenty of hyperparameters to tune, but often default parameter settings are used. Previous research shows that finding a good tuning can drastically improve the results from analytics tools. The lack of tuning in parts of previous research raises the question if conclusions from comparative studies from the past would still be valid if proper tuning would have been done.
In this paper, the authors present DODGE, a pragmatic tool for hyperparameter optimization. The main feature of DODGE is that it ignores redundant settings, thus it operates much faster than an exhaustive search. Still, results from tuning of defect prediction models and text mining show that DODGE can deliver better tunings than algorithms presented in previous work.
The manuscript addresses an important topic and contributes novel insights that could support the software engineering community. If the authors document how to use DODGE (in a comprehensible way), I believe this work could have an academic impact. Reading the manuscript convinces me that the authors have substantial experience from hyperparameter optimization of various machine learning models. Also, the application of DODGE on two different applications, i.e., defect prediction and text mining, supports the argumentation in the paper very well.
While I enjoyed reading the manuscript, I think it needs a major revision before being published in a flagship software engineering journal. I have two major considerations that should be addressed.
\end{com}
Thank you for your support, we have addressed your concerns below.
\item \begin{com}
First, I don’t think the writing style is suitable for a top SE journal. While partly a matter of taste, I think a revised version could help future readers. The manuscript alternates between a casual language suitable for a blog post (e.g., parts of the introduction) with content that is hard to digest (e.g., Table 1). I recommend the authors to revise the manuscript with the readership in mind. This could result in a more academic writing style in some parts of the paper and improved explanations to help the reader digest the technical parts – perhaps also adding some figures with concrete examples to illustrate DODGE and FFTree. Since the paper has an important message to communicate, I recommend the authors to consult a professional copy editor to improve readability and fitness for its purpose.
Moreover, the manuscript does not follow the conventional IMRAD structure of a research article. While this certainly is not a requirement, I think the authors should think about whether the current structure really is a better option. To me, the structure of the manuscript increased the cognitive load instead of supporting my reading experience. My guess is that the authors want to frame the paper as an experience report rather than an empirical study, but I don’t think this is the right choice for a TSE paper.
\end{com}
Thank you giving us the insight on the structure of the paper. Based on your recommendations, we have completely modified the structure of this paper.
Now we follow, as you suggest the structure of
Introduction, Related work (section2), Motivation (section3), method (section4) and experimental results (section5) .
We have also added a Figure~\ref{fig:tabu_pseudo} explaining \IT* and there is an example of FFtree in Table~\ref{tbl:three}.
\item \begin{com}
Second, I miss a proper related work section in the paper. The challenge of hyperparameter tuning is not unique to software analytics. I support the authors’ decision to focus only on SE in this manuscript, but I think the background and/or related work section should introduce the reader to work on tuning also beyond SE. It is good to see that the authors compare DODGE to other hyperparameter optimization results from prominent SE venues, but I think a TSE paper should also synthesize the general discussion on the hunt for feasible parameter settings – this would also turn the paper into a stronger contribution within SE, i.e., it would balance the heavy component of machine learning details.
\end{com}
Excellent suggestion! Please see \tion{related}.
\item \begin{com}
I understand that the authors decided not to compare DODGE to optimizers from search-based SE, but I think the authors should still discuss parameter tuning in the light of previous work. A quick search for related work using a few keywords gave me:
i) Arcuri, A., \& Fraser, G. (2013). Parameter tuning or default values? An empirical investigation in search-based software engineering. Empirical Software Engineering, 18(3), 594-623,
ii) Altinger, H., Herbold, S., Schneemann, F., Grabowski, J., \& Wotawa, F. (2017, February).
Performance tuning for automotive software fault prediction. In 2017 IEEE 24th International Conference on Software Analysis, Evolution and Reengineering (SANER) (pp. 526-530),
iii) Borg, M. (2016).
TuneR: a framework for tuning software engineering tools with hands‐on instructions in R. Journal of software: Evolution and Process, 28(6), 427-459, and
iv) Aleti, A., Moser, I., \& Grunske, L. (2017). Analysing the fitness landscape of search-based software testing problems. Automated Software Engineering, 24(3), 603-621.
\end{com}
Thank you for finding those references. We have extended the Related Work section as you suggested
(discussing the relationship of {\IT*} work to others).
If you don't mind, we'd rather not include papers from SANER and SEP
but the ASE conference and journal papers you mention are now added to the literature review. Also, we traced forward in time
and found some interesting subsequent work that offered extra insight into Arcuri et al.
As to your more general point, that there is much more that could be said about this topic, we agree.
Please see our latest literature
review on this topic; e.g. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1812.01550.pdf (currently under review, second round, at EMSE).
Our new related work section (\tion{related}) references that paper (and gives a link for free download).
\item \begin{com}
Detailed comments:
Abstract: The abstract needs to be revised. It contains a mix of very short and very long sentences, unconventional use of parentheses and quotation marks, and the first sentences led me to expect a different contribution in the paper. The “AI software” mentioned first is not about software products enabled by AI (e.g., a classifier trained for object detection in a self-driving car), but rather software analytics tools used by software engineers to support development of high-quality software products. At least I was confused by how the paper started.
\end{com}
Thank you for your suggestion, we have updated the abstract.
\item \begin{com}
Page 2:19 – The paper never defines what is meant by software analytics. Do the authors include anything related to analyzing software product and process data?
\end{com}
Please see the first line of the new introduction. And yes, analytics includes anything related to analyzing software product and process data.
\item \begin{com}
Table 1: I fear that the table would shock the reader early on with very many terms without any explanation. I suggest keeping only some of them, explaining them carefully, and then moving the rest to the appendix.
Figure 1: This caption might be too long. Perhaps move parts to the running text?
\end{com}
We've done as you suggested and moved some of the caption text into page1 of the introduction.
But
if you don't mind, we'd rather keep the rest where it is. the whole point of that in the paper is, as you say, to shock
the reader into realizing how large and complex is the internal choices of all these machine learners.
\item \begin{com}
Page 4:46 – “assessment effectiveness increases exponentially with assessment effort” Is there a typo here? I guess the effectiveness of QA rather saturates, at least in terms of identified bugs. I might misunderstand the statement.
\end{com}
Thanks for catching that. We've fixed that now to ``Software quality assurance budgets are finite but increasing assessment effectiveness by some
linear amount can take exponentially more effort.''.
\item \begin{com}
Page 5:5 – “predict 87 percent of code defects”. What is the granularity here? File? Or method? Important to clarify.
Table 3: Same as above. What does “\% of defects” mean?
\end{com}
Clarified now in text: When Misirli et al.~\cite{misirli2011ai} built a defect prediction model for a telecommunications company, those models
could predict 87\% of files with defects.
\item \begin{com}
Page 5:37 – The time dimension is interesting and cross-validation might lead to overly optimistic results. Two papers discussing this “Online Defect Prediction for Imbalanced Data” Tan et al., ICSE2015 and “Automated Bug Assignment: Ensemble-based Machine Learning in Large Scale Industrial Contexts” Jonsson et al., EMSE 21(4), 2016.
\end{com}
If we understand you correctly, you are saying that we did cross validation on defect prediction datasets.
But this {\em not} what we did.
For defect prediction,
we had access to multiple versions of software so we used past releases as training and the most recent one as testing data.
\item \begin{com}
Table 2: The code metrics are not explained. Perhaps add explanations in an appendix?
\end{com}
We will ask the AE about that (but last we checked TSE does not allow an appendix). Meanwhile we have updated the caption of Table~\ref{tbl:ck} to refer \cite{agrawal2018better} for the definitions.
\item \begin{com}
Table 4: Very many acronyms introduced here. Perhaps better to explain the four groups in running text and add a reference to Ghotra et al. for details? Presenting such complex details without explaining them might not be the best choice from a readability perspective.
\end{com}
We agree and based on your recommendations we have removed the table and provided a reference to Ghotra et al. in the text.
\item \begin{com}
Page 6: I like the metrics!
Sec 5: The critical discussion in the manuscript is brief and solely addresses external validity. There might be additional aspect to discuss in this section. If important control parameters are not explored, is that really an external validity threat? Wouldn’t that rather be a confounding factor? Regarding construct validity, I’m thinking about whether binary severity prediction is a meaningful construct. On the other hand, that is not the main point in this manuscript.
\end{com}
As noted in the beginning of our replies to you, yes, that is not the main point of this paper.
Your remarks have also highlighted for us a structural flaw in the previous version.
To make the main point clearer,
we have added the following into the text of paper.
IN THREATS TO VALIDITY, we now say: This paper is not about how to generate good predictors, per se. Instead, it is more about an instrument, {\IT*}, that probes the nature of the
space options associated with AI tools applied to SE. We show that when prior work has tried to generate good predictors, their algorithms have been much slower
than necessary since those algorithm have wasted much time exploring a vast amount of redundant options.
To show that, we repeat numerous prior studies, this time adding in {\IT*} framework.
Since we are repeating prior work,
our work shares the same threats to validity as that prior work (such is the nature of repeated studies).
\item \begin{com}
Nitpicks:
(numerous typos listed)
\end{com}
We have fixed the above typos and any other typos which we could have identified.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection*{Reviewer 3}
\label{sec:Reviewer3}
\renewcommand*{\theenumi}{3.\arabic{enumi}}
\renewcommand*{\theenumii}{\theenumi.\arabic{enumii}}
\begin{enumerate}
\item \begin{com}
This paper introduced a hyperparameter optimization tool named DODGE to ignore redundant tunings and can run orders of magnitude faster. The performance of DODGE can find better tunings than state-of-the-art techniques. They evaluate their tool on two software tasks, namely, software defect prediction and software text mining. The authors give detailed introduction of its baselines and their results. I consider the problem address in this paper to be relevant, and the approach presented innovative. I would like to see the contribution of your work built on by going into more depth in each component of your approach. Currently, the presentation of your approach and its baselines are mixed.
\end{com}
Thank you for your supporting words. We have addressed your concerns below.
\item \begin{com}
Specific suggestions for each aspect of the paper are given below:
I have some concerns about the evaluation that cannot be ignored.
The first concern is the details of DODGE. The author describes the baseline FFTree in detail. However, it is hard for the readers to assess the percentage of original contribution from your side, from the percentage of use of existent work.
\end{com}
You are correct-- the prior draft contained no section ``relation to prior work''. That was out mistake,
which we have fixed in this draft.
Please see the new \tion{prior}.
\item \begin{com}
The second concern is about the organization and presentation of the experiments. It is rather confusing with details about the experiment spread between Section 2 to Section 4. For examples, the RQs are proposed in Section 1. In particular, the RQs should be presented first and then all the details of the design of the experiment adopted to answer these RQs, including the used baselines, the dataset, the way the dataset has been used to build the model, the metrics to answer the RQs, and so on.
\end{com}
You raise an important point.
If papers follow a standard structure then
that reduces the effort
required by humans to skim and understand a paper.
Accordingly,
based on your recommendations and reviewer 2's suggestions, we have changed our structure of the paper to provide better readability.
To that end, we have adopted a more standard
structure for this paper:
\begin{itemize}
\item
All our RQs are now introduced in
the introduction.
\item
The paper now follows the standard
structure of
Introduction, Related work (section2), Motivation (section3), methods (section4) and experimental results (section5).
\end{itemize}
\item \begin{com}
The author should give the definition of $\mathcal{E}$ first, it is important for the readers to understand the approach better. In addition, it is unclear how does the \IT* work. The authors should introduce their approach in detail.
\end{com}
We have now provided a definition on $\mathcal{E}$ in the introduction section. We have also expanded the details in the section~\ref{sect:dodge} and with another Figure~\ref{fig:tabu_pseudo} introducing its pseudocode in detail.
\item \begin{com}
Page 1. What does the output space mean?
\end{com}
Our mistake-- we did not define that term
when we first used it.
That has now been fixed (see page1).
FYI: a learner assessed by $p$ performance scores has a $p$ dimensional output space.
\item \begin{com}
Page 2. There is a figure without label on right column. This figure also lacks more details. At least, how can you get the 25 cells from the figure.
\end{com}
You are correct to point this out. We have added a label to that figure.
The 25 cells in the Page1 figure comes from the
calculation
$1/\mathcal{E}^p=1/{0.2}^2=25$, where $p$ is the number of performance scores.
\item \begin{com}
Page 2 line 9. It seems that unclear for what the authors want to give us examples in the abstract.
\end{com}
Your are right. Example now removed.
\item \begin{com}
Page 3. In Table 1, the authors listed some traditional learners. But neural network-based models are not mentioned, whose performance also depended on the hyperparameters.
\end{com}
You are correct. Table~1 is not complete-- something we did not stress in the original version (but now we do, please see the first \textcolor{red}{red text} on page1.
Note that this paper does not need to explore
{\em all options}-- it just needs to explore
the common ones seen in the analytics literature.
As to the specifics of neural nets, whenever
we've explored them for SE analytics, we've found
simpler, faster, and better alternatives \cite{majumder18,fu2017easy}.
Others researchers
have had similar experiences~\cite{hellendoorn2017deep}.
\item \begin{com}
Page 3. In Figure 1, the authors said that “Y-axis shows the frequency at which a learner was selected to be “top-ranked” (by a statistical analysis)”. What does “top-ranked” mean? Does it mean that this learner performs best?
\end{com}
We have removed that figure.
\item \begin{com}
Page 4. The authors didn’t explain why the FFtrees used fewer evaluation.
\end{com}
Excellent point! We never closed
that loop. Please see the new \textcolor{red}{red text}
at start of conclusion.
\item \begin{com}
Page4. It is hard to understand how to get the results of Figure 2. It is better to add more details of this figure.
\end{com}
Sorry about that . The figure2 text has been clarified and improved.
\item \begin{com}
Page5 line 34. What does the phrase “those methods” mean? I can’t find any description of those methods.
\end{com}
We cannot find that text in this version. Perhaps
it was deleted during an edit about some
other point.
\item \begin{com}
Page 5 line 47. How to get the median defect percentage in training data is 29\% and in the test data, it is49\%? It seems not 49\% in test set.
\end{com}
Our mistake, the median is 52, not 49, calculated as follows.
The test set numbers are
2,11,19,34,34,69,64,74,92,99
The median is half way between 34 and 69 i.e. 52.
\item \begin{com}
Section 2.3.1. The authors give many reasons which are popular in prior works but not suitable in these tasks, such as precision or accuracy. They should give the advantages of the proposed metrics d2h and Popt. It is important to expound if it is reasonable of the metrics. It would be better to explain them with examples.
\end{com}
Thank you for that suggestion. Please see new text, start of \tion{easures}. Also, please see our reply to reviewer1.14.
Note that we do not elaborate on our reasons for not using precision-- that
would require a more lengthy explanation,
which we have published previously (see~\cite{Menzies:2007prec}).
\item \begin{com}
Page 6 line 17. The author thought the large variation in the out space caused the mentioned conditions. Is there any evidence can support this hypothesis? What will happen if there are enough data and the margin between training set and testing set is little?
\end{com}
We have been seeing many such examples from the past where only few key evaluations can provide better measures. For e.g.,
\begin{itemize}
\item Feature selection results of where two to three attributes was enough to predict software defects
or development effort~\cite{menzies2007data,chen2005finding,menzies2003data}.
\item Incremental learning results of~\cite{menzies2008implications,menzies2010defect} where
a few dozen examples of defective and non-defective modules
performed as well as anything else.
\item Maths model at the end of~\cite{nam2017heterogeneous} that showed, in the expected
case, that very few examples are required to learn
SE defect models.
\end{itemize}
But till now there hasn't been any explanation or a way to utilize this large variability in the data. \IT* is a framework which also provided the explanation and existence of this large variation without the need of any other past evidences.
We do believe if there are enough data and the margin between training set and testing set is little, then this framework might or might not work. We are still exploring this as part of future work.
\item \begin{com}
Section 2.4. “We first used them as an explanation tool, but realized that they had broader implications.” Would you please give some implications for better understanding?
\end{com}
We deleted that sentence (irrelevant to this article).
\item \begin{com}
Section4.1 page 8. The author didn’t give the reason why N=30 and ε=0.2. Also, Why N is evaluated among 30, 100, 1000 and ε is evaluated among 0.05, 0.1, 0.2. In figure 4, it seems better when ε = 0.05 than ε =0.2. In figure 5, the results of N=1000 outperform N=30. The author may provide more details for answering RQ1.
\end{com}
You are right, that was not explained enough in the text. We now updated more details in the RQ1.
When tested with an effect size test we could not show
that
the delta between N=30 and N=1000 was statistically supportable.
Note that the text in \tion{rq1} now says {\em As shown in these figures, these changes to $\{N,\mathcal{E}\}$ alter the performance of \IT* by less than a ``small effect''.}
\item \begin{com}
Section 4.2. This paper just describes the results of DODGE(0.2) and baselines. I am more curious why is DODGE better/worse than the baselines. In addition, why is the DODGE worse than baselines when it was measured be D2h while better than baselines when it was measured by Popt.
\end{com}
As to your first point, please see the new text at start of conclusion.
As to your second point,
we added more text to explain that. Top of \fig{smote}
we point that that {\em smaller} values of $d2h$ are better
while {\em larger} values of {\em Popt(20)} are better.
That is, on both measures, usually {\IT*} performs better.
Note that we also stress that, earlier in the paper, when we define these measures
(see text at end of \tion{easures}).
\item \begin{com}
Section 4.3. The authors introduce the algorithms for text mining in detail, i.e., SVM and LDA. What does DODGE do in the text mining task? It seems unclear here. The author should give explanation further.
\end{com}
Good point. Please see the first text in \textcolor{red}{red} at start of \tion{text}.
\IT* is an optimization tool which can tune the parameters of transformation (LDA) and learner (SVM) at the same time. \IT* explores the billions of options created from Table~\ref{tbl:options} when combined, to find the optimal settings of a transformation and learner.
\item \begin{com}
Page 11 Figure 8. The authors didn’t explain the results from PitsA. In this case, both DODGE and FFT are worse than LDADE SVM.
\end{com}
Recall that these are results from multiple trials so we should look at the distributions (using statistics)
and not point values. As mentioned in the text,
LDADE SVM do not statistically win against FFT or \IT*.
\item \begin{com}
Figure 8. This paper divides the treatments of Figure 8 into several groups. But it is hard to read the improvements between groups.
\end{com}
You are correct-- there was no value added in that separation into different groups. We have removed that
text.
\item \begin{com}
The author describes the external validity. I am wondering if there is any internal validity in this paper. If it has, please give the details.
\end{com}
Yes we have added some other threats to validity. The internal validity is addressed in the construct validity of Section~\ref{sect:threats}.
\item \begin{com}
(typos listed)
\end{com}
Fixed! Thanks for finding these!
\ee
\section{Introduction}\label{sect:intro}}
\else
\section{Introduction}
\label{sect:intro}
\fi
Software analytics is becoming increasingly complicated.
Fisher et al.~\cite{interactions-with-big-data-analytics} defines software analytics as a workflow that distills large quantities of low-value
data into smaller sets of higher value data.
Due to the complexities and computational cost of SE
analytics, they say ``the luxuries of interactivity, direct manipulation, and fast system response are gone''.
In fact, they characterize modern cloud-based analytics as a throwback to the 1960s- batch processing mainframes where
jobs are submitted and then analysts wait, wait, wait for results with ``little insight into what’s really going
on behind the scenes, how long it will take, or how much it’s going to cost''.
Fisher et al. document
issues seen by industrial data scientists, one who says:
\begin{quote}
{\em ``Fast iteration is key, but incompatible
with jobs ... in the cloud. It’s frustrating to wait for hours, only to realize
you need a slight tweak...''}
\end{quote}
One impediment to fast iterations are
{\em hyperparameter optimizers}
that automatically tune control options for data mining.
\tbl{options} lists some
tuning options for data pre-processing and machine learning for two
well-studied
SE tasks:
\begin{itemize}
\item
{\em Software defect prediction}
(classifying software modules into ``buggy'' or otherwise~\cite{agrawal2018better,chen2018applications,fu2016tuning,tantithamthavorn2016automated,menzies2007data,ghotra2015revisiting});
\item
{\em Software bug report text mining} (to find severity~\cite{agrawal2018better,oliveira2010ga}).
\end{itemize}
If numeric options divide into 10 sub-ranges, then
\tbl{options} has over a billion options.
With enough CPU, automatic hyperparameter optimizers
can prune those options to
find tunings that improve the performance
of software quality predictors~\cite{agrawal2018better,fu2016tuning,liu2010evolutionary,sarro2012further,tantithamthavorn2016automated,zhong2004,treude2018per,oliveira2010ga}.
For example, \fig{tanit} shows an example where
tuning converts some very bad learners into outstandingly good ones.
The problem with hyperparameter optimization is that tuning requires the evaluation of hundreds to millions of different tuning options.
The cost of running a data miner through all those options is very high, requiring days to weeks to decades of CPU~\cite{abs-1807-11112,tantithamthavorn2016automated,wang2013searching,treude2018per,xia18}.
For many years, we have addressed these long CPU times via cloud-based CPU farms.
Fisher et al.~\cite{interactions-with-big-data-analytics} warn that cloud computation is a heavily monetized environment that charges for all their services (storage, uploads, downloads, and CPU time). While each small part of that service is cheap, the total annual cost to an organization can be exorbitant.
\input{choices}
\begin{figure*}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=5.7in]{tantit.png}}
\captionsetup{font=footnotesize}
\caption{Effects of hyperparameter optimization on control parameters of a learner from~\cite{tantithamthavorn2016automated}. Blue dots
\textcolor{blue}{\CIRCLE}
and red triangles
\textcolor{red}{{\large $\blacktriangle$}}
show the mean performance before and after tuning (respectively).
X-axis shows different learners. Y-axis shows the frequency at which a learner was selected to be ``top-ranked'' (by a statistical analysis). Vertical lines show the variance of that selection process over repeated runs.
On the left-hand-side of the chart we see pre-tuned learners that seem ineffective (C5.0 and AVNNet). Yet after tuning, these seemingly poor performers performed outstandingly well,
defeating 23/26 of the other classifiers.
}\label{fig:tanit}
\end{figure*}
Recently, and surprisingly, it was discovered how to (a)~save most of that CPU cost while at the same time (b)~find better tunings.
As discussed later,
a very simple
ensemble learning approach called FFtrees~\cite{phillips2017FFtrees} is outperforming the supposed state-of-the-art expensive SE tuning algorithms for our two SE tasks~\cite{chen2018applications}
(where ``simpler''
means less CPU is
required to build better software quality prediction models).
This is a strange result
since standard tuning sampled hundreds to thousands of options, while FFtrees explored just a dozen or so.
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{1in}
\includegraphics[width=1in]{grid.png}
\end{wrapfigure}
To explain this result, we observe
that there is some variation $\mathcal{E}$ in performance
between training and test (e.g. if test data comes from new project data not available during training).
As shown in right,
if
$ \mathcal{E} = 0.2$, then {\em recall} vs {\em false alarms}
groups into
$1 / (0.2^2)=25$ cells (where green cells are preferred over red).
In that space,
if we explored more than 25 tunings, some
would be {\em redundant}; i.e., certain
pairs would have indistinguishably different outcomes.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{evals.png}
\captionsetup{font=footnotesize}
\caption{Number of evaluations required by different methods in this article. Note that these are the number of evaluations required
to find just one tuning. In practice, many more evaluations will be required. For example, when exploring data sets using a 5*5 cross-val, these evaluations need to be repeated 125 times. For LDA-GA SVM (described in \tion{text}), that implies 125,000 evaluations.
}\label{fig:timings}
\end{figure}
It turns out there are better ways to avoid redundant tunings than FFtrees.
Our {\IT*} tuning tool learns to ignore redundant tunings (parameter settings including which classifier and preprocessor to use)
(those that fall within $\mathcal{E}$ of other results).
When tested defect
prediction and text mining,
{\IT*} terminated after fewer evaluations than standard optimizers (such as those that generated \fig{tanit}).
Also, it produced better performance scores than state-of-the art research articles (from the two well-studied SE tasks listed above~\cite{fu2016tuning,agrawal2018better,chen2018applications,agrawal2018wrong,Panichella:2013,ghotra2015revisiting}).
We conjecture that other methods perform relatively worse since they do not appreciate the simplicity of
the output space. Hence, those other methods waste CPU as they
struggle to cover billions of redundant tuning options like \tbl{options} (most of which yield indistinguishably different results).
This article introduces and evaluates {\IT*}. \tion{fftrees}
describes how FFtrees lead to
the design of {\IT*} (in \tion{dodge}).
\tion{rq} then answers the following research questions.
{\bf RQ1: Is {\IT*} too complicated? How to find appropriate value of $\mathcal{E}$?}
We can not recommend a method
if it is too complex to use.
Fortunately, we show that it is easy to find {\IT*}'s parameters since
it's success is
not altered by large
changes to $\mathcal{E}$.
{\bf RQ2: How does {\IT*} compare to recent prominent
defect prediction and hyperparameter optimization results?}
We show that {\IT*} out-performs:
\begin{itemize}
\item An ICSE'15 article that explored many different learners for
defect prediction~\cite{ghotra2015revisiting} by about 50\% and 40\% on an average for {\em d2h} and {\em Popt(20)} respectively;
\item
An IST'16 journal article that demonstrated
the value of tuning
for defect predictors~\cite{fu2016tuning} by about 30\% and 10\% on an average for {\em d2h} and {\em Popt(20)} respectively while exploring larger parameter search space with faster termination;
\item
An ICSE'18 article that advocated tuning data pre-preprocessors~\cite{agrawal2018better} by about 10\% and 5\% on an average for {\em d2h} and {\em Popt(20)} respectively while exploring larger parameter search space with faster termination.
\item
The FSE'18 article that reported the FFtree results~\cite{chen2018applications} by about 10\% and 5\% on an average for {\em d2h} and {\em Popt(20)} respectively while exploring larger parameter search space with faster termination.
\end{itemize}
{\bf RQ3: Is {\IT*} only useful for defect prediction?}
In order to stress test our methods, we must apply {\IT*}
to some harder task than defect prediction.
Software bug report text mining is a
harder task than defect prediction since
the
latter only process a few dozen attributes while former
task have tens of thousands of attributes.
For text mining, we show
{\IT*} performs better than:
\begin{itemize}
\item
An IST'18 journal article that had showed the value
of tuning for SE text mining applications~\cite{agrawal2018wrong} by about 20\% on an average for {\em d2h} while exploring larger parameter search space with faster termination.
\item
An earlier ICSE'13 article that applied genetic algorithms to
learn the settings for a text miner~\cite{Panichella:2013} by about 20\% on an average for {\em d2h} while exploring larger parameter search space with faster termination.
\end{itemize}
\noindent
From our findings, we have several reasons to endorse {\IT*}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
{\IT*} generates better quality predictors than recent SE state-of-the-art research articles~\cite{fu2016tuning,agrawal2018better,chen2018applications,agrawal2018wrong,Panichella:2013,ghotra2015revisiting}.
\item
Also, we endorse {\IT*} over the FFtree method that inspired it.
\fig{timings} shows the number of evaluations required by different frameworks in this paper.
\fig{timings} shows that FFtrees uses fewer evaluations than {\IT*}.
However, our
RQ2 and RQ3 results show that {\IT*} typically defects FFtrees.
\item
Further,
{\IT*} is a simpler way to build those predictors (where ``simpler'' is measured in terms of the CPU required to run the method). From \fig{timings}, it can be observed that {\IT*} takes 30 evaluations, far less to explore billions of choices as shown in \tbl{options} than any other frameworks which tries to explore few thousands only.
\item
Finally, and more fundamentally, {\IT*} tests the theory that much simpler hyperparameter optimizers can be built by assuming the output space divides into just
a few regions of size
$\mathcal{E}$. {\IT*} is one way to exploit this effect.
We believe that further research could be in many others ways
(e.g. different learners; better visualizations and/or explanations of analytics).
\end{enumerate}
Before beginning, we digress to make two points. Firstly,
just to say the obvious,
while these results are certainly promising, our approach
needs to be tested using more SE tasks
(for more on this, see {\em External Validity}
in \tion{threats}).
Secondly, when we say {\IT*} does better than prior work, we also include several of our own papers. Based on the results
of this paper, we can no longer endorse the specific conclusions (about how to do hyperparameter optimization) from~\cite{agrawal2018wrong,agrawal2018better,fu2016tuning}. When researchers discover ways to overturn their own results, they should feel duty-bound to declare what was learned from that self-refutation. This is an important
methodological point since, as Matthew Strassler observes, ``All the great revolutions in science start with an unexpected discrepancy that wouldn’t go away.''~\footnote{https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Science}.
\input{data.tex}
\section{Background and Motivation}\label{sect:fftrees}
This section describes the background on defect prediction, text mining, our 2 case studies understudy and also the surprising results
from FFtrees in defect prediction that lead to {\IT*}.
\subsection{Why Study Defect Prediction?}\label{sect:dp}
Software developers are smart, but sometimes make mistakes. Hence, it is essential to test software before the deployment ~\cite{orso2014software,barr2015oracle,yoo2012regression, myers2011art}.
Software quality assurance budgets are finite while assessment effectiveness increases exponentially with assessment effort~\cite{fu2016tuning}. Therefore, standard practice is to apply the best available methods on code sections that seem most critical and bug-prone.
Software bugs are not evenly distributed across the project~\cite{hamill2009common,koru2009investigation, ostrand2004bugs,misirli2011ai}. Hence,
a useful way to perform software testing is to allocate most assessment budgets to
the more defect-prone parts in software projects.
Software defect predictors are never 100\% correct. But
they can be used to suggest where to focus more expensive methods.
There is much commercial interest in defect prediction. In a survey of 395 practitioners from 33 countries and five continents,
Wan et al.~\cite{wan18} found that over 90\% of
the respondents were willing to adopt defect prediction
techniques. Other results from commercial deployments show the benefits of defect prediction.
When Misirli et al.~\cite{misirli2011ai} built a defect prediction model for a telecommunications company, those models
could predict 87 percent of code defects.
Those models also decreased inspection efforts by 72 percent, and hence reduce post-release defects by 44 percent. Also, when Kim et al.~\cite{kim2015remi} applied a defect prediction model, REMI, to an API
development process at Samsung Electronics, they could
predict the bug-prone APIs with reasonable accuracy~(0.68 F1 score)
and reduce the resources required for executing test cases.
Software defect predictors not only save labor compared with traditional manual methods, but they are also competitive with certain automatic methods.
A recent study at ICSE'14, Rahman et al. ~\cite{rahman2014comparing} compared (a) static code analysis tools FindBugs, Jlint, and PMD and (b) static code defect predictors (which they called ``statistical defect prediction'') built using logistic regression.
They found no significant differences in the cost-effectiveness of these approaches.
Given this equivalence, it is significant to
note that static code defect prediction can be quickly adapted to new languages by building lightweight parsers to extract static code metrics such as \tbl{ck}. The same is not true for static code analyzers - these need extensive modification before they can be used in new languages.
\input{algo.tex}
\subsection{Data and Algorithms for Defect Prediction}\label{sect:daa}
Our defect predictors use static code measurements
from \tbl{ck}.
\tbl{versions},
shows our defect prediction data available for multiple software versions (from http://tiny.cc/seacraft).
This is important since, an important principle of data mining is not to test on the data used in training.
There are many ways to design a experiment that satisfies this principle.
Some of those methods have limitations; e.g., leave-one-out is too slow for
large data sets and cross-validation mixes up older and newer data~
(such that data from the past may be used to test on future data). In
this work, for each project data, we set the latest version of project data
as the testing data and all the older data as the training data.
For example, we use $\mathit{poi1.5, poi2.0, poi2.5}$ data for training predictors,
and the newer data, $\mathit{ poi3.0}$ is left for testing.
\tbl{versions} illustrates the variability of SE data. When we compare the \mbox{\% of Defects} in the training and test data, we see that the past can be very different to the future. Observe how the median defect
percentage in the training data is 29\% but in the test data, it is 49\% (i.e. nearly doubled). This tells us that software analytics will forever be an imprecise science (and one of the lessons of this paper is that
imprecision can be used to simplify complex tasks like hyperparameter optimization).
Some of the data in \tbl{versions} has
imbalanced class frequencies.
If the target class is not common (as in the camel, ivy, jedit test data in \tbl{versions}), it is difficult to generate a model that can locate it.
A standard approach for handling class imbalance is SMOTE~\cite{Chawla:2002} that randomly
deletes members of the majority class while synthetically
creating members of the minority class.
SMOTE is controlled by the parameters shown in \tbl{options}.
\begin{table}
\caption{OO code metrics used for the defect prediction studies of this article.
Last line, shown in \colorbox{lightgray}{gray}, denotes the dependent variable.}\label{tbl:ck}
\begin{center}
\small
\begin{tabular}{c|l}\hline
amc & average method complexity \\\hline
avg\, cc & average McCabe \\\hline
ca & afferent couplings \\\hline
cam & cohesion among classes \\\hline
cbm & coupling between methods \\\hline
cbo & coupling between objects \\\hline
ce & efferent couplings \\\hline
dam & data access\\\hline
dit & depth of inheritance tree\\\hline
ic & inheritance coupling\\\hline
lcom (lcom3) & 2 measures of lack of cohesion in methods \\\hline
loc & lines of code \\\hline
max\, cc & maximum McCabe\\\hline
mfa & functional abstraction\\\hline
moa & aggregation\\\hline
noc & number of children\\\hline
npm & number of public methods\\\hline
rfc & response for a class\\\hline
wmc & weighted methods per class\\\hline
\rowcolor{lightgray}
defects & Boolean: where defects found in bug-tracking\\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\input{versions.tex}
As to machine learning algorithms, these are many and varied.
At ICSE'15, Ghotra et al.~\cite{ghotra2015revisiting} applied 32 different machine learning algorithms to defect prediction.
In a result consistent with the theme of this article, they found that those 32 algorithms formed the four groups
of \tbl{algo}
(and the performance of two learners in any one group
were statistically indistinguishable from each other).
\begin{table}[!t]
\centering
\caption {32 defect predictors clustered by their performance rank by Ghotra et al. (ranked using their Scott-Knot statistical test)~\cite{ghotra2015revisiting}.}
\label{tbl:algo}
\begin{tabular}{|l|p{6.5cm}|}
\hline
\rowcolor[HTML]{C0C0C0}
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Overall \\ Rank\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Classification \\ Technique\end{tabular} \\ \hline
1 (best) & Rsub+J48, SL, Rsub+SL,Bag+SL, LMT, RF+SL, RF+J48, Bag+LMT, Rsub+LMT, and RF+LMT\\ \hline
2 & RBFs, Bag+J48, Ad+SL, KNN, RF+NB, Ad+LMT, NB, Rsub+NB, and Bag+NB \\ \hline
3 & Ripper, EM, J48, Ad+NB, Bag+SMO, Ad+J48,Ad+SMO, and K-means \\ \hline
4 (worst) & RF+SMO, Ridor, SMO, and Rsub+SMO \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Evaluation of Defect Predictors}\label{sect:goals}
\subsubsection{Measures of Performance}
We choose not to evaluate defect predictors on any single criteria (e.g., not just recall)
since succeeding on one criteria can damage another~\cite{fu2016tuning}. Also,
we eschew from precision and accuracy since these can be inaccurate for data sets where the target class is rare (which is common
in defect prediction data sets)~\cite{Menzies:2007prec}. Instead, we will evaluate our predictors on metrics
that aggregate multiple metrics.
{\em D2h}, or ``distance to heaven'', shows how close scores fall to ``heaven'' (where recall=1 and false alarms=0)~\cite{chen2018applications}:
{\footnotesize\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:recall}
\mathit{Recall} & = & \frac{\mathit{True Positives}}{\mathit{True Positives + False Negatives}} \\
\mathit{FPR} & = & \frac{\mathit{False Positives}}{\mathit{False Positives + True Negatives}} \\
\mathit{d2h} & = & \frac{ \sqrt{ (1-\mathit{Recall})^2 + (0-\mathit{FPR })^2}}{ \sqrt{2}}\label{eq:d2h}
\end{eqnarray}}
{\noindent}Here, the $\sqrt{2}$ term normalizes {\em d2h} to the range zero to one.
{\em Popt(20)} comments on the effort required {\em after} a defect predictor triggers and humans have to read code, looking
for errors.
$Popt(20)=1- \Delta_{opt}$, where $\Delta_{opt}$ is the area
between the effort~(code-churn-based) cumulative lift charts of the optimal
learner and the proposed learner. To calculate {\em Popt(20)}, we divide all the code modules into those predicted to be defective ($D$) or not ($N$). Both sets are then sorted in ascending order of lines of code. The two sorted sets are
then laid out across the
x-axis,
with $D$ before $N$. This layout means that
the x-axis extends from 0 to 100\% where lower values of $x$ are predicted to be more defective than $x$ higher values.
On such a chart, the y-axis shows what percent of the defects would be recalled if we traverse the code sorted that x-axis order.
Following from the recommendations of Ostrand et al.~\cite{ostrand2004bugs}, {\em Popt} is reported at the 20\% point; show how many bugs are find if we inspect a small portion of the code (20\%).
Kamei, Yang et al. ~\cite{yang2016effort,kamei2013large,monden2013assessing} normalize {\em Popt} using:
{\footnotesize\begin{eqnarray}
P_{opt}(m) = 1- \frac{S(optimal)-S(m)}{S(optimal)-S(worst)}\label{eq:popt}
\end{eqnarray}}
\noindent
where $S(optimal)$, $S(m)$ and $S(worst)$ represent the area of curve under the optimal learner, proposed learner, and worst learner.
Note that the worst model is built by sorting all the changes according to the actual defect density in ascending order.
After normalization, {\em Popt(20)} (like {\em d2h}) has the range zero to one.
But note that:
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em Larger} values of {\em Popt(20)} are {\em better};
\item {\em Smaller} values of {\em d2h} are {\em better}.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Comparing to a Sample}\label{sect:sample}
As to statistical methods, the following results use two approaches.
Firstly, when comparing one result to a sample of $N$ others, we will sometimes see ``small effects'' (which can be ignored). To define ``small effect'',
we use Cohen's delta~\cite{cohen1988statistical}:
{\footnotesize \begin{equation}\label{eq:cohen}
d=\mathit{small\; effect} = 0.2*\sqrt{\frac{\sum_i^x(x_i- ({\sum}x_i/n))^2}{n-1}}\end{equation}}
i.e., 20\% of the standard deviation.
Secondly, other statistical tests are required
when comparing results from two samples; e.g. when
two variants of some stochastic process are applied, many
times, to a population.
For this second kind of comparison, we need a statistical
significance test (to certify that the distributions are indeed different) and an effect size test
(to check that the differences are more than a ``small effect'').
There are many ways to implement second kind of test.
Here, we have used those which have past peer reviewed in the literature~\cite{agrawal2018better,agrawal2018wrong}. Specifically, we use Efron's 95\% confidence bootstrap procedure~\cite{efron93bootstrap} and the A12 test~\cite{Arcuri:2011}.
In this second test, to say that
one sample $S_1$ is ``{\em worse}'' than another sample $S_2$
is to say:
\begin{itemize}
\item
The mean {\em Popt(20)} values of $S_1$ are less than $S_2$.
\item
The mean {\em D2h} values of $S_1$ are more than $S_2$.
\item The populations are not statistically similar; i.e. (a)~their mean difference is larger than a small effect (using A12)
and that
(b)~a statistical significance test (bootstrapping) has not rejected the hypothesis that
they are different (at 95\% confidence).
\end{itemize}
Note we do not use A12 or bootstrap
for the first kind of test, since those methods
are not defined for comparisons of
individuals to a sample.
\subsection{Results from FFtrees}\label{sect:fft}
Fast and Frugal Trees (FFtrees)
were developed by psychological scientists~\cite{martignon2008categorization}
trying
to generate succinct, easily comprehensible models. We first used them as an explanation tool, but
realized that they had broader implications.
FFtrees are binary trees that
return a binary classification (e.g., true, false).
Unlike standard decision trees,
each level of an FFtree
must have at least one leaf node.
For example,
\tbl{three} shows an FFTtree generated from
the log4j JAVA system of \tbl{versions}.
The goal of this tree is to classify a software module as ``defective=true'' or ``defective=false''.
The four nodes in the \tbl{three} FFTree reference four attributes \emph{cbo,\ rfc,\ dam,\ amc} (defined in
\tbl{ck}).
\begin{table}[!b]
\caption{An example FFtree generated from \tbl{versions} data sets. Attributes come from \tbl{ck}.
``True'' means ``predicted to be defective''.}\label{tbl:three}
{
\begin{verbatim}
if cbo <= 4 then false
else if rfc > 32 then true
else if dam > 0 then true
else if amc < 32.25 then true
else false
\end{verbatim}}
\end{table}
Following the advice of~\cite{phillips2017FFtrees}, we use trees with depth $d=4$.
This means that
our FFtrees make their decisions using at most four attributes (where numeric ranges have been binarized by splitting at the median point).
Standard rule learners select
ranges that best select for some goal (e.g., selecting for the ``true'' examples). This can lead to overfitting.
To avoid overfitting, FFtrees use a somewhat unique strategy:
at each level of the tree,
FFtrees builds two trees using the ranges that {\em most} and {\em least} satisfy some goal; e.g., {\em d2h} or {\em Popt20}.
That is, half the time, FFtrees will try to avoid the target class by building a leaf node that exits to ``false''.
Assuming a maximum tree depth of \mbox{$d=4$} and two choices at each level,
then FFtree builds $2^d=16$ trees then prunes away all but one, as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item
First, we first select
a goal predicate; e.g., {\em d2h} or {\em Popt20}.
\item
Next, while {\em building one tree}, at each level of the tree, FFtree scores
each range according to how well that range \{does, does not\} satisfy that goal.
These selected range becomes a leaf note. FFtree then calls itself
recursively on all examples that do not fall into that range.
\item
Finally, while {\em assessing 16 trees}, we run the training data through each tree to find what examples
are selected by that tree. Each tree is scored by passing the selected examples through the goal predicate.
The tree with the best score is then applied to the test data.
\end{itemize}
In summary, FFtrees {\em explore around} a few dozen times, trying different options for how to best model the data (i.e., what exit
node to use at each level of the tree).
After a few {\em explorations}, FFtrees deletes the worst models, and uses the remaining model on the test data.
\begin{figure}[!t]
{\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{cc}
{\em D2h}: {\em less} is {\em better}.
&
{\em Popt(20)}: {\em more} is {\em better}. \\
``small effect'' $= 5.1$
&
``small effect'' $=5.2$\\
\includegraphics[width=1.6in]{d2huntuned.png}&\includegraphics[width=1.6in]{pot20untuned.png}\\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{ \includegraphics[width=2in]{keyuntuned.png}}
\end{tabular}}
\captionsetup{font=footnotesize}
\caption{Defect prediction results for FFtree vs untuned learners. From~\cite{chen2018applications}.
FFtrees is almost never beaten by other methods (by more than a ``small effect'').
Exception: see the synapse+EM results in the left column.
}\label{fig:chen}
\end{figure}
\fig{chen} shows results from Chen et al.~\cite{chen2018applications} that compared
FFtrees to standard defect predictors.
In that comparison, Ghotra et al.~\cite{ghotra2015revisiting} was used to guide learner selection.
They found
that 32 defect predictors group together into just four ranks (see~\tbl{algo}).
We picked at random from each of their ranks to select SL=Simple Logistic, NB=Naive Bayes, EM=Expectation Maximization,
SMO=Sequential Minimal Optimization (a kind of support vector machine). We call these learners ``standard'' since, in \fig{chen}, we use them
with their defaults from Scikit-learn~\cite{pedregosa2011scikit}.
In \fig{chen}:
\begin{itemize}
\item Performance is evaluated using metrics from \tion{goals}.
\item Data comes from \tbl{versions}.
\item This data has the attributes of \tbl{ck}.
\item For data with multiple versions, we test on the latest version and train on a combination of all the rest.
\item
If FFtrees perform worse than any other learner by more than a ``small effect''
(defined using \eq{cohen}), then that result is highlighted in red (see the synapse d2h results of \fig{chen}).
For each column, the size of a ``small effect'' is listed at top.
\end{itemize}
As shown in \fig{chen}, FFtrees nearly always performs as well, or better, than anything else.
\section{From FFtrees to {\IT*}}\label{sect:dodge}
\fig{chen} is a very strange result. How can something as simple as FFtree perform so well?
\begin{itemize}
\item
FFtrees explores very few alternate
models (only 16).
\item
Each model
references only four attributes.
\item
To handle numeric variables,
a very simplistic discretization policy is applied at each level of tree
(numerics are separated at the median value).
\item
Strangest of all, the FFtree overfitting mechanism will (half the time) try to {\em avoid} the target class
when it selects a leaf node that exits to ``false''.
\end{itemize}
Under what conditions would something
that simple work as well as shown in \fig{chen}?
One possible answer was offered in the introduction. If our data
has large $\mathcal{E}$
in its output space, then:
\begin{itemize}
\item
The output space divides into just a few cells; so
\item If there are $c$ cells and $t$ tunings, then when $t>c$, then some of those will be {\em redundant};
i.e. they achieve results within $\mathcal{E}$ of other results.
\item Which means that {\em exploring around} $c$ times will cover much of the output space.
\end{itemize}
If that is true then to do better than FFtrees:
\begin{itemize}
\item Try {\em exploring around} across a {\em wider range of options}.
\item If some options result in a performance score $\alpha$, then we will {\em deprecate
options} that lead to $\alpha \pm\mathcal{E}$.
\end{itemize}
To find a {\em wider range of options},
{\IT*} uses the \tbl{options} tree of options. Leaves in that tree are either:
\begin{itemize}
\item Single choices; e.g., {\em DecisionTree}, ``splitter=random''; or
\item Numeric ranges; e.g., {\em Normalizer}, ``norm=l2''.
\end{itemize}
Each node in the tree is assigned a weight $w=0$.
When {\em evaluating} a branch,
the options in that branch
configure, then executes, a pre-processor/learner.
Each evaluation selects one leaf from the learner sub-tree and
one from the pre-processing tree (and defect prediction and text mining
explores different pre-processing sub-trees, see \tbl{options}).
If the evaluation score
is more than $\mathcal{E}$ of prior scores, then all nodes in that branch are endorsed ($w=w+1$).
Otherwise, {\IT*} deprecates ($w=w-1$).
{\IT*} these weights to select options via a recursive {\em weighted descent} where, at each level,
it selects sub-trees whose root has the largest weight (i.e., those most
endorsed).
The design conjecture
of {\IT*} is that exploring some tuning options matters but, given
a large $\mathcal{E}$ output space, the details of those
options are not so important. Hence, a limited number of
$N_1$ times, we pick some options at random. Having selected
those options, for further $N_2$ samples, we learn
which of the $N_1$ options should be most deprecated
or endorsed.
The $N_2$ stage refines numeric ranges.
When a range is initially evaluated, a random number \mbox{$r=random(\mathit{lo}, \mathit{hi})$} is selected and its weight $w(r)$ is set to zero.
Subsequently, this
weight is endorsed/deprecated technique as described above, with
one refinement. When a new value is required
(i.e., when the branch is evaluated again) then {\IT*} restricts
the $\{\mathit{lo}, \mathit{hi}\}$ range as follows.
If the best,worst weights seen so far (in this range)
are associated with $b,w$ (respectively) then use
$\mathit{lo}=b$ and $\mathit{hi}=\frac{b+w}{2}$.
Important point: {\em endorse} and {\em deprecate} is done each time a branch is evaluated
within each $N_1$ and $N_2$ steps.
In summary, {\IT*} is a method for learning what tunings are {\em redundant}; i.e. lead to results that are very similar to other tunings.
It is controlled by two meta-parameters:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mathcal{E}$: results are ``similar'' if they differ by less than $\mathcal{E}$;
\item $N$: the number of sampled tunings.
\end{itemize}
Recall that $N=N_1+N_2$ where
\begin{itemize}
\item
The first $N_1$ times, the set of tuning options grows;
\item
For the remaining $N_2$ times, that set is frozen while we refine our understanding of what tunings to avoid.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[!t]
{\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{cc}
{\em D2h}: {\em less} is {\em better}.
&
{\em Popt(20)}: {\em more} is {\em better}. \\
``small effect'' $=4.4$
&
``small effect'' $=6.1$\\
\includegraphics[width=1.6in]{d2hContatnN,IncreasingE.png}&\includegraphics[width=1.6in]{PoptContatnN,IncreasingE.png}\\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{ \includegraphics[width=1.3in]{legendContatnN,IncreasingE.png}}
\end{tabular}}
\caption{{\bf RQ1} results. Defect prediction with {\IT{$\mathcal{E} \in \{0.2, 0.1, 0.05\}$}}, keeping samples constant at $N=30$.
As before, changing $\mathcal{E}$ does not change learner performance any more than a ``small effect''.
This figure was generated using the
same experimental set up as \fig{varN}. }\label{fig:varE}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
{\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{cc}
{\em D2h}: {\em less} is {\em better}.
&
{\em Popt(20)}: {\em more} is {\em better}. \\
``small effect'' $=4.0$
&
``small effect'' $=4.9$\\
\includegraphics[width=1.6in,height=2.1in]{d2hConstatntE,increasingN.png}&\includegraphics[width=1.6in,height=2.1in]{pOptConstantE,increasingN.png}\\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{ \includegraphics[width=1.7in]{legendConstantE,increasingN.png}}
\end{tabular}}
\caption{More {\bf RQ1} results. Defect prediction with {\IT{.2}}, varying samples $N$.
Note that for any data set, all these results are very similar; i.e., changing the sample size does not change learner performance any more than a ``small effect''.
This figure was generated using the
same experimental set up as \fig{chen} (where tuning options taken from \tbl{options}).
}\label{fig:varN}
\end{figure}
\section{Answers to Research Questions}\label{sect:rq}
Using {\IT*}, we can now answer the research questions asked in this article's introduction.
\subsection{RQ1: Is \IT* too complicated? How to find appropriate value of $\mathcal{E}$?}
When proposing simplifications to software analytics, it is important to check if the new proposed method is itself
simple to apply.
Accordingly, this research question asks if it is difficult to find useful
values for $N$ (the number of samples) or the $\mathcal{E}$ value used in the search. \fig{varE} and \fig{varN} explore different settings
of $\{N,\mathcal{E}\}$.
\begin{itemize}
\item \fig{varE} varies $\mathcal{E}$ but keeps $N$ constant.
\item \fig{varN} varies $N$ but keeps $\mathcal{E}$ constant.
\end{itemize}
As shown in these figures, these changes to $\{N,\mathcal{E}\}$ alter the performance of \IT* by less than a ``small effect''.
That is,
(a)~the output space for this data falls into a very small number of regions so
(b)~a large number of samples across a fine-grained division of the output space
performs just as well as a few samples over a coarse-grained division.
In summary, our answer to {\bf RQ1} is that the values of $\{N,\mathcal{E}\}$ can be set very easily. Based on the results of \fig{varE} and \fig{varN}, for the rest of this article
we will use $\mathcal{E}=0.2$ while taking $N=30$ samples of the options from Table~\ref{tbl:options}.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\scriptsize \begin{tabular}{|p{.95\linewidth}|}\hline
INPUT:
\begin{itemize}
\item A dataset, such as \tbl{versions};
\item A tuning goal $G$ (e.g., \eq{d2h} or \eq{popt} from \tion{goals});
\item DE parameters: $\mathit{np}=10$, $\mathit{f}=0.75$, $\mathit{cr}=0.3$, $\mathit{lives}=5$
\end{itemize}
PROCEDURE:
\begin{itemize}
\item Given $x$ options, generate $x{\times}np$ tunings as the initial population $P$;
\item Score each tuning $\mathit{P_i}$ in the population with goal $G$;
\item While $\mathit{lives} > 0$
\begin{enumerate}
\item Set $\delta = -1$; i.e., we will lose a life (unless we find improvements);
\item
For $i\in P$ do
\begin{enumerate}
\item Make a mutant $m$ by extrapolating between $\{a, b, c\} \in P$ at probability $\mathit{cr}$. For decisions $m_k \in m$:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $m_k= a_k + f*(b_k-c_k)$ (continuous values).
\item $m_k= a_k \vee ~ ( b_k \vee c_k)$ (discrete values).
\end{enumerate}
\item Build a learner with parameters $m$ and train data;
\item Using the data and $G$, score that learner;
\item If $m$ beats $i$, replace $i$ and do not lose a life (set $\delta=0$).
\end{enumerate}
\item $\mathit{lives} = \mathit{lives} + \delta$
\end{enumerate}
\end{itemize}\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\captionsetup{justification=centering}
\caption{ Storn's differential evolution algorithm~\cite{storn1997differential, fu2017easy}.} \label{fig:DE}
\end{figure}
\subsection{RQ2: How does {\IT*} compare to recent prominent defect prediction and hyperparamter optimization results?}
SMOTUNED is
Agrawal et al. ICSE'18~\cite{agrawal2018better}'s hyperparamater optimizer that tunes SMOTE, a data pre-processor
(recall that
SMOTE is a tool for addressing class imbalance and was described in \tion{daa}).
Agrawal et al. reported that SMOTUNED's tunings
greatly improved classifier
performance. SMOTUNED uses the differential evolutionary algorithm described in \fig{DE}. SMOTUNED has the same
control parameters as SMOTE (see \tbl{options}).
DE+RF is a hyperparameter optimizer proposed by Fu et al.~\cite{fu2016differential}
that uses differential evolution to tune the control parameters of random forests
The premise of RF (which is short for random forests) is ``if one tree is useful, why not a hundred?''.
RF quickly builds many trees, each time using a random selection of the attributes and examples. The final conclusion is then generated by polling across all the trees in the forest. RF's control parameters are listed in \tbl{options}.
SMOTUNED and
DE+RF used DE since
DE can handle numeric and discrete options (see step 2a in \fig{DE}).
Also, DE has been proven useful in prior SE tuning
studies~\cite{fu2016tuning}.
Further,
other evolutionary algorithms (genetic algorithms~\cite{goldberg2006genetic}, simulated annealing~\cite{kirkpatrick1983optimization}) mutate each attribute in isolation. When two attributes are correlated, those algorithms can mutate variables inappropriately in different directions. DE, on the other hand, mutates attributes
in tandem along known data trends.
Hence, DE's tandem search can outperform other optimizers such as
(a)~particle swarm optimization~\cite{vesterstrom2004comparative}; (b)~the grid search used by Tantithamthavorn et al.~\cite{tantithamthavorn2016automated}
to tune their defect predictors~\cite{fu2016differential}; or (c)~the genetic algorithm
used by Panichella et al. ~\cite{Panichella:2013} to tune a text miner (that result is presented below).
\begin{figure}[!b]
{\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{cc}
{\em D2h}: {\em less} is {\em better}.
&
{\em Popt(20)}: {\em more} is {\em better}. \\
Means results from 25 runs
&
Means results from 25 runs \\
\includegraphics[width=1.6in]{d2hdefectAll.png}&\includegraphics[height=2.8in,width=1.6in]{popt20defectAll.png}\\
\multicolumn{2}{c}{ \includegraphics[width=2.5in]{legenDdefectAll.png}}
\end{tabular}}
\caption{{\bf RQ2} results. Defect prediction results for {\IT{.2}, $N=30$} vs (FFtrees, SMOTUNED, DE+RF, RANDOM).
In only a few cases (those highlighted in red) is {\IT{.2}}'s performance worse than anything else (where ``worse''
is defined using the statistics of \tion{sample}.) }\label{fig:smote}
\end{figure}
\fig{smote} compares hyperparameter optimizers with {\IT{.2}}, FFtrees and (just for completeness) a random search method that picks 30 random options (equivalent N as of \IT*) from \tbl{options}. These experiments make extensive use of stochastic algorithms
whose behavior can significantly differ between each run (DE and Random30).
Hence, \fig{smote} shows mean results from 25 runs using 25 different seeds. In those results:
\begin{itemize}
\item
Usually, random performs badly and never defeats {\IT*}. This result tells us that the reweighing scheme within {\IT*} is useful.
\item
In 16/20 cases combining the \textit{d2h} and \textit{Popt20} datasets, {\IT{.2}} is no worse than anything else
(where ``worse'' is defined as per \tion{sample}).
\item
In two cases, {\IT{.2}} is beaten by FFtrees (see the {\em d2h} results for jedit and log4j).
That is, in 90\% of these results, methods that explore a little around the results space do no worse than methods that try to
extensively explore the space of tuning options.
\end{itemize}
In summary, our answer to {\bf RQ2} is that {\IT*} often performs
much better than recent prominent standard hyperparameter optimization results.
\subsection{RQ3: Is {\IT*} only useful for defect prediction?}
\label{sect:text}
{\IT*} was designed in the context of defect prediction. This section checks if that design applies to a very
different software analytics; i.e., SE text mining.
\subsubsection{Why Study SE Text Mining?}
The defect predictors described above learned models from {\em structured data}; i.e., simple tables of data which include a target class such as {\em buggy} equals {\em true}
or {\em false}. But many SE project artifacts come in the form of {\em unstructured text} such as
word processing files, slide presentations, comments,
Github issue reports, etc.
According to White~\cite{white05}:
\begin{itemize}
\item
80\% of business is conducted on unstructured data;
\item
85\% of all data stored is held in an unstructured format;
\item Unstructured data doubles every three months.
\end{itemize}
Nadkarni and Yezhkova~\cite{nadkarni2014structured}
say that most of the planet's 1600 Exabytes of data does not appear
in structured sources (databases, etc) and that
each year, humans generate far less structured than unstructured artifacts.
Lately, there has been much interest in SE text mining~\cite{menzies2008improving,menzies2008automated,Panichella:2013,agrawal2018wrong,xu2016predicting,majumder18}
since this covers a much wider range of SE activities.
Text mining is harder than defect prediction due to presence of free form natural language which is semantically very complex and may not conform to any known grammar.
In practice, text documents require tens of thousands of attributes (one for each word in the natural language of the author of those documents).
For example, consider NASA's software
project and issue tracking systems (or PITS)~\cite{menzies2008improving, menzies2008automated} that contain text
discussing
bugs and changes in source code. It also contains comments on software
patches. As shown in \tbl{data_text}, our text data contains tens to hundreds of thousands
of words (even when reduced to unique words, there are still 10,000+ unique words).
When such a free text tool like PITS is used by a very broad community, it is hard to ensure
that humans comment on artifacts in a consistent manner. To encourage
a better and more uniform comment system within PITS, Menzies \& Marcus~\cite{menzies2008automated}
developed a text miner that checked on the
validity of PITS severity reports.
\begin{itemize}
\item After seeing an issue in some artifact, a human
analyst assigns a
severity level {\em severityX}.
\item
Our text miner learns a predictor for issue severity
level from logs. This is applied to the latest
issue to assign a severity level {\em severityY}.
\item
When {\em severityY} is different to
{\em severityX}, then a human supervisor reviews the dispute to, possibly, override
the human's severity ranking.
\end{itemize}
The rest of this section compares different methods for implementing this severity classifier.
\subsubsection{Data and Algorithms for Text Mining}
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption{Dataset statistics. Data comes from the SEACRAFT repository: \url{http://tiny.cc/seacraft}}
\label{tbl:data_text}
\begin{tabular}{c@{~}|r@{~}|r@{~}|r@{~}}
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}} \textbf{Dataset} \end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}} \textbf{No. of Documents}\end{tabular} & \textbf{No. of Unique Words} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}} \textbf{Severe \%}\end{tabular} \\ \hline
PitsA & 965 & 155,165 & 39 \\
PitsB & 1650 & 104,052 & 40 \\
PitsC & 323 & 23,799 & 56 \\
PitsD & 182 & 15,517 & 92 \\
PitsE & 825 & 93,750 & 63 \\
PitsF & 744 & 28,620 & 64 \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption{Top 10 topics found by LDA for PitsA dataset from\tbl{data_text}. Within
each topic, the weight of words decreases exponentially left to right across the order shown here.
The words here are truncated (e.g., ``software'' becomes ``softwar'') due to stemming.}
\label{tbl:topics}
\begin{tabular}{r@{=~}l}
Topics & Top words in topic\\\hline
01 & command engcntrl section spacecraft unit icd tabl point referenc indic \\
02 & softwar command test flight srobc srup memori script telemetri link \\
03 & file variabl line defin messag code macro initi use redund \\
04 & file includ section obc issu fsw code number matrix src \\
05 & mode safe control state error power attitud obc reset boot \\
06 & function eeprom send non uplink srup control load chang support \\
07 & valu function cmd return list ptr curr tss line code \\
08 & tabl command valu data tlm load rang line count type \\
09 & flight sequenc link capabl spacecraft softwar provid time srvml trace \\
10 & line messag locat column access symbol file referenc code bld \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption{Document Topic distribution found by LDA for PitsA dataset}
\label{tbl:features}
\begin{tabular}{r|r@{~~~}r@{~~~}r@{~~~}r@{~~~}r@{~~~}r@{~~~}r@{~~~}r@{~~~}r@{~~~}r|c}
Issue & \multicolumn{10}{c|}{10 Topics} & Severe? \\\hline
01 & .60 & .10 &.00& .15 & .00& .05 & .03 & .04 & .03 &.00& y \\
02 & .10 & .03 & .02 &.00& .03 & .02 & .15 & .65 &.00&.00& n \\
03 &.00& .20 & .05 & .05 &.00& .60 & .02 & .03 & .03 & .02 & n \\
04 & .03 & .01 & .01 & .10 & .15 &.00& .70 &.00&.00&.00& y \\
etc &
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\tbl{data_text} describes our
PITS data, which comes from six different NASA systems (which we label PitsA, PitsB,...etc).
For this study, all datasets were preprocessed using the usual text mining filters~\cite{feldman2006j}.
We implemented stop words removal using NLTK toolkit~\cite{bird2006nltk}
(to ignore very common short words such as ``and'' or ``the'').
Next,
Porter's stemming filter~\cite{Porter1980} was used to delete uninformative word endings
(e.g., after performing stemming, all the following words would be rewritten
to ``connect'': ``connection'', ``connections'',
``connective'',
``connected'',
``connecting'').
After that, {\IT*} selected other pre-processors using the space of options from \tbl{options}.
A standard learner in text mining is SVM (support vector machine).
SVMs seek a hyperplane that separates the data while maximizing the distance of the plane to examples\cite{Cortes95support-vectornetworks}.
A drawback with SVM is that its models may not be human comprehensible.
Finding insights among unstructured text
is difficult unless we can search, characterize, and classify the
textual data in a meaningful way. One of the common techniques for
finding related topics within unstructured text (an area called
topic modeling) is the Latent Dirichlet allocation (LDA)~\cite{blei2003latent}.
LDA clusters text into ``topics'' defined by the high-frequency words in that cluster.
For example, the topics found by LDA for one of our PITS data sets are shown in \tbl{topics}.
We study LDA in this article since it is a widely-used technique in recent prominent SE research articles.
For example, in the last decade, at least
39 articles using LDA have appeared at ICSE, FSE, TSE, OOPSLA, IST, JSS, ASE, MSR, ICPC, SANER, ICSME, ISSRE, and the Empirical SE journal~\cite{agrawal2018wrong}.
LDA is controlled by various parameters (see \tbl{options}).
At ICSE'13,
Panichella et al.~\cite{Panichella:2013} used a genetic algorithm to tune their LDA
text miners.
More recently, in an IST'18 journal article,
Agrawal et al.~\cite{agrawal2018wrong} saw that differential evolution can out-perform genetic algorithms
for tuning LDA.
A standard pre-processor for text mining is {\em vectorization}; i.e., replace the raw observations
that wordX appears in documentY with some more informative statistic.
For example, Agrawal et al. converted the PITS text data into the vectors
of \tbl{features}. The cells in that table shows how much
each issue report matches each topic (and the final column shows the issue severity of that report).
\tbl{options} lists the options for the LDA vectorization, plus three other vectorization methods.
The important thing about vectorization is that,
after that conversion, then a standard
machine learning algorithm can be applied to text miners
(e.g., see the learners of \tbl{options}).
\subsubsection{Evaluation of Text Miners}
In this article we assess how well our text miners perform at recognizing the ``severe'' issue reports
for PITS. Since this a
standard classification problem, it is appropriate to use the {\em d2h} metric of \tion{goals}.
That said, we must adjust some of the evaluation methods used in this
article's previous work on defect prediction.
We should not use {\em Popt20} for these text mining studies since that is a specialized metric that reports the effectiveness
of the source code reviews triggered by defect prediction.
Also, unlike the defect prediction data of \tbl{versions}, the PITS data is
not conveniently divided into versions. Hence, to generate separate train and test
data sets, we use a $x*y$ cross-validation study where, $x=5$ times, we randomize the order of the data
then divide into $y=5$ bins. Then, we test on that bin after training on all the others.
Since cross-validation can significantly alter performance between different train/test pairs, we will show mean results from 25 runs using 25 different seeds.
\subsubsection{Results}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
{\footnotesize {\em D2h}: {\em less} is {\em better}.
Mean results from 25 runs.
\vspace{1mm}
}
\includegraphics[width=3in]{pitsd2h.png}
\end{center}
\caption{{\bf RQ3} results. Mean text mining prediction results using {\IT{.2}} and $N=30$ (results seen in 25 repeats
of a cross-validation study).
In only one case (PitsB) is \IT*'s performance is worse than anything else
(where ``worse'' is defined as per \tion{sample}).
Same experimental set up as \fig{chen} except here,
we use Efron's 95\% confidence bootstrap procedure~\cite{efron93bootstrap} (to demonstrate
significant differences), then the A12 effect size test~\cite{Arcuri:2011} (to demonstrate
that the observed delta is bigger than a ``small effect'').
}\label{fig:text}
\end{figure}
\fig{text} shows our text mining results.
The treatments of \fig{text} divide into several groups.
The first Group1 does no hyperparameter optimization. This group includes LDA-FFT and LDA-SVM and uses
LDA to vectorize the data, then applies either the FFTree or the SVM classifier.
Here, we use LDA-SVM since that was
found useful in prior studies~\cite{Krishna:2016}. Also, we use FFT since this is analogous to the defect prediction
study discussed above.
The second Group2, tunes the pre-processor but not the learner. This group includes LDADE-FFT, LDADE-SVM
and LDA-GA-SVM. In this group, LDA is used for vectorization, which is tuned by either DE (as done by~\cite{agrawal2018wrong})
or
a genetic algorithm (as done by~\cite{Panichella:2013}). For GA, we used the same control
parameters as used by Panichella et al. in their text mining work~\cite{Panichella:2013}
The third Group3, which contains {\IT*} and RANDOM tunes both the pre-processor and learner.
RANDOM is included, just for completeness. As to {\IT*}, we use $N=30$ samples
and $\mathcal{E}=0.2$. In those results,
{\IT*} was free to apply any learner or pre-processing or vectorization procedure of \tbl{options}.
As seen in \fig{text}, in on one case
is {\IT*}'s performance worse than anything else
(where ``worse'' is defined as per \tion{sample}).
The LDA-FFT results from PitsF look a little better than {\IT*}, but
difference was deemed insignificant by our statistical tests.
And, just as with the \fig{smote} results, when {\IT*} fails, it is beaten by a treatment that uses FFtree (see the PitsB LDA-FFT results).
That is, in 100\% of these results, methods that explore a little around the results space do no worse than methods that try to extensively explore the space of tuning options (e.g., genetic algorithms and differential evolution).
In summary, our answer to {\bf RQ3} is that {\IT*} is not just a defect prediction method. Its success with text mining make it an interesting
candidate for further experimentation with other SE tasks.
\section{External Validity}
\label{sect:threats}
{\IT*} self-selects
the tunings used in the pre-processors and data miners. Hence, by its very nature, this
article avoids one threat to external validity
(i.e., that important control parameter settings are not explored).
This paper
reports results from two tasks (defect prediction and text mining)
to show that the same effect holds in both tasks; i.e.
algorithms can be remarkably effective
when they assume the output space seems to
divide into a very small number of regions.
Most software analytics papers report results from one task;
i.e. either defect prediction {\em or} text mining. In that sense, the external validity of this paper is greater than most analytics papers.
On the other hand, this paper {\em only} reports results
from two tasks. There
are many more kinds of SE tasks that should be explored
before it can be conclusively stated that {\IT*} is widely
applicable and useful.
Another threat to external validity is that
this article compares {\IT*} against
existing baselines for hyperparameter optimization in the SE analytics literature. We do not compare our new approach
against the kinds of optimizers we might find
in search-based SE literature~\cite{petke2018guest}.
There are two reasons for this.
Firstly, search-based SE methods are typically CPU intensive and so do not address our simplicity goal.
Secondly, the main point of this article is
to document a previous unobserved feature of the output
space of software analytics.
It is an open question whether or not
{\IT*} is the best way to explore output space
In order
to motivate the community to explore that space, some article
must demonstrate it's existence and offer baseline results that, using
the knowledge of output space, it is possible to do better than past work. Hence,
this article.
\section{Conclusion}
This article has discussed ways to reduce the CPU cost associated with
hyperparameter optimization for software analytics.
Tools like FFtrees or {\IT*} were shown to work as well, or better, than numerous
recent SE results.
As stated in the introduction,
we assert that other methods perform worse than {\IT*} since they do not appreciate the simplicity of
the output space. Hence, those other methods waste much CPU as they
struggle to cover billions of tuning options like \tbl{options} (most of which yield indistinguishably different results).
Generalizing from our results,
perhaps it is time for a new characterization of software analytics:
\begin{quote}
{\em
Software analytics is that branch of machine learning
that studies problems with large
$\mathcal{E}$ outputs. }
\end{quote}
This new characterization is interesting since it means that machine learning algorithm developed in the AI
community might not apply to SE.
We suspect that understanding SE is a fundamentally different problem to understanding
other problems that are more precisely controlled and restrained. Perhaps, it is time to design new
machine learning algorithms (like {\IT*}) that are better
suited to large $\mathcal{E}$ SE problems.
As shown in this article, such new algorithms can exploit the peculiarities of SE data to dramatically simplify software analytics.
We hope that this article inspires much future work on
a next generation of SE data miners. For example,
tools like {\IT*} need to be applied to more SE tasks to check the external validity of these results. Another useful extension to this work
would be to explore problems with three or more goals
(e.g., reduce false alarms while at the same time
improving precision and recall).
Also, there are many ways that {\IT*} might be improved. For example, right now we only deprecate tunings that lead to similar results. Another approach would be also depreciate
tunings that lead to similar {\em and worse} results (perhaps to rule out larger parts of the output space, sooner).
Further, for
pragmatic reasons it would be useful if the \tbl{options} list could be reduced to a smaller, faster to run, set of learners. That is, here we would select learners that run fast while generating the most variable kinds of models.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This work was partially funded by an NSF Grant \#1703487.
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtranS}
\subsubsection{How to Study Defect Prediction?}
cohen= 4 for fig8 d2h
This section shows the FFtree results that lead to
the design of \IT*. DODGE. After that,
\section{Accidental Simplification with FFTtrees}
\subsection{ Simplification is Possible?}
AI researchers have repeatedly concluded that a small number of {\em key} variables determine the behavior of the rest of the system. Keys have been discovered and rediscovered many times and given different names,
including feature subset selection~\cite{kohavi1997wrappers}, narrows~\cite{michalski2013machine}, master variables~\ctie{Crawford1994ExperimentalRO}, and back doors~\cite{Williams:2003}.
We mention this since the problem of mining data with keys reduces to just the mining the key variables.
For many years, we have been acc
For over a decade now, we have been documenting examples were solutions to SE analytics problems were surprisingly simple (but until {\IT*}, we had no explanation for that phenomenon nor a method to exploit that simpilicity).
For example, when optimizing requirements engineering, we have often found that most requirements are dependent on just a few {\em key} choices. We have exploited this effect
to simpigy reasoning about requirements engineering models. For example, fat NASA'sJey ropulsion aroty, we dted a decison procesdure impmeeted as a genatic algorithm. While the GA offered decision of 90 decisions, we found 30 keys which (once decided) controlled the rest.
\subsection{Exploiting $\mathcal{E}$ }
Many methods have been proposed to reduce the above uncertainties.
For example, in our research we have explored
feature selection to remove spurious outliers~\cite{menzies2007data}, application of
background knowledge to constrain model generation~\cite{fenton2012risk}, and optimizers to tune model parameters to reduce uncertainty~\cite{Agrawal18stab}.
Despite all that work, some degree of uncertainty in the results
from software analytics persists (for a detailed analysis on this point, see~\cite{menzies2012special}).
We conjecture that, for all reasons listed in the last section,
uncertainty is an inherent property of software quality prediction. If so, the question becomes, ``what to do with that uncertainty?''.
The starting point for this article was the following speculation:
\textbf{\em{ Instead of striving to make $\mathcal{E}=0$, use $\mathcal{E}>0$ as a method for simplifying software quality predictors}}. For example,
Deb's principle of $\mathcal{E}$-dominance~\cite{deb2005evaluating}
states that if there exists
some $\mathcal{E}$ value below
which is useless or impossible to distinguish results, then
it is superfluous to explore anything less than $\mathcal{E}$.
Note that $\mathcal{E}$ effectively clusters the space of possible results.
For example, consider the result space defined by recall $r$ and false alarms $f$.
Both these measures have the range \mbox{$0 \le r \le 1$} and
\mbox{$0 \le f \le 1$}.
Large values of $\mathcal{E}$ divide the results
into just a few regions. For example, when
\mbox{ $\mathcal{E}=0.2$}, then the results space of possible recalls and false alarms divides into the 5*5 grid of \fig{resultspace}. Most learners avoid the red regions (where recall is worse than false alarms) and the gray region (called the no-information region).
Hence,
when \mbox{$\mathcal{E}=0.2$}, learners produce results
that uusally fall into a small number of regions (just the ten
green squares of \fig{resultspace}).
Now consider the implications of large $\mathcal{E}$
for exploring hyperparameter optimization. Recall that such optimizers find a few useful options by exploring
a very large number of options. Given a results space like
\fig{resultspace}, many of those options will fall into the same regions. If we mark which options generate results that fall within $\mathcal{E}$ of other results,
then we strive to avoid those options in the future,
then theoretically we might be able to search across \fig{resultspace}, very quickly.
\subsection{{\IT*}}
A sketch of the {\IT*} algorithm was offered in the introduction.
This section offers other details about {\IT*}.
{\IT*} inputs a tree of options $o_1..o_m$ (like \tbl{options}) as well as some constraints describing what sets of options are illegal (for example, see the last line of that figure).
Some options contain a range (e.g. {\em Binarizer}'s threshold ranges from 0 to 100). Each such option gets 100 sub-trees that divide
its range into 100 sub-ranges.
{\IT*} then attaches a counter $c_i$ to each leaf and each node
in the tree. If ever a leaf counter is incremented or decremented by 1,
then all the counts in the branch leading to that leaf are incremeneted or decremented by the same amount.
The option tree in {\IT*} is processed by two sub-routines: {\em Generate} and {\em ReCount}.
\begin{itemize}
\item {\em Generate} is called prior to running a learner to generate some tuning options $T$. {\em Generate}
is a recursive descent down two trees: one for the learners and one for the data pre-processors. At each level, {\em Guess} will recurse into the subtree with highest counter value.
\item {\em ReCount} is called after running a learner (using options $T$) and its performance score is available. If that score is within $\mathcal{E}$ of a prior score,
then {\em ReCount} will minus one from all the options $o \in T$.
Else, it will add one.
\end{itemize}
XXXX note that next Guess will recountxxx
. For example, in \tbl{options}, The rest of this article explores this theoretical prediction using {\IT*}, an algorithm that implements the procedure
of the last paragraph.
\section{Methods}
\subsection{Problem Domains}
This article tests {\IT*} in the four domains listed in the introduction. These domains use defect prediction,
\subsection{{\IT*}: Exploiting Large $\mathcal{E}$}
We can exploit this effect as follows. Suppose we
\begin{figure*}
\begin{tabular}{|p{.48\linewidth}|p{.48\linewidth}|}\hline
{\bf Software Defect Prediction}
\begin{itemize}
\item
Software developers are smart, but sometimes make mistakes. Hence, it is essential to test software before the deployment ~\cite{orso2014software,barr2015oracle,yoo2012regression, myers2011art}.
\item
Software quality assurance budgets are finite while assessment effectiveness increases exponentially with assessment effort~\cite{fu2016tuning}. Therefore, standard practice is to apply the best available methods on code sections that seem most critical and bug-prone.
\item
Software bugs are not evenly distributed across the project~\cite{hamill2009common,koru2009investigation, ostrand2004bugs,misirli2011ai}. Hence,
a useful way to perform software testing is to allocate most assessment budgets to
the more defect-prone parts in software projects.
\item
Software defect predictors are never 100\% correct. But
they can be used to suggest where to focus more expensive methods.
\item
Software defect predictors have been proven useful in many industrial settings.
When Misirli et al.~\cite{misirli2011ai} built a defect prediction model for a telecommunications company, those models
could predict 87 percent of code defects.
Those models also decreased inspection efforts by 72 percent, and hence reduce post-release defects by 44 percent. Also, when Kim et al.~\cite{kim2015remi} applied defect prediction model, REMI, to API
development process at Samsung Electronics, they found they could
predicted the bug-prone APIs with reasonable accuracy~(0.68 F1 score)
and reduced the resources required for executing test cases.
\item
Software defect predictors not only save labor compared with traditional manual methods, but they are also competitive with certain automatic methods.
A recent study at ICSE'14, Rahman et al. ~\cite{rahman2014comparing} compared (a) static code analysis tools FindBugs, Jlint, and PMD and (b) static code defect predictors (which they called ``statistical defect prediction'') built using logistic regression.
They found no significant differences in the cost-effectiveness of these approaches.
\item
Given this equivalence, it is significant to
note that static code defect prediction can be quickly adapted to new languages by building lightweight parsers that find in-
formation like Table ~\ref{tbl:ck}. The same is not true for static code analyzers - these need extensive modification before they can be used in new languages.
\end{itemize}
&
{\bf Software bug report text mining }
\end{tabular}
\end{figure*}
|
\section{Introduction}
We present the general ideas on SuperSymmetric Quantum Mechanics (SUSY-QM) using different representations for the operators in question, which are defined by the corresponding bosonic Hamiltonian as part of SUSY Hamiltonian and its supercharges, $\rm \hat Q^-$ and $\rm \bar Q^+$, which are defined as matrix or differential operators.
We show that, although most of the SUSY partners of one-dimensional Schr\"odinger problems have already been
found,\cite{cooper} there are still some unveiled aspects of the factorization procedure which may lead to richer insights of the problem involved.
In particular, we refer to the factorization of the Hamiltonian in terms of two non-mutually-adjoint operators.\cite{ranferi,rafael}
In this work we try three main schemes, the first one consists on finding the
eigenvalue Schrodinger equation in one dimension
using the matrix representation via the appropriate factorization
with ladder like operators, and finding the one parameter isospectral equation for
this one. In this scheme the wave
function is written as a supermultiplet. Continuining with the
Schrodinger model, we extend SUSY to include two parameters
factorizations, which include the SUSY factorization as particular
case. As examples, we include the case of the harmonic oscillator and
the P\"oschl-Teller potentials. Also, we include the steps for the
two-dimensional case and apply it to particular cases. The
second scheme uses the differential representation in
Grassmann numbers, where the wave function can be written as an
n-dimensional vector or as an expansion in Grassmann variables
multiplied by bosonic functions. We apply the scheme in two bosonic
variables a particular cosmological model and compare the corresponding
solutions found.
The third scheme trias on extensions to the SUSY factorization, and to the case of
quasi-exactly solvable potentials; we present a particular case
which does not form part of the class of potentials found using Lie
algebras.
To establish the different approaches presented here, we will briefly describe the different main formalisms applied to supersymmetric quantum mechanics, techniques that are now widely used
in a rich spectrum of physical problems, cover such diverse fields as particle physics, quantum field theory, quantum gravity, quantum cosmology and statistical mechanics, to mention some of them:
\begin{itemize}
\item{} In one dimension, SUSY-QM may be considered an equivalent formulation of the Darboux transformation method, which is well known in mathematics from the original paper of Darboux \cite{darboux}, the book by Ince \cite{Ince}, and the book by Matweev and Salle \cite{MS}, where the method is widely used in the context of the soliton theory. An essential ingredient of the method, is the particular choice of a transformation operator in the form of a differential operator which intertwines two Hamiltonian and relates their eigenfunctions. When this approach is applied to quantum theory, it allows to generate a huge family of exactly solvable local potential starting with a given exactly solvable local potential \cite{CKS}. This technique is also known in the literature as isospectral formalism, \cite{Mielnik,Nieto,Fernandez,CKS}.
\item{} Those defined by means of the use of supersymmetry as a square root \cite{BG,OSB,lidsey,sm}, in which the Grassmann variables are auxiliary variables and are not identified as the supersymmetric partners of the bosonic variables. In this formalism, a differential representation is used for the Grassmann variables. Also the supercharges for the n-dimensional case read as
\begin{equation}
\rm \hat Q^- = \psi^\mu \left[-\hbar \partial_{q^\mu} + \frac{\partial
S}{\partial q^\mu} \right], \qquad \rm \hat Q^+ = \bar \psi^\nu
\left[-\hbar \partial_{q^\nu} - \frac{\partial S}{\partial q^\nu}
\right], \label{supercharge2}
\end{equation}
where $\rm S$ is known as the super-potential function which are related to the physical potential under consideration, when the hamiltonian density is written as the Hamilton-Jacobi equation,
and the algebra for the variables $\psi^\mu$ and $\bar \psi^\nu$ is,
\begin{equation}\rm
\left\{ \psi^\mu ,\bar \psi^\nu \right \} = \eta^{\mu\nu}, \qquad
\left\{ \psi^\mu, \psi^\nu \right \} = 0, \qquad \left\{ \bar
\psi^\mu,\bar \psi^\nu \right \} =0. \label{oper-fer}
\end{equation}
There are two forms where the equations in 1-D are satisfied: in the literature we find either the matrix representation or the differential operator scheme. However for more than one dimensions, there exist many applications to cosmological models, where the differential representation for the Grassmann variables is widely applied \cite{sm,Tkach,s,so,socorro}. There are few works in more dimensions in the first scheme \cite{filho}, we present in this work the main ideas to built the 2D case, where the supercharges operators become $\rm 4 \times 4$ matrices.
\end{itemize}
\section{Factorization method in 1-Dimension: matrix approach}
We begin by introducing the main ideas for the 1-Dimensional quantum harmonic oscillator . The corresponding hamiltonian is written in operator form as
\begin{equation}
\rm \hat H_B=\frac{1}{2}\hat p^2+\frac{1}{2}\omega_B^2 \hat q^2\label{hamiltonbosonico}
\end{equation}
where $\rm \hat q$ is the generalized coordinate, and $\rm \hat p$ is the associated momentum, the canonical commutation relation between this quantities being $\rm [\hat q,\hat p]=i$ . We introduce two new operators, known as the creation and annihilation operators $\rm \hat a^+ , \hat a^-$ respectively, defined as
\begin{equation}
\hat a^-= \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega_B}}(\hat p-i\omega_B \hat q), \qquad
\hat a^+=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega_B}}(\hat p+i\omega_B \hat q), \label{creationanihilationbos}
\end{equation}
This hamiltonian can be written in terms of the anti-commutation relation between these operators as
\begin{equation}
\hat H_B=\frac{\omega_B}{2}\{\hat a^+,\hat a^-\}, \label{Hambos}
\end{equation}
the symmetric nature of $\rm \hat H_B$ under the interchange of $ \hat a^-$ and $ \hat a^+$ suggests that these operators satisfy Bose-Einstein statistics, and it is therefore called bosonic.
Now, we build the operators $ \hat b^-$ and $ \hat b^+$ that obey similar rules to operators $ \hat a^-, \hat a^+$ changing $\rm [\, ,\, ] \leftrightarrows \{\, , \, \}$, that is
\begin{equation}
\{\hat b^-,\hat b^+\}=1;\hspace{1 cm} \{\hat b^-,\hat b^-\}=\{\hat b^+,\hat b^+\}=0, \label{fer-ope}
\end{equation}
and in analogy to (\ref{Hambos}), we define the corresponding new hamiltonian as
\begin{equation}
\rm \hat H_F=\frac{\omega_F}{2}[\hat b^+, \hat b^-], \label{hamfer}
\end{equation}
The antisymmetric nature of $\rm \hat H_F$ under the interchange of $ \hat b^-$ and $ \hat b^+$ suggests that these operators satisfy the Fermi-Dirac statistics, and it is called fermionic.
These operators $ \hat b^-$ and $ \hat b^+$ admit a matrix representations in terms of Pauli matrices, that satisfy all rules defined above, that is
\begin{equation}
\hat b^- = \sigma_- , \qquad \hat b^+ = \sigma_+, \qquad \sigma_\pm=\frac{1}{2}(\sigma_1\pm i\sigma_2) \label{creationanihilationfer}
\end{equation}
with $\rm [\sigma_+,\sigma_-]=\sigma_3$, $
\sigma_-=
\begin{pmatrix}
0&0\\
1&0
\end{pmatrix},
\quad
\sigma_+=
\begin{pmatrix}
0&1\\
0&0
\end{pmatrix}, \quad \sigma_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1\\1&0 \end{pmatrix}, \quad \sigma_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 0&-i\\i&0 \end{pmatrix},
\quad \sigma_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1&0\\0&-1 \end{pmatrix}. $
Now, consider both hamiltonians as a composite system, that is, we consider the superposition of two oscillators, one being bosonic and one fermionic, with energy $\rm E_T=E_B+ E_F$
\begin{equation}
\rm E_T=\omega_B(n_B+\frac{1}{2})+\omega_F(n_F-\frac{1}{2})=\omega_B n_B + \omega_F n_F +\frac{1}{2}(\omega_B-\omega_F). \label{enertotiso}
\end{equation}
When we demand that both frequencies are the same, $\omega_B=\omega_F=\omega$, we introduce a new symmetry, called supersymmetry (SUSY),
we can see that the simultaneous creation of a quantum fermion $(n_F\rightarrow n_F+1)$, causes the destruction of quantum boson
$(n_B\rightarrow n_B-1)$ and viceversa, in the sense that the total energy is unaltered. The ground energy state is exact and no degenerate. The degeneration appears from n=1, where it is double degenerate.
In this way, we have the super-hamiltonian $\rm \hat H_{susy}$, written as
\begin{equation}
\hat H_{susy}=\frac{\omega}{2} \{\hat a^+, \hat a^- \}+ \frac{\omega}{2}[\hat b^+, \hat b^-]=\frac{\omega}{2} \{\hat a^+, \hat a^- \}I+\frac{\omega}{2}\sigma_3=\omega \left(
\begin{tabular}{ll}
$ \hat a^- \hat a^+$ & 0\\ 0 & $\hat a^+ \hat a^-$ \end{tabular} \right)=\begin{pmatrix} \hat H_-&0\\0& \hat H_+ \end{pmatrix}, \label{superhammatrix}
\end{equation}
where I is a $\rm 2\times 2$ unit matrix, and where the two components of $\rm \hat H_{susy}$ in (\ref{superhammatrix}) can be written independently as
\begin{eqnarray}
\hat H_+=\frac{1}{2}\hat p^2+\frac{1}{2}(\omega^2q^2- \omega)\equiv \omega \hat a^+ \hat a^- \label{ham+}\\
\hat H_-=\frac{1}{2} \hat p^2+\frac{1}{2}(\omega^2q^2+\omega)\equiv \omega \hat a^- \hat a^+\label{ham-}.
\end{eqnarray}
From equations (\ref{ham+}) and (\ref{ham-}), we can see that $\rm \hat H_+$ and $\rm \hat H_-$ are the same representation of one hamiltonian with a constant shifting $\omega$ in the energy spectrum.
The question is, what are the generators for this SUSY hamiltonian? The answer is, considering that the degeneration is the result of the simultaneous destruction (creation) of quantum boson and the creation (destruction) of quantum fermion, that the corresponding generators for this symmetry must be written as
$ \hat a^- \hat b^+$ (or $\hat a^+ \hat b^-$). therefore we introduce the following generators, called supercharges $\rm \hat Q^-$ and
$\rm \hat Q^+$ defined as
\begin{equation}
\hat Q^-=\sqrt{2\omega} \hat a^- \hat b^+=\sqrt{2\omega}\begin{pmatrix} 0 & \hat a^-\\0&0 \end{pmatrix} , \qquad \hat Q^+=\sqrt{2\omega }\hat a^+ \hat b^-=\sqrt{2\omega}\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0\\\hat a^+&0 \end{pmatrix} , \label{superchar}
\end{equation}
implying that
\begin{equation}
\rm \hat H_{susy}=\frac{1}{2}\{\hat Q^+,\hat Q^-\} \label{superham}
\end{equation}
and satisfying the following relations
\begin{equation}
\rm \{\hat Q^-, \hat Q^-\}=\{\hat Q^+, \hat Q^+\}=0;\hspace{0.5 cm} [\hat Q^-,\hat H_{susy}]=[\hat Q^+, \hat H_{susy}]=0. \label{superchargconmut}
\end{equation}
We can generalize this procedure for a certain function W(q), and
at this point we can define two new operators $\rm \hat A^-$ and $\rm \hat A^+$ with a property similar to (\ref{creationanihilationbos}),
\begin{equation}
\rm \hat A^-=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega}}(\hat p-i\omega W(q)), \qquad
\hat A^+=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega}}(\hat p+ i \omega W(q)), \label{new}
\end{equation}
In order to obtain the general solutions, we can use an arbitrary potential in equation (\ref{hamiltonbosonico}), that is
\begin{equation}
\rm \hat H_B=\frac{1}{2}\hat p^2+ V(q),\label{arbitrary-potential0}
\end{equation}
the hamiltonians $\rm \hat H^+$ and $\rm \hat H^-$ determine two new potentials,
\begin{eqnarray}
\rm \hat H_+=\frac{1}{2}\hat p^2+V_+=\frac{1}{2}\hat p^2+\frac{1}{2}\left(W^2- \frac{dW}{dq}\right) \label{ham+}\\
\rm \hat H_-=\frac{1}{2}\hat p^2 + V_-=\frac{1}{2} \hat p^2+\frac{1}{2}\left(W^2+ \frac{dW}{dq}\right),\label{ham-}
\end{eqnarray}
where the potential term V$_+$(q) is related to the superpotential function W(q) via the Ricatti equation
\begin{equation}
\rm V_+=\frac{1}{2}\left(W^2- \frac{dW}{dq}\right), \label{ricatti}
\end{equation}
(modulo constant $\epsilon$, which is related to some energy eigenvalue)
and $\rm V_-=\frac{1}{2}\left(W^2+ \frac{dW}{dq}\right)=V_+ + \frac{dW}{dq}$,
with the same spectrum, except for the ground state, which is related to the energy potential $\rm V_+$.
In a general way, let us now find the general form of the function W. The quantum equation (\ref{arbitrary-potential0}) applied to stationary wave function $\rm u_i$ becomes
\begin{equation}
\rm - \frac{1}{2} \frac{d^2 u_i}{dq^2} + V(q)u_i=E_i u_i, \label{solution}
\end{equation}
where $\rm E_i$ are the energy eigenvalues. Considering the transformation $\rm W(q)=-\frac{d ln[u_i(q)]}{dq}$ and introducing it into (\ref{ham+}), we have that
$$\rm V(q)-E_i=\frac{1}{2}\left(W^2-\frac{dW}{dq}\right)=\left( \frac{1}{2u_i} \frac{du_i}{dq}\right)^2- \frac{\left( \frac{du_i}{dq}\right)^2-u_i \frac{d^2 u_i}{dq^2}}{2u_i^2}= \frac{1}{2u_i}\frac{d^2 u_i}{dq^2}$$
then, this equation is the same as the original one, eq.(\ref{solution}), that is, W is related to a initial solution of the bosonic hamiltonian.
What happens to the iso-potential $\rm V_-(q)=\frac{1}{2}\left(W^2+\frac{dW}{dq}\right)$? Considering that
$$\rm 2V_-=W^2+\frac{dW}{dq}\equiv \hat W^2+\frac{d \hat W}{dq}=2 \hat V_-,$$
the question is, what is $\rm \hat W$ if we know the function W? Finding it we can build a family of potentials $\rm \hat V_-$ depending on a free parameter $\lambda$, the supersymmetric parameter that, to some extent, plays the role of internal time. Following the procedure $\rm \hat W= W+\frac{1}{y(q)}$, where the function y(q) satisfy the linear differential equation $\rm \frac{dy}{dq}-2 Wy=1$, the solution implies
\begin{equation}
\rm y(q)=\frac{\lambda + \int u_i^2 dq}{u_i^2}, \qquad \to \qquad \hat W=W+\frac{u_i^2}{\lambda + \int u_i^2 dq}. \label{y-b}
\end{equation}
The family of potentials $\rm \hat V_+$ can be built now as
\begin{equation}
\rm \hat V_+-E_i=\frac{1}{2}\left(\hat W^2-\frac{d \hat W}{dq}\right)= V_- + \frac{d \hat W}{dq} \ .
\label{family-pot}
\end{equation}
Finally
\begin{equation}
\rm \hat u=g(\lambda)\frac{u_i}{\lambda+ \int u_i^2 dq}
\end{equation} is the isospectral solution of the Schr\"odinger like equation for the new family potential (\ref{family-pot}), with the condition $\rm g(\lambda)=\sqrt{\lambda (\lambda +1)}$, which in the limit
$$\rm \lambda \to \pm \infty, \qquad g(\lambda)=\lambda, \qquad \hat u_i\to u_i.$$
This $\lambda$ parameter is included not for factorization reasons; in particular, in quantum cosmology the wave functions are still nonnormalizable, and $\lambda$ is used as a decoherence parameter embodying a sort of quantum cosmological dissipation (or damping) distance.
\subsection{Two dimensional case.}
We use Witten's idea \cite{witten}, to find the supersymmetric
supercharges operators $\rm Q^-$ and $\rm Q^+$ that generate the
superHamiltonian $\rm H_{susy}$. Using equations (\ref{superchar}), (\ref{superham}) and (\ref{superchargconmut}), we can generalize the one-dimensional factorization scheme.
We define the two dimensional Hamiltonian as
\begin{equation}
\rm \hat H_B(x,y)=\frac{1}{2}\hat p_x^2+ \frac{1}{2}\hat p_y^2+ V(x)+V(y),\label{arbitrary-potential}
\end{equation}
where the Schr\"odinger like equation can be
obtained as the bosonic sector of this super-Hamiltonian in the
superspace, i.e, when all fermionic fields are set equal to zero
(classical limit).
In two dimensions the supercharges are defined by the tensorial products
\begin{equation}
\rm Q^-=\sqrt{2} d|^-\otimes \sigma_+, \qquad
Q^+ = \sqrt{2}d|^+\otimes \sigma_-\label{supercargas}
\end{equation}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
d|^-=
\begin{pmatrix}
a^-&0\\
0&b^-
\end{pmatrix},
\qquad
d|^+=
\begin{pmatrix}
a^+&0\\
0&b^+
\end{pmatrix},
\label{realization}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\rm \sigma_\pm$ are the same as in (\ref{creationanihilationfer}).
From equations (\ref{supercargas}) we have that the supercharges are $\rm 4 \times 4$ matrices
\begin{equation}\rm
\hat Q^+=\sqrt{2}
\begin{bmatrix}
0&0&0&0\\
0&0&0&0\\
a^+&0&0&0\\
0&b^+&0&0
\end{bmatrix}
\qquad
\hat Q^-=\sqrt{2}
\begin{bmatrix}
0&0&a^-&0\\
0&0&0&b^-\\
0&0&0&0\\
0&0&0&0
\end{bmatrix}
\end{equation}
where the super-Hamiltonian, (\ref{superham}), can be written as
\begin{equation}
\rm H_{susy}=
\begin{pmatrix}
a^-a^+&0&0&0\\
0&b^-b^+&0&0\\
0&0&a^+a^-&0\\
0&0&0&b^+b^-
\end{pmatrix}=\begin{pmatrix}
H^{1}_-(x)&0&0&0\\
0&H^{1}_-(y)&0&0\\
0&0&H^{2}_+(x)&0\\
0&0&0&H^{2}_+(y)
\end{pmatrix},
\end{equation}
where
\begin{eqnarray}
a^-=\rm \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\frac{d}{dx}+W(x)\right), &\qquad& a^+=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(-\frac{d}{dx}+W(x)\right)\\
b^-=\rm \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(\frac{d}{dx}+Z(y)\right), &\qquad& b^+=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\left(-\frac{d}{dx}+Z(y)\right)
\end{eqnarray}
and $\rm V(x,y)=W(x)+Z(y)$.\\
The Ricatti equation (\ref{ricatti}) is written in 2D as
\begin{equation}
\rm V_+(x,y)=V_{+}1(x)+V_{+2}(y)=\frac{1}{2}\left(W^2-\frac{dW}{dx}\right) + \frac{1}{2}\left( Z^2-\frac{dZ}{dy}\right),
\end{equation}
and, using separation variables, we get
\begin{eqnarray}\rm
V_1(x)-\frac{1}{2}\left(W^2(x)-\frac{dW}{dx}\right)=C_0\\
\rm V_2(y)-\frac{1}{2}\left(Z^2(y)-\frac{dZ}{dy}\right)=-C_0
\end{eqnarray}
In general, we find that each potential $\rm V_{+i}$ satisfy
\begin{equation}\rm
\frac{1}{2}\frac{d^2}{dx^2}u_i(x)+V_{+i}u_i(x)=E_i u_i(x), \qquad i=1,2,
\end{equation}
and we can find the iso-potential as $\rm W=-\frac{1}{u_1}\frac{du_1}{dx}$, when $\rm u_1$ is known.
Following the same steps as in the 1D case, we find that the solutions (\ref{y-b}) are the same in this case. So, the general solution for $\rm \hat W$ is $\rm \hat W=W+\frac{1}{y(x)}$, with $\rm y = u_1^{-2}(x)\left[\lambda_1+\int{u_1^2(x)dx}\right]$.
The general solution for the superpotential $\hat W(x)$ is
\begin{equation}
\rm \hat W=-\frac{1}{u_1}\frac{du_1}{dx}+\frac{u_1^2}{\lambda_1+\int{u_1^2\, dx}}
=W_p+\frac{d}{dx}\left[Ln(\lambda_1+I_1)\right]
\end{equation}
where $\rm W_p=-\frac{1}{u_1}\frac{du_1}{dx}$ and $I_1=\int{u_1^2\,dx}$.\\
In the same manner, we have that
\begin{equation}
\rm \hat Z=-\frac{1}{u_2}\frac{du_2}{dy}+\frac{u_2^2}{\lambda_2+\int{u_2^2 \,dy}}
=Z_p+\frac{d}{dy}\left[Ln(\lambda_2+I_2)\right]
\end{equation}
with $\rm Z_p=-\frac{1}{u_2}\frac{su_2}{dy}$ and $\rm I_2=\int{u_2^2 \,dy}$.
On the other hand, using the Ricatti equation, we can build a generalization for the isopotential, using the new potential $\rm \hat W$, as
\begin{equation}\rm
\hat V_{+1}(x,\lambda_1)=\frac{1}{2}\left(\hat{W}^2-\hat{W}'\right)
=V_+(x)-\frac{2u_1 \frac{du_1}{dx}}{\lambda_1+I_1}+\frac{u_1^4}{(\lambda_1+I_1)^2} \label{iso_x}
\end{equation}
For the other coordinate, we have
\begin{equation}
\hat V_{+2}(y,\lambda_2)=\frac{1}{2}\left(\hat{Z}^2-\frac{d\hat Z}{dy} \right)
=V_+(y)-\frac{2u_2 \frac{du_2}{dy} }{\lambda_2+I_2}+\frac{u_2^4}{(\lambda_2+I_2)^2}. \label{iso_y}
\end{equation}
The general solutions for $\rm \hat u_i$ depends on the initial solutions to the original Schr\"odinger equations in the variables (x,y), that is, $\rm u_1=u_1(x)$, $\rm u_2=u_2(y)$, being
\begin{equation}
\hat u_1(x,\lambda_1)=C_1(\lambda_1)\frac{ u_1}{\lambda_1+I_1}, \qquad \hat u_2(y,\lambda_2)=C_2(\lambda_2)\frac{ u_2}{\lambda_2+I_2}.
\label{ui-general}
\end{equation}
where the {\it variables $C_i(\lambda_i)$} have the same properties that $\rm g(\lambda)$ obtained in the 1D case.
\subsection{Application to cosmological Taub model}
The Wheeler-DeWitt equation for the cosmological Taub model is given by
\begin{equation}
\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial\alpha^2}-\frac{\partial^2\Psi}{\partial\beta^2}+e^{4\alpha}V(\beta)\Psi=0 \label{taub}
\end{equation}
where $\rm V(\beta)=\frac{1}{3}\left(e^{-8\beta}-4e^{-2\beta}\right)$. This equations can be separated using $\rm x_1=4\alpha-8\beta$ and $\rm x_2=4\alpha-2\beta$, rendering
\begin{equation}
\rm -\frac{\partial^2f_1(x_1)}{\partial x_1^2}+\frac{1}{144}e^{x_1}f_1(x_1)= \frac{\omega^2}{4}f_1(x_1), \qquad
-\frac{\partial^2f_2(x_2)}{\partial x_2^2}+\frac{1}{9}e^{x_2}f_2(x_2)= \omega^2f_2(x_2),
\end{equation}
where the parameter $\omega$ is the separation constant.
These equations possess the solutions
\begin{equation}
\rm f_1 = K_{i\omega}\left(\frac{1}{6}e^{\frac{x_1}{2}}\right) \label{f1},
\qquad f_2= L_{2i\omega}\left(\frac{2}{3}e^{\frac{x_2}{2}}\right)+K_{2i\omega}\left(\frac{2}{3}e^{\frac{x_2}{2}}\right)
\end{equation}
where K (or I) is the modified Bessel function of imaginary order, and
the functions L is define as
$$L_{2i\omega}=\frac{\pi i}{2\sinh(2\omega\pi)}\left(I_{2i\omega}+I_{-2i\omega}\right) \ .$$
Using equations (\ref{iso_x}) and (\ref{iso_y}) we obtain the isopotential for this model
\begin{equation}
\rm \hat V(x_1)=V_+(x_1)-\frac{2K_{i\omega}K_{i\omega}'}{\lambda_1+I_1}+\frac{K_{i\omega}^4}{\left(\lambda_1+I_1\right)^2}, \qquad
\hat V(x_2)=V_+(x_2)-\frac{2\left(L_{2i\omega}+K_{2i\omega}\right)\left(L_{2i\omega}+K_{2i\omega}\right)'}{\lambda_2+I_2}
+\frac{\left(L_{2i\omega}+K_{2i\omega}\right)^4}{\left(\lambda_2-I_2\right)^2}
\end{equation}
Using (\ref{ui-general}) we can obtain general solutions for the functions $\rm f_1$ and $\rm f_2$ in the following way
\begin{equation}
\hat f_1=\frac{C_1K_{i\omega}\left(\frac{1}{6}e^{\frac{x_1}{2}}\right)}{\lambda_1+I_1}, \qquad
\hat f_2=\frac{C_2\left[L_{2i\omega}\left(\frac{2}{3}e^{\frac{x_2}{2}}\right)
+K_{2i\omega}\left(\frac{2}{3}e^{\frac{x_2}{2}}\right)\right]}{\lambda_2+I_2}
\end{equation}
\section{ Differential approach: Grassmann variables}
The supersymmetric scheme has the particularity of being very restrictive, because there are many constraint equations applied to the wave function. So, in this work and in others, we
found that there exist a tendency for supersymmetric vacua to remain close to their semiclassical limits, because the exact solutions found are also the lowest-order WKB like approximations, and do not correspond to the full quantum solutions found previously for particular
models.\cite{sm,Tkach,s,so,socorro}
Mantaining the structure of the equations (\ref{superchar}), (\ref{superham}), (\ref{superchargconmut}) and (\ref{new}), taking the differential representation for the fermionic operator $\hat b \leftrightarrow \psi^\mu$ for convenience in the calculations, and changing the function $\rm W \to \frac{\partial S}{\partial q^\mu}$, the supercharges for the n-dimensional case read as
\begin{equation}
\rm \hat Q^- = \psi^\mu \left[P_\mu + i\frac{\partial
S}{\partial q^\mu} \right], \qquad \rm \hat Q^+ = \bar \psi^\nu
\left[P_\nu - i\frac{\partial S}{\partial q^\nu}
\right], \label{supercharge2}
\end{equation}
where $\rm S$ is known as the super-potential functions which are related to the physical potential under consideration, when the hamiltonian density is written as the Hamilton-Jacobi equation,
and the following algebra for the variables $\psi^\mu$ and $\bar \psi^\nu$, (similar to equation (\ref{fer-ope}))
\begin{equation}\rm
\left\{ \psi^\mu ,\bar \psi^\nu \right \} = \eta^{\mu\nu}, \qquad
\left\{ \psi^\mu, \psi^\nu \right \} = 0, \qquad \left\{ \bar
\psi^\mu,\bar \psi^\nu \right \} =0. \label{oper-fer}
\end{equation}
these rules are satisfied when we use a differential representation for these $\psi^\mu , \bar \psi^\nu$ variables in terms of the Grassmann numbers, as
\begin{equation}
\rm \psi^\mu=\eta^{\mu\nu} \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta^\nu}, \qquad\qquad \bar \psi^\nu=\theta^\nu,
\end{equation}
where $\eta^{\mu\nu}$ is a diagonal constant matrix, its dimensions depending on the independent bosonic variables that appear in the bosonic hamiltonian. Now the superhamiltonian is written as
\begin{equation}
H_S=\frac{1}{2}\{\hat Q^+,\hat Q^-\}={\cal H}_0 + \frac{\hbar}{2}\frac{\partial^2 S}{\partial q^\mu \partial q^\nu} \left[ \bar \psi^\mu, \psi^\nu \right], \label{ss}
\end{equation}
where $\rm {\cal H}_0 =\Box + U(q^\mu)$ is the quantum version of the classical bosonic hamiltonian, $\Box$ is the d'Alambertian in three dimension when we have three bosonic independent coordinates, and $\rm U(q^\mu)$ is the potential energy in consideration.
The superspace for three dimensional model becomes $(q_1,q_2,q_3,\theta^0, \theta^1, \theta^2)$, where the variables $\theta^i$ are the coordinate in the fermionic space, as the Grassmann numbers, which have the property of $\theta^i \theta^j=-\theta^j \theta^i$, and the wavefunction has the representation
\begin{eqnarray}
\rm \Psi&=& \rm {\cal A}_+ + {\cal B}_0 \theta^0, \qquad 1 \,dimension \label{1d}\\
\rm \Psi&=& \rm {\cal A}_+ + {\cal B}_0 \theta^0 + {\cal B}_1 \theta^1 + {\cal A}_- \theta^0 \theta^1, \qquad 2\, dimensions \label{2d}\\
\rm \Psi&=& \rm {\cal A}_+ + {\cal B}_\nu \theta^\nu +\frac{1}{2} \epsilon_{\mu \nu \lambda} {\cal C}^\lambda \theta^\mu \theta^\nu + {\cal A}_- \theta^0 \theta^1 \theta^2, \qquad 3\, dimensions \label{3d}
\end{eqnarray}
where the indices $\rm \mu, \nu, \lambda$ values are 0,1 and 2, and $\rm {\cal A}_\pm, {\cal B}_\nu$ and $\rm {\cal C}^\lambda$
are bosonic functions which depend on the bosonic coordinates $\rm q^\mu$ and not on the Grassmann numbers. Here, the wavefunction representation structure is set in terms of $2^n$ components, for $n$ independent bosonic coordinates, with half of the terms coming from the bosonic (fermionic) contribution into the wavefunction.
It is well known that the physical states are determined by the applications of the supercharges $\hat Q^-$ and $\hat Q^+$ on the wavefunctions, that is
\begin{equation}
\rm \hat Q^- \Psi=0, \qquad \hat Q^+ \Psi=0, \label{states}
\end{equation}
where we use the usual representation for the momentum $\rm P_\mu=-i\hbar \frac{\partial}{\partial q^\mu}$.
Considering the 2D case, the last second equation gives
\begin{eqnarray}
\theta^0 &:& \left [ \frac{\partial A_+}{\partial q^0}-A_+\frac{\partial S}{\partial q^0}\right] =0,\label{tetabar0}\\
\theta^1 &:& \left [ \frac{\partial A_+}{\partial q^1}-A_+\frac{\partial S}{\partial q^1}\right] =0,\label{tetabar1} \\
\theta^0\theta^1 &:& \left [ \frac{\partial B_1}{\partial q^0}-B_1\frac{\partial S}{\partial q^0}\right]-
\left [ \frac{\partial B_0}{\partial q^1}-B_0\frac{\partial S}{\partial q^1}\right] =0,\label{tetabar01}
\end{eqnarray}
from (\ref{tetabar0}) and (\ref{tetabar1}) we obtain the relation
$\frac{\partial A_+}{\partial q^\mu}-A_+\frac{\partial S}{\partial q^\mu}=0$ with the solution
$\rm A_+=a_+e^S.$
On the other hand, the first equation in (\ref{states}) gives
\begin{eqnarray}
\theta^0 &:& \left [ \frac{\partial A_-}{\partial q^1}+A_-\frac{\partial S}{\partial q^1}\right] =0,\label{teta0}\\
\theta^1 &:& \left [ \frac{\partial A_-}{\partial q^0}+A_-\frac{\partial S}{\partial q^0}\right] =0,\label{teta1}\\
free\, term &:& -\left [ \frac{\partial B_0}{\partial q^0}+B_0\frac{\partial S}{\partial q^0}\right]+
\left [ \frac{\partial B_1}{\partial q^1}+B_1\frac{\partial S}{\partial q^1}\right] =0,\label{tetalibre}
\end{eqnarray}
the free term equation is written as $\rm \eta^{\mu\nu}(\partial_\mu B_\nu+B_\nu\partial_\mu S)=0$, and
taking the ansatz $B_\mu=e^{-S}\partial_\nu f_+(q^\mu),$
the equation (\ref{tetabar01}) is fulfilled, so we obtain for the free term,
\begin{equation}
\rm \square f_+ + 2\eta^{\mu\nu} \nabla_\mu S \nabla_\nu f_+=0, \label{master+}
\end{equation}
with the solution to $f_+=h(q^1-q^2)$, with h an arbitrary function depending of its argument. However, this function f must depend on the potential under consideration.
Also, equations (\ref{teta0}) and (\ref{teta1}) are written as
\begin{equation}
\rm \frac{\partial A_-}{\partial q^\mu}+ A_- \frac{\partial S}{\partial q^\mu}=0, \qquad
\frac{1}{A_-} \frac{\partial A_-}{\partial q^\mu}=- \frac{\partial S}{\partial q^\mu} \qquad \rightarrow
\qquad \frac{\partial Ln A_-}{\partial q^\mu }=-\frac{\partial S}{\partial q^\mu}
\end{equation}
whose solution is $\rm A_-=a_- e^{-S}$.In this way, all functions entering the wavefunction are
$$\rm A_\pm =a_\pm e^{\pm S}, \qquad
B_0 = e^{-S}\partial_0 (f_+), \qquad
B_1 = e^{-S}\partial_1 (f_+).$$
\subsection{The unnormalized probability density}
To obtain the wavefunction probability density $\rm |\Psi|^2$ in this supersymmetric fashion, we need first to integrate over the Grassmann variables $\theta^i$. This procedure is well known,\cite{faddeev} and here we present the main ideas. Let $\rm \Psi_1$
and $\rm \Psi_2$ be two functions that depend on Grassmann numbers, the product $<\Psi_1,\Psi_2>$ is defined as
$$<\Psi_1,\Psi_2>=\int (\Psi_1(\theta^*))^* \Psi_2(\theta^*)\, e^{-\sum_i \theta^*_i \theta_i } \Pi_i d\theta^*_i d \theta_i, \qquad (C \theta_i \cdots \theta_r)^*=\theta^*_r \cdots \theta^*_i C^*,$$
and the integral over the Grassmann numbers is $\int \theta^*_i \theta_i \cdots \theta_m \theta_m^* d\theta^*_m d\theta_m \cdots d\theta^*_i d\theta_i =1$.
In 2D, the main contributions to the term $e^{-\sum_i \theta^*_i \theta_i }$ come from
$$e^{-\sum_i \theta^*_i \theta_i}=e^{\sum_i \theta_i \theta^*_i}=1+ \theta^0 \theta^{*0} + \theta^1 \theta^{*1} +
\theta^0 \theta^{*0} \theta^1 \theta^{*1}$$
and using that $\rm \int \theta d\theta=1$, and $\int d\theta=0$, which act as a filter, we obtain that
$$\rm |\Psi|^2={\cal A^*_+} {\cal A_+} +{\cal B}^*_0 {\cal B}_0 +{\cal B}^*_1 {\cal B}_1 + {\cal A^*_-} {\cal A_-}.$$
By demanding that $\rm |\Psi|^2$ does not diverge when $\rm |q^0|, |q^1|\to \infty$, only the contribution with the exponential $\rm e^{-2S}$ will remain.
\section{Beyond SUSY factorization\label{susy2par1}}
Although most of the SUSY partners of 1D Schr\"odinger problems have been found,\cite{cooper} there are still some unveiled aspects of the factorization procedure.
We have shown this for the simple harmonic oscillator in previous works,\cite{ranferi,rafael} and will procede here in the same way for the problem of the modified P\"oschl-Teller potential. The factorization operators depend on two supersymmetric type parameters, which when the operator product is inverted allow us to define a new SL operator, which includes the original QM problem.
The Hamiltonian of a particle in a modified P\"oschl-Teller potential is \cite{rosen,cooper}
\begin{equation}
H_{m+1} \, \Psi =
\left(-\frac{\hbar^2}{2\mu}\frac{d^2}{dx^2}-\frac{\alpha^2m(m+1)}{\cosh^2\!\alpha x}\right)\Psi=E\,\Psi \ ,
\label{eq1}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha>0$, and the integer $m$ is greater than 0. To shorten the algebraic equations we shall set $\frac{\hbar^2}{2\mu}=1$.
The eigenvalue problem may be solved using the Infeld \& Hull's (IH)
factorizations,\cite{infeld}
\begin{subequations}\label{fih}
\begin{align}
\label{fih1}
A^+_{m+1} A^-_{m+1} \, \psi^m_{m-n} &=
\left(H_{m+1}+\epsilon_{m+1}\right) \psi^m_{m-n} , \\
\label{fih2}
A^-_m A^+_m \, \psi^m_{m-n} &=
\left(H_{m+1}+\epsilon_{m}\right) \psi^m_{m-n} ,
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where the IH raising/lowering operators are given by
\begin{equation}\label{ampih}
A^\mp_{m}=
k(x,m)\mp\frac{d}{dx}
\:.
\end{equation}
where
$k(x,m)=\alpha m\, \tanh\alpha x$; also $\epsilon_m=\alpha^2 m^2$, and $n$ is the eigenvalue index,
\begin{equation}\label{esubn}
\Psi_n=\psi_{m-n}^m, \hspace{5mm} E_{n}=-\epsilon_{m-n}=-\alpha^2(m-n)^2, \hspace{1cm} n=0,1,2...<m .
\end{equation}
Beginning with the zeroth order eigenfunctions
The eigenfunctions can be found by successive applications of the raising operator,
which only increases the value of the upper index. That is,
\begin{equation}\label{psi0}
\psi_\ell^\ell(x)=\sqrt{\frac{\alpha\Gamma(\ell+\frac{1}{2})}{\sqrt{\pi}\Gamma(\ell)}}\cosh^{-\ell}\alpha x .
\end{equation}
we repeatedly apply the creation operator $A^-_{s+1} \, \psi^s_\ell = \psi^{s+1}_{\ell}$.
Note that from (\ref{fih}), $A^-_m A^+_m$ and $A^+_m A^-_m$ give different Hamiltonian operators.
\subsection{Two parameter factorization of the P\"oschl-Teller Hamiltonian}
Following our previous work,\cite{ranferi,rafael} we define two non-mutually adjoint first order operators,
\begin{equation}\label{bmbp}
B_m=\eta_m^{-1}\frac{d}{dx}+\beta_m, \hspace{2cm}
B^*_m=-\eta_m\frac{d}{dx}+\beta_m,
\end{equation}
where $\beta_m$ and $\eta_m$ are functions of $x$, and we require that
$B_{m+1}B^*_{m+1}=H_{m+1}+\epsilon_{m+1}$. Then $\beta_{m+1}$ and $\eta_{m+1}$ are the solutions of
\begin{equation}\label{coup1p}
-\frac{\eta'}{\eta} + \frac{\beta}{\eta} - \beta\eta = 0,
\hspace*{1.5cm}
\frac{\beta'}{\eta}+\beta^2 =
- \frac{\alpha^2 m(m+1)}{\cosh^2\alpha x} + \epsilon\,.
\end{equation}
By multiplying the first equation by $\beta/\eta$ and adding, we have that
\begin{equation}\label{ricmp}
\left( \frac{\beta_{m+1}}{\eta_{m+1}} \right)'+
\left( \frac{\beta_{m+1}}{\eta_{m+1}} \right)^2=
-\frac{\alpha^2 m(m+1)}{\cosh^2\alpha x} + \epsilon_{m+1}\,.
\end{equation}
This Ricatti equation was found in \cite{rosas}, it has the solution $\beta/\eta=D\, \tanh\alpha x$, with $\epsilon=D^2$, and two possible values for $D$, $D = \alpha(m+1) \, , -\alpha m $.
If we simply set $\eta_m \to 1$, we recover the factorization (\ref{fih1}).
The constant $\epsilon$ is usually related to the lowest energy eigenvalue, but here the two different values come from the index asymmetry in the factorizations (\ref{fih}).
Following Ref.\cite{rosas}, we solve for $D=\alpha (m+1)$.
The general solution to the pair of coupled equations (\ref{coup1p}) is
\begin{equation}\label{eta2p}
\eta_{m+1}(x)=\left[
1+\frac{\gamma_2 \,\mbox{sech}^{2(m+1)} \alpha x}{
\left( 1 + \gamma_1 \int_0^x \,\mbox{sech}^{2(m+1)}\alpha y\, dy \right)^2}
\right]^{-1/2},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{beta2p}
\beta_{m+1}(x) =
\left[\alpha(m+1) \, \tanh\alpha x +
\frac{\gamma_1 \,\mbox{sech}^{2(m+1)}\alpha x}
{1 + \gamma_1\int_0^x \,\mbox{sech}^{2(m+1)}\alpha y\ dy }
\right]
\times \eta_{m+1}(x) \, .
\end{equation}
where $\gamma_1$ has to satisfy
$ |\gamma_1|<2\alpha\,\Gamma(m+3/2) / \left( \sqrt{\pi}\,\Gamma(m+1)\right)$.
The corresponding condition on $\gamma_2$ involves trascendental functions, but one may use
$\gamma_2>-1+\gamma_1^2$ determine the $(\gamma_1,\gamma_2)$ parameter space.
When $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0$ we recover the original IH raising/lowering operators.
\subsection{Reversing the operator product: new Sturm-Liouville operator}
Now we invert the first order operators' product, keeping in mind eq.(\ref{fih2}),
\begin{eqnarray}\label{bpbm}
B^*_m B_m=-\frac{d^2}{dx^2}+2 \frac{\eta_m'}{\eta_m} \frac{d~}{dx}+
\left( V_0+\epsilon_m-\eta_m\beta_m'-\frac{\beta_m'}{\eta_m} \right) \, .
\end{eqnarray}
Then we can define a new Sturm-Liouville (SL) eigenvalue problem
$ {\cal L} \Phi_n + \omega(x) E_n \Phi_n=0 $,
where
\begin{equation}\label{opsl2p}
{\cal L}=\frac{d~}{dx}\left[ \eta_{m}^{-2}\frac{d~}{dx}\right]
+\left(\epsilon_{m}-\beta_{m}^2\right)
\left(1+\eta_{m}^{-2}\right)
-\alpha^2m(m+1) \,\mbox{sech}^2(\alpha x)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\label{phinew}
\Phi_n=\phi_{m-n}^m\equiv B^*_m\, \psi_{m-n}^{m-1} \, ,
\end{equation}
with the weight function $\omega(x)=\eta_m^{-2}(x)$.
This new SL operator is isospectral to the original PT problem. The zeroth-order eigenfunction is easily found by solving $B\phi_0= \left[ \frac{d~}{dx} +\beta_m \eta_m\right]\Phi_0=0 $
which gives
\begin{equation}\label{phi0gen2sol}
\Phi_0= \eta_m(x)\times \frac{\,\mbox{sech}^{m+1}(\alpha x)}
{1+\gamma_1 \int_0^x \,\mbox{sech}^{2(m+1)}(\alpha y)\, dy }
\end{equation}
\subsection{Regions in the two-parameter space}
We may recover the original QM problem when $\gamma_1=\gamma_2=0$, the origin of the two-parameter space. Moreover, the SUSY partner of the PT problem arises when one sets $\gamma_2=0$, moving along the horizontal axis. In this case,
${\cal L}$ becomes
\begin{equation}\label{opsl2psusy}
{\cal L}=\frac{d^2~}{dx^2}+\alpha^2\lambda(\lambda+1) \,\mbox{sech}^2(\alpha x)
-2 S_1^2(\alpha x) -4 \alpha \lambda \tanh(\alpha x) S_1(\alpha x)
\end{equation}
where $\lambda=m+1$, with
$
S_1(\alpha x)= \frac{\gamma_1 \,\mbox{sech}^{2\lambda}(\alpha x)}
{1+\gamma_1 \int_0^x \,\mbox{sech}^{2\lambda}\alpha y\, dy}
$,
and $\omega(x)=1$. These in turn define a SUSY PT problem
\begin{equation}\label{susy2}
\left[-\frac{d^2~}{dx^2}+\widetilde V(x)\right] \Phi_n = E_n \Phi_n(x)
\end{equation}
where the partner SUSY potentials are given by
\begin{equation}\label{Vsusy2}
\widetilde V=-\alpha^2\lambda(\lambda+1) \,\mbox{sech}^2(\alpha x)
+2 S_1^2(\alpha x) +4 \alpha\lambda\, \tanh(\alpha x) \, S_1(\alpha x)
\end{equation}
The zero-order eigenfunction is defined by $B^-\phi_0=0$, that is
\begin{equation}\label{phi02}
\phi_0= \frac{\,\mbox{sech}^\lambda(\alpha x)}
{1+\gamma_1 \int_0^x \,\mbox{sech}^{2\lambda}(\alpha y)\, dy }
\end{equation}
\section{Quasi-exactly solvable potentials}
In exactly solvable problems the whole spectrum is found analytically, but the vast majority of problems have to be solved numerically.
A new possibility arised with the class of QES potentials, where a subset of the spectrum may be found analytically.\cite{Turbiner,Shifman,Ushveridze1}
QES potentials have been studied using the Lie algebraic method \cite{Turbiner}:
Manning,\cite{Qiong} Razavy\cite{Razavy}, and Ushveridze\cite{Ushveridze2} potentials belong to this class (see also \cite{Chennn}).
Theses are double well potentials, which received much attention due to their applications in theoretical and experimental problems. Furthermore, hyperbolic type potentials are found in many physical applications, like the Rosen-Morse potential,\cite{Oyewumi} Dirac type hyperbolic potentials,\cite{Wei} bidimensional quantum dot,\cite{Xie} Scarf type entangled states,\cite{Downing} etc.
QES potentials classification have been given by Turbiner,\cite{Turbiner} and Ushveridze.\cite{Ushveridze2}
Here we show that the Lie algebraic procedure may impose strict restrictions on the solutions:
we shall construct here analytical solutions for the Razavy type potential
$V(x)=V_0\left( {\rm sinh}^4(x)- k\, {\rm sinh}^2(x) \right)$ based on the polynomial solutions of the related Confluent Heun Equation (CHE) \cite{Ronveaux}, and show that in that case the energy eigenvalues diverge when $k\to -1$, a feature solely of the procedure. We shall also show that other QES potentials may be found that do not belong to any of the potentials found using the Lie algebraic method.
\subsection{A Razavy type QES potential}
Let us consider Schr\"odinger's problem for the Razavy type potential
$V(x)=V_0\left( {\rm sinh}^4(x)- k\, {\rm sinh}^2(x) \right)$,
\begin{equation} \label{ecuaciondeschrodinger}
\frac{-\hbar^2}{2\mu} \frac{d^2 \psi(x)}{d x^2} +
V_0 \left( \sinh^{4}(\lambda x) -k\, {\rm sinh}^2(\lambda x) \right) \,
\psi(x)=E \, \psi(x)
\end{equation}
For simplicity, we set $\mu=\hbar=\lambda=1$.\cite{Downing,Wen}
Here the potential function is the hyperbolic Razavy potential
$V(x)=\frac{1}{2}\left( \zeta \,{\rm cosh}(2x)-M \right)^2$, with $V_0=2\zeta^2$,
where $M$ energy levels are found if $M$ is a positive integer.\cite{Razavy}
It may also be viewed as the Ushveridze potential
$V(x)=2\xi^2 \,{\rm sinh}^4(x)+2\xi\left[ \xi-2(\gamma+\delta)-2\ell \right] {\rm sinh}^2(x)
+2(\delta-\frac{1}{4})(\delta-\frac{3}{4})\, {\rm csch}^2(x)
-2(\gamma-\frac{1}{4})(\gamma-\frac{3}{4})\, {\rm sech}^2(x)$,
when $\gamma=\frac{1}{4}$ and $\delta=\frac{3}{4}$, or viceversa,\cite{Ushveridze2}
which is QES if $\ell=0,1,2,\cdots$ (with $\delta\ge \frac{1}{4}$).
El-Jaick {\it et al.} showed that it is also QES if $\ell=$half-integer and
$\gamma,\delta=\frac{1}{4},\frac{3}{4}$,\cite{Jaick}.
In the case of the Razavy potential, the solutions obtained by Finkel {\it et al.}, are
\begin{equation}
\psi_{\sigma \eta} \left( x,E_{R} \right) \propto \left( \sinh x \right)^{ \frac{1}{2} \left( 1 - \sigma - \eta \right)} \left( \cosh x \right)^{\frac{1}{2} \left( 1 - \sigma + \eta \right)} e^{- \frac{\zeta}{2} \cosh(2x)} \sum_{j=0}^{n} \frac{\hat{P}_{j}^{\sigma \eta} \left(E_{R} \right)}{ \left( 2j + \frac{\eta - \sigma + 1}{2} \right) !} \cosh^{2j}(x)
\end{equation}
with the parameters $(\sigma,\eta)=(\pm 1,0)$ or $(0,\pm 1)$, the energy eigenvalues being the roots of the polynomials $P_{j+1}^{\sigma \eta}(E_R)$, satisfying the three term recursive relations
\begin{equation}
\hat{P}_{j+1}^{\sigma \eta} = \left( E_{R} - b_{j} \right) \hat{P}_{j}^{\sigma \eta} \left( E_{R} \right) - a_{j} \hat{P}_{j-1}^{\sigma \eta} \left( E_{R} \right), \qquad j \geq 0
\end{equation}
with $E_R=2E$, and
\begin{equation}\label{ajbj}
\begin{matrix}
a_j=16\zeta j(2j-\sigma+\eta)(j-n-1)
\\
b_{j} = -4j \left( j + 1 - \sigma + 2 \zeta \right) + \left( 2n + 1 \right) \left( 2 \left( n - \sigma \right) + 3 \right) + \zeta \left( \zeta - 2 \eta + 4n \right)
\end{matrix}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Symmetric solutions for $\boldsymbol{V(x) = V_0 ~ \mathrm{sinh}^{4}(x)}$}\label{seckeq0}
To find the even solutions to eq.(\ref{ecuaciondeschrodinger}) with $k=0$, let us set
$\beta(x) = \cosh^2(x)$, to get
\begin{equation} \label{ecuacion4}
\beta \left( \beta -1 \right) \frac{d^{2} \psi}{d \beta^{2}} + \left( \beta - \frac{1}{2} \right) \frac{d \psi}{d \beta} + \frac{1}{4} \left[ 2 E - 2 V_0 \beta^{2} + 4 V_0 \beta - 2 V_0 \right] = 0
\end{equation}
and to ensure that $\psi (x)$ vanishes as $x\to\pm\infty$, let
$\psi \left( x \right) = e^{-\frac{\alpha}{2} \beta} f(\beta)$.
Previous works may not include square integrable solutions to the Razavy potential.\cite{no2int2,no2int3,no2int}
By requiring $\alpha^{2} = 2 V_{0}$, we obtain \cite{Yao}
\begin{equation} \label{ecuacion5.1}
\beta \left( \beta - 1\right) \frac{d^{2} f}{d \beta^{2}} + \left[ - \alpha \beta \left( \beta -1 \right) + \left( \beta - \frac{1}{2} \right) \right] \frac{d f}{d \beta} + \left[ \frac{\alpha^{2} \beta}{4} - \frac{\alpha \beta}{2} + \frac{\alpha}{4} + \frac{E}{2} - \frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} \right] f = 0 \ .
\end{equation}
We shall look for rank $N$ polynomial solutions: $f(\beta)$=$f_0$ for $N=0$,
or $f(\beta)$=$f_0 \prod_{i=1}^{N} \left( \beta - \beta_i \right)$ for $N>0$, the $\beta_i$ being the roots of the resulting polynomial in eq.(\ref{ecuacion5.1}). Sometimes the $N$=$0$ solution is not even considered.\cite{Downing}
The highest power of $\beta$ in eq.(\ref{ecuacion5.1})
fix $\alpha$ to $\alpha = 4 N + 2$. The energy eigenvalues and the roots satisfy
\begin{equation}
E = \frac{1}{2} \left[ \alpha^{2} + \alpha \left( 4 \sum_{i=1}^{N} \beta_{i} - 1 - 4 N \right) - 4 N^{2} \right] \label{ecuacion2.101c1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{ecuacion2.102c1}
\sum_{i \neq j}^{N} \frac{2}{\beta_{i} - \beta_{j}} + \frac{-\alpha \beta_{i}^{2} + \left( \alpha + 1 \right) \beta_{i} - \frac{1}{2}}{ \beta_{i}^{2} - \beta_{i}} = 0, \qquad i = 1,2,\ldots, n
\end{equation}
$V_0$ is found to depend on the order of the polynomial,
$V_{0} = 2(2N+1)^2$ for even solutions, and solutions with different $N$ can not be scaled one into the other due to the sinh$^4(x)$ dependence of the potential function. The highest solution order
is $n=2N$, and we use subindexes $\left\{N,n\right\}$ to label eigenvalues/eigenfunctions.
For $N=0$, $f(\beta)=1$,
we get $V_0 = 2$, $E_{0,0} = 1$, and the (unnormalized) ground state eigenfunction
$\psi_{0,0} \left( x \right) = e^{- \cosh^{2} \left( x \right)}$.
For $N = 2$, $f(\beta)=f_0(\beta-\beta_1)(\beta- \beta_2 )$,
equating to zero the coefficients of the polynomial $P(\beta)$, we get the coupled equations
\begin{equation}\label{eq7}
\begin{matrix}
&\frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} - \frac{5 \alpha}{2} = 0 \\
&3+ \left( \beta_1 + \beta_2 \right) \left( - \frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} + \frac{3\alpha}{2} \right) + \left( - \frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} + \frac{9 \alpha}{2} + \frac{E}{2}\right) = 0 \\
&-3 - \left( \beta_1 + \beta_2 \right) \left( - \frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} + \frac{5 \alpha}{4} + \frac{E}{2} + 1 \right) + \beta_1 \beta_2 \left( \frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} - \frac{\alpha}{2} \right) = 0 \\
&\frac{1}{2} \left( \beta_1 + \beta_2 \right) + \beta_1 \beta_2 \left( -\frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} + \frac{\alpha}{4} + \frac{E}{2} \right) = 0
\end{matrix}
\end{equation}
Solving these, we find that $V_{0} = 50$, and the 3 possible eigenvalues, $E_{2,0} = \ 2.6301$,
$E_{2,2} = 19.0121$, and $E_{2,4} = 43.2490$.
\subsection{Antisymmetric solutions}\label{seckeq0b}
In order to find antisymmetric solutions to eq.(\ref{ecuacion5.1}), we set
$f(\beta) = \mathrm{sinh}(x) \, g(\beta)$, to obtain
\begin{align} \label{ecuacion32}
\nonumber \beta \left[ \beta - 1 \right] \frac{d^{2}g}{dx^{2}} &+ \left[ - \alpha \beta^{2} + \left( \alpha + 2 \right) \beta - \frac{1}{2} \right] \frac{d g}{dx} \\
&+ \left[ \left( - \alpha + \frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} \right) \beta + \left( - \frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} + \frac{\alpha}{4} + \frac{E}{2} + \frac{1}{4} \right) \right] g = 0
\end{align}
This CHE can be solved in power series:
$g(\beta) = g_{0}$ if $N = 0$, or $g(\beta)=g_{0}\, \prod_{i=1}^{N} \left( \beta - \beta_i \right)$ for $N > 0$. Then, $\alpha = 4 (N + 1)$, and
\begin{equation}
E = \frac{1}{2} \left[ \alpha^{2} + \alpha \left( 4 \sum_{i=1}^{N} \beta_{i} - 1 - 4 N \right)
- 4 N^{2} -4N -1 \right] \label{ecuacion2.101c2}
\end{equation}
Here, $V_{0} = 8(N+1)^2$, and all even and odd solutions have different $V_0$. The maximum solutions order is $n=2N+1$.
For example, for $N = 3$ we get $\alpha=16$, $V_{0} = 128$, and
\begin{equation}
\begin{matrix}
&\left( \beta_1 + \beta_2 + \beta_3 \right) \left( 3 \alpha - \frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} \right) + \left( - \frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} + \frac{13 \alpha}{4} + \frac{E}{2} - \frac{49}{4}\right) = 0 \\
&\left( \beta_1 + \beta_2 + \beta_3 \right) \left( \frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} - \frac{9 \alpha}{4} - \frac{E}{2} - \frac{25}{4} \right) + \left( \beta_1 \beta_2 + \beta_2 \beta_3 + \beta_3 \beta_1 \right) \left( \frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} - 2 \alpha \right) - \frac{15}{2} = 0 \\
&3 \left( \beta_1 + \beta_2 + \beta_3 \right) + \left( \beta_1 \beta_2 + \beta_2 \beta_3 + \beta_3 \beta_1 \right) \left( -\frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} + \frac{5 \alpha}{4} + \frac{9}{4} + \frac{E}{2} \right) + \beta_1 \beta_2 \beta_3 \left( - \frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} + \alpha \right) = 0 \\
&- \frac{1}{2} \left( \beta_1 \beta_2 + \beta_2 \beta_3 + \beta_3 \beta_1 \right) - \beta_1 \beta_2 \beta_3 \left( \frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} - \frac{\alpha}{4} - \frac{E}{2} - \frac{1}{4} \right) = 0
\end{matrix}
\end{equation}
We find four eigenvalues,
$E_{3,1} = 12.8152$,
$E_{3,3} = 40.4568$,
$E_{3,5} = 75.7246$, and
$E_{3,7} = 117.003$.
\section{The potential function
$\boldsymbol{V(x) = V_0 \left( \mathrm{sinh}^{4}(x) - k \ \mathrm{sinh}^{2}(x)\right) }$}\label{seckgt0}
Now we apply our analysis to the problem with the
$V(x) = V_0 \left( \mathrm{sinh}^{4}(x) - k \ \mathrm{sinh}^{2}(x)\right)$, which is a symmetric double well if $k>0$.
To find even solutions we set again $\beta(x) = \cosh^{2} (x)$ and
$\psi (\beta) = e^{- \frac{\alpha}{2} \beta} f (\beta)$, with $\alpha^2=2V_0$,
\begin{align}
\label{ecuacion5.5c5}
\nonumber \beta \left( \beta - 1 \right) \frac{d^{2} f}{d \beta^{2}} + &\left[ - \alpha \beta \left( \beta - 1 \right) + \left( \beta - \frac{1}{2} \right) \right] \frac{d f}{d \beta} \\
&+ \left[ \frac{\alpha^{2} \beta}{4} \left(1 + k \right) - \frac{\alpha \beta}{2} + \frac{\alpha}{4} + \frac{E}{2} - \frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} \left( 1 + k\right)\right] f = 0 \ .
\end{align}
We now find that $V_0=\frac{2(2N+1)^2}{1+k}$, $k$ varying freely. For example, if $N=0$,
$E_{0,0}=1/(1+k)$, and no negative energy eigenvalues may exist.
For $N=1$ the two energy eigenvalues found are
\begin{equation} \label{Ek-n1}
E = \frac{9 - \left( 1+ k \right) \pm \sqrt{ \left( 1+ k \right)^{2} + 36 }}{1+k}
\end{equation}
meaning that for $k>3/2$ we will have negative eigenvalues. Note that for $N>0$ it is always possible to find a zero-energy groundstate, a feature that may have cosmological implications.\cite{socorro}
For the case with $N=2$, choosing $k=4$, the energy eigenvalues are
$E_{2,0} = -3.74456$, $E_{2,2} = 1.00000$, and $E_{2,4} = 7.74456$. The corresponding eigenfunctions are plotted in Fig.(\ref{figAN2k5}).
Now, to find the antisymmetric eigenfunctions we set
$f(\beta) = {\rm sinh}(x) \ g(\beta)$, to get the CHE
\begin{eqnarray} \label{ecuacion5.34}
\nonumber \beta (\beta - 1) \frac{d^{2} g}{d \beta^{2}} &+& \left[ -\alpha \beta^{2} + \left( \alpha + 2 \right) \beta - \frac{1}{2} \right] \frac{d g}{d \beta} \\
&+& \left[\beta \left( \frac{\alpha^{2}}{4} \left( 1 + c \right) - \alpha \right) + \left( \frac{\alpha}{4}+ \frac{E}{2} - \frac{\alpha^{2}}{4}\left( 1 + c\right) + \frac{1}{4} \right) \right]g = 0 \ .
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{figure}
\centering
{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{./art-fig3n.jpg}}
\hspace{7mm}
{\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{./art-fig4.png}}
\caption{
Left: The three even eigenfunctions (narrow solid lines) found analytically for $k=4$ and $N = 2$, together with the corresponding eigenvalues (dashed lines).
Right: The three odd eigenfunctions (narrow solid lines) found analytically for $k=5$ and $N = 2$, together with the corresponding eigenvalues (dashed lines).
The unsolved eigenvalues are shown in dotted lines. }
\label{figAN2k5}
\end{figure}
For $N=0$ we get that $\alpha = 4/(1+k)$ and $E_1 = 6/(1+k) - 1/2$, such that if $k > 11$ we may
find negative energy eigenvalues. For $N=2$, $\alpha = 12/(1+k)$, if we set $k = 5$
the energy eigenvalues found are
$E_{2,1} = -7.11693$, $E_{2,3} = 1.08119$, and $E_{2,5} = 9.53574$.
The eigenfunctions are plotted in Fig.(\ref{figAN2k5}).
Note that in this case $(E_1-E_0)/E_0=0.0052$, and it is not possible to distinguish these eigenvalue's lines from each other in Fig.(\ref{figAN2k5}) for antisymmetric eigenvalues, implying quasi-degenerate eigenstates. A similar effect is seen in the symmetric case.
\subsection{The case with $\boldsymbol{k=-1}$}\label{secnew}
As was seen in Section \ref{seckgt0}, the ground state energy diverges as $1/(1+k)$ as $k\to -1$, and this also happens to all higher order even eigenvalues (see eq.(\ref{Ek-n1})). This is a strange behaviour, since it is clear that the potential function has a rather simple functional form for any value of $k$: a single or double well with infinite barriers.
We can see that this is only a characteristic due to the analytical solution procedure, coming from the fact that
the potential strength $V_0$ is also divergent when $k\to -1$.
\subsection{Unclassified QES potentials}\label{secnew2}
Finally, we would like to emphasize that there should be other potential functions which may not be classified form the Lie algebraic methood.\cite{Turbiner}
Indeed, let us consider Schr\"odinger's problem
with the potential function
\begin{equation} \label{ecuacion2}
V(x) = \frac{\alpha^2}{2} \cosh^{2}(x) -\frac{3\alpha}{2} \cosh(x) + \frac{\alpha}{\cosh(x)}
\end{equation}
For this problem, the ground state eigenfunction and eigenvalue are given by
\begin{equation} \label{ecuacion9}
\psi = \psi_0 e^{- \alpha \cosh(x) } \cosh(x) \ , \ \ \ \
E = \frac{\alpha^2 - 1}{2}
\end{equation}
while this particular problem does not belong to the class of potentials found using the Lie algebraic method. Similar potentials may be found which do not belong to that class, leaving space for further developments.
\acknowledgments{ \noindent \noindent This work was partially
supported by CONACYT 179881 grants. PROMEP grants
UGTO-CA-3. This work is part of the collaboration within the
Instituto Avanzado de Cosmolog\'{\i}a. E. Condori-Pozo is supported by a CONACYT graduate fellowship }
|
\section{Introduction}
Wasserstein distances are an increasingly common tool in statistics and machine learning. Their popularity can be traced back to their empirical success on a wide range of practical problems~\citep[see, e.g.,][for a survey]{PeyCut17} and a line of recent computational advances leading to much faster algorithms~\citep{Cut13,AltWeeRig17}.
Wasserstein distances are a special case of the problem of {\em optimal transport}, one of the foundational problems of optimization \citep{Mon81,Kan42}, and a very important topic in analysis \citep{Vil08}. This problem asks how one can transport mass with distribution $\mu$ to have another distribution $\nu$, with minimal global transport cost. This problem also has the probabilistic interpretation, known as the Monge--Kantorovich formulation, of finding a coupling minimizing a cost between random variables $X$ and $Y$ with given marginal distributions. The Wasserstein distance emerges as the minimum value of this problem, and creates a natural tool to compare distributions, with $W_p$ corresponding to the $\|\cdot\|^p$ transport cost:
\[
W_p^p(\mu,\nu) %
= \inf_{\pi \in \mathcal{M}(\mu,\nu)} \int \|x-y\|^p \mathrm{d} \pi(x,y)\, ,
\]
where the set $\mathcal{M}(\mu, \nu)$ denotes the set of joint measures with marginals $\mu$ and $\nu$, respectively.
In many modern applications, a Wasserstein distance is used as a loss function in an optimization problem over measures. Solving such problems involves optimizing functionals of the form $\nu \mapsto W_p(\nu, \mu)$ where $\mu$ is unknown.
Given $n$ i.i.d.~samples from $\mu$, much of the statistics literature adopts the plug-in approach and focuses on using the empirical distribution $\hat \mu_n$ to obtain the estimated functional $\nu \mapsto W_p(\nu, \hat \mu_n)$.
In this case, the rates of convergence are of order $n^{-1/d}$, and the sample size required for a particular precision is exponential in the dimension, a phenomenon known as the {\em curse of dimensionality}.
Moreover, it is known that this exponential dependence is tight, in the sense that no better estimate is available in general~\citep{SinPoc18}.
Our work adopts a different approach to show that the plug-in estimator is suboptimal for measures possessing a smooth density.
Estimating the density of a distribution, based on independent samples, is one of the fundamental problems of statistics. The usual goal in these problems is to produce an estimate $\tilde f$ which is as close as possible to the unknown density $f$, measured either at one point of the sample space, or in $L_p$ norm.
In this line of work, $f$ is usually assumed to belong to a large, nonparametric class defined via smoothness or regularity conditions, and typically the rates obtained in this setting show that sufficient smoothness can substantially mitigate the curse of dimensionality.
This is the subject of a wide literature on \emph{nonparametric density estimation}.
In this work, we follow the same philosophy and derive similar rates for $W_p$ distances, over Besov classes of densities $\bes{s}{p}{q}$. We likewise show that the smoothness parameter $s$ improves the optimal exponent of $n$ in the Wasserstein setting.
Algorithmic aspects are an important part of optimal transport problems. For practical applications, the proposed estimates must therefore also be computationally tractable. We describe a method to produce computationally tractable atomic estimators from any estimator that outperforms the empirical distribution, under minimal assumptions. We study the computational cost of this method, compared to the cost of using the empirical distribution with $n$ atoms, and exhibit a trade-off between computational cost and statistical precision.
\subsection{Prior work}
The question of establishing minimax rates for estimation in Wasserstein distances has been examined in several recent works. \citet{SinPoc18} established that, in the absence of smoothness assumptions, the empirical distribution $\hat \mu$ is rate optimal in a variety of examples. Their proof relies on a dyadic partitioning argument \citep[see, e.g.][]{WeeBac18}, and does not appear to extend to the smooth case.
Closer to our setting, under a smoothness assumption on the density of $\mu$, \citet{Lia17} and \citet{SinUppLi18} showed minimax rates of convergence for the Wasserstein-1 distance. To obtain these rates, these works focus on the dual form of $W_1$:
\begin{equation*}
W_1(\mu, \nu) = \sup_{f \in \mathrm{Lip}} \int f (\mathrm{d} \mu - \mathrm{d} \nu)\,,
\end{equation*}
where the supremum is taken over all 1-Lipschitz functions. This dual formulation puts the Wasserstein-1 distance into the category of \emph{integral probability metrics}~\citep{Mul97}, for which both \citet{Lia17} and \citet{SinUppLi18} obtain general results. It has been shown that choosing functions which are smoother than Lipschitz in this definition can result in improved rates of convergence for empirical measures~\citep{Klo18}. Crucially, the metric $W_p$ for $p > 1$ is \emph{not} an integral probability metric. Establishing sharp rates for general Wasserstein distances therefore requires different techniques.
A separate line of work has focused instead on modifying the definition of the Wasserstein distance to include a regularizing term based on the mutual information of the coupling.
It has been shown that this definition enjoys improved convergence rates relative to the unregularized version~\citep{GenChiBac18}.
Our proofs rely on establishing control of Wassserstein distances by Besov norms of negative smoothness. Similar results have been obtained elsewhere under different conditions.
\citet{ShiJac08} showed that the optimal transportation distance with cost $\|\cdot\|^p$ for $0 < p < 1$ can be characterized explicitly via an expression involving wavelet coefficients, which implies that these distances agree with a particular Besov norm (see \ref{sec:besov_introduction}).
\citet{Loe06} \citep[see also][]{MauRouSan10} showed that the Wasserstein-2 distance between measures with densities bounded above dominates a negative Sobolev norm, and \citet{Pey18} extended this result to show that $W_2$ is in fact \emph{equivalent} to such a norm when the densities are in addition bounded below.
To our knowledge, ours is the first result to establish a connection to Besov norms of negative smoothness and general Wasserstein distances.
The use of wavelet estimators for density estimation has a long history in nonparametric statistics~\citep{KerPic92,HarKerPic98,DonJohKer96,DouLeo90,Wal92}. However, while wavelets have been used for computational purposes in the optimal transport community~\citep{CheIweChi12,ShiJac08,DomAngTan08,RabPeyDel11}, the statistical properties of wavelet estimators with respect to Wasserstein distances have remained largely unexplored.
\section{Main results}
\subsection{Problem description and preliminaries}
\subsubsection{Nonparametric density estimation in Wasserstein distance}
Our observation consists of an i.i.d.~sample of size $n$ drawn from a probability measure~$\mu_f$ on $\mathbb{R}^d$ with smooth density $f$.
Our goal is to compute an estimator~$\tilde \mu_n$ that is close to $\mu_f$ in expected Wasserstein distance.
As noted above, such an estimator can serve as a proxy for $\mu_f$ in statistical and computational applications.
While estimation of the density $f$ in norms such as $L_p$ is a well studied problem in nonparametric statistics~\citep{Tsy09}, such estimates do not readily lend themselves to guarantees in Wasserstein distance.
For technical reasons, we restrict ourselves to the case of measures supported on a compact set $\Omega \subseteq \mathbb{R}^d$.
\textbf{We focus throughout on $\Omega := [0, 1]^d$.}
The extension to other rectangular sets is straightforward; however, non-rectangular sets present nontrivial challenges, which we do not explore here.
\subsubsection{Wavelets and Besov spaces}\label{sec:besov_introduction}
We direct the reader to~\citet{HarKerPic98} and~\citet{Mey90} for an introduction to the theory of wavelets.
In brief, we assume the existence of sets $\Phi$ and~$\Psi_{j}$ for $j \geq 0$ of functions in $L_2(\Omega)$ satisfying the standard requirements of a wavelet basis. (See Appendix \ref{app:wave} for our precise assumptions.)
Wavelets can be used to characterize the Besov spaces $\bes{s}{p}{q}(\Omega)$. We follow the approach of~\citet{Coh03} for defining such spaces on bounded domains.
Suppose $s > 0$ and $p, q \geq 1$, and let $n > s$ be an integer.
Given $h \in \mathbb{R}^d$, set
\begin{align*}
\Delta_h^1 f(x) & := f(x+h) - f(x)\\
\Delta_h^k f(x) & := \Delta_h^1(\Delta_h^{k-1})f(x) \quad \forall 1< k \leq n\,,
\end{align*}
where these functions are defined on $\Omega_{h, n} := \{x \in \Omega: x + nh \in \Omega\}$.
For $t > 0$, we then define
\begin{equation*}
\omega_n (f, t)_p = \sup_{\|h\| \leq t} \|\Delta_h^n f\|_{L_p(\Omega_{h, n})}\,.
\end{equation*}
The function $\omega_n$ measures the order-$n$ smoothness of $f$ in $L_p$.
Finally, we define the space $\bes{s}{p}{q}(\Omega)$ to be the set of functions for which the quantity
\begin{equation*}
\|f\|'_{\bes{s}{p}{q}} := \|f\|_{L_p} + \left\|(2^{sj} \omega_n(f, 2^{-j})_p)_{j \geq 0}\right\|_{\ell_q}
\end{equation*}
is finite.
Assuming that the elements of $\Phi$ and $\Psi_j$ have $r$ continuous derivatives for $r > s$ and that polynomials of degree up to $\lfloor s \rfloor$ lie in the span of $\Phi$, the norm $\|\cdot\|'_{\bes{s}{p}{q}}$ is equivalent to a sequence norm based on wavelet coefficients.
Given $f \in L_p(\Omega)$, denote by $\alpha = \{\alpha_\phi\}_{\phi \in \Phi}$ the vector defined by $\alpha_\phi := \int f(x) \phi(x) \,\mathrm{d} x$ and for $j \geq 0$ denote by $\beta_j = \{\beta_\psi\}_{\psi \in \Psi_j}$ the vector whose entries are given by $\beta_\psi := \int f(x) \psi(x) \,\mathrm{d} x$.
Then $\|\cdot\|'_{\bes{s}{p}{q}}$ is equivalent to $\|\cdot\|_{\bes{s}{p}{q}}$ defined by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:bes_def}
\|f\|_{\bes{s}{p}{q}} := \|\alpha\|_{\ell_p} + \left\|2^{js} 2^{dj(\frac 12 - \frac 1p)} \|\beta_j\|_{\ell_p} \right\|_{\ell_q}\,.
\end{equation}
This expression can then be used directly to define a norm when $s < 0$~\citep[see][Theorem 3.8.1]{Coh03}, as long as the elements of $\Phi$ and $\Psi_j$ have $r$ continuous derivatives for $r > |s|$ and polynomials of degree up to $\lfloor |s| \rfloor$ lie in the span of $\Phi$.
In what follows, we therefore adopt~\eqref{eq:bes_def} as our primary definition and assume throughout that the wavelet system has sufficient regularity that the equivalence of $\|\cdot\|'_{\bes{s}{p}{q}}$ and $\|\cdot\|_{\bes{s}{p}{q}}$ holds.
\subsubsection{Notation}
The quantities $C$ and $c$ will refer to constants whose value may change from line to line. \textbf{All constants throughout may depend on the choice of wavelet system and the dimension.} Since we are interested in establishing optimal rates of decay with respect to the exponent (i.e., finding $\gamma$ such that the rate $n^{-\gamma}$ holds), we leave finer control on dimension-dependent constants to future work.
We freely use the notation $a \lesssim b$ to indicate that there exists a constant $C$ for which $a \leq C b$ holds. Again, such constants may depend on the multiresolution and dimension.
The notation $a \asymp b$ indicates that $a \lesssim b$ and $b \lesssim a$.
We set denote by $\mathcal{D}(\Omega)$ the set of probability density functions on $\Omega$, and by $\mathcal{P}$ the set of all probability measures on $\mathbb{R}^d$.
Given a density $f$, we denote by $\mu_f$ the associated measure. We write $a \wedge b := \min\{a, b\}$ and $a \vee b := \max\{a,b\}$ for real numbers $a$ and $b$.
\subsection{Minimax estimation of smooth densities}\label{sec:smooth}
In this section, we give our main statistical results on the problem of estimating densities in Wasserstein distance.
These results reveal several striking phenomena: (i) the minimax rate of estimation can improve significantly for smooth densities, and (ii) the optimal rates depend strongly on whether the density in question is bounded away from $0$. Indeed, we show that the optimal rate for general densities is strictly worse than the corresponding rate for densities bounded below, no matter the smoothness.
While the first phenomenon is well known in nonparametric statistics, the second phenomenon does not occur in classical density estimation problems. As we explore further below, this behavior is fundamental to the Wasserstein distances.
We define two classes of probability densities on $\Omega$.
Given $m, L > 0$, set
\begin{align*}
\bes{s}{p}{q}(L) & := \{f \in L_p(\Omega) : \|f\|_{\bes{s}{p}{q}} \leq L, \int f(x) \,\mathrm{d} x= 1, f \geq 0\} \\
\bes{s}{p}{q}(L; m) & := \bes{s}{p}{q}(L) \cap \{f : f \geq m\}\,.
\end{align*}
We note that if $s$ is sufficiently large and $L$ is sufficiently small then in fact $\bes{s}{p}{q}(L) \subseteq \bes{s}{p}{q}(L; m)$ for $m$ a constant.
We assume throughout that $m < 1$, since when $m \geq 1$, the class $\bes{s}{p}{q}(L; m)$ is trivial.
\subsubsection{Bounded densities}
Our first result gives an upper bound on the rate of estimation for functions in $\bes{s}{p}{q}(L; m)$.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:estimation_ub}
For any $m > 0$, $s \geq 0$, and $p \in [1, \infty)$, there exists an estimator $\hat f$ such that for any~$p' \geq p$ and $q \geq 1$, the estimator satisfies
\begin{equation*}
\sup_{f \in \bes{s}{p'}{q}(L; m)} {\rm I}\kern-0.18em{\rm E} W_p(\mu_f, \mu_{\hat f}) \lesssim \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
n^{- \frac{1 + s}{d + 2s}} & d \geq 3 \\
n^{-1/2} \log n & d = 2 \\
n^{-1/2} & d = 1\,.
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
The upper bound in Theorem \ref{thm:estimation_ub} is achieved by a wavelet estimator.
As $s$ ranges between $0$ and $\infty$, the upper bound interpolates between the dimension-dependent rate $n^{-1/d}$ and the fully parametric rate $n^{-1/2}$.
Our lower bounds nearly match the upper bounds proved in Theorem~\ref{thm:estimation_ub}, up to a logarithmic factor in the $d = 2$ case.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:estimation_lb}
For any $p,p',q \geq 1$, and $s \geq 0$,
\begin{equation*}
\adjustlimits\inf_{\tilde \mu \in \mathcal{P}} \sup_{f \in \bes{s}{p'}{q}(L; m)} {\rm I}\kern-0.18em{\rm E} W_p(\mu_f, \tilde \mu) \gtrsim \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
n^{- \frac{1 + s}{d + 2s}} & d \geq 3 \\
n^{-1/2} & d \leq 2\,,
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation*}
where the infimum is taken over all estimators $\tilde \mu$ based on $n$ observations.
\end{theorem}
The rates Theorems~\ref{thm:estimation_ub} and~\ref{thm:estimation_lb} evince two phenomena not present in $L_p$ density estimation. First, in low dimension ($d \leq 2$), the rates are independent of $s$, so that there is no benefit to smoothness. Second, even in the case when $s = 0$, nontrivial estimation is possible at the rate $n^{-1/d}$ when $d \geq 3$.
Our bounds are obtained via the following technical result, which establishes a connection between Wasserstein distances and Besov norms of negative smoothness.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:besov_wp}
Let $p \in [1, \infty)$.
If $f, g$ are two densities in $L_p([0, 1]^d)$ satisfying $m \leq f, g \leq M$ for~$m, M > 0$, then
\begin{equation*}
M^{-1/p'} \|f - g\|_{\mathcal{B}^{-1}_{p, \infty}} \lesssim W_p(\mu_f, \mu_g) \lesssim m^{-1/p'} \|f - g\|_{\mathcal{B}^{-1}_{p, 1}}\,,
\end{equation*}
where $\frac 1p + \frac{1}{p'} = 1$.
\end{theorem}
Theorem~\ref{thm:besov_wp} can be viewed as a partial extension of the dual formulation of~$W_1$ to $W_p$ for~$p > 1$.
Indeed, the inclusions
$\bes{1}{\infty}{1} \subseteq \mathrm{Lip} \subseteq \bes{1}{\infty}{\infty}$, where $\mathrm{Lip}$ is the space of bounded Lipschitz functions, imply $\|f - g\|_{\mathcal{B}^{-1}_{1, \infty}} \lesssim W_1(\mu_f, \mu_g) \lesssim \|f - g\|_{\mathcal{B}^{-1}_{1, 1}}$.
Theorem~\ref{thm:besov_wp} establishes the analogous result when~$p > 1$, but only when the densities $f$ and $g$ are bounded.
A proof of this theorem appears in Section~\ref{sec:wasbes}.
We prove Theorems~\ref{thm:estimation_ub} and~\ref{thm:estimation_lb} in Section~\ref{sec:bounded}.
\subsubsection{Unbounded densities}
Surprisingly, the density estimation problem over the class $\bes{s}{p}{q}(L)$ is strictly harder than the corresponding problem over $\bes{s}{p}{q}(L; m)$, even under a smoothness assumption.
We prove the following lower bound.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:unbounded_lb}
For any $p,p',q \geq 1$, and $s \geq 0$, if $L$ is a sufficiently large constant, then
\begin{equation*}
\adjustlimits\inf_{\tilde \mu \in \mathcal{P}} \sup_{f \in \bes{s}{p'}{q}(L)} W_p(\mu_f, \tilde \mu) \gtrsim n^{-\frac{1 + s/p}{d + s}} \vee n^{-1/2p}\,,
\end{equation*}
where the infimum is taken over all estimators $\tilde \mu$ based on $n$ observations.
\end{theorem}
Note that, when $p \geq 2$, this rate is worse than the upper bound given in Theorem~\ref{thm:estimation_ub} for all $s > 0$ and $d \geq 1$.
This establishes that the class of densities bounded from below is strictly easier to estimate than the class of all densities, for all nontrivial smoothness parameters.
When $s \in [0, 1)$, we can also prove an upper bound.
While this bound does not match the lower bound above, it nevertheless verifies qualitatively the behavior present in Theorem~\ref{thm:unbounded_lb}. Moreover, the estimator we construct is a \emph{histogram}. This property enables the use of such an estimator in practical applications. We take up this point in Section~\ref{sec:comp}.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:unbounded_ub}
For any $s \in [0, 1)$, there exists a histogram estimator $\hat f$ such that for any $1 \leq p \leq p' < \infty$ and $1 \leq q \leq \infty$, the estimator satisfies
\begin{equation*}
\sup_{f \in \bes{s}{p'}{q}(L)} {\rm I}\kern-0.18em{\rm E} W_p(\mu_f, \mu_{\hat f}) \lesssim \left\{ \begin{array}{ll}
n^{- \frac{1 + s/p}{d + 2s}} & d > 2 p \\
n^{- \frac{1}{2p}} \log n & d = 2p \\
n^{- \frac{1}{2p}} & d < 2p\,.
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
The proofs of both Theorems~\ref{thm:unbounded_ub} and~\ref{thm:unbounded_lb} appear in Section~\ref{sec:unbounded}.
\subsection{Computational aspects of smooth density estimation}
In many computational applications, it is significantly simpler to work with discrete measures supported on a finite number of points, since in general there is no closed form expression for the Wasserstein distance between continuous measures.
Unfortunately, the estimators presented in Section~\ref{sec:smooth} are not of this form, so it is unclear whether smoothness of the underlying measure can be exploited in applications.
However, a simple argument shows that optimal rates can be achieved by \emph{resampling} from the smooth estimator we construct to obtain a discrete distribution supported on~$M \geq n$ points which achieves an accelerated rate for $s \in [0, 1)$.
We extract one simple result in this direction.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:ub_comp}
For any $s \in [0, 1)$, there exists an estimator $\bar \mu_{n, M}$, supported on $M = o(n^2)$ points, such that for any $1 \leq p \leq p' < \infty$ and $1 \leq q \leq \infty$, the estimator enjoys the same rate as in Theorem~\ref{thm:unbounded_ub}.
Moreover, $\bar \mu_{n, M}$ can be computed in time $O(M)$.
\end{theorem}
Additional computational considerations along with a proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:ub_comp} appear in Section~\ref{sec:comp}.
\section{Controlling the Wasserstein distance by Besov norms}\label{sec:wasbes}
The main goal of this section is a proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:besov_wp}, which establishes that the Wasserstein distance between two measures on $\Omega = [0, 1]^d$ can be controlled by a Besov norm of the difference in their densities \emph{as long as their densities are bounded above and below}. We also establish that no analogous result can hold for arbitrary densities.
While we give upper and lower bounds, the Besov norms appearing in the two bounds do not agree. We do not know whether under some conditions the $W_p$ distance is in fact \emph{equivalent} to a particular Besov norm $\|\cdot\|_{\bes{-1}{p}{q}}$ for some $q \in [1, + \infty]$.
The results of this section are closely results to results of \citet{ShiJac08} and \citet{Pey18}, who established similar results for $p < 1$ and $p = 2$, respectively.
In Section~\ref{sec:bes_ub}, we show the upper bound of Theorem~\ref{thm:besov_wp}, and in Section~\ref{sec:gen_dens} we show that no similar bound can exist once the assumption that the density is bounded away from zero is relaxed.
The lower bound is proved in Section~\ref{sec:bes_lb}.
\subsection{Upper bound}\label{sec:bes_ub}
Let $f$ and $g$ be probability densities in $L_p(\Omega)$ for $p \in [1, \infty)$ with the following wavelet expansions.
\begin{equation}\label{eq:fg-expansion}
\begin{aligned}
f & = \sum_{\phi \in \Phi} \alpha_\phi \phi + \sum_{j \geq 0} \sum_{\psi \in \Psi_j} \beta_\psi \psi \\
g & = \sum_{\phi \in \Phi} \alpha'_\phi \phi + \sum_{j \geq 0} \sum_{\psi \in \Psi_j} \beta'_\psi \psi\,,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where we assume (see Assumption~\ref{assume:regularity} in Appendix~\ref{app:wave}) that constant functions lie in the span of $\Phi$.
For the upper bound, we do not need to assume any additional regularity---in particular, Proposition~\ref{prop:wavelet_ub} holds for the Haar wavelet basis~\citep[see][]{Tri10}.
By definition, the expansions in~\eqref{eq:fg-expansion} hold in $L_2$, but in fact convergence also holds in $L_p$ assuming that $f, g \in L_p(\Omega)$~\citep[Remark 8.4]{HarKerPic98}.
We prove the following proposition in Appendix~\ref{app:main}.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:wavelet_ub}
Let $1 \leq p < \infty$.
If $f, g \geq m$ on $[0, 1]^d$, then
\begin{align*}
W_p(\mu_f, \mu_g) & \lesssim %
m^{-1/p'} \left(\|\alpha - \alpha'\|_{\ell_p} + \left\|2^{js} 2^{dj(\frac 12 - \frac 1p)} \|\beta_j\|_{\ell_p} \right\|_{\ell_1}\right)\,,
\end{align*}
where $\frac 1p + \frac{1}{p'} = 1$.
\end{proposition}
\subsection{Densities not bounded below}\label{sec:gen_dens}
We now show that no statement like Proposition~\ref{prop:wavelet_ub} can hold for densities not bounded below. Indeed, in this case, under mild assumptions, it is impossible to control $W_p(\mu_f, \mu_g)$ by any function norm when $p > 1$.
This stands in sharp contrast to the fact that, when $p = 1$, the dual formulation of $W_1$ implies that the Wasserstein distance is such a norm.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:not_norm}
Let $\| \cdot \|$ be any norm on functions on $\Omega$, and suppose that there exists a function $h$ in~$L_1(\Omega)$, not identically zero, satisfying
\begin{itemize}
\item $\int_\Omega h \,\mathrm{d} x= 0$
\item $\|h\| < \infty$
\item The sets $\overline{\{h > 0\}}$ and $\overline{\{h < 0\}}$ are disjoint.
\end{itemize}
Then for any $p > 1$,
\begin{equation*}
\sup_{f, g \in \mathcal{D}(\Omega)} \frac{W_p(\mu_f, \mu_g)}{\|f - g\|} = \infty\,.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
A proof appears in Appendix~\ref{app:main}.
\subsection{Lower bound}\label{sec:bes_lb}
We can prove a lower bound similar to Proposition~\ref{prop:wavelet_ub} when $f$ and $g$ are bounded above.
Unlike the assumption that the densities are bounded below required for Proposition~\ref{prop:wavelet_ub}, this assumption is relatively benign, insofar as it holds automatically for continuous densities on $[0, 1]^d$.
For Proposition~\ref{prop:wavelet_lb}, we require the wavelets in~\eqref{eq:fg-expansion} to possess at least one continuous derivative (see Assumption~\ref{assume:regularity} in Appendix~\ref{app:wave}).
A proof appears in Appendix~\ref{app:main}.
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:wavelet_lb}
Let $1 \leq p < \infty$. If $f, g \leq M$ on $[0, 1]^d$, then
\begin{equation*}
W_p(\mu_f, \mu_g) \gtrsim M^{-1/p'} \left(\|\alpha - \alpha'\|_{\ell_p} + \left\|2^{js} 2^{dj(\frac 12 - \frac 1p)} \|\beta_j\|_{\ell_p} \right\|_{\ell_\infty}\right)\,,
\end{equation*}
where $\frac 1 p + \frac{1}{p'} = 1$.
\end{proposition}
\section{Wavelet estimation in for bounded densities}\label{sec:bounded}
In this section, we employ the results of Section~\ref{sec:wasbes} to prove Theorems~\ref{thm:estimation_ub} and~\ref{thm:estimation_lb}.
We show that the minimax rate over $\bes{s}{p}{q}(L; m)$ can be achieved by a wavelet estimator.
We do not address the issue of adaptivity (to $m$ or to the smoothness $s$) here, but note that it can be handled by known techniques in wavelet density estimation~\citep{DonJoh95}.
\subsection{Upper bound}
To prove Theorem~\ref{thm:estimation_ub}, we introduce the following estimator based on a wavelet expansion of regularity $r > \max\{s, 1\}$ (see Assumption~\ref{assume:regularity} in Appendix~\ref{app:wave}) truncated to level $J$, for some $J \geq 0$ to be chosen. Set
\begin{align*}
\tilde \alpha_\phi & := \frac 1n \sum_{i=1}^n \phi(X_i) \quad \phi \in \Phi\\
\tilde \beta_\psi & := \frac 1n \sum_{i=1}^n \psi(X_i) \quad \psi \in \Psi_j, 0 \leq j \leq J
\end{align*}
and let $\tilde f := \sum_{\phi \in \Phi} \tilde \alpha_\phi \phi + \sum_{0 \leq j \leq J} \sum_{\psi \in \Psi_j} \tilde \beta_\psi \psi$.
While such an estimator can already yield optimal rates in $L_p$~\citep{KerPic92}, $\tilde f$ may fail to be a probability density, in which case the quantity $W_p(\mu_f, \mu_{\tilde f})$ is undefined.
We therefore focus on the estimator
\begin{equation*}
\hat f := \min_{g \in \mathcal{D}(m)} \|g - \tilde f\|_{\bes{-1}{p}{1}}\,,
\end{equation*}
where $\mathcal{D}(m)$ is the set of probability densities on $\Omega$ bounded below by $m$.
By construction, $\hat f$ is a density, so that $W_p(\mu_f, \mu_{\hat f})$ is meaningful.
The proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:estimation_ub} now follows from standard facts in wavelet density estimation. It appears in Appendix~\ref{app:main}
\subsection{Lower bound}
Our lower bound follows almost directly from the bound proved by~\citet{KerPic92} to establish minimax rates for density estimation in $L_p$ over Besov spaces.
We defer the proof to Appendix~\ref{app:main}.
\section{General smooth densities}\label{sec:unbounded}
In this section, we give results for general smooth densities (Theorems~\ref{thm:unbounded_lb} and~\ref{thm:unbounded_ub}).
Our main result is a lower bound showing that the rate of estimation over the class $\bes{s}{p'}{q}(L)$ is strictly worse than the rate over the class $\bes{s}{p'}{q}(L; m)$ when $L$ is large enough that $\bes{s}{p'}{q}(L) \not\subseteq \bes{s}{p'}{q}(L; m)$. We also give an upper bound when the smoothness parameter $s$ is less than 1, which nearly matches our lower bounds.
\subsection{Lower bounds}
We assume that $L$ is large enough that $\bes{s}{p'}{q}(L)$ contains a function $g_0$ whose support lies entirely inside $(0, 1/3)^d$. It is easy to see that this goal is indeed achievable by choosing $g_0$ to be suitable compactly supported smooth bump functions, as long as $L$ is a large enough constant.
The lower bound is based on the following fundamental lemma, which gives a lower bound on the Wasserstein distances for a pair of measures with disconnected support.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:wp_separated_lb}
Let $\mu$ and $\nu$ be measures on $\mathbb{R}^d$.
Suppose there exist two compact sets $S$ and $T$ such that $d(S, T) \geq c$ and such that the supports of $\mu$ and $\nu$ lie in $S \cup T$.
Then
\begin{equation*}
W_p(\mu, \nu) \geq c |\mu(S) - \nu(S)|^{1/p}
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assume without loss of generality that $\mu(S) \geq \nu(S)$.
Then any coupling between $\mu$ and $\nu$ must assign mass at least $\mu(S) - \nu(S)$ to $S \times T$, so that $W_p^P(\mu, \nu) \geq c^p \lambda$.
\end{proof}
The proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:unbounded_lb} boils down to applying Lemma~\ref{lem:wp_separated_lb} to appropriately chosen measures.
We defer the proof to Appendix~\ref{app:main}.
\subsection{Upper bounds}
We now show how to prove an upper bound for general densities that achieves the rate $n^{- \frac{1 + s/p}{d + 2s}}$ for $s < 1$.
The construction is based on the following observation.
For $j \geq 0$, let $\mathcal{Q} := \bigcup_{j \geq 0} \mathcal{Q}_j$ be the dyadic decomposition of $[0, 1]^d$, where $\mathcal{Q}_j$ consists of a partition of $[0, 1]^d$ into cubes with sides of length $2^{-j}$.
If $\mu$ and $\nu$ are two measures on $[0, 1]^d$, then such a decomposition can be used to obtain an upper bound on the Wasserstein distance between $\mu$ and $\nu$~\citep[see, e.g.,][Proposition 1]{WeeBac18}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:haar_expansion}
W_p^p(\mu, \nu) \lesssim \sum_{j \geq 0} 2^{-jp} \sum_{Q \in \mathcal{Q}_j} |\mu(Q) - \nu(Q)|\,.
\end{equation}
When $\mu$ and $\nu$ possess densities $f$ and $g$, respectively, the expression on the right side of the above inequality is an expansion of $f - g$ with respect to the Haar wavelet basis.
We can therefore again employ a wavelet estimator using the Haar wavelet, as in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:estimation_ub}. The definition of the Haar wavelet implies that such an estimator is in fact a histogram, that is, its density is constant on each cube in $\mathcal{Q}_J$, where $J$ represents the level at which the wavelet expansion is truncated.
A full proof appears in Appendix~\ref{app:main}.
\section{Computational aspects}\label{sec:comp}
One of the motivations for this line of work is found in applications of optimal transport techniques for data analysis and machine learning, with unknown distributions and access to an independent sample of size $n$.
Many so-called {\em variational Wasserstein problems} involve the problem of minimizing a functional $F:\nu \mapsto W_p(\nu,\mu)$ with unknown $\mu$.
These problems, such as minimum Kantorovich estimators~\citep{BasBodReg06} and Wasserstein barycenters~\citep{AguCar11}, are increasingly common in practical applications~\citep{PeyCut17}, especially when the minimization is taken over a parametric class, with $\nu = \nu_\theta$ for $\theta \in \Theta$.
Solving variational Wasserstein problems in practice requires first obtaining an empirical estimate of the functional $F$ on the basis of data drawn from $\mu$, and then writing the resulting optimization problem in a computationally tractable form. The first issue is typically addressed by obtaining an estimator $\tilde \mu_n$ of $\mu$ and then estimating the functional via the plug-in principle.
Indeed, the triangle inequality implies that
\[
\sup_{\nu \in \mathcal{P}}|W_p(\nu,\mu) - W_p(\nu,\tilde \mu_n)| = W_p(\mu, \tilde \mu_n)\, ,
\]
where equality is achieved at $\mu = \nu$.
Following this approach, guarantees in Wasserstein distance between $\mu$ and the estimator $\tilde \mu_n$ therefore yield uniform deviation bounds for these functionals over the set of all probability measures on $\mathbb{R}^d$.
To solve the resulting optimization problem, finite discretizations are often taken for $\nu$ and $\tilde \mu_n$ to render the resulting problem amenable to discrete optimization techniques~\citep{Cut13,AltWeeRig17}.
For this reason, the estimator $\tilde \mu_n$ is often taken to be the empirical distribution $\hat \mu_n$, since this measure is a finitely supported measure and enjoys the rate
\begin{equation*}
{\rm I}\kern-0.18em{\rm E} W_p(\mu, \hat \mu_n) \lesssim n^{-1/d}\,,
\end{equation*}
as long as $d > 2p$, which is minimax optimal over the class of compactly supported probability measures~\citep{SinPoc18}.
However, Sections~\ref{sec:bounded} and~\ref{sec:unbounded} establish that under natural regularity assumptions for $\mu$, estimators based on density estimation statistically outperform the empirical distribution. Focusing on the regime $d > 2p$, Theorems~\ref{thm:estimation_ub} and~\ref{thm:unbounded_ub} yield guarantees of the form
\[
{\rm I}\kern-0.18em{\rm E} W_p(\mu,\tilde \mu_n) \lesssim n^{-\gamma^*(s)/d}\, ,
\]
where $\gamma^*(s) \geq 1$ increases as the smoothness of $\mu$ increases.
These results are summarized in the following table, highlighting that the optimal exponent $\gamma^*(s)/d$ interpolates between $1/d$ (for $s=0$) and $1/2p$ (for $s$ going to $\infty$). The value $s=1$ is of special interest, as it corresponds to the maximum smoothness which can be exploited by a histogram estimator, which is most relevant for computational aspects.
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\rule{0pt}{3ex} Nonparametric class & optimal $\gamma^*(s)$ & $\gamma^*(0)/d$ & $\gamma^*(\infty)/d$ & $\gamma^*(1)/d$\\
\hline
\rule{0pt}{3ex} $\bes{s}{p}{q}(L)$ & $\frac{1+s/p}{1+2s/d}$ & $1/d$ & $1/2p$ & $\frac{1+1/p}{d+2}$ \\[1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
Note that for $d>2p$, the exponent $\gamma^*(s)$ is greater than 1. In the light of these results, there is an apparent tension between two objectives: statistical precision and computational efficiency. On the one hand, using the empirical measure as an estimator of the unknown distribution permits efficient computation of Wasserstein distances: the optimal transport problem reduces to a linear program in finite dimension. The statistical performance of this approximation can however be suboptimal: for smooth densities the lower bound in $n^{-1/d}$ applies to all $n$-atomic distributions~\citep{Dud69}, which is strictly worse than the rate appearing in the table above. On the other hand, wavelet estimators can attain minimax-optimal statistical precision, but even in the simple case of histograms (piecewise-constant densities), there is no explicit or simple way to solve optimal transport problems involving such measures.
We therefore propose a procedure to leverage the regularity of the distribution, and to handle our proposed estimators in a computationally efficient manner. The idea is to exploit the best of both worlds, by creating an atomic measure with $M \geq n$ atoms, based on a density estimator. Such measures statistically outperform the empirical measure, and optimal transport problems can be explicitly solved on these measures. If it is possible to efficiently sample from one of these estimators, it is always possible to extract an atomic distribution out of it, as described in the following
\begin{definition}
Let $\tilde \mu_n$ be a probability measure from which one can efficiently sample points, and let $Z_1,\ldots,Z_M$ be an i.i.d. sample from $\tilde \mu_n$. The {\em estimator resample distribution} is $\bar \mu_{n,M} := \frac{1}{M} \sum_{i=1}^M \delta_{Z_i}$.
\end{definition}
The distribution $\bar \mu_{n,M}$ is ``simply'' the empirical distribution of a sample of size $M$ from a distribution. However, we retain $n$ in the notation, to highlight that the $Z_i$'s are themselves drawn from an estimator based on a sample of size $n$ from an unknown $\mu$. We recall the following result for compactly supported distributions.
\begin{proposition}[\citealp{FouGui15}]
For $d > 2p$, the estimator resample distribution~$\bar \mu_{n,M}$ satisfies
\[
{\rm I}\kern-0.18em{\rm E} W_p(\tilde \mu_n, \bar \mu_{n,M}) \lesssim M^{-1/d}\, .
\]
\end{proposition}
As a consequence of this result, resampling from the estimated distribution yields an atomic measure as close in Wasserstein distance to the original estimator as desired, since $M$ can be chosen by the statistician. This approach shares some similarities with the concept of the parametric bootstrap~\citep{Was04}, where a sample of the same size is drawn from an estimator. Conceptually, this is however quite different: our focus is not on inference and we do not aim to to create a proxy of our original sample sharing similar probabilistic properties. The resample of size $M$ is created to approximate, up to statistical precision, the estimate of $\mu$ by an atomic measure, as in finite element methods in numerical analysis.
It is naturally only useful to chose an approximation error $M^{-1/d}$ of the same order as the estimation error, as seen in the following.
\begin{corollary}\label{resample}
Assume $d > 2p$.
Let $\mu$ be in a nonparametric class such that there exists an estimator~$\tilde \mu_n$ from which one can efficiently sample, and such that ${\rm I}\kern-0.18em{\rm E} W_p(\tilde \mu_n, \mu) \lesssim n^{-\gamma^*/d}$.
For any $\gamma \in [1,\gamma^*]$, the estimator resample distribution $\bar \mu_{n,M}$ with $M=n^\gamma$ satisfies
\[
{\rm I}\kern-0.18em{\rm E} W_p(\mu, \bar \mu_{n,M}) \lesssim n^{-\gamma/d}\, .
\]
\end{corollary}
The proofs of this corollary and Theorem~\ref{thm:ub_comp}, which follows directly, appear in Appendix~\ref{app:main}.
In some examples, the choice of $\gamma^*$ can be left to the practitioner. For our estimators, this corresponds to choosing the depth of the wavelet decomposition. Taking piecewise constant estimators (histograms) limits the exponent $\gamma$ to $\gamma^*=\gamma^*(1)$. In any case, it is also possible to chose $M=n^{\gamma}$ for $\gamma \in (1,\gamma^*(1)]$, and let the approximation error $n^{-\gamma/d}$ dominate the statistical error $n^{-\gamma^*(1)/d}$.
Using the estimator resample distribution $\bar \mu_{n,M}$ instead of $\hat \mu_n$ requires solving optimal transport problems of size $M=n^\gamma$ instead of $n$.
This naturally increases the computational cost. This motivates the question of quantifying the statistical and computational tradeoffs of our proposal. The dependency of the algorithmic cost of solving optimal transportation problems on the size of the distribution is the subject of a large literature~\citep[see][]{PeyCut17}, from which we extract a simple bound.
\begin{proposition}[\citealp{AltWeeRig17,DvuGasKro18}]\label{prop:sink}
Given two distributions $\alpha$ and~$\beta$ supported on at most $M$ atoms on a set of diameter $1$, an additive approximation to $W^p_p(\alpha, \beta)$ of accuracy $\varepsilon$ can be computed in time $O(M^2 \log(M) / \varepsilon^2)$.
\end{proposition}
The following describes the interplay between statistical precision and computational efficiency for estimating the Wasserstein distance between distributions. We prove this theorem in Appendix~\ref{app:main}.
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:tradeoff}
Let $\mu$ be in a nonparametric class such that there exists an estimator $\tilde \mu_n$ from which one can efficiently sample, and such that
\[
{\rm I}\kern-0.18em{\rm E} W_p(\tilde \mu_n, \mu) \lesssim n^{-\gamma^*/d}
\]
Given a sample of size $n$ from $\mu$ and known $\nu$, for any $\gamma \in [1,\gamma^*]$ an estimate $\tilde W_{p,n}$ of $W_p(\nu,\mu)$ satisfying
\[
{\rm I}\kern-0.18em{\rm E} |\tilde W_{p,n} - W_p(\nu,\mu)| \lesssim n^{-\gamma/d}
\]
can be computed in time $O\big(n^{\gamma(2+2p/d)} \log(n)\big)$.
\end{theorem}
Taking $\gamma=1$, $\tilde \mu_n = \hat \mu_n$ and $M=n$ with $\bar \mu_{n,M} = \hat \mu_n$ (without resampling) is always possible. It yields an algorithm that outputs a $n^{-1/d}$ approximation in time $\tilde O\big(n^{2+2p/d}\big)$. However, whenever another estimator $\tilde \mu_n$ with precision $n^{-\gamma/d}$ exists for $\gamma \in (1,\gamma^*(s)]$, it is possible to obtain a better approximation with error $n^{-\gamma/d}$ in time of order $\tilde O(n^{\gamma(2+2p/d)}$. This quantifies the computational cost for added statistical precision. %
We summarize these results in the following table, for $\gamma^*= \gamma^*(1)$ for histogram estimators (from which it is easy to sample).
The parameter $\gamma$ can be taken in the full range from $1$ to $\gamma^*(1)$.
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
\rule{0pt}{3ex} $\gamma$ & precision $n^{-\gamma/d}$& $M = n^\gamma$ & time $n^{\gamma(2+2/d)} \log(n)$ \\
\hline
\rule{0pt}{3ex} $\gamma=1$ & $n^{-\frac{1}{d}}$ & $n$ & $n^{2+2p/d} \log(n)$ \\ [1ex]
\rule{0pt}{3ex} $\gamma^*(1) = \frac{1+1/p}{1+2/d}$ & $n^{-\frac{1+1/p}{d+2}}$ & $n^{\frac{1+1/p}{1+2/d}}$ & $n^{2(1+1/p)(1+ \frac{p-2}{d+2})} \log(n)$ \\[1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
In the high-dimensional limit,
we obtain that a histogram estimator can improve the exponent in the precision by a factor $\gamma$ of nearly $1+1/p$ at the price of increasing the exponent in the running time by nearly the same factor.
The choice of $M$, which can be left to the statistician, determines the value of $\gamma$.
\bibliographystyle{abbrvnat_weed}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{introduction}
The multiple stellar populations (MPs) present in individual globular clusters (GCs) are characterised by star-to-star abundance anti-correlations
of light elements (C-N, O-Na and Mg-Al to a certain extent) together with spreads of initial He abundances \citep[e.g.][]{Milone18,Bastian18}.
It has been recently shown that massive intermediate-age clusters in the Magellanic Clouds (MCs) --with ages down to $\sim$2~Gyr--
also display light element abundance patterns like GCs
\citep[e.g.][]{Hollyhead17,Niederhofer17_121,Niederhofer17}. On the other hand, clusters younger than $\sim$2~Gyr seem to lack detectable MPs,
suggesting that age (or stellar mass) play a major factor in the onset of this phenomenon in massive stellar clusters \citep{Martocchia18}.
An important question to be addressed is the following: Do the MCs massive clusters older than $\sim$2~Gyr also display He abundance spreads, like Galactic GCs?
If this is the case, these intermediate-age clusters are the counterparts of Galactic GCs in terms of MPs, thus suggesting that the MP formation
is not restricted to high redshift environments. This, in turn, implies that young stellar clusters can also be used to constrain the MP formation process.
In a very recent paper, \citet{Lagioia19} determined the presence of He abundance spread in four SMC massive clusters, employing photometry of
red giant branch (RGB) stars.
They found small helium abundance spreads in NGC~121, NGC~339 and NGC~416, while no spread was found for Lindsay~1.
Here, we will investigate the presence of a He abundance spread in a sample of MC clusters by modelling
the morphology of their Red Clump (RC) and red horizontal branch (HB) stars in the colour-magnitude-diagram (CMD) using synthetic HB (and RC) models.
As is well known, the CMD morphology of the He-burning phase is very sensitive to the initial He abundance of the parent populations,
and indeed synthetic HB models have been employed to determine He abundance spreads
in Milky Way GCs such as NGC~104 \citep{Gratton13}, NGC~2419 \citep{diCriscienzo11,diCriscienzo15},
NGC~2808 \citep{Dalessandro11}, NGC~5272 \citep{Dalessandro13}, NGC~5904 \citep{Gratton13}, NGC~6388 \citep{Busso07}, and NGC~6441 \citep{Busso07,Caloi07}.
The massive, intermediate-age clusters investigated in this study are Lindsay~1, NGC~121, NGC~339, NGC~416, in common with \citet{Lagioia19}, plus
Hodge~6, Lindsay~38, Lindsay~113 and NGC~1978. They are all younger than the average Milky Way GC, with ages ranging between $\sim$2~Gyr and $\sim$10~Gyr. Additionally, all clusters have had MP signatures detected within them either photometrically or spectroscopically, except Lindsay 38 and Lindsay 113 that are currently being investigated (Martocchia et al.~2019, in preparation).
Our study expands the sample of clusters in the MCs investigated for the presence of initial He abundance spreads. Also, our method is complementary to the technique employed
by \citet{Lagioia19}. These latter authors model several colour differences --sensitive to He, C, N, O abundance spreads-- between fiducial sequences that
trace the RGB of the main populations of each cluster (for one cluster they also determine the He spread from the RGB bump, whose brightness is also
sensitive to the initial He abundance). As such, their method tends to measure differences of mean He abundances between cluster subpopulations.
Our HB modelling aims at reproducing the full colour and magnitude range of the observed HBs, and should estimate the maximum He spread amongst stars in individual clusters.
The paper is organised as follows.
Sect.~\ref{mando} that describes both stellar evolution models and observations employed in this paper.
Section~\ref{theory} describes briefly the synthetic HB models, how they can reveal the presence of initial $Y$ variations, and the fitting
procedure to observational data.
In Sect.~\ref{analysis}
we investigate the presence of $Y$ variations in individual clusters in our sample, and in Sect.~\ref{discussion} we finally discuss and summarise our results.
\section{Stellar models and observations}\label{mando}
We employ non-rotating stellar evolution models and tracks computed with the code STAREVOL \citep[e.g.][]{Lagarde12}. Our calculations do not include atomic
diffusion\footnote{All observed HBs and RCs investigated here are cool enough ($T_{\rm eff} \lesssim$10'000~K) to avoid strong effects of atomic diffusion \citep{HuiBonHoa00,Michaud11}.}.
For each assumed cluster metallicity and age, we have computed models --from the zero age main sequence to the end of the HB, following the evolution
through the He-flash-- with various values of the initial Helium mass fraction ($Y$), choosing appropriate initial main sequence masses to reach the cluster age at the beginning of the
He-burning phase. Our calculations do not include the early-asymptotic giant branch phase following the exhaustion of central He.
The $Y$ values range from the value expected from Galactic chemical evolution ($\Delta Y$/$\Delta Z \sim 1.57$) to the maximum values given in Table~\ref{Table:ClustersHB},
that vary from cluster to cluster.
As for the metal distribution of our models, we assume a scaled solar distribution (\citealt{Asplund09}, with
an $\alpha$-enhancement for the case of NGC~104 and NGC~121, see next section). Also, the He-enhanced models
(that in principle should have metal distributions with altered C, N, O, Na, Mg, Al abundances) are calculated for the same scaled solar (or $\alpha$-enhanced) metal mixture,
given that stellar evolution is not affected by these abundance variations if the sum of the C+N+O abundance is kept constant at fixed
metallicity \citep[as generally observed, within the errors, in Galactic GCs, see e.g.][]{Yong15}. In addition, we work on CMDs in the \textit{ACS} and \textit{WFC3}
F475W, F555W, and F814W photometric bands, that are insensitive to variations of these light elements \citep[see e.g.,][]{Salaris06,Sbordone11}.
Mass-loss during the red giant branch (RGB) evolution is accounted for by employing the Reimers formula \citep{Reimers75}:
\begin{equation*}
\dot{M} = 4 \times10^{-13} \eta_R \frac{LR}{M} M_\odot yr^{-1}
\end{equation*}
where L, M and R are the model luminosity, mass and radius in solar units.
For each metallicity and $Y$ abundances we have calculated tracks for various values of $\eta_R$.
Bolometric corrections to the \textit{ACS} and \textit{WFC3} filters are obtained by interpolation amongst the tables from the MIST database \citep{Choi16} \footnote{\url{http://waps.cfa.harvard.edu/MIST/model_grids.html}}.
Clusters' photometries are taken from the \textit{Hubble Space Telescope} survey presented in \cite{Niederhofer17_121,Niederhofer17,Martocchia18}
and Martocchia et al. (\textit{in prep.}). In this study we use the \textit{ACS} $F555W$ and $F814W$ optical filters, except
for Hodge~6, for which we use \textit{WFC3} photometry in the $F475W$ and $F814W$ filters.
The cluster CMDs are shown in Fig.~\ref{Figure:CMDs}, and the relevant cluster properties are listed in Table~\ref{Table:ClustersHB}.
\cite{Niederhofer17_121,Niederhofer17,Martocchia18} and Martocchia et al. (\textit{in prep.}) investigated these clusters for differential reddening and only NGC~416 is affected (we refer to these works for more details). Thus we use the data corrected for differential reddening for this cluster.
\begin{table*}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{| c | c | c | c | c | c | c | c | c | c | c | c | c |}
\hline \hline
\multicolumn{9} {c} {Cluster} & \multicolumn{2} {c} {minimum $Y$ models} & \multicolumn{2} {c} {maximum $Y$ models} \\
ID & [Fe/H] & Age (Gyr) & Ref. & Mass (M$_\odot$) & Ref. &$(m-M)_V$ & $E(B-V)$ & Ref. & Y$_\mathrm{ini}$ & M$_\mathrm{ini}$ (M$_\odot$) & Y$_\mathrm{ini}$ & M$_\mathrm{ini}$ (M$_\odot$) \\ \hline
NGC~104 & -0.72 & 12.0 & M15 & $7.79\times10^5$ & B18 & 13.37 & 0.04 & H96 & 0.251 & 0.905 & 0.291 & 0.84 \\ \hline
NGC~121 & -1.30 & 10.5 & G8a,N17 & $5.83\times10^5$ & G11 & 19.00 & 0.03 & G8a,N17a & 0.248 & 0.89 & 0.288 & 0.83 \\
Lindsay~1 & -1.14 & 7.5$\pm$0.5 & G8b & $1.74\times10^5$ & G11 & 18.78 & 0.02 & G8b & 0.249 & 0.97 & 0.279 & 0.92 \\
NGC~339 & -1.12 & 6$\pm$0.5 & G8b & $2.88\times10^5$ & G11 & 18.80 & 0.02 & G8b & 0.250 & 1.04 & 0.290 & 0.97 \\
NGC~416 & -1.00 & 6$\pm$0.5 & G8b & $2.32\times10^5$ & G11 & 18.90 & 0.08 & G8b & 0.250 & 1.045 & 0.330 & 0.905 \\
Lindsay~38 & -1.50 & 6$\pm$0.5 & M19 & $3.35\times10^4$ & G11 & 19.10 & 0.02 & M19 & 0.249 & 1.02 & 0.269 & 0.985 \\
Lindsay~113 & -1.40 & 4.5$\pm$0.5 & M19 & $\sim2.3\times10^4$ & C10 & 18.85 & 0.02 & M19 & 0.249 & 1.11 & 0.269 & 1.07 \\
Hodge~6 & -0.40 & 2.25$\pm$0.05 & P14,G14 & $5.5\times10^4$ & G14 & 18.77 & 0.09 & P14 & 0.258 & 1.53 & 0.318 & 1.37\\
NGC~1978 & -0.35 & 1.9$\pm$0.1 & M07 & $2-4\times10^5$ & W97 & 18.71 & 0.05 & M18b & 0.258 & 1.60 & 0.288 & 1.51 \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption[]{Adopted parameters for the clusters we investigate in this study. Note that the minimum and maximum $Y$ models displayed in this table are the models of our grid we use to interpolate in between to create the synthetic HB models (cf text). References: (M15) \cite{McDonald15}; (B18) \cite{Baumgardt18}; (H96) \cite{Harris96}, 2010 edition; (G8a) \cite{Glatt08_121}; (N17) \cite{Niederhofer17_121}; (G11) \cite{Glatt11}; (G8b) \cite{Glatt08}; (M19) Martocchia et al. (in prep.); (C10) Computed from the absolute magnitude in the V band \citep[-5.29,][]{Carretta10} and adopting a mass-to-light ratio of $\sim2$ \citep{Baumgardt18}; (P14) \cite{Piatti14}; (G14) \cite{Goudfrooij14}; (M07) \cite{Mucciarelli07}; (W97) \cite{Westerlund97}, (M18b) \cite{Martocchia18_1978}.} \label{Table:ClustersHB}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{NGC121.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{L1.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{NGC339.png} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{NGC416.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{L38.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{L113.png} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{Hodge6.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.33\textwidth]{NGC1978.png} \\
\caption{CMDs of NGC~121, Lindsay~1, NGC~339, NGC~416, Lindsay~38, Lindsay~113, Hodge~6 and NGC~1978 with a zoom on the HB/RC region.
Except for Hodge~6, whose CMD is displayed in the F475W vs (F475W-F814W) diagram, all the other CMDs are F555W vs (F555W-F814W).} \label{Figure:CMDs}
\end{figure*}
\section{Synthetic horizontal branch modelling}\label{theory}
To determine the theoretical cluster HB (or RC) location and morphology in the CMD we need to fix a number of parameters, namely the cluster
age, metallicity, initial He distribution, RGB mass loss efficiency ($\eta_R$, that determines the actual mass of the synthetic HB stars for a given cluster age and initial chemical composition).
For each cluster, we fix age and metallicity to the values estimated in previous studies, as reported in Table~\ref{Table:ClustersHB}.
Notice that variations of the age around the values in Table~\ref{Table:ClustersHB} will change the derived value of $\eta_R$ (because of a different HB progenitor mass) but not the
overall results about the presence (or absence) of a He abundance spread in individual clusters.
Also, the minimum value of $Y$ (that we denote as the He abundance of the He-normal population) is fixed to the value given by $Y = Y_0+ \Delta Y/ \Delta Z \times Z$ where $Z$ is the heavy element mass fraction. The primordial helium mass fraction Y$_0$ chosen is equal to 0.2479 \citep{Coc04}.
The free parameters that are left to be determined by fitting synthetic HBs to observed CMDs are the minimum and eventually maximum value of $\eta_R$
(if the observed HB is matched with a spread of
mass loss instead of $Y$), and the maximum value of $Y$ (if a range of $Y$ is required).
For simplicity, we assume a uniform probability distribution for $\eta_R$ and $Y$, between the minimum and maximum values.
We interpolate in $Y$ and $\eta_R$ amongst our model grid to determine the HB track of our synthetic star for a given $\eta_R$ and $Y$. We then extract a random age
with uniform probability between the
zero age HB and the exhaustion of central He points, to fix the position of the synthetic stars in the CMD\footnote{The underlying standard assumptions is that stars are fed to the HB at a constant rate.}.
Magnitudes and colours of the synthetic stars are then perturbed by random Gaussian photometric errors, with 1$\sigma$ values taken from the mean photometric errors of the observations. We also checked these errors by comparing with the RGB width. We verticalised the RGB to determine the standard deviation of the $\delta$(colour) distribution of RGB stars at the HB magnitude level. The standard deviation then derived is similar to the photometric errors of the observations, in addition this standard deviation can be considered as an upper limit since the He spread also affects the RGB width. Thus we are confident with these photometric errors. For each cluster we create the same number of synthetic stars as the one observed in a box delimiting the HB region of each cluster.
The procedure adopted to match the observed HB of a given cluster works as follows. For any given cluster we apply to the models distance modulus
and reddening values listed in Table~\ref{Table:ClustersHB}, using the extinction coefficient for the \textit{ACS} and \textit{WFC3} filters from \cite{Goudfrooij09,Goudfrooij14}.
We then adjust $E(B-V)$ to fit the cluster RGB with the track of the HB progenitor, and fix $\eta_R$ to match the reddest part of the observed HB
with models calculated with the minimum value of $Y$.
We then vary the maximum value of $Y$ at fixed $\eta_R$ --or $\eta_R$ and fixed initial $Y$-- to reproduce by eye the slope and full colour
extension of the HB. Due to the strong sensitivity of the HB morphology to variations of $Y$ (and $\eta_R$), we found with numerical tests that
a simple fit by eye can give an accuracy on $\Delta Y$ better than 0.01 (see Sect.~\ref{analysis}).
We do not try to enforce the constraint of statistical agreement between the theoretical and observed star counts, because a perfect fit of star counts rests on the precise knowledge of, for example, the initial $Y$ distribution among the cluster stars, that could be extremely complicated and/or discontinuous.
The morphological constraints imposed on the matching synthetic HB are however sufficient to put strong bounds on $\Delta Y$, the maximum He abundance range, that is
the main parameter discussed in this work. Obviously, our technique does not determine the exact number distribution of HB stars as a function of their initial $Y$.
Figure~\ref{Figure:Theory} shows the case of two clusters, one (Lindsay~1) representative of intermediate-age and old clusters (initial mass of He-normal HB progenitors
lower than $\sim$1.5 $M_{\odot}$),
and one (NGC~1978) representative of younger clusters but still populated by RGB stars with electron degenerate cores.
For the sake of clarity we display selected HB evolutionary tracks without photometric errors applied. The tracks shown do not represent the best fit
models for these two clusters that will then
be presented in Sect.~\ref{analysis}, rather their purpose is just to highlight trends in the CMD.
In both cases a variation $\Delta Y$ at fixed $\eta_R$ (and age) moves the HB tracks in an orthogonal direction with respect to the effect of varying
$\eta_R$ ($\Delta \eta_R$ ) at fixed $Y$ \citep[see also Fig.~1 in][]{Salaris16}, although the directions of the $\Delta Y$ and $\Delta \eta_R$ vectors change between the two age regimes.
It is quite obvious even from this simple qualitative test shown in Fig.~\ref{Figure:Theory}, that Lindsay~1 HB morphology can be matched only
with $\Delta Y>$0.
On the other hand, the HB morphology of NGC~1978 seems more likely to be shaped by a range of $\eta_R$.
We will see that the inclusion of photometric errors
makes however difficult to draw firm conclusions for this cluster and the similar cluster Hodge~6.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{theoryblue_label.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{theory2blue_label.png}
\caption{\textbf{\textit{Left:}} HB of Lindsay 1 in grey open triangles. The HB stellar evolution tracks with initial main sequence mass
$M_{ini} =$ 0.97~M$_\odot$, [Fe/H] = -1.14, $\Delta Y = 0$ (cluster age $\sim$7.5~Gyr) and $\eta_R$ = 0.3 and 0.5 are displayed with red and green lines, respectively. The track with initial main sequence mass $M_{ini} =$ 0.92~M$_\odot$, [Fe/H] = -1.14, $\Delta Y = 0.03$
(HB age $\sim$7.5~Gyr), $\eta_R$ = 0.3 is displayed with a blue line. The values of the corresponding current HB masses are displayed in the labels. \textbf{\textit{Right:}} Horizontal branch of NGC~1978
in grey open triangles. HB tracks with initial mass $M_{ini} =$ 1.60~M$_\odot$, [Fe/H] = -0.35, $\Delta Y = 0$ (cluster age $\sim$1.9~Gyr), $\eta_R$ = 0.4 and 0.2 are
displayed with red and green lines respectively. Tracks with an initial mass $M_{ini} =$ 1.51~M$_\odot$, [Fe/H] = -0.35 and $\Delta Y = 0.03$ (HB age $\sim$1.9~Gyr) and $\eta_R$ = 0.4 is displayed with a
blue line. The current masses are displayed in the label.} \label{Figure:Theory}
\end{figure*}
We conclude this section with a test of our synthetic HB modelling on the well studied Galactic GC NGC~104
(total mass equal to $\sim$ $7.8\times10^{5} M_\odot$, age $\sim$12~Gyr, [Fe/H] = $-$0.72, as summarized in Table~\ref{Table:ClustersHB}) and compare with the synthetic HB modelling by \citet{Salaris16},
who found that a helium range $\Delta Y$=0.03 is needed to reproduce the observed HB morphology. Their result is in good agreement with several previous studies
\citep{Anderson09, diCriscienzo10,Milone12,Gratton13} who determined $\Delta Y \sim$0.02-0.03 for this GC.
We employed the same data \citep[$BVI$ photometry by][]{Bergbusch09} used by \cite{Salaris16}, an apparent distance modulus $(m-M)_V$ = 13.37 and reddening $E(B-V)$ = 0.04 \citep[][2010 edition]{Harris96},
and calculated $\alpha$-enhanced stellar models for [Fe/H] = -0.72, [$\alpha$/Fe]=+0.2, an age of 12~Gyr and various initial $Y$ and $\eta_R$. We use here for the extinction $A_B/A_V = 1.29719$ and $A_I/A_V= 0.60329$. Following the procedure described before, we find $\eta_R$ = 0.34 ($\Delta M_{RGB}\sim 0.17$~M$_\odot$) and $\Delta Y$ = 0.03 from the match of the observed HB. Figure~\ref{Figure:NGC104} compares the observed HB with synthetic HBs calculated with $\eta_R$ = 0.34 and both $\Delta Y$ = 0 (left-hand panel) and $\Delta Y$ = 0.03 (right-hand panel).
A $\Delta Y$ of only 0.025 produces a HB too short and $\Delta Y$=0.035 produces a HB slightly too extended compared to the observations,
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{104_00.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.4\textwidth]{104_30_noB_arrow_V2.pdf} \\
\caption{$VI$ CMD of NGC~104 HB (grey open triangles) together with our synthetic HB models (red circles). \textbf{\textit{Left:}} synthetic HB with $\Delta Y$=0.
\textbf{\textit{Right:}} Synthetic HB with $\Delta Y$=0.03 and uniform helium abundance distribution. The number of synthetic and observed stars in the box (blue) delimiting the HB region is the same. The arrows describe the direction along which variations in Y and mass-loss work, the amplitude being arbitrary here.} \label{Figure:NGC104}
\end{figure*}
Our derived $\Delta Y$ = 0.03$\pm$0.005 is in good agreement with what is found in
the literature.
\section{Analysis of the Magellanic Clouds' cluster sample}\label{analysis}
\subsection{NGC~121}
NGC~121 (SMC) has been investigated by \citet{Dalessandro16} and \citet{Niederhofer17_121}. The latter found two distinct populations from the analysis of the RGB with appropriate filter combinations, and
they also concluded that a He abundance spread $\Delta Y$=0.025$\pm$0.005 is needed to explain the morphology of the cluster HB.
Therefore this cluster, with properties very similar to massive Milky Way GCs (total mass $\sim 5.8\times10^{5} M_\odot$, age equal to $\sim$10.5~Gyr, and [Fe/H] = $-$1.30),
allows us to compare again our results with previous independent results.
We found that $\eta_R$ = 0.33 (corresponding to a total RGB mass loss $\Delta M_{RGB}\sim 0.145$~M$_\odot$, irrespective of the initial $Y$ of the models)
and $\Delta Y \sim$0.03 are required to match the colour extension and slope of the observed HB, as shown in Fig.~\ref{Figure:N121}.
A variation of $\eta_R$ at constant initial $Y$ would extend the synthetic HB orthogonally compared to the observations (see Fig.~\ref{Figure:Theory}).
The derived $\Delta Y$ is consistent with \citet{Niederhofer17_121} result, based on a different set of HB stellar evolution models.
In the same Fig.~\ref{Figure:N121} we display the effect of changing $\Delta Y$ of the synthetic HBs by $\pm$0.01 around $\Delta Y =$0.03.
It is obvious that in this case the colour extension of the observed HB is clearly not matched by the synthetic stars, implying that the error on our
estimates of $\Delta Y$ is lower than 0.01. This is the typical upper limit to the error in the $\Delta Y$ values obtained for the other clusters in our sample.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{121_00.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{121_30_arrow.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{121_20.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{121_40.png} \\
\caption{CMD of NGC~121 HB. Observations are represented by grey open triangles. Our synthetic HB models are overplotted in red.
\textbf{\textit{Top panels:}} Synthetic HB calculated with $\Delta Y$=0.0 and $\Delta Y$=0.03, respectively, both assuming $\eta_R$ = 0.33. The arrows describe the direction along which variations in Y and mass-loss work, the amplitude being arbitrary here.
\textbf{\textit{Bottom panels:}} Synthetic HBs with $\eta_R$ = 0.33 calculated with $\Delta Y$=0.02 and $\Delta Y$=0.04 (see text for details).} \label{Figure:N121}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{L1_00.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{L1_30_arrow.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{339_00.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{339_30_arrow.pdf} \\
\caption{CMDs of Lindsay~1, and NGC~339 HBs. Observations are represented by grey open triangles. Our synthetic HB models are overplotted in red.
\textbf{\textit{From left to right:}} synthetic HB models at constant $Y$ and best fit $\eta_R$, and models with both best fit $\Delta Y$ and $\eta_R$, respectively. The arrows describe the direction along which variations in Y and mass-loss work, the amplitude being arbitrary here.} \label{Figure:AllY}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{416_00.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{416_65_arrow.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{L38_00.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{L38_05_arrow.pdf} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{L113_00.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.35\textwidth]{L113_10_arrow.pdf} \\
\caption{As Fig.~\ref{Figure:AllY} but for NGC~416, Lindsay~38 and Lindsay~113. The arrows describe the direction along which variations in Y and mass-loss work, the amplitude being arbitrary here.} \label{Figure:AllY2}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Lindsay~1}
Lindsay~1 (SMC), has a mass and metallicity typical of a Galactic GC ($1.7\times10^{5} M_\odot$, [Fe/H] =$-$1.14 respectively) but a younger age ($\sim$7.5~Gyr).
\cite{Hollyhead17} found a significant nitrogen abundance spread ($\Delta$[N/Fe]$>$ 1~dex) among stars located below the RGB bump, a signature of
GC-like multiple stellar populations.
Later, \cite{Niederhofer17} detected a photometric split of the RGB in suitable photometric filter combinations, a signature of a N spread among its stars.
We determine from our HB fitting procedure $\eta_R$ = 0.3 ($\Delta M_{RGB}\sim 0.11$~M$_\odot$) and $\Delta Y\sim$0.03 (see Fig.~\ref{Figure:AllY}).
\subsection{NGC~339}
NGC~339 is a SMC cluster with total mass equal to 2.9$\times10^{5}$~M$_\odot$, an age of $\sim$6~Gyr, and [Fe/H] =$-$1.12.
\cite{Niederhofer17} found a photometric RGB splitting, characteristic of the presence of the multiple stellar populations.
From the HB fitting we determine $\eta_R$ = 0.4 ($\Delta M_{RGB}\sim 0.14$~M$_\odot$) and $\Delta Y \sim 0.03$ (see Fig.~\ref{Figure:AllY}).
\subsection{NGC~416}
NGC~416 is a SMC cluster very similar to NGC~339, with a total mass equal to $2.3\times10^{5} M_\odot$, an age $\sim$6~Gyr, and [Fe/H] =$-$1.00.
We use here the data from \cite{Niederhofer17} corrected for differential reddening, that affects this cluster.
\citet{Niederhofer17} found also in this cluster a RGB splitting, signature of the presence of multiple stellar populations.
Our HB fitting provides $\eta_R$ = 0.4 ($\Delta M_{RGB}\sim 0.145$~M$_\odot$) and $\Delta Y$ = 0.065 (see Fig.~\ref{Figure:AllY2}).
This range of initial $Y$ is much larger than in the previous clusters, and might be at least
slightly overestimated if there is some residual differential reddening not accounted for, given that the reddening vector is aligned with the HB slope.
\subsection{Lindsay 38}
The SMC cluster Lindsay~38 has an age similar to NGC~416 and NGC~339 ($\sim$6~Gyr), a lower mass ($\sim 3.35\times10^{4} M_\odot$) and a lower metallicity ([Fe/H] = $-$1.50).
The HB fitting provides $\eta_R$ = 0.3 ($\Delta M_{RGB}\sim 0.09$~M$_\odot$), but there is no strong indication of $\Delta Y>$0.
Fig.~\ref{Figure:AllY2} shows that $\Delta Y$=0.005 is probably an upper limit to the range of initial He in this cluster.
\subsection{Lindsay 113}
Lindsay~113 is the youngest SMC cluster in our sample ($\sim$4.5~Gyr), the least massive one ($\sim 2.3\times10^{4} M_\odot$), and metal-poor ([Fe/H] = $-$1.40).
We derive from the HB fitting $\eta_R$ = 0.3 ($\Delta M_{RGB}\sim 0.08$~M$_\odot$), and again no strong signature of a helium abundance spread.
Figure~\ref{Figure:AllY2} shows that $\Delta Y\sim$0.01 is very likely an upper limit to the possible $Y$ spread amongst the cluster stars.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{H6_00.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{H6_60_arrow.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{H6_eta.png} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{1978_00_half.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{1978_40_half_arrow.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.3\textwidth]{1978_eta_half.png} \\
\caption{CMDs of Hodge~6 and NGC~1978, the two youngest clusters in our sample. Observations are denoted with grey open triangles, synthetic HB
models are overplotted in red. \textbf{\textit{From left to right:}} $\Delta Y$=0 models, models with $\Delta Y>$0 ($\eta_R$ fixed to the best fit value used in
the left panel), and with $\Delta \eta_R >0$ ($Y$ fixed to the He-normal value of the left panel). The arrows describe the direction along which variations in Y and mass-loss work, the amplitude being arbitrary here.} \label{Figure:young}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Hodge~6 and NGC~1978}\label{1978}
These two LMC clusters are the youngest clusters in our sample, with ages equal to $\sim$2.25 (Hodge~6) and $\sim$1.9~Gyr (NGC~1978), and [Fe/H] around $-$0.40
(see Table~\ref{Table:ClustersHB}). Multiple populations have been found in both clusters \citep[][Hollyhead et al. \textit{submitted}]{Martocchia18_1978}.
Due to their younger age, the direction of the $\Delta \eta_R$ and $\Delta Y$ vectors
is different compared to the case of the other clusters, as shown in Fig.~\ref{Figure:Theory}.
The different direction of these two vectors compared to the older clusters, coupled to the photometric error of these observations --
of the order of 0.01-0.03~mag in magnitudes and
colours-- makes it difficult to reach a definitive conclusion about the existence of a $\Delta Y>$0 in these two clusters.
Figure.~\ref{Figure:young} shows that an initial He spread (at fixed mass loss) or a mass loss spread (at fixed $Y$)
can similarly approximate the colour extension and slope of the observed CMD of core He burning stars.
If we make the assumption that $\eta_R$ must be constant, in agreement with the results for the other clusters in our sample, we would obtain
$\Delta Y\sim$0.06 for Hodge~6, and $\Delta Y\sim$0.04 for NGC~1978. But without this assumption, the CMD analysis does not discriminate between
a spread in $\eta_R$ or in $Y$ for these two clusters. However, we also note that Hodge~6 has the largest photometric errors of any of the clusters in our sample, adding further uncertainty for this cluster.
\section{Discussion}\label{discussion}
We have determined the total initial He abundance spread $\Delta Y$ in a sample of intermediate-age, massive LMC and SMC clusters -- and the old cluster NGC~121--
by reproducing the shape and colour extension of their HB/RC stars with synthetic HB models.
Our derived $\Delta Y$ values are shown in Table~\ref{Table:results}. The typical error on these estimates of $\Delta Y$ is below 0.01.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\textwidth]{DeltaY.png}
\caption{Relation between $\Delta Y$ and cluster mass (in solar mass units). Galactic GC data from \protect\cite{Milone18} and \protect\cite{Baumgardt18} are displayed in black circles, the results for our SMC and LMC clusters are displayed as red circles.}
\label{Figure:discussion}
\end{figure}
We can compare our results with the estimates by \citet{Lagioia19}. These authors found spreads of initial He abundances equal to 0.009$\pm$0.006, 0.007$\pm$0.004, 0.010$\pm$0.003, 0.000$\pm$0.004
for NGC~121, NGC~339, NGC~416 and Lindsay~1, respectively. These values are clearly smaller than our results in Table~\ref{Table:results}. But as mentioned already in the Introduction,
the method employed by \citet{Lagioia19} most likely determines mean abundance spreads among the cluster subpopulations, whereas our modelling tends to determine the maximum
abundance spread, irrespective of the exact distribution of initial He abundances. This is quite clear by looking at the HB of NGC~121 in Fig.~\ref{Figure:N121}. The bulk of the HB
population has ($m_{\mathrm F555W}-m_{\mathrm F814W}$)$>$0.8, consistent with a negligible $\Delta Y$ with just a plume of stars extending towards bluer colors and brighter magnitudes, that is, with
significantly different initial $Y$.
The values in Table~\ref{Table:results} are also plotted in Fig.~\ref{Figure:discussion} as a function of the mass of the host cluster. In the same figure we display also
the maximum initial $Y$ spread determined for a sample of Galactic GCs by \citet{Milone18}.
\citet{Milone18} found a trend between $\Delta Y$ and the mass of the host cluster, that is clearly visible in Fig.~\ref{Figure:discussion} and the results for our clusters follow this trend well. We found a Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient of 0.64 (p-value $\sim$ 0.17) between $\Delta Y_{max}$ and the logarithm of the cluster mass. This result confirms the ubiquity of multiple stellar populations in massive
intermediate-age clusters and GCs, questioning at the same time the distinction between these two classes of stellar systems.
Interestingly, our very tentative determination of $\Delta Y$ for NGC~1978 would fit the trend of Galactic GCs, whereas the $\Delta Y$ for Hodge~6 would be much higher for its value of total mass (but note that this final measurement is highly uncertain due to the photometric errors and age of the cluster as discussed in Sec.~\ref{1978}).
We also searched for possible trends of $\Delta Y$ with the cluster age amongst our cluster sample, but we did not find any statistically significant correlation
(Spearman rank-order correlation coefficient of 0.35, p-value $\sim$ 0.49, between $\Delta Y_{max}$ and M$_{cluster}$).
This result is, to some degree, surprising given that the N abundance spreads has been found correlated with age in MCs intermediate-age clusters \citep{Martocchia18,Martocchia18_1978},
and may potentially shine a new light on the MP phenomenon.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{| c | c | c | c |}
\hline \hline
ID & $\Delta Y_{max}$ \\ \hline \hline
NGC~121 & 0.03 \\
Lindsay~1 & 0.03 \\
NGC~339 & 0.03 \\
NGC~416 & 0.065 \\
Lindsay~38 & $\le$0.005 \\
Lindsay~113 & $\le$0.01 \\
Hodge 6 & (0.06) \\
NGC~1978 & (0.04) \\
\hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption[]{Initial helium abundance spread derived from the HB fitting. The values in parenthesis are determined in the assumption that the RGB mass loss does
not vary among clusters' stars, because of a degeneracy between thr effects of mass loss spread and He spread in these clusters (see text for details).} \label{Table:results}
\end{table}
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We warmly thank E. Dalessandro for useful discussions. W. Chantereau acknowledges funding from the Swiss National Science Foundation under grant P2GEP2\_171971.
N.B. and W.C. gratefully acknowledge financial support from the European Research Council (ERC-CoG-646928, Multi-Pop).
N.B. gratefully acknowledges financial support from the Royal Society (University Research Fellowship). Finally, we warmly thank the referee for the pertinent suggestions that have helped us improve the presentation of our results.
\bibliographystyle{mnras}
|
\section{Introduction}
Fragmentation and coagulation processes occur in many physical systems, with the associated mathematical models receiving much attention in the literature. Example application areas include colloid science \cite{ziff80,Costas95}, population dynamics \cite{Degond17a,Degond17b} and astrophysics \cite{johansen08,Dullemond14}. However, analytical solutions to these models are only available for a limited number of specific cases, and we often have to resort to approximate solutions generated by an appropriate numerical scheme. A range of numerical techniques have been applied to these problems, and these broadly fall into two categories: those involving a stochastic (Monte Carlo) element, for example \cite{guias1997,babovsky99,eibeck2000} and those based around various deterministic approximation schemes \cite{Kumar96, Nicmanis96, Barrett96, Smirnov16}. The introductory chapter of \cite{kumarphd10} and the references therein provide a detailed overview of a number of these approximation methods.
In the earlier work \cite{baird18}, we presented a mixed discrete-continuous model of fragmentation in an attempt to resolve the issue of `shattering' mass-loss observed in some purely continuous models \cite{mcgrady87}. By modelling the mass distribution amongst the smallest particles using a discrete model, whilst modelling the distribution of larger particle masses with a continuous model, the aim was to introduce a higher degree of physical fidelity thus resolving the shattering mass-loss problem, whilst also retaining the mathematical efficiency of the continuous model.
Given the similarities between this model and those existing in the literature, in addition to the added complexity of the mixed framework, we would expect in most cases to have to rely on numerical methods to obtain a solution. In this paper we present a numerical scheme for the solution of the mixed fragmentation model proposed in \cite{baird18}. The basis of the scheme is a finite volume discretisation of the continuous regime equation. The use of such a method would appear a reasonable choice in this case, given its conservative nature and the motivation behind the model development. Indeed, finite volume schemes have been commonly applied to the solution of coagulation and fragmentation equations, with the first such use being \cite{filbet04}, where the case of pure coagulation was considered. For problems involving fragmentation, the article \cite{bourgade08} sees such a scheme employed in approximating the binary coagulation and fragmentation equation, whilst \cite{kumarphd10} and \cite{Kumar15} examine their use for the multiple fragmentation equation, with \cite{kumar14} extending this to include coagulation. Further works have seen these methods applied to a number of coagulation--fragmentation model variants, for example with the inclusion of spacial diffusion \cite{filbet08diffusion} and additional nucleation and growth processes \cite{QAMAR2009, kumar2013moment}. Whilst a number of articles \cite{QAMAR2007,forestier2012,Saha19} cover the approximation of multi-dimensional coagulation or fragmentation, whereby particles may be classified by additional variables beyond their mass or volume.
\subsection{Mixed Discrete-Continuous Model}
In the mixed model of \cite{baird18}, a cut-off value $N\in \mathbb{N}$ is introduced; above this cut-off, particle mass is considered as a continuous variable, whilst below it, the particles are forced to take discrete integer masses. If we denote by $u_C(x,t)$ the particle mass density within the continuous mass regime ($x>N$), then the evolution of $u_C(x,t)$ is governed by the continuous multiple fragmentation equation:
\begin{align}\label{equation301}
\hspace{-8mm}\frac{\partial u_C(x,t)}{\partial t}&=-a(x)u_C(x,t)+\int_{x}^{\infty}a(y)b(x|y)u_C(y,t)\dd y, \hspace{1.92mm}x>N,\hspace{1.2mm}t>0,\\
u_C(x,0)&=c_{0}(x).\nonumber
\end{align}
This equation is similar in form to the multiple fragmentation equation introduced in \cite{mcgrady87}. The function $a(x)$ provides the fragmentation rate for a particle of mass $x$, whilst $b(x|y)$ represents the distribution of particles of mass $x>N$ resulting from the break-up of a particle of mass $y>x$. The functions $a$ and $b$ are assumed to be nonnegative measurable functions, defined on $\left(N,\infty\right)$ and $\left(N,\infty\right)\times\left(N,\infty\right)$, respectively. We also require $b(x|y)=0$ for $x>y$, since no particle resulting from a fragmentation event can have a mass exceeding the original particle. The initial mass distribution within the continuous regime is given by the nonnegative function $c_{0}(x)$.
Letting $u_{Di}(t)$ denote the concentration of discrete mass $i$-mer particles ($i\leq N$) and $u_{D}(t)$ the $N$-component vector taking these values as entries, the change in the values $u_{Di}(t)$, $i=1,\dots,N$, is governed by the equation:
\begin{align}\label{equation302}
\hspace{-80mm}\frac{\ddn u_{Di}(t)}{\ddn t} &\hspace{-.7mm}=\hspace{-.7mm}-a_iu_{Di}(t)+\hspace{-1.9mm}\sum_{j=i+1}^{N}\hspace{-1.2mm}a_jb_{i,j}u_{Dj}(t)
+\hspace{-1mm}\int_{N}^{\infty}a(y)b_i(y)u_{\small{C}}(y,t)\dd y,\hspace{.7mm}\hspace{1.1mm}t>0,\\
u_{D}(0)&=d_{0}.\nonumber
\end{align}
In the case of $i=N$, the second term becomes an empty sum and is taken to be $0$. The values $a_i$ give the rates at which $i$-mer particles fragment, with $a_1=0$. The quantities $b_{i,j}$ give the expected number of $i$-mers produced from the fragmentation of a $j$-mer and the functions $b_i(y)$ give the expected number of $i$-mers produced from the fragmentation of a particle of mass $y>N$. The underlying physics demands that each $a_i$, $b_{i,j}$ and $b_i(y)$ be nonnegative. Finally, $d_{0}$ is the $N$-component vector of nonnegative values, specifying the initial concentrations within the discrete regime.
During each fragmentation event, mass is simply redistributed from the larger particle to the smaller resulting particles, but the total mass involved should be conserved. This gives rise to the following two conditions to supplement equations~\eqref{equation301} and~\eqref{equation302}:
\begin{align}
\label{equation303}&\int_{N}^{y}xb(x|y)\dd x+\sum_{j=1}^{N}jb_j(y)=y\hspace{2mm} \text{for} \hspace{2mm}y>N,\\
\label{equation304}&\sum_{j=1}^{i-1}jb_{j,i}=i\hspace{2mm} \text{for} \hspace{2mm}i=2,\ldots,N.
\end{align}
The condition~\eqref{equation303} is an expression of mass conservation upon the fragmentation of a particle from the continuous mass regime. The equation~\eqref{equation304} comes from the conservation of mass when a particle from the discrete mass regime breaks up.
For further details on the mixed discrete-continuous model and its properties, the reader is directed to consult \cite{baird18} or \cite{bairdphd}.
\subsection{Truncation and Reformulation}
When considering the numerical solution of equations~\eqref{equation301} and~\eqref{equation302}, we encounter an issue in that the range of the continuous mass variable $x$ is an unbounded interval, which presents a computational problem. We therefore introduce a truncation parameter $R>N$, and restrict the continuous mass variable to the range $N<x<R$. Therefore, in place of equations~\eqref{equation301}, we consider the truncated version
\begin{align}\label{equation40001}
\hspace{-8mm}\frac{\partial u_{C}^R(x,t)}{\partial t}&=-a(x)u_{C}^R(x,t)+\int_{x}^{R}a(y)b(x|y)u_{C}^R(y,t)\dd y, \hspace{1.92mm}N<x<R,\hspace{1.2mm}t>0,\\
u_{C}^R(x,0)&=\chi_{(N,R)}(x)c_{0}(x), \hspace{2.5mm}N<x<R,\nonumber
\end{align}\\
where $\chi_{(N,R)}$ denotes the characteristic function of the interval $(N,R)$.
\noindent Taking our lead from the aforementioned articles, we now rewrite equation \eqref{equation40001} in a conservative form, although in our case we must include an additional sink term to account for the mass leaked down to the discrete regime. Therefore we end up with the following equation for the mass quantity $xu_{C}^R(x,t)$:
\begin{equation}\label{equation402}
\frac{\partial \left(xu_{C}^R\right)}{\partial t}=\frac{\partial \mathcal{F}^R\left(xu_{C}^R\right)}{\partial x}-S(xu_{C}^{R}),\hspace{1.5mm}
u_{C}^R(x,0)=c_{0}(x),\hspace{1.5mm}\text{for}\hspace{1.5mm}N<\hspace{-.5mm}x\hspace{-.5mm}
< R,\hspace{.5mm}t>0,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{F}^R$ and $S$ are a truncated flux term and sink term, respectively, given by
\begin{equation*}
\hspace{-4mm}\mathcal{F}^R(f)=\int_{x}^{R} \int_{N}^{x} \frac{y}{z} a(z) b(y|z)f(z)\dd y\dd z,\hspace{4mm}S(f)=\frac{a(x)}{x}\sum_{i=1}^{N}ib_i(x)f(x),\hspace{2mm}\text{for}\hspace{2mm}N<x<R.
\end{equation*}
The equation \eqref{equation40001} may be recovered from \eqref{equation402} by a formal application of Leibniz's rule for differentiating under the integral. However, the equivalence of the two forms can be seen to be justified rigorously in \cite[Appendix C]{bairdphd}. Before continuing, we establish a result concerning the behaviour of the flux term $\mathcal{F}^R$ at the limits of our domain.
\begin{lemma}\label{lastthing}If the kernels $a$ and $b$ are assumed to belong to $L_{\infty,loc}$ on the domains $[N,\infty)$ and $[N,\infty)\times[N,\infty)$ respectively, which will be the case in the upcoming analysis, then for
$f\in L_1(N,R)$ the flux term $\mathcal{F}^R(f)$ satisfies
\[\lim_{x\rightarrow N,R}\left|\mathcal{F}^R(f)(x)\right|=0.\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}It is a straightforward matter to bound $\mathcal{F}^R(f)$ as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{final}
\left|\mathcal{F}^R(f)(x)\right|\leq \int_N^R \chi_{(x,R)}(z)\frac{a(z)\left|f(z)\right|}{z}\left(\int_N^x yb(y|z)\dd y \right)\dd z,
\end{equation}
which holds for $x \in(N,R)$. Recalling the mass conservation condition~\eqref{equation303}, we deduce that
\begin{equation*}
\chi_{(x,R)}(z)\left( \int_N^x yb(y|z)\dd y \right)\leq \int_N^z yb(y|z)\dd y\leq z,
\end{equation*}
for all $z\in(N,R)$. Hence the integrand appearing in~\eqref{final} is bounded above by $a(z)\left|f(z)\right|$, which, thanks to
$a\in L_{\infty,loc}[N,\infty)$ and $f\in L_1(N,R)$, is integrable.
Considering the limit as $x\rightarrow N$ first, if we denote by $\beta(R)$ the essential supremum of $b$ over $[N,R]\times[N,R]$, then we have
\begin{equation*}
\chi_{(x,R)}(z)\left( \int_N^x yb(y|z)\dd y \right)\leq x \beta(R)(x-N).
\end{equation*}
As such, the integrand in~\eqref{final} converges pointwise to 0 over $z\in(N,R)$ as we let $x\searrow N$. An application of the Lebesgue
dominated convergence theorem then gives the required convergence of $\left|\mathcal{F}^R(f)(x)\right|$ as $x\searrow N$. Turning now to the limit as $x\nearrow R$, another application of condition~\eqref{equation303} provides us with
\begin{equation*}
\chi_{(x,R)}(z)\left( \int_N^x yb(y|z)\dd y \right)\leq\chi_{(x,R)}(z) \int_N^z yb(y|z)\dd y\leq \chi_{(x,R)}(z)z,
\end{equation*}
for $z\in(N,R)$. Therefore, the integrand from~\eqref{final} must again converge pointwise to 0 over $(N,R)$, this time as we let $x\nearrow R$. Another application of the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem gives the convergence of $\left|\mathcal{F}^R(f)(x)\right|$ to 0, as $x\nearrow R$.
\end{proof}
This result will be utilised later in a number of arguments, most significantly in approximating $\mathcal{F}^R$ within our numerical scheme and in establishing a weak formulation of equation~\eqref{equation402}.
The truncation of the continuous mass interval also has an impact on our discrete regime equation; therefore, instead of equation \eqref{equation302}, we consider
\begin{align}\label{equation403}
\hspace{-80mm}\frac{\ddn u_{Di}^R(t)}{\ddn t}
&\hspace{-.7mm}=\hspace{-.7mm}-a_iu_{Di}^R(t)+\hspace{-1.9mm}\sum_{j=i+1}^{N}\hspace{-1.2mm}a_jb_{i,j}
u_{Dj}^R(t)+\hspace{-1mm}\int_{N}^{R}\hspace{-.5mm}a(y)b_i(y)u_{C}^R(y,t)\dd y,\\
u_{Di}^R(0)&={d_{0}}_i,\hspace{2mm}\text{for}\hspace{2mm}i=1,2,\ldots,N,\hspace{2mm}t>0.\nonumber
\end{align}
In the case of $i=N$, the empty sum above is taken to be zero; this convention will be adopted in all similar cases which follow.
This truncation procedure is a standard approach when dealing with fragmentation and coagulation problems, having been applied for example in \cite{mcl1}, where the theory and methods of operator semigroups were employed, and \cite{stewart89} where an alternative weak compactness style argument was adopted. The common approach of these works involves establishing the existence of solutions to a sequence of such truncated problems. A limit is then obtained as the truncation point is increased without bound, with this limit then being shown to satisfy the untruncated problem in some sense. Although in this article we restrict our attention to the numerical approximation of the truncated discrete--continuous problem, as given by equations \eqref{equation40001} and \eqref{equation403}, it can be shown that the solutions to the truncated problems converge, in an appropriate space, to give the solutions to the untruncated \eqref{equation301} and \eqref{equation302}. The proof of this convergence argument follows similar lines to that set out in \cite[Section 8.3.2]{banasiak06}, with the reader being directed to \cite[Chapter 6]{bairdphd} for the specific details. Additionally, the reader may find an empirical examination of this convergence in \cite[Section 7.5]{bairdphd}, where the key factors influencing the convergence, and thus the selection of an appropriate $R$ are investigated.
\section{Preliminaries}
Having set out our problem in the previous section, we now present a brief outline of the key results which appear in the upcoming material and which may be considered nonstandard or which are particular to our case.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem201} In the analysis pursued in subsequent results, we shall be working extensively in spaces of the type $L_1$. In particular we shall be working in the spaces $L_1=L_1((N,R)\times [0,T),\dd x \dd t)$ and $L_1^1=L_1((N,R)\times[0,T),x \dd x \dd t)$, where
$N$ is a positive integer and $R>N$ is a finite real value. With the associated norms, these form equivalent spaces.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
First let us suppose that $f\in L_1^1$; then we have
\[\|f\|_{L_1}=\int_0^T\int_N^R\left|f(x,t)\right|\dd x \dd t\leq\frac{1}{N}\int_0^T\int_N^R\left|f(x,t)\right|\,x\dd x \dd t=\frac{1}{N}\|f\|_{L_1^1}.\]
Therefore $f \in L_1$ also, with $\|f\|_{L_1}\leq \frac{1}{N}\|f\|_{L_1^1}$. Now let us assume that $f\in L_1$; then we have
\[\|f\|_{L_1^1}=\int_0^T\int_N^R\left|f(x,t)\right|\,x \dd x \dd t\leq R\int_0^T\int_N^R\left|f(x,t)\right|\dd x \dd t=R\|f\|_{L_1}.\]
Hence $f \in L_1^1$ with $\|f\|_{L_1^1}\leq R\|f\|_{L_1}$. Taken together, the above results show us that the spaces $L_1((N,R)\times[0,T),\dd x \dd t)$
and $L_1((N,R)\times[0,t),x\dd x \dd t)$ contain the same elements and have equivalent norms.
\end{proof}
This result shall prove useful in the forthcoming analysis, allowing us to switch spaces when mathematically convenient whilst retaining convergence.
Given a sequence $\left\lbrace f_n\right\rbrace_{n=1}^\infty$ in a normed vector space $\left(X,\|\cdot\|\right)$, we assume the reader is familiar with the concept of \emph{weak} convergence and in particular its definition in spaces of the type $L_1(\Omega,\mu)$. In our analysis when handling weakly convergent sequences we will usually find them appearing alongside other factors and we would like the product to converge weakly also. The following theorem gives us sufficient conditions for the product of two sequences to converge weakly and will be used extensively in the convergence proofs for our numerical schemes.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem203}Let $\left(\Omega,\mathcal{A},\mu\right)$ be a measure space with $\mu$ finite. Suppose $f_h\rightharpoonup f$ in $L_1\left(\Omega,\mu\right)$, $g_h\rightarrow g$ point-wise $\mu$ a.e. in $\Omega$, and $\sup_{h}\|g_h\|_{L_\infty}<\infty$, then $f_hg_h\rightharpoonup fg$ in $L_1\left(\Omega,\mu\right)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}The reader is referred to \cite[Proposition 2.61]{fonseca07}.
\end{proof}
The main part of our convergence argument utilises the Dunford--Pettis theorem, which provides us with sufficient conditions to establish the weak convergence of our sequence of approximations. One such condition is that of \emph{equiintegrability}. There are a number of equivalent characterisations of equiintegrability, which the reader may find in \cite[Theorem 2.29]{fonseca07}. For our purposes the most important characterisation of equiintegrability is given by de la Vall\'ee Poussin's theorem, a refined version of which is given below.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem204}\textnormal{(de la Vall\'ee Poussin's Theorem)} Let $\mathcal{F}$ be a bounded subset of $L_1\left(\Omega,\mu\right)$, then $\mathcal{F}$ is equiintegrable if and only if there exists a nonnegative, convex function $\Phi\in C^\infty \left([0,\infty)\right)$, with $\Phi(0)=0$ and $\Phi'(0)=1$, such that $\Phi'$ is concave and
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\Phi(x)}{x}\rightarrow\infty\hspace{2mm}\text{as}\hspace{2mm}x\rightarrow\infty \hspace{3mm}\text{and}\hspace{3mm}
\sup_{f\in \mathcal{F}}\int_{\Omega}\Phi\left(\left|f\right|\right)\dd \mu<\infty.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} The necessity of this condition can be derived easily from \cite[Theorem 8]{laurencot15}, which under the assumption that $\mathcal{F}$ is equiintegrable provides us with a $\Psi$ satisfying all the stated conditions with the exception that the function $\Psi$ has derivative $0$ at $0$ and is not stated to be nonnegative. Given such a $\Psi$, we set $\Phi(x)=\Psi(x)+x$. Then $\Phi$ retains the required properties of $\Psi$ but additionally $\Phi'(0)=1$. Also, by utilising the following standard inequality for $C^1$ convex functions
\begin{equation}\label{equation203}
\Phi(x)\geq\Phi(y)+\Phi'(y)(x-y),
\end{equation}
with $x\geq 0$ and $y=0$ we can see that $\Phi(x)$ must be nonnegative on $[0,\infty)$. The sufficiency of our conditions comes straight from the standard version of the de la Vall\'ee Poussin theorem \cite[Theorem 2.29 (iii)]{fonseca07}.
\end{proof}
In our analysis we shall require some properties of such a function, which we set out in the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma203} Let $\Phi$ be as in Theorem~\ref{theorem204}; then for nonnegative $x$ and $y$ we have the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $x\Phi'(y)\leq \Phi(x)+\Phi(y)$,
\item $\Phi'(y)\geq 0$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}The first of these inequalities is nonstandard and the proof can be found in \cite[Proposition 13 (30)]{laurencot15}. For the second property we return to inequality~\eqref{equation203}, with $x=0$ and $y\geq 0$, which gives us
\[\underbrace{\Phi(0)}_{=0}\geq\underbrace{\Phi(y)}_{\geq 0}+\Phi'(y)(0-y).\]
An obvious rearrangement yields
\[y\Phi'(y)\geq\Phi(y)\geq0.\]
Now in the case that $y=0$ property (ii) is given by the definition of $\Phi$. Hence we may assume that $y>0$ and divide through by it to obtain the desired result that $\Phi'(y)\geq 0$.
\end{proof}
We now come to the Dunford--Pettis theorem, one of the most significant technical tools applied in this work. The theorem provides necessary and sufficient conditions for a subset of an $L_1$ space to be \emph{weakly sequentially compact}. That is, any sequence in the subset must have a subsequence which is weakly convergent.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem205}\textnormal{(Dunford--Pettis Theorem)} Let $\left(\Omega,\mathcal{A},\mu\right)$ be a measure space and let $\mathcal{F}\subset L_1\left(\Omega,\mu\right)$. Then $\mathcal{F}$ is weakly sequentially compact if and only if the following conditions are satisfied:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\mathcal{F}$ is bounded in $L_1\left(\Omega,\mu\right)$;
\item $\mathcal{F}$ is equiintegrable;
\item For every $\varepsilon >0$ there exists $A_\varepsilon\subset \Omega$ with $A_\varepsilon\in \mathcal{A}$ such that $\mu\left(A_\varepsilon\right)<\infty$ and
\[ \sup_{f\in \mathcal{F}} \int_{\Omega\setminus A_\varepsilon} \left|f\right|\dd \mu\leq \varepsilon.\]
\end{enumerate}
We note that in the case that $\mu(\Omega)<\infty$ condition \textup{(}iii\textup{)} is automatically satisfied by taking $A_\varepsilon= \Omega$ for all values of $\varepsilon$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}See \cite[Theorem 2.54]{fonseca07}.
\end{proof}
In the later analysis of this paper we shall be relying heavily on the methods and theory of operator semigroups. In particular the concept of substochastic semigroups, the Kato--Voigt perturbation theorem and the notion of semigroup honesty. For the sake of brevity we refrain from outlining such material here, however the reader may find details of the requisite results in the preliminary sections of \cite{baird18} or \cite{bairdphd} or the text \cite{banasiak06}.
\section{Development of the Numerical Scheme}\label{section1}
We now introduce our numerical approximation scheme for the truncated system, \eqref{equation402} and \eqref{equation403}. First we must
discretise the continuous mass variable $x$, and so we introduce the mesh $\left\lbrace x_{i-1/2}\right\rbrace_{i=0}^{I_h}$ on the interval $(N,R)$, with
\[x_{-1/2}\hspace{-.2mm}=\hspace{-.2mm}N,\hspace{1.3mm}x_{I_h-1/2}\hspace{-.2mm}=\hspace{-.2mm}R,\hspace{1.3mm}x_{i}\hspace{-.2mm}=\hspace{-.2mm}
(x_{i-1/2}+x_{i+1/2})/2,
\hspace{1.3mm}h/k<\Delta x_{i}\hspace{-.2mm}=\hspace{-.2mm}x_{i+1/2}-x_{i-1/2}\hspace{-.5mm}<\hspace{-.5mm}h,\]
where $h\in(0,1)$ and $k>1$ is some constant. Additionally we denote the interval $[x_{i-1/2},x_{i+1/2})$ by $\Lambda_i$, however the (left-hand-most)
interval $\Lambda_0$ is taken to be $(x_{-1/2},x_{1/2})$.
For the time variable $t$, if $T$ is the final time up to which we wish to compute an approximate solution, then we define the time step
$\Delta t=T/M$ where $M$ is some large integer. The time points are then given by $t_n=n\Delta t$ for $n=0,1,\dots,M$ with corresponding time intervals
$\tau_n=[t_n,t_{n+1})$ for $n=0,1,\dots,M-1$.
We restrict the choice of the mesh by assuming the existence of positive constants $k_1$ and $k_2$ so that the mesh sizes $h$ and $\Delta t$ satisfy
\begin{equation}\label{equation404}
k_1h\leq \Delta t \leq k_2 h.
\end{equation}
The numerical scheme requires representative values for the functions $a(x)$, $b(x|y)$ and $b_i(y)$ over the appropriate intervals. This is
done by taking their average value over each interval. Therefore we define
\begin{equation}\label{equation405}
A_i=\frac{1}{\Delta x_{i}}\int_ {\Lambda_{i}} a(x)\dd x\hspace{3mm}\text{for}\hspace{2mm}i=0,1,\dots,I_h-1,\nonumber
\end{equation}
as our approximation of $a(x)$ over the interval $\Lambda_{i}$. We approximate $b(x|y)$ over $\Lambda_{i}\times \Lambda_{j}$ by
\begin{equation}\label{equation406}
B_{i,j}=\frac{1}{\Delta x_{i}\Delta x_{j}}\int_ {\Lambda_{j}} \int_ {\Lambda_{i}}\hspace{-1mm} b(x|y)\dd x\dd y\hspace{2mm}\text{for}\hspace{2mm}
i=0,1,...,I_h-1\hspace{2mm}\text{and}\hspace{2mm}j=0,1,\ldots,I_h-1,\nonumber
\end{equation}
and the functions $b_i(y)$ are approximated over $\Lambda_{j}$ by the values
\begin{equation}\label{equation407}
\tilde{B}_{i,j}=\frac{1}{\Delta x_{j}}\int_ {\Lambda_{j}} b_i(y)\dd y\hspace{2mm}\text{for}\hspace{2mm}i=1,2,\ldots,N\hspace{2mm}\text{and}\hspace{2mm}
j=0,1,\dots,I_h-1.\nonumber
\end{equation}
We note by our initial assumption regarding the nonnegativity of $a$, $b$ and $b_i$, that each of the values introduced above must be nonnegative. If $\chi_I$ denotes the characteristic function of a set $I$, then we can construct piecewise constant approximations to the functions $a$, $b$ and $b_i$ as follows:
\begin{equation*}
a^h(x) \hspace{-.5mm}=\hspace{-.5mm}\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} \chi_{\Lambda_i}(x)A_i, \hspace{1.5mm}
b^h(x|y)\hspace{-.5mm}=\hspace{-.5mm}\sum_{j=0}^{I_h-1}\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}\chi_{\Lambda_i}(x)\chi_{\Lambda_j}(y)B_{i,j}, \hspace{1.5mm}
b_i^h(y)\hspace{-.5mm}=\hspace{-.5mm}\sum_{j=0}^{I_h-1} \chi_{\Lambda_j}(y)\tilde{B}_{i,j}.
\end{equation*}
\begin{remark} \label{convremark1}
This is a standard means of approximation and assuming the choice of kernels is suitably restricted, the approximations will converge pointwise to the desired functions almost everywhere on the appropriate domains. In our case, the kernels $a$ and $b$ will be assumed to be $L_{\infty,loc}$ on $[N,\infty)$ and $[N,\infty)\times[N,\infty)$, respectively. In addition, the restriction \eqref{equation303} determines each $b_i$ as an element of $L_{\infty,loc}[N,\infty)$. Having $a$, $b$ and $b_i$ as $L_{\infty,loc}$ functions is sufficient to ensure that the approximations $a^h$, $b^h$ and $b_i^h$ converge pointwise to $a$, $b$ and $b_i$ almost everywhere in their respective domains. This is a standard result, however full details can be found in \cite[Lemma 4.2.1]{bairdphd}.
\end{remark}
We are now ready to construct the approximation scheme. Let $u_{C}^{n,i}$ denote our approximation to $u_C^R(x,t)$ over the mass interval $\Lambda_i$ for the time interval $\tau_n$. The equation \eqref{equation402} is then approximated by
\begin{equation}\label{equation4075}
x_i\frac{u_{C}^{n+1,i}-u_{C}^{n,i}}{\Delta t}=\frac{F_{i+1/2}^n-F_{i-1/2}^n}{\Delta x_{i}}-S_i^n,\nonumber
\end{equation}
where $F_{i-1/2}^n$ is an approximation of the flux $\mathcal{F}^R(xu_C^R)$ at the point $x=x_{i-1/2}$ over the time interval $\tau_n$, and is given by
\begin{align}\label{equation408}
\left(\mathcal{F}^R(xu_C^R)\right)(x_{i-1/2})&=\int_{x_{i-1/2}}^{R} \int_{N}^{x_{i-1/2}}y a(z) b(y|z)u_C^R(z,t)\dd y\dd z\nonumber\\
&=\sum_{j=i}^{I_h-1}\int_{\Lambda_j}\left(\sum_{k=0}^{i-1}\int_{\Lambda_k} y a(z) b(y|z)u_C^R(z,t)\dd y\right)\dd z\nonumber\\
&\approx\sum_{j=i}^{I_h-1}\sum_{k=0}^{i-1}x_{k}A_jB_{k,j}u_{C}^{n,j}\Delta x_{k}\Delta x_{j}=:F_{i-1/2}^n\nonumber,
\end{align}
for $i=1,\ldots,I_h-1$, with $F_{-1/2}^n=F_{I_h-1/2}^n=0$, which can be justified by Lemma~\ref{lastthing}. The values $S_i^n$ approximate the sink term $S(xu_C^R)$ over $\Lambda_i$ for the
time interval $\tau_n$, and are computed by
\begin{equation}\label{sink}
S_i^n=A_i\sum_{j=1}^{N}j\tilde{B}_{j,i}u_{C}^{n,i}\hspace{1.5mm}\text{for}\hspace{1.5mm}i=0,1,\dots,I_h-1.
\end{equation}
This gives rise to the following numerical method for the computation of the approximations $u_{C}^{n,i}$:
\begin{equation}\label{equation409}
u_{C}^{n+1,i}=u_{C}^{n,i}+\frac{\Delta t}{x_i\Delta x_{i}}(F_{i+1/2}^n-F_{i-1/2}^n)-\frac{\Delta t}{x_i}S_i^n\hspace{2mm}\text{for}
\hspace{1.5mm}\left\lbrace \begin{array}{l} \hspace{.5mm}i=0,1,\dots,I_h-1, \\ n=0,1,\dots,M-1. \end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
The sequence of approximations generated by \eqref{equation409} requires us to provide an initial set of values to get started. For our starting values we simply average the initial datum over each of the mass intervals; hence
\begin{equation}\label{equation410}
u_{C}^{0,i}=\frac{1}{\Delta x_{i}}\int_ {\Lambda_{i}} c_0(x)\dd x\hspace{3mm}\text{for}\hspace{2mm}i=0,1,\dots,I_h-1.
\end{equation}
Then our approximation to $u_{C}^R(x,t)$ over $(N,R)\times[0,T)$ is constructed as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{equation4105}
u^h_C(x,t)=\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} \chi_{\Lambda_i}(x)\chi_{\tau_n}(t)u_{C}^{n,i}.
\end{equation}
\begin{remark} \label{convremark2}
The convergence proof for our numerical scheme requires the initial approximation given by \eqref{equation410} and \eqref{equation4105} to converge strongly in $L_1(N,R)$ to the restriction of $c_0$ to $(N,R)$. Again, that this is the case with our definition of the discretised initial datum is a standard result and details can be found in \cite[Lemma 4.2.2]{bairdphd}.\\
\end{remark}
Now considering the discrete regime, let $u_{D}^{n,i}$ denote our approximation of $u_{Di}^R(t)$ over the time interval $\tau_n$. Equation \eqref{equation403} is then
approximated as\\
\begin{equation}\label{equation411}
\frac{u_{D}^{n+1,i}-u_{D}^{n,i}}{\Delta t}=-a_iu_{D}^{n,i}+\hspace{-1.9mm}\sum_{j=i+1}^{N}a_jb_{i,j}u_{D}^{n,j}+\sum_{j=0}^{I_h-1}A_j
\tilde{B}_{i,j}u_{C}^{n,j}
\Delta x_{j},\nonumber
\end{equation}
giving rise to the relation
\begin{equation}\label{equation412}
u_{D}^{n+1,i}=(1-\Delta ta_i)u_{D}^{n,i}+\Delta t\sum_{j=i+1}^{N}\hspace{-1mm}a_jb_{i,j}u_{D}^{n,j}+\Delta t\sum_{j=0}^{I_h-1}\hspace{-1mm}A_j\tilde{B}_{i,j}u_{C}^{n,j}
\Delta x_{j}\hspace{2mm}\text{for}\hspace{1.5mm}\left\lbrace \begin{array}{l} \hspace{.5mm}i=1,\dots,N, \\\hspace{-.5mm} n=0,1,\dots,M-1. \end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
The initial values for the discrete approximation are simply given by the initial condition vector $d_0$, so that $u_{D}^{0,i}={d_0}_i$
for $i=1,\ldots, N$. Then our approximations $u_{Di}^h(t)$ to $u_{Di}^R(t)$ for $t \in [0,T)$ are given by
\begin{equation}\label{equation4125}
u_{Di}^h(t)=\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \chi_{\tau_n}(t)u_{D}^{n,i}\hspace{3mm}\text{for}\hspace{2mm}i=1,2,\ldots,N.
\end{equation}
\section{Properties of Numerical Solutions: Nonnegativity and Mass Conservation}
In the article \cite{baird18} we proved the existence and uniqueness of a solution to our system \eqref{equation301} and \eqref{equation302}. This solution was shown to possess a number of properties that we would expect given the physical nature of the model, namely the solution preserved nonnegativity and conserved total mass. In the following sections we examine whether the approximate solution provided by \eqref{equation4105} and \eqref{equation4125}, also displays these properties. These properties, apart from being physically relevant, will also be utilised in the forthcoming proofs of the convergence of the approximations \eqref{equation4105} and \eqref{equation4125} to a solution to the system \eqref{equation40001} and \eqref{equation403}, and subsequently the uniqueness and differentiability of that solution.
\subsection{Nonnegativity of the Numerical Solution}
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma401} For a fixed partition $(x_{i-1/2})_{i=0}^{I_h}$, suppose that $\Delta t$ is sufficiently small
that the following condition is satisfied:
\begin{equation*}
0<\Delta t \leq \frac{x_i}{A_i\left(\sum_{k=0}^{i-1}x_{k}B_{k,i}\Delta x_{k}+\sum_{j=1}^{N}j\tilde{B}_{j,i}\right)},
\end{equation*}
for all $i \in \left\lbrace0,1,\dots,I_h-1\right\rbrace$ such that the denominator is nonzero, and
\begin{equation*}
0<\Delta t \leq \frac{1}{a_i},
\end{equation*}
for all $i \in \left \lbrace 2,\dots,N \right\rbrace$ such that $a_i\neq0$. Then, the approximate solutions defined
by \eqref{equation4105} and \eqref{equation4125} preserve nonnegativity.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Starting with the approximation for the continuous regime, let us consider equation \eqref{equation409}. By cancelling common terms we
get that
\begin{align}\label{equation413}
&F_{i+1/2}^n-F_{i-1/2}^n=x_{i}\Delta x_{i}\sum_{j=i+1}^{I_h-1}A_jB_{i,j}u_{C}^{n,j}\Delta x_{j}-A_iu_{C}^{n,i}\Delta x_{i}\sum_{k=0}^{i-1}x_{k}B_{k,i}
\Delta x_{k}
\end{align}
for $i=1,\dots,I_h-2$. Therefore we have
\begin{align*}
&\frac{\Delta t}{x_i\Delta x_{i}}(F_{i+1/2}^n-F_{i-1/2}^n)-\frac{\Delta t}{x_i}S_i\\
&=\Delta t\sum_{j=i+1}^{I_h-1}A_jB_{i,j}u_{C}^{n,j}\Delta x_{j}-\frac{\Delta t}{x_i}A_iu_{C}^{n,i}\sum_{k=0}^{i-1}x_{k}B_{k,i}\Delta x_{k}
-\frac{\Delta t}
{x_i}A_iu_{C}^{n,i}\sum_{j=1}^{N}j\tilde{B}_{j,i} \\
&=\Delta t\sum_{j=i+1}^{I_h-1}A_jB_{i,j}u_{C}^{n,j}\Delta x_{j}-\frac{\Delta t}{x_i}A_iu_{C}^{n,i}\left(\sum_{k=0}^{i-1}x_{k}B_{k,i}\Delta x_{k}+
\sum_{j=1}^{N}j\tilde{B}_{j,i}\right).
\end{align*}\\
Substituting this into \eqref{equation409} gives us
\begin{align}\label{equation901}
u_{C}^{n+1,i}&=\left(1-\frac{\Delta t}{x_i}A_i\left(\sum_{k=0}^{i-1}x_{k}B_{k,i}\Delta x_{k}+\sum_{j=1}^{N}j\tilde{B}_{j,i}\right)\right)u_{C}^{n,i}
+\Delta t\sum_{j=i+1}^{I_h-1}A_jB_{i,j}u_{C}^{n,j}\Delta x_{j},
\end{align}
for $i=1,\dots,I_h-2$. The cases $i=0$ and $i=I_h-1$ can be handled similarly to obtain the same result, where the empty sums are taken
as 0.
From this it is clear that if each of the approximations $u_{C}^{n,i}$ is nonnegative, and provided $\Delta t$ is sufficiently small
such that the term within the outer brackets is nonnegative, then each of the approximations $u_{C}^{n+1,i}$, for the subsequent time step, will also be
nonnegative. Hence to ensure the approximations $u_{C}^{n+1,i}$ are nonnegative we can take\\
\begin{equation}\label{equation414}
0<\Delta t \leq \frac{x_i}{A_i\left(\sum_{k=0}^{i-1}x_{k}B_{k,i}\Delta x_{k}+\sum_{j=1}^{N}j\tilde{B}_{j,i}\right)}\hspace{3mm}\text{for}
\hspace{2mm}i=0,1,\dots,I_h-1.
\end{equation}
In the case of the above denominator being zero for some $i$, such that the bound \eqref{equation414} is undefined, then $u_{C}^{n+1,i}$ can be seen from \eqref{equation901} to automatically satisfy the nonnegativity requirement, for any value of
$\Delta t$.
Turning to the approximation for the discrete regime, it is immediately clear from the form of \eqref{equation412} that if all of the
values $u_{C}^{n,i}$ and $u_{D}^{n,i}$ are nonnegative, then each $u_{D}^{n+1,i}$ will be nonnegative if for each $i=1,\dots,N$ we have
that $1-\Delta ta_i$ is nonnegative. This can be ensured by taking
\begin{equation}\label{equation415}
0<\Delta t \leq \frac{1}{a_i} \hspace{3mm} \text{for}\hspace{2mm}i=2,\dots,N \hspace{2mm} \text{such that} \hspace{2mm} a_i\neq0.
\end{equation}
Therefore if we choose a $\Delta t$ small enough that both \eqref{equation414} and \eqref{equation415} are satisfied, then our approximate
solutions will remain nonnegative.
\end{proof}
From now on we shall assume that conditions \eqref{equation414} and \eqref{equation415} are satisfied and that
$c_0(x)\geq 0$ and each $d_{0,i}\geq 0$ so that our approximations remain nonnegative.\\
\begin{remark}\label{remark401}The bound \eqref{equation414} is dependent on the mesh and it is perhaps not immediately apparent how this bounding value might vary as we refine the mesh. In particular, it would be advantageous to confirm that it is indeed possible to find a constant $k_1$, such that conditions \eqref{equation404} and \eqref{equation414} can be satisfied simultaneously, whilst $h\searrow0$. In the upcoming analysis we will place restrictions on the functions $a$ and $b$; these constraints will allow us to guarantee the existence of such a $k_1$.
The upcoming Theorem~\ref{theorem501} imposes the restriction $a,b\in L_{\infty}$ on the restricted domains $[N,R]$ and $[N,R]\times[N,R]$ respectively, with $\alpha(R)$ and $\beta(R)$ being the essential suprema for $a$ and $b$ on said domains. This being the case, we have $A_i\leq \alpha(R)$ and $B_{k,i}\leq\beta(R)$ for all values of $i$ and $k$ admissible in \eqref{equation414}. Furthermore, from \eqref{equation303} we may deduce that each $b_i(y)\leq y$, hence $\tilde{B}_{j,i}\leq R$. Finally, all mesh midpoints $x_i$ must clearly satisfy $x_i\geq N\geq1>h$. Taken together, these bounds lead, via a simple calculation, to
\begin{align*}
\frac{h}{\alpha(R)\left(\beta(R)R\left(R-N\right)+RN(N+1)/2\right)}
\leq \frac{x_i}{A_i\left(\sum_{k=0}^{i-1}x_{k}B_{k,i}\Delta x_{k}+\sum_{j=1}^{N}j\tilde{B}_{j,i}\right)},
\end{align*}
for $i=0,1,\dots,I_h-1$. Hence, we have established a possible value for $k_1$, which ensures \eqref{equation404} and \eqref{equation414} can be satisfied simultaneously as $h\searrow0$.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Mass Conservation by the Numerical Solutions}
In \cite[Lemma 6.2]{baird18}, the exact solution to our system of equations \eqref{equation301} and \eqref{equation302} was shown to conserve mass between the two regimes. We now show that this property is shared by our numerical solutions.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma402} The approximate solutions generated by \eqref{equation409} and \eqref{equation412} conserve mass.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} The mass associated with the approximate continuous regime solution, $u_C^h(x,t)$, is given by
\begin{align}\label{equation416}
\|u^h_C(\cdot,t)\|_{L_{1}^1(N,R)}&=\int_N^R\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} \chi_{\Lambda_i}(x)\chi_{\tau_n}(t)u_{C}^{n,i}\,x\dd x\nonumber\\
&=\sum_{n=0}^{M-1}\chi_{\tau_n}(t) \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} u_{C}^{n,i}\int_N^R \chi_{\Lambda_i}(x)\,x\dd x\nonumber\\
&=\sum_{n=0}^{M-1}\chi_{\tau_n}(t) \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_i u_{C}^{n,i},
\end{align}
whilst the approximate solution $u_D^h(t)$ has associated mass given by
\[ \|u_{D}^h(t)\|_{X_D}=\sum_{i=1}^N i u_{Di}^h(t)= \sum_{i=1}^N i \sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \chi_{\tau_n}(t)u_{D}^{n,i} =\sum_{n=0}^{M-1}
\chi_{\tau_n}(t) \sum_{i=1}^N i u_{D}^{n,i}.\]
Summing these two expressions gives the total mass:
\begin{equation}\label{equation417}
M^h(t)=\sum_{n=0}^{M-1}\chi_{\tau_n}(t)\left( \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_i u_{C}^{n,i}+ \sum_{i=1}^N i u_{D}^{n,i}\right).
\end{equation}
First let us examine the mass accounted for by the continuous regime. From the relation \eqref{equation409} we get
\begin{align}\label{equation418}
&\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_iu_{C}^{n+1,i}\Delta x_{i}=\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i\left(u_{C}^{n,i}+\frac{\Delta t}{x_i\Delta x_{i}}(F_{i+1/2}^n-F_{i-1/2}^n)-
\frac{\Delta t}{x_i}S_i^n\right)\Delta x_{i}\nonumber\\
&=\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_iu_{C}^{n,i}\Delta x_{i}+\Delta t\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}(F_{i+1/2}^n-F_{i-1/2}^n)-\Delta t\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}S_i^n\Delta x_{i}
\nonumber\\
&=\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_iu_{C}^{n,i}\Delta x_{i}-\Delta t\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}S_i^n\Delta x_{i}.
\end{align}
The middle summation term is lost in going to the final line as the sum is telescoping with zero end terms.
Now we consider the discrete regime mass; the generating relation \eqref{equation412} gives us
\begin{align}\label{equation419}
&\sum_{i=1}^{N}iu_{D}^{n+1,i}=\sum_{i=1}^{N}i\left((1-\Delta ta_i)u_{D}^{n,i}+\Delta t\sum_{j=i+1}^{N}a_jb_{i,j}u_{D}^{n,j}
+\Delta t\sum_{j=0}^{I_h-1}A_j
\tilde{B}_{i,j}u_{C}^{n,j}\Delta x_{j}\right)\nonumber\\
&=\sum_{i=1}^{N}iu_{D}^{n,i}-\Delta t\sum_{i=1}^{N}ia_iu_{D}^{n,i}+\Delta t\sum_{i=1}^{N}i\sum_{j=i+1}^{N}a_jb_{i,j}u_{D}^{n,j}+\Delta t
\sum_{i=1}^{N}i
\sum_{j=0}^{I_h-1}A_j\tilde{B}_{i,j}u_{C}^{n,j}\Delta x_{j}\nonumber\\
&=\sum_{i=1}^{N}iu_{D}^{n,i}-\Delta t\sum_{i=2}^{N}ia_iu_{D}^{n,i}
+\Delta t\sum_{j=2}^{N}a_ju_{D}^{n,j}\hspace{-1mm}\left(\sum_{i=1}^{j-1}ib_{i,j}\right)+\Delta t\hspace{-.2mm}\sum_{j=0}^{I_h-1}\Delta x_{j}\hspace{-.2mm}\left(\hspace{-.2mm}A_ju_{C}^{n,j}\sum_{i=1}^{N}i\tilde{B}_{i,j}
\hspace{-.2mm}\right)\nonumber\\
&=\sum_{i=1}^{N}iu_{D}^{n,i}+\Delta t\sum_{j=0}^{I_h-1}\Delta x_{j}S_j^n.
\end{align}
The middle two terms cancel due to the mass conservation condition \eqref{equation304}. Combining equations \eqref{equation418} and
\eqref{equation419} we obtain
\begin{align*}
&\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_iu_{C}^{n+1,i}\Delta x_{i}+\sum_{i=1}^{N}iu_{D}^{n+1,i}\\
&=\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_iu_{C}^{n,i}\Delta x_{i}-\Delta t\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}S_i^n\Delta x_{i}+\sum_{i=1}^{N}iu_{D}^{n,i}+\Delta t\sum_{j=0}^{I_h-1}
\Delta x_{j}S_j^n\\
&=\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_iu_{C}^{n,i}\Delta x_{i}+\sum_{i=1}^{N}iu_{D}^{n,i}.
\end{align*}
From repeated application of this equality it is easily seen that the bracketed expression appearing in \eqref{equation417} is equal for all values
of $n$, and hence the total mass $M^h(t)$ remains constant.
\end{proof}
\section{Convergence of the Scheme to a Weak Solution as \texorpdfstring{$h\rightarrow 0$}{}}
Having determined the nonnegativity and mass conservative properties of the approximate solutions provided by \eqref{equation4105} and \eqref{equation4125}, in this section we set out to prove that they
converge, in some sense, to a limit as the parameter $h$, and by necessity $\Delta t$, go to zero, and show that this limit itself is an `exact' solution to our truncated model.
\subsection{Continuous Fragmentation Regime: Convergence}
Let us start with the continuous regime approximations $\left\lbrace u^h_C \right \rbrace$. In order to prove the (weak)
convergence of this family, we employ a weak compactness argument, utilising the Dunford--Pettis theorem (Theorem~\ref{theorem205}),
which provides necessary and sufficient conditions for weak compactness in an $L_{1}$ space. We begin by proving the equiboundedness of
the set $\left\lbrace u^h_C \right \rbrace$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma501}The family of approximations $\left\lbrace u_C^h\right\rbrace$ is equibounded (uniformly bounded) in the space $L_1((N,R) \times [0,T),x \dd x \dd t)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recalling equation \eqref{equation416}, we have for any $t\in [0,T)$ that
\begin{align*}
\|u^h_C(\cdot,t)\|_{L_{1}^1(N,R)}&=\sum_{n=0}^{M-1}\chi_{\tau_n}(t) \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_i u_{C}^{n,i}.
\end{align*}
From the analysis of Lemma~\ref{lemma401}, each of the values $u_{C}^{n,i}$ is nonnegative, and as such the values $S_i^n$ are nonnegative. Therefore, from the last line of equation \eqref{equation418} we deduce that
\[\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_i u_{C}^{n,i}\leq \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_iu_{C}^{n-1,i}\hspace{3mm}\text{for}\hspace{2mm}n=1,\ldots,M-1.\]
Repeated application of this inequality yields
\begin{equation}\label{equation501}
\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_i u_{C}^{n,i}\leq \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_i u_{C}^{0,i}=\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \int_ {\Lambda_{i}} c_0(x)\dd x\leq\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}\frac{x_i}{x_{i-1/2}} \int_ {\Lambda_{i}} c_0(x)\,x\dd x.
\end{equation}
The quantity $\frac{x_i}{x_{i-1/2}}$ can be bounded as follows:
\begin{equation*}
\frac{x_i}{x_{i-1/2}}=\frac{x_{i-1/2}+\frac{1}{2}\Delta x_i}{x_{i-1/2}}\leq 1+ \frac{h}{2N}\leq \frac{3}{2}.
\end{equation*}
We note this bound as it will appear regularly in subsequent calculations. Substituting this within \eqref{equation501} yields
\[\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_i u_{C}^{n,i}\leq\frac{3}{2}\|c_0\|_{L_{1}^1(N,R)},\]
for $n=0,\ldots,M-1$. Replacing this inequality in our calculation gives us the following, which holds for all $t\in [0,T)$:
\begin{align*}
\|u^h_C(\cdot,t)\|_{L_{1}^1(N,R)}&\leq\sum_{n=0}^{M-1}\chi_{\tau_n}(t)\frac{3}{2}\|c_0\|_{L_{1}^1(N,R)}= \frac{3}{2}\|c_0\|_{L_{1}^1(N,R)}.
\end{align*}
Integrating this inequality with respect to $t$ from $0$ to $T$ we obtain the required equiboundedness of $\left\lbrace u_C^h\right\rbrace$ in the space $L_1((N,R) \times [0,T),x\dd x\dd t)$.
\end{proof}
We now move on to prove the second of the two required conditions for the Dunford--Pettis theorem, namely equiintegrability. However, prior to this we collect all the conditions so far imposed on our model via the functions $a$, $b$ and $b_i$, and the initial distributions $c_0$ and $d_0$, and also on our mesh via the parameters $h$ and $\Delta t$.
\begin{remark}\label{conditions}Throughout the remaining analysis, the following conditions shall be assumed to be satisfied.
\begin{enumerate}
\item The initial mass distributions within the continuous and discrete regimes are nonnegative, that is $c_0(x)$ for all $x>N$ and $d_{0,i}\geq0$ for $i=1,\ldots,N$.
\item The functions $a$ and $b$ are nonnegative and belong to the spaces $L_{\infty,loc}\left([N,\infty)\right)$ and \\$L_{\infty,loc}\left([N,\infty)\times[N,\infty)\right)$, respectively.
\item Each of the functions $b_i$ is assumed to be nonnegative. This nonnegativity in conjunction with condition $2$ is sufficient to guarantee that $b_i\in L_{\infty,loc}\left([N,\infty)\right)$, as per Remark \ref{convremark1}.
\item There exist positive constants $k_1$ and $k_2$ such that the mesh parameters $h$ and $\Delta t$ satisfy
\[k_1h\leq \Delta t \leq k_2 h.\]
\item To ensure that the approximate solutions remain nonnegative, the time step $\Delta t$ is assumed to satify the following constraints:
\[0<\Delta t \leq \frac{x_i}{A_i\left(\sum_{k=0}^{i-1}x_{k}B_{k,i}\Delta x_{k}+\sum_{j=1}^{N}j\tilde{B}_{j,i}\right)}\hspace{3mm}\text{for}
\hspace{2mm}i=0,1,\dots,I_h-1,\]
for all cases of the denominator being nonzero, and
\[0<\Delta t \leq \frac{1}{a_i} \hspace{3mm} \text{for}\hspace{2mm}i=2,\dots,N \hspace{2mm} \text{such that} \hspace{2mm} a_i\neq0.\]
\item There exists a constant $\theta>0$ such that
\[K(R) \Delta t \leq \theta<1, \]
where $K(R)=\alpha(R)\beta(R) R$, with $\alpha(R)$ and $\beta(R)$ being the essential suprema for $a$ and $b$ on the restricted domains $[N,R]$ and $[N,R]\times[N,R]$, respectively.
\end{enumerate}
\end{remark}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem501} Under the assumptions outlined in Remark \ref{conditions}, the family $\left\lbrace u_C^h\right\rbrace$ is equiintegrable in $L_1((N,R) \times[0,T),x\dd x \dd t)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Consider the constant sequence comprising solely of the initial data $c_0\in L_{1}\left((N,R),x\dd x\right)$. Clearly this sequence is
convergent, therefore $\left\lbrace c_0\right\rbrace$ forms a weakly sequentially compact set in $L_{1}\left((N,R),x\dd x\right)$. Hence
by the de la Vallee Poussin theorem (Theorem~\ref{theorem204}) there exists a nonnegative, convex function $\Phi \in C^\infty ([0,\infty))$, with $\Phi(0)=0$ and $\Phi'(0)=1$ such that $\Phi'$ is concave and satisfies
\begin{equation*}
\frac{\Phi(x)}{x}\rightarrow\infty\hspace{2mm}\text{as}\hspace{2mm}x\rightarrow\infty \hspace{3mm}\text{and}\hspace{3mm}\int_{N}^R\Phi(c_0)(x)\,x\dd x
<\infty.
\end{equation*}
A standard inequality \eqref{equation203}, for $C^1$ convex functions gives us
\begin{equation*}
\Phi(u_{C}^{n+1,i})-\Phi(u_{C}^{n,i})\leq\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}-u_{C}^{n,i}\right)\Phi'(u_{C}^{n+1,i}).
\end{equation*}
Multiplying this by $x_i \Delta x_i$ and summing over all $i$ gives
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i\Delta x_i \left(\Phi\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}\right)-\Phi\left(u_{C}^{n,i}\right) \right)
\leq \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_i\left(\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}-u_{C}^{n,i}\right)\Phi'(u_{C}^{n+1,i})\right).
\end{equation*}
Utilising equation~\eqref{equation409} we can rewrite this as
\begin{align}\label{equation504}
&\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i\Delta x_i \left(\Phi\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}\right)-\Phi\left(u_{C}^{n,i}\right) \right)\nonumber\\
&\leq \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i\Delta x_i \left(\frac{\Delta t}{x_i\Delta x_{i}}(F_{i+1/2}^n-F_{i-1/2}^n)-\frac{\Delta t}{x_i}S_i^n\right)
\Phi'\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}\right).
\end{align}
Recalling the definition of $S_i^n$ from \eqref{sink}, we see that it must be nonnegative. Additionally, Lemma~\ref{lemma203}(ii) and Lemma~\ref{lemma401} give $\Phi'\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}\right)\geq0$, hence we can drop the term involving $S_i^n$ from \eqref{equation504} and the inequality will still remain valid, giving us
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i\Delta x_i \left(\Phi\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}\right)-\Phi\left(u_{C}^{n,i}\right) \right)
\leq \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} \Delta t(F_{i+1/2}^n-F_{i-1/2}^n)\Phi'\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}\right).
\end{equation*}
With some easy modification, equation~\eqref{equation413} becomes the inequality
\[F_{i+1/2}^n-F_{i-1/2}^n\leq x_{i}\Delta x_{i}\sum_{j=i+1}^{I_h-1}A_jB_{i,j}u_{C}^{n,j}\Delta x_{j},\]
which, if placed in the previous inequality, results in
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_i \left(\Phi\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}\right)-\Phi\left(u_{C}^{n,i}\right) \right)
\leq \Delta t\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}\sum_{j=i+1}^{I_h-1}x_i A_jB_{i,j}u_{C}^{n,j}\Delta x_{i}\Delta x_{j}\Phi'\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}\right).
\end{equation*}
Utilising Lemma~\ref{lemma203}(i) with $x=u_{C}^{n,j}$ and $y=u_{C}^{n+1,i}$ and noting that the constants $\alpha(R)$ and $\beta(R)$ bound the average values $A_j$ and $B_{i,j}$, we get
\begin{align*}
&\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1 }x_i\Delta x_i \left( \Phi\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}\right)-\Phi\left(u_{C}^{n,i}\right) \right)
\leq \alpha \beta \Delta t\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} \sum_{j=i+1}^{I_h-1}x_i\Delta x_{i} \Delta x_{j} u_{C}^{n,j}
\Phi'\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}\right)\\
&\leq \alpha(R) \beta(R) \Delta t \left(\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} \left(x_i \Delta x_{i} \Phi\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}\right)\sum_{j=i+1}^{I_h-1}\Delta x_j\right)+\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}\left( x_i \Delta x_{i} \sum_{j=i+1}^{I_h-1} \Delta x_j \Phi(u_{C}^{n,j})\right)\right).
\end{align*}
As $j$ is restricted to be greater than $i$ we have $x_j>x_i$ for admissible $j$ and $i$. This allows us to switch $x_i$ for $x_j$ in the
second term and take this within the inner summation. Following this we expand the summation over $j$ to give
\begin{align*}
&\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1 }x_i\Delta x_i \left( \Phi\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}\right)-\Phi\left(u_{C}^{n,i}\right) \right)\\
&\leq \alpha(R) \beta(R) \Delta t \left(\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} \left(x_i \Delta x_{i} \Phi\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}\right)\sum_{j=i+1}^{I_h-1}\Delta x_j\right)+\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}\left(\Delta x_{i} \sum_{j=i+1}^{I_h-1}x_j \Delta x_j \Phi(u_{C}^{n,j})\right)\right)\\
&\leq \underbrace{\alpha(R)\beta(R) R}_{=K(R)} \Delta t \left(\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} x_i \Delta x_{i} \Phi\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}\right)
+ \sum_{j=0}^{I_h-1}x_j \Delta x_j \Phi(u_{C}^{n,j})\right).
\end{align*}
If we change the index variable from $j$ to $i$ in the second summation and re-arrange then we obtain
\begin{align*}
\left(1-K(R)\Delta t\right)\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} x_i\Delta x_{i}\Phi(u_{C}^{n+1,i})\leq \left(1+K(R)\Delta t\right)\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_{i}
\Phi\left(u_{C}^{n,i}\right).
\end{align*}
Some further manipulations produce
\begin{align*}
\left(1-K(R)\Delta t\right)\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_{i}\left(\Phi(u_{C}^{n+1,i})-\Phi(u_{C}^{n,i})\right)
\leq 2K(R)\Delta t\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_{i}\Phi\left(u_{C}^{n,i}\right).
\end{align*}
By the final assumption of Remark \ref{conditions}, we have $1-K(R)\Delta t>0$ allowing us to divide through to get
\begin{align*}
\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_{i}\Phi(u_{C}^{n+1,i})\leq\left(1+\frac{2K(R)\Delta t}{1-K(R)\Delta t}\right)\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_{i}
\Phi\left(u_{C}^{n,i}\right).
\end{align*}
Repeated application of this inequality yields
\begin{align*}
\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_{i}\Phi(u_{C}^{n+1,i})&\leq\left(1+\frac{2K(R)\Delta t}{1-K(R)\Delta t}\right)^{n+1}\hspace{1mm}\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} x_i
\Delta x_{i}\Phi\left(u_{C}^{0,i}\right)\\
&\leq\exp\left(\frac{2K(R)\Delta t (n+1)}{1-K(R)\Delta t}\right)\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_{i}\Phi\left(u_{C}^{0,i}\right).
\end{align*}
For values of $t$ in the interval $\tau_n=[t_n,t_{n+1})$ this gives us
\begin{align*}
\int_{N}^{R}\Phi \left(u^h_C(x,t)\right)\,x\dd x
&=\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} x_i\Delta x_{i}\Phi\left(u_{C}^{n,i}\right)\\
&\leq\exp\left(\frac{2K(R)t}{1-K(R)\Delta t} \right)\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_{i}\Phi\left(u_{C}^{0,i}\right)\\
&=\exp\left(\frac{2K(R)t}{1-K(R)\Delta t} \right)\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} x_i \Delta x_{i}\Phi\left(\frac{1}{\Delta x_{i}}\int_ {\Lambda_{i}} c_0(x)\dd x
\right).
\end{align*}
An application of Jensen's inequality \cite[Theorem 2.2]{lieb01} allows us to switch the order of $\Phi$ and integration to get
\begin{align*}
\int_{N}^{R}\Phi \left(u^h_C(x,t)\right)\,x\dd x
&\leq\exp\left(\frac{2K(R)t}{1-K(R)\Delta t} \right)\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} x_i \int_ {\Lambda_{i}} \Phi( c_0(x))\dd x\\
&\leq\frac{3}{2}\exp\left(\frac{2K(R)t}{1-K(R)\Delta t} \right)\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} \int_ {\Lambda_{i}} \Phi( c_0(x))\,x\dd x.
\end{align*}
By assumption $6$ of Remark \ref{conditions}, that $K(R)\Delta t \leq \theta<1$, we deduce that
\begin{align*}
\int_{N}^{R} \Phi \left(u^h_C(x,t)\right)\,x\dd x
\leq\frac{3}{2}\exp\left(\frac{2K(R)t}{1-\theta}\right)\int_{N}^{R}\Phi( c_0(x))\,x\dd x,
\end{align*}
which holds for all $t\in[0,T)$. Integrating the inequality with respect to $t$ from $0$ to $T$ confirms the equiintegrability of the family $\left\lbrace u_C^h\right\rbrace$ in the space $L_1((N,R) \times [0,T),x\dd x\dd t)$.
\end{proof}
By Theorem~\ref{theorem205} (Dunford--Pettis theorem), the sequence $\left\lbrace u_C^h\right\rbrace$ forms a weakly sequentially compact set in the space $L_{1}\left((N,R)\times[0,T),x\dd x\dd t\right)$. This implies the existence of a subsequence $\left\lbrace u_C^{hj}\right\rbrace$ and a function $u_C^R\in L_{1}\left((N,R)\times[0,T),x\dd x\dd t\right)$ such that $u_C^{hj}\rightharpoonup u_C^R$ in $L_{1}\left((N,R)\times[0,T),x\dd x\dd t\right)$ as $j\rightarrow \infty$ and $h_{j}\rightarrow0$.\\
\begin{remark}\label{remark501} From now on this convergent subsequence will be considered implicitly, unless otherwise stated; as such we now use the notation $\left\lbrace u_C^h\right\rbrace$ to denote such a convergent subsequence, the choice of which, we note, may not be unique.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Continuous Fragmentation Regime: Weak Solution}
Having shown that our sequence of approximations converges (weakly) to a limit, we now aim to show that this limit provides a solution to our truncated equation \eqref{equation402}. Precisely, we intend to show that the function $u_C^R$ satisfies the following criterion.
\begin{definition}\label{definition501} The function $u_C^R$ is a weak solution of equation \eqref{equation402}, if it satisfies
\begin{align}\label{equation505}
&\int_{0}^{T}\int_{N}^{R} xu_C^R(x,t)\frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial t}(x,t) \dd x\dd t+\int_{N}^{R}xc_{0}(x)\varphi(x,0)\dd x\nonumber\\
&=\int_{0}^{T}\int_{N}^{R}\mathcal{F}^R\left(xu_{C}^R\right)\hspace{-.6mm}(x,t)\hspace{1mm}\frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial x}(x,t) \dd x\dd t
+\int_{0}^{T}\int_{N}^{R}S(xu_C^R)(x,t)\varphi(x,t)\dd x\dd t,
\end{align}
for all functions $\varphi$, which are twice continuously differentiable functions on $(N,R)\times(0,T)$, such that $\varphi$ and each of its derivatives up to order $2$ may be continuously extended to $[N,R]\times[0,T)$, and such that for each fixed $x\in[N,R]$, the support of $\varphi$ with respect to $t$ is a compact subset of $[0,T)$. We denote the set of such extended functions by $C_c^2\left([N,R]\times[0,T)\right)$. Finally, we note that the weak formulation \eqref{equation505} was obtained from \eqref{equation402} in the usual manner, recalling the zero boundary conditions established in Lemma~\ref{lastthing}.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}\label{remark502} We now make note of a property of the function $\varphi$ and its derivatives, which we will make use of in our analysis. As $\varphi$ has compact support and is identically zero outwith this support, its derivatives, both first and second, must also be zero outwith the support. Now within this compact support, $\varphi$ and its derivatives are continuous and so must be bounded functions.
\end{remark}
\begin{definition}\label{definition502}
In the analysis which follows we make use of the following three approximations to $x$ over the domain $(N,R)$. First we have the left endpoint approximation, defined by
\[\xi^h:x \in (N,R)\rightarrow \xi^h(x)= \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} \chi_{\Lambda_i}(x)x_{i-1/2}.\]
Secondly we consider the midpoint approximation, defined by
\[X^h:x \in (N,R)\rightarrow X^h(x)= \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} \chi_{\Lambda_i}(x)x_i, \]
and finally we introduce the right endpoint approximation given by
\[\Xi^h:x \in (N,R)\rightarrow \Xi^h(x)= \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1} \chi_{\Lambda_i}(x)x_{i+1/2}. \]
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}\label{convremark3}
It is a simple exercise to show that the three approximations, introduced above, converge point-wise (uniformly) to $x$ over the domain $(N,R)$ as the mesh parameter $h$ goes to $0$. The reader may find details given in \cite[Lemma 5.2.3]{bairdphd}.
\end{remark}
We are now in a position to proceed with our proof that $u_C^R$ is a weak solution to \eqref{equation402}.
\begin{definition}\label{definition503} Let $\varphi\in C_c^2\left([N,R]\times[0,T)\right)$ , then for sufficiently small $\Delta t$, the support of $\varphi$ with respect to $t$ lies within $[0,t_{M-1}]$. We define $\varphi_{i}^{n}$ as an approximation of $\varphi$ on $\Lambda_{i}\times \tau_n$ by
\[\varphi_i^n=\frac{1}{\Delta t}\int_{\tau_n}\varphi(x_{i-1/2},t)\dd t,\]
with $\varphi_{i}^{M-1}=\varphi_{i}^{M}=0$ for admissible $i$ and define $\varphi_{I_h}^{n}=0$ for all $n$.
\end{definition}
Rearranging equation \eqref{equation409}, multiplying by $\varphi_{i}^{n}$ and summing over $n=0,\ldots,M-1$ and $i=0,\ldots,I_h-1$, gives us
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}\left(x_i\Delta x_{i}\left(u_{C}^{n+1,i}-u_{C}^{n,i}\right)\varphi_{i}^{n}-\Delta t(F_{i+1/2}^n-F_{i-1/2}^n)
\varphi_{i}^{n}+\Delta t\Delta x_{i}S_i^n\varphi_{i}^{n}\right)=0.
\end{equation*}
Rearrangement of the summations and utilising the compact support of $\varphi$ and the zero boundary flux gives us the following equality:
\begin{align}\label{equation506}
&\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i\Delta x_{i}u_{C}^{n+1,i}\left(\varphi_{i}^{n+1}-\varphi_{i}^{n}\right)
+ \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_{i} u_{C}^{0,i}\varphi_{i}^{0}\nonumber\\
&-\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}\Delta t F_{i+1/2}^n(\varphi_{i+1}^{n}-\varphi_{i}^{n})
-\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}\Delta t\Delta x_{i}S_i^n\varphi_{i}^{n}
=0.
\end{align}
The above equality can be seen as the discrete equivalent of the weak formulation \eqref{equation505}. Our approach now involves taking the limit as $h\rightarrow 0$ of \eqref{equation506} and showing that we do indeed obtain \eqref{equation505} with $u_C^R$ as a weak solution. Observing the terms of \eqref{equation505} we see that the integrals are with respect to the measure $\ddn x\dd t$ whilst we have shown that convergence occurs in the space with weighted measure $x \dd x \dd t$. At this point we highlight the use of Theorem~\ref{theorem201} to switch spaces but retain convergence.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem502}
Under the assumptions outlined in Remark \ref{conditions}, the function $u_C^R$ obtained as the limit of the sequence $\left\lbrace u_C^h \right\rbrace$, is a weak solution of our equation, satisfying \eqref{equation505}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Looking initially at the first two terms of \eqref{equation506}, we can express them as follows:
\begin{align*}
&\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i\Delta x_{i}u_{C}^{n+1,i}\left(\varphi_{i}^{n+1}-\varphi_{i}^{n}\right)
+ \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i \Delta x_{i} u_{C}^{0,i}\varphi_{i}^{0}\nonumber\\
&=\underbrace{\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}x_i\Delta x_{i}u_{C}^{M,i}\left(\varphi_{i}^{M}-\varphi_{i}^{M-1}\right)}_{=0}\\
&\hspace{5mm}+\sum_{n=0}^{M-2} \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}\int_{\tau_{n+1}} \int_{\Lambda_{i}}X^h(x)u^h_C(x,t)
\frac{\varphi( \xi^h(x),t)-\varphi( \xi^h(x),t-\Delta t)}{\Delta t}\dd x \dd t\\
&\hspace{5mm}+\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}\int_{\Lambda_{i}}X^h(x)u^h_C(x,0)\frac{1}{\Delta t}\int_{0}^{\Delta t}\varphi( \xi^h(x),t)\dd t \dd x\\
&=\int_{0}^{T} \int_{N}^{R} \chi_{[\Delta t,T)}(t) X^h(x)u^h_C(x,t)
\frac{\varphi( \xi^h(x),t)-\varphi( \xi^h(x),t-\Delta t)}{\Delta t}\dd x \dd t\\
&\hspace{5mm}+\int_{N}^{R}X^h(x)u^h_C(x,0)\frac{1}{\Delta t}\int_{0}^{\Delta t}\varphi( \xi^h(x),t)\dd t\dd x.
\end{align*}
Considering the first of the double integrals, let $(x,t)\in(N,R)\times(0,T)$, then in the case that $0<\Delta t \leq t$, Taylor expansions of the $\varphi$ terms about the point $(x,t)$ give us
\[\varphi( \xi^h(x),t)=\varphi(x,t)+(\xi^h(x)-x)\frac{\partial \varphi}{\partial x}(x,t)+O(h^2),\]
\[\varphi( \xi^h(x),t-\Delta t)=\varphi(x,t)+(\xi^h(x)-x)\frac{\partial \varphi}{\partial x}(x,t)
+(t-\Delta t-t)\frac{\partial \varphi}{\partial t}(x,t)+O(h^2,h\Delta t,\Delta t^2).\]
Simple cancellations and recalling the condition \eqref{equation404} relating $h$ and $\Delta t$ give us
\begin{equation}\label{equation507}
\chi_{[\Delta t,T)}(t)\frac{\varphi( \xi^h(x),t)-\varphi( \xi^h(x),t-\Delta t)}{\Delta t}=\left\lbrace \begin{array}{cc}&\hspace{-5mm}\dfrac{\Delta t\frac{\partial \varphi}{\partial t}(x,t)+O(\Delta t^2)}{\Delta t}, \hspace{6mm}\Delta t \leq t\\ \vspace{-3mm}\\&\hspace{10.5mm}0,\hspace{21.2mm}\Delta t > t\end{array}\right..
\end{equation}
The expression on the left-hand side of \eqref{equation507} can thus be seen to converge pointwise to $\varphi_t$ on $(N,R)\times(0,T)$ as the mesh size goes to 0. Furthermore, since the derivatives of $\varphi$ are bounded as per Remark \ref{remark502}, we can bound the left-hand side of \eqref{equation507} on $(N,R)\times(0,T)$, with a bound that is uniform w.r.t $h$, as $h\searrow 0$. As noted in Remark \ref{convremark3}, the functions $X^h(x)$ converge pointwise to $x$ on $(N,R)$ as $h\searrow 0$, and are clearly bounded by $R$ for all values of $x$ and $h$. Noting that $(N,R)\times[0,T) \backslash (N,R)\times(0,T)$ is of measure $0$ with respect to the measure $\dd x \dd t$, we see that the terms accompanying $u_C^h$ in our double integral satisfy the conditions for $\left\lbrace g_h \right\rbrace$ from Theorem~\ref{theorem203}. We have shown previously that $u_C^h\rightharpoonup u_C^R$ in $L_{1}\left((N,R)\times[0,T),\,x\dd x\dd t\right)$ and by Theorem~\ref{theorem201} this is also the case in $L_{1}\left((N,R)\times[0,T),\dd x \dd t\right)$ and so an application of Theorem~\ref{theorem203} gives us
\begin{align}\label{equation508}
\int_{0}^{T} \int_{N}^{R} \chi_{[\Delta t,T)}(t) & X^h(x)u^h_C(x,t)
\frac{\varphi( \xi^h(x),t)-\varphi( \xi^h(x),t-\Delta t)}{\Delta t} \dd x \dd t\rightarrow \nonumber\\
&\int_{0}^{T}\int_{N}^{R} xu_C^R(x,t)\frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial t}(x,t) \dd x \dd t,
\end{align}
as the mesh size parameter $h$ goes to 0. Next, we consider the second term appearing above. Since
$\varphi$ is $C_c^2\left([N,R]\times[0,T)\right)$, its derivatives are bounded, allowing us to deduce that
\begin{equation}\label{equation54322}
\frac{1}{\Delta t} \int_{0}^{\Delta t} \varphi(\xi^h(x),t)\dd t\rightarrow\varphi(x,0)\hspace{2mm}\text{as}\hspace{2mm}h\searrow0,
\end{equation}
for all $x\in (N,R)$, as we now demonstrate. Consider the following:
\begin{align}\label{equation54321}
&\left|\frac{1}{\Delta t}\int_{0}^{\Delta t}\varphi( \xi^h(x),t)\dd t-\varphi(x,0)\right|=
\left|\frac{1}{\Delta t}\int_{0}^{\Delta t}\left(\varphi( \xi^h(x),t)-\varphi(x,0)\right)\dd t\right|\nonumber\\
&=\left|\frac{1}{\Delta t}\int_{0}^{\Delta t}\left(\varphi( \xi^h(x),t)-\varphi(x,t)+\varphi(x,t)-\varphi(x,0)\right)\dd t\right|\nonumber\\
&\leq\frac{1}{\Delta t}\int_{0}^{\Delta t}\left|\varphi( \xi^h(x),t)-\varphi(x,t)\right|\dd t
+\frac{1}{\Delta t}\int_{0}^{\Delta t}\left|\varphi(x,t)-\varphi(x,0)\right|\dd t.
\end{align}
Expressing $\varphi( \xi^h(x),t)$ using a Taylor expansion about $(x,t)\in(N,R)\times(0,T)$, and recalling Remark~\ref{remark502} about the derivatives of $\varphi$ we get
\[\varphi( \xi^h(x),t)=\varphi(x,t)+(\xi^h(x)-x)\frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial x}(x,t)+O(h^2).\]
Hence bounding the derivative $\partial\varphi/\partial x$ and noting that $\left|\xi^h(x)-x\right|\leq h$ gives us
\[\left|\varphi( \xi^h(x),t)-\varphi(x,t)\right|\leq C_1h,\]
for some constant $C_1$ independent of $h$ and $\Delta t$. Similarly, expanding $\varphi(x,t)$ about $(x,0)$, where $x\in(N,R)$, produces
\begin{equation}\label{Tseries}
\varphi( x,t)=\varphi(x,0)+\underbrace{(t-0)}_{\leq \Delta t}\frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial t}(x,0_+)+O(h^2),
\end{equation}
for $t\geq0$. The use of the notation $\tfrac{\partial\varphi}{\partial t}(x,0_+)$ signifies we are considering the right derivative of $\varphi$ with respect to $t$ at $t=0$.
The expansion \eqref{Tseries} then leads to
\begin{align*}
\left|\varphi(x,t)-\varphi(x,0)\right|\leq C_2h,
\end{align*}
for some other constant $C_2$, independent of $h$ and $\Delta t$. Returning to \eqref{equation54321} we have
\begin{align*}
\left|\frac{1}{\Delta t}\int_{0}^{\Delta t}\varphi( \xi^h(x),t)\dd t-\varphi(x,0)\right|\leq (C_1+C_2)h.
\end{align*}
Hence \eqref{equation54322} does indeed hold for $x\in (N,R)$, furthermore the convergence is uniform with respect to $x$. Together with the pointwise convergence of $X^h(x)$ to $x$, and from Remark~\ref{convremark2}, the $L_1(N,R)$ strong convergence of $u^h_C(x,0)$ to the restriction of $c_0$ to $(N,R)$, another application of Theorem~\ref{theorem203} yields
\begin{equation}\label{equation509}
\int_{N}^{R}X^h(x)u^h_C(x,0)\frac{1}{\Delta t}\int_{0}^{\Delta t}\varphi( \xi^h(x),t)\dd t\dd x\rightarrow
\int_{N}^{R}xc_{0}(x)\varphi(x,0)\dd x.
\end{equation}
Moving on to the third term of equation \eqref{equation506}, for $t\in\tau_n$ and $x\in\Lambda_i$ we can write the numerical flux as an integral as follows:
\begin{align*}
F_{i+1/2}^{n}&=\sum_{j=i+1}^{I_h-1}\sum_{k=0}^{i}x_{k}A_jB_{k,j}u_{C}^{n,j}\Delta x_{k}\Delta x_{j}\\
&=\sum_{j=i+1}^{I_h-1}\sum_{k=0}^{i}\int_{\Lambda_j}\int_{\Lambda_k}X^h(w)a^h(v)b^h(w|v) u_C^h(v,t)\dd w\dd v\\
&=\int_{x_{i+1/2}}^{R}\int_{N}^{x_{i+1/2}}X^h(w)a^h(v)b^h(w|v) u_C^h(v,t)\dd w\dd v\\
&=\int_{N}^{R}\int_{N}^{R} \chi_{[\Xi^h(x),R]}(v)\chi_{[N,\Xi^h(x)]}(w) X^h(w)a^h(v)b^h(w|v) u_C^h(v,t)\dd w\dd v\\
&=:\mathcal{F}^h(u_C^h)(x,t).
\end{align*}
Then the third term of equation \eqref{equation506} is given by
\begin{align*}
&\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}\Delta t F_{i+1/2}^n(\varphi_{i+1}^{n}-\varphi_{i}^{n})\\
&=\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}F_{i+1/2}^n\int_{\tau_n}\varphi(x_{i+1/2},t)-\varphi(x_{i-1/2},t)\dd t\\
&=\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}\int_{\tau_n}\int_{\Lambda_i}F_{i+1/2}^n\frac{\partial\varphi }{\partial x}(x,t)\dd x\dd t\\
&=\int_0^T \int_{N}^R\mathcal{F}^h(u_C^h)(x,t)\frac{\partial\varphi }{\partial x}(x,t)\dd x \dd t.
\end{align*}
Expressed in full this gives us the following, after a switch in the order of integration:
\begin{align}\label{equation510}
&\int_0^T\int_{N}^R\int_{N}^{R}\int_{N}^{R} \chi_{[\Xi^h(x),R]}(v)\chi_{[N,\Xi^h(x)]}(w) X^h(w)a^h(v)b^h(w|v) u_C^h(v,t)\dd w \dd v\frac{\partial\varphi }{\partial x}(x,t)\dd x\dd t\nonumber\\
&=\int_{N}^R\int_{N}^{R}\chi_{[N,\Xi^h(x)]}(w) X^h(w)\left(\int_0^T\int_{N}^{R} \chi_{[\Xi^h(x),R]}(v)a^h(v)b^h(w|v) u_C^h(v,t)\frac{\partial\varphi }{\partial x}(x,t)\dd v\dd t\right)\dd w\dd x.
\end{align}
Due to the boundedness of the partial derivative $\varphi_x$ and the $L_{\infty,loc}$ property of the functions $a$ and $b$, for almost all fixed $(x,w) \in (N,R) \times (N,R)$, the product $\chi_{[\Xi^h(x),R]}(v)a^h(v)b^h(w|v)\frac{\partial\varphi }{\partial x}(x,t)$ is a bounded (uniformly w.r.t. $h$) function of $v$ and $t$. Also, as a consequence of Remarks~\ref{convremark1} and~\ref{convremark3}, it converges pointwise almost everywhere (w.r.t the measure $\dd v\dd t$) on $(v,t) \in (N,R) \times [0,T)$ to $\chi_{[x,R]}(v)a(v)b(w|v)\frac{\partial\varphi }{\partial x}(x,t)$ as $h\rightarrow 0$. Since $u_C^h\rightharpoonup u_C^R$ in $L_1((N,R)\times[0,T),\dd x\dd t)$, an application of Theorem~\ref{theorem203} gives us
\begin{align*}
&\int_0^T\int_{N}^{R} \chi_{[\Xi^h(x),R]}(v)a^h(v)b^h(w|v) u_C^h(v,t)\frac{\partial\varphi }{\partial x}(x,t)\dd v\dd t\\
&\hspace{10mm}\rightarrow \int_0^T\int_{N}^{R} \chi_{[x,R]}(v)a(v)b(w|v) u_C^R(v,t)\frac{\partial\varphi }{\partial x}(x,t)\dd v\dd t.
\end{align*}
Using the local boundedness of $a$ and $b$, along with the boundedness of the partial derivative $\frac{\partial\varphi }{\partial x}$, and the boundedness of the sequence $\left\lbrace u_C^h \right\rbrace$ in $L_1((N,R)\times[0,T),\dd x \dd t)$, the left--hand side above can be bounded by a constant. It is easily seen that $\chi_{[N,\Xi^h(x)]}(w) X^h(w)$ converges pointwise to $\chi_{[N,x]}(w)w$ as $h \rightarrow 0$ and can be bounded by $R$ over our domain of interest. Therefore applying the Lebesgue dominated convergence theorem \cite[Theorem 1.8]{lieb01}, we get that
\eqref{equation510} converges to
\begin{align}\label{equation511}
&\int_{N}^R\int_{N}^{R}\chi_{[N,x]}(w)w\left(\int_0^T\int_{N}^{R} \chi_{[x,R]}(v)a(v)b(w|v)
u_C^R(v,t)\frac{\partial\varphi }{\partial x}(x,t)\dd v\dd t\right)\dd w \dd x\nonumber\\
&=\int_0^T\int_{N}^R\left(\int_{x}^{R}\int_{N}^{x}w a(v)b(w|v)u_C^R(v,t)\dd w\dd v \right)
\frac{\partial\varphi }{\partial x}(x,t)\dd x\dd t\nonumber\\
&=\int_0^T\int_{N}^R\mathcal{F}^R\left(xu_{C}^R\right)(x,t)\frac{\partial\varphi }{\partial x}(x,t)\dd x\dd t.
\end{align}
Therefore, in the limit as $h\rightarrow 0$, the third term of \eqref{equation506} coincides with the third term of \eqref{equation505}.
Now the fourth term from equation \eqref{equation506} is given fully by
\begin{align*}
&\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}A_i\left(\sum_{j=1}^{N}j\tilde{B}_{j,i}\right)u_{C}^{n,i}\varphi_{i}^{n}\Delta x_{i} \Delta t\\
&=\sum_{n=0}^{M-1}\sum_{i=0}^{I_h-1}\int_{\tau_n}\int_{\Lambda_i}a^h(v)\left(\sum_{j=1}^{N}jb_j^h(v)\right)u_c^h(v,t)
\varphi(\xi^h(v),t)\dd v\dd t\\
&=\int_{0}^T\int_{N}^Ra^h(v)\left( \sum_{j=1}^{N}jb_j^h(v)\right)u_c^h(v,t)\varphi(\xi^h(v),t)\dd v\dd t.
\end{align*}
The pointwise convergence of $a^h$, $b_j^h$ and $\xi^h$ along with the continuity of $\varphi$ means that
\[a^h(v)\left(\sum_{j=1}^{N}jb_j^h(v)\right)\varphi(\xi^h(v),t)\rightarrow a(v)\left( \sum_{j=1}^{N}jb_j(v)\right)\varphi(v,t),\]
for all $t\in[0,T)$ and almost all $v\in(R,N)$ as $h\rightarrow0$. Since $a$ and $b_i$ are in $L_{\infty,loc}([N,\infty))$ and $\varphi$ is $C^2$ on
$[N,R]\times [0,T)$ with compact support (hence is a bounded function), the expressions on either side belong to $L_{\infty}((N,R)\times[0,T))$, with the left-hand side being uniformly bounded w.r.t. $h$. Hence, with $u_c^h\rightharpoonup u_C^R$ in $L_1((N,R)\times[0,T),\dd v\dd t)$, applying Theorem~\ref{theorem203}, yields
\begin{align}\label{equation512}
&\int_{0}^T \int_{N}^R a^h(v) \left( \sum_{j=1}^{N}jb_j^h(v)\right) u_c^h(v,t) \varphi(\xi^h(v),t) \dd v\dd t\nonumber\\
&\rightarrow\int_{0}^T\int_{N}^Ra(v)\left( \sum_{j=1}^{N}jb_j(v)\right)u_c^R(v,t)\varphi(v,t)\dd v\dd t\nonumber\\
&=\int_{0}^{T}\int_{N}^{R}S(vu_C^R)(v,t) \varphi(v,t)\dd v\dd t.
\end{align}
Taken together \eqref{equation508}, \eqref{equation509}, \eqref{equation511} and \eqref{equation512} show that $u_C^R$ satisfies \eqref{equation505} for all $\varphi\in C_c^2([N,R]\times[0,T))$, and hence $u_C^R$ is a weak solution, as set out in Definition \ref{definition501}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Discrete Fragmentation Regime: Convergence}
Now let us consider the discrete regime approximations. This is treated by a similar approach to the one we adopted for the continuous regime equation, but as a first step we establish a bound on the values $u_{D}^{n,i}$.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma503}There exists a constant $C$, independent of $h$ and $R$, such that for all values of $n$ and $i$ we have
\[0\leq u_{D}^{n,i}\leq C.\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}The nonnegativity of $u_{D}^{n,i}$ follows from Lemma \ref{lemma401}. We shall therefore concentrate on the upper bound. From Lemma~\ref{lemma402} we have, for all admissible $n$, that the following holds:
\begin{align*}
\sum_{i=0}^{I_{h-1}}x_i \Delta x_i u_{C}^{n,i} + \sum_{i=1}^N i u_{D}^{n,i}&=\sum_{i=0}^{I_{h-1}}x_i \Delta x_i u_{C}^{0,i} + \sum_{i=1}^N i u_{D}^{0,i}\\
&=\sum_{i=0}^{I_{h-1}}x_i \int_{\Lambda_i}c_0(x)\dd x + \sum_{i=1}^N i d_{0i}\\
&\leq\frac{3}{2}\sum_{i=0}^{I_{h-1}}\int_{\Lambda_i}c_0(x)\,x\dd x + \sum_{i=1}^N i d_{0i}\\
&\leq\frac{3}{2}\int_{N}^\infty c_0(x)\,x\dd x + \sum_{i=1}^N i d_{0i}=C<\infty.
\end{align*}
Therefore, for all $n$ and $i$ we have that
\[u_{D}^{n,i}\leq C,\]
where the constant $C$ is independent of the mesh parameter $h$ and the truncation parameter $R$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem503}For each $i=1,\ldots,N$, the family $\left\lbrace u^h_{Di}\right \rbrace$ forms a sequentially weakly compact set in $L_{1}\left([0,T)\right)$, hence must have a weakly convergent subsequence.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The bound obtained in Lemma~\ref{lemma503} allows us to easily establish equiboundedness and equiintegrability in $L_{1}\left([0,T)\right)$ for each of the families $\left\lbrace u^h_{Di}\right \rbrace$ as follows:
\begin{equation}\label{equation513}
\left\|u_{Di}^h(\cdot)\right\|_{L_1\left([0,T)\right)}=\sum_{n=0}^{M-1}u^{n,i}_D\Delta t \leq \sum_{n=0}^{M-1}C\Delta t=CT.
\end{equation}
Now let $\Phi$ be any function of the nature described in Theorem~\ref{theorem204}. Since $\Phi$ is increasing, the established bound for $u^{n,i}_D$ allows us to deduce that
\begin{equation*}
\int_0^T\Phi(u_{Di}^h(t))\dd t=\sum_{n=0}^{M-1}\Phi(u^{n,i}_D)\Delta t \leq \sum_{n=0}^{M-1}\Phi(C)\Delta t=\Phi(C)T.
\end{equation*}
Hence each of the families $\left\lbrace u^h_{Di} \right \rbrace$ is equiintegrable. By the Dunford--Pettis theorem (Theorem~\ref{theorem205}), each of the families form a weakly sequentially compact set in $L_{1}\left([0,T)\right)$. As such, they all contain some weakly convergent subsequence.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
We note that what we seek is a collection of values $\left\lbrace h^j \right \rbrace$, such that all of the sequences $\left\lbrace u^{h^j}_{Di} \right \rbrace$, for $i=1,\ldots,N$, converge weakly, as $j\rightarrow \infty$ and $h_j\rightarrow 0$. We achieve this by means of a diagonal argument, which we now outline. Knowing that the family $\left\lbrace u^h_{D1} \right \rbrace$ has a weakly convergent subsequence, let us denote the corresponding sequence of $h$-values by $\left\lbrace h^j \right \rbrace_{j=1}^\infty$ and consider the family $\left\lbrace u^{h^j}_{D2} \right \rbrace_{j=1}^\infty$. As this set satisfies the equiboundedness and equiintegrability conditions of the Dunford--Pettis theorem, it too must have a weakly convergent subsequence. Extracting this subsequence and denoting the corresponding $h$-values by $\left\lbrace h^{j_n} \right \rbrace_{n=1}^\infty$, we then have both
$\left\lbrace u^{h^{j_n}}_{D1} \right \rbrace$ and $\left\lbrace u^{h^{j_n}}_{D2} \right \rbrace$ converging (weakly) as $n\rightarrow \infty$ and $j_n\rightarrow \infty$ . We can continue this process, working through each of the families $\left\lbrace u^h_{Di} \right \rbrace$, until we have a set of common $h$-values, $\left\lbrace h_j^{\prime } \right \rbrace_{j=1}^\infty$, for which all the subsequences $\left\lbrace u^{h_j^{\prime }}_{Di} \right \rbrace_{j=1}^\infty$ are (weakly) convergent as $j\rightarrow \infty$ and $h_j^{\prime }\rightarrow 0$.
From now on these convergent subsequences are considered implicitly and we use $\left\lbrace u^h_{Di} \right \rbrace$ to denote said subsequences, unless otherwise stated. Let us denote the weak limit of $\left\lbrace u^h_{Di}\right \rbrace$ by $u_{Di}^R$ (note the upper case superscript notation for the limit).
\end{remark}
\subsection{Discrete Fragmentation Regime: Weak Solution}
Having established the convergence of our sequence of approximations we now aim to determine whether the limit produced provides a solution to the equation \eqref{equation403} and if so in what sense. As such, following on from Definition \ref{definition501}, we introduce
\begin{definition}\label{weakdisc}
We say that the function $u_{Di}^R$ is a weak solution of equation \eqref{equation403} if it satisfies
\begin{align}\label{equation515}
&\int_{0}^T u_{Di}^R(t)\frac{\ddn \phi}{\ddn t}(t)\dd t + d_{0_i}\phi(0) - \int_{0}^T a_iu_{Di}^R(t) \phi(t) \dd t\nonumber\\
&+ \int_{0}^T \sum_{j=i+1}^{N}a_jb_{i,j}u_{Dj}^R(t) \phi(t) \dd t + \int_{0}^T \int_{N}^{R} a(y)b_i(y)u_{C}^R(y,t)\phi(t)\dd y \dd t=0
\end{align}
for any $\phi \in C_c^2([0,T))$, where $C_c^2([0,T))$ is defined in an analogous fashion to $C_c^2\left([N,R]\times[0,T)\right)$ from Definition \ref{definition501}.
\end{definition}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem504}The functions $u_{Di}^R$ obtained as weak limits of the sequences $\left\lbrace u^h_{Di} \right \rbrace$ are indeed weak solutions of \eqref{equation403}, satisfying equation \eqref{equation515} for any $\phi \in C_c^2([0,T))$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} For such a function $\phi$, let us denote its approximation over $\tau_n$ by $\phi^n$, which is defined as
\[\phi^n=\frac{1}{\Delta t}\int_{\tau_n}\phi(t)\dd t\hspace{2mm}\text{for}\hspace{1.5mm}n=0,\ldots,M-1,\]
and $\phi^M=0$. Multiplying \eqref{equation412} by $\phi^n$ and summing over $n$ from $0$ to $M-1$, gives us the following equality:
\begin{align*}
&\sum_{n=0}^{M-1}\left(u_{D}^{n+1,i}-u_{D}^{n,i}\right)\phi^n= -\sum_{n=0}^{M-1}a_i u_{D}^{n,i}\phi^n \Delta t \\
&+\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{j=i+1}^{N} a_j b_{i,j} u_{D}^{n,j} \phi^n \Delta t+ \sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{j=0}^{I_h-1} A_j \tilde{B}_{i,j} u_{C}^{n,j}\phi^n
\Delta x_{j}\Delta t.
\end{align*}
Since $\phi$ is compactly supported, for sufficiently small $\Delta t$ we have $\phi^{M-1}=0$; then, further manipulation of the first term yields
\begin{align}\label{equation516}
&\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} u_{D}^{n+1,i} \left( \phi^{n+1} -\phi^n \right)+ u_{D}^{0,i}\phi^{0} - \sum_{n=0}^{M-1} a_i u_{D}^{n,i} \phi^n \Delta t\nonumber \\
&+\sum_{n=0}^{M-1}\sum_{j=i+1}^{N}a_jb_{i,j}u_{D}^{n,j}\phi^n\Delta t+\sum_{n=0}^{M-1}\sum_{j=0}^{I_h-1}A_j\tilde{B}_{i,j}u_{C}^{n,j}\phi^n
\Delta x_j\Delta t=0.
\end{align}
Looking more closely at the first term above we can rewrite it as
\begin{align*}
\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} u_{D}^{n+1,i} \left( \phi^{n+1} -\phi^n \right)
&=\underbrace{u_{D}^{M,i} \left( \phi^{M} -\phi^{M-1} \right)}_{=0}
+\sum_{n=0}^{M-2} \int_{\tau_{n+1}} u_{Di}^h(t) \frac{\phi(t)-\phi(t-\Delta t)}{\Delta t} \dd t\\
&=\int_{0}^T \chi_{[\Delta t,T)}(t) u_{Di}^h(t) \frac{\phi(t)-\phi(t-\Delta t)}{\Delta t} \dd t.
\end{align*}
Assuming that $t\in(0,T)$ and $\Delta t\leq t$, then a Taylor series expansion of $\phi(t-\Delta t)$ about $t$ gives
\[\phi(t-\Delta t)=\phi(t)-\Delta t \frac{\ddn \phi}{\ddn t}(t)+O(\Delta t^2).\]
Therefore, we have
\begin{equation}\label{equation51515}
\chi_{[\Delta t,T)}(t)
\frac{\phi(t)-\phi(t-\Delta t)}{\Delta t}=\left\lbrace \begin{array}{cc}&\hspace{-5mm}\dfrac{\Delta t\frac{d \phi}{dl t}(x,t)+O(\Delta t^2)}{\Delta t}, \hspace{6mm}\Delta t \leq t\\ \vspace{-3mm}\\&\hspace{10.5mm}0,\hspace{21.2mm}\Delta t > t\end{array}\right..
\end{equation}
As such, the left-hand side of \eqref{equation51515} can be seen to converge pointwise to $\phi_t$ on $(0,T)$, as $h$, and by condition \eqref{equation404}, $\Delta t$ goes to $0$. By an analogous argument to that used for $\varphi$ and its derivatives, $\phi$ and its derivative $\phi_t$ must be bounded, therefore we can bound the left-hand side above, with the bound being uniform w.r.t $h$. Then, as ${u_D^h}_i\rightharpoonup {u_D^R}_i$ in $L_1\left([0,T)\right)$, applying Theorem~\ref{theorem203}, as before, gives us
\begin{equation}\label{equation517}
\int_{0}^T \chi_{[\Delta t,T)}(t) u_{Di}^h(t)\frac{\phi(t)-\phi(t-\Delta t)}{\Delta t} \dd t\rightarrow \int_{0}^T u_{Di}^R(t) \frac{\ddn \phi}{\ddn t}(t)\dd t.
\end{equation}
By definition, $u_{D i}^{n}={d_0}_i$, and since $\phi$ is $C^2$ with compact support, its derivative must be bounded, from which we deduce that
\[\phi^0=\frac{1}{\Delta t}\int_0^{\Delta t}\phi(t)\dd t\rightarrow\phi(0),\]
as $h$ goes to 0. Therefore
\begin{equation}\label{equation518}
u_{D}^{0 ,i}\phi^0\rightarrow{d_0}_i\phi(0)\hspace{1.5mm}\text{as}\hspace{1.5mm} h \rightarrow 0.
\end{equation}
By defining $b_{i,i}$ to be $-1$, we can combine the third and fourth terms of \eqref{equation516}, writing them as
\begin{align*}
\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{j=i}^{N} a_j b_{i,j} u_{D}^{n,j} \phi^n \Delta t&=\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{j=i}^{N} \int_{\tau_n}a_j b_{i,j} u_{Dj}^h(t) \phi(t)
\dd t\\
&=\int_0^T\sum_{j=i}^{N} a_j b_{i,j} u_{Dj}^h(t) \phi(t) \dd t,
\end{align*}
and since $u_{Dj}^h\rightharpoonup u_{Dj}^R$ in $L_1\left([0,T)\right)$, for each $j$, we have
\begin{align}\label{equation519}
&\int_0^T\sum_{j=i}^{N} a_j b_{i,j}u_{Dj}^h(t) \phi(t) \dd t \rightarrow \int_0^T\sum_{j=i}^{N} a_j b_{i,j} u_{Dj}^R(t) \phi(t) \dd t\nonumber\\
&=-\int_{0}^T a_iu_{Di}^R(t) \phi(t) \dd t+ \int_{0}^T \sum_{j=i+1}^{N}a_jb_{i,j}u_{Dj}^R(t) \phi(t) \dd t,
\end{align}
giving us the third and fourth terms of our weak formulation \eqref{equation515}. Rewriting the final term of our discrete relation, we get
\begin{align*}
\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{j=0}^{I_h-1} A_j \tilde{B}_{i,j} u_{C}^{n,j}\phi^n\Delta x_j \Delta t&=\sum_{n=0}^{M-1} \sum_{j=0}^{I_h-1} \int_{\tau_n}
\int_{\Lambda_j} a^h(y)b_i^h(y)\phi(t) u_C^h(y,t)\dd y \dd t\\
&=\int_{0}^T\int_{N}^R a^h(y)b_i^h(y)\phi(t) u_C^h(y,t)\dd y \dd t.
\end{align*}
From Remark~\ref{convremark1} we have $a^h(y)$ and $b_i^h(y)$ converging pointwise to $a(y)$ and $b_i(y)$ respectively, and along with $\phi$ are bounded (uniformly with respect to $h$), a final application of Theorem~\ref{theorem203} allows us to deduce that
\begin{equation}\label{equation520}
\int_{0}^T\int_{N}^R a^h(y)b_i^h(y)\phi(t) u_C^h(y,t)\dd y \dd t\rightarrow\int_{0}^T \int_{N}^{R} a(y)b_i(y)u_{C}^R(y,t)\phi(t)\dd y \dd t,
\end{equation}
as the mesh size parameter $h\rightarrow0$. Taking the results \eqref{equation517}, \eqref{equation518}, \eqref{equation519} and \eqref{equation520}, we see that by letting $h\rightarrow0$ in \eqref{equation516} we obtain the weak formulation \eqref{equation515}, hence $u_{Di}^R$ is indeed a weak
solution of \eqref{equation403}.
\end{proof}
In this section we established the weak convergence of a subsequence of our sequence of approximate solutions as the mesh parameter was decreased to zero. The limits were shown to provide a set of weak solutions to the truncated equations \eqref{equation402} and \eqref{equation403}. However, there are a number of questions which remain unanswered which we seek to address in the following section.
\section{Uniqueness and Differentiability of Solutions }
In the previous section, we formed approximate solutions to a truncated version of our system. A subsequence of these approximations was shown to converge to a weak solution to our problem, as the underlying mesh was refined. This convergence of subsequences, rather than the full sequence, raises the possibility of nonunique solutions, with each convergent subsequence possibly offering a different solution. In this section we seek to address this, showing that any limits must coincide, providing a unique solution. Further, we would like to establish whether this solution may in fact display extra regularity, as we might expect from the results in \cite{baird18}.
\subsection{Continuous Regime}
Returning to equation \eqref{equation40001}, we introduce the space $X_C^R=L_{1}\left((N,R),x\dd x\right)$ with the aim of recasting the equation as an abstract Cauchy problem, as was carried out for \eqref{equation301} in \cite{baird18}. Motivated by the terms appearing on the right-hand side, of \eqref{equation40001} we define the following linear operators $A_C^R$ and $B_C^R$ on the space $X_C^R$:
\begin{equation*}
(A_C^Rf)(x)=-a(x)f(x)\hspace{2mm} \text{and}\hspace{2mm} (B_C^Rf)(x)=\int_{x}^{R}a(y)b(x|y)f(y)\dd y\hspace{2mm} \text{for} \hspace{2mm}N<x<R.
\end{equation*}
with the respective domains
\[D(A_C^R)=\left\lbrace f\in X_C^R:A_C^Rf \in X_C^R\right\rbrace \hspace{6mm}D(B_C^R)=\left\lbrace f\in X_C^R:B_C^Rf \in X_C^R\right\rbrace,\]
Assuming that the functions $a$ and $b$ retain the properties imposed in Remark~\ref{conditions}, in particular $a\in L_{\infty,loc}\left([N,\infty)\right)$ and $b\in L_{\infty,loc}\left([N,\infty)\times [N,\infty)\right)$, then, the following property holds for the operators $A_C^R$ and $B_C^R$.
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma504}The operators $A_C^R$ and $B_C^R$ are bounded linear operators on the space $X_C^R$, with $\left\|B_C^Rf\right\|_{X_C^R}\leq\left\|A_C^Rf\right\|_{X_C^R}$ for all $f\in X_C^R$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}We will first consider the operator $A_C^R$. Let $f\in X_C^R$; then we have
\begin{align*}
\left\|A_C^Rf\right\|_{X_C^R}&=\int_N^R \left|a(x) f(x)\right|\,x\dd x\\
&=\int_N^Ra(x)\left|f(x)\right|\,x\dd x.\\
&\leq \alpha(R)\int_N^R\left|f(x)\right|\,x\dd x= \alpha(R)\left\|f\right\|_{X_C^R}.
\end{align*}
Therefore $A_C^R$ is a bounded operator on the space $X_C^R$. The boundedness of $B_C^R$ in $X_C^R$ can be seen as follows. Let $f\in X_C^R$; then
\begin{align*}
\left\|B_C^Rf\right\|_{X_C^R}&=\int_{N}^{R}\left|\int_{x}^{R}a(y)b(x|y)f(y)\dd y\right|x\dd x\nonumber\\
&\leq\int_{N}^{R}\left(\int_{x}^{R}a(y)b(x|y)\left|f(y)\right|\dd y\right)x\dd x\nonumber\\ &=\int_{N}^{R}a(y)\left|f(y)\right|\left(\int_{N}^{y}xb(x|y)\dd x\right)\dd y\\
&\leq \int_{N}^{R}a(y)\left|f(y)\right|y\dd y=\left\|A_C^Rf\right\|_{X_C^R}\leq \alpha(R)\left\|f\right\|_{X_C^R}.\nonumber
\end{align*}
The change in the order of integration can be justified by the nonnegativity of the integrand along with Tonelli's theorem. The inequality in going from the third to the fourth line comes as a result of the mass conservation condition~\eqref{equation303}.
\end{proof}
Equation \eqref{equation40001} is then recast as the following abstract Cauchy problem in the space $X_C^R$:
\begin{equation}\label{equation522}
\frac{\ddn}{\dd t}u_C^R(t)=\left(A_C^R+B_C^R\right)[u_C^R(t)],\hspace{3mm}t>0;\hspace{3mm}u_C^R(0)=c_{0}^R=\chi_{(N,R)}(x)c_{0}(x).
\end{equation}
Here $u_C^R$ denotes an $X_C^R$-valued function rather than the scalar-valued function of two variables from the previous section. However due to the relationship between the spaces $L_1\left(I,L_1(\Omega,\dd \mu)\right)$ and $L_1\left(\Omega\times I,\dd \mu \dd t \right)$, we may switch between the two, with each $L_1$-valued solution to \eqref{equation522} providing us with a scalar-valued solution to \eqref{equation40001} and vice versa.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma505} The operator $\left(A_C^R+B_C^R\right)$ generates a uniformly continuous semigroup of positive contractions on $X_C^R$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}As a bounded linear operator on the space $X_C^R$, the sum $A_C^R+B_C^R$ generates a uniformly continuous semigroup $\left(T_R(t)\right)_{t\geq0}$ on $X_C^R$, \cite[Chapter 1, Theorem 3.7 and Chapter 2, Corollary 1.5]{engel00}. Furthermore, the Kato--Voigt perturbation theorem, \cite[Corollary 5.17]{banasiak06} as applied in \cite[Theorem 3.2]{baird18}, is readily utilised in the case $\left(A_C^R+B_C^R,X_C^R\right)$ to give us an `extension' of $\left(A_C^R+B_C^R,X_C^R\right)$ as a generator of a substochastic semigroup. Now as $A_C^R+B_C^R$ is defined and bounded on all of $X_C^R$, this extension must be $A_C^R+B_C^R$ itself and by \cite[Theorem 2.6]{pazy83}, the substochastic semigroup generated must be $\left(T_R(t)\right)_{t\geq0}$. Hence $\left(T_R(t)\right)_{t\geq0}$ is a uniformly continuous semigroup of positive contractions.
\end{proof}
From standard results concerning strongly continuous semigroups, \cite[Theorem 2.40 and Theorem 2.41]{morante98}, the existence of the semigroup $\left(T_R(t)\right)_{t\geq0}$ on $X_C^R$, provides a unique strong solution to equation \eqref{equation522}, given by $u_C^R(t)= T_R(t)c_{0}^R$. Additionally, by \cite[Chapter 2, Proposition 6.4]{engel00} this is also a unique mild solution, satisfying an equation of the form
\begin{equation}\label{equation523}
u_C^R(t)=c_{0}^R+\left(A_C^R+B_C^R\right)\int_0^tu_C^R(s)\dd s=c_{0}^R+\int_0^t\left(A_C^R+B_C^R\right)u_C^R(s)\dd s, \hspace{3mm}(t\geq 0).
\end{equation}
We are able to take the operator $A_C^R+B_C^R$ inside the integral as a consequence of its boundedness by applying \cite[Proposition 1.1.7.]{arendt01}. Hence our equation \eqref{equation523} corresponds with the mild solution form of \cite[Definition 1.10]{canizo06}. The article \cite{canizo06} also provides a notion of an $X_C^R$-valued weak solution of equations of type \eqref{equation522}, which we outline here for our specific example.
\begin{definition}\label{definition282} The function $u_C^R:[0,T)\longrightarrow X_C^R$ is a \emph{weak} solution of \eqref{equation522}, if for all $\phi$ in $L_{\infty}\left((N,R)\right)$ (the dual space of $X_C^R$), we have that $t\rightarrow \langle u_C^R(t),\phi\rangle$ is locally integrable in $(0,T)$ and
\begin{equation}\label{equation282}
\int_0^T\langle u_C^R(s),\phi \rangle \frac{\ddn}{\ddn s}\psi(s)\dd s =-\langle f_0,\phi \rangle\psi(0) - \int_0^T \left\langle \left(A_C^R+B_C^R\right)u_C^R(s),\phi \right\rangle \psi(s)\dd s,
\end{equation}
for all $\psi \in C^\infty\left([0,T)\right)$ with compact support, where $\langle g,\phi\rangle$ denotes the duality pairing of $g$ and $\phi$.
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}\label{remark284}If $D\subseteq {X_C^R}'$ is dense in the weak-$\ast$ topology, then it is sufficient to show that \eqref{equation282} holds for all $\phi \in D$ to establish $u_C^R:[0,T)\rightarrow X_C^R$ as a \emph{weak} solution of \eqref{equation522}; see \cite[Definition 1.9]{canizo06}.
\end{remark}
The results so far have provided us with the existence of unique strong and mild solutions to \eqref{equation522}. We now show that, for our case, any mild solution satisfying \eqref{equation523} must necessarily be a weak solution as in Definition~\ref{definition282} and vice-versa, providing the existence and uniqueness of a weak solution.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem505}The function $u_C^R:[0,\infty)\longrightarrow X_C^R$ provided by the semigroup $\left(T_R(t)\right)_{t\geq0}$ is the unique weak solution to equation \eqref{equation522}, satisfying Definition~\ref{definition282} over any time interval $[0,T)$ where $T<\infty$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}From the analysis above we have the semigroup $\left(T_R(t)\right)_{t\geq0}$ providing a unique mild (strong) solution $u_C^R:[0,\infty)\longrightarrow X_C^R$ to equation \eqref{equation522}. The result \cite[Theorem 1.20]{canizo06} tells us that if the right-hand side of \eqref{equation522} is integrable then, given either a weak or mild solution to our evolution equation \eqref{equation522}, the solution can be modified on a set of measure zero to obtain a solution of the other form. Therefore in our case, if the conditions of \cite[Theorem 1.20]{canizo06} hold, the existence of a unique mild solution will provide a unique weak solution (as given in Definition~\ref{definition282}) on each finite time interval $[0,T)$, with this solution being given by the semigroup $\left(T_R(t)\right)_{t\geq0}$.
Let $0<T<\infty$; and let us consider the following integral:
\begin{align*}
&\int_0^T\left\|(A_C^R+B_C^R)u_C^R(s)\right\|_{X_C^R}\dd s\\
&=\int_0^T\hspace{-.5mm} \int_N^R \bigg|-a(x)(u_C^R(s))(x)
+\int_{x}^{R}a(y)b(x|y)(u^R_C(s))(y)\dd y\bigg|\,x\dd x \dd s\\
&\leq \alpha(R)\hspace{-.8mm}\int_0^T \hspace{-1.5mm}\int_N^R \hspace{-.5mm}\left|(u_C^R(s))(x)\right|\,x\dd x\dd s
+\alpha(R)\hspace{-.7mm}\int_0^T\hspace{-1.5mm}\int_N^R\hspace{-1.5mm}\int_{x}^{R}b(x|y)\left|(u_C^R(s))(y)\right|\dd y\,x\dd x\dd s\\
&= \hspace{-.5mm}\alpha(R)\hspace{-1mm}\int_0^T\hspace{-1.5mm}\int_N^R \hspace{-1mm}\left|(u_C^R(s))(x)\right|\,x\dd x\dd s
+\alpha(R) \hspace{-1mm}\int_0^T \hspace{-1.5mm}\int_N^R \left|(u_C^R(s))(y)\right|\int_{N}^{y}\hspace{-.7mm}b(x|y)\,x\dd x\dd y\dd s\\
&\leq 2\alpha(R)\int_0^T \int_N^R \left|(u_C^R(s))(x)\right|\,x\dd x\dd s= 2\alpha(R)\int_0^T \left\|T_R(s)c_0^R\right\|_{X_C^R}\dd s\leq 2\alpha(R)T \left\|c_0^R\right\|_{X_C^R}<\infty.
\end{align*}
In going to the final line, the bounding of the inner integral of the second term from the previous line comes from the mass conservation condition~\eqref{equation303},
whilst the subsequent norm inequality relies on the fact that the semigroup $\left(T_R(t)\right)_{t\geq0}$ consists of contractions.
By \cite[Chapter 2, Theorem 2 and Theorem 4]{diestel77}, the above bound implies that the right-hand side of equation \eqref{equation522} is integrable over the interval $[0,T)$ and so by \cite[Theorem 1.20]{canizo06}, any mild or weak solutions must agree (up to sets of measure zero). Therefore equation \eqref{equation522} has a unique weak solution given by $u_C^R(t)=T_R(t)c_0^R$,
which is in fact a strong solution.
\end{proof}
Let $u_C^R(x,t)$ be a scalar representation of the semigroup solution $(u_C^R(t))(x)=\left(T_R(t)c_0^R\right)(x)$. Then
applying Definition \ref{definition282} to our example and noting the equivalence of \eqref{equation40001} and \eqref{equation402} as detailed fully in \cite[Appendix C]{bairdphd}, we get that equation \eqref{equation282} is equivalent to
\begin{align}\label{equation524}
&\int_{0}^{T}\int_{N}^{R} xu_C^R(x,t)\frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial t}(x,t)\dd x\dd t
+\int_{N}^{R}xu_C^R(x,0)(x)\varphi(x,0)\dd x\nonumber\\
&=\int_{0}^{T}\int_{N}^{R}\mathcal{F}^R\left(xu_C^R(x,t)\right)\hspace{-.6mm}(x,t)\hspace{1mm}\frac{\partial\varphi}{\partial x}(x,t) \dd x \dd t\nonumber\\
&\hspace{45mm}+\int_{0}^{T}\int_{N}^{R}S(xu_C^R(x,t))(x,t)\varphi(x,t)\dd x\dd t,
\end{align}
for all $\varphi$ of the form $\varphi(x,t)=\phi(x)\psi(t)$ where $\phi\in C^{\infty}_c\left((N,R)\right)$ and $\psi \in C^{\infty}_c\left([0,T)\right)$, due to the weak-$\ast$ density of $C^{\infty}_c\left((N,R)\right)$ in $L_{\infty}\left((N,R)\right)$, via Remark \ref{remark284}.
Having determined a one-to-one correspondence between scalar-valued weak solutions satisfying \eqref{equation524} and $X_C^R$-valued strong solutions of the abstract Cauchy problem \eqref{equation522}, we are now in a position to establish the uniqueness and differentiability of the weak solutions of the previous section.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem506}The weak solution obtained as the limit of the sequence of approximate solutions for the continuous
regime in Theorems~\ref{theorem501} and ~\ref{theorem502} is unique, continuously differentiable with respect to $t$ on any interval $[0,T)$
and satisfies equation \eqref{equation40001}
directly, except perhaps on a set of measure zero.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof} It is easily seen that any scalar-valued function $u_C^R(x,t)$ satisfying Definition~\ref{definition501} will immediately
satisfy the equation \eqref{equation524} above. From any such scalar-valued function we may define a function
$u_C^R:[0,T)\longrightarrow X_C^R$ via $\left(u_C^R (t) \right)(x):=u_C^R(x,t)$, for almost all $(x,t)\in (N,R)\times[0,T)$. Since the
scalar function satisfies equation \eqref{equation524}, the $X_C^R$-valued function must provide a weak solution, as defined in
Definition~\ref{definition282}, to the abstract Cauchy problem \eqref{equation522}. By Theorem \ref{theorem505}, this weak solution must
necessarily also be the unique (up to sets of measure zero) strong solution of \eqref{equation522}. Hence for each scalar weak solution
$u_C^R(x,t)$ satisfying Definition~\ref{definition501} there is a unique corresponding $X_C^R$-valued strong solution $u_C^R$ to the
associated abstract Cauchy problem, whereby the original function $u_C^R(x,t)$ is one scalar representation of the strong solution.
Since the strong solution is unique, as are its scalar representations (up to measure zero), it follows that the weak solution must be
unique, up to a set of measure zero. Further, as a representation of a strongly differentiable $X_C^R$-valued function, by \cite[Theorem 2.40]{banasiak06}, $u_C^R(x,t)$ is continuously differentiable with respect to $t$, except perhaps on a set of zero measure. Further, by a similar argument as applied at the end of \cite[Theorem 8.3]{banasiak06} or directly as in \cite[Theorem 3.2.7.]{bairdphd}, $u_C^R(x,t)$ can be seen to directly satisfy equation \eqref{equation40001} almost everywhere.
\end{proof}
This result greatly strengthens those of the previous section, where before we had only the existence of a (weakly) convergent
subsequence and the possibility of the numerical scheme converging to multiple weak solutions. We now know that the limit solution must necessarily be unique, continuously differentiable with respect to $t$ and a solution, in the classical sense, of the truncated
fragmentation equation.
\subsection{Discrete Regime}
Recalling the truncated discrete regime equation \eqref{equation403}, we have for $i=1,\ldots,N$:
\begin{align}\label{equation550}
\hspace{-80mm}\frac{\ddn u_{Di}^R(t)}{\ddn t}
&\hspace{-.7mm}=\hspace{-.7mm}-a_iu_{Di}^R(t)+\hspace{-1.9mm}\sum_{j=i+1}^{N}\hspace{-1.2mm}a_jb_{i,j}u_{\small{D}}^R(t)_j+\hspace{-1mm}\int_{N}^{R}a(y)b_i(y)u_{\small{C}}^R(y,t)\dd y,\hspace{.7mm}\hspace{1.1mm}t>0,\\
u_{D}^R(0)&=d_{0}.\nonumber
\end{align}
With the aim of recasting these equations as an inhomogeneous abstract Cauchy problem as in \cite{baird18}, we introduce the space $X_D=\mathbb{R}^N$, equipped with the weighted norm:
\[\left\|v\right\|_{X_D}=\sum_{j=1}^{N}j|v_j|,\hspace{2mm} \text{where} \hspace{2mm}v=(v_1,\ldots,v_N).\]
The equations \eqref{equation550} then become
\begin{equation}\label{equation551}
\frac{\ddn}{\ddn t}u_D^R(t)=(A_D+B_D)[u_D^R(t)]+C_R[u_C^R(t)],\hspace{3mm}t>0;\hspace{3mm}u_D^R(0)=d_{0},
\end{equation}
where $A_D$ and $B_D$ are defined on $X_D$, by
\[(A_Dv)_i=-a_iv_{i}\hspace{2mm}\text{and}\hspace{2mm}(B_Dv)_i=\sum_{j=i+1}^{N}a_jb_{i,j}v_{j},\hspace{2mm}\text{for}\hspace{2mm}i=1,
\ldots,N,\]
$u_C^R$ is the truncated semigroup solution of \eqref{equation522} and where $C_R \hspace{-0.5mm}:\hspace{-0.5mm} D(C_R)\subseteq X_C^R \rightarrow X_D $ is given by
\[(C_Rf)_i=\int_{N}^{R}a(y)b_i(y)f(y)\dd y, \hspace{3mm} D(C_R)=\left\lbrace f\in X_C^R:C_Rf \in X_D\right\rbrace=X_C^R,\]
for $i=1,\ldots,N$. The fact that $D(C_R)=X_C^R$ is a consequence of the $L_{\infty,loc}$ boundedness of $a$ and each $b_i$. Recall that since the space $X_D$ is finite-dimensional, the operators $A_D$ and $B_D$ are bounded and therefore by \cite[Chapter 1, Theorem 3.7 and Chapter 2, Corollary 1.5]{engel00} their sum must generate a uniformly continuous semigroup $\left(T(t)\right)_{t\geq0}$ on $X_D$. We then consider the term
$C_R[u_C^R(t)]$ as a perturbation and \eqref{equation551} as an inhomogeneous abstract Cauchy problem. The following lemma establishes the differentiability of this perturbation term, a property that we will require in showing the existence of solutions of equation \eqref{equation551}, along with determining their nature.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma601} The term $C_R[u_C^R(t)]$ from \eqref{equation551} is strongly differentiable (in the space $X_D$) with respect to $t$, at almost all points of $[0,T]$. Furthermore its derivative is given by $C_R[\frac{\ddn}{\ddn t}u_C^R(t)]$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Recalling the $L_{\infty,loc}$ boundedness of $a$ and the bound $b_i(y)\leq y$ for each $i\in \left\lbrace1,2,\ldots,N\right\rbrace$, which is easily derived from \eqref{equation303}, we have that
\begin{align*}
&\left|\frac{\left(C_R[u_C^R(t+h)]\right)_i-\left(C_R[u_C^R(t)]\right)_i}{h}-\left(C_R\left[\frac{\ddn}{\ddn t}u_C^R(t)\right]\right)_i\right|\\
&=\left| \int_{N}^{R} a(y)b_i(y)\left(\frac{\left(u_C^R(t+h)\right)\hspace{-1.5mm}(y)-\left(u_C^R(t)\right)\hspace{-1.5mm}(y)}{h}
-\left[ \frac{\ddn}{\ddn t}u_C^R(t)\right]\hspace{-1mm}(y)\right) \dd y\right|\\
&\leq \alpha(R)\int_{N}^{R}\left|\frac{\left(u_C^R(t+h)\right)(y)-\left(u_C^R(t)\right)(y)}{h}-\left[ \frac{\ddn}{\ddn t}
u_C^R(t)\right]\hspace{-1mm}(y)\right|\,y\dd y\\
&=\alpha(R)\left\|\frac{u_C^R(t+h)-u_C^R(t)}{h}-\frac{\ddn}{\ddn t}u_C^R(t)\right\|_{X_C^R},
\end{align*}
where $\alpha(R)$ is the essential supremum of $a$ over $[N,R]$. From the differentiability of $u_C^R$, by
letting $h \rightarrow 0$ on both sides of the above calculation, we may deduce that $C_R[u_C^R(t)]$ is differentiable (in the space $X_D$) at almost
all points of $[0,T]$, with derivative $C_R[\frac{\ddn}{\ddn t}u_C^R(t)]$.
\end{proof}
Having shown the differentiability of the perturbation term $C_R[u_C^R(t)]$, we now look at its derivative more closely, showing that
it is integrable, belonging to the space $L_1((0,T),X_D)$ and in doing so establish the existence of a unique strong solution to
equation~\eqref{equation551}.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem602}The derivative of $C_R[u_C^R(t)]$ belongs to the space $L_1((0,T),X_D)$.
As such equation~\eqref{equation551} has a unique strong solution, which is given by
\begin{equation}\label{solutionform}
u_{D}^R(t)=T(t)d_{0}+\int_0^t T(t-s)C_R[u_C^R(s)]\dd s.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}If we take the $X_D$-norm of the derivative $\frac{\ddn}{\ddn t}C_R[u_C^R(t)]$ established in the previous lemma and integrate from $0$ to $T$, then we obtain
\begin{align}\label{equation604}
&\int_0^T \left\|\frac{\ddn}{\ddn t}C_R\left[u_C^R(t)\right]\right\|_{X_D}\,\hspace{-2mm}\dd t
=\int_0^T \left\|C_R\left[\frac{\ddn}{\ddn t}u_C^R(t)\right]\right\|_{X_D}\hspace{-1mm}\dd t\nonumber\\
&=\int_0^T \sum_{i=1}^Ni\left|\int_N^R a(y)b_i(y)\left[\frac{\ddn}{\ddn t}u_C^R(t)\right](y)\dd y\right|
\dd t\nonumber\\
&\leq\alpha(R)N^2\int_0^T\left\lbrace \int_N^R \left|\left[\frac{\ddn}{\ddn t}u_C^R(t)\right](y)\right|\,y\dd y
\right\rbrace\dd t\nonumber\\
&=\alpha(R)N^2 \int_0^T \left\| \frac{\ddn} {\ddn t}u_C^R(t) \right\|_{X_C^R}\hspace{-2mm}\dd t.
\end{align}
Recalling the abstract Cauchy problem \eqref{equation522}, since the operators $A_C^R$ and $B_C^R$ are bounded and since $u_C^R$ is given by a contraction semigroup, we have
\begin{align*}
\left\|\frac{\ddn}{\ddn t}u_C^R(t)\right\|_{X_C^R}\leq\left\|A_C^R+B_C^R\right\|\left\|u_C^R(t)\right\|_{X_C^R}\leq M \left\|c_0\right\|_{X_C^R},
\end{align*}
where $M$ is a constant such that $\left\|A_C^R+B_C^R\right\|\leq M$. Inserting this into \eqref{equation604} gives us
\begin{align*}
\int_0^T\left\|\frac{\ddn}{\ddn t}C_R[u_C^R(t)]\right\|_{X_D}\,\hspace{-4mm}\dd t&\leq \alpha(R)N^2\int_0^T M \left\|c_0\right\|_{X_C^R}\dd s\leq \alpha(R)N^2TM \left\|c_0\right\|_{X_C^R}<\infty.
\end{align*}
Therefore the derivative of $C_R[u_C^R(t)]$ belongs to the space $L_1((0,T),X_D)$; hence, by \cite[Chapter 4, Corollary 2.2 and Corollary 2.10]{pazy83}, the equation~\eqref{equation551} has a unique strong solution $u_{D}^R:[0,T)\rightarrow X_D$ given by \eqref{solutionform}.
\end{proof}
Having established the existence of a unique strong solution to equation~\eqref{equation551} given by \eqref{solutionform}, this solution must also provide us with a unique mild solution to our equation. Now we consider the possibility of weak solutions, as defined in Definition~\ref{definition282}. We aim to show that any weak solution of equation~\eqref{equation551} must also be a mild solution (permitting changes on sets of measure zero), and hence the weak solution must be unique and differentiable.
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem603}Given an integrable weak solution $u_{D}^R:[0,T)\rightarrow X_D$ of equation~\eqref{equation551} as defined in
Definition~\ref{definition282}, then it must also be a strong solution. Therefore any integrable weak solution must be unique up to sets of measure zero and differentiable in $X_D$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}Considering the right-hand side of equation \eqref{equation551}, taking the norm in $X_D$ and integrating from
$0$ to $T$ gives us
\begin{align*}
&\int_0^T \left\|(A_D+B_D)[u_D^R(t)]+C_R[u_C^R(t)]\right\|_{X_D} \dd t\\
&\leq \int_0^T \left\|(A_D+B_D)[u_D^R(t)]\right\|_{X_D} \dd t+\int_0^T \left\|C_R[u_C^R(t)]\right\|_{X_D} \dd t\\
&= \int_0^T \left\|(A_D+B_D)[u_D^R(t)]\right\|_{X_D} \dd t+\int_0^T \sum_{i=0}^Ni\left|\int_N^R a(y)b_i(y)(u_C^R(t))(y)\dd y
\right|\dd t\\
&\leq \int_0^T\left\|A_D+B_D\right\|\left\|u_D^R(t)\right\|_{X_D}\dd t
+\alpha(R)N^2\int_0^T \int_N^R \left|(u_C^R(t))(y)\right|\,y\dd y
\dd t\\
&\leq \left\|A_D+B_D\right\| \int_0^T\left\|u_D^R(t)\right\|_{X_D}\dd t+\alpha(R)N^2\int_0^T \left\|u_C^R(t)\right\|_{X_C^R} \dd t.
\end{align*}
The assumption that $u_D^R(t)$ is integrable and \cite[Chapter 2, Theorem 2 and Theorem 4]{diestel77} allow us to deduce that the first of these integrals must be finite,
whilst recalling that $u_C^R(t)$ was given by a contraction semigroup immediately enables us to bound the second integral above.
Hence, \cite[Chapter 2, Theorem 2 and Theorem 4]{diestel77}, the right-hand side of equation~\eqref{equation551} is integrable and therefore \cite[Theorem 1.20]{canizo06}
tells us that the weak solution $u_D^R(t)$ (allowing for changes on sets on measure zero) must also be a mild solution.
Since, by Theorem~\ref{theorem602}, equation~\eqref{equation551} has a unique mild solution which is in fact a strong solution, the weak solution
$u_D^R(t)$ we started with must agree with the strong solution (up to sets of measure zero) and therefore is unique and differentiable.
\end{proof}
Having established that any integrable weak solution of equation~\eqref{equation551}, in the sense of Definition~\ref{definition282},
is also a strong solution, we now set out to prove that the solutions of equation~\eqref{equation550} obtained previously as the limit of our numerical scheme, provide us with such a weak solution and in the process establish their uniqueness and differentiability.
\begin{lemma}\label{lemma602}The weak solutions $u_{Di}^R(t)$ to the equations~\eqref{equation550}, obtained from our numerical scheme, when taken as the components of $u_{D}^R:[0,T)\rightarrow X_D$, produce a $u_{D}^R$ which is integrable.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}The weak solutions $u_{Di}^R$ to the equations \eqref{equation550}, constructed in the previous section, were obtained as the weak limits in $L_1(0,T)$ of the sequences $\left\lbrace u^h_{Di} \right \rbrace$ as we let $h\searrow 0$. By the weak lower semicontinuity of the norm \cite[Theorem 2.11]{lieb01}, and using the bound \eqref{equation513}, we obtain
\[\|u_{Di}^R\|_{L_1(0,T)}\leq\liminf_{h\rightarrow 0}\left\|u^h_{Di} \right\|_{L_1(0,T)}\leq CT,\]
where $C$ denotes the constant from \eqref{equation513}. If we take the components of the function $u_{D}^R:[0,T)\rightarrow X_D$
to be given by $u_{Di}^R$ for $i=1,\ldots,N$ then we get
\begin{align*}
\int_0^T \|u_{D}^R(t)\|_{X_D}\dd t=\int_0^T \sum_{i=1}^Ni\left|u_{Di}^R(t)\right|\dd t
\leq N\sum_{i=1}^N \underbrace{\int_0^T \left|u_{Di}^R(t)\right|\dd t}_{=\|u_{Di}^R\|_{L_1(0,T)}}
\leq N^2CT<\infty.
\end{align*}
Therefore the function $u_{D}^R:[0,T)\rightarrow X_D$ formed by taking $u_{Di}^R$ as its $i^{th}$ component is integrable.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}\label{theorem604}The weak solutions $u_{Di}^R:[0,T)\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ for $i=1,\ldots,N$ of the equations~\eqref{equation515} obtained in the previous section agree with the components of the strong solution established in Theorem~\ref{theorem602} and hence are unique (up to sets of measure zero) and differentiable.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}Let us consider our abstract equation~\eqref{equation551} with the aim of rewriting it in a weak formulation as in \eqref{equation282}. First let us note that the dual space of $X_D$ is $\mathbb{R}^N$ and the duality pairing $\langle \cdot,\cdot\rangle$ appearing in \eqref{equation282} is given by the standard inner product on $\mathbb{R}^N$. Let $u_{D}^R:[0,T)\rightarrow X_D$ be a weak solution of equation~\eqref{equation551} with the components $u_{Di}^R:[0,T)\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ for $i=1,\ldots,N$. Then, in this case, the function $F:(0,T)\rightarrow X_D$ appearing in \eqref{equation282} is given componentwise by
\[F_i(t)=-a_iu_{Di}^R(t)+\hspace{-1.9mm}\sum_{j=i+1}^{N}\hspace{-1.2mm}a_jb_{i,j}u_{Dj}^R(t)
+\hspace{-1mm}\int_{N}^{R}a(y)b_i(y)(u_C^R(t))(y)\dd y,\]
for $i=1,\ldots,N$. Therefore the weak formulation of equation~\eqref{equation551} becomes:
\begin{align*}
&\sum_{i=1}^N \phi_i \int_{0}^T \hspace{-1.5mm}u_{Di}^R(t) \frac{\ddn}{\ddn t} \psi(t) \dd t
=-\sum_{i=1}^N \phi_i{d_{0}}_i\psi(0)
+\sum_{i=1}^N \phi_i\int_{0}^T\hspace{-1.5mm} a_iu_{Di}^R(t) \psi(t) \dd t\\
&-\sum_{i=1}^N \phi_i\int_{0}^T\hspace{-1.5mm} \sum_{j=i+1}^{N}\hspace{-1.5mm}a_jb_{i,j}u_{Dj}^R(t) \psi(t) \dd t
-\sum_{i=1}^N \phi_i\int_{0}^T \hspace{-1mm}\int_{N}^{R}a(y)b_i(y)u_{C}^R(y,t)\psi(t)\dd y \dd t,
\end{align*}
for any $\phi=\left(\phi_1,\ldots,\phi_N\right)\in \mathbb{R}^N$ and $\psi \in C_c^\infty\left([0,T)\right)$, where $u_{C}^R(\cdot,t)$ is the (unique) real-valued representation of the $X_C^R$-valued $u_{C}^R:[0,T)\rightarrow X_C^R$.
Comparing this with equation~\eqref{equation515} of the previous section, it is easily seen that the $u_{Di}^R$ obtained there provide
us with a solution to the above equation and so taking these $u_{Di}^R:[0,T)\rightarrow \mathbb{R},$ $i=1,\ldots,N$, as the components of
an $X_D$-valued function $u_{D}^R:[0,T)\rightarrow X_D$ provides us with an integrable weak solution to equation~\eqref{equation551}. As any such
$u_{D}^R:[0,T)\rightarrow X_D$ must be unique and differentiable in $X_D$, the components $u_{Di}^R:[0,T)\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ must be unique
(up to sets of measure zero) and differentiable in the traditional sense.
\end{proof}
\noindent In this article we have shown the convergence of our approximate solutions to a weak solution of the truncated problem given by equations \eqref{equation40001} and \eqref{equation403}, and the equivalence of this weak solution to the unique strong/classical solution of the truncated problem. However, it is possible using standard arguments along the lines of \cite[Section 8.3.2]{banasiak06} to show these truncated solutions converge, in the sense of the appropriate space, to the unique strong/classical solution of the untruncated problem as given by \eqref{equation301} and \eqref{equation302}, whose existence was established in \cite{baird18}. For further details of this convergence in the specific case of the mixed discrete-continuous model, the reader is directed to consult \cite[Chapter 6]{bairdphd}. Furthermore, for an experimental study of this convergence, the factors influencing it and therefore the selection of a suitable value for the truncation parameter $R$, the reader is directed to \cite[Section 7.5]{bairdphd}.
\section{Numerical Experiments}\label{sectionsexperiments}
To assess the efficacy of our numerical scheme, we tested it on the power law model as set out in \cite[Section 7]{baird18}, where the continuous equation was defined by
\begin{equation*}
a(x)=x^\alpha,\hspace{4mm}\alpha\in\mathbb{R},\hspace{5mm}\text{and}\hspace{5mm}b(x|y)=(\nu+2)\frac{x^\nu}{y^{\nu+1}},\hspace{4mm}-2<\nu\leq0.
\end{equation*}
The discrete equation was specified by the following values for $a_i$ and $b_{i,j}$
\[
a_i=\left\{ \begin{aligned}
\hspace{2mm} 0\hspace{4mm} &\textup{for} \hspace{2mm} i=1, \\
\hspace{2mm} i^\alpha\hspace{4mm} &\textup{for} \hspace{2mm} i=2,\ldots,N,
\end{aligned} \right.\hspace{5mm}
b_{i,j}=\frac{2}{j-1}, \hspace{5mm}i=1,\ldots,N-1,\hspace{1.2mm}j=i,\ldots,N,
\]
and the continuous to discrete distribution functions $b_i(y)$ were given by
\begin{align*}
b_i(y)=\frac{i^{\nu+2}-(i-1)^{\nu+2}}{iy^{\nu+1}}, \hspace{5mm}y>N,\hspace{1.2mm}i=1,\ldots,N.
\end{align*}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.45\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{conv1.eps}\\\hspace{0mm}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{conv3.eps}
\end{minipage}
\hspace{0.5cm}
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.45\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{conv2.eps}\\\hspace{0mm}\\
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{conv4.eps}
\end{minipage}
\centering{
\includegraphics[scale=0.5]{conv5.eps}
\caption{Numerical convergence for $\alpha=0.5,0.1,-0.5,-1$ and $-2$.} \label{figure705}}
\end{figure}
It can be easily verified that conditions \eqref{equation303} and \eqref{equation304} are satisfied by these choices. The parameters $N$ and $R$ were set at $5$ and $15$ respectively, and an initial state assumed, with
\[
c_0(x)=\left\{ \begin{aligned}
\hspace{2mm} 1\hspace{4mm} &\textup{for} \hspace{2mm} 5<x<15, \\
\hspace{2mm} 0\hspace{4mm} &\textup{for} \hspace{2mm} x\geq 15,
\end{aligned} \right.
\]
and $d_0$ being the $N-$vector consisting entirely of $1'$s. The parameters $\alpha$ and $\nu$ were varied, taking all possible combinations of $\alpha\in\left\lbrace0.5,0.1,-0.5,-1,-2\right\rbrace$ and $\nu\in\left\lbrace0,-0.5,-1,-1.5\right\rbrace$, with the final time $T$ selected in each case to allow the system to reach a near equilibrium state.
The approximate solutions generated by the numerical scheme were compared to the exact solutions derived in \cite[Section 7.1]{baird18}, with the discrepancy being measured by taking the relative error with respect to the norm on $L_1\left([0,T),X_D\right)\times L_1\left([0,T),X_C^R\right)$. That is, supposing $u^h=(\underline{u}_D^h(t),u_C^h(x,t))$ is our approximation of an exact solution $u=(\underline{u}_D(t),u_C^R(x,t))$, then we measure the error via
\begin{equation*}
\textrm{Error}(u^h|u)=\frac{\|u^h-u\|}{\|u\|},
\end{equation*}
where the norm $\|\cdot\|$, is given by
\begin{align*}
\|u\|&=\int_0^T\sum_{i=1}^N i \left|u_{Di}(t)\right|\dd t+\int_0^T\int_N^R\left|u_C^R(x,t)\right|\,x\dd x\dd t.
\end{align*}
For each model configuration, we computed approximate solutions over a sequence of uniform meshes, refining at each step by halving the mesh parameter $h$. The charts in Figure \ref{figure705} plot the observed relative error against the mesh parameter $h$, for all possible parameter configurations. From even the briefest examination of the charts it is clear that as the mesh is refined, the relative error of the approximations is reduced. Whilst if we were to examine the gradients of the lines appearing in Figure \ref{figure705}, then they appear generally to be getting closer to 1, as the mesh is refined. With the gradients between the most refined mesh pairings having a mean value of 1.0301, across all configurations. This would suggest that our numerical scheme has order $\gamma\approx1$, with the error in the approximations being $\mathcal{O}(h)$. The full numerical details of the errors and the associated convergence rates underlying Figure \ref{figure705} may be found in \cite[Appendix A]{bairdphd}.
\section{Conclusions}
In this article we introduced a numerical scheme for the approximate solution of
a truncated version of a mixed discrete-continuous fragmentation model. The scheme was
based upon a finite volume discretisation of the modelling equation for the continuous component.
The resulting numerical approximations were first shown to be nonnegative and
to conserve mass, provided the underlying mesh satisfied certain constraints.
Following which we established the weak convergence of a subsequence of our
approximations, as the mesh size parameter $h$ was decreased to zero. The resulting limits
were then shown to provide a weak solution to the truncated model.
By relating the scalar-valued weak formulation of our truncated model to an
equivalent weak formulation within a Banach space setting, we were able to establish
a one-to-one relationship between any scalar and Banach-space-valued
weak solutions. Under suitable constraints, these Banach-space-valued weak solutions
were shown to provide the unique strong solution to the associated abstract Cauchy
problem, in the process establishing the uniqueness of the original scalar-valued
weak solutions. Additionally, as a further consequence of this linkage, the scalar
weak solutions were shown to be differentiable classical solutions.
Finally, by conducting a range of experiments with a test model, under varying model
parameter choices and mesh refinements, we experimentally established that the
error in our numerical solutions was $\mathcal{O}(h)$.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
\noindent This work was supported by the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council [EP/J500495/1 03].
\bibliographystyle{elsarticle-num}
|
\section{Introduction}
For many machine learning and data mining applications, efficiently solving the optimization problem with nonsmooth regularization is important. In this paper, we focus on the following composite optimization
problem of machine learning model with nonsmooth regularization term as
\begin{equation}\label{problem}
\min_{x\in\mathbb{R}^m}\,F(x) = f(x) + g(x)
\end{equation}
where $f:\mathbb{R}^m \to\mathbb{R}$ captures the empire risk which is smooth and possibly nonconvex, and $g:\mathbb{R}^m \to\mathbb{R}$, corresponding to the regularization term, reduces to a finite-sum
\begin{equation}
g(x) = \sum_{j=1}^m g_j(x_j)
\end{equation}
where each $g_j$ can be nonconvex.
Many problems on \eqref{problem} correspond to convex model that can be efficiently
optimized by first order algorithm, in particular accelerated proximal gradient (APG) methods which is proven to be efficient for the class of convex functions. However, many real applications require the problems to be nonconvex. The nonconvexity might originate either from function $f(x)$ or the regularization function. This type of problems is popular in machine learning, for example, sparse logistic regression \cite{liu2009large}, and sparse multi-class classification \cite{blondel2013block}. On the other hand regarding the nonsmooth regularization terms, proximal gradient methods often address solving optimization problems with nonsmoothness. The proximal operator is defined as following
\[
\text{Prox}_{\eta g_j}(y) = \text{arg}\min_{x\in\mathbb{R}^m}\frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{x-y}^2+g_j(x_j)
\]
where $\eta > 0$, and $\norm{\cdot}$ is $l_2$-norm. If the proximal operator does not have an analytic solution, an algorithm should be used to solve the proximal operator which might be inexact. In this paper we consider only algorithms which use exact proximal mapping.
While the new algorithms for problem \eqref{problem} provide both good theoretical convergence and empirical performances, the investigations on them
were mainly conducted in the sequential setting.
In the current big data era, we need to design algorithms to deal with
very large scale problems ($m$ is large). In this case, we need
to eliminate sequential updates which usually take too much costly idle time. This necessitates parallel computation which will not use synchronization to wait for all others and share their updates. Recently asynchronous parallelization have received huge
successes due to its potential to vastly speed up algorithms \cite{dean2012large,recht2011hogwild}. We design and analyze an asynchronous parallel implementations of the accelerated proximal coordinate descent algorithms with bounded and unbounded delays for nonconvex nonsmooth problems, which is not well studied in the literature, to the best of our knowledge.
\subsection{Contributions}
The main contributions of this paper are
summarized as follows. We first propose the basic stochastic and deterministic variants of asynchronous accelerated proximal
coordinate descent algorithm for nonconvex problems.
By construction of Lyapunov functions, we show that the limit points of the sequences generated by AAPCD are critical points of the problem \eqref{problem} for both bounded delays and unbounded delays. This is one of the first convergence results for a method with acceleration which alleviates the bottleneck of unbounded delays for nonsmooth nonconvex functions. The convergence studies for AAPCD, through a novel perspective, characterize the stepsize based on the momentum parameter. This fills the void in previous analyses such as \cite{li2015accelerated,yao2017efficient}, where the effect of the exact value of the momentum parameter on the acceleration of convergence were not observed. As the stability of the algorithm is highly affected by asynchronism, by allowing negative momentum for high staleness values we will show the reduction in the objective function will be increased significantly and accelerates convergence. In particular, we characterize the momentum parameter in the sense that increasing the stepsize would involve decreasing of the momentum parameter, while it will provide comparable asymptotic convergence in terms of the violation of first-order optimality
conditions. We will show that by requiring momentum, a fixed stepsize could be chosen for unbounded delays.
By leveraging different cases of Kurdyka-Łojasiewicz property of the objective function, we establish the linear and sub-linear convergence rates of the function value sequence generated by the deterministic AAPCD with bounded deterministic delays and they match the synchronous results. In all the cases investigated in this paper, the independence assumption between blocks and delays is avoided.
We provide numerical experiments to demonstrate the performance of our stochastic AAPCD algorithm on various
large-scale real-world datasets. The results outperforms other asynchronous stochastic algorithms reported in literature such as ASCD \cite{liu2015asynchronous} and
AASCD \cite{fang2018accelerating}. It also shows that
AAPCD can achieve good speedup on large-scale
real-world datasets and provide significantly faster convergence to a reasonable accuracy than
competing options, while still providing favorable asymptotic accuracy.
\section{Related Works}
{\bf{Proximal Gradient Algorithms:}} Proximal gradient methods for nonsmooth regularization are among the most important methods for solving composite optimization problems. There have been accelerated exact proximal gradient variants.
Specifically, for convex problems, the authors in \cite{beck2009fast} displayed basic accelerated proximal gradient (APG) method which extends
Nesterov's accelerated methods for solving single smooth convex function \cite{nesterov1983method}. They proved that APG displays the non-asymptotic convergence rate $O(\frac{1}{k^2})$, where $k$ is the number of iterations.
For extensions to nonconvex settings, \cite{ghadimi2016accelerated} studied the condition that only the regularization term could be nonconvex,
and proved the convergence rate of APG method. \cite{boct2016inertial} established the convergence of proximal method when
$f(x)$ and $g(x)$ could be nonconvex. \cite{li2015accelerated} focused on first-order algorithms and by exploiting KL property they proved that APG algorithm can converge to a stationary point in different rates. Recently, in \cite{gu2016inexact} and \cite{li2017convergence} several accelerated proximal methods were studied, and sublinear and linear rates under different cases of the KL property for nonconvex problems were provided.
In addition to the above proximal gradient
methods, several stochastic optimization methods were developed for solving composite problems see, e.g., proximal stochastic coordinate descent prox-SCD \cite{shalev2011stochastic}, prox-SVRG \cite{xiao2014proximal}, prox-SAGA \cite{defazio2014saga}, prox-SDCA \cite{shalev2014accelerated}. Under the assumption that the regularization term is block separable, \cite{richtarik2014iteration} developed a randomized block-coordinate descent method. An accelerated variant of this method is studied in \cite{lin2015accelerated}. All these stochastic methods require convexity of $f$, or even stronger assumptions.
For nonconvex problems, \cite{ghadimi2016accelerated} generalized an accelerated SGD method to solve nonconvex but smooth minimization problems. Stochastic variance reduction methods for nonconvex problems were investigated in \cite{allen2016variance,reddi2016stochastic}. Furthermore, proximal variance reduction methods for general nonconvex, nonsmooth problems are proposed in \cite{reddi2016proximal,allen2017natasha}. Then, \cite{xu2015block} proposed a block stochastic gradient method for nonconvex and nonsmooth problems.
{\bf Asynchronous Coordinate Descent:}
The asynchronous computation is much more
efficient than the synchronous computation. More recently, asynchronous parallel methods have been successfully applied to accelerate many optimization algorithms including stochastic coordinate descent \cite{liu2015asynchronous}. We briefly review the works which are closely related to
ours as follows. ASCD can provide linear and sublinear convergence rates \cite{liu2015asynchronous,avron2015revisiting}. Similar results were established for asynchronous SGD \cite{recht2011hogwild}, and stochastic variance reduction algorithms \cite{reddi2015variance,leblond2017asaga}. A study of ASCD for unbounded delays has been performed in \cite{sun2017asynchronous}, however the results are restricted only to Lipschitz differentiable functions. Some asynchronous algorithms particularly outperform conventional ones.
In \cite{meng2016asynchronous}, authors integrated momentum acceleration and variance reduction techniques to accelerate asynchronous SGD. Several accelerated schemes for asynchronous coordinate descent and SVRG using momentum compensation techniques were proposed in \cite{fang2018accelerating}. Recently, \cite{hannah2018texttt} analyzed an asynchronous accelerated block coordinate descent algorithm with optimal complexity which converges linearly to a solution for strongly convex functions.
However, to the best of our knowledge, there is no study on the asynchronous parallel versions of accelerated proximal coordinate descent algorithms for nonconvex nonsmooth objective functions.
\section{Preliminaries and Assumptions}
We describe our asynchronous accelerated proximal coordinate descent for nonconvex problems in Algorithm \ref{AAPCD-Algo}. Compared to the regular proximal coordinate descent step, AAPCD takes an extra linear extrapolation step depending on the value of the current ages of $\hat{y}^k$, which is called also delay and denoted by $d_k$. In order to compute the delay $d_k$, we use a scalar counter to denote the weights at iteration $k$, starting from $k=0$, and with each update we increment the counter by one. We allow each worker to record the iteration $i$ when reading the weights and we let $k$ to denote the iteration when the same worker updating the weights. Then the actual delay $d_k$ is $d_k = k - i$. If delay is greater than the threshold $T_1$, we consider adding negative momentum to extrapolate a new iterate. We further show that adding such a
momentum for large delays have the effect of decreasing Lyapunov function over iterations. For acceleration, AAPCD only accepts the new extrapolated iterate when the objective function value is sufficiently decreased. It is important to note that the threshold $T_1$ can adaptively change during the iterations. From practical point of view there is a need to know how to select the parameter $T_1$. We will address this question later when we present the analyses of convergence.
It will be shown that accumulation points of sequences generated by AAPCD will converge to stationary points of $F$.
In the step 5 of Algorithm \ref{AAPCD-Algo}, at iteration $k$, the block gradient $\nabla_{j_k} f$ is computed at the delay iterate $\hat{y}^k$, which is assumed to be some earlier state of $y^k$ in the shared memory with the delay $d_k$. The delay iterate $\hat{y}^k$ can be formulated as
\begin{equation}
\hat{y}^k = y^k - \sum_{h\in I(k)} (y^{h+1}-y^h)
\end{equation}
where $I(k) \in \{k-1,\ldots,k-d_k\}$ is a subset of previous iterations. From the proximal update for AAPCD, we have $x^{k+1}_j=y^{k}_j$ for $j\neq j_k$. We also assume $\beta = \max_{k}\{\beta_k\geq 0\}$ and $\beta' = \max_{k}\{\beta_k< 0\}$. We let $\Gamma_{k}^{r}$ be the set of iterations from $k$ to $r$ with $d_k> T_1$ and $y^{k+1} = v^k$, ${\Gamma^c}_{k}^{r}$ denote the set of iterations from $k$ to $r$ with $d_k\leq T_1$ and $y^{k+1} = v^k$, and ${\Gamma^0}_{k}^{r}$ denote the set of iterations from $k$ to $r$ with $y^{k+1} = x^{k+1}$.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Asynchronous Accelerated Proximal Coordinate Decent (AAPCD)}
\label{AAPCD-Algo}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State\textbf{Input:}{\,} The stepsize $\eta$, threshold $T_1$
\State\textbf{Initialize:}{\,} $y^0 \in \mathbb{R}^m$
\For{ $k=0, 1,\ldots, R$ }
\State Randomly choose $j_k$ from
$\{1,\ldots,m\}$
\State $x_{j_k}^{k+1}=\text{Prox}_{j_k,\eta g_{j_k}}{(y^k-\eta\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k}}))$ and $x_{j}^{k+1} = y_{j}^{k}$ for $j\neq j_k$
\If {$d_k \leq T_1$}{\text{ choose} $\beta_k > 0$}
\State $v^k_{j_k}=x^{k+1}_{j_k}+\beta_k(x^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k})$ and $v_{j}^{k} = y_{j}^{k}$ for $j\neq j_k$
\Else {\text{ choose} $\beta_k < 0$}
\State $v^k_{j_k}=x^{k+1}_{j_k}+\beta_k(x^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k})$ and $v_{j}^{k} = y_{j}^{k}$ for $j\neq j_k$
\EndIf
\If {$F(x^{k+1})\leq F(v^k)$}
\State $y_{j_k}^{k+1}=x_{j_k}^{k+1}$
\Else
\State{$y^{k+1}_{j_k}=v^k_{j_k}$}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\State\textbf{Output:}{\,} ${y}_{R+1}$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
By studying different cases of KL property we will show that AAPCD will decrease the function value properly at the initial point. For the deterministic AAPCD with deterministic bounded staleness, we prove the linear and sublinear convergence rate by exploiting different cases of KL property.
In the following we first introduce some tools for analyzing asynchronous algorithms, and then describe the
assumptions on the problem \eqref{problem} that we assume in this
paper.
For analysis of the stochastic algorithm, we let $\mathcal{F}_k$ denote the sigma algebra generated by $\{y^0,\ldots, y^k\}$ . We denote the total expectation by $\mathbb{E}$ and the expectation over the stochastic variable $d_k$ by $\mathbb{E}_{d_k}$. Function $g(x)$ is lower semicontinuous at point $x_0$ if $\lim\inf_{x\to x_0} g(x) \geq g(x_0)$. Throughout this paper, we assume each $g_j$ in problem \eqref{problem} is lower semicontinuous. A point $x\in \mathbb{R}^m$ is said a critical point of function $F$ if $0\in\partial F(x)$.
The following Uniformized KL property is a powerful tool to analyze the first order descent algorithms.
\begin{definition}[Uniformized KL Property]
A function $f:\mathbb{R}^m\to (-\infty,\infty]$ is said to satisfy the Uniformized KL property if for every compact set $\Omega\subset \text{dom}~\partial f$ on which $f$ is constant, there exists $\epsilon, \gamma\in (0,+\infty]$ and $\phi \in \Phi_{\gamma}$, such that for all $\hat{u}\in\Omega$ and all $u\in \{u\in\mathbb{R}^m:\text{dist}_{\Omega}(u) <\epsilon\}\cap\{u\in\mathbb{R}^m: f(\hat{u})<f(u)<f(\hat{u})+\gamma\}$, the following inequality holds
\[
\phi'(f(u)-f(\hat{u}))\text{dist}_{\partial f(u)}(0) \geq 1
\]
where $\Phi_{\gamma}$ stands for a class of function $\phi:[0,\gamma)\to\mathbb{R}^+$ satisfying: (1) $\phi$ is concave and $C^1$ on $(0,\gamma)$; (2) $\phi$ is continuous at $0$, $\phi(0)=0$; and (3) $\phi'(x)>0$, for all $x\in (0,\gamma)$.
\end{definition}
By \cite[Lemma 6]{bolte2014proximal}, if function $f$ is lower semicontinuous and satisfies KL property at every point of $\Omega$, then it satisfies the Uniformized KL property.
All semi-algebraic functions satisfy the KL property. Specially, the desingularising function $\phi(t)$ of semi-algebraic functions can be chosen to take the form $\phi(t) = \frac{C}{\theta}t^\theta$ with
$\theta\in (0,1]$. In particular, typical semi-algebraic functions include real polynomial functions, $\norm{x}_p$ with $p \geq 0$, rank, etc.
We make the following assumptions on the problem \eqref{problem} in this paper.
\begin{assumption}\label{P2-assu1}
Function $f$ and each $g_j$ are proper and lower semicontinuous; $\inf_{x\in\mathbb{R}^m} F(x) > -\infty$; the sublevel set
$\{x \in \mathbb{R}^d : F (x) \leq \alpha\}$ is bounded for all $\alpha\in\mathbb{R}$.
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}\label{P2-assu2} Function $f$ is continuously differentiable and the gradient $\nabla f$ is $L$-Lipschitz continuous.
\end{assumption}
To prove the limit points of $\{y^k\}$ generated by AAPCD are stationary points, we need a new assumption:
\begin{assumption} \label{unbdd-determinstic-rule}
For AAPCD, it is assumed that there exists $K \in \mathbb{N}$ such that for all $k \in \mathbb{N}$,
we have $\{1, \ldots,m\} \subseteq \{j_{k+1},\ldots,j_{k+K}\}$.
\end{assumption}
The goal of our paper is to provide a comprehensive analysis for AAPCD for both bounded and unbounded delays to justify the overall advantages of AAPCD.
\section{AAPCD with Bounded Delays}
In this section we analyze the convergence of Algorithms \ref{AAPCD-Algo} for bounded delays, i.e., we assume $d_k\leq \tau$ for all $k$ and for a fixed number $\tau$.
Define the Lyapunov function $G$ as
\[
G(x^k):=G(x^k,y^k,\ldots,y^{k-\tau}) = F(x^k) + \xi_k
\]
where the sequence $\{\xi_k\}_{k\in\mathbb{N}}$, defined by
\[
\xi_k := \frac{L^2\tau}{2C}\sum_{h=k-\tau+1}^k(h-k+\tau)\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2
\]
with $C>0$ is a constant to be determined later.
In the lemma below, we present an inequality which states for a proper stepsize, AAPCD can provide sufficient descent in our Lyapunov function.
\begin{lemma}\label{P2-lemma1} Suppose Assumption \ref{P2-assu2} hold. Given $\eta > 0$, we have
{
\begin{equation}\label{p2-lemma-eq-v1}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[&G(x^{k+1})]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(y^{k})]\\
&~~-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{L\tau(1+\beta_k)}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
}
\end{lemma}
We characterize the convergence of
AAPCD. Our first result characterizes the behavior of
the limit points of the sequence generated by AAPCD. Based on the lemma, we show that the sequence $\{y^k\}$ generated by AAPCD approaches critical points of the general nonconvex problem \eqref{problem}.
\begin{theorem}\label{P2-theo1}
Let Assumptions \ref{P2-assu1}-\ref{unbdd-determinstic-rule} hold for the
problem \eqref{problem}. Then with stepsize $\eta < \frac{1}{L+2LT_1(1+\beta)}$, and the momentum $-1 < \beta_k < \frac{1}{L\tau}(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2})-1$ the sequence $\{y^k\}$ generated by AAPCD satisfies
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\{y^k\}$ is an almost surely bounded sequence and $\mathbb{E}\norm{y^{k+1}-y^k}\to 0$.
\item The set of limit points of $\{y^k\}$ forms a compact set, on which function $F$ is a constant $F^*$ and the sequences $\{F(y^k)\}$ and $\{G(y^k)\}$ converge to $F^*$.
\item All the limit points of $\{y^k\}$ are critical points of $F$, and $\mathbb{E}[\text{dist}_{\partial F(y^{k})}(0)]={o}(\frac{1}{\sqrt{k}})$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
The connectedness and compactness of the set
$\Omega$ of the limit points of $\{y^k\}$ is implied from $E\norm{y^{k+1} - y^k}\to 0$. Theorem \ref{P2-theo1} also states that the objective function on $\Omega$ containing the critical points remains constant.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
Equation \eqref{p2-lemma-eq-v1} shows that the selection of negative $\beta_k$ for substantial staleness values would increase Lyapunov function reduction over an iteration. In the light of the bounds for the momentum term $\beta_k$ in Theorem \ref{P2-theo1}, we could realize an estimation of an upper bound for the threshold $T_1$ in AAPCD algorithm. The staleness bound $T_1$ should be large enough to allow positive $\beta_k$. For example if $\beta=\frac{1}{2}$, then we should have, $\frac{1}{L\tau}(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2})-1\geq \frac{1}{2}$. Thus, by choosing $\eta=\frac{1}{L+4LT_1(1+\beta)}$, we obtain $T_1\geq \frac{3\tau}{4(1+\beta)}=\frac{\tau}{2}$.
\end{remark}
The compact set $\Omega$ satisfies the requirements of the Uniformized KL property, and hence can be utilized to show the decrease of function values, depending on a certain exponent $\theta$ defined below.
\begin{theorem}
Let the conditions of Theorem \ref{P2-theo1} hold. Suppose that $F$ satisfies the Uniformized KL property with desingularising function $\phi$ of the form $\phi(t) = \frac{e}{\theta} t^\theta$. Let $F(x) = F^*$ for all
of the limit points of $\{x^k\}$ in AAPCD, and denote $r_k = F(x^k) - F^*$. Then the sequence $\{r_k \}$ for $k$ large enough satisfies
\begin{enumerate}\label{P2-theo2}
\item If $\theta = 1$, and $x_0$ is chosen such that $r_0< \frac{1}{b_1e^2}$, then $r_k$ reduces to zero in finite steps;
\item If $\theta= \frac{1}{2}$, then $\mathbb{E}[r_{k+1}]\leq \frac{b_1e^2}{1+b_1e^2} \mathbb{E}[r_{0}]$,
\end{enumerate}
where
\[
b_1 = \frac{2(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2(K+1)+2L^2T_1(1+\beta)+2L^2T(1+\beta'')}{\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{L\tau(1+\beta)}\right)}
\]
with $\beta''=\max\{\beta',0\}$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
As $\beta''\leq 0$, the contribution of the delays greater than $T_1$ in the factor $b_1$, i.e., $2L^2T(1+\beta'')$ decreases, which indicates acceleration is possible with negative momentum term.
\end{remark}
\section{AAPCD with Unbounded Delays}
In this section, we allow the delay $d_k$ to be an unbounded stochastic variable, and extremely large delays in our algorithm are permitted. Depending on some limitations on the distribution of $d_k$, we can still prove convergence. For unbounded delay analysis, one approach is to consider a new bound for the distribution of the end-behavior of $d_k$ to decay sufficiently fast as the iterations progress.
We emulate this solution in the following. In particular, we define fixed parameters $p_j$ related to probabilities of the delay such that $p_j \geq P(j(k) = j)$, for all $k$, and $c_{k}:=\sum_{t=1}^\infty t(t+k)p_{t+k}$ with $\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} c_k <\infty$. For instance, we note that if ${p_j}$ have the probability distributions with decay bound $p_j={\mathcal{O}}(j^{-t})$, $t>4$, then $\sum_{k=0}^{\infty} c_k$ is finite.
We define a more involved Lyapunov function $G$ as
\begin{equation}
G(x^k) := G(x^k,y^k,\ldots,y^0) = F(x^k) + \xi_k
\end{equation}
where to simplify the presentation, we define $\xi_k$ which encompasses all terms
\[
\xi_k :=\frac{L^2}{2C} \sum_{h=1}^{k} c_{k-h}\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2.
\]
where $\frac{1}{C} > 0$ is a contraction rate to be defined later.
\begin{lemma}\label{stc-unbdd-P2-lemma1} Under Assumption \ref{P2-assu1}, for any $\eta > 0$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{stc-unbdd-p2-lemma-eq}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[&G(x^{k+1})]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(y^{k})]\\
&-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{L(1+\beta_k){\sqrt{c_0}}}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
Now we characterize the behavior of
the limit points of the sequence generated by AAPCD with unbounded delays.
\begin{theorem}\label{stc-unbdd-P2-theo1}
Let Assumptions \ref{P2-assu1}-\ref{unbdd-determinstic-rule} hold for the
problem \eqref{problem}. Then with stepsize $\eta<\frac{1}{L+2L\sqrt{c_{T_1}}(1+\beta)}$ and momentum $-1 < \beta_k < \frac{1}{L\sqrt{c_0}}(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2})-1$, the sequence $\{y^k\}$ generated by AAPCD satisfies
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\{y^k\}$ is an almost surely bounded sequence and $\mathbb{E}[\xi_k]\to 0$.
\item The set of limit points of $\{y^k\}$ forms a compact set, on which the functions $F$ is a constant $F^*$ and $\{F(y^k)\}$ and $\{G(y^k)\}$ converge to $F^*$.
\item All the limit points of $\{y^k\}$ are critical points of $F$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
Lemma \ref{stc-unbdd-P2-lemma1} shows that the selection of negative $\beta_k$ for delays greater than $T_1$ would decrease Lyapunov function substantially over an iteration. The bounds for $\beta_k$ in Theorem \ref{stc-unbdd-P2-theo1} imply an estimation of a lower bound for $c_{T_1}$. For example if $\beta=\frac{1}{2}$, then, we should have $\frac{1}{L\tau}(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2})-1\geq \frac{1}{2}$. Hence, by selecting $\eta=\frac{1}{L+4L\sqrt{c_{T_1}}(1+\beta)}$, we obtain $c_{T_1}\geq \frac{9c_0}{16(1+\beta)^2}=\frac{c_0}{4}$.
\end{remark}
Now by applying the Uniformized KL property we show Algorithm \ref{AAPCD-Algo} decreases the objective value below that of $F(x_0)$.
\begin{theorem}\label{stc-unbdd-P2-theo2}
Let the conditions of Theorem \ref{stc-unbdd-P2-theo1} hold and $F$ satisfies the Uniformized KL property and the desingularising function has the form of $\phi(t) = \frac{e}{\theta}t^{\theta}$ with $e > 0$. We denote $r_k = F(y^k) - F^*$, where $F^*$ is the function value on the set of limit points of $\{y^k\}$. Then for $k$ large enough the sequence $\{r_k \}$ satisfies
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\theta = 1$, and $x_0$ is chosen such that $r_0< \frac{1}{b_1e^2}$ then $r_k$ reduces to zero in finite steps;
\item If $\theta= \frac{1}{2}$, then $\mathbb{E}[r_{k+1}]\leq \frac{b_1e^2}{1+b_1e^2} \mathbb{E}[r_{0}]$,
\end{enumerate}
where
\[
b_1 = \frac{(\frac{2}{\eta^2}+4L^2)+4L^2+{4L^2c_0}(1+\beta)}{\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{L(1+\beta){\sqrt{c_0}}}}.
\]
\end{theorem}
\section{Deterministic AAPCD}
In this section, we consider deterministic unbounded delays. Specifically, deterministic AAPCD is presented in Algorithm \ref{Deterministic-AAPCD-Algo}. The stochastic and deterministic AAPCD differ only on how the current coordinates are selected at each iteration. For this purpose, we assume the delay variable $d_k$ is deterministic, which allow extremely large delays in our algorithm. We will prove that a subsequence of points $\{y^k\}$ generated by deterministic AAPCD converges to a stationary point. Using KL property we will see that if $x^0$ is not a stationary point, Algorithm \ref{Deterministic-AAPCD-Algo} decreases
the objective value below that of $F(x^0)$. We also prove the rate of convergence for the deterministic algorithm with deterministic bounded delay by exploiting KL property, which is unavailable in the stochastic setting for the Lyapunov function.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Deterministic AAPCD}\label{Deterministic-AAPCD-Algo}\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\State\textbf{Input:}{\,} The stepsize $\eta$, threshold $T_1$
\State\textbf{Initialize:}{\,} $y^0 \in \mathbb{R}^m$
\For{ $k=0, 1, 2,\ldots, R$ }
\State Choose $j_k$ from
$\{1,\ldots,m\}$
\State {$x_{j_k}^{k+1}=\text{Prox}_{j_k,\eta g_{j_k}}{(y^k-\eta\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k}}))$ and $x_{j}^{k+1} = y_{j}^{k}$ for $j\neq j_k$}
\If {$d_k \leq T_1$} {choose $\beta_k>0$}
\State {$v^k_{j_k}=x^{k+1}_{j_k}+\beta_k(x^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k})$ and $v_{j}^{k} = y_{j}^{k}$ for $j\neq j_k$}
\Else { choose $\beta_k <0$}
\State {$v^k_{j_k}=x^{k+1}_{j_k}+\beta_k(x^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k})$ and $v_{j}^{k} = y_{j}^{k}$ for $j\neq j_k$}
\EndIf
\If {$F(x^{k+1})\leq F(v^k)$}
\State {$y_{j_k}^{k+1}=x_{j_k}^{k+1}$}
\Else
\State{$y^{k+1}_{j_k}=v^k_{j_k}$}
\EndIf
\EndFor
\State\textbf{Output:}{\,} ${y}_{R+1}$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
As recommended in \cite{sun2017asynchronous}, we set a sequence $\{\epsilon_i\}_{i\geq 0}$ and define the Lyapunov function $G$ which encompasses all terms to control unbounded delays
\begin{equation}
G(x^k) := F(x^k) + \xi_k
\end{equation}
where to simplify the presentation, we define
\[
\xi_k :=\frac{L^2}{2C} \sum_{h=1}^{\infty} \delta_{k-h}\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2
\]
with $\delta_i = \sum_{j=i}^\infty \epsilon_j$ such that $\sum_{j=0}^\infty \delta_j < \infty$ and $C > 0$ to be determined later.
\begin{lemma}\label{unbdd-P2-lemma1} Let Assumption \ref{P2-assu2} hold. For any $\eta > 0$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{unbdd-p2-lemma-eq}
\begin{split}
G(&x^{k+1})\leq G(y^{k})\\
&~~-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-\sqrt{{\delta_0}{\mu_{d_k}}}L(1+\beta_k)\right)\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $\mu_{d_k} = \sum_{h=0}^{d_k-1}\frac{1}{\epsilon_{h}}$.
\end{lemma}
For any $T \geq \lim \inf d_k$ which can be arbitrarily large, let $S_T$ be the subsequence of $\mathbb{N}$ where the current delay is less than $T$. We will show the
points $x^k$, $k \in S_T$, have convergence guarantees.
The following theorem for unbounded deterministic delay is parallel to Theorem \ref{stc-unbdd-P2-theo1}.
\begin{theorem}\label{unbdd-P2-theo1}
Suppose that Assumptions \ref{P2-assu1}-\ref{unbdd-determinstic-rule} hold. Then with stepsize $\eta = \frac{c}{L+2 \sqrt{{\delta_0}{\mu_{T_1}}}L(1+\beta)}$ for $c\in (0,1)$, and momentum $-1 < \beta_k < {\frac{\sqrt{\mu_{T_1}}}{c\sqrt{\mu_{d_k}}}}(1+\beta)-1$, we have,
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\{y^k\}$ is a bounded sequence and $\xi_k\to 0$.
\item The function $F$ is constant on the set of limit points of $\{y^k\}$ and the sequences $\{F(y^k)\}$ and $\{G(y^k)\}$ converge to it.
\item For any subsequence $S_T$ generated by the deterministic AAPCD, all the limit points of $\{y^k\}_{k\in S_T}$ are critical points of $F$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
Lemma \ref{unbdd-P2-lemma1} shows that the use of momentum for delayed gradient might gain no performance and have negative effects. Hence, to compensate this issue, we allow the selection of negative $\beta_k$ for high staleness values to maximize the reduction of
the Lyapunov function over an iteration. By taking the bounds in Theorem \ref{unbdd-P2-theo1} for the momentum term $\beta_k$ in to consideration, we could present an upper bound estimate for the threshold $T_1$ in AAPCD. The delay bound $T_1$ should be large enough to allow positive $\beta_k$. For example if we choose $\beta=1$, then we should have, ${\frac{\sqrt{\mu_{T_1}}}{c\sqrt{\mu_{d_k}}}}(1+\beta)-1\geq 1$. Therefore, $T_1$ must be large enough such that ${\mu_{T_1}}\geq \frac{4c^2\mu_{d_k}}{(1+\beta)^2}=c^2\mu_{d_k}$, for all $k$.
\end{remark}
It is important to note that although Theorem \ref{unbdd-P2-theo1} shows a fixed step size works for deterministic AAPCD, however, in return the upper bound for momentum is adaptive to the current delay.
In the following theorem, it turns out that a subsequence of Algorithm \ref{Deterministic-AAPCD-Algo} can decrease the function value at $x_0$, depending on the parameter $\theta$ defined below.
\begin{theorem}\label{unbdd-deter-subseq-conver}
Let conditions of Theorem \ref{unbdd-P2-theo1} hold and that $F$ satisfies the Uniformized KL property and the desingularising function has the form $\phi(s)=\frac{e}{\theta}t^\theta$, where $\theta\in (0, 1]$ and $e > 0$. Let $F(x) = F^*$ for all $x \in\Omega$ (the set
of limit points), and denote $r_k = F(y^k) - F^*$. Then the sequence $\{r_k \}_{k\in S_T}$ for $k$ large enough satisfies
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\theta = 1$, and $x_0$ is chosen such that $r_0< \frac{1}{b_1c^2}$ then $r_k$ reduces to zero in finite steps;
\item If $\theta\in [\frac{1}{2},1)$, then for $k$ large enough $r_k\leq \frac{b_1e^2}{1+b_1e^2} r_{0}$;
\item If $\theta\in (0,\frac{1}{2})$, then
$r_{k}\leq \left(\frac{1}{b_2{({1-2\theta})}+r_{{0}}^{2\theta-1}}\right)^{\frac{1}{1-2\theta}}
$
\end{enumerate}
where
\[
b_1=\frac{2(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2+3(1+\beta)^2L^2T_1+2(1+\beta'')^2L^2T}{(\frac{1}{c}-1)\frac{L}{2}}
\]
with $\beta''=\max\{\beta',0\}$ and $b_2 = \min(\frac{1}{b_1e^2R},\frac{r_{0}^{2\theta-1} (R^{\frac{2\theta-1}{2\theta-2}}-1)}{1-2\theta})$ for a fixed number $R\in(1, \infty)$.
\end{theorem}
For the deterministic AAPCD with deterministic bounded delay $T$, we define $\epsilon_i=0$ for $i > T$ and we let $\tilde{G}(x^k,y^k,\ldots,y^{k-T})$
denote the corresponding Lyapunov function. In the following $\tilde{G}(x)$ refers to $\tilde{G}(x,x,\ldots,x)$. We let $\Omega$ denote the set of stationary points of $F$. Since $\xi_k\to 0$, by Theorem \ref{unbdd-P2-theo1}, $\tilde{G}$ is constant on $\Omega$. We can derive convergence rates for
\begin{equation}
r_k = \tilde{G}(y^k)-F^*.
\end{equation}
\begin{theorem}\label{bd-deter-corro}
Assume the conditions of Theorem \ref{unbdd-deter-subseq-conver}, but only $\tilde{G}$ satisfies the Uniformized KL property and the desingularising function has the form $\phi(s)=\frac{e}{\theta}t^\theta$, where $\theta\in (0, 1]$ and $e > 0$. Then if the delay is bounded by $T$, the sequence $\{r_k \}$ for $k$ large enough satisfies
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\theta = 1$, then $r_k$ reduces to zero in finite steps;
\item If $\theta\in [\frac{1}{2},1)$, then $r_{k}\leq \left(\frac{b_1e^2}{1+b_1e^2}\right)^{\lfloor\frac{k-k_1}{T+K}\rfloor}r_{k_1}$ for $k_1$ large enough;
\item If $\theta\in (0,\frac{1}{2})$, then $r_{k}\leq \left(\frac{1}{{\lfloor\frac{k-k_0}{T+K}\rfloor}b_2{({1-2\theta})}+r_{{0}}^{2\theta-1}}\right)^{\frac{1}{1-2\theta}}$,
\end{enumerate}
where
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
b_1=&\frac{3}{(\frac{1}{c}-1)\frac{L}{2}}\bigg((\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2+(1+\beta)^2L^2T_1\\&+(1+\beta'')^2L^2T+2(1+\beta)^2{L^2\mu_{T}} \delta_{0}\bigg)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
with $\beta''=\max\{\beta',0\}$ and $b_2 = \min(\frac{1}{b_1e^2R},\frac{r_{0}^{2\theta-1} (R^{\frac{2\theta-1}{2\theta-2}}-1)}{1-2\theta})$ for a fixed number $R\in(1, \infty)$.
\end{theorem}
The convergence rates in Theorem \ref{bd-deter-corro} match the results from \cite{davis2016asynchronous}, but they need the independence assumption between blocks and delays. If $T=0$ we obtain a synchronous version of the accelerated coordinate descent, and hence Theorem \ref{bd-deter-corro} implies the same rates as given in \cite{li2015accelerated} for nonconvex functions.
\begin{remark}
The characterization of the factor $b_1$ in Theorems \ref{unbdd-deter-subseq-conver} and \ref{bd-deter-corro} is noticeable in a particular way that the delays greater than $T_1$ contribute to this factor. Since $\beta'' \leq 0$, it shows that applying negative momentum for high delay values could efficiently decrease the value of $b_1$ which results in acceleration.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
The KL property of $F$ is not necessarily sufficient to ensure that the Lyapunov function $G$ satisfies the KL property. However, since $G-F$ is semi-algebraic and the class of
semi-algebraic functions is closed under addition, it shows
that $G$ is semi-algebraic, which implies that $G$ is a KL function.
\end{remark}
\section{Numerical Results}
In this section we test the efficiency of the asynchronous stochastic proximal coordinate descent algorithm with momentum acceleration. We performed binary classifications on the benchmark dataset {\it{rcv1}}. Following the practices in \cite{gong2013general}, we consider the logistic loss function with nonconvex regularization,
\[
g(x) = \lambda \sum_{j=1}^m \min{(|{x_j}|,\theta)},
\]
with $\lambda = 0.0001$, $\theta= 0.1\lambda$ and the zero vector as starting point. Figure \ref{fig:FSVRG_speedup} demonstrates the speedups of our algorithm. AAPCD has significant linear speedup on a parallel platform with shared memory compared to its sequential counterpart.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{figure_scalability_logistic_rcv.pdf}%
\caption{Speedup results of AAPCD on {\it rcv1} dataset.}
\label{fig:FSVRG_speedup}
\end{figure}
We conduct experiments for comparing AAPCD with other asynchronous algorithms: ASCD \cite{liu2015asynchronous}, an synchronous version of doubly stochastic proximal algorithm (DSPG) \cite{zhao2014accelerated}, AASCD \cite{fang2018accelerating}. ASCD and DSPG did not utilize the momentum acceleration techniques. AASCD is an asynchronous accelerated variant of ASCD but only for convex and strongly convex functions. For all experiments we set the number of local workers to $32$. We set $\lambda = 0.0001$, $\theta=0.1\lambda$. For AAPCD, we set $\eta = 0.08$, $\beta=-0.08$ for negative momentum, $\beta=0.8$ for positive momentum and threshold $T_1=0.9\tau$. All blocks are of size $1000$. We set the stepsize for ASCD with $\eta=0.06$. In AASCD we set $\eta=0.09$, with momentum value $\theta_1=0.8$. For DSPG, the stepsize is $\eta=0.03$ and mini-batch size is $200$. All algorithms are terminated when the number of iterations exceeds $100$. Note that we use the best tuned parameters for each method which is obtained over a refined grid to attain the best performance. Figure \ref{fig:FSVRG_compare} shows the convergence of the objective function with respect to CPU time and the number of iterations.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\subfloat[a]{
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.44\linewidth]{figure_logistic_rcv_update_32_time.pdf}}%
\hfill
\subfloat[b]{
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.44\linewidth]{figure_logistic_rcv_update_32_iteration.pdf}}%
\caption{Figure(a) is convergence of objective value vs. time; Figure(b) is comparison of the objective function vs. iteration for different algorithms.}
\label{fig:FSVRG_compare}
\end{figure}
Towards the
end AAPCD decreases rapidly and needs much fewer iterations and less computing time than ASCD and AASCD to reach the same objective function values. This means that our AAPCD algorithm is very efficient and attains the best performance. Moreover AAPCD obtains a much smaller objective value by order of magnitudes compared with other algorithms. For saving space, we leave another experiment for Sigmoid loss in the supplementary materials.
Figure \ref{fig:AAPCD_neg} shows AAPCD by only applying nonnegative momentum values which is slower than AAPCD, showing that linear extrapolation using negative momentum $\beta$ for large delays is significantly useful.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{figure_logistic_rcv_32_time_aapcd.pdf}%
\caption{AAPCD versus AAPCD with momentum values $\beta >0$.}
\label{fig:AAPCD_neg}
\end{figure}
In summary our experimental results validate that AAPCD can indeed accelerate the convergence in practice.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we have studied the stochastic and deterministic asynchronous parallelization of coordinate descent algorithm with momentum acceleration for efficiently solving nonconvex nonsmooth problems.
We have shown that every limit point is a critical point and proved the convergence rates for deterministic AAPCD with bounded delay.
We verified the advantages of our method through numerical experiments.
Overall speaking, these asynchronous proximal
algorithms can be highly efficient when being used to solve
large scale nonconvex nonsmooth problems. As for future work, an extension of this study might develop the analysis in this paper to inexact proximal methods. We also plan to investigate the asynchronous parallelization of more algorithms for nonconvex nonsmooth programming for solving more complicated models.
\subsection{Proof of Lemma \ref{P2-lemma1}}
\subsection{Proof of Lemma \ref{P2-lemma1}}
\begin{proof}
Since $x^{k+1}_{j_k} = \text{Prox}_{j_k,\eta g_{j_k}}(y^k-\eta\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k}))$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{p2-lemma-eq4}
\begin{split}
\Iprod{{x}^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}+&\frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{{x}^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k}}^2+g_{j_k}({x}^{k+1}_{j_k})\\
&\leq g_{j_k}(y^{k}_{j_k}).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
As $f$ is $L$-Lipschitz smooth,
\[
f(x^{k+1})\leq f(y^{k}) + \Iprod{x_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^{k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})}+\frac{L}{2}\norm{x_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^{k}}^2.
\]
Combining with \eqref{p2-lemma-eq4}, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f(&x^{k+1})+\sum_{j=1}^m g_j(x^{k+1}_j)\leq f(y^{k})+\sum_{j=1}^m g_j(y^{k}_j)\\
&+\frac{L}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2+\Iprod{{x}^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}-\frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we used $x^{k+1}_j=y^{k}_j$ for $j\neq j_k$. This is equivalent to,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
F(x^{k+1})& \leq F(y^{k})+\frac{L}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2\\
&+\Iprod{{x}_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^{k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}-\frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
For the cross term we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\Iprod{{x}^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{i_k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}\\
&\myeq{a)}{\leq} L \norm{x_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^k}\norm{y^k-\hat{y}^{k}}\\
&\myeq{b)}{\leq} \frac{L^2}{2C}\norm{y^k-\hat{y}^{k}}^2+\frac{C}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $a)$ is by the Lipschitz of $\nabla f$, $b)$ by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality. By taking expectation over $d_k$, the following sequence of inequalities is true for any $C > 0$:
\begin{equation}\label{stc-bd-deay-lemm1-eq1}
\begin{split}
&\mathbb{E}_{d_k}\Iprod{{x}^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{i_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})~\left|~\mathcal{F}_k\right.}\\
&\leq \frac{L^2}{2C}\mathbb{E}_{d_k}\left[\norm{y^k-\hat{y}^{k}}^2~\left|~\mathcal{F}_k\right.\right]+\frac{C}{2}\mathbb{E}_{d_k}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
&\myeq{a)}{\leq} \frac{L^2\tau}{2C} \sum_{h=k-\tau+1}^k\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2+\frac{C}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
&= \left(\frac{L^2\tau}{2C} \sum_{h=k-\tau+1}^k(h-k+\tau)\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2-\frac{L^2\tau}{2C} \sum_{h=k+1-\tau+1}^{k+1}(h-(k+1)+\tau)\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2\right)\\
&~~~~~~~+\frac{L^2\tau^2}{2C}\norm{y^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2+\frac{C}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $a)$ is due the triangle inequality and $d_k\leq \tau$.
The linear extrapolation step for the
momentum acceleration in Algorithm \ref{AAPCD-Algo} yields
\begin{equation}\label{Ex-Acceleration-InE}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}\norm{y^{h+1}-y^{h}}&= (1+\beta_h) \mathbb{E}\norm{x^{h+1}-y^{h}}\qquad \text{for } h\in {\Gamma^c}_{k}^{r}, \beta_h>0\\
\mathbb{E}\norm{y^{h+1}-y^{h}}&= \mathbb{E}\norm{x^{h+1}-y^{h}}\qquad \text{for } h\in {\Gamma^0}_{k}^{r}\\
\mathbb{E}\norm{y^{h+1}-y^{h}}&= (1+\beta_h) \mathbb{E}\norm{x^{h+1}-y^{h}}\qquad \text{for } h\in {\Gamma}_{k}^{r}, \beta_h<0.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Thus, by taking total expectation on both sides of \eqref{stc-bd-deay-lemm1-eq1} we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[\xi_{k+1}]&\leq\mathbb{E}[\xi_k]-\mathbb{E}\Iprod{{x}_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^{k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}\\
&~~~~~~~+\frac{L^2\tau^2}{2C}\mathbb{E}\norm{y^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2+\frac{C}{2}\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
&\leq\mathbb{E}[\xi_k]-\mathbb{E}\Iprod{{x}_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^{k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}\\
&~~~~~~~+\left(\frac{L^2\tau^2(1+\beta_k)^2}{2C}+\frac{C}{2}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Therefore, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[F(x^{k+1})+\xi_{k+1}]+&\frac{1}{2\eta}\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2\\
\leq \mathbb{E}[F(y^{k})+\xi_{k}]+&\frac{L}{2}\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2+\left(\frac{L^2\tau^2(1+\beta_k)^2}{2C}+\frac{C}{2}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Hence, we can derive
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[F(x^{k+1})+\xi_{k+1}&]\\
\leq \mathbb{E}[F(y^{k})+&\xi_{k}]-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-\frac{L^2\tau^2(1+\beta_k)^2}{2C}-\frac{C}{2}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By choosing $C={L\tau(1+\beta)}$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[F(x^{k+1})+\xi_{k+1}&]\\
\leq \mathbb{E}[F(y^{k})+&\xi_{k}]-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{L\tau(1+\beta_k)}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and the result follows from the definition of $G(x^{k+1})$.
\end{proof}
\noindent\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{P2-theo1}}
\begin{proof}
Applying Lemma \ref{P2-lemma1}, we obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{P2-Theo1-eq0}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[G(x^{k+1})]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(y^{k})]-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{L\tau(1+\beta_k)}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Since $\eta < \frac{1}{L+2LT_1(1+\beta)}$ and $-1 < \beta_k < \frac{1}{L\tau}(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2})-1$, it follows that $\mathbb{E}[G (x^{k+1})]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(y^k)]$.
Moreover, the update rule of AAPCD guarantees that $F (y
^{k+1})\leq F(x^{k+1})$. In
summary, for all $k$ the following inequality holds:
\begin{equation}\label{P2-Theo1-eq1}
\mathbb{E}[G(y^{k+1})]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(x^{k+1})]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(y^{k})]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(x^{k})].
\end{equation}
Hence, from \eqref{P2-Theo1-eq0}, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{P2-Theo1-eq01}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[G(y^{k+1})]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(y^{k})]-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{L\tau(1+\beta_k)}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
From \eqref{P2-Theo1-eq01} it is seen that $\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2$ is summable (telescoping sum). Thus, $\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}\to 0$ and consequently using \eqref{Ex-Acceleration-InE} we have $\mathbb{E}\norm{y^{k+1}-y^k}\to 0$, which means $\mathbb{E}[\xi_k]\to 0$.
Combing further \eqref{P2-Theo1-eq1} with the fact that $F(x^k), F(y^k) \geq \inf F > -\infty$ for all $k$ and $\mathbb{E}\norm{y^{k+1}-y^k}\to 0$, we conclude that $\{G(x^k )\}, \{G(y^k)\}$ converge to the same limit $F^*$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{P2-Theo1-eq2}
\lim_{k\to\infty}\mathbb{E}[F(x^k)] = \lim_{k\to\infty}\mathbb{E}[F(y^k)] =\lim_{k\to\infty}\mathbb{E}[G(x^k)] = \lim_{k\to\infty}\mathbb{E}[G(y^k)]= F^*.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, by induction we conclude from equation \eqref{P2-Theo1-eq1} that for all $k$
\[
\mathbb{E}[F(y^k)]\leq\mathbb{E}[G(y^k)]\leq F(x^0),\qquad \mathbb{E}[F(x^k)]\leq\mathbb{E}[G(x^k)]\leq F(x^0).
\]
Combining with Assumption \ref{P2-assu1} that $F$ has bounded sublevel set, we conclude that $\{x^k\}$ and $\{y^k\}$ are almost surely bounded and thus
have bounded limit points.
\noindent Since $\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1} - y^k} \to 0$, and hence ${x^{k+1}}$ and ${y^k}$ share the same set of limit points denoted by $\Omega$. We let $l(k, j) \in \mathbb{N}$ be the last time coordinate $j$ was updated:
\[
l(k,j) = \max(\{q~|~j_q=j,q<k\}\cup \{0\}).
\]
On the other hand, by optimality condition of the proximal gradient step of AAPCD, we obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{P2-Theo1-eq41}
\begin{split}
-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})-\frac{1}{\eta}(x_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^k)&\in \partial g_{j_k}(x^{k+1}_{j_k})\\
\leftrightarrow\underbrace{\nabla_{j_k} f(x^{k+1})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})-\frac{1}{\eta}(x^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^k_{j_k})}_{q^{k+1}_{j_k}}&\in \partial_{x_{j_k}} F(x^{k+1})
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and for $j\neq j_k$,
\begin{equation}\label{P2-Theo1-eq43}
\begin{split}
-\nabla_{j} f(\hat{y}^{l(k,j)})-\frac{1}{\eta}(x_{j}^{l(k,j)+1}-y_{j}^{l(k,j)})&\in \partial g_{j}(x^{k+1}_{j})\\
\leftrightarrow\underbrace{\nabla_{j} f(x^{k+1})-\nabla_{j} f(\hat{y}^{l(k,j)})-\frac{1}{\eta}(x^{l(k,j)+1}_{j}-y^{l(k,j)}_{j})}_{q^{k+1}_{j}}&\in \partial_{x_{j}} F(x^{k+1}).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We have
\begin{equation}\label{P2-Theo1-eq5}
\begin{split}
\norm{q^{k+1}_j} &\myeq{a)}{\leq} \norm{\nabla_j f(x^{k+1})-\nabla_j f(\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}})-\frac{1}{\eta}(x^{k+1}_j-y^{l(k+1,j)}_j)}\\
&\myeq{b)}{\leq} \frac{1}{\eta} \norm{x^{k+1}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}+L\norm{x^{k+1}_j-\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}\\
&\myeq{c)}{\leq}(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)\norm{x^{{k+1}}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}+L\norm{y^{l(k+1,j)}_j-\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}\\
&\myeq{d)}{\leq}(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)\norm{x^{{k+1}}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}+L\sum_{h=k+1-\tau+1-K}^{k+1}\norm{y^h_j-y^{h-1}_j}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $a)$ is from \eqref{P2-Theo1-eq41} and \eqref{P2-Theo1-eq43}, $b)$ by by Lipschitz of $\nabla f$, $c)$ by applying the triangle inequality and $d)$ from Assumption \ref{unbdd-determinstic-rule} and the assumption of bounded staleness. The right hand terms converge to 0 and hence $\mathbb{E}\norm{q^{k+1}_j}\to 0$. Since $\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2$ is summable, it implies that $\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2 = o(\frac{1}{k+1})$. Therefore we have $\mathbb{E}[\text{dist}_{\partial F(y^{k+1})}(0)]\leq \mathbb{E}\norm{q^{k+1}_j}=o(\frac{1}{\sqrt{k+1}})$. Consider any limit point $x\in\Omega$, and subsequences say $x^{k_t} \to x$, $y^{k_t} \to x$. By the definition
of the proximal map, the proximal gradient step of AAPCD implies that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\Iprod{\nabla_j f(\hat{y}^{l(k_t+1,j)})}{x^{k_t+1}_j-y^{l(k_t+1,j)}_j}+\frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{x^{k_t+1}_j-y^{{l({k_t+1},j)}}_j}^2+g_j(x^{k_t+1}_j)\\
&\leq\Iprod{\nabla_j f(\hat{y}^{l({k_t+1},j)})}{x_j-y^{l({k_t+1},j)}_j} + \frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{x_j-y^{l({k_t+1},j)}_j}^2+g_j(x_j).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Taking $\lim\sup$ on both sides and note that $x^{k+1} - y^k \to 0$, $y^{k_t} \to x$, we obtain that $\lim\sup_{t\to\infty} g_j(x^{k_t+1}_j) \leq g_j(x_j)$. Since
$g$ is lower semicontinuous and $x^{k+1}\to x$, it follows that $\lim\sup_{t\to\infty} g_j(x^{k_t+1}_j)\geq g_j(x_j)$.
Combining both inequalities, we
conclude that $\lim_{t\to\infty} g_j(x^{k_t+1}_j) = g_j(x_j)$. Note that the continuity of $f$ yields $\lim_{t\to\infty} f(x^{k_t}) = f(x)$, we then conclude that
$\lim_{t\to\infty} F(x^{k_t}) = F(x)$, and $\lim_{t\to\infty} G(x^{k_t}) = F(x)$, since $\xi_k\to 0$. By \eqref{P2-Theo1-eq2} we have $\lim_{t\to\infty} F(x^{k_t}) = F^*$, hence
\begin{equation}\label{P2-limit-points}
F(x)=F^*,\qquad \text{for all } x\in\Omega.
\end{equation}
Thus by \eqref{P2-limit-points}, $F$ remains constant on the compact set $\Omega$ (the set $\Omega$ is closed and bounded in $\mathbb{R}^m$). To this end, we have shown $x^{k_t}\to x$, $G (x^{k_t})\to F^*$. Further, we proved $q_{k_t} \in \partial F(x^{k_t})$ converges zero. We conclude that $0\in\partial F(x)$ for all $x\in\Omega$.
\end{proof}
\noindent\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{P2-theo2}}
\begin{proof}
Throughout the proof we assume that $r_k\neq 0$ for all $k$ because otherwise the conclusions
hold trivially. From \eqref{P2-Theo1-eq01} we have
\begin{equation
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[G(y^{k+1})]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(y^{k})]-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{L\tau(1+\beta)}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By summing this inequality over $h=h-\tau-K,\ldots,k$ iterations we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{P2-Theo2-eq4}
\begin{split}
\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{L\tau(1+\beta)}\right)\sum_{h=k-K-\tau}^k\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{h+1}-y^{h}}^2 \leq \mathbb{E}[G(y^{k-K-\tau})]-\mathbb{E}[G(y^{k+1})].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Moreover, equations \eqref{P2-Theo1-eq41} and \eqref{P2-Theo1-eq5} imply that
\begin{equation}\label{P2-Theo2-eq5}
\begin{split}
\left(\text{dist}_{\partial F(x^{k+1})}(0)\right)^2 &\leq \sum_{j=1}^m \left(\norm{\nabla_j f(x^{k+1})-\nabla_j f(\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}})-\frac{1}{\eta}(x^{k+1}_j-y^{l(k+1,j)}_j)}\right)^2\\
&\myeq{a)}{\leq} \sum_{j=1}^m \left(\frac{1}{\eta} \norm{x^{k+1}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}+L\norm{x^{k+1}_j-\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}\right)^2\\
&\myeq{b)}{\leq} 2(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2\sum_{j=1}^m\norm{x^{{k+1}}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}^2+2L^2\sum_{j=1}^m\norm{y^{l(k+1,j)}_j-\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}^2\\
&\myeq{c)}{\leq} 2(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2(K+1)\sum_{h=k+1-{K}}^{k+1}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2\\
&~~~+2L^2T_1(1+\beta)\sum_{\substack{ k\in {\Gamma^c}_{k-\tau+1-{K}}^{k+1}}}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2\\
&~~~+2L^2T(1+\beta'')\sum_{\substack{ k\in {\Gamma^0}_{k-\tau+1-{K}}^{k+1}\cup{\Gamma}_{k-\tau+1-{K}}^{k+1}}}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $a)$ follows from Lipschitz of $\nabla f$, $b)$ is by the triangle inequality, $c)$ from Assumption \ref{unbdd-determinstic-rule}, the assumption of bounded delays and by \eqref{Ex-Acceleration-InE}.
We have shown in Theorem \ref{P2-theo1} that $F(x^k)\to F^*$, and it is also clear that $\text{dist}_{\Omega}(x^k)\to 0$. Thus, for any $\epsilon,\gamma > 0$ there is $k_0$ such that for all
$k \geq k_0$, we have
\begin{equation}
x^k\in\{x|\,\,\text{dist}_{\Omega}(x)\leq \epsilon, F^* < F(x) < F^*+\gamma\}.
\end{equation}
Since $\Omega$ is compact and $F$ is constant on it, the Uniformized KL property implies that for all $k \geq k_0$
\begin{equation}\label{P2-Theo2-eq3}
\phi'(F(x^{k+1})-F^*)\text{dist}_{\partial F(x^{k+1})}(0)\geq 1.
\end{equation}
Recall that $r_{k+1} := F(y^{k+1}) - F^*$. Then equation \eqref{P2-Theo2-eq3} is equivalent to
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
1&\leq \left(\phi'(F(x^{k+1}) - F^*)\text{dist}_{\partial F(x^{k+1})}(0)\right)^2\\
&\leq \left(\phi'(r_{k+1})\text{dist}_{\partial F(x^{k+1})}(0)\right)^2\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where in the last inequality we used $r_{k+1}\leq F(x^{k+1})-F^*$ and $\phi'(t) = et^{\theta-1}$ is nonincreasing. By taking expectation on both sides of this equation and using \eqref{P2-Theo2-eq5}, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{e^2}\mathbb{E} [r_{k+1}^{2-2\theta}]&{\leq} 2(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2(K+1)\sum_{h=k+1-{K}}^{k+1}\mathbb{E}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2\\
&~~~+2L^2T_1(1+\beta)\sum_{\substack{ k\in {\Gamma^c}_{k-\tau+1-K}^{k+1}}}\mathbb{E}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2\\
&~~~+2L^2T(1+\beta'')\sum_{\substack{ k\in {\Gamma^0}_{k-\tau+1-{K}}^{k+1}\cup{\Gamma}_{k-\tau+1-{K}}^{k+1}}}\mathbb{E}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2\\
&\leq \frac{2(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2(K+1)+2L^2T_1(1+\beta)+2L^2T(1+\beta'')}{\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{{L\tau(1+\beta)}}\right)}\\
&~~~\times\mathbb{E}[G(y^{k-K-\tau})-G(y^{k+1})]\\
&= b_1\mathbb{E}[G(y^{k-K-\tau})-G(y^{k+1})].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The second inequality is by \eqref{P2-Theo2-eq4}, and the equality is from the definition of $b_1$. Thus by using $F(x^{k-K-\tau})\leq F(x^0)$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{p2-rate-relation-LK}
\mathbb{E} [r_{k+1}^{2-2\theta}]\leq b_1e^2 \mathbb{E}[G(y^{k-K-\tau})-G(y^{k+1})]\leq b_1e^2 \mathbb{E}[r_{0}-r_{k+1}].
\end{equation}
\noindent {\bf Part} $1:$ Suppose that $\theta = 1$, then for all $k$, we have $\mathbb{E}[r_0-r_{k+1}]\geq \frac{1}{b_1e^2}>0$, which cannot hold because $r_0 < \frac{1}{b_1e^2}$. Thus, $\{G(y^k)\}$ must converge in finitely many steps, which is by Theorem \ref{P2-theo1} is the stationary point of $F$.
\noindent {\bf Part} $2:$ Suppose that $\theta = \frac{1}{2}$. We have
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E}[r_{k+1}]\leq \frac{b_1e^2}{1+b_1e^2} r_{0}
\end{equation}
which yields the result.
\end{proof}
\noindent\subsection{Proof of Lemma \ref{stc-unbdd-P2-lemma1}}
\begin{proof}
Since $x^{k+1}_{j_k} = \text{Prox}_{j_k,\eta g_{j_k}}(y^k-\eta\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k}))$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{stc-p2-lemma-eq4}
\begin{split}
\Iprod{{x}^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}+&\frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{{x}^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k}}^2+g_{j_k}({x}^{k+1}_{j_k})\\
&\leq g_{j_k}(y^{k}_{j_k}).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
As $f$ is $L$-Lipschitz smooth,
\[
f(x^{k+1})\leq f(y^{k}) + \Iprod{x_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^{k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})}+\frac{L}{2}\norm{x_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^{k}}^2.
\]
Combining with \eqref{stc-p2-lemma-eq4}, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f(x^{k+1})&+\sum_{j=1}^m g_j(x^{k+1}_j)\leq f(y^{k})+\sum_{j=1}^m g_j(y^{k}_j)\\
&+\frac{L}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2+\Iprod{{x}^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}-\frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{x^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k}}^2
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we used $x^{k+1}_j=y^{k}_j$ for $j\neq j_k$.
Therefore,
\begin{equation}\label{stc-combin-ineq}
\begin{split}
F(x^{k+1})& \leq F(y^{k})+\frac{L}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2\\
&+\Iprod{{x}_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^{k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}-\frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Hence,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\Iprod{{x}^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{i_k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}\\
&\myeq{a)}{\leq} L \norm{x_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^k}\norm{y^k-\hat{y}^{k}}\\
&\myeq{b)}{\leq} \frac{L^2}{2C}\norm{y^k-\hat{y}^{k}}^2+\frac{C}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $a)$ is by the Lipschitz of $\nabla f$ and $b)$ is by Cauchy-Schwarz inequality. We bound the expectation of $\norm{y^k-\hat{y}^{k}}^2$ over the delay. In particular, the following sequence of inequalities is true for any $C > 0$:
\begin{equation}\label{stc-combin-ineq-cross}
\begin{split}
&\mathbb{E}_{d_k}\Iprod{{x}^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{i_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})~\left|~\mathcal{F}_k\right.}\\
&\leq \frac{L^2}{2C}\mathbb{E}_{d_k}\left[\norm{y^k-\hat{y}^{k}}^2~\left|~\mathcal{F}_k\right.\right]+\frac{C}{2}\mathbb{E}_{d_k}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
&\leq \frac{L^2}{2C} \mathbb{E}_{d_k}\sum_{j=1}^mi\sum_{h=k-i+1}^k\norm{y^h_j-y^{h-1}_j}^2+\frac{C}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
&\leq \frac{L^2}{2C} \sum_{i=1}^{\infty}ip_{i}\sum_{h=k-i+1}^k\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2+\frac{C}{2} \norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
&\myeq{a)}{=} \left(\frac{L^2}{2C} \sum_{i=1}^{\infty}ip_{i}\sum_{h=k-i+1}^k(h-k+i)\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2-\frac{L^2}{2C} \sum_{i=1}^{\infty}ip_{i}\sum_{h=k-i+2}^{k+1}(h-(k+1)+i)\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2\right)\\
&~~~~~~~+\frac{L^2c_0}{2C}\norm{y^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2+\frac{C}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
&\myeq{b)}{=} \left(\frac{L^2}{2C} \sum_{h=1}^{k}\sum_{i=k-h+1}^\infty ip_{i}(h-k+i)\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2-\frac{L^2}{2C} \sum_{h=1}^{k+1}\sum_{i=k-h+2}^{\infty}ip_{i}(h-(k+1)+i)\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2\right)\\
&~~~~~~~+\frac{L^2c_0}{2C}\norm{y^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2+\frac{C}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
&= \left(\frac{L^2}{2C} \sum_{h=1}^{k}\sum_{t=1}^\infty t(t-h+k)p_{t-h+k}\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2-\frac{L^2}{2C} \sum_{h=1}^{k+1}\sum_{t=1}^{\infty}t(t-h+k+1)p_{t-h+k+1}\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2\right)\\
&~~~~~~~+\frac{L^2c_0}{2C}\norm{y^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2+\frac{C}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
&\myeq{c)}{=}\left(\frac{L^2}{2C} \sum_{h=1}^{k} c_{k-h}\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2-\frac{L^2}{2C} \sum_{h=1}^{k+1}c_{k+1-h}\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2\right)\\
&~~~~~~~+\frac{L^2c_0}{2C}\norm{y^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2+\frac{C}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where in $a)$, we used $c_0=\sum_{t=1}^{\infty}t^2p_t$, in $b)$, we switched the order of summation in the double sum, and c) uses $c_{k-h}:=\sum_{t=1}^\infty t(t-h+k)p_{t-h+k}$. Taking total expectation on the equation above, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\mathbb{E}\Iprod{{x}^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}\\
&\leq\left(\frac{L^2}{2C} \sum_{h=1}^{k} c_{k-h}\mathbb{E}\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2-\frac{L^2}{2C} \sum_{h=1}^{k+1}c_{k+1-h}\mathbb{E}\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2\right)\\
&~~~~~~~+\frac{L^2c_0}{2C}\mathbb{E}\norm{y^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2+\frac{C}{2}\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
&\myeq{d)}{\leq} \left(\frac{L^2}{2C} \sum_{h=1}^{k} c_{k-h}\mathbb{E}\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2-\frac{L^2}{2C} \sum_{h=1}^{k+1}c_{k+1-h}\mathbb{E}\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2\right)\\
&~~~~~~~+\left(\frac{L^2c_0(1+\beta_k)^2}{2C}+\frac{C}{2}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
&=\mathbb{E}[\xi_k]-\mathbb{E}[\xi_{k+1}]+\left(\frac{L^2c_0(1+\beta_k)^2}{2C}+\frac{C}{2}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $d)$ follows from \eqref{Ex-Acceleration-InE}.
Thus, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[\xi_{k+1}]&\leq\mathbb{E}[\xi_k]-\mathbb{E}\Iprod{{x}_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^{k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}\\
&~~~~~~~+\left(\frac{L^2c_0(1+\beta_k)^2}{2C}+\frac{C}{2}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
which is substituted into \eqref{stc-combin-ineq} to yield
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E} [F(x^{k+1})]+&\mathbb{E}[\xi_{k+1}]\leq \mathbb{E} [F(y^{k})]+\mathbb{E}[\xi_{k}]-\frac{1}{2\eta}\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2\\
&+\frac{L}{2}\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2+\left(\frac{L^2c_0(1+\beta_k)^2}{2C}+\frac{C}{2}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Thus, we get
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[F(x^{k+1})+&\xi_{k+1}]\\
\leq \mathbb{E}[F(y^{k})+\xi_{k}]-&\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-\frac{L^2c_0(1+\beta_k)^2}{2C}-\frac{C}{2}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Finally, by choosing $C=L(1+\beta)\sqrt{{c_0}}$, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[F(x^{k+1})+&\xi_{k+1}]\\
\leq \mathbb{E}[F(y^{k})+\xi_{k}]-&\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{L(1+\beta_k){\sqrt{c_0}}}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In particular for all $k\in\mathbb{N}$, we have $G(y^k) = F(y^k)+\xi_k$ so \eqref{stc-unbdd-p2-lemma-eq} follows.
\end{proof}
\noindent\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{stc-unbdd-P2-theo1}}
\begin{proof}
From Lemma \ref{stc-unbdd-P2-lemma1} we have
\begin{equation}\label{stc-unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq0}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[G(x^{k+1})]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(y^{k})]-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{L(1+\beta_k){\sqrt{c_0}}}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Since $\eta<\frac{1}{L+2L{\sqrt{c_{T_1}}}(1+\beta)}$ and by the upper bound for $\beta_k$, it follows that $\mathbb{E}[G (x^{k+1})]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(y^k)]$. Moreover, the update rule of AAPCD guarantees that $F (y^{k+1})\leq F(x^{k+1})$ and so we have $\mathbb{E}[G (y^{k+1})]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(x^{k+1})]$. In
summary, for all $k$ the following inequality holds:
\begin{equation}\label{stc-monoto-f-g}
\mathbb{E} [G(y^{k+1})]\leq \mathbb{E} [G(x^{k+1})]\leq \mathbb{E} [G(y^{k})]\leq \mathbb{E} [G(x^{k})].
\end{equation}
Thus, from \eqref{stc-unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq0} we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{stc-unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq01}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[G(y^{k+1})]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(y^{k})]-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{L(1+\beta_k){\sqrt{c_0}}}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Hence $\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2$ is summable and $\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2$ converges to zero.
Further, by the fact $\sum_{h=1}^\infty\mathbb{E}\norm{ y^{h}-y^{h-1}}^2< \infty$ and using $\sum_{h=1}^\infty c_{h} < \infty$, the series $S_k = \sum_{h=1}^k c_{k-h} \mathbb{E}\norm{y^{h}-y^{h-1}}^2$ converges to zero, i.e., $
\mathbb{E}[\xi_k]\to 0$. Combing further with the fact that $F(x^k), F(y^k) \geq \inf F > -\infty$ for all $k$ and \eqref{stc-monoto-f-g}, we conclude that $\{F(x^k )\}, \{F(y^k)\}$ converge to the same limit $F^*$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{stc-unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq2}
\lim_{k\to\infty}\mathbb{E}[F(x^k)] = \lim_{k\to\infty}\mathbb{E}[F(y^k)] =\lim_{k\to\infty}\mathbb{E}[G(x^k)] = \lim_{k\to\infty}\mathbb{E}[G(y^k)]= F^*.
\end{equation}
Since $\mathbb{E}\norm{y^k - x^{k+1}} \to 0$, and hence ${x^k}$ and ${y^k}$ share the same set of limit points which is denoted by $\Omega$. Similar to the analysis of AAPCD with bounded delay, using the optimality condition of the proximal step of AAPCD, we obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{stc-P2-Theo1-eq4}
\begin{split}
-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})-\frac{1}{\eta}(x_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^k)\in \partial g_{j_k}(x^{k+1}_{j_k})&\\
\Longrightarrow\underbrace{\nabla_{j_k} f(x^{k+1})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})-\frac{1}{\eta}(x^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^k_{j_k})}_{q^{k+1}_{j_k}}&\in \partial_{x_{j_k}} F(x^{k+1})
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and for $j\neq j_k$,
\begin{equation}\label{stc-P2-Theo1-eq41}
\begin{split}
-\nabla_{j} f(\hat{y}^{l(k,j)})-\frac{1}{\eta}(x_{j}^{l(k,j)+1}-y_{j}^{l(k,j)})\in \partial g_{j}(x^{k+1}_{j})&\\
\Longrightarrow\underbrace{\nabla_{j} f(x^{k+1})-\nabla_{j} f(\hat{y}^{l(k,j)})-\frac{1}{\eta}(x^{k+1}_{j}-y^{l(k,j)}_{j})}_{q^{k+1}_{j}}&\in \partial_{x_{j}} F(x^{k+1})
\end{split}.
\end{equation}
By the Assumption \ref{unbdd-determinstic-rule}, we can derive
\begin{equation}\label{stc-P2-Theo1-eq5}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}\norm{q^{k+1}_j}^2 &\leq \mathbb{E}\left(\norm{\nabla_j f(x^{k+1})-\nabla_j f(\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}})-\frac{1}{\eta}(x^{k+1}_j-y^{l(k+1,j)}_j)}\right)^2\\
&\myeq{a)}{\leq} \mathbb{E}\left(\frac{1}{\eta} \norm{x^{k+1}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}+L\norm{x^{k+1}-\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}}}\right)^2\\
&\myeq{b)}{\leq} \mathbb{E}\left((\frac{1}{\eta}+L)\norm{x^{{k+1}}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}+L\norm{y^{l(k+1,j)}-\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}}}\right)^2\\
&{\leq} 2(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{{k+1}}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}^2+2L^2\mathbb{E}\norm{y^{l(k+1,j)}-\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}}}^2\\
&\myeq{c)}{\leq} 2(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{{k+1}}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}^2+2L^2\sum_{h=k-{K}}^k\mathbb{E}[\xi_{h}-\xi_{h+1}]\\
&~~~+{2L^2c_0}\sum_{h=k-K}^{k}\mathbb{E}\norm{y^{h+1}-y^{h}}^2\\
&\myeq{d)}{\leq} 2(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2K\sum_{h=k-{K}}^{k}\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{h+1}_j-y^{h}_j}^2+2L^2\mathbb{E}[\xi_{k-{K}}-\xi_{k+1}]\\
&~~~+{2L^2c_0}\sum_{h=k-K}^{k}\mathbb{E}\norm{y^{h+1}-y^{h}}^2
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $a)$ is by Lipschitz of $\nabla f$, $b)$ by the triangle inequality, $c)$ from \eqref{stc-combin-ineq-cross} and $d)$ by using a telescoping sum. As $k\to \infty$, this right term converges to zero and therefore we have $\mathbb{E}\norm{q_j^{k+1}}^2\to 0$.
On the other hand, by induction we conclude from equation \eqref{stc-unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq2} that for all $k$
\[
\mathbb{E}[F(y^k)]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(y^k)]\leq F(x^0)\qquad \mathbb{E}[F(x^k)]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(x^k)]\leq F(x^0).
\]
Combining with Assumption \ref{P2-assu1} that $F$ has bounded sublevel set, we conclude that $\{x^k\}$ and $\{y^k\}$ are almost surely bounded and thus
have bounded limit points.
We assume that $\{x^k\}$ and $\{y^k\}$ are bounded and thus have bounded limit points.
We fix any limit point $x\in\Omega$, say $x^{k_t} \to x$, $y^{k_t} \to x$. Note that the continuity of $f$ yields $\lim_{t\to\infty} f(x^{k_t}) = f(x)$. Moreover, by the definition
of the proximal map, the proximal gradient step of AAPCD implies that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\Iprod{\nabla_j f(\hat{y}^{l(k_t+1,j)})}{x^{k_t+1}_j-y^{l(k_t+1,j)}_j}+\frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{x^{k_t+1}_j-y^{l(k_t+1,j)}_j}^2+g_j(x^{k_t+1}_j)\\
&\leq\Iprod{\nabla_j f(\hat{y}^{l(k_t+1,j)})}{x_j-y^{l(k_t+1,j)}_j} + \frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{x_j-y^{l(k_t+1,j)}_j}^2+g_j(x_j).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Hence, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
g_j(x^{k_t+1}_j)&\leq\Iprod{\nabla_j f(\hat{y}^{l(k_t+1,j)})}{x_j-x^{k_t+1}_j} + \frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{x_j-y^{l(k_t+1,j)}_j}^2+g_j(x_j)\\
&\leq\Iprod{\nabla_j f(\hat{y}^{l(k_t+1,j)})}{x_j-x^{k_t+1}_j}\\
&~~~ + \frac{1}{\eta}\norm{x_j - y_j^{k_t+1}}^2+\frac{1}{\eta}\norm{y_j^{k_t+1}-y^{l(k_t+1,j)}_j}^2+g_j(x_j)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where the last inequality is by the triangle inequality. Taking $\lim\sup$ on both sides and note that $x^{k_t} - y^{k_t} \to 0$, $y^{k_t} \to x$, we obtain that $\lim\sup_{t\to\infty} g_j(x^{{k_t}}_j) \leq g_j(x)$. Since
$g_j$ is lower semicontinuous and $x^{k_t}\to x$, it follows that $\lim\sup_{t\to\infty} g_j(x^{k_t}_j)\geq g_j(x)$.
Combining both inequalities we
conclude that $\lim_{t\to\infty} g_j(x^{k_t}_j) = g_j(x)$. Hence we have that
$\lim_{t\to\infty} F(x^{k_t}) = F(x)$. Since $\lim_{t\to\infty} F(x^{k_t}) = F^*$ by equation \eqref{stc-unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq2}, we get
\begin{equation}
F(x)=F^*,\qquad \text{for all } x\in\Omega.
\end{equation}
Hence, $F$ remains constant on the compact set $\Omega$. Since $\lim \mathbb{E}[\xi_k]\to 0$, we have, $\mathbb{E}[G (x^{k_t})]\to F(x)$ and thus
$\mathbb{E}[G (x^{k_t})]\to F^*$. We have shown $x^{k_t}\to x$, $F (x^{k_t})\to F(x)$ and that
$q_{k_t} \in \partial F(x^{k_t})$ converges zero. Altogether, we have $0\in \partial F(x)$ for all $x\in\Omega$.
\end{proof}
\noindent\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{stc-unbdd-P2-theo2}}
\begin{proof}
Throughout the proof we assume that $r_k\neq 0$ for all $k$ because otherwise the algorithm terminates and the conclusions
hold trivially. Lemma \ref{stc-unbdd-P2-lemma1} yields that
\begin{equation}\label{stc-P2-Theo2-eq1}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[G(x^{h+1})]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(y^{h})]-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{L(1+\beta_k){\sqrt{c_0}}}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{h+1}-y^h}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Therefore, from \eqref{stc-monoto-f-g} we obtain
\begin{equation
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[G(y^{h+1})]\leq \mathbb{E}[G(y^{h})]-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{L(1+\beta_k){\sqrt{c_0}}}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{h+1}-y^h}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By summing this inequality over $h=k-K,\ldots,k$ iterations we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{stc-theo2-eq2}
\begin{split}
\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{L(1+\beta){\sqrt{c_0}}}\right)\sum_{h=k-K}^k\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{h+1}-y^{h}}^2 \leq \mathbb{E}[G(y^{k-K})]-\mathbb{E}[G(y^{k+1})].
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We have shown in Theorem \ref{stc-unbdd-P2-theo1} that $F(x^k)\to F^*$, and it is also clear that $\text{dist}_{\Omega}(x^k)\to 0$. Thus, for any $\epsilon,\gamma > 0$ there is $k_0$ such that for all
$k \geq k_0$, we have
\begin{equation}
x^k\in\{x|\,\,\text{dist}_{\Omega}(x)\leq \epsilon, F^* < F(x) < F^*+\gamma\}
\end{equation}
Since $\Omega$ is compact and $F$ is constant on it, we can apply KL property. The Uniformized KL property implies that for all $k \geq k_0$
\begin{equation}\label{stc-P2-Theo2-eq3}
\phi'(F(x^{k+1})-F^*)\text{dist}_{\partial F(x^{k+1})}(0)\geq 1.
\end{equation}
Moreover, equations \eqref{stc-P2-Theo1-eq4} and \eqref{stc-P2-Theo1-eq41} imply that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
1&\myeq{a)}{\leq} \left(\phi'(F(x^{k+1})-F^*)\text{dist}_{\partial F(x^{k+1})}(0)\right)^2\\
&\myeq{b)}{\leq} \left(\phi'(r_{k+1})\text{dist}_{\partial F(x^{k+1})}(0)\right)^2\\
&\leq (\phi'(r_{k+1}))^2 \sum_{j=1}^m\left(\norm{\nabla_j f(x^{k+1})-\nabla_j f(\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}})-\frac{1}{\eta}(x^{k+1}_j-y^{l(k+1,j)}_j)}\right)^2\\
&\leq (\phi'(r_{k+1}))^2 \sum_{j=1}^m\left(\norm{\nabla_j f(x^{k+1})-\nabla_j f(\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}})-\frac{1}{\eta}(x^{k+1}_j-y^{l(k+1,j)}_j)}\right)^2\\
&\leq (\phi'(r_{k+1}))^2 \left(\frac{2}{\eta^2} \sum_{j=1}^m\norm{x^{k+1}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}^2+2\sum_{j=1}^m\norm{\nabla_j f(x^{k+1})-\nabla_j f(\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}})}^2\right)\\
&\myeq{c)}{\leq} (\phi'(r_{k+1}))^2 \left(\frac{2}{\eta^2} \sum_{j=1}^m\norm{x^{k+1}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}^2+2L^2\sum_{j=1}^m\norm{x^{k+1}-\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}}}^2\right)\\
&\myeq{d)}{\leq} (\phi'(r_{k+1}))^2 \left((\frac{2}{\eta^2}+4L^2)\sum_{j=1}^m\norm{x^{{k+1}}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}^2+4L^2\sum_{j=1}^m\norm{y^{l(k+1,j)}-\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}}}^2\right)\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $a)$ follows from \eqref{stc-P2-Theo2-eq3}, $b)$ by $r_{k+1} \leq F(x^{k+1})-F^*$ and the fact that $\phi'$ is nonincreasing, $c)$ from the Lipschitz of $\nabla f$ and $d)$ from the triangle inequality.
We have that $\phi'(t)={e}t^{\theta-1}$. Thus the above equation becomes
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{e^2}r_{k+1}^{2-2\theta} \leq (\frac{2}{\eta^2}+4L^2)\sum_{j=1}^m\norm{x^{{k+1}}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}^2+4L^2\sum_{j=1}^m\norm{y^{l(k+1,j)}-\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}}}^2.
\end{equation}
By taking total expectation on both sides of this equation, and following the derivations similar to that of \eqref{stc-P2-Theo1-eq5}, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{e^2}\mathbb{E} [r_{k+1}^{2-2\theta}] &\leq (\frac{2}{\eta^2}+4L^2)\sum_{j=1}^m\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{{k+1}}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}^2+4L^2\sum_{j=1}^m\mathbb{E}\norm{y^{l(k+1,j)}-\hat{y}^{{l(k+1,j)}}}^2\\
&\leq (\frac{2}{\eta^2}+4L^2)\sum_{h=k-{K}}^{k}\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{{h+1}}-y^{h}}^2+4L^2\mathbb{E}[\xi_{k-{K}}-\xi_{k+1}]\\
&~~~+{4L^2c_0}\sum_{h=k-K}^{k}\mathbb{E}\norm{y^{h+1}-y^{h}}^2\\
&\leq (\frac{2}{\eta^2}+4L^2)\sum_{h=k-{K}}^{k}\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{{h+1}}-y^{h}}^2+4L^2\mathbb{E}[\xi_{k-{K}}-\xi_{k+1}]\\
&~~~+{4L^2c_0}(1+\beta)\sum_{\substack{ k\in {\Gamma^c}_{k+1-{K}}^{k+1}}}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2+{4L^2c_0}\sum_{\substack{ k\in {\Gamma^0}_{k+1-{K}}^{k+1}}}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2\\
&~~~+{4L^2c_0}(1+\beta')\sum_{\substack{ k\in {\Gamma}_{k+1-{K}}^{k+1}}}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2\\
&\leq b_1\mathbb{E}[G(y^{k-K})-G(y^{k+1})]\\
&\leq b_1\mathbb{E}[F(y^{0})-F(y^{k+1})]\\
&= b_1\mathbb{E}[r_0-r_{k+1}]
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where the second last inequality is by the definition of $b_1$ and \eqref{stc-theo2-eq2}. Thus from the above inequality we have
\begin{equation}\label{stc-p2-rate-relation-LK}
\mathbb{E} [r_{k+1}^{2-2\theta}]\leq b_1e^2 \mathbb{E}[r_0-r_{k+1}].
\end{equation}
\noindent {\bf Part} $1:$ Suppose that $\theta = 1$, then for all $k$, we have $\mathbb{E}[r_0-r_{k+1}]\geq \frac{1}{b_1e^2}>0$, which cannot hold because $\mathbb{E}[r_{k+1}]\geq 0$ and $r_0< \frac{1}{b_1e^2}$. Thus, $\{F(y^k)\}$ must converge in finitely many steps, which is by Theorem \ref{stc-unbdd-P2-theo1} the stationary point of $F$.
\noindent {\bf Part} $2:$ Suppose that $\theta = \frac{1}{2}$. We have from \eqref{stc-p2-rate-relation-LK}
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{E}[r_{k+1}]\leq \frac{b_1e^2}{1+b_1e^2} \mathbb{E}[r_{0}]
\end{equation}
which yields the result.
\end{proof}
\noindent\subsection{Proof of Lemma \ref{unbdd-P2-lemma1}}
\begin{proof}
Since $x^{k+1}_{j_k} = \text{Prox}_{j_k,\eta g_{j_k}}(y^k-\eta\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k}))$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{unbd-p2-lemma-eq4}
\begin{split}
\Iprod{{x}^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}+&\frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{{x}^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k}}^2+g_{j_k}({x}^{k+1}_{j_k})\\
&\leq g_{j_k}(y^{k}_{j_k}).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
As $f$ is $L$-Lipschitz smooth,
\[
f(x^{k+1})\leq f(y^{k}) + \Iprod{x_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^{k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})}+\frac{L}{2}\norm{x_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^{k}}^2.
\]
Combining with \eqref{unbd-p2-lemma-eq4}, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
f(&x^{k+1})+\sum_{j=1}^m g_j(x^{k+1}_j)\leq f(y^{k})+\sum_{j=1}^m g_j(y^{k}_j)\\
&+\frac{L}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2+\Iprod{{x}^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}-\frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we used $x^{k+1}_j=y^{k}_j$ for $j\neq j_k$. This is equivalent to,
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
F(x^{k+1})& \leq F(y^{k})+\frac{L}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2\\
&+\Iprod{{x}_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^{k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}-\frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
For the cross term we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\Iprod{{x}^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{i_k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}\\
&\myeq{a)}{\leq} L \norm{x_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^k}\norm{y^k-\hat{y}^{k}}\\
&\myeq{b)}{\leq} \frac{L^2}{2C}\norm{y^k-\hat{y}^{k}}^2+\frac{C}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $a)$ is by the Lipschitz of $\nabla f$, $b)$ by the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality. By taking expectation over $d_k$, the following sequence of inequalities is true for any $C > 0$:
\begin{equation}\label{stc-unbd-deay-lemm1-eq1}
\begin{split}
&\mathbb{E}_{d_k}\Iprod{{x}^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{i_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})~\left|~\mathcal{F}_k\right.}\\
&\leq \frac{L^2}{2C}\mathbb{E}_{d_k}\left[\norm{y^k-\hat{y}^{k}}^2~\left|~\mathcal{F}_k\right.\right]+\frac{C}{2}\mathbb{E}_{d_k}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
&\myeq{a)}{\leq} \frac{L^2\tau}{2C} \sum_{h=k-\tau+1}^k\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2+\frac{C}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
&= \left(\frac{L^2\tau}{2C} \sum_{h=k-\tau+1}^k(h-k+\tau)\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2-\frac{L^2\tau}{2C} \sum_{h=k+1-\tau+1}^{k+1}(h-(k+1)+\tau)\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2\right)\\
&~~~~~~~+\frac{L^2\tau^2}{2C}\norm{y^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2+\frac{C}{2}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $a)$ is due the triangle inequality and $d_k\leq \tau$.
The linear extrapolation step for the
momentum acceleration in Algorithm \ref{AAPCD-Algo} yields
\begin{equation}\label{deter-Ex-Acceleration-InE}
\begin{split}
\norm{y^{h+1}-y^{h}}&= (1+\beta_h) \mathbb{E}\norm{x^{h+1}-y^{h}}\qquad \text{for } h\in {\Gamma^c}_{k}^{r}, \beta_h>0\\
\norm{y^{h+1}-y^{h}}&= \mathbb{E}\norm{x^{h+1}-y^{h}}\qquad \text{for } h\in {\Gamma^0}_{k}^{r}\\
\norm{y^{h+1}-y^{h}}&= (1+\beta_h) \mathbb{E}\norm{x^{h+1}-y^{h}}\qquad \text{for } h\in {\Gamma}_{k}^{r}, \beta_h<0.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Thus, by taking total expectation on both sides of \eqref{stc-unbd-deay-lemm1-eq1} we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[\xi_{k+1}]&\leq\mathbb{E}[\xi_k]-\mathbb{E}\Iprod{{x}_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^{k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}\\
&~~~~~~~+\frac{L^2\tau^2}{2C}\mathbb{E}\norm{y^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2+\frac{C}{2}\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
&\leq\mathbb{E}[\xi_k]-\mathbb{E}\Iprod{{x}_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^{k}}{\nabla_{j_k} f(y^{k})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})}\\
&~~~~~~~+\left(\frac{L^2\tau^2(1+\beta_k)^2}{2C}+\frac{C}{2}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Therefore, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[F(x^{k+1})+\xi_{k+1}]+&\frac{1}{2\eta}\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2\\
\leq \mathbb{E}[F(y^{k})+\xi_{k}]+&\frac{L}{2}\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2+\left(\frac{L^2\tau^2(1+\beta_k)^2}{2C}+\frac{C}{2}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Hence, we can derive
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[F(x^{k+1})+\xi_{k+1}&]\\
\leq \mathbb{E}[F(y^{k})+&\xi_{k}]-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-\frac{L^2\tau^2(1+\beta_k)^2}{2C}-\frac{C}{2}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By choosing $C={L\tau(1+\beta)}$, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathbb{E}[F(x^{k+1})+\xi_{k+1}&]\\
\leq \mathbb{E}[F(y^{k})+&\xi_{k}]-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta}-\frac{L}{2}-{L\tau(1+\beta_k)}\right)\mathbb{E}\norm{x^{k+1}-y^k}^2\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and the result follows from the definition of $G(x^{k+1})$.
\end{proof}
\noindent\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{unbdd-P2-theo1}}
\begin{proof}
Applying Lemma \ref{unbdd-P2-lemma1} with $x=x^k$, $y=y^k$, we obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq1}
\begin{split}
G(x^{k+1})\leq G(y^{k})-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta_k}-\frac{L}{2}-\sqrt{{\delta_0}{\mu_{d_k}}}L(1+\beta_k)\right)\norm{x^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^k_{j_k}}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Since $\eta=\frac{c}{L+2L\sqrt{{\delta_0}{\mu_{T_1}}}(1+\beta)}$ and $-1 < \beta_k < {\frac{\sqrt{\mu_{T_1}}}{c\sqrt{\mu_{d_k}}}}(1+\beta)-1$, it follows that $G (x^{k+1})\leq G(y^k)$. Moreover, the update rule of the deterministic AAPCD guarantees that $F (y^{k+1})\leq F(x^{k+1})$ and hence we have $G (y^{k+1})\leq G(x^{k+1})$. In
summary, for all $k$ the following inequality holds:
\begin{equation}\label{unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq2}
G(y^{k+1})\leq G(x^{k+1})\leq G(y^{k})\leq G(x^{k}).
\end{equation}
Hence from \eqref{unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq1} we have
\begin{equation}\label{unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq11}
\begin{split}
G(y^{k+1})\leq G(y^{k})-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta_k}-\frac{L}{2}-\sqrt{{\delta_0}{\mu_{d_k}}}L(1+\beta_k)\right)\norm{x^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^k_{j_k}}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
This equation shows $\norm{x^{h}-y^{h-1}}^2$ is summable. Thus, we have $\lim_{k} \norm{x^{k}-y^{k-1}}^2 = 0$.
Since $\sum_{h=1}^\infty \delta_{h} < \infty$, the series $A_k = \sum_{h=1}^k \delta_{k-h} \norm{y^{h}-y^{h-1}}^2$ converges to zero, i.e., $\xi_k\to 0$. Combing further with the fact that $F(x^k), F(y^k) \geq \inf F > -\infty$ for all $k$, we conclude that $\{G(x^k )\}, \{G(y^k)\}$ converge to the same limit $F^*$, i.e.,
\begin{equation}
\lim_{k\to\infty}F(x^k) = \lim_{k\to\infty}F(y^k) =\lim_{k\to\infty}G(x^k) = \lim_{k\to\infty}G(y^k)= F^*.
\end{equation}
On the other hand, by induction we conclude from equation \eqref{unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq2} that for all $k$
\[
F(y^k)\leq G(y^k)\leq F(x^0)\qquad F(x^k)\leq G(x^k)\leq F(x^0).
\]
Combining with Assumption \ref{P2-assu1} that $F$ has bounded sublevel set, we conclude that $\{x^k\}$ and $\{y^k\}$ are bounded and thus
have bounded limit points.
\noindent Since $\norm{y^k - x^{k+1}} \to 0$, ${x^k}$ and ${y^k}$ share the same set of limit points $\Omega$ which is compact in $\mathbb{R}^m$. We fix any limit point $x\in\Omega$, say $x^{k_t+1} \to x$, $y^{k_t} \to x$. Note that the continuity of $f$ yields $\lim_{t\to\infty} f(x^{k_t}) = f(x)$.
By the definition of $x^{k+1}_j$ as a proximal point, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
&\Iprod{\nabla_j f(\hat{y}^{l(k_t+1,j)})}{x^{l(k_t+1,j)+1}_j-y^{l(k_t+1,j)}_j}+\frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{x^{l(k_t+1,j)+1}_j-y^{l(k_t+1,j)}_j}^2+g_j(x^{l(k_t+1,j)+1}_j)\\
&\leq\Iprod{\nabla_j f(\hat{y}^{l(k_t+1,j)})}{x_j-y^{l(k_t+1,j)}_j} + \frac{1}{2\eta}\norm{x_j-y^{l(k_t+1,j)}_j}^2+g_j(x_j).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Taking $\lim\sup$ on both sides and note that $x^{k_t+1} - y^{k_t} \to 0$, $y^{k_t} \to x$, we obtain that $\lim\sup_{t\to\infty} g_j(x^{k_t+1}_j) \leq g_j(x_j)$. Since
$g$ is lower semicontinuous and $x^{k_t}\to x$, it follows that $\lim\sup_{t\to\infty} g_j(x^{k_t+1}_j)\geq g_j(x_j)$.
Combining both inequalities, we
conclude that $\lim_{t\to\infty} g_j(x^{k_t+1}_j) = g_j(x_j)$. We then obtain
$\lim_{t\to\infty} F(x^{k_t}) = F(x)$. Since $\lim_{t\to\infty} F(x^{k_t}) = F^*$ by equation \eqref{unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq2}, we have
\begin{equation}
F(x)=F^*,\qquad \forall x\in\Omega.
\end{equation}
Thus, $F$ remains constant on the set of limit points $\Omega$.
By optimality condition of the proximal gradient step of AAPCD, we obtain that
\begin{equation}\label{unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq4}
\begin{split}
-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})-\frac{1}{\eta_k}(x_{j_k}^{k+1}-y_{j_k}^k)&\in \partial g_{j_k}(x^{k+1}_{j_k})\\
\leftrightarrow\underbrace{\nabla_{j_k} f(x^{k+1})-\nabla_{j_k} f(\hat{y}^{k})-\frac{1}{\eta_k}(x^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^k_{j_k})}_{q^{k+1}_{j_k}}&\in \partial_{x_{j_k}} F(x^{k+1})
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and for $j\neq j_k$,
\begin{equation}\label{unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq6}
\begin{split}
-\nabla_{j} f(\hat{y}^{l(k,j)})-\frac{1}{\eta_k}(x_{j}^{l(k,j)+1}-y_{j}^{l(k,j)})&\in \partial g_{j}(x^{k+1}_{j})\\
\leftrightarrow\underbrace{\nabla_{j} f(x^{k+1})-\nabla_{j} f(\hat{y}^{l(k,j)})-\frac{1}{\eta_k}(x^{l(k,j)+1}_{j}-y^{l(k,j)}_{j})}_{q^{k+1}_{j}}&\in \partial_{x_{j}} F(x^{k+1}).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We have also
\begin{equation}\label{unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq61}
\frac{\partial y^{k+1}_{j_k}}{\partial x_{j_k}^{k+1}}\frac{\partial G(x^{k+1})}{\partial y^{k+1}_{j_k}} = \frac{\partial y^{k+1}_{j_k}}{\partial x_{j_k}^{k+1}}\sqrt{\frac{\mu_{d_k}}{\delta_0}}\frac{L}{(1+\beta_k)} \delta_0 (y^{k+1}_{j_k}-y^{k}_{j_k})
\end{equation}
where $\norm{\frac{\partial y^{k+1}}{\partial x^{k+1}}} \leq (1+\beta_k)$. For $k+1\in S_T$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq8}
\begin{split}
\norm{q_j^{k+1}}^2 &\myeq{a)}{\leq} \left(\norm{\nabla_j f(x^{k+1})-\nabla_j f(\hat{y}^{l(k+1,j)})-\frac{1}{\eta}(x^{k+1}_j-y^{l(k+1,j)}_j)}\right)^2\\
&\myeq{b)}{\leq} \left(\frac{1}{\eta} \norm{x^{k+1}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}+L\norm{x^{k+1}_j-\hat{y}^{l(k+1,j)}_j}\right)^2\\
&\myeq{c)}{\leq} \left((\frac{1}{\eta}+L)\norm{x^{{k+1}}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}+L\norm{y^{l(k+1,j)}_j-\hat{y}^{l(k+1,j)}_j}\right)^2\\
&\leq 2(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2\norm{x^{{k+1}}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}^2+2L^2\norm{y^{l(k+1,j)}_j-\hat{y}^{l(k+1,j)}_j}^2\\
&\myeq{d)}{\leq} 2(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2\norm{x^{{l(k+1,j)+1}}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}^2+2L^2T\sum_{h=l(k+1,j)-T+1}^{l(k+1,j)}\norm{y^h_j-y^{h-1}_j}^2\\
&\myeq{e)}{\leq} 2(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2K\sum_{h=k+1-K}^{{k+1}}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2+2L^2T\sum_{h=k+1-T-K}^{{k+1}}\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $a)$ follows from \eqref{unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq4} and \eqref{unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq6}, $b)$ by the Lipschitz of $\nabla f$,
$c)$ is by the triangle inequality, $d)$ from triangular inequality and and the fact that $k+1\in S_T$ and $e)$ is due to Assumption \ref{unbdd-determinstic-rule}.
Thus, from this we have $\norm{q_j^{k+1}}\to 0$.
We have shown $x^{k_t}\to x$, $F (x^{k_t})\to F(x)$ and that
$\partial F(x^{k_t})$ converges to $0$. Therefore, $0\in\partial F(x)$ for all $x\in\Omega$.
\end{proof}
\noindent\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{unbdd-deter-subseq-conver}}
\begin{proof}
From equation \eqref{unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq11} we have
\begin{equation
\begin{split}
G(y^{h+1})\leq G(y^{h})-\left(\frac{1}{2\eta_h}-\frac{L}{2}-\sqrt{{\delta_0}{\mu_{d_h}}}L(1+\beta_h)\right)\norm{x^{h+1}-y^h}^2.\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Recall $\eta=\frac{c}{L+2L\sqrt{{\delta_0}{\mu_{T_1}}}(1+\beta)}$ for $c\in (0,1)$, and $-1 < \beta_k < {\frac{\sqrt{\mu_{T_1}}}{c\sqrt{\mu_{d_k}}}}(1+\beta)-1$ implies
\begin{equation
\begin{split}
(\frac{1}{c}-1)&\frac{L}{2}\norm{x^{h+1}-y^{h}}^2 \leq G(y^{h})-G(y^{h+1}).\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
By summing the above inequality over ${k+1-T-K},\ldots, k$ iterations we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{unbdd-P2-Theo2-eq1}
\begin{split}
(\frac{1}{c}-1)&\frac{L}{2}\sum_{h=k+1-T-K}^{k}\norm{x^{h+1}-y^{h}}^2 \leq G(y^{k+1-T-K})-G(y^{k+1}).\\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
We have shown in Theorem \ref{unbdd-P2-theo1} that $F(x^k)\to F^*$, and it is also clear that $\text{dist}_{\Omega}(x^k)\to 0$. Thus, for any $\epsilon,\gamma > 0$ there is $k_0$ such that for all
$k \geq k_0$, we have
\begin{equation}
x^k\in\{x|\,\,\text{dist}_{\Omega}(x)\leq \epsilon, F^* < F(x) < F^*+\gamma\}.
\end{equation}
Since $\Omega$ is compact and $F$ is constant on it, the Uniformized KL property implies that for all $k \geq k_0$
\begin{equation}\label{deter-P2-Theo2-eq3}
\phi'(F(x^{k+1})-F^*)\text{dist}_{\partial F(x^{k+1})}(0)\geq 1.
\end{equation}
Recall that ${r_k := F(y^k) - F^*}$. Then, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
1&\myeq{a)}{\leq} \left(\phi'(F(x^{k+1})-F^*)\text{dist}_{\partial F(x^{k+1})}(0)\right)^2\\
&\myeq{b)}{\leq} \left(\phi'(r_{k+1})\text{dist}_{\partial F(x^{k+1})}(0)\right)^2\\
&\myeq{c)}{\leq} (\phi'(r_{k+1}))^2\bigg(2(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2\sum_{j=1}^m\norm{x^{{l(k+1,j)+1}}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}^2\\&~~~+2L^2T_1\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{h=l(k+1,j)-T_1+1}^{l(k+1,j)}\norm{y^h_j-y^{h-1}_j}^2\\
&~~~+2L^2T\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{h=l(k+1,j)-T+1}^{l(k+1,j)}\norm{y^h_j-y^{h-1}_j}^2\bigg)\\
&{\leq} (\phi'(r_{k+1}))^2\bigg( 2(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2\sum_{h=k+1-K}^{{k+1}}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2+2L^2T_1\sum_{h=k+1-T_1-K}^{{k+1}}\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2\\
&~~~+2L^2T\sum_{h=k+1-T-K}^{{k+1}}\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2\bigg)\\
&{\leq} (\phi'(r_{k+1}))^2\bigg( 2(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2\sum_{h=k+1-K}^{{k+1}}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2+{2L^2T_1}(1+\beta)^2\sum_{\substack{ h\in {\Gamma^c}_{k+1-{K}}^{k+1}}}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2\\
&+{2L^2T}(1+\beta'')^2\sum_{\substack{ h\in {\Gamma^0}_{k+1-T-{K}}^{k+1}\cup{\Gamma}_{k+1-T-{K}}^{k+1}}}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2\bigg)\\
&\myeq{d)}{\leq} (\phi'(r_{k+1}))^2\left(\frac{2(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2+3(1+\beta)^2L^2T_1+2(1+\beta'')^2L^2T}{(\frac{1}{c}-1)\frac{L}{2}}\right)\\
&~~~~\times(G(y^{k+1-T-K})-G(y^{k+1}))\\
&\myeq{e)}{\leq} (\phi'(r_{k+1}))^2b_1(G(y^{k+1-T-K})-G(y^{k+1}))\\
&\myeq{f)}{\leq} (\phi'(r_{k+1}))^2b_1(F(y^{0})-F(y^{k+1}))
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $a)$ follows from \eqref{deter-P2-Theo2-eq3}, $b)$ is due to $r_{k+1}\leq F(x^{k+1})-F^*$ and the fact that $\phi'$ is nonincreasing, $c)$ from \eqref{unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq8}, $d)$ is a direct
computation using \eqref{unbdd-P2-Theo2-eq1} and $\beta'' = \max\{\beta',0\}$, $e)$ is also a result of the definition of $b_1$ and $f)$ by $G(y^{k+1-T-K})\leq F(y^0)$ and $F(y^{k+1})\leq G(y^{k+1})$.
We have that $\phi'(t)={e}t^{\theta-1}$. Thus the above inequality becomes
\begin{equation}\label{deter-p2-rate-relation-LK}
1\leq b_1e^2 r_{k+1}^{2\theta-2}(r_{{0}}-r_{k+1})\qquad k+1\in S_T.
\end{equation}
\noindent {\bf Part} $1:$ Suppose that $\theta = 1$, then for all $k$, we have $r_{0}-r_{k+1}\geq \frac{1}{b_1e^2}>0$, which cannot hold because $r_0 < \frac{1}{b_1e^2}$. Thus, $\{F(y^k)\}$ must converge in finitely many steps, which is by Theorem \ref{unbdd-P2-theo1} the stationary point of $F$.
In the following we assume that $r_k\neq 0$ for all $k\in S_T$ because otherwise the algorithm terminates.
\noindent {\bf Part} $2:$ Suppose that $\theta\in[\frac{1}{2},1)$. We select $k_1$ large enough such that $r_{k+1}^{2-2\theta} \geq r_{k+1}$, for all $k\geq k_1$. Then for all $k \geq k_1$, and $k+1\in S_T$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{undbb-deter-part2-eq1}
r_{k+1}\leq \frac{b_1e^2}{1+b_1e^2} r_{0}.
\end{equation}
\noindent {\bf Part} $3:$ Suppose that $\theta\in (0,\frac{1}{2})$. Let $h(s):=s^{2\theta-2}$. Then from \eqref{deter-p2-rate-relation-LK} we find that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{b_1e^2}&\leq h(r_{k+1})(r_{0}-r_{k+1}) = \frac{h(r_{k+1})}{h(r_{0})} h(r_{0})(r_{0}-r_{k+1})\\
&\leq \frac{h(r_{k+1})}{h(r_{0})}\int_{r_{k+1}}^{r_{0}} h(s) ds = \frac{h(r_{k+1})}{h(r_{0})}\frac{r_{k+1}^{2\theta-1}-r_{0}^{2\theta-1}}{1-2\theta}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Let $R\in(1, \infty)$ be a fixed number. We consider two cases:
\noindent {\bf Case 1:} Let $\frac{h(r_{k+1})}{h(r_{0})}\leq R$.
Then we have
\begin{equation}\label{unbdd-KL-case3case1}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{b_1e^2R}&\leq \frac{r_{k+1}^{2\theta-1}-r_{{0}}^{2\theta-1}}{1-2\theta}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\noindent {\bf Case 2:} Let $\frac{h(r_{k+1})}{h(r_{0})}\geq R$.
Then, since $h(r_{k+1})\geq h(r_{0}) R$, we have $r_{k+1}^{2\theta-1}\geq r_{0}^{2\theta-1} R^{\frac{2\theta-1}{2\theta-2}}$. Therefore, we obtain
\[
r_{k+1}^{2\theta-1}\geq r_{0}^{2\theta-1} R^{\frac{2\theta-1}{2\theta-2}}.
\]
Thus, we can deduce that
\begin{equation}\label{unbdd-KL-case3case2}
\begin{split}
\frac{r_{0}^{2\theta-1} (R^{\frac{2\theta-1}{2\theta-2}}-1)}{1-2\theta}\leq \frac{r_{k+1}^{2\theta-1}-r_{0}^{2\theta-1}}{1-2\theta}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Combining equations \eqref{unbdd-KL-case3case1} and \eqref{unbdd-KL-case3case2} yields
\begin{equation}\label{undbb-deter-part3-eq1}
\begin{split}
\min(\frac{1}{b_1e^2R},\frac{r_{0}^{2\theta-1} (R^{\frac{2\theta-1}{2\theta-2}}-1)}{1-2\theta}) \leq \frac{r_{k+1}^{2\theta-1}-r_{0}^{2\theta-1}}{1-2\theta}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Hence we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
b_2 \leq \frac{r_{k+1}^{2\theta-1}-r_{0}^{2\theta-1}}{1-2\theta},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $b_2 = \min(\frac{1}{b_1e^2R},\frac{r_{0}^{2\theta-1} (R^{\frac{2\theta-1}{2\theta-2}}-1)}{1-2\theta})$. Thus, we have the following bound for all $k+1\in S_T$
\begin{equation}
r_{k+1}\leq \left(\frac{1}{b_2{({1-2\theta})}+r_{{0}}^{2\theta-1}}\right)^{\frac{1}{1-2\theta}}.
\end{equation}
\end{proof}
\noindent\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{bd-deter-corro}}
\begin{proof}
We have shown in Theorem \ref{unbdd-P2-theo1} that $\tilde{G}(x^k)\to F^*$, and it is also clear that $\text{dist}_{\Omega}(x^k)\to 0$. Furthermore, similar to the proof of Theorem \ref{unbdd-P2-theo1}, we can show the elements of $\Omega$ are the critical points of $\tilde{G}$. Thus, for any $\epsilon,\gamma > 0$ there is $k_0$ such that for all
$k \geq k_0$, we have
\begin{equation}
x^k\in\{x|\,\,\text{dist}_{\Omega}(x)\leq \epsilon, F^* < \tilde{G}(x) < F^*+\gamma\}.
\end{equation}
Since $\Omega$ is compact and $\tilde{G}$ is constant on it, the Uniformized KL property implies that for all $k \geq k_0$
\begin{equation}\label{bdd-deter-P2-Theo2-eq3}
\phi'(\tilde{G}(x^{k+1})-F^*)\text{dist}_{\partial \tilde{G}(x^{k+1})}(0)\geq 1.
\end{equation}
Recall that ${r_k := \tilde{G}(y^k) - F^*}$. Then, we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
1&\myeq{a)}{\leq} \left(\phi'(\tilde{G}(x^{k+1})-F^*)\text{dist}_{\partial \tilde{G}(x^{k+1})}(0)\right)^2\\
&\myeq{b)}{\leq} \left(\phi'(r_{k+1})\text{dist}_{\partial \tilde{G}(x^{k+1})}(0)\right)^2\\
&\myeq{c)}{\leq} (\phi'(r_{k+1}))^2\bigg(3(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2\sum_{j=1}^m\norm{x^{{l(k+1,j)+1}}_j-y^{{l(k+1,j)}}_j}^2\\&~~~+3L^2T_1\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{h=l(k+1,j)-T_1+1}^{l(k+1,j)}\norm{y^h_j-y^{h-1}_j}^2\\
&~~~+3L^2T\sum_{j=1}^m\sum_{h=l(k+1,j)-T+1}^{l(k+1,j)}\norm{y^h_j-y^{h-1}_j}^2+{6L^2\mu_{T}} \delta_{0}\norm{y^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2\bigg)\\
&{\leq} (\phi'(r_{k+1}))^2\bigg( 3(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2\sum_{h=k+1-K}^{{k+1}}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2+3L^2T_1\sum_{h=k+1-T_1-K}^{{k+1}}\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2\\
&~~~+3L^2T\sum_{h=k+1-T-K}^{{k+1}}\norm{y^h-y^{h-1}}^2+{6L^2\mu_{T}} \delta_{0}\norm{y^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2\bigg)\\
&{\leq} (\phi'(r_{k+1}))^2\bigg( 3(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2\sum_{h=k+1-K}^{{k+1}}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2+{3L^2T_1}(1+\beta)^2\sum_{\substack{ h\in {\Gamma^c}_{k+1-{K}}^{k+1}}}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2\\
&+{3L^2T}(1+\beta'')^2\sum_{\substack{ h\in {\Gamma^0}_{k+1-T-{K}}^{k+1}\cup{\Gamma}_{k+1-T-{K}}^{k+1}}}\norm{x^h-y^{h-1}}^2+{6L^2\mu_{T}} \delta_{0}(1+\beta)^2\norm{x^{k+1}-y^{k}}^2\bigg)\\
&\myeq{d)}{\leq} (\phi'(r_{k+1}))^2\left(\frac{3(\frac{1}{\eta}+L)^2+3(1+\beta)^2L^2T_1+3(1+\beta'')^2L^2T+6(1+\beta)^2{L^2\mu_{T}} \delta_{0}}{(\frac{1}{c}-1)\frac{L}{2}}\right)\\
&~~~~\times(\tilde{G}(y^{k+1-T-K})-\tilde{G}(y^{k+1}))\\
&\myeq{e)}{\leq} (\phi'(r_{k+1}))^2b_1(\tilde{G}(y^{k+1-T-K})-\tilde{G}(y^{k+1}))
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $a)$ follows from \eqref{bdd-deter-P2-Theo2-eq3}, $b)$ is due to $r_{k+1}\leq \tilde{G}(x^{k+1})-F^*$ and the fact that $\phi'$ is nonincreasing, $c)$ from \eqref{unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq8} and \eqref{unbdd-P2-Theo1-eq61}, $d)$ is a direct
computation using \eqref{unbdd-P2-Theo2-eq1} and $\beta'' = \max\{\beta',0\}$, and $e)$ is also a result of the definition of $b_1$.
We have that $\phi'(t)={e}t^{\theta-1}$.
Thus, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{bdd-deter-p2-rate-relation-LK}
1\leq b_1e^2 r_{k+1}^{2\theta-2}(r_{{k+1-T-K}}-r_{k+1}).
\end{equation}
\noindent {\bf Part} $1:$ Suppose that $\theta = 1$, then for all $k$, by \eqref{bdd-deter-p2-rate-relation-LK} we have $r_{k+1-T-K}-r_{k+1}\geq \frac{1}{b_1e^2}>0$, which cannot hold because $r_{k}\to 0$. Thus, $\{G(y^k)\}$ must converge in finitely many steps, which is the stationary point of $\tilde{G}$.
In the following we assume that $r_k\neq 0$ for all $k\in S_T$ because otherwise the algorithm terminates.
\noindent {\bf Part} $2:$ Suppose that $\theta\in[\frac{1}{2},1)$. We select $k_1$ large enough such that $r_{k+1}^{2-2\theta} \geq r_{k+1}$, for all $k\geq k_1$. Then for all $k \geq k_1$, and $k+1\in S_T$ we have
\begin{equation}
r_{k+1}\leq \frac{b_1e^2}{1+b_1e^2} r_{k+1-T-K}\leq \left(\frac{b_1e^2}{1+b_1e^2}\right)^{\lfloor\frac{k+1-k_1}{T+K}\rfloor}r_{k_1}.
\end{equation}
\noindent {\bf Part} $3:$ Suppose that $\theta\in (0,\frac{1}{2})$. Let $h(s):=s^{2\theta-2}$. Then from \eqref{bdd-deter-p2-rate-relation-LK} we find that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{b_1e^2}&\leq h(r_{k+1})(r_{k+1-T-K}-r_{k+1}) = \frac{h(r_{k+1})}{h(r_{k+1-T-K})} h(r_{k+1-T-K})(r_{k+1-T-K}-r_{k+1})\\
&\leq \frac{h(r_{k+1})}{h(r_{k+1-T-K})}\int_{r_{k+1}}^{r_{k+1-T-K}} h(s) ds = \frac{h(r_{k+1})}{h(r_{k+1-T-K})}\frac{r_{k+1}^{2\theta-1}-r_{k+1-T-K}^{2\theta-1}}{1-2\theta}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Let $R\in(1, \infty)$ be a fixed number. We consider two cases:
\noindent {\bf Case 1:} Let $\frac{h(r_{k+1})}{h(r_{k+1-T-K})}\leq R$.
Then we have
\begin{equation}\label{bdd-unbdd-KL-case3case1}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{b_1e^2R}&\leq \frac{r_{k+1}^{2\theta-1}-r_{{k+1-T-K}}^{2\theta-1}}{1-2\theta}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\noindent {\bf Case 2:} Let $\frac{h(r_{k+1})}{h(r_{k+1-T-K})}\geq R$.
Then, since $h(r_{k+1})\geq h(r_{k+1-T-K}) R$, we have $r_{k+1}^{2\theta-1}\geq r_{k+1-T-K}^{2\theta-1} R^{\frac{2\theta-1}{2\theta-2}}$. Therefore, we obtain
\[
r_{k+1}^{2\theta-1}\geq r_{k+1-T-K}^{2\theta-1} R^{\frac{2\theta-1}{2\theta-2}}.
\]
Thus, we can deduce that
\begin{equation}\label{bdd-unbdd-KL-case3case2}
\begin{split}
\frac{r_{k+1-T-K}^{2\theta-1} (R^{\frac{2\theta-1}{2\theta-2}}-1)}{1-2\theta}\leq \frac{r_{k+1}^{2\theta-1}-r_{k+1-T-K}^{2\theta-1}}{1-2\theta}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Combining equations \eqref{bdd-unbdd-KL-case3case1} and \eqref{bdd-unbdd-KL-case3case2} yields
\begin{equation}\label{bdd-undbb-deter-part3-eq1}
\begin{split}
\min(\frac{1}{b_1e^2R},\frac{r_{k+1-T-K}^{2\theta-1} (R^{\frac{2\theta-1}{2\theta-2}}-1)}{1-2\theta}) \leq \frac{r_{k+1}^{2\theta-1}-r_{k+1-T-K}^{2\theta-1}}{1-2\theta}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
From equation \eqref{bdd-undbb-deter-part3-eq1} we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
tb_2 \leq \frac{r_{k+1+t{(T+K)}}^{2\theta-1}-r_{k+1}^{2\theta-1}}{1-2\theta},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $b_2 = \min(\frac{1}{b_1e^2R},\frac{r_{0}^{2\theta-1} (R^{\frac{2\theta-1}{2\theta-2}}-1)}{1-2\theta})$. Thus, we have the following bound for all $k \geq k_0$
\begin{equation}
r_{k+1}\leq \left(\frac{1}{{\lfloor\frac{k+1-k_0}{T+K}\rfloor}b_2{({1-2\theta})}+r_{{0}}^{2\theta-1}}\right)^{\frac{1}{1-2\theta}}.
\end{equation}
\end{proof}
\noindent\subsection{Additional Numerical Results}
We focus here on Sigmoid loss with $l_2$ regularization term:
\[
f(x) = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^n \frac{1}{1+e^{b_ix^Ta_i}}
\]
and
\[
g(x) = \lambda \sum_{j=1}^m\norm{x_j}.
\]
Experiments are performed on $\it{Covetype}$ dataset. We conduct experiments for comparing AAPCD with other algorithms: ASCD, AASCD, and DSPG. For all the experiments we set the number of workers P=32. The block size for all experiments is $10$. The convergence results are presented in Figure \ref{fig:algo_comp_supp}. The results from AAPCD outperforms other algorithms. Moreover AAPCD obtains a much smaller objective value. Note that DSPG and ASCD have similar performance. AASCD is faster than ASCD, but the analyses for AASCD is only developed for convex functions. Overall, the results show that our algorithm is very efficient for nonconvex functions such as Sigmoid loss.
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\subfloat[a]{
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.40\linewidth]{figure_sigmoid_update_32_time.eps}}%
\hfill
\subfloat[b]{
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.40\linewidth]{figure_sigmoid_update_32_iteration.eps}}%
\setlength{\abovecaptionskip}{2pt}
\caption{Training loss residual versus time (Figure(a)) and iteration (Figure(b)) plot of AAPCD, ASCD, AASCD, and DSGD. }
\label{fig:algo_comp_supp}
\end{figure*} |
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro}
Direct imaging of Earthlike exoplanets requires detecting light from a planet
whose intensity is $10^{-10}$ times dimmer than the light of its host star. Doing so necessitates the control of diffraction in the telescope to remove the residual light from the stellar PSF at the planet location. Over the last several decades, several families of approaches to control diffraction at this level, collectively referred to as coronagraphy, have been proposed and implemented in the lab and on ground telescopes. However, achieving the extremely high contrast needed to image and characterize rocky planets like Earth requires extreme control of the wavefront in the coronagraph. This is accomplished by going to space, where atmospheric interference is eliminated and thermal and dynamic instabilities are minimized, and by implementing active control of the wavefront via deformable mirrors to correct for the slowly changing distortions within the telescope. In fact, the first fully capable in-space high-contrast coronagraph with wavefront control is planned for NASA's next large observatory, the
Wide-Field Infra-Red Survey Telescope (WFIRST) Coronagraph Instrument
(CGI) (\cite{demers2015requirements,tang2015wfirst}). This instrument will demonstrate the critical technologies and algorithms needed for future missions.
Wavefront errors in a coronagraph are typically divided into Low-Order and High-Order modes.
The control of low spatial frequency and high temporal frequency wavefront errors
(LOWFE) has been successfully demonstrated in the laboratory via Low Order
Wavefront Sensing and Control (LOWFS/C) (\cite{shi2015low,shi2017dynamic}) that
employs Fast Steering Mirrors (FSM) (\cite{patterson2015control}). However,
these methods address just the first few spatial modes of the wavefront
phase at the pupil plane (in terms of Zernike polynomials). High-order wavefront error (HOWFE) caused, for example, by inaccuracies in coronagraph masks and high-frequency surface errors,
are addressed via Focal Plane Wavefront Correction (FPWC) methods
such as Electric Field Conjugation (EFC) (\cite{give2007electric,give2007broadband})
and Stroke Minimization (\cite{pueyo2009optimal}). These methods employ
the deformable mirrors (DMs) both to correct the wavefront and to increase phase diversity in order to estimate the residual star light
electric field (speckles) from intensity measurements in the high-contrast
region (dark hole) of the science camera plane (\cite{paxman1992joint}) This avoids the introduction of uncorrectible non-common path errors introduced by a separate sensing optical path, as in ground adaptive optics.
FPWC is designed to create the dark hole by converging to the appropriate
DM control settings, which are then kept constant throughout the long
integration phase as the telescope is pointed at the target star.
Nevertheless, even with an optimal wavefront control system and perfectly stable telescope, these control techniques typically are only capable of reducing the stellar speckle intensity to the level of the planet; sophisticated image analysis approaches are also required to separate the incoherent planet light from the residual stellar halo.
The current approach for extracting a planet from the background limited image is to subtract an estimated reference Point Spread Function from the composite image after taking a series of long exposures while pointed at the target start. This has been commonly referred to as ``post-processing'' or ``PSF subtraction.''
The resulting intensity estimate is presumed to contain the planet signal, other sources of light incoherent with the star (e.g. zodi, dark current, etc.), and starlight residuals from systematic errors in the PSF. A key goal of post-processing approaches is to remove these systematic errors. Approaches to mitigating them currently in use on the ground or proposed for space include rotating the field of view (Angular Differential Imaging or ADI) (\cite{lowrance1998coronagraphic,marois2006angular}),
projecting the data onto precomputed PSF subspaces (\cite{soummer2012detection}),
or using bright stars to obtain reference PSFs (\cite{mawet2011dim}).
All of the approaches to post-processing assume the residual stellar PSF after wavefront control does not change during the final integration (implying fixed DM settings and no observatory instabilities). In reality, the PSF will change due to thermal and dynamic drift of the telescope as well as DM drift, translating directly into errors in estimates of planet intensity and limits on the achievable Signal-to-Noise Ratio (SNR) (\cite{nemati2017sensitivity}). As a result, the potential of high-order disturbances such as mechanical and thermal stresses over periods of tens of days can impose tight stability requirements on the optical elements of the observatory and instrument (\cite{shaklan2011stability,stahl2013engineering}).
One alternative that relaxes stability requirements is the recently proposed Linear Dark Field Control (LDFC). LDFC keeps actuating
the DM to maintain the high contrast by utilizing measurements of
speckles outside the dark hole (\cite{miller2017spatial,guyon2017spectral}).
LDFC is the first closed loop approach to take into account wavefront error drift, although it relies on both measuring speckles outside of the dark
hole and on a high-fidelity model relating them to the speckles inside the dark hole.
In this paper, we derive a post-processing {\it a posteriori} intensity estimator
which takes into account speckle drift and the history of DM actuations.
This algorithm can then be used in conjunction with any closed loop dark-hole maintenance scheme. One such scheme, which relies solely on intensity
measurements in the dark hole, is also proposed here.
Our key finding is that small DM actuations (dither) during the integration phase are necessary for both post-processing and online PSF estimation for closed loop control. Although it has been previously suggested that small, unknown perturbations of the speckles might reduce their spatial variability and thus increase the planet SNR (\cite{angel1994ground}), it was later shown not to be the case in practice (\cite{sivaramakrishnan2002speckle}). Consequently, one must incorporate additional information from the influence of DM dithering on the speckles, as shown in this paper.
Section \ref{sec:overview} is an overview of the most common current focal-plane wavefront control approaches, Electric Field Conjugation (EFC), and
PSF subtraction for planet detection. In section \ref{sec:a_posterior_estimation}, we introduce
the post-processing (or offline) intensity estimator. In section \ref{sec:closed_loop}, we propose a closed loop control and estimation scheme for maintaining the contrast in the dark hole and show that it benefits from small random DM actuations (dither) to increase phase diversity. Finally, section \ref{sec:numerical_results} presents a numerical study of the proposed algorithms and their combined potential for estimating planet intensity in the presence of instabilities, thus potentially relaxing the severe telescope stability requirements.
\section{\label{sec:overview}Creating the Dark Hole and PSF subtraction}
\subsection{\label{sub:EFC}Dark Hole Creation via EFC}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{diagram.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:diagram}The aberrated electric field after low-order correction, $E_{ab}$,
is slightly modified by the DM before passing through the coronagraph to produce the final field, $E$, whose intensity is
detected at the science camera as a photon count, $y$ (which grows linearly with intensity, $I=\left|E\right|^{2}$).
FPWC estimates the electric field at the camera (denoted by \textasciicircum{}), and computes the optimal
control, $\mathbf{u}_{opt}$, to minimize speckle intensity. Probes or dither
($\delta \mathbf{u}$) are added to the optimal actuations, $\mathbf{u}_{opt}$, in
order to increase phase diversity. The drift of the aberrated electric
field, $\delta E_{ab}$, is unknown and the estimation of its effects
on the focal plane electric field, $E$, is the subject of section \ref{sec:a_posterior_estimation}.}
\end{figure}
Creating a high-contrast dark hole to reduce the background due to the stellar halo minimizes the shot noise due to
speckles and thus increases the post-processing SNR. It has long been known that a coronagraph alone is not sufficient to create the needed high contrast due to wavefront error in the telescope. Thus, wavefront control is introduced to correct the distortions and recover the needed contrast.
This is done iteratively
by estimating the electric field of the speckles at the focal plane,
$E$, and applying some optimal control (in a sense which will
be discussed later), $\mathbf{u}_{opt}$, to reduce the resulting field intensity
$I=\left|E\right|^{2}$; see Fig.~\ref{fig:diagram}.
Using only Fourier optics, it can be shown that the electric field at some plane after the first DM, $E_{p,1}$, is
a linear operator, ${\cal C}_{1}$, acting on the wavefront leaving the deformable mirrors,
\begin{equation}
E_{p,1}={\cal C}_{1}\left\{ E_{ab}e^{i\phi\left(\mathbf{u}_{1}\right)}\right\} ,
\end{equation}
where $E_{ab}$ is the incoming, aberrated wavefront and
$\phi\left(\mathbf{u}_{1}\right)$ is the phase induced by the command $\mathbf{u}_{1}$ of a first DM. Similarly, the field at some plane after the second DM is given by a second operator, ${\cal C}_{2}$,
\begin{equation}
E_{p,2}={\cal C}_{2}\left\{ E_{p,1}e^{i\phi\left(\mathbf{u}_{2}\right)}\right\} ,
\end{equation}
etc.\ until the focal plane of the detector which we define with a composite operator, ${\cal C}$,
\begin{equation}
E={\cal C}\left\{ E_{ab}, \mathbf{u}_{1},\mathbf{u}_{2}, ...\right\}={\cal C}\left\{ E_{ab}, \mathbf{u}\right\}.
\end{equation}
It has been shown (\cite{give2007broadband}) that multiple deformable mirrors are required to correct for both phase and amplitude disturbances in the aberrated field, $E_{ab}$.
Figure \ref{fig:diagram} illustrates a general closed loop control approach with some ``optimal'' control setting, $\mathbf{u}_{opt}$, computed
at iteration $k$. Throughout the paper, $E_{i,j}(k)$ denotes the electric field $E$ at pixel $i,j$ and time $k$ and the vector $\mathbf{E}(k)$ denotes the real and imaginary parts of all $E_{i,j}(k)$.
The effect of small deviations from $\mathbf{u}_{opt}(k)$
on the focal plane electric field, $\mathbf{E}(k)$, can be approximated to first order
by,
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbf{E}(k) & = \mathbf{E} \left( E_{ab}(k), \mathbf{u}_{opt}(k) + \delta \mathbf{u}(k) \right) \approx
\\
& \approx \mathbf{E} \left( E_{ab}(k), \mathbf{u}_{opt}(k) \right) + {\cal G}\delta \mathbf{u}(k),\label{eq:linearity_assumption}
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\cal G}$ is the Jacobian matrix of the coronagraph operator, which is either precomputed or estimated in real time (\cite{sun2018identification}),
and $\delta \mathbf{u}(k)$ are small actuations. The small perturbations to the DM setting are either predetermined probes used to estimate the field for creating the dark hole (\cite{give2011pair}) or randomly generated to produce dither, as described below.
In both cases, these small actuations introduce the phase diversity necessary for estimating the electric field at the science camera (\cite{groff2015methods}).
Given the $k$th estimate of the field $\hat{\mathbf{E}}(k)$ (with
$\delta \mathbf{u}=0$), the control at the next step can be computed by various
methods such as Speckle Nulling (\cite{borde2006high}), Electric Field
Conjugation (EFC) (\cite{give2007electric}) and/or Stroke Minimization (\cite{pueyo2009optimal}).
Specifically, for EFC, the optimal control minimizes a weighted sum
of the field intensity and control energy at step $k$. The resulting command is given
by,
\begin{equation}
\mathbf{u}_{opt}(k+1)=\mathbf{u}_{opt}(k)-\left({\cal G}^{t}{\cal G}+\alpha{\cal I}\right)^{-1}{\cal G}^{t}\hat{\mathbf{E}}(k),\label{eq:EFC}
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ is some constant, ${\cal I}$ is the identity matrix and $\cdot^{t}$ stands for the matrix transpose.
Note that EFC treats the open loop electric field as constant ($E_{ab}(k)=E_{ab}(0)$),
which results in systematic errors in the estimate of the planet intensity
when speckle drift is present. This issue is addressed
next.
\subsection{PSF Subtraction}
The current approach to processing for planet detection is to take long exposure images (or many stacked exposures) once a dark hole has been established, creating the final science image.
PSF subtraction based methods are then employed to remove the residual speckles remaining after control and to estimate the planet intensity (e.g., roll subtraction (\cite{lowrance1998coronagraphic}),
ADI (\cite{marois2006angular}), or KLIP (\cite{soummer2012detection})). All of these techniques assume
that the speckle field does not change in time ($E(k)=E(0),\:\forall k$) during the final integration step.
These approaches produce an estimate of the intensity of all light incoherent with the
speckles via
\begin{equation}
\hat{I}_{ij}=\frac{1}{T}\underset{k=1}{\overset{T}{\sum}}\left(\beta^{-1}y_{ij}(k)-\left|\hat{E}_{ij}(0)\right|^{2}\right),\label{eq:PSF_sub}
\end{equation}
where, $i,j$ are indices of a single detector pixel, $T$ is the
total number of exposure frames, $\beta$ is the mean number of photons
per unit intensity expected to arrive at a single pixel in the duration
of a single frame and $y$ is the number of photons that were actually
detected. Initial errors in $\left|\hat{E}_{ij}(0)\right|^{2}$, mechanical
stresses during pointing and roll maneuvers, and thermal instabilities
of the optical system all contribute to the systematic error directly affecting the estimate $\hat{I}_{ij}$.
Additional sources contributing to the number of ``detected'' photons (e.g.
zodiacal light and dark current), have low spatial frequencies and are
constant in time. We assume that they produce electrons which are
Poisson distributed and therefore indistinguishable from the planet
induced electrons.
Consequently, we lump all of these sources together into one term,
\begin{equation}
I_{ij}=I_{ij}^{P}+I_{ij}^{Z}+I_{ij}^{D},
\end{equation}
where $I_{ij}^{P}$ and $I_{ij}^{Z}$ are the intensities of the light from
the planet and zodi respectively and $I_{ij}^{D}$ is the effective intensity
of the dark current (i.e., an intensity of light that, given the efficiency
of the detector, would produce electrons distributed identically to
the thermal electrons).
To simplify matters further, we will ignore $I_{ij}^{Z}$
and scale all physical quantities
such that $\beta=1$. Since the number of detected photons per pixel, $y_{ij}$,
is Poisson distributed,
\begin{equation}
y_{ij}\sim\mathrm{Poiss}\left(I_{ij}+\left|E_{ij}\right|^{2}\right),\label{eq:photons_count}
\end{equation}
the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) after PSF subtraction is given by (\cite{nemati2017sensitivity})
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{SNR}_{ij}\left(T\right)=\frac{I_{ij}^{P}T}{\sqrt{\left(I_{ij}+\left|E_{ij}\right|^{2}\right)T+\left(\Delta\left|E_{ij}\right|^{2}\right)^{2}T^{2}}},\label{eq:SNR}
\end{equation}
where $\Delta\left|E_{ij}\right|^{2}$ is the systematic error in speckle
intensity. Note that this error limits the maximum attainable SNR
to $\frac{I_{ij}^{P}}{\Delta\left|E_{ij}\right|^{2}}$, indicating its strong dependence on reference PSF errors and instabilities. More advanced methods which use multiple reference PSFs, reduce this limit (assuming the systematic errors associated with them are uncorrelated), but do not eliminate it completely.
In the remainder of this paper we relax the assumption that the residual speckle field is constant and allow for non-fixed DM actuation throughout the integration
phase to alleviate this issue of limited achievable SNR. To this end, we introduce an estimator for both the intensity of the incoherent light,
$\hat{I}_{ij}$, and the history of the speckle field, $\left\{\hat{E}_{ij}(k) \right\}_{k=0}^{T}$.
\section{\label{sec:a_posterior_estimation}A Posteriori Intensity Estimation}
In this section we describe a post-processing method for estimating the incoherent intensity, $I_{ij}$, given the history of measurements $y_{ij}$ and controls $\mathbf{u}$. It is independent of the algorithm used for choosing the controls in real-time, if any (one such algorithm is provided in Sec.~\ref{sec:closed_loop}).
The underlying assumption throughout this section is that we begin with a dark hole created by some optimal control process such as EFC (see Sec.~\ref{sub:EFC}), and that all changes in the speckle field and DM actuations are small deviations from their nominal values established at the end of that dark-hole generation process.
\subsection{\label{sub:drift_process}Speckle Drift Process}
Statistical methods exploiting phase diversity to estimate the electric field of the speckles, with or without DM
actuation, have been present in the literature for a long time (for a review, see \cite{rousset1999wave}).
None of them, however, take into account the evolution of the speckle
field, which is a stochastic process with some initial distribution (of $E_{ij}(0)$).
Given $N$ pixels and $T$ frames, the joint distribution of $E_{ij}(k)$
consists of at least $N\cdot T$ \emph{dependent} random variables,
which renders the estimation problem computationally intractable.
We therefore introduce a simplifying assumption to be used for simulation
and estimation purposes in the remainder of the paper.
First, we slightly modify equation (\ref{eq:linearity_assumption}) to fit in a more general context than just dark hole creation,
\begin{equation}
E_{ij}\left(\mathbf{u},k\right)\approx E_{ij}^{OL}\left(E_{ab}(k),\mathbf{u}_{0}\right)+G_{ij}\Delta\mathbf{u}(k),\label{eq:EOL_def}
\end{equation}
and isolate the open loop behavior, $E^{OL}_{ij}(k)=E_{ij}^{OL}\left(E_{ab}(k),\mathbf{u}_{0}\right)$, of the speckles after the completion of the dark hole. Here, $\mathbf{u}_0$ is the optimal dark hole control setting chosen to flatten the open loop field $E_{ij}^{OL}(0)$ and $\Delta \mathbf{u}(k)$ is a possible additional control setting on top of $\mathbf{u}_0$ to maintain the dark hole (see Sec.~\ref{sec:closed_loop}).
Second, we introduce the
assumption that the increments of the open loop speckle field $E_{ij}^{OL}(k)-E_{ij}^{OL}(k-1)$
are spatially and temporally independent (with respect to $i,j$ and
$k$), thus forming a Brownian random walk. The residual speckle field at each pixel can then be considered
individually and the probability density of its sample path written
as the product,
\begin{equation}
p\left(E_{ij}^{OL}(0),\cdots,E_{ij}^{OL}(T)\right)=p\left(E_{ij}^{OL}(0)\right)\underset{k=1}{\overset{T}{\prod}}p\left(E_{ij}^{OL}(k)-E_{ij}^{OL}(k-1)\right).
\end{equation}
Although the above model discards spatial and temporal correlations, it is a good starting point for pixel based estimation of the incoherent light. We are currently developing a reduced-order approach that takes spatial coupling into account; it will be presented in a future paper.
This drift model is simplified further by assuming
\begin{eqnarray}
E_{ij}^{OL}\left(k\right)-E_{ij}^{OL}\left(k-1\right) & \sim{\cal N}\left(\mu_{ij},\Sigma_{ij}\right),\label{eq:field_increment}\\
E_{ij}^{OL}\left(0\right) & \sim{\cal N}\left(\mu_{ij,0},\Sigma_{ij,0}\right)\label{eq:field_init}
\end{eqnarray}
where, with a slight abuse of notation, the $E_{ij}$ are treated as
2D vectors consisting of the real and imaginary parts of the electric
field at pixel $i,j$ and ${\cal N}\left(\mu_{ij},\Sigma_{ij}\right)$ stands for the Normal distribution
with mean $\mu_{ij}$ and covariance matrix $\Sigma_{ij}$. In a simulation
setting (see section \ref{sec:numerical_results}), the parameters $\mu_{ij}$ and $\Sigma_{ij}$ can be estimated via a Monte-Carlo method.
\subsection{\label{sub:estimator}Speckle Drift Process Estimator}
Equipped with a prior distribution for the field at pixel $i,j$, it becomes possible to define
corresponding estimators of the incoherent intensity, $\hat{I}_{ij}$, and the posterior field, $\hat{E}_{ij}^{OL}(k)$,
based on the observations $y_{ij}(k)$. Although any
such estimators would be sub-optimal as they discard spatial correlation
between pixels, they allow for a computationally tractable solution. Before defining a simultaneous estimate for both the intensity and the field history, we consider each of their estimates given the other.
When the field sample path, $\left\{ E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}=\left\{E_{ij}^{OL}(0),\cdots,E_{ij}^{OL}(T)\right\}$,
is given, Eq.~(\ref{eq:PSF_sub}) can be extended to a sample mean estimator,
\begin{equation}
\hat{I}_{ij}=\frac{1}{T}\underset{k=1}{\overset{T}{\sum}}\left(y_{ij}(k)-\left|E_{ij}^{OL}(k)+G_{ij}\Delta\mathbf{u}(k)\right|^{2}\right),\label{eq:intermediate_estimator}
\end{equation}
where $\Delta\mathbf{u}(k)=\mathbf{u}(k)-\mathbf{u}_{0}$ are known DM controls (which could have possibly been chosen by the algorithm in Sec.~\ref{sec:closed_loop} or set to zero in the case of no control during the science observation).
Alternatively, given the incoherent intensity, $I_{ij}$, and the number
of photons observed, $\left\{{y}_{ij}(k)\right\}=\left\{y_{ij}\left(1\right),\cdots,y_{ij}\left(T\right)\right\}$,
a maximum {\it a posteriori} estimator for $\left\{ \hat{E}_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}=\left\{\hat{E}_{ij}^{OL}(0),\cdots,\hat{E}_{ij}^{OL}(T)\right\}$
is one which maximizes the conditional probability of $\left\{{y}_{ij}(k)\right\}$. In other words,
\begin{equation}
\left\{ \hat{E}_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}=\underset{\left\{E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}}{\mathrm{argmax}}\:p\left(\left.\left\{{y}_{ij}(k)\right\}\right|I_{ij},\left\{E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}\right)p\left(\left\{E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}\right),
\end{equation}
where $p\left(\left\{E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}\right)$ is the prior distribution of the electric field (obtained from Eqs. (\ref{eq:field_increment}), (\ref{eq:field_init})), and the conditional probability of $\left\{{y}_{ij}(k)\right\}$ given $I_{ij}$ and $\left\{E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}$ is
\begin{equation}
p\left(\left.\left\{{y}_{ij}(k)\right\}\right|I_{ij},\left\{E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}\right)=\underset{k=1}{\overset{T}{\prod}}\frac{\left(I_{ij}+\left|E_{ij}^{OL}(k)+G_{ij}\Delta\mathbf{u}(k)\right|^{2}\right)^{y_{ij}(k)}}{y_{ij}(k)!}e^{-\left(I_{ij}+\left|E_{ij}^{OL}(k)+G_{ij}\Delta\mathbf{u}(k)\right|^{2}\right)},\label{eq:observation_probability}
\end{equation}
since $\left\{{y}_{ij}(k)\right\}$ are independently Poisson distributed. Note that while the intensities of the speckles at different pixels and times are correlated, the {\it conditional} distributions of photons at a {\it single} pixel are uncorrelated in time.
We therefore introduce the following mixed estimator
\begin{eqnarray}
\tilde{I}_{ij}\left(\left\{E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}\right) \equiv & \frac{1}{T}\underset{k=1}{\overset{T}{\sum}}\left(y_{ij}(k)-\left|E_{ij}^{OL}(k)+G_{ij}\Delta\mathbf{u}(k)\right|^{2}\right)\label{eq:estimator1}\\
\left\{\hat{E}_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\} = & \underset{\left\{E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}}{\mathrm{argmax}}\:p\left(\left.\left\{{y}_{ij}(k)\right\}\right|\tilde{I}_{ij}\left(\left\{E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}\right),\left\{E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}\right)p\left(\left\{E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}\right)\label{eq:estimator2}\\
\hat{I}_{ij} = & \tilde{I}_{ij}\left(\left\{\hat{E}_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}\right)\label{eq:estimator3}
\end{eqnarray}
with $\tilde{I}_{ij}$ taking the role of an ``intermediate-step
sample mean estimator'' suggested by Eq.~(\ref{eq:intermediate_estimator}).
The estimator defined by Eqs. (\ref{eq:estimator1})-(\ref{eq:estimator3}) is not
unbiased or efficient due to the mixed treatment of the intensity
and the electric field. However, it only requires optimization over the
electric fields $E_{ij}^{OL}(0),\cdots,E_{ij}^{OL}(T)$, which have
the same order of magnitude and for which we can obtain a good initial
guess (see section \ref{sec:closed_loop}).
\subsection{\label{sub:estimation_algorithm}Offline Estimation Algorithm}
One should be cautious when applying Eq.~(\ref{eq:estimator1}), as the
intensity cannot possibly be lower than the intensity of the dark
current, $I_{ij}\ge I_{D}>0$, and negative values of $\tilde{I}_{ij}$
may give negative probabilities in (\ref{eq:estimator2}). For numerical
purposes we define
\begin{equation}
\tilde{I}_{ij}^{\#}=\begin{cases}
\tilde{I}_{ij} & \tilde{I}_{ij}>I_{D}\\
I_{D} & otherwise
\end{cases},\label{eq:constrained_I}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\frac{d}{d\tilde{I}_{ij}}\tilde{I}_{ij}^{\#}=\begin{cases}
1 & \tilde{I}_{ij}>I_{D}\\
0 & otherwise
\end{cases}.
\end{equation}
Putting Eqs. (\ref{eq:field_increment}),(\ref{eq:field_init}),(\ref{eq:observation_probability})
and (\ref{eq:estimator1})-(\ref{eq:estimator3}) together, the cost to be minimized at each pixel is explicitly written as
\begin{eqnarray}
J_{ij}\left(\mathbf{E}_{ij}^{OL}\right) \equiv & -\log\left(p\left(\left.\mathbf{y}_{ij}\right|\tilde{I}_{ij}^{\#}\left(\mathbf{E}_{ij}^{OL}\right),\mathbf{E}_{ij}^{OL}\right)p\left(\mathbf{E}_{ij}^{OL}\right)\right)=\nonumber \\
= & -\underset{k=1}{\overset{T}{\sum}}y_{ij}(k)\log\left(\tilde{I}_{ij}^{\#}\left(\mathbf{E}_{ij}^{OL}\right)+\left|E_{ij}^{OL}(k)+G_{ij}\Delta\mathbf{u}(k)\right|^{2}\right)+\nonumber \\
+ & \underset{k=1}{\overset{T}{\sum}}\left(\tilde{I}_{ij}^{\#}\left(\mathbf{E}_{ij}^{OL}\right)+\left|E_{ij}^{OL}(k)+G_{ij}\Delta\mathbf{u}(k)\right|^{2}\right)+\nonumber \\
+ & \underset{k=1}{\overset{T}{\sum}}\frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{bmatrix}\mathrm{Re}\left\{ E_{ij}^{OL}(k)-E_{ij}^{OL}(k-1)\right\} \\
\mathrm{Im}\left\{ E_{ij}^{OL}(k)-E_{ij}^{OL}(k-1)\right\}
\end{bmatrix}-\mu_{ij}\right)^{t}\Sigma_{ij}^{-1}\cdot \nonumber \\
& \cdot \left(\begin{bmatrix}\mathrm{Re}\left\{ E_{ij}^{OL}(k)-E_{ij}^{OL}(k-1)\right\} \\
\mathrm{Im}\left\{ E_{ij}^{OL}(k)-E_{ij}^{OL}(k-1)\right\}
\end{bmatrix}-\mu_{ij}\right)+\nonumber \\
+ & \frac{1}{2}\left(\begin{bmatrix}\mathrm{Re}\left\{ E_{ij}^{OL}(0)\right\} \\
\mathrm{Im}\left\{ E_{ij}^{OL}(0)\right\}
\end{bmatrix}-\mu_{ij,0}\right)^{t}\Sigma_{ij,0}^{-1}\cdot \nonumber \\
& \cdot\left(\begin{bmatrix}\mathrm{Re}\left\{ E_{ij}^{OL}(0)\right\} \\
\mathrm{Im}\left\{ E_{ij}^{OL}(0)\right\}
\end{bmatrix}-\mu_{ij,0}\right)+\underset{k=1}{\overset{T}{\sum}}\log
\end{eqnarray}
This cost, $J_{ij}$, can be minimized with respect to $\left\{E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}_{k=0}^{T}$
using standard gradient descent methods; the final estimate of
the incoherent intensity is then found from
\begin{equation}
\hat{I}_{ij}=\tilde{I}_{ij}^{\#}\left(\underset{\left\{E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}}{\mathrm{argmin}}\:J_{ij}\left(\left\{E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}\right)\right).
\end{equation}
Note that the above offline estimate incorporates the closed loop
control $\Delta\mathbf{u}$ which has to be either predetermined or
chosen in real time. The numerical study in section \ref{sub:open_loop_simulation}
illustrates the benefits of non-zero predetermined $\Delta\mathbf{u}$,
while the next section discusses the choice of $\Delta\mathbf{u}$
based on an online estimator of the speckles.
\subsection{\label{sub:implementation}Implementation}
To summarize, the goal of the post-processing scheme is to estimate the constant incoherent signal, $I_{ij}$ (at pixel $i,j$), given the history of photon counts, $y_{ij}(0),\cdots,y_{ij}(T)$, and DM controls, $\Delta\mathbf{u}(0),\cdots,\Delta\mathbf{u}(T)$. This is done for each pixel separately, regardless of the scenario in which these measurements were obtained and the technique used to choose the controls.
The signal, $I_{ij}$, is estimated indirectly by first optimizing the cost function $J_{ij}$ with respect to the unknown history of the electric field at pixel $i,j$, denoted by $\hat{E}_{ij}^{OL}(0),\cdots,\hat{E}_{ij}^{OL}(T)$. The authors found the Dataflow Graphs approach utilized by TensorFlow (\cite{abadi2016tensorflow}), to be the most convenient for implementation purposes, since it reduces the problem to merely \emph{defining} the cost function in terms of the optimization parameters (or variables) and inputs. The optimization procedure itself can then be chosen among several standard gradient-decent algorithms and invoked in a straightforward manner (for the results in Sec.~\ref{sec:numerical_results}, the authors employed the TensorFlow implementation of the Adam Optimizer \cite{kingma2014adam}).
We therefore proceed by defining (in a hierarchical fashion) the cost function, $J_{ij}$, in terms of the inputs $\left\{y_{ij}(k)\right\}_{k=0}^{T}$, $\left\{\Delta\mathbf{u}(k)\right\}_{k=0}^{T}$ and the variables $\left\{\hat{E}_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}_{k=0}^{T}$: first, the intensity estimate is given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:estimator1}), then its constrained value is defined in Eq.~(\ref{eq:constrained_I}); finally, the cost function itself is given by Eq.~(\ref{eq:full_cost_func}).
Since $J_{ij}$ is a non-linear function, the initial guess of $\left\{\hat{E}_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}_{k=0}^{T}$ plays an important role in the accuracy of the final estimate. In the numerical simulations presented in Sec.~\ref{sec:numerical_results}, we obtained our initial guesses from the electric field estimator described in Sec.~\ref{sub:high_intensity_estimation} and Appendix \ref{sec:ekf_equations}, and used for control purposes during the observation scenario itself.
\section{\label{sec:closed_loop}Closed Loop Dark Hole Maintenance}
In this section we present a real-time feedback controller for maintaining a high contrast in the dark hole. It consists of a recursive estimator of the speckle field and a slightly modified EFC control law.
The estimation technique presented in the previous section could, in principle, be used instead of a recursive estimator, although it requires optimizing over the entire speckle history at every pixel, a computationally expensive task. As we will show, the
joint estimation and control problem is non-linear, and hence the
choice of optimal closed loop control, $\Delta\mathbf{u}$, is non-trivial.
\subsection{\label{sub:high_intensity_estimation}High-Intensity Regime Recursive
Estimation}
Assuming that the increments of the speckle field are spatially and
temporally independent and normally distributed (Eq.~(\ref{eq:field_increment})),
the corresponding state equation is
\begin{eqnarray}
\begin{bmatrix}\mathrm{Re}\left\{ E_{ij}^{OL}(k+1)\right\} \\
\mathrm{Im}\left\{ E_{ij}^{OL}(k+1)\right\}
\end{bmatrix} & =\begin{bmatrix}\mathrm{Re}\left\{ E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\} \\
\mathrm{Im}\left\{ E_{ij}^{OL}(k)\right\}
\end{bmatrix}+v_{E}(k)\label{eq:EKF_state1}\\
I_{ij}(k+1) & =I_{ij}(k)+v_{I}(k),\label{eq:EKF_state2}
\end{eqnarray}
where $v_{E}(k)\sim{\cal N}\left(\mu_{ij},\Sigma_{ij}\right)$ and
$v_{I}(k)\sim{\cal N}\left(0,\sigma_{I}^{2}\right)$ ($\sigma_{I}$
is non-zero for numerical purposes). Note that the control input $\mathbf{u}$
is excluded from the state equation contrary to its common formulation (\cite{groff2013kalman}).
To put the observation equation in a convenient form, we note that
the Poisson distribution of the number of photons, $y_{ij}(k)$, converges
to a Normal distribution, i.e.
\begin{equation}
y_{ij}(k)\sim{\cal N}\left(I_{ij}+\left|E_{ij}^{OL}(k)+G_{ij}\Delta\mathbf{u}(k)\right|^{2},I_{ij}+\left|E_{ij}^{OL}(k)+G_{ij}\Delta\mathbf{u}(k)\right|^{2}\right)
\end{equation}
for large values of the intensity. This gives an approximation of
the measurement equation,
\begin{equation}
y_{ij}(k)\approx I_{ij}+\left|E_{ij}^{OL}(k)+G_{ij}\Delta\mathbf{u}(k)\right|^{2}+\sqrt{I_{ij}+\left|E_{ij}^{OL}(k)+G_{ij}\Delta\mathbf{u}(k)\right|^{2}}w(k),\label{eq:EKF_observation}
\end{equation}
where $w(k)\sim{\cal N}\left(0,1\right)$.
Equations (\ref{eq:EKF_state1}), (\ref{eq:EKF_state2}) and (\ref{eq:EKF_observation})
allow for a standard formulation of an Extended Kalman Filter (EKF) with non-additive noise (see Appendix \ref{sec:ekf_equations}).
The approximation in Eq.~(\ref{eq:EKF_observation}) breaks down when the average number of photons per pixel per frame is significantly
less than one. In that case one may either increase the exposure time
for each frame or combine several frames together.
\subsection{\label{sub:EFC_dithering}EFC with Dithering}
Unfortunately, a filter combined with a naive choice of a control
law may result in a completely wrong estimate of the speckle field.
It can be shown that the optimal EFC control law based on
a recursive EKF estimate of the field $\hat{E}^{OL}(k)$,
\begin{equation}
\Delta\mathbf{u}_{opt}(k+1)=-\left({\cal G}^{t}{\cal G}+\alpha{\cal I}\right)^{-1}{\cal G}^{t} \hat{\mathbf{E}}^{OL}(k).\label{eq:opt_u}
\end{equation}
may cause the estimate to converge to the wrong value. In these cases EFC alone cannot prevent the rise in the intensity of the speckles. A similar failure of the ``zero probe''
EKF has been reported in the context of dark hole creation (\cite{riggs2014optimal}).
Consequently, we propose adding some small control perturbation (dither)
$\delta\mathbf{u}$ at every time step,
\begin{equation}
\Delta\mathbf{u}(k)=\Delta\mathbf{u}_{opt}(k)+\delta\mathbf{u}(k),\label{eq:EFC_with_dither}
\end{equation}
in order to introduce phase diversity and avoid the divergence of the
EKF. For simplicity, we suggest randomly choosing
\begin{equation}
\delta\mathbf{u}(k)\sim{\cal N}\left(0,\sigma_{u}^{2}{\cal I}\right),
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_{u}$ is small to ensure that the average intensity
in the dark hole is not significantly increased. An empirical approach
to choosing $\sigma_{u}$ is presented in section \ref{sub:open_loop_simulation}.
\subsection{\label{sub:recalibration}The Effects of Errors in $\cal G$ and Dark Hole Recalibration}
While errors in the control interaction matrix, the Jacobian $\cal G$, affect both the real time and the post-processing estimates, the authors found these effects to not be very significant. Specifically, one of the implicit benefits of the above closed loop approach is that it naturally compensates for the increase in speckles intensity caused by errors in the estimate. Moreover, the EFC controller has a regularization component which counteracts zero mean errors in $G_{ij}$ (assuming they are uncorrelated between pixels). We also suspect that the random choice of $\delta\mathbf{u}$ might have a similar regularization effect in post-processing, although we leave a detailed robustness analysis for future work.
The effect of model errors can, however, be noticed after long integration times (see Fig.~\ref{fig:closed_loop_EKF}
in section \ref{sub:closed_loop_simulation}).
As the phase at the entrance pupil drifts, the electric field, $E^{OL}$, its estimate, $\hat{E}^{OL}$,
and the control deviation, $\Delta\mathbf{u}$, all increase; hence,
the linearization in Eq.~(\ref{eq:EOL_def}) becomes less accurate. To
alleviate the accumulation of systematic errors ($G_{ij}$ multiplied
by a large $\Delta\mathbf{u}$), we suggest periodically shifting
$\mathbf{u}_{0}$ and the speckle estimates
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathbf{u}_{0}\left(k_{r}\right) \leftarrow & \mathbf{u}_{0}\left(k_{r}\right)+\Delta\mathbf{u}\left(k_{r}\right)\label{eq:recalib_u}\\
\hat{E}_{ij}^{OL}\left(k_{r}\right) \leftarrow & \hat{E}_{ij}^{OL}\left(k_{r}\right)+G_{ij}\Delta\mathbf{u}\left(k_{r}\right),\label{eq:recalib_E}
\end{eqnarray}
where ``$\leftarrow$'' denotes assignment and $k_{r}$ is some predetermined number of time steps. In other words, we suggest updating the nominal dark hole DM setting, around which the system is linearized, every $k_{r}$ steps.
Such periodic ``recalibration'' eliminates the systematic bias at the expense
of a temporarily higher estimation error, which is then corrected
at future iterations.
One can think of the resulting closed loop scheme as performing one step of a dark hole creation algorithm for every $k_{r}$ steps of the newly suggested dark hole maintenance algorithm. Indeed, the former uses large actuations to quickly create a dark hole while the latter uses finer control inputs to battle small drifts in the speckle field resulting in better final estimates.
\section{\label{sec:numerical_results}Numerical Simulations}
In order to make the discussion of the numerical results more general,
we identify several non-dimensional parameters and calculate their
typical values for a mission similar to WFIRST--CGI observing a relatively
faint target planet.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{masks.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:masks}The shape pupil (a) introduced in \cite{belikov2007demonstration} and used together with the focal plane mask (b) in our simulation of the HCIL testbed.}
\end{figure}
Consider a $2.37$ meter telescope observing 55 Cancri (a magnitude 6 star) in
$10\%$ broadband light centered at $635\:\mathrm{nm}$. We simulated
the Princeton High Contrast Imaging Lab (HCIL) testbed with a shaped pupil coronagraph (described in detail in \cite{belikov2007demonstration} and shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:masks}(a))
with a contrast of $3.2\cdot10^{-9}$ at $8\:\lambda/D$ where the target planet, 55 Cancri d, would be located. The detector mask (Fig.~\ref{fig:masks}(b)) consists of $2088$ pixels spanning two $[-45^\circ,45^\circ]\times[6.5\:\lambda/D,11\:\lambda/D]$ slices. While the shaped pupil used here is unlike that being planned for WFIRST, it is representative of a shaped pupil coronagraph and allows easy comparison to lab results. Future work will explicitly model the WFIRST/CGI optical system.
When taking optical losses into account, the above setup results in an average of
$5\cdot10^{-3}$ photons from the star reaching a detector pixel every second and a peak of $2\cdot10^{-3}$ photons per second from the planet. We assumed all other noise sources (including zodi and dark current) contributed an additional $3\cdot10^{-3}$ photons per second per pixel. Fixing a $100$ second exposure time allows us to define non-dimensional parameters for the scaled
intensities of the star and the planet in terms of the average number
of photons per pixel per frame (see table \ref{tab:parameters}).
\begin{table}[h!]
\begin{tabular}{lcc}
Parameter & Expression & Order of Magnitude \\
\hline
Mean speckles intensity & $\frac{1}{\left|P\right|}\underset{i,j\in P}{\sum}\left|E_{ij}(0)\right|^{2}$ & $1\frac{\#photons}{pixel\cdot frame}$ \\
Typical planet intensity & $\frac{1}{2}\underset{i,j}{\max}I_{ij}^{P}$ & $0.1\frac{\#photons}{pixel\cdot frame}$ \\
Dark current effective intensity & $I^{D}$ & $0.1\frac{\#photons}{pixel\cdot frame}$ \\
Field drift variance & $\left\Vert \Sigma_{ij}\right\Vert $ & $0.01-0.1\frac{\#photons}{pixel\cdot\left(frame\right)^{2}}$
\end{tabular}
\caption{\label{tab:parameters}Non-dimensional parameters that determine the
intensity ratios between the star, the planet, the dark current and
speckle instabilities. The low number of photons suggests that a Gaussian
approximation in section \ref{sub:high_intensity_estimation} might
be applicable to the speckles, but not to the incoherent light.}
\end{table}
Finally, to characterize the speckle drift at the focal plane, we introduced
phase perturbations at the pupil plane and propagated them through
the optical system to approximate the statistics of the electric field prior, $\mu_{ij},\Sigma_{ij},\mu_{ij,0},\Sigma_{ij,0}$
(see Eqs. (\ref{eq:field_increment}),(\ref{eq:field_init})).
Although our estimator doesn't rely on any particular phase disturbance
model, for intuitive purposes we chose to represent them using the first 15 Zernike polynomials whose coefficients satisfy a random walk with amplitude $0.1\:\mathrm{nm}$
r.m.s. (per frame) (a relatively
unstable system according to \cite{shaklan2011stability}). Propagating
this or any other type of disturbances gives the fourth non-dimensional
parameter in table \ref{tab:parameters}.
In the remainder of this section, we explore the performance of the offline estimator
and the online controller in this setting. The offline procedure was implemented as a standalone algorithm, described in Sec.~\ref{sub:implementation}, to compute an estimate of the incoherent intensity given photon measurements and DM controls, whether they were simulated in an open loop (Sec.~\ref{sub:open_loop_simulation}) or closed loop (Sec.~\ref{sub:closed_loop_simulation}) manner. The online controller (described in Appendix \ref{sec:ekf_equations} and employed in Sec.~\ref{sub:closed_loop_simulation}), was implemented as a part of our optics model and became active immediately after the dark hole creation step. The measurements, $y_{ij}(k)$, were sampled from a Poisson distribution corresponding to the simulated speckle field and incoherent intensity at pixel $i,j$ and frame $k$.
\subsection{\label{sub:open_loop_simulation}Offline Estimator with Small Drift}
To evaluate the offline intensity estimator in an open loop scenario
we performed a Monte Carlo study in which the sample path of the electric
field and the incoherent intensity were estimated for each realization
of the drift process.
All simulations considered a single pixel (the indices $ij$ are dropped)
at which the incoherent intensity remained constant at $I=0.22$.
Each path of the real and imaginary parts of the electric field was
a realization of a Brownian bridge between frames $k=0$
and $k=T$, that is, the increments of the real and imaginary parts of the
field were normally distributed,
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{Re}\left\{ E^{OL}(k+1)-E^{OL}(k)\right\} \sim{\cal N}\left(0,\sigma^{2}\right)
\end{equation}
where $\sigma=0.03$ and $E^{OL}(0)=E^{OL}(T)=0$. This last constraint
resulted in a ``small'' drift so that we could choose a fixed $\mathbf{u}_{opt}=0$
and focus only on the effects of the dither magnitude. To this end,
the real and imaginary parts of the actuator term were also normally
distributed,
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{Re}\left\{ G\Delta\mathbf{u}\right\} \sim{\cal N}\left(0,\sigma_{u}^{2}\right)
\end{equation}
where the sensitivity to the dither magnitude $\sigma_{u}$ (in $\sqrt{\frac{\#photons}{pixel\cdot frame}}$),
was the subject of investigation in this section.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{offline_process.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:offline_process}(a) A sample path of the Brownian bridge of the simulated open loop electric field (solid lines) and its estimate (dashed lines). (b) Total light intensity including the effect of the dither
with $\sigma_{u}=0.5$ (solid line), measured number of photons ($\cdot$)
and the incoherent light estimate (dashed line). Only the first 100 frames are shown.}
\end{figure}
A sample path of the drift process is shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:offline_process}(a)
while Fig.~\ref{fig:offline_process}(b) shows the number of photons
``detected'' at each frame. The estimates of the speckle sample
path (assuming $E(0)=0)$ and the incoherent light, both obtained
via the algorithm described in section \ref{sub:estimation_algorithm},
are also shown for comparison.
In order to assess the effect and necessity of the dither, we computed
the average error in the estimate of the incoherent intensity, $I$, across a Monte Carlo ensemble with several
dither magnitudes, $\sigma_{u}$. As can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:offline_errors},
even without dithering ($\sigma_{u}=0$), the estimation algorithm
significantly outperforms PSF subtraction. For small non-zero values
of $\sigma_{u}$, the errors become smaller and less spread
out (an indicator of a smaller variance of the estimator). However,
larger dither lets more star light into the dark hole and the associated
shot noise drives the error back up. We conclude that there exists
an optimal non-zero value of $\sigma_{u}$ that reduces the mean
error and variance of the proposed estimator. Estimating the precise optimal $\sigma_{u}$ for a real system such as WFIRST/CGI requires the capacity to simulate numerous observation scenarios of the system (\cite{riggs2018fast}) with meaningful values of the WFE drift (\cite{seo2017hybrid}).
Nevertheless, Fig.~\ref{fig:offline_errors} suggests that there is a wide range of near-optimum dither amplitudes in which the estimate errors remain almost constant.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{offline_errors.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:offline_errors}Comparison of errors in intensity (mean
and standard deviation) as a function of dither intensity $\sigma_{u}$
across numerous Monte-Carlo simulations. Higher dither intensities
increase the number of photons (in figure \ref{fig:offline_process}(b))
and the associated shot noise but also the phase diversity of the
signal. PSF subtraction (dashed line) does not take drift into account
and gives very large errors. The incoherent light intensity is shown
for comparison (solid line) with no dark current ($I_{D}=0$) present in
this simulation.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{\label{sub:closed_loop_simulation}Closed Loop with Unbounded Drift}
The maximum expected WFE is commonly used to estimate the best attainable SNR
or to specify stability requirements of the optical system (\cite{krist2008extraction,nemati2017sensitivity,shaklan2011stability}).
In this section, however, we assume that the pupil plane phase perturbations
perform an unbounded random walk. In that case, the intensities of the speckles in the
dark hole also grow without bounds, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:speckles_image}(a).
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{speckles_image.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:speckles_image}(a) Speckle intensity increases without
bound as the WFE performs a random walk (in terms of the first 15
Zernike polynomials). (b) Closing the loop on the electric field helps
maintain a high contrast despite the drift. The contrast is slightly
worse than in a perfect dark hole due to dithering.}
\end{figure}
Maintaining a high contrast in the dark hole is achieved through a
combination of the EKF and EFC described in Sections \ref{sub:high_intensity_estimation}
and \ref{sub:EFC_dithering}. The resulting speckle field is shown
in Fig.~\ref{fig:speckles_image}(b) and although the intensity
of the speckles is higher than in the perfect initial dark hole, their magnitude remains bounded.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{closed_loop_EKF.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:closed_loop_EKF}In open loop, as the phase errors at the pupil plane drift, the average intensity of the speckles steadily increases (solid
line). However, the approach outlined in section \ref{sec:closed_loop}
maintains the intensity of the speckles at a constant level (dashed line).
As the drift increases, the accumulated systematic error due to the
linearization (Eq.~(\ref{eq:EOL_def})) becomes significant
(blue dotted line). This can be remedied by periodically recalibrating
the dark hole control setting as discussed in section \ref{sub:recalibration}
(red dotted line).}
\end{figure}
Looking at the mean intensities and errors in Fig.~\ref{fig:closed_loop_EKF},
the open loop dark hole begins at a high contrast which quickly deteriorates,
while the dark hole maintenance controller keeps the contrast at a constant level. This level is slightly worse than the initial contrast due to the dither ($\sigma_{u}\ne0$) which was shown to be necessary for
accurate estimation in section \ref{sub:open_loop_simulation}. Note
that we allowed a relatively large drift, hence PSF subtraction would
perform poorly in this case: at earlier times a low number of photons
would result in low SNR, and at later times the error in the PSF would
dominate.
The necessity of recalibrating the dark hole control is also apparent
from Fig.~\ref{fig:closed_loop_EKF}. With constant $\mathbf{u}_{0}$,
the linearization in Eq.~(\ref{eq:EOL_def}) becomes inaccurate as the
open loop field drifts by a considerable amount. However, a simple
recalibration step (Eqs. (\ref{eq:recalib_u}),(\ref{eq:recalib_E}))
every 500 frames resolves the issue.
Finally, the newly suggested EKF with dithering is simpler,
computationally more efficient and gives more accurate results than the
previously suggested 1-probe EKF algorithm (\cite{groff2013kalman}).
We attribute this to the fact that the latter was designed for creating
the dark hole when speckle intensities are high but remain constant
over time. Figure. \ref{fig:closed_loop_comparison} shows the dark hole intensity at each of the three frames of the 1-probe EKF: one frame with an ``unperturbed'' control and two frames with complex-conjugate perturbations. We observe that during all three frames, including those corresponding to the ``unperturbed'' control, the contrast in the dark hole was comparable or worse than the contrast maintained by the newly suggested algorithm. Using larger probes would result in better estimates for the 1-probe EKF and hence better contrast during one third of the duty cycle, but would also dramatically increase the intensity of the speckles during the other two thirds. We also note that the EKF version described in detail in Appendix \ref{sec:ekf_equations} is more precise than the version in \cite{groff2013kalman} (since it takes drift into account), regardless of the method chosen to introduce phase diversity (probes or dither).
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[scale=0.7]{closed_loop_comparison.pdf}
\centering
\caption{\label{fig:closed_loop_comparison}The newly suggested online control law
(red dashed line) slightly outperforms the 1-probe EKF
(blue dotted line) which was designed for creating the dark hole and
doesn't take the WFE drift into account (\cite{groff2013kalman}). The intensity refers to speckles only; its effect on the post-processing estimate of the incoherent intensity are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:combined}.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Combined Results}
Both dark hole maintenance (Section \ref{sec:closed_loop}) and post-processing (Section \ref{sec:a_posterior_estimation}) are necessary
for accurate estimation of the incoherent light. Although the recursive
estimate of the incoherent light from the EKF is very noisy, it is sufficient to
keep the speckles bounded. Using only classical PSF subtraction, even if the measurements are acquired from a ``closed-loop-maintained'' dark hole, yields poor results when the incoherent light is dimmer than the time varying speckles. The offline estimator was specifically designed to address this issue. However, when used on measurements from an ``un-maintained'' dark hole, it suffers from progressively higher errors as the open loop shot noise increases due to the speckle drift.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{incoherent_image.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:incoherent_image}(a) Incoherent intensity estimation via classical
PSF subtraction is completely ruined by the open loop speckle drift when the DMs are kept fixed.
(b) Closed loop dark hole maintenance followed by an offline {\it a posteriori}
intensity estimation, allows a significantly larger SNR to be achieved given
the same integration times. Note that the incoherent intensity includes the dark current.}
\end{figure}
As can be seen in Fig.~\ref{fig:incoherent_image}(a), the effect
of unbounded WFE drift when using PSF subtraction is highly detrimental. In comparison,
the combined control and estimation approach maintains the dark hole
for as long as necessary
and the incoherent light estimate becomes
progressively better (Fig.~\ref{fig:incoherent_image}(b)). The
effective dark current intensity, which we considered to be part of
the total incoherent intensity, is known, can be subtracted, and therefore
doesn't limit the SNR. However, as the magnitude of the drift increases, so does the optimal magnitude of the dither ($\sigma_{u}$) and the shot noise associated with it. This means that for extremely large dither, extremely long integration times would be necessary and the linearity assumption (Eq.~\ref{eq:linearity_assumption}) would break down, effectively limiting the achievable SNR.
In a perfect linear model of the observatory, this approach eliminates the systematic PSF error which,
according to Eq.~(\ref{eq:SNR}), means that the incoherent
intensity error should decrease as the square root of the number of
frames (that is, the estimation becomes photon noise limited). This was nearly the case in our simulation illustrated
in Fig.~\ref{fig:combined}, where the error in the half-max planet intensity region ($I^{P}>0.5\max I^{P}$) initially decreases as $k^{-0.5}$ but, after an equivalent of 56 hours of observation on a system like WFIRST, reaches a steady value of $1/30$ of the mean speckle intensity.
We suspect that this eventual SNR limitation is due to imperfect estimates of the Jacobian (${\cal G}$, which varies with time due to the drift) and the error statistics ($\Sigma_{ij},\mu_{ij}$).
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{combined.pdf}
\caption{\label{fig:combined}Mean intensity of open loop (solid black line) and
closed loop (dotted blue line) evolution of the speckles. In our simulation,
the planet was about five times dimmer than the closed loop speckles requiring a post-processing
step to estimate its intensity (dash-dotted line).
The errors in the
intensity (computed offline and denoted as $\times$ and $+$), decay
roughly as the square root of the integration time (dashed line).}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper, we introduced two algorithms for focal plane wavefront control
and estimation of speckle intensity evolution and incoherent intensities. Combined,
these two algorithms maintain the dark hole during long integration
times on the target star and reduce systematic errors present in
PSF subtraction methods.
Under the admittedly limiting assumptions of a perfectly accurate and linear model of speckle drift and control actuators, we have thus reduced the estimation problem from being background limited to photon noise limited regardless of the flux ratio between the star and planet, the size of the residual speckles, or their time variation. This implies that one can eliminate any bounds on the SNR and therefore detect arbitrarily dim planet given sufficiently long integration times when the two algorithms operate in perfect conditions.
The EKF based algorithm for closed loop dark hole maintenance employs the EFC control law while adding small DM dither.
This addition was justified analytically in Section \ref{sub:EFC_dithering}
and numerically in Section \ref{sub:open_loop_simulation}, although
we leave the optimization of dither shape and magnitude for future work. We found that the newly suggested approach results in lower residual speckle than the EKF
based algorithms for creating the dark hole, as those do not take WFE drift
into account.
Allowing for DM actuation and possible speckle drift during the
integration phase requires a more nuanced approach for computing
the intensity of sources incoherent with the star light. An {\it a posteriori}
intensity estimation algorithm proposed in Section \ref{sub:estimation_algorithm}
considers the statistics of the drift and shot noise over the whole
history of integration and gives a (sub-optimal) estimate of the incoherent
intensity. Despite discarding all spatial information, this estimator
is still computationally expensive and has to be performed offline.
The currently proposed mode of operation for the WFIRST, as well as for the proposed HabEx mission, involves a pointing sequence alternating between open loop observation of the target and a periodic ``re-creation'' of the dark hole using a reference star (\cite{rizzo2018wfirst}). This approach has the potential to introduce additional mechanically induced wavefront errors during slews and doesn't take the statistics of the drift at the post-processing step into account. It therefore results in significant over-specification of the stability of the instrument. Our method eliminates the need for alternating pointing and achieves considerably better performance than PSF subtraction, thus reducing the stability requirements or observation times.
We leave for a future work the task of estimating these bounds on the wavefront stability for various realistic values of flux ratio between the speckles and the planet, and the sensitivity analysis of the proposed algorithms. This analysis will address model errors stemming from the assumptions of linearity and Brownian motion of the WFE, and the associated imperfect estimates of the Jacobians and drift statistics.
Finally, we note that the proposed estimators were developed for a monochromatic optical model
with no regard for correlation between focal plane pixels. They can,
however, be formulated in a reduced order setting similar to KLIP (\cite{soummer2012detection})
with a particular choice of PSF basis (spatial or chromatic) for the speckle field.
This direction will also be explored in future work.
\section{Acknowledgements}
This work was partially performed under contract to the Jet Propulsion Laboratory of the California Institute of Technology, award number AWD1004079. We would also like to thank Bijan Nemati for providing technical details for various observation scenarios of the WFIRST telescope.
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:Introduction}
Early efforts in the field of deep learning have focused mostly on the training aspect of neural networks. The success of these efforts has led to widespread deployment of trained neural networks in data-centers \cite{Park2018b,Jouppi2017} and on embedded devices \cite{Ignatov2018} where they are used for inference which in turn emphasized the need to make the inference phase more efficient. Quantization, which means conversion of the arithmetic used within the net from high-precision floating-points to low-precision integers, is an essential step for efficient deployment, however, quantization degrades network performance. Here, we follow the commonly used quantization scheme described in \citet{Jacob2017} but note that other schemes exist \cite{Vanhoucke2011,Gupta2015,Courbariaux2014} to which our results apply as well. Briefly, integer quantization consists of approximating real values with intergers according to $ x_Q=x/scale $ where $scale=(max(x)-min(x))/2^N $ and N is the number of bits used in the approximation. Each layer's weights and activations are given a different scale according to their extremum values. The noise introduced by this limited precision approximation encapsulates a fundamental dynamic range-precision trade-off.
Existing approaches to decreasing induced degradation are ‘quantization-aware’ training \cite{Jacob2017,Banner2018a,Zhou2017,Zhou_2018_CVPR,McKinstry2018} and reducing the dynamic range of activations by clipping outliers \cite{Migacz2017,Choi2018,Banner2018b}. Training is a powerful method but it is time-consuming, hard to implement, and requires access to the original training dataset which might not always be available (e.g. when the user wishes to use an off-the-shelf pre-trained model). Clipping has limited effect since it only addresses noise from activation quantization.
In this paper, we propose a different approach. Instead of focusing on improving the quantization process itself, we explore equivalent weight arrangement that make the net less sensitive to quantization. An equivalent weight arrangements is a factorization that changes the weights of the networks without changing its function - i.e. for a given input, the network output remains the same. During quantization, the range of each layer is set by the channel with the largest absolute activation which we term the dominant channel. This single channel determines the noise in all other channels, many of which have smaller values. Therefore, amplifying these channels to match the dominant channel while compensating the change at the next layer can reduce the effect of the noise.
We begin by analyzing the noise introduced by quantization of weights and activations in terms of signal-to-quantization-noise ratio (SQNR). We inspect the effect of channel-scaling on SQNR and introduce an equalization procedure which, under some constraints, tries to scale each output channel such that its range matches that of the dominant channel. We show that equalization reduces the layer SQNR and then apply equalization iteratively layer-by-layer and empirically show that the overall post-quantization degradation of the network decreases. Since our approach can be a pre-processing step prior to quantization, it is fully compatible with other approaches that improve the quantization process. Nevertheless, an appealing aspect of our scheme is that for most nets it reduces the quantization induced degradation enough as to make quantization-aware training unnecessary and thus facilitates rapid deployment of quantized models.
The main contributions of this paper are:
\begin{itemize}
\setlength\itemsep{1em}
\item \textbf{Inversely proportional factorization}: we show the utility of weight factorization for the task of quantization. Future work can benefit by exploiting these factorizations in other settings. To the best of our knowledge this work is the first to both highlight and show the usefulness of inversely proportional factorizations.
\item \textbf{Equalization}: we show that layers which have channels with similar ranges are less affected by quantization and we show how to transform a network closer to this ideal. We also perform a quantitative analysis of the effect of equalization on quantization noise and quantization induced degradation for a wide range of network architectures.
\end{itemize}
\section{Previous Work} \label{sec:Previous Work}
\textbf{Equalization.} Having channels with similar dynamic ranges motivated \cite{Jacob2017} to use of Relu6 activations which were subsequently used in MobileNets \cite{Howard2017}. However, in practice, many channels remain un-clamped and the dynamic range strongly varies within a layer \cite{Sheng2018}. It was also observed \cite{Krishnamoorthi2018} that having a scale for each channel of a layer greatly improves quantization performance. While effective for networks where most of the degradation stems from the quantization of weights, it doesn't improve performance of networks that are degraded by the quantization of activation such as DenseNets \cite{Huang2016}.
\textbf{Quantization Noise Analysis.} The properties of noise induced by the quantization of both activations and weights were analyzed in \citet{Lin2015} focusing on the optimal bit width assignment to each layer across the network. We follow a similar analysis but focus on the dynamic ranges of individual channels within a layer. \citet{pmlr-v70-sakr17a} gives an upper bound on the relationship between SQNR and network accuracy. An empirical disambiguation of the contributions of activation and weight noise to total degradation was given in \citet{Krishnamoorthi2018} for several networks. The consensus of previous works seems to be that weight quantization is responsible for the bulk of degradation but we show the opposite for some common networks.
\section{Theoretical Foundation} \label{sec:Theoretical Foundation}
For a given network architecture there exist many weight assignments that result in networks that realize the same mapping from input to output. Thus, we are afforded with an important degree of freedom enabling us to choose assignments that have desirable properties for the task at hand.
We show, that for a family of networks it is possible to gradually switch between equivalent assignments through the use of inversely proportional factorizations. These factorizations enable us to scale individual channels within a layer by any positive factor. We then analyze the source of quantization noise and show that by scaling channels we can improve the SQNR withing a layer. Our analysis is done for Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) but the same principles can apply to other types of nets as well. Since our focus is on trained networks we assume that batch-normalization \cite{IoffeS15} layers are always folded back to the preceding layer and we ignore them.
\subsection{Channel scaling through inversely-proportional factorization} \label{sec:Channels Re-scaling}
Consider a convolutional layer with kernel W, bias B, input X, and output Y. For notional simplicity we eschew convolutions and consider matrix multiplication. To this end we denote $X^{i,j}_{1\times(K_x\cdot K_y\cdot F_{in})},Y^{i,j}_{1\times F_{out}}$, the channel vectors when the kernel is centered on spatial position i,j within X,Y. We can then write the kernel as a matrix $W_{(K_x\cdot K_y\cdot F_{in})\times F_{out}}$ and the bias as a vector $B_{1\times F_{out}}$. The following two factorizations hold:
\small \begin{equation} \label{eq:inputScaling}
\begin{aligned}
Y^{i,j} &= (X^{i,j}C_1 ) (C_1^{-1} W) + B
\end{aligned}
\end{equation} \normalsize
\small \begin{equation} \label{eq:outputScaling}
\begin{aligned}
Y^{i,j}C_2 &= X^{i,j} (W C_2) + (B C_2)
\end{aligned}
\end{equation} \normalsize
where for both cases $C_i$ is a diagonal matrix with positive entries and $C_i^{-1}$ is its the inverse diagonal matrix. The first factorization scales the channels of the layer's input and the second factorization scale the channels of layer's output.
We now consider a simple setting where $L1$ and $L2$ are two consecutive convolutionalal layers in a network. We assume that the activation function of $L1$, $A(\cdot )$, is homogeneous with degree 1 for positive numbers. That is, it satisfies equation \ref{eq:multiplication invariant functions}.
\small \begin{equation} \label{eq:multiplication invariant functions}
A(\alpha \cdot x) = \alpha \cdot A(x) \ \ \ \forall \alpha > 0
\end{equation} \normalsize
With this assumption, if $Y_1$ is the output of $L1$ and $X_2$ is the input to $L2$, the scaling of $Y_1$ results in a corresponding scaling of $X_2$. Combining all of the above we arrive to our main result - the post-activation output channels of $L1$ can be scaled by any positive factors by scaling the weights in the kernel and bias of $L1$ (\ref{eq:inputScaling}) and the output of the network will remain unchanged if we inversely scale the corresponding weight in $L2$ (\ref{eq:outputScaling}). We term this endomorphism an inversely-proportional factorization and it is shown schematically in Figure \ref{Fig:Two layers equalization example}.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\vskip 0.2in
\begin{center}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{twoLayersFact.png}}
\caption{A schematic showing inversely proportional factorization in a pair of convolutional layers. An output channel $i$ in $K_1$, the kernel of $L1$, is scaled by a positive factor $c_i$. Assuming the activation function $A(\cdot)$ is homogeneous, the post activation channel is also scaled by $c_i$. All the weights in $K_2$, the kernel of $L2$ that interact with channel $i$ are inversely scaled. $Y_2$, the output of $L2$ remains unchanged. The bias terms were omitted for clarity. }
\label{Fig:Two layers equalization example}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.2in
\end{figure}
With the exception of the last layer, we can scale the individual channels withing each layer in a full network by iteratively factorizing pairs of layers. Finally, we note that the commonly used ReLU\cite{Nair:2010:RLU:3104322.3104425}, PRelu\cite{He2015} and linear activations all satisfy the homogeneous property from equation (\ref{eq:multiplication invariant functions}). Thus our scheme is applicable to most commonly used CNNs.
\subsection{Quantization Noise Analysis}
Understanding the formation and propagation of quantization noise across the network is an essential step in the design of better quantization algorithms. In this section we analyze the effects of weight and activations quantization using the same two-layers setting depicted in Figure \ref{Fig:Two layers equalization example}. We model the effect of limited precision by adding noise terms $\Delta W_1\in {\rm I\!R}^{K_1\times K_1\times F_{in1}\times F_{out1}}$, $\Delta W_2\in {\rm I\!R}^{K_2\times K_2\times F_{in2}\times F_{out2}}$, and $\Delta Y_1\in {\rm I\!R}^{F_{out1}}$ to $W_1$, $W_2$, and $Y_1$ respectively. The noisy model is shown in Figure \ref{Fig:Two layers noise model}. For simplicity we also assume that all the biases are zero and that all activations are linear.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\vskip -0.0in
\begin{center}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{twoLayersModelNew}}
\caption{A simple model showing the effects of quantization on two layers model. $\Delta W_1$, $\Delta W_2$, and $\Delta Y_1$ emulate the quantization effect.}
\label{Fig:Two layers noise model}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.2in
\end{figure}
We now show how each noise term affects the overall noise at the output of each layer. For a given tensor $T$ we denote $\hat{T}$ the noisy version of that tensor. In addition, we denote with $\tilde{T}^{\Delta N}$ the additive noise source to $T$ due to $\Delta N$. We start by calculating the output of the first layer
\vspace{-0ex}
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Y1Calculation}
\begin{split}
&\hat{Y_1} = X_1\circledast (W_1 + \Delta W_1) +\Delta Y_1 \\
&= X_1*W_1 + X_1\circledast \Delta W_1 + \Delta Y_1\\
& \equiv Y_1 + \tilde{Y_1}^{\Delta W_1} + \tilde{Y_1}^{\Delta Y_1}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The output of the first layer has two noise sources. $\tilde{Y_1}^{\Delta W_1}$ is due to the interaction of the weight quantization noise with the input $X_1$ and $\tilde{Y_1}^{\Delta Y_1}$ is the intrinsic quantization noise. Assuming the noises are independent, their variance is:
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Y1NoiseVarEstimation}
\begin{split}
E \left \{ (\tilde{Y}_1^{\Delta W_1})^2 \right \} &= K_1^2\cdot F_{in1}\cdot E\{(X_1)^2\}\cdot E\{\Delta (W_1)^2\} \\
E \left \{ (\tilde{Y_1}^{\Delta Y_1})^2 \right \} &= E\{\Delta Y_1^2\}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
For uniform quantization, the noise terms $\Delta W1, \Delta Y1$ distribution can be approximated as uniform, zero-centered, i.i.d processes \cite{Lin2015,Marco2005}. Denoting by $W_1^r$, $Y_1^r$ the dynamic ranges of $W_1$, $Y_1$ we get
\begin{equation} \label{eq:distributionY1Y2}
\begin{aligned}
&\Delta W1 \sim U(-\frac{W_1^r}{2^{N+1}},\frac{W_1^r}{2^{N+1}}) \\
&\Delta Y1 \sim U(-\frac{Y_1^r}{2^{N+1}},\frac{Y_1^r}{2^{N+1}}) \\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The dynamic range of a tensor is determined by the extreme values across all the channels within it and so the noise distribution is determined by, at most, two channels - the channel with the largest value and the channel with smallest value. We term these channels the dominant channels and note that there is substantial variance between the extermum values of different channels.
Next, we calculate the output of the second layer. Explicit calculation of $Y_2$ shows four noise sources, three are due to the quantization of $\Delta W_1$, $\Delta W_2$, $\Delta Y_1$, and one rooted in the multiplication of $Y_1^{\Delta W_1}$, $Y_1^{\Delta Y_1}$ by $\Delta W_2$. The last component can be neglected in most practical scenarios and the variances of the others are
\begin{equation} \label{eq:Y2NoiseVarEstimation}
\begin{split}
E \left \{ (\tilde{Y_2}^{\Delta W_1})^2 \right \} &= \left (\sum W_2^2 \right ) \cdot E \left \{ (\tilde{Y_1}^{\Delta W_1})^2 \right \} \\
E \left \{ (\tilde{Y_2}^{\Delta Y_1})^2 \right \} &= \left (\sum W_2^2 \right ) \cdot E \left \{ (\tilde{Y_1}^{\Delta Y_2})^2 \right \} \\
E \left \{ (\tilde{Y_2}^{\Delta W_2})^2 \right \} &= K_2^2\cdot F_{in2}\cdot E\{(Y_1)^2\}\cdot E\{(\Delta W_2)^2\} \\
\end{split}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Effect of inversely-proportional factorization on SQNR}\label{sec:SQNR scaling}
We use SQNR to quantify the effect of the quantization noise.
\begin{equation} \label{eq:sqnrDef}
SQNR_Y \equiv \frac{E \left \{Y^2 \right \}}{E \left \{ (Y-\hat{Y})^2 \right \}} = \frac{E \left \{Y^2 \right \}}{E \left \{ \tilde{Y}^2 \right \}}
\end{equation}
We calculate $SQNR_{Y1}$ and $SQNR_{Y2}$, the SQNRs at the outputs of layer 1 and 2 respectively, by plugging (\ref{eq:Y1NoiseVarEstimation}),(\ref{eq:Y2NoiseVarEstimation}) into (\ref{eq:sqnrDef}).
\begin{equation} \label{eq:sqnrY1Y2}
\begin{aligned}
&SQNR_{Y1} = \frac{E \left \{ Y_1^2 \right \}}{E \left \{ (\tilde{Y_1}^{\Delta W_1}+\tilde{Y_1}^{\Delta Y_1})^2 \right \}} \\
&SQNR_{Y2} = \frac{E \left \{ Y_1^2 \right \}}{E \left \{ (\tilde{Y_2}^{\Delta W_1}+\tilde{Y_2}^{\Delta Y_1}+\tilde{Y_2}^{\Delta W_2})^2 \right \}}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
We now show how inversely proportional factorization affects the SQNR of both layers. We start by looking at the effect on the signal components. We denote the scaling vector with $C\in {\rm I\!R}^{F_{out1}}$ and the scaled version of tensor $T$ by $T'$. For simplicity, since scaling the whole layer by a constant has no effect on the SQNR, we can assume without loss of generality that $C\geq 1$. Therefore, we can say that all channels in $Y_1$ are either amplified or unchanged. In addition, we showed in Section \ref{sec:Channels Re-scaling} that the factorization has no effect on $Y_2$. Thus for the signal components we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq:equal_sig_inquality}
\begin{aligned}
E\{(Y_1')^2\} &\ge E\{(Y_1)^2\} \\
E\{(Y_2')^2\} &= E\{(Y_2)^2\} \\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Amplifying the channels of $Y_1$ haphazardly might increase the layer's extremum values which will increases the variance of the noise sources $\Delta W_1$, $\Delta Y_1$ (\ref{eq:distributionY1Y2}). On the other hand, amplification $Y_1$ is compensated by attenuation of $W_2$ which may only decrease the variance of $\Delta W_2$ if it results in a reduction of $W_2$'s extremum values. Thus for the noise sources we have
\begin{equation} \label{eq:equal_noise_inquality}
\begin{aligned}
E\{(\Delta W_1')^2\} &\geq E\{(\Delta W_1)^2\} \\
E\{(\Delta Y_1')^2\} &\geq E\{(\Delta Y_1)^2\} \\
E\{(\Delta W_2')^2\} &\leq E\{(\Delta W_2)^2\} \\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
We now make the crucial assumption that the channels of $Y_1$ are amplified in such a manner that the variances of $\Delta W_1$, $\Delta Y_1$ remain unchanged while the variance of $\Delta W_2$ decreases.
Under these assumptions, $\tilde{Y_1}^{\Delta W_1}$, $\tilde{Y_1}^{\Delta Y_1}$ are unaffected by the amplification of $Y_1$ and we get that
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
SQNR'_{Y1} \geq SQNR_{Y1}
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The effect on $SQNR_{Y2}$ (\ref{eq:sqnrY1Y2}) is more tricky. $E \left \{ (\tilde{Y2}^{\Delta W1})^2 \right \}$, $E \left \{ (\tilde{Y2}^{\Delta Y1})^2 \right \}$ are decreased by the attenuation of $W_2$. What happens to $E \left \{ (\tilde{Y_2}^{\Delta W_2})^2 \right \}$ depends on $E\{(Y_1)^2\}\cdot E\{(\Delta W_2)^2\}$, i.e. whether the amplification of $Y_1$ is more dominant than the attenuation of $\Delta W_2$. Thus there is no guarantee that $SQNR_{Y2}$ improves.
Undaunted, in the next section we present a greedy algorithm that through iterative application of inversely-proportional factorization improves the SQNR across the network and reduces the post-quantization degradation.
\section{Equalization Algorithm} \label{sec:Equalization Algorithm}
Building on the analysis in Section \ref{sec:Theoretical Foundation} we propose two algorithms designed around the idea of applying a pre-quantization factorization that increases the energy of channels without changing the variance of the noise. This is achieved by amplifying non-dominant channels such that their extremum values are matched with those of the dominant channels. As shown in Figure \ref{Fig:EqualExample}, these algorithms tends to equalize the channels' energy and therefore got the name \textit{channel equalization}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfigure[One Step Equalization]{\label{fig:a}\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{postEqualRange}}
\subfigure[Two Steps Equalization]{\label{fig:b}\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{postEqualRangeAndReduce}}
\caption{Example of the effect of channel equalization on the two layers model. Each bar indicates the maximum values of a channel. The blue graphs show the data for weights, the green for the activations, and the red the weights of the successor layer. Figure (a) demonstrates the one step algorithm. On the left is the initial state and on the right is the state after equalization. Figure (b) demonstrates the two steps algorithm. On the left is the state after is the next layer weights equalization and on the right is the final state}
\label{Fig:EqualExample}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{One-Step Equalization} \label{sec:One Step Equalization}
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{One Step Equalization}\label{alg:One Step Equalization}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\WHILE {1}
\STATE $layer \gets getNextLayer()$
\IF {layer is last layer}
\STATE return
\ENDIF
\STATE $kerOutChMax \gets getKerOutChMax(layer)$
\STATE $actOutChMax \gets getActOutChMax(layer)$
\STATE $kerOutMax \gets max(kerOutChMax)$
\STATE $actOutMax \gets max(actOutChlMax)$
\STATE $kerScale \gets \frac{kerOutMax}{kerOutChMax}$
\STATE $actScale \gets \frac{actOutMax}{actOutChMax}$
\STATE $scale \gets min(kerScale,actScale,S_{max})$
\STATE $scaleLayer(layer, scale) $
\ENDWHILE
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Algorithm \ref{alg:One Step Equalization} explains a simple, one-step channel equalization method. We assume that the network can be represented as direct acyclic graph with layers being represnted by nodes and that it is topologicaly sorted. The algorithm is then applied iteratively beginning at the first layer(node) and continues until we reach all of the network's output layers. At each iteration the layer's channels are equalized by employing inversely-proportional factorization with its successor layers. A layer is eligible to be equalized only once all of its predecessor layers were equalized. The function $getNextLayer()$ returns the next layer. The functions $getKerOutChMax(layer)$ and $getActOutChMax(layer)$ return the maximum values per channel for the weights and activation respectively. Each one of them results in a vector of length $F_{out}$. For each channel, we calculate the ratio between the layer's extermum and the channel's extremum for the activations and weights, these ratios are defined as the activation and weight scales. When a layer is scaled, each channel is scaled by the minimum between the activation and weight scales. We further limit the scale by a pre-defined maximum to prevent the over-scaling of channels with small activation values. $scaleLayer(layer, scale)$ is the scaling of the layer and its successors according to (\ref{eq:inputScaling}), (\ref{eq:outputScaling}). It is easy to see that the maximum values of the weights and the activation post equalization won't change and that all the scales are $\geq1$.
An example of the results of one-step equalization on the channel scales within a layer is shown in Figure \ref{Fig:EqualExample}(a). We see that, post equalization, channels have much less variance in scales which in turn implies that they tend to have similar energy.
As explained in section \ref{sec:SQNR scaling} for each iteration there is no guarantee that $SQNR_{Y2}$ improves but in most cases we witnessed that it did. Moreover, even if the $SQNR_{Y2}$ decreases it will improved in next iteration when the channel of $Y_2$ will be equalized.
\subsection{Two Steps Equalization} \label{sec:Two Steps Equalization}
We define optimal equalization (OE) as the state where the extremum values of all the channels are equal. OE can be done in terms of weights only, activations only or both. OE for activations or weights can always be achieved but equalization of one will be sub-optimal for the other. OE for both, on the other hand, is out of reach in most cases because we have only one scale per channel. The two steps equalization tries to make a step toward the optimal OE.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Two Steps Equalization}\label{alg:Two Steps Equalization}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\WHILE {1}
\STATE $layer \gets getNextLayer()$
\IF {layer is last layer}
\STATE return
\ENDIF
\STATE $sucInChMax \gets getSucInChMax(layer)$
\STATE $sucInMax \gets max(sucInChMax)$
\STATE $kerOutChMax \gets getKerOutChMax(layer)$
\STATE $actOutChMax \gets getActOutChMax(layer)$
\STATE $kerOutMax \gets max(kerOutChMax)$
\STATE $actOutMax \gets max(actOutChMax)$
\STATE $kerScale \gets \frac{KerOutMax}{kerOutChMax}\cdot \frac{sucInChMax}{sucInMax}$
\STATE $actScale \gets \frac{actOutMax}{actOutChMax}\cdot \frac{sucInChMax}{sucInMax}$
\STATE $scale = min(kerScale,actScale,S_{max})$
\STATE $scale = scale/min(scale)$
\STATE $scaleLayer(layer, scale) $
\ENDWHILE
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Algorithm \ref{alg:Two Steps Equalization} explains the two steps equalization process. The basic idea is to diminish the layers extremum values before the equalization. This is done by applying proportionally-inverse factorization in reverse - we attenuate the channels of the first layer and compensate by amplifying the values of the second layer. To avoid increasing the weight noise in the second layer the compensating amplification is not allowed to change the extremum values of the second layer. This is done by using the function $getSucInChMax$ that returns the maximum per input channel of the successor layer weights. Dividing each channel by $\frac{sucInChMax}{sucInMax}$ will equalize the next layer and attenuate all the channels in the current layer. The second step of the algorithm is the same as in the one-step equalization. At the end of the algorithm we normalized all the scales so they will all be $\geq 1$. Figure \ref{Fig:EqualExample}(b) shows an example of two steps equalization. We can see that the channels are equalized a little bit better and that the maximum value of the next layer is lower. Therefore, we can expect the noise in the network after this equalization will be attenuated and indeed our tests showed that this algorithm can produce better channel equalization. Our intuition is that if a dominant channel can be attenuated than it means that the weights of second layer multiplying it are small. In other words - before the factorization the second layer was "naturally" attenuating the channel, signaling that its scale is too large compared to the other channels. In a limited precision setting it is important that this "gain control" be done beforehand since quantization is adversely affected by channels with outlier scales.
\section{Experiments and Results} \label{sec:Results}
In this section we perform experiments analyzing the performance of our proposed algorithms. We first verify our analysis in previous sections by measuring the noise across test networks with and without equalization. We then show that a reduction in noise translates to a reduction in the post-quantization degradation of classifier networks trained on the ImageNet dataset\cite{ILSVRC15} and finally we show that our algorithm can also be applied to MobileNets\cite{Howard2017} with some modifications. In all our tests we used layer wise quantization. Activations were encoded using 8-bit unsigned integers and weights were encoded using 8-bit integers. Biases were encoded using 16-bits integers. We used passive quantization, meaning that no retrain was used and there is no need for labeled data. For all experiments we extract the activation extremum values using 64 images.
\subsection{SQNR measurements}
We designed a test that shows the noise of each layer separately. Moreover, the test can differentiate between activations and weights noises. For each layer we measured three quantities: the layer output where only the weights are quantized ($Y_1 + \tilde{Y_1}^{\Delta W_1}$), the layer output where only the activations are quantized($Y_1 + \tilde{Y_1}^{\Delta Y1}$), and the layer output where both are quantized ($\hat{Y_1}$). To measure the noise we compared these quantities to those of the original full precision layer output.
We measured the SQNR of each layer and compared it to the one predicted by (\ref{eq:Y1NoiseVarEstimation}) to verify our assumptions. The results of this experiment are shown in in Figure \ref{Fig:estimatedNoises} for ResNet-152\cite{He2015b} and Inception-V3\cite{Szegedy2015}. The results show good agreement between predicted and measured noise.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{estimatedNoises.png}
\caption{Noise estimation verification, A Comparison between the estimated SQNR according to (\ref{eq:Y1NoiseVarEstimation}) and measured SQNR. The layer index is sorted by the estimated SQNR from largest to smallest.}
\label{Fig:estimatedNoises}
\end{figure}
We now analyze the quality of our two-steps equalization algorithm. To that end we look at a simple setting where only the weight or only the activations are quantized. For weight quantization, we compare $SQNR_{W1}\equiv \sum (W_1)^2 / \sum (\Delta W_1)^2$, a measure of how well the layers weights are equalized to the weight OE. And for activation quantization, we compare $SQNR_{Y1}\equiv \sum (Y_1)^2 / \sum (\Delta Y_1)^2$ , a measure of how well the layers output channels are equalized, to the activation OE. This gives us an idea how far we are from the overall OE of both activations and weights. Figure \ref{Fig:OptEqualComapision} shows the results of this comparison on Inception-V3. We see that the method improves significantly the SQNR of the activations and almost reached the performance of the OE. For weights, the effect is smaller and the gap to the OE is larger.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{OptEqualComapision}
\caption{A comparison to the optimal SQNR. Demonstrating the effect of equalization algorithm on the SQNR for inception-V3. The figure shows how the algorithm tries to close the gap between the original state and optimal equalization. In these graphs the energy of the signal is measured and noise is estimated based on a uniform distribution assumption. The layer index is sorted by the estimated SQNR from largest to smallest.}
\label{Fig:OptEqualComapision}
\end{figure}
Finally, we measured the effect of equalization on noises throughout the network. We measured the SQNR in three cases: without equalization, with one- and two-steps equalization. Observing the results, as shown on Figure \ref{Fig:equalizationComperasion}, several conclusions can be drawn:(1) overall the SQNR is improved by equalization (2) The greedy nature of the algorithm means that for some intermediate layers the weight induced SQNR decreases. This is due to the fact that weight induced noise is increased when the layer input is amplified.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfigure[Matched]{\label{fig:Inception-V3}\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth]{noiseMeas_inception_v3}}
\subfigure[Sorted]{\label{fig:Inception-V3 Sorted}\includegraphics[width=0.45\columnwidth]{noiseMeas_inception_v3_sorted}}
\caption{Noise measurement across the network for Inception-V3. Measure the activation SQNR $\sum (Y_1)^2/\sum (\tilde{Y}_1^{\Delta Y_1})^2$ and weights SQNR $\sum (Y_1)^2/\sum (\tilde{Y}_1^{\Delta W_1})^2$ for three cases: pre-equalization, post one step equalization, and post two steps equalization. In figure (a), for better visibility, the layers are sorted by pre-equalization SQNR values. In figure (b), for even better visibility, the post equalization lines are sorted as well.}
\label{Fig:equalizationComperasion}
\end{figure}
\subsection{ImageNet Quantization Performance}
We now show that the overall reduction in SQNR achieved by the equalization algorithms results in improved performance of the quantized networks. Table \ref{tbl:QuantizationDegradationComparison} summarizes our results. We compared the classification performances of the quantized networks to their floating point version. Equalization improves quantization performance for almost all nets and for some, like inception-V1 \cite{Inception_v1} and DenseNet121 , a considerable improvement is observed. An examination of these networks revealed layers which suffer from an extreme imbalance between the channels. As we showed, this significantly increase the noise within the layer, triggering an avalanche effect throughout the network. Equalization eliminates this effect and enables good performance post quantization. Overall we see that two-steps equalization gives better performance than one-step equalization.
Figure \ref{Fig:equalizationComperasion} shows that the noise stemming from activation quantization is always reduced while the noise stemming from weight quantization occasionally increases after equalization. To quantify the effect we have on both noise sources we repeated the performance measurements for weights-only and activations-only quantization. We see that equalization has a positive effect for both scenarios and that which noise term is dominant is network dependent. For example, for the Inception architectures, weights quantization is dominant, while for ResNet-152 and DenseNet activation quantization is dominant. In addition, our results indicate that the total degradation $\approx$ weight degradation + activation degradation.
MobileNet is a challenging architecture for quantization and many passive quantization schemes result in large degradation \cite{Jacob2017,Lee2018}. It also employs ReLU6\cite{Jacob2017} activations which require special treatment for the equalization algorithm to work since it does not satisfy (\ref{eq:multiplication invariant functions}).
\begin{table}[]
\caption{A comparison of the performance of the two proposed algorithms. For each network we tabulate the post-quantization degradation without equalization and with one- and two-steps equalization. The degradation is measured relative to the networks top-1 accuracy which is estimated using the full ILSCRC2015 validation set of 50K images. For Resnet-152 and Inception-V3 we also measure the degradation when only the weights or activations are quantized. To facilitate reproducibility we used open source pre-trained networks. All networks are taken from TF-slim models \cite{TFSilm} with the exception of DenseNet\cite{DenseNetGit} }
\begin{tabular}{|l||l||l|l|l|}
\hline
\textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Network \\ Name\end{tabular}} &
\textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}} Original \\ Top-1 \\ accuracy \end{tabular}} &
\textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}No \\ Equal\end{tabular}} & \textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}One \\ Step \\ Equal\end{tabular}} & \textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Two \\ Steps\\ Equal\end{tabular}} \\ \hline
\multicolumn{5}{|c|}{Weights and Activations Quantization} \\ \hline
ResNet-V1-50 &$75.2\%$& $0.25\%$ & $0.38\%$ & $0.25\%$ \\ \hline
ResNet-V1-152 &$76.8\%$& $1.27\%$ & $0.80\%$ & $0.78\%$ \\ \hline
Inception-V3 &$77.9\%$& $0.66\%$ & $0.47\%$ & $0.35\%$ \\ \hline
Inception-V1 &$69.8\%$& $2.23\%$ & $0.41\%$ & $0.39\%$ \\ \hline
DenseNet-121 &$74.3\%$& $5.78\%$ & $0.42\%$ & $0.35\%$ \\ \hline
\multicolumn{5}{|c|}{Weights Quantization Only} \\ \hline
ResNet-V1-152 &$76.8\%$& $0.23\%$ & $0.19\%$ & $0.16\%$ \\ \hline
Inception-V3 &$77.9\%$& $0.55\%$ & $0.36\%$ & $0.32\%$ \\ \hline
\multicolumn{5}{|c|}{Activations Quantization Only} \\ \hline
ResNet-V1-152 &$76.8\%$& $0.98\%$ & $0.66\%$ & $0.62\%$ \\ \hline
Inception-V3 &$77.9\%$& $0.09\%$ & $0.03\%$ & $0.05\%$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tbl:QuantizationDegradationComparison}
\end{table}
One-step equalization can be used almost without change if it only amplifies channels with extremum activation value below 6. One-step equalization gives limited improvement (Table \ref{tbl:QuantizationDegradationComparisonMobileNet}). To enable Two-steps equalization we disable the division by $min(scale)$ at the end of algorithm \ref{alg:Two Steps Equalization} and in doing so allow the algorithm to attenuate channels ($C<1$). However, to prevent significant modification to the full-precision network results, we limit the attenuation to 70\% of the original range. This method shows negligible effect on the full-precision network but shows a significant improvement for the quantized network (Table \ref{tbl:QuantizationDegradationComparisonMobileNet}).
In addition, we found that due to the use of depthwise convolutions which have a small number of weights in each kernel the mean of the quantized weights might be different from the original value which results in a shift of the distribution. As a remedy to this problem we use knowledge distillation \cite{Hinton2015} and fine-tune only the biases to compensate for the shift so that the distribution means are the same for both the original and quantized network. Since only the biases are being updated 1000 unlabeled images are all that is needed and the fine-tuning process is very short. Used in conjunction with equalization we get competitive results (Table \ref{tbl:QuantizationDegradationComparisonMobileNet}) with the state-of-the art \cite{Jacob2017,Lee2018,Krishnamoorthi2018,Sheng2018,Rub1}. However, our result is unique in the following regards: it doesn't require channel-wise quantization which has significant overhead for hardware implementation as well as additional storage requirements. It uses only $\sim 1000$ unlabeled images allowing it to be used with off-the-shelf pre-trained models and the quantization process is simple and very fast to implement.
\begin{table}[]
\caption{MobileNet degradation of the different quantization schemes compared to the floating point implementation. All networks are taken from TF-slim models \cite{TFSilm}. }
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
\textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Net \\ Version\end{tabular}} & \textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}No \\ Equal\end{tabular}} & \textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}One \\ Step \\ Equal\end{tabular}} & \textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Two \\ Steps\\ Equal\end{tabular}} &
\textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}Bias \\ Only\end{tabular}} & \textbf{\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}} Equal+\\ Bias \end{tabular}} \\ \hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}V1-1.0\end{tabular} &$7.89\%$ & $6.12\%$ & $3.2\%$ & $1.3\%$ & $0.95\%$\\ \hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}V2-1.0\end{tabular} &$42.68\%$ & $4.07\%$ & $2.1\%$ & $1.5\%$ & $0.61\%$\\ \hline
\begin{tabular}[c]{@{}l@{}}V2-1.4\end{tabular} & $8.06\%$ & $6.21\%$ & $1.9\%$ & $1.4\%$ & $0.55\%$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tbl:QuantizationDegradationComparisonMobileNet}
\end{table}
\section{Discussion}
This paper highlights a property of convolutional neural networks that is often overlooked which allows inversely-proportional factorization. We showed methods to harness this property to generate equivalent networks that are much more robust to quantization noises. Our intuition was that networks have implicit "gain control" mechanisms that can be made explicit through channel equalization. When the channel are equalized, outliers are removed and quantization performance is improved. Given the same constrains of 8bits quantization, layer-wise scaling, and without re-training our algorithms reached state-of-the-art performance.
Our focus was on passive quantization allowing rapid deployment, however, equalization should benefit other quantization methods. When fine tuning or quantization-aware training are used, equalization can be integrated as a pre-processing step to reduce noise prior to training. We believe that most current quantization methods will benefit from applying proper equalization.
There is much more to explore towards realizing the full potential of inversely proportional factorizations. We suggested a greedy equalization algorithm that performs well but advanced equalization algorithms can push the improvement even further. For example, we showed that the impact of weights and activations quantization might change between layers. This property can be exploited for better equalization. In addition, advanced prediction methods of the noise's effect on the network performance like those suggested in \citet{pmlr-v70-sakr17a} or \citet{DBLP:journals/corr/ChoiEL16} can be used for equalization optimization.
More generally, this work is a first attempt to utilize equivalent net factorizations. The approach should find merit in other applications as well. For pruning, activation only equalization can be employed to make the interpretation of weight importance more natural. After equalization, small weights have less effect on the network and therefore are more likely to be pruned by methods that rely on the relative weight size\cite{Han2015}. During training, inversely-proportional factorization can be used to scale the gradients of different channels within a layer allowing for faster convergence or avoiding vanishing/exploding gradients.
|
\section{Introduction}
``Post-truth politics''~\cite{higgins2016post} and ``weaponized
relativism''\footnote{\small{\url{https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/mar/02/guardian-view-russian-propaganda-truth-out-there}}}
describe strategies by which misleading information can be used to
shape debates, redirect attention and sow confusion in order to
influence political outcomes. In recent times, concern has been raised
about politicians, foreign states, and hyper-partisan media exploiting social media to try and reach out and influence voters and citizens on an unprecedented scale. Where once social media were heralded as the beginning of a new age of interactive democracy, the question in the minds of researchers and many others is now ``can democracy survive the
internet''~\cite{persily20172016}. A working theory might postulate that the low bar to publishing created by Web 2.0 has resulted in a number of effects that we explore here under three headings:
\begin{itemize}
\item{\textbf{Partisan media}: today’s highly competitive online media
landscape has resulted in poorer quality journalism and worsening
opinion diversity, with misinformation, bias and factual
inaccuracies routinely creeping in. Many outlets also resort to
highly partisan reporting of key political events, which can have
acrimonious and divisive effects.}
\item{Online \textbf{propaganda}: State-backed
(e.g. Russia Today), ideology-driven (e.g. misogynistic or
Islamophobic), or for-profit clickbait websites and social media
accounts are engaged in spreading manipulative content and disinformation often with the intent to deepen social division and/or influence key political outcomes.}
\item{\textbf{Post-truth politics}, where politicians, parties and
governments frame key political issues in propaganda instead of
facts. Misleading claims are repeated, even when proven untrue by
journalists or independent fact checkers. This has a highly corrosive
effect on public trust and informed participation in democratic
processes.}
\end{itemize}
While researchers have started studying these
recently~\cite{skjesethall,ferrara2017disinformation}, the majority of
work has focused primarily on misinformation and fake news during
elections~\cite{vosoughi2018spread,kaminskajunk} and the role of bots in
spreading it \cite{shao2018spread,howard2016bots}. This paper presents large-scale, quantitative research on the presence and impact of these three ``Ps'' in online Twitter debates in two contexts: (i) the run up to the UK EU membership referendum (``Brexit''); and (ii) the information operations of Russia-backed online troll accounts. The aggregate data on which this work is based will be made available online upon publication.
We first compare the impact of highly partisan versus mainstream media
during the Brexit referendum, specifically comparing tweets by half a
million ``leave'' and ``remain'' supporters. Next, online propaganda strategies
are examined, specifically differentiating left- and right-wing troll
accounts. Lastly, we study the impact of misleading claims made by the
political leaders of the leave and remain campaigns. This is then
compared to the impact of the Russia-backed partisan media and
propaganda accounts during the referendum. In particular, just two of
the many misleading claims made by politicians during the referendum
were found to be cited in 4.6 times more tweets than the 7,103 tweets
related to Russia Today and Sputnik and in 10.2 times more tweets than
the 3,200 Brexit-related tweets by the Russian troll accounts.
Furthermore, late in 2018 Twitter released a set of nine million tweets
from accounts they have identified as belonging to the Russian Internet
Research Agency (IRA). The IRA dataset covers a time period spanning
from the beginning of the Ukraine conflict in 2014 through the Brexit
referendum and US presidential election until well into President Donald
Trump's term of office. These data provide rich possibilities for
investigating propaganda. We present here the first exhaustive analysis
of this new dataset, with a focus on what we can learn about how
propaganda succeeds and fails under the conditions created by modern
social media. We also accurately classify accounts into different
activity types (left trolls, right trolls, etc.), enabling a deeper
understanding of how different strategies pay off in terms of impact.
\subsection{Related Work}
The work presented here is set against a backdrop of increasing
awareness of the ways in which the internet and social media are
changing society. Social media have been widely observed to provide a
platform for fringe views. Faris \textit{et
al}~\shortcite{faris2017partisanship} showed that social media seem to
amplify more extreme views, with materials linked on Twitter being more
outr\'e than the open web, and on Facebook even more so, a finding
echoed by Silverman~\shortcite{silverman2015lies}. Barber\'a and
Rivero~\shortcite{barbera2015understanding} and Preotiuc-Pietro \textit{et
al}~\shortcite{preoctiuc2017beyond} both show that Twitter users with more
ideologically extreme positions post more content than those with
moderate views.
Researchers also report consistent asymmetries in the way these changed
conditions play out. Allcott and Gentzkow~\shortcite{allcott2017social},
during the run-up to the 2016 US presidential election, found 115
pro-Trump fake news stories, which were shared a total of 30 million
times. They found 41 pro-Clinton fake news stories, which were shared a
total of 7.6 million times. This disparity is again echoed in
Silverman's~\shortcite{silverman2015lies} work. Hare and
Poole~\shortcite{hare2014polarization} find that the increased separation
between American left and right wing partisans in recent years is
accounted for by a right wing shift to the right; left wing voters have
not changed their position.
There is little evidence of a difference in the way information
consumers of different political valences respond to materials that
might account for this
asymmetry~\cite{faris2017partisanship,allcott2017social}. Instead, Faris
\textit{et al} suggest that in the case of the 2016 presidential
election, it was the cooperative behaviour of pro-Trump media themselves
that led to an advantage, in a phenomenon they dub ``network
propaganda''. This raises questions about the reach of such a network or
the conditions under which it might arise elsewhere, and its
relationship to political views if any. The idea of an ``alternate
reality'' created by network propaganda has implications for social
polarization given Lewandowsky \textit{et
al}'s~\shortcite{lewandowsky2017beyond} observation that where partisans are
isolated in echo chambers extremism is rewarded, as a message may reach
sympathizers without the cost attached in alienating centric or opposing
voters.
A body of work~\cite{lansdall2016change,mangold2016should} has begun to
explore Brexit opinion and sentiment as expressed on Twitter. Matsuo and
Benoit~\footnote{\small{\url{http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/brexit/2017/03/16/more-positive-assertive-and-forward-looking-how-leave-won-twitter/}}}
focus on differences in the dialogue between leave and remain camps.
Moore and Ramsay~\shortcite{moore2017uk}'s mostly manual research is focused
on analysing the newspaper media during the referendum and highlights
differences in the tone of the different campaigns. Our work builds on
theirs by exploring how the behaviour they discuss relates to a medium's
partisan appeal, as well as focusing on social media, rather than
newspapers.
Howard and Kollanyi~\shortcite{howard2016bots} share our interest in
propaganda. Our novel contributon is in exploiting large-scale, reliable
voter classification in order to explore partisan dynamics and
polarisation. Their group have also specifically investigated Russian
bot involvement in Brexit~\cite{narayananrussian}, but on a
significantly smaller scale. Likewise, Bastos and
Mercea~\shortcite{bastos2017brexit} study the impact of bot activity during
Brexit, and present some observations about the nature of the content
they spread. They find that such materials are likely to be
user-generated, tabloid-style emotionally orientated materials. The role
of Twitter misinformation and bot activity in the context of the 2016 US
presidential election has attracted much research attention, as
previously discussed. This has primarily focused on the amount of
traffic generated by bots or trolls, without providing evidence of
impact. In this paper, instead, we focus on quantifying bot impact and
investigating the strategies for achieving it.
The release of the IRA dataset is so recent as to preclude much in the
way of in-depth investigation so far.The largest prior study available
by Linvill and Warren~\shortcite{linvill2018troll} still had access to only 3
million tweets, which is very significantly less than the 9 million just
released by Twitter. This new large corpus constitutes an unprecedented
opportunity, since troll accounts are rapidly suspended by the platform,
creating a moving target for research.
\subsection{Term Definitions}
The politically-motivated actors and strategies that are central to this
study (partisan media, propaganda, and post-truth politics) have complex, overlapping characteristics. Figure~\ref{fig:defterms} provides a conceptual diagram of these inter-relationships, as examined in the scope of this paper. We distinguish explicitly \textit{political vs. apolitical}, because although there are many other cases where propaganda and partisan media play a significant role, the focus here is on political influences. The sector of the figure that we are interested in in this work is the \textit{top right}; namely, political and less truthful/unbiased, as we aim to highlight these important new trends in techno-political sociology. Others\footnote{\small{\url{https://medium.com/1st-draft/fake-news-its-complicated-d0f773766c79}}} have explored the ``Ps'' concept with more coverage of apolitical motivations.
Inevitably there is overlap and grey areas between the media and
behaviours we discuss in this work. Motivations for behaviours are
unclear; for example, is a popular political message in the press
intended to influence political outcomes or sell more newspapers? In
this work we confine our interest to media behaviour that is
politically engaged \textit{and} misleading. We therefore define:
\begin{itemize}
\item{\textbf{Partisan media} to to be media presenting themselves as
news, including:}
\begin{itemize}
\item{\textbf{Partisan press}; mainstream media unambiguously identifying as providers of news reportage, but who may present partisan materials as
more factual than they really are;}
\item{\textbf{Alternative media}; a broad and varied ecosystem of
new publishers presenting themselves as news, some of whom are politically partisan and therefore of interest;}
\end{itemize}
\item{\textbf{Propaganda} to be politically motivated behaviours and
materials with a primary purpose of influencing toward a particular point of view, see e.g. OED.\footnote{\small{\url{http://www.oed.com/view/Entry/152605}}} Origin may be veiled;}
\item{\textbf{Post-truth politics} to be politically motivated output
with little regard for truth and public, political figure or
entity as instigator;}
\end{itemize}
We explore our findings below under these headings.
\vspace{0.25in}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.40\textwidth]{defining-terms.png}
\captionof{figure}{Term Definition and Conceptualisation}
\label{fig:defterms}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.15in}
\section{Methodology}
The first corpus used is a large collection of tweets collected using the GATE Cloud Twitter
Collector~\footnote{\small{\url{https://cloud.gate.ac.uk/shopfront/displayItem/twitter-collector}}}, a tool that allows tweets to be gathered according to search criteria as they appear, and processed using
GATE~\footnote{\small{\url{https://gate.ac.uk/}}} text processing
pipelines to enrich the tweets with relevant background information,
including the EU membership stance of the author. The method is described more fully by Maynard \textit{et al}~\shortcite{maynard2017framework}.
In the next section we describe collecting the tweets, then after that the user vote intent classification. The corpus thus enriched was indexed using the M\'imir
search engine for efficient exploration, which again is described in
more detail by Maynard \textit{et al}~\shortcite{maynard2017framework}.
The second corpus is Twitter's IRA data downloaded from their site.\footnote{\small{\url{https://about.twitter.com/en_us/values/elections-integrity.html#data}}} We introduce this corpus at the end of this section and describe how we classified the accounts into six types introduced by Linvill and Warren~\shortcite{linvill2018troll}. These account types are distinctively different in behaviour, and classifying them enabled important insights.
\subsubsection*{Partisanship Attention Score}
Throughout the work we make use of Partisanship Attention Score (PAS), first introduced by Faris \textit{et
al}~\shortcite{faris2017partisanship}. This metric is a simple ratio of
the number of times a source is linked by one valence of user, for
example leavers, versus the other valence. In this work we use
``leave-PAS'' to describe a PAS in which leave linkers outnumber
remain linkers, and ``remain-PAS'' to describe a PAS in which remain
linkers dominate. We have grouped sources into five sets; those in
which a PAS is greater than 30:1 (one leave set and one remain set),
those in which the PAS is greater than 3:1 (leave and remain) and
those with a more balanced PAS of less than 3:1. The 30:1 and 3:1
ratios were selected heuristically--throughout the work we are careful
to reflect on how that choice might affect the results.
\subsection{Brexit Tweet Collection}
Around 17.5 million tweets were collected up to and including 23 June
2016 (EU referendum day). The highest volume was 2 million tweets on
Jun 23rd (only 3,300 lost due to rate limiting), with just over 1.5
million during poll opening times. Of the 2 million, 57\% were
retweets and 5\% replies. June 22nd was second highest, with 1.3
million tweets. The 17.5 million tweets were authored by just over 2
million distinct Twitter users (2,016,896). The work presented here
focuses on a subset of these, covering the month up to and including
June 23rd. Within that period, there were just over 13.2 million
tweets, from which 4.5 million were original tweets (4,594,948), 7.7
million were retweets (7,767,726) and 850 thousand were replies
(858,492). These were sent by just over 1.8 million distinct
users. The tweets were collected based on the following keywords and
hashtags: \textit{votein, yestoeu, leaveeu, beleave, EU referendum,
voteremain, bremain, no2eu, betteroffout, strongerin, euref,
betteroffin, eureferendum, yes2eu, voteleave, voteout, notoeu,
eureform, ukineu, britainout, brexit, leadnotleave}. These were
chosen for being the main hashtags, and are broadly balanced
across remain and leave hashtags, though the ultimate test of the
balance of the dataset lies in the number of leavers and remainers
found in it, which is discussed below.
Most URLs found in tweets have been shortened, either automatically by
Twitter or manually by the user, which has the side effect of
obfuscating the original domain being linked to. For this work we
expanded the URLs in tweets using the following approach. From manual
analysis of the URLs we accumulated a list of 18 URL shorteners or
redirect services: shr.gs, bit.ly, j.mp, ow.ly, trib.al, tinyurl.com,
ift.tt, ln.is, dlvr.it, t.co, feeds.feedburner.com,
redirect.viglink.com, feedproxy.google.com, news.google.com,
www.bing.com, linkis.com, goo.gl, and adf.ly. All URLs from other
domains were considered to already be expanded. (A small number of
minor URL shorteners have gone unexpanded due to the long tail in this
large tweet set and the necessity of manually identifying shortening
services.) When we saw a shortened URL it was expanded, either by
following HTTP redirects or using the API of the shortener,
recursively until the resulting URL no longer pointed to a domain in
our list of shorteners.
\subsection{User Vote Intent Classification}
Classification of users according to vote intent was done on the basis
of tweets authored by them and identified as being in favour of
leaving or remaining in the EU. Such tweets were identified using 59
hashtags indicating allegiance, given in the online experimental
materials\footnote{\small{\url{http://http://staffwww.dcs.shef.ac.uk/people/G.Gorrell/publications-materials/brexit-domains-shared-materials.ods}}}
Hashtags in the final position more reliably summarise the tweeter's position, so only these were used. Consider, for example. ``is Britain really \#strongerin? I don't think so! \#voteleave''.
This approach was evaluated using a set of users that explicitly
declared their vote intent. A company called
Brndstr\footnote{\small{\url{http://www.brndstr.com/}}} ran a campaign
offering a topical profile image modification (a flag overlaid on their profile picture)
in response to a formulaic vote intent declaration mentioning their brand. This enabled a ground truth sample to be easily and accurately gathered. On these data, we found our method produced a 94\% accuracy even on the basis of a single partisan tweet (where three are required, an accuracy of 99\% can be obtained, though only 60,000 such users can be found, as opposed to 290,000 with at least one partisan tweet). The Brndstr data itself, consisting of around 100,000 users of each valence, was also used to supplement the set, raising the accuracy further, and resulting in a list of 208,113 leave voters and 270,246 remain voters. Table~\ref{tab:votercl} gives detailed statistics for three conditions; one matching tweet found for that user, two found or three found. ``Total'' is the total number of users found with that number of matching tweets. ``Brndstr found'' is the number of those users found in the Brndstr set, and so able to be evaluated. The remaining figures refer to that set, providing an accuracy for the total list of users found using the given minimum number of partisan tweets.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
& \textbf{Total} & \textbf{Brndstr} & \textbf{Of found} & \textbf{Accuracy} & \textbf{Cohen's}\\
& & \textbf{found} & \textbf{correct} & & \textbf{kappa} \\
\hline
Leavers, 3\# & 34539 & 1142 & 1129 & 0.987 & 0.972\\
Remainers, 3\# & 26674 & 603 & 594 & &\\
\hline
Leavers, 2\# & 49080 & 1368 & 1350 & 0.984 & 0.966\\
Remainers, 2\# & 50972 & 901 & 882 & &\\
\hline
Leavers, 1\# & 114519 & 1935 & 1801 & 0.943 & 0.885\\
Remainers, 1\# & 175042 & 1744 & 1667 & &\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\captionof{table}{Brexit Classifier Accuracy}
\label{tab:votercl}
\end{table}
\vspace{0.2in}
There may be a case for using a threshold of two hashtags in order to
produce a more balanced set of leavers and remainers, but this would
disproportionately exclude remainers with more moderate feelings (if
the number of hashtags can be seen as an indicator of this). The
resulting set is somewhat slanted toward remainers, demonstrating the
obvious; that Twitter isn't a representative sample of the UK
population, who voted to leave the EU to the order of 52\%. However,
leavers were more vocal and apparent in the data presented below,
contrary to what we would expect if the higher number of remainers had
affected the result. It is possible that some users changed their mind
about how to vote after making their Brndstr declaration, but voters
making an online declaration of their vote intent are perhaps those
less likely to vacillate, and the work can in either case be seen as
an exploration of the behaviour of those who held a particular
allegiance during the time period studied.
\subsection{IRA Corpus and Account Classification}\label{sec:ira-dataset}
The Twitter IRA corpus\footnote{\small{\url{https://about.twitter.com/en_us/values/elections-integrity.html#data}}} contains 3,836 unique users and 9,041,308 tweets. The tweets are posted in 57 different languages, but most of the tweets are in Russian (53.68\%) and English (36.08\%), comprising almost 90\% of the tweets. The majority of accounts (as opposed to tweets) are self-declared English language (2,384), but note that many of these have Russian display names. Average account age is around four years, and the longest accounts are as much as ten years old. Linvill and Warren~\shortcite{linvill2018troll} have analyzed the English language accounts and find several key types of account emerging. A large amount of activity in both the English and Russian accounts is given to \textbf{news} provision. Secondly, many accounts seem to engage in \textbf{hashtag games}, which may be an easy way to establish a history for an account to make it seem more credible. Of particular interest however are the political trolls. \textbf{Left trolls} pose as individuals interested in the Black Lives Matter campaign. \textbf{Right trolls} are patriotic, anti-immigration Trump supporters. Among left and right trolls, several have achieved large follower numbers and even a degree of fame.\footnote{\small{\url{https://www.theguardian.com/technology/shortcuts/2017/nov/03/jenna-abrams-the-trump-loving-twitter-star-who-never-really-existed}}} Finally there are \textbf{fearmonger} trolls, that propagate scares, and a small number of \textbf{commercial} trolls. The Russian language accounts may also provide news, or may pose as individuals with opinions about for example Ukraine or western politics. These troll types provide insight into how IRA effort was targeted and to what extent these different behaviour types translate into impact, such as followers attracted to the accounts and retweets achieved. For this reason we took their dataset and built a classifier enabling us to classify all the accounts.
Linvill and Warren manually categorized 1,102 IRA-associated handles into the six categories described above, providing us with an adequate training set to build a classifier. 55\% of their labelled accounts are right trolls, 20\% are left trolls, 10\% are fearmonger and hashtag gamer accounts, 5\% are newsfeeds and less than 1\% are commercial accounts. We used a support vector machine (SVM) to predict the categories of the remaining accounts. Features were term frequency-inverse document frequency (tf-idf) of English tweet texts, the domain of shared links including the domains of the shortened and expanded versions of the links, and the topic distribution of the tweet text.
We used 75\% of the dataset for training and 25\% for testing. The F1 score was 0.89, which was also equal to precision and recall values. The final model was trained on all data and was used to classify the remaining 2157 accounts which had English tweets. No attempt was made to classify an account that had no English language tweets. The resulting fully classified dataset contains 60\% right trolls, 12\% fearmongers, 11\% having no English language tweets, 10\% left trolls, 5\% hashtag gamers, 3\% newsfeed accounts and negligible commercial accounts (n=6). The reason for the change in class proportions is likely to be the criteria that Linvill and Warren used for selecting accounts to manually classify. They classified accounts represented in their tweet set, which was collected via retrospective search on IRA account names in late 2017, and collected therefore only tweets still available at that point going back to mid-2015. We find generally speaking more left and right trolls than in their sample, and less newsfeeds and hashtag gamers.
\section{Findings}
We now present findings under the headings of the three ``Ps'', beginning with partisan media, then moving on to propaganda, then post-truth politics.
\subsection{Partisan Media}
\label{sec:partisan}
We begin our investigation with the Brexit tweet collection described above. As a starting point for quantifying the various influences and evidence of partisanship, the top 100 most posted domains were manually grouped into high level categories, as shown in figure~\ref{fig:typelink}. The dominant domain to appear was Twitter itself, appearing whenever anyone posts an image, as well as when they link to another tweet. After that, the greater proportion of the links are to items in a wide variety of mainstream news media. ``Other content hosts'' refers to smaller content platforms such as Instagram. YouTube and Facebook are listed separately. Finally, smaller amounts of material are linked from referendum campaign sites and alternative media. (Alternative media range from publications that are nearly mainstream through to conspiracy sites and fake news.) The ``long tail'' of a further 17,000 less linked domains that haven't been
manually classified are included in the chart to give a quantification
of the unknown; note that this unknown section is likely to contain
many more small alternative media, blogs etc. than mainstream
media. Also only domains that were tweeted at least once by a user
that has been classified for vote intent were included. The actual
number of domains mentioned in the set is much greater. The graph broadly agrees with table 1 of Narayanan \textit{et
al}~\shortcite{narayananrussian}. We are also able divide each count into
three parts, indicating the proportion of tweets in that section by
unclassified users, remainers and leavers. It is evident at a glance
that remainers were tweeting less linked material, since their
representation is smaller. Also there were fewer remainers in the
unclassified tail (that is, the column of unclassified sites, not the
unclassified users), suggesting perhaps a preference for more popular
sites on the part of remainers. It is unknown how many leavers,
remainers and undecideds constitute the unclassified users (the grey
bottom section of the columns) but there's no particular reason why
the classified users wouldn't give a representative impression.
\vspace{0.15in}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.40\textwidth]{./typelink.png}
\captionof{figure}{Types of links posted}
\label{fig:typelink}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.15in}
\subsubsection*{PAS of High Impact Media}
Figure~\ref{fig:biggestsites} shows the sites that had the most
impact, in terms of total number of times they appeared in tweets in
the Brexit dataset. These were almost entirely mainstream media,
mostly UK media, with the exception of the remain campaign site
``ukstronger.in'' and the UK government domain. The graph gives total
counts of appearances of the most influential domains, colour coded by
partisanship attention score (PAS); the ratio of links from leave
voters to remain voters or vice versa. Platforms such as Facebook,
where the site doesn't author the content, are excluded. Only link
appearances in original tweets are used in this graph (not appearances
in retweets or replies). Tables~\ref{tab:neutralishsites}
and~\ref{tab:partisansites} in the appendix give a longer
list of sites. The full set is also available for
download~\footnote{\small{\url{http://http://staffwww.dcs.shef.ac.uk/people/G.Gorrell/publications-materials/brexit-domains-shared-materials.ods}}}
\vspace{0.15in}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{./high-impact-sites.png}
\captionof{figure}{Number of appearances of high impact sites}
\label{fig:biggestsites}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.15in}
On page 13 of Moore and Ramsay~\shortcite{moore2017uk} a similar graph
shows the number of referendum-related articles published by UK
media. The number of Brexit articles published by a medium shows a
strong correlation to its link presence on Twitter (0.71). In fact,
the Express has been somewhat less taken up on Twitter than its
engagement with the subject might predict; figure~\ref{fig:grassroots}
and its discussion later in the paper may offer further insights on
this point.
It is evident that mainstream media were the dominant source of linked
materials in the Brexit discussion on Twitter, with the six most
influential domains all being British mainstream media as shown in
figure~\ref{fig:biggestsites}. Smaller in influence but nonetheless
significant were alternative media, with Breitbart appearing in ninth
place in figure~\ref{fig:biggestsites}, user-shared content on other
content platforms such as Facebook, and campaign sites. This suggests
a continuing important role for traditional media, though leaves
questions about how social media, and
indeed alternative media, may interact to popularize certain materials
and influence the focus. It is also apparent that the most popular
domains were either neutral in their appeal or appealed to leavers, with
only two smaller sources, the government and the ``Stronger In''
campaign, appealing to remainers. This subject is taken up more fully
in the next section.
\subsubsection{Ground-Truthing Mainstream Media}
Figure~\ref{fig:mediabias}a shows British mainstream newspapers ranked from left to right in order of their PAS ratio. For those media with negative leave PAS ratios, the remain PAS ratio has been plotted (ratio of appearances in remain tweets against those in leave tweets). In this way, both leave and remain media can be shown commensurately on the same graph. The point at which the PAS ratios switch direction is indicated with a vertical arrow. The extreme right of the graph, therefore, shows the newspaper with the highest remain PAS ratio (The Guardian/Observer). Two horizontal lines indicate PAS ratios of 3:1 and 30:1. PAS ratios for link appearances in all tweets and just original tweets are shown.
In figure~\ref{fig:mediabias}b, the green line indicates the number of upheld press complaints for that medium. The purple line also includes the number of complaints for which a resolution was found. The majority of press complaints regarded articles that were anti-immigration in their focus.
In figure~\ref{fig:mediabias}c, newspaper front pages provided by Moore and Ramsay~\shortcite{moore2017uk} for the two month period preceding the referendum have been manually classified as leave, remain or neutral in their orientation. An example of a leave front page might be "EU 'very bad' for pensions" (The Express, June 21st 2016). An example of a remain front page might be "Vote remain today" (The Mirror, June 23rd 2016). Bars show leave front pages in green and remain in purple. Where possible, the original article was consulted before classifying a front page. However, in many cases this information wasn't accessible. In these cases, a conservative judgment was reached, but this means that counts for the Sun and the Independent may be a little depressed, since the full article usually wasn't available for them. Note also that the work was completed by a single annotator, and that in many cases, classifying the headlines was quite a subtle judgment call.
\vspace{0.15in}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.45\textwidth]{./press-complaints-etc.png}
\captionof{figure}{PAS (a), Press Complaints (b) and Partisan Front Page Counts (c) for UK Mainstream News Media}
\label{fig:mediabias}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.15in}
Several British newspapers declared their allegiances regarding Brexit, reportedly giving media supporting the UK leaving the EU an audience of around 4.8 million, while those in favour of remaining in the EU reach just over 3
million~\footnote{\small{\url{https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/which-newspapers-support-brexit_uk_5768fad2e4b0a4f99adc6525}}}. Stance information is included in figure~\ref{fig:mediabias}c in the form of coloured marks--a green square for leave and a purple circle for remain. Both marks appear for the Mail because the Daily Mail shares its domain with the Mail on Sunday. The Daily Mail were in favour of leaving the EU, and the Mail on Sunday, with a slightly lower circulation, were in favour of remaining.
PAS was found to correlate with press complaints (0.922, p\textless0.001) as well as bias as quantified by the magnitude of the difference between pro- and anti-Europe front page counts (0.842, p\textless0.001).
Figure~\ref{fig:mediabias}a shows that all of the media that declared their support for the remain cause were broadly neutral in their appeal, with the exception of the Guardian/Observer, who, when retweets and replies are counted, has a leave PAS greater than 3:1. The media that declared their official support for leave all to varying extent appealed more to leavers. This brings to mind Faris \textit{et al}'s~\cite{faris2017partisanship} conclusion from their study of the 2016 US presidential election that mainstream media ranging from left to centre right show more investment in principles of neutrality. The Brexit question cut across the political spectrum, although in terms of media stance, the left-leaning papers favoured remain and the right, leave. However, it is also possible that leavers engaged with
remain materials for other reasons. Press complaints and front page partisanship data provide further insights. It is interesting to note that PAS seems to echo upheld press complaints better than it does partisanship as indicated by front pages. There are prominent cases where media published many stories in keeping with their Brexit stance, but without attracting press complaints; most notably the Telegraph and the Guardian. Materials supportive of a particular stance don't \textit{per se} seem to draw partisan attention---the PAS of both these media is low.
This is important in correctly interpreting figure~\ref{fig:biggestsites}. The medium with the biggest impact is the Guardian, which published many pro-remain articles. So in this sense, there wasn't a lack of attention to pro-remain materials, and if the colour coding of the graph were based on the ``front page diff'' used above, the impression created would be quite
different. PAS captures something different. Manual review of the tweets suggests that Guardian articles tend to be factual in tone, and attract critical engagement from leavers. Express articles tend to use emotive and suggestive language, and seem to attract less discussion. Moore and Ramsay's analysis~\shortcite{moore2017uk} gives much information about the rhetorical styles employed by the press in the run-up to the referendum. Circulation size does not explain the number of complaints received, with the Express having less than half the readership of any of the four largest
media.\footnote{\small{\url{http://www.pressgazette.co.uk/nrs-national-press-readership-data-telegraph-overtakes-guardian-as-most-read-quality-title-in-printonline/}}}
\subsubsection*{Extreme/Affective Materials}
We saw in section~\ref{sec:partisan} that high PAS scores show a potential relationship with upheld press complaints, and that polarity of PAS is a good indicator of the stance of the source, as determined from press front pages. We now use PAS scores of greater than 30:1 to select sources that may be misleading for further examination. Sites of either camp with at least 1000 total mentions in tweets in the dataset and at least 50 tweets, retweets or replies by leavers or remainers were manually analysed. We present the sites divided into 4 categories; mainstream media, alternative media, campaign sites and other sites. ``Others'' includes for example personal blogs or special interest websites not primarily focused on Brexit.
\vspace{0.15in}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.40\textwidth,height=2.5in]{./whohighlypreferred.png}
\captionof{figure}{Who are the PAS\textgreater30:1 influencers?}
\label{fig:whohighlypreferred}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.15in}
Figure~\ref{fig:whohighlypreferred} shows that remain
PAS\textgreater30:1 sites are dominated by explicit campaign sites. As
we would expect given the data above, among leave influencers we see
more mainstream media---note that the only high PAS mainstream media
were leave media; namely the Express. We also see a much greater role
for alternative media in the leave campaign. The total impact of leave
PAS\textgreater30:1 media was 389,000 mentions. For remain it was
70146 mentions, or 18\% of the PAS\textgreater30:1 impact. All sites
with a PAS higher than 30:1 and more than 5000 mentions are shown in
figure~\ref{fig:whohp}. The Express dominates, with the US alternative
medium Breitbart in second place. As indicated above, remain sites are
mainly campaign sites. Other leave sites are media ranging from
alternative to conspiracy, plus the campaign site
``voteleavetakecontrol.org''. A longer list can be found in
table~\ref{tab:partisansites} in the appendix.
\vspace{0.15in}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{./hp.png}
\captionof{figure}{Who are the PAS\textgreater30:1 sites?}
\label{fig:whohp}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.15in}
Key observations from figure~\ref{fig:whohighlypreferred} include that
in terms of mentions in tweets, the influence of leave sites dwarfs
that of remain sites. It is also notable in that figure that high
remain-PAS sites were mostly explicit campaign sites; in other words,
openly partisan, with no suggestion of providing reportage. The range
of media providing high leave-PAS materials, plus the presence of
Breitbart raises the question of whether these findings demonstrate a
similar phenomenon happening in the UK as described by Faris
\textit{et al}, or whether indeed it is simply the same phenomenon -
an extension of the same network of propaganda.
Figure~\ref{fig:grassroots} presents counts of sites according to
their PAS status. A threshold of 20 total original tweets by leavers
and remainers was applied, in order to exclude sites for which too
little evidence was available to classify them. The graph shows peaks
to either extreme, despite the stringent 30:1 criterion, reinforcing
previous researchers' findings that extreme content tends to
proliferate on social
media~\cite{faris2017partisanship,silverman2015lies,barbera2015understanding,preoctiuc2017beyond}. The
neutral peak most likely arises because content-neutral platforms such
as Facebook are counted here, rather than because there is a peak in
neutral materials such as unbiased news providers. On the right we see
the actual link counts to the sites. Twitter mentions have not been
included, since they give a large, uninformative boost to the neutral
count. Were other content-neutral platforms to be excluded, this count
would be lower still. Nonetheless, we see that the extremes no longer
outnumber the moderate sites. Evidently most Twitter users prefer less
extreme materials of those on offer. However, this provides evidence of the diet Twitter is offering.
\vspace{0.15in}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{grassroots.png}
\captionof{figure}{All domains vs total mentions by PAS of domain}
\label{fig:grassroots}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.15in}
\subsection{Online Propaganda}
\label{sec:propaganda}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.75\textwidth,height=10.5cm]{./account-type-graph.png}
\captionof{figure}{Network of IRA Troll Accounts}
\label{fig:toptrolls}
\end{figure*}
Recall that political propaganda is non-objective information, which is aimed at influencing citizens and/or furthering a political agenda. In this section we use the Twitter IRA tweet collection, introduced in Section~\ref{sec:ira-dataset}, to explore evidence for the impact of different propaganda strategies.
\vspace{0.15in}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.35\textwidth]{./left-hashtags.png}
\captionof{figure}{Left Troll Hashtags}
\label{fig:left-hashtags}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.15in}
\vspace{0.15in}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.35\textwidth]{./right-hashtags.png}
\captionof{figure}{Right Troll Hashtags}
\label{fig:right-hashtags}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.15in}
Initially, in the autumn of 2017, Twitter released a list of around 3,000 Twitter accounts to US Congress that they had identified as being Russian state-controlled troll accounts, and had suspended. In the autumn of 2018, the full set of 9 million tweets by these IRA propaganda accounts were released. The majority of tweets are in Russian as noted above, primarily with Ukraine-related focus. In contrast, the English language tweets focus predominantly on US politics.
Prior to the release of the full 9 million tweet set, Linvill and Warren~\shortcite{linvill2018troll} researched a partial subset of 3 million tweets by most of the IRA accounts, which they gathered and released independently. They found differing patterns of troll activity, with news accounts keeping up a relatively steady output of genuine news and achieving a fair reach, hashtag trolls showing bursty activity around playing ``hashtag games''\footnote{\small{\url{https://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-dwoskin/you-should-be-playing-has_b_7910728.html}}} (i.e., seeking to get many retweets and favourites through exploiting hashtags), and left and right trolls being more event-triggered. Political trolls in some cases achieve a significant following. Examples are given in table~\ref{tab:toptrolls}, and include both left and right trolls and news feeds.
Figures~\ref{fig:left-hashtags} and~\ref{fig:right-hashtags} give word clouds we generated for the subset of left and right troll accounts that were manually identified by Linvill and Warren~\shortcite{linvill2018troll}. Left troll material has a strong Black issues focus, and often talks about conflict with the police. Right troll material is political, supportive of Trump, against the Democrats and anti-Muslim.\footnote{``TCOT'' means ``Top Conservatives on Twitter''; ``PJNET'' means ``Patriot Journalist Network''.} We also find differences in the web domains left and right trolls tend to link. The most-linked domains of we found for Linvill and Warren's left and right trolls are included in table~\ref{tab:irasites} in the appendix. Domains intersect with domains linked by leavers and remainers, as described above and also included in the appendix. Three sites frequently linked by left trolls appear on the Brexit list; the Independent, the Huffington Post and the New York Times. All had a neutral PAS. Three highly hyperpartisan sites frequently linked by right trolls also appear on the Brexit list; Breitbart, Infowars and the Express. All had a leave PAS of greater than 30:1. This suggests an overlap in outlook between Brexit leave voters and the right troll persona. Left trolls link neutral sites as well as Black-focused sites that aren't relevant to Brexit.
\vspace{0.15in}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
\textbf{Type} & \textbf{Number} & \textbf{Av Tw} & \textbf{Av Orig} & \textbf{Retw Rec} & \textbf{Av Foll} & \textbf{Retw Rat}\\
\hline
Right & 2194 & 2560 & 1436 & 8710 & 1609 & 6.066\\
Left & 339 & 2755 & 1025 & 30121 & 1815 & 29.377\\
Fearmonger & 432 & 487 & 481 & 10 & 62 & 0.022\\
Hashtag & 189 & 3041 & 1582 & 924 & 2225 & 0.584\\
News & 99 & 9981 & 9859 & 13925 & 9552 & 1.412\\
\hline
All trolls & 3667 & 2466 & 1537 & 8522 & 1741 & 5.546\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\captionof{table}{Troll Impact}
\label{tab:impact}
\end{table}
\vspace{0.15in}
Table~\ref{tab:impact} gives impact statistics for the different troll types. First we give average number of tweets, then average number of original tweets (excluding retweets). Then we report average number of retweets received, average number of followers and rate of retweets per original tweet. It is clear that political trolls achieve by far the best ratio of retweets to original tweets. Left trolls achieve more retweets per original tweet than right trolls, both in terms of mean, shown in the table, and median (48 vs. 21). However, other account types are more highly followed, and news and hashtag accounts may influence their followers even though their tweets do not inspire retweets to the same extent. Where an agent retweets someone else's tweet rather than authoring an original tweet, we don't have data about how widely retweeted that tweet was, as it counts for the original author; it is possible that agents retweeting the tweets of others are having significant impact in amplifying a message. Of the account types shown, all have average longevities of active life approaching a couple of years with the exception of fearmonger trolls, where the average duration of active life (first activity to last activity) is less than six months. Follower count correlates with retweet rate per original tweet to the tune of 0.25, which is highly significant, but as we see, different types of tweeting behaviour produce different profiles in terms of being followed and being retweeted.
\begin{comment}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
\textbf{Troll Type} & \textbf{Number} & \textbf{Av. Tweets} & \textbf{Av. Orig,} & \textbf{Av. Retw. Rec.} & \textbf{Av. Followers} & \textbf{Retw./Tw. Rate}\\
\hline
Right & 27 & 3432 & 407917 & 26713 & 118.848\\
Left & 11 & 7734 & 892510 & 31026 & 115.401\\
News & 36 & 22974 & 18180 & 22016 & 0.791\\
Hashtag & 13 & 10277 & 4886 & 10232 & 0.476\\
\hline
All typed trolls & 86 & 12941 & 244063 & 22197 & 18.858\\
All trolls & 3667 & 2466 & 8522 & 1740 & 3.456\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\caption{Troll Impact}
\label{tab:impact}
\end{table}
\end{comment}
\vspace{0.15in}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{./retweet-timeline.png}
\captionof{figure}{Timeline of Retweets Achieved by Troll Type}
\label{fig:retweettimeline}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.15in}
In figure~\ref{fig:retweettimeline} we see a timeline of retweets achieved for the different types of trolling behaviour. This gives an indicator of the effectiveness of the different troll types. The figure is available in interactive form at \url{https://gate.ac.uk/ira/retweet_counts_excluding_from_trolls.html}. It is notable that political trolls are achieving many more retweets than any other type, with the others barely appearing in the graph. Retweets by other IRA trolls have been removed from these counts. As a whole, IRA trolls have not tended to retweet each other a great deal; 27\% of retweets in the corpus are of other trolls, but this was extremely variable; right trolls retweeted each other significantly until the end of 2016 then stopped. Hashtag gamers do retweet each other to a minor extent.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
\textbf{Name} & \textbf{Bio} & \textbf{Followers} & \textbf{Tweets}\\
\hline
TEN\_GOP & Unofficial Twitter of Tennessee Republicans. & 147,767 & 10,794\\
& Covering breaking news, national politics, & &\\
& foreign policy and more. \#MAGA \#2A & &\\
\hline
Jenn\_Abrams & Calm down, I'm not pro-Trump. I am pro-& 79,152 & 25,378\\
& common sense. Any offers/ideas/questions? & & \\
& DM or email me <EMAIL> & & \\
& (Yes, there are 3 Ns) & & \\
\hline
Pamela\_Moore13 & Southern. Conservative. Pro God. Anti & 72,121 & 6,203\\
& Racism & & \\
\hline
TodayNYCity & New York City's local news on Twitter. & 66,980 & 59,420\\
& Breaking news, sports, events and & & \\
& international news. Tweet us or DM & & \\
\hline
ELEVEN\_GOP & This is our back-up account in case & 59,279 & 115\\
& anything happens to @TEN\_GOP & & \\
\hline
wokeluisa & APSA. \#Blackexcellence. Political science & 57,295 & 2,288\\
& major & & \\
\hline
Crystal1Johnson & It is our responsibility to promote the positive & 56,581 & 7,915\\
& things that happen in our communities. & & \\
\hline
SouthLoneStar & Proud TEXAN and AMERICAN patriot \#2a & 53,999 & 3,600\\
& \#prolife \#Trump2016 \#TrumpPence16 Fuck & & \\
& Islam and PC. Don't mess with Texas! & & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\captionof{table}{High Impact IRA Trolls}
\label{tab:toptrolls}
\end{table}
\vspace{0.15in}
Figure~\ref{fig:toptrolls} gives a network diagram of only trolls with more than 5,000 followers. Connections are based on the trolls mentioning, retweeting, replying to or quoting each other, not whether they follow each other, as we do not have access to that information in the dataset released by Twitter. ``Not English'' accounts are mostly Russian, and consist of a large number of newsfeed accounts (``novosti'') as well as others. The figure is available in interactive form at \url{https://gate.ac.uk/ira/network/}.
In the following subsections we discuss a selection of cases illustrating different aspects of the dataset that shed light on some aspect of online propaganda. We discuss prominent ``spikes''; brief periods of much escalated tweeting. We also briefly cover an attempt at a ``scare'' from 2014, before concluding with an analysis of the relevance of Russian Twitter propaganda to Brexit.
\vspace{0.15in}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{./english-russian-tweet-timeline.png}
\captionof{figure}{Timeline of Tweet Activity}
\label{fig:tweet-timeline}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.15in}
\subsubsection*{Cases}
There are three prominent spikes in activity among English language tweets, and three among the Russian ones, as can be seen in figure~\ref{fig:tweet-timeline}. The figure is available in interactive form at \url{https://gate.ac.uk/ira/daily_tweets.html}. The first and greatest of the English spikes shows little in the way of meaningful content. Impact (retweets) in this period was negligible despite a high number of original tweets. The second was timed well, in October 2016, as an attempt to influence Americans who would go to the polls to elect a new president the following month. The final of three spikes in English language tweets occurred in August 2017 and focuses on the incidents in Charlottesville.\footnote{\small{\url{https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite_the_Right_rally}}} Table~\ref{tab:spikes} gives an overview of the spikes. ``\% Retw'' gives the percentage of the tweets that were retweets of others, whereas ``Retw Rec'' gives number of times these tweets were retweeted, and ``Retw Rat'' gives number of times each tweet was retweeted.
\vspace{0.15in}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
\textbf{When} & \textbf{Lang} & \textbf{Tweet Total} & \textbf{\% Retw} & \textbf{Retw Rec} & \textbf{Retw Rat}\\
\hline
17-20 Jun 2014 & Rus & 118,219 & 17\% & 30,365 & 0.31\\
8-10 Oct 2014 & Rus & 70,233 & 44\% & 22,572 & 0.57\\
17-19 Mar 2015 & Eng & 57,710 & 1\% & 637 & 0.01\\
23-25 Nov 2015 & Rus & 28,252 & 72\% & 38,760 & 4.90\\
5-7 Oct 2016 & Eng & 31,111 & 90\% & 121,117 & 38.93\\
11-18 Aug 2017 & Eng & 95,112 & 2\% & 297,960 & 3.20\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\captionof{table}{Statistics of Tweet Spikes}
\label{tab:spikes}
\end{table}
\vspace{0.15in}
31,111 tweets were found in the set between October 5th and 7th 2016, which constituted the second largest English language ``spike'' in the dataset. It is evident in the table that the number of these tweets that were retweets was high, and at 90\% much higher than the corpus-wide average rate of 38\%.
In the two day window from October 5th to 7th, almost half the tweets originated in the most active twenty accounts and consisted almost entirely of retweets. These accounts had on average 1,300 followers each. Prominent trolls continued their activity as usual during this period, and the top 15, which each had more than 500 retweets and are familiar, established accounts such as ``TEN\_GOP'' and ``Crystal1Johnson'', achieved 98\% of retweets (of original tweets) in this period. The retweet rate of original tweets in this period was 39 retweets per original tweet, which is much higher than the corpus-wide retweet rate of 3.46 retweets per original tweet. It is possible that the retweeting activity boosted the impact of the original tweets during this time; however the retweet quality is generally low and the retweets were not generally of other troll accounts. It is perhaps more likely that the political climate in this period enabled skilled political trolls to be particularly effective.
In the Charlottesville spike we again see the overwhelming majority of retweets achieved by a handful of prominent trolls. 97\% of retweets were achieved by the 19 trolls with retweet counts over 500. Among those 19 we see familiar faces, who continued to operate as usual and with their usual high impact, most notably ``TEN\_GOP'' who achieved 130,000 retweets in that period. However there is also a presence of a cluster of accounts that became active at the end of July 2017 and remained active for short durations only, often posing as patriotic, Trump-supporting individuals and notably giving as their profile URL a link to ``ReportSecret.com'', a now-defunct alternative news site also run by the Internet Research Agency. During the Charlottesville period, one of these accounts achieved 21,000 retweets, a return of four retweets per tweet, particularly notable given that the account was active for only eighteen days. The tone of the material is pro-Trump, consisting of a fair percentage of skilled original tweets, and retweets that are consistent with the message so likely to be manual. 65\% of tweets in this period originated in accounts with ``ReportSecret.com'' profile URLs. This operation was probably more expensive, and whilst the retweet per original tweet rate was typical for the corpus, by far the highest total number of retweets was achieved of all the spikes, whilst succeeding in scaling up beyond the handful of established, popular trolls and gaining significant impact with new accounts.
In contrast, a tweet set from a single day in September 2014 illustrates perhaps a further early unsuccessful attempt at influence. 8,520 tweets in total contained the hashtag ``\#ColumbianChemicals'' and spread false rumours of an accident at a US chemical plant, and consisted of 275 tweets in Russian, most of which came earliest in the day, 3,119 tweets targeted at prominent individuals that achieved just eight retweets, 3,821 original tweets that achieved 1360 retweets, and 1305 retweets by the IRA trolls themselves, accounting for most of the retweets of original tweets. This attempt at a scare clearly fell flat. Here is an example tweet from the set:
\begin{quote}
@BarackObama Barack , Are you kidding?? I saw the video \#ColumbianChemicals and it looks like hell!!! What a nightmare!
\end{quote}
\subsubsection*{IRA and Brexit}
With regards to Brexit, we looked at tweets posted by the accounts in our own Brexit tweet dataset in a one month period before the referendum. Furthermore, using our data, a further forty-five troll accounts were able to be identified and subsequently suspended by Twitter, in work described by Buzzfeed News.\footnote{\small{\url{https://www.buzzfeed.com/tomphillips/we-found-45-suspected-bot-accounts-sharing-pro-trump-pro}}}
Influence by those accounts was modest. Amongst the 3,200 total tweets, 830 came from the 45 newly identified accounts (26\%). Brexit interest in the new corpus echoed previous findings provided in the Buzzfeed article
showing little interest in advance of the referendum and a peak on the day of the referendum almost entirely in foreign languages (German).
Table~\ref{tab:hashtags} shows all tweets posted one month before 23 June 2016, which were either authored by Russia Today or Sputnik, or are retweets of these. This gives an indication of how much activity and engagement there was around these accounts. To put these numbers in context, the table also includes the equivalent statistics for the two main pro-leave and pro-remain Twitter accounts. It is evident that influence was modest.
\vspace{0.15in}
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{%
\begin{tabular}{|l|l|l|l|l|l|}
\hline
\textbf{Account} & \textbf{Orig. tweets} & \textbf{Retweeted}
& \textbf{Retweets} & \textbf{Replies} & \textbf{Total}\\
\hline
@RT\_com & 39 & 2,080 & 62 & 0 & 2,181\\
@RTUKnews & 78 & 2,547 & 28 & 1 & 2,654\\
@SputnikInt & 148 & 1,810 & 3 & 2 & 1,963\\
@SputnikNewsUK & 87 & 206 & 8 & 4 & 305\\
\hline
\textbf{TOTAL} & 352 & 6,643 & 101 & 7 & 7,103\\
\hline
@Vote\_leave & 2,313 & 231,243 & 1,399 & 11 & 234,966\\
@StrongerIn & 2,462 & 132,201 & 910 & 7 & 135,580\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
}
\end{center}
\captionof{table}{Russian Account Activity vs Campaign Sites}
\label{tab:hashtags}
\end{table}
\vspace{0.15in}
\subsubsection*{Automation in the Brexit Tweets}
Automation is another area of concern with regards to propaganda, as it may be used to increase reach at low cost. We saw evidence above suggesting that it is difficult to achieve a high impact with automated accounts. However, other research finds a role for automated accounts in information spread~\cite{shao2018spread}. With regards to Brexit, whilst it is hard to quantify automation among the accounts, Bastos and Mircea~\shortcite{bastos2017brexit} identified 13,493
suspected bot accounts, among which Twitter found only 1\% to be
linked to Russia. In our Brexit dataset there are tweets by
1,808,031 users in total, which makes these bot accounts only
0.74\% of the total. If we consider Twitter accounts that have posted more than 50 times a day (widely considered to indicate a high degree of automation), then there are only 457 such users in the month leading up to the referendum on 3 June 2016. The most prolific accounts were "ivoteleave" and "ivotestay", both suspended, which were similar in usage pattern. There were also a lot of accounts that did not really seem to post much about Brexit but were perhaps using the hashtags in order to gain attention for commercial reasons. We also analysed the leaning of these 457 high automation accounts and identified 361 as pro-leave (with 1,048,919 tweets), 39 pro-remain (156,331 tweets), and the remaining 57 as undecided. This leaning towards leave echoes our above findings that the leave campaign was much more vocal on Twitter.
\subsection{Post-Truth Politics--A Tale of Two Claims}
\label{sec:posttruth}
The rise of post-truth politics has been linked to the lowered bar to publication offered by Web 2.0 and the consequent momentum that can be gained for organized disinformation campaigns~\cite{faris2017partisanship}. A House of Commons Treasury Committee Report published on May 2016, states that: ``The public debate is being poorly served by inconsistent, unqualified and, in some cases, misleading claims and counter-claims. Members of both the `leave' and `remain' camps are making such claims.'' We analysed the number of Twitter posts around some of the these disputed claims. A study of the news coverage of the EU Referendum campaign established that the economy was the most covered issue, and in particular, the remain claim that Brexit would cost households £4,300 per year by 2030 and the leave campaign’s claim that the EU cost the UK £350 million each week. Therefore, we focused on these two key claims and analysed tweets about them.
With respect to the disputed £4,300
claim\footnote{\small{\url{https://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/policy-institute/CMCP/UK-media-coverage-of-the-2016-EU-Referendum-campaign.pdf}}}
(made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer), we identified 2,404 posts
in our dataset (tweets, retweets, replies), referring to this claim. For the £350 million a week disputed
claim\footnote{\small{\url{https://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/policy-institute/CMCP/UK-media-coverage-of-the-2016-EU-Referendum-campaign.pdf}}}
there are 32,755 pre-referendum posts (tweets, retweets, replies) in
our dataset. This is 4.6 times the 7,103 posts related to Russia Today
and Sputnik and 10.2 times more than the 3,200 tweets by the
Russia-linked accounts suspended by Twitter.
In particular, there are more than 1,500 tweets from different voters \textit{within our sample}, with one of these wordings:
\begin{quote}I am with @Vote\_leave because we should stop sending £350
million per week to Brussels, and spend our money on our NHS
instead.\\
\\
I just voted to leave the EU by postal vote! Stop sending our
tax money to Europe, spend it on the NHS instead! \#VoteLeave
\#EUreferendum
\end{quote}
Many of those tweets have themselves received over a hundred likes and retweets each. This false claim is popularly regarded as one of the key ones behind the success of the leave campaign. Regarding the impact of these claims, a potentially useful indicator comes from an Ipsos Mori poll published on 22nd June 2016, which showed that for 9\% of
respondents the NHS was the most important issue in the campaign.
The leave claim notably appeared as a bus advert, so spreading its message to the voting public via a different channel. To assess the impact of this, the number of appearances of pictures of the red bus in our sample was counted; a high recall OCR
step was followed by a manual classification to find these images. 913 images of the bus were found. Furthermore, 21,240 appearances of the leave claim in some form of image were found, using a fully automated OCR method with an F1 of 0.87, substantially increasing the textual count for that claim. Moore and Ramsay~\shortcite{moore2017uk}
state that the remain claim was discussed in 365 newspaper articles,
whereas the leave claim was discussed in only 147. The greater media
interest in the Osborne claim is unsurprising given his position of
authority, but this didn't translate into interest on Twitter.
Note that not all Twitter discussion of the misleading headlines is
uncritical propagation. The tweets often talk about the credibility of
the headline. The 21,240 leave claim images were tweeted by 16,490 unique users. Of those, a higher number were remainers (5,369 vs. 4,950, with the remainder unclassified), suggesting a high proportion of Twitter interest in the claim was at least somewhat critical. Note also that although pictorial versions of the claim were tweeted by more remainers, the leavers that did tweet it tweeted it more; in terms of actual tweets containing pictures making the claim (buses as well as other imagery containing the claim) leavers accounted for 7531, compared with 6585 remainers, with the remainder unclassified, suggesting a greater enthusiasm for sharing the imagery among leavers, as one might expect. Recall that as we found above, our sample contains more remainers, but the leavers were more vocal. These findings recall Venturini~\shortcite{venturini2019}, who notes that the spreading of information is largely independent of whether the spreader actually believes it, and that this viral tendency and the resulting deluge of valueless information may be the more significant aspect of the problem.
A similar result is found when considering another prominent pictorial campaign; the UK Independence Party's poster showing a large queue of people alongside the slogan ``Breaking Point'' and the suggestion that ``we must take back control of our borders''. The poster has been criticised for implying that the people in the poster are entering the UK as immigrants, whereas in fact the picture was taken in Slovenia~\footnote{\small{\url{https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/jun/16/nigel-farage-defends-ukip-breaking-point-poster-queue-of-migrants}}}. This claim was found in 3,388 tweets in pictorial form, of which leavers account for 948 and remainers, 1,007, the greater number, and the rest unclassified. In terms of unique users, 843 leavers posted the claim in image form and 890 remainers did so (1,331 unclassified). It is evident from the above that in this case, remainers repeated the leave claim more than leavers.
\begin{comment}
\subsection{Polarization}
\label{sec:polarization}
Recent narratives speak of increased polarization, and suggest a role for social media in this, though evidence challenges this. In fact, social media users are less likely to hold ideologically polarized views~\cite{barbera2014social}. The median Facebook user holds 20\% of their connections with individuals who hold a different position than they do~\cite{bakshy2015exposure}. Such exposure has a positive effect on their awareness of alternative viewpoints. On the other hand, affective polarization has
increased~\cite{iyengar2012affect,lelkes2016mass}, with a greater tendency toward incivility on the internet being a hypothesized factor~\cite{anderson2014nasty} in raising the emotional temperature. In an atmosphere of increased mutual disrespect and
dislike, it is perhaps more likely that internet users will seek solace in media use intended to ``reinforce their in-group identity and share in partisan folklore''~\cite{faris2017partisanship}, even at the expense of the truth.
\end{comment}
\section{Discussion}
We have presented evidence addressing the presence of partisan media, propaganda and post-truth politics in the run-up to the UK EU membership referendum on Twitter and in the media, as well as more broadly. With regards to partisanship in Brexit, we saw that websites linked in topically related tweets were most often neutral or bipartisan in their appeal. However, sources with \textbf{partisan} appeal also captured a sizeable portion of the debate, and of those, the leave-partisan materials were much more heavily propagated. Mainstream media with a stated remain stance produced materials appealing to both sides of the debate. Some mainstream media with a stated leave stance produced materials predominantly appealing to leavers.
A high degree of imbalance between leavers and remainers in those linking to a medium's website was found to suggest partisanship or even propaganda; materials with a strong appeal to leavers rather than remainers were plentiful and diverse, and included mainstream media and alternative media including US and other foreign sources. Materials with a strong appeal to remainers were fewer and less influential, and mainly comprised explicit campaign sites. Number of upheld press complaints correlates more strongly with a site's partisan appeal than the bias of the source as determined by the difference between its pro- and anti-Europe front pages (though both correlations are highly significant), suggesting that partisan appeal is capturing something other than the extent to which a source provides a voice for a particular opinion, and that misinformation may be a part of it. Evidence of Russian state involvement was modest. Automated accounts were in evidence.
The main evidence presented regarding \textbf{propaganda} was taken from a dataset identified by Twitter as originating in the Russian Internet Research Agency, an organization known to seek global influence through the dissemination of propaganda materials. Observation of this data suggests a learning process on their part regarding how impact can effectively be achieved. Tapping into deeply felt issues such as Black equality and patriotism has allowed a few skilled agents to build a large following, accounting for by far the greater part of the IRA's reach. The appetite of the audience for a particular message might therefore be seen as the ``Trojan Horse'', via which the desired message may then be insinuated. Indeed some difficulty may arise in distinguishing the vehicle message from the propagandistic message that motivates the efforts. A good vehicle may bide its time, or indeed be an end in itself (for example leading to financial benefit through advertising revenue).
Low effort approaches, such as possibly automated retweeting and large scale tweeting of pleasing but vague content, didn't appear to result in a high reach. One observed case of a fabricated scare fell entirely flat. Whilst success to very great extent is in the hands of a handful of highly skilled political trolls, scaling up reach beyond a few established popular accounts was achieved in conjunction with the events at Charlottesville in 2017. The material appears to be skilled and probably not automated. Future work exploiting this corpus should involve a deeper review of the Russian language IRA tweets. This would provide a greater understanding of the early history of an internet propaganda operation. Linked materials also provide more detailed material. The website ``ReportSecret.com'' has been highlighted above, along with other partisan press and alternative media in reference to the Brexit case. Furthermore the Russian accounts linked thousands of times to pages on the website LiveJournal, where extensive material more in the nature of personal opinion achieved a high reach; most-linked pages discuss the shooting down of Malaysian Airlines Flight 17, and are pro-Russian, anti-Ukraine. The material has provided an opportunity to benefit from the IRA's learning process in understanding how messages spread or fail to spread. However, the observations made here are preliminary only, and must form part of a more rigorous and complete picture formed of all available data, not just part, and backed up by controlled studies.
Claims made by leave and remain campaigns were reviewed in the context of \textbf{post-truth politics}. Echoing findings above, uptake of misleading leave claims was found to be high, dwarfing, for example, any evidence of Russian influence on Brexit. The greater hazard for public information may be the increasing tendency for public figures to take liberties with the truth.
A background issue through the findings is the issue of polarization. In the section on partisan media we found that the pro-remain Guardian newspaper attracted critical comment, which the Express did not do to the same extent, instead attracting upheld press complaints. This raises questions about the factors that encourage, or discourage, bipartisan discussion. Highly partisan materials were found to be evident in great quantities in the form of linked materials in the Brexit tweet sample. Whilst
these materials are of concern in that they are prolific and more often misleading, and are attracting significant attention, information consumers show a preference for linking more moderate materials, supporting previous research suggesting that there is a polarizing pull from those putting out their message on the internet. In the IRA materials we found that political trolls attracted the greatest following and achieved the greatest impact pushing at a small number of what might be seen as ``open doors''; topics where feelings are already running high. These existing cracks in society may offer opportunities for those that wish to create further division.
The release of the IRA dataset by Twitter is an important step forward in platforms working together with scientists to enable a better understanding of the new social dynamic they have created. Controversial posts and accounts are suspended at a very high rate, creating an issue for open and repeatable science on social media data. However the dataset was limited in that follower/followee networks weren't included. Gaining a full picture requires access to all related data, not only tweets from a particular set of accounts. Similarly the impact of retweets cannot be understood without information about the retweet rate of retweets. Fully understanding impact requires information about how often a tweet appeared on someone's screen. Moving forward requires a careful debate about privacy. Failing to have that debate may result in information being richly available to those with commercial objectives, namely the platforms themselves, but denied to a society reeling from the effects.
As already discussed above, disinformation and biased content reporting are not just the preserve of fake news and state-driven propaganda sites and social accounts. A significant amount also comes from media and factually incorrect statements by prominent politicians. The impact of widely known and influential claims made by politicians from both sides of the referendum campaign was already discussed above. Therefore, effectively combating deliberate online falsehoods must address such cases. Furthermore transparency in political advertising on social platforms and a review process for political advertising are likely to help with reducing the impact of all other kinds of disinformation already discussed above (i.e. fake news sites, Russian propaganda, etc).
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work was partially supported by the European Union under grant agreements No. 687847 ``Comrades'' and No. 654024 ``SoBigData'', the UK Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council grant EP/I004327/1 and the British Academy under call ``The Humanities and Social Sciences Tackling the UK’s International Challenges''.
\bibliographystyle{aaai}
|
\section{Introduction}
A {\em Beltrami field} on an open set $U \subset \mathbb{R}^3$ is a vector field ${\mathbf u}$ on $U$ that is a solution to the PDE system
\begin{equation}
\text{curl\ } {\mathbf u} = f {\mathbf u}, \qquad \text{div\ } {\mathbf u} = 0 \label{Beltrami-def}
\end{equation}
for some smooth function $f:U \to \mathbb{R}$, called the {\em proportionality factor}. When $f$ is constant, the divergence-free condition is redundant and ${\mathbf u}$ is called a {\em strong Beltrami field}. Strong Beltrami fields are well-studied; see, e.g., \cite{EPS12}, \cite{EPS15}.
In \cite{EPS16} and \cite{EPS18}, the authors undertake a study of Beltrami fields on open subsets of $\mathbb{R}^3$, with a primary focus on Beltrami fields with nonconstant proportionality factor. Both local and global issues are considered, and the most significant result is that Beltrami fields of this type are {\em rare}, in the sense that most nonconstant functions $f$ cannot occur as the proportionality factor for any nonvanishing Beltrami field, even locally. Specifically, the following theorem is proved in \cite{EPS16}:
\begin{theoremvoid}
Let $U \subset \mathbb{R}^3$ be an open set, and assume that the function $f:U \to \mathbb{R}^3$ is nonconstant and of class $C^{6,\alpha}$. There is a nonlinear partial differential operator $P \neq 0$, which can be computed explicitly and involves derivatives of order at most $6$, such that \eqref{Beltrami-def} has no nonzero solutions ${\mathbf u}$ unless $P[f]$ is identically zero in $U$. In particular, \eqref{Beltrami-def} has no nonzero solutions ${\mathbf u}$ for all $f$ in an open and dense subset of $C^k(U)$ for any $k \geq 7$.
\end{theoremvoid}
This is clearly an important result; unfortunately, the operator $P$ is extremely cumbersome to compute. Moreover, this necessary condition for $f$ is almost certainly not sufficient; the proof of the theorem shows that there is, in fact, a hierarchy of differential constraints that the function $f$ must satisfy provided that it is sufficiently smooth. So it remains an open question precisely which proportionality factors $f$ can occur for a nonzero Beltrami field ${\mathbf u}$.
In this paper, we seek to further explore the question raised in \cite{EPS16}, namely,
\noindent {\bf Question 1:} Which nonconstant functions $f$ can occur as proportionality factors for nonzero Beltrami fields?
We will also consider the related question:
\noindent {\bf Question 2:} For each such function $f$, how large is the space of associated Beltrami fields?
We will approach these questions from the point of view of adapted orthonormal frame fields on $\mathbb{R}^3$ and exterior differential systems, and the Cartan-K\"ahler theorem (essentially a geometric version of the Cauchy-Kowalevski theorem) will play an important role in analyzing solution spaces. (See \cite{BCG3} or \cite{CFB} for a comprehensive introduction to these topics.) Due to the limitations imposed by these tools, we will consider only locally defined, real analytic functions $f$ and Beltrami fields ${\mathbf u}$. Therefore, topological constraints such as those discussed in \cite{EPS16} will not play any role here. Moreover, any statement along the lines of ``assume that $X$ is nonzero" should be interpreted as ``assume that $X$ is not identically zero and restrict to the open set where $X$ is nonzero."
Specifically, we will assume that $f$ is a nonvanishing, real analytic function on an open set $U \subset \mathbb{R}^3$, with $\nabla f \neq 0$ on $U$. (Since $f$ is nonconstant, these conditions hold on a dense open subset of $U$, and we shrink $U$ accordingly if necessary.) The Beltrami fields on $U$ with proportionality factor $f$ are the solutions ${\mathbf u}$ to the PDE system \eqref{Beltrami-def} on $U$. We will say that a nonvanishing function $f$ {\em admits a nonzero Beltrami field} if there exists a nonzero solution ${\mathbf u}$ to the system \eqref{Beltrami-def}.
Cartan's theory has the advantage of reducing analytic questions regarding the solution space of the PDE system \eqref{Beltrami-def} to algebraic computations. Unfortunately, some of these algebraic computations remain intractable to us, even with the assistance of computer algebra packages such as {\sc Maple}, and so we are unable to give as explicit an answer to these questions as we might like. Nevertheless, these methods allow us to prove the following results:
\begin{theorem}\label{all-Beltrami-theorem}
The space of all Beltrami fields on $U$ is locally parametrized by 3 functions of 2 variables.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}\label{constant-Beltrami-theorem}
The space of all Beltrami fields on $U$ with constant proportionality factor is locally parametrized by 2 functions of 2 variables.
\end{theorem}
Taken together, Theorems \ref{all-Beltrami-theorem} and \ref{constant-Beltrami-theorem} imply that a generic Beltrami field has nonconstant proportionality factor.
\begin{theorem}\label{nonconstant-Beltrami-theorem}
Let $f$ be a nonvanishing function on $U$ with $\nabla f \neq 0$ on $U$.
\begin{itemize}
\item If the level surfaces of $f$ are totally umbilic (i.e., open subsets of planes or spheres), then $f$ admits no nonzero Beltrami fields unless the level surfaces of $f$ are contained in either parallel planes or concentric spheres, which case the solution space of \eqref{Beltrami-def} is locally parametrized by 2 functions of 1 variable. (Note that in the case of concentric spheres, our restrictions imply that the common center of the spheres may not be contained in $U$.)
\item If the level surfaces of $f$ contain no umbilic points, then $f$ admits at most a 3-dimensional space of Beltrami fields. \end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
In addition, we conjecture the following:
\begin{conjecture}\label{nonconstant-Beltrami-conjecture}
Nonconstant proportionality factors $f$ admitting a nonzero Beltrami field have the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item The space of proportionality factors $f$ admitting a nonzero Beltrami field is locally parametrized by 3 functions of 2 variables.
\item If the level surfaces of $f$ contain no umbilic points, then $f$ admits at most a 2-dimensional space of Beltrami fields.
\item A generic proportionality factor $f$ that admits a nonzero Beltrami field admits exactly a 1-dimensional space of Beltrami fields.
\end{itemize}
\end{conjecture}
Again, we wish to emphasize that the obstacles to proving this conjecture are computational rather than theoretical in nature. Specifically, a complete proof would require computing the real-valued solution spaces to large systems of polynomial equations, and we have so far been unable to carry these computations to completion.
This paper is organized as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item In \S \ref{Cauchy-sec}, we apply the Cauchy-Kowalevski theorem to the PDE system \eqref{Beltrami-def} in standard coordinates to compute the size of the space of {\em all} local Beltrami fields, regardless of proportionality factor. This computation provides a proof of Theorem \ref{all-Beltrami-theorem} and also gives some insight into the size of the space of proportionality factors $f$ that admit solutions.
\item In \S \ref{f-constant-sec}, we apply the Cauchy-Kowalevski theorem to compute the size of the space of local Beltrami fields with constant proportionality factor $f$. This computation provides a proof of Theorem \ref{constant-Beltrami-theorem}.
\item In \S \ref{setup-sec}, we assume that $f$ is nonconstant and choose an orthonormal frame field $({\mathbf e}_1, {\mathbf e}_2, {\mathbf e}_3)$ on $U$ that is adapted to the geometry of the level surfaces of $f$. We then reformulate the PDE system \eqref{Beltrami-def} in terms of this frame field and its dual coframe field $(\omega^1, \omega^2, \omega^3)$. As a consequence, we will see that the system \eqref{Beltrami-def} may be regarded as a system of 4 equations for only 2 unknown functions on $U$ rather than the 3 component functions of ${\mathbf u}$ that appear in \eqref{Beltrami-def}.
\item In \S \ref{example-sec}, we consider some specific examples of proportionality factors $f$ and use the ideas developed in \S \ref{setup-sec} to compute the spaces of Beltrami fields that they admit. These examples provide some intuition as to what sorts of behavior we might expect in general.
\item In \S \ref{analysis-sec}, we define an exterior differential system whose integral manifolds are in one-to-one correspondence with Beltrami fields on $U$ with proportionality factor $f$.
We then apply Cartan's methods to analyze this exterior differential system and its integral manifolds in general. In the course of this analysis, we will see how the geometry of the level surfaces of $f$ plays a crucial role in the existence and size of the space of integral manifolds.
\item In \S \ref{symmetry-sec}, we consider the special case of Beltrami fields that possess either a translation symmetry or a rotation symmetry. In both cases, the symmetry assumption simplifies the PDE system defining Beltrami fields sufficiently to allow a complete classification of local Beltrami fields with these symmetries.
\end{itemize}
\section{The space of Beltrami fields via Cauchy-Kowalevski}\label{Cauchy-sec}
In this section, we give a proof of Theorem \ref{all-Beltrami-theorem}.
We begin by writing \eqref{Beltrami-def} explicitly as a first-order system for the coordinate functions $(u^1, u^2, u^3)$ of ${\mathbf u}$:
\begin{equation}\label{Beltrami-sys-expanded}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial u^2}{\partial x^3} - \frac{\partial u^3}{\partial x^2} = f u^1, \\
\frac{\partial u^3}{\partial x^1} - \frac{\partial u^1}{\partial x^3} = f u^2, \\
\frac{\partial u^1}{\partial x^2} - \frac{\partial u^2}{\partial x^1} = f u^3, \\
\frac{\partial u^1}{\partial x^1} + \frac{\partial u^2}{\partial x^2} + \frac{\partial u^3}{\partial x^3} = 0.
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
Observe that the function $f$ can be eliminated from these equations to obtain a determined system of 3 equations for the 3 unknown functions $(u^1, u^2, u^3)$, and that this system can be put into Cauchy form:
\begin{equation}\label{Beltrami-sys-no-f}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\partial u^1}{\partial x^3} & = \frac{\partial u^3}{\partial x^1} - \frac{u^2}{u^3} \left( \frac{\partial u^1}{\partial x^2} - \frac{\partial u^2}{\partial x^1} \right), \\
\frac{\partial u^2}{\partial x^3} & = \frac{\partial u^3}{\partial x^2} + \frac{u^1}{u^3} \left( \frac{\partial u^1}{\partial x^2} - \frac{\partial u^2}{\partial x^1} \right), \\
\frac{\partial u^3}{\partial x^3} & = -\left( \frac{\partial u^1}{\partial x^1} + \frac{\partial u^2}{\partial x^2} \right).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The initial value problem for this system is well-posed as long as we choose initial data
\[ u^i(x^1, x^2, 0) = \bar{u}^i(x^1, x^2), \qquad 1 \leq i \leq 3 \]
along the plane $\{x^3 = 0\}$ satisfying $\bar{u}^3(x^1, x^2) \neq 0$, which, by reordering the functions $u^i$ if necessary, we may assume without loss of generality.
By the Cauchy-Kowalevski theorem, the space of solutions---which corresponds to {\em all} Beltrami fields with all possible proportionality factors $f$---is locally parametrized by 3 functions of 2 variables.
This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{all-Beltrami-theorem}.
Observe that, given any solution ${\mathbf u} = (u^1, u^2, u^3)$ to the system \eqref{Beltrami-sys-no-f}, we can recover the proportionality factor $f$ from the equation
\begin{equation}\label{f-from-solution}
f = \frac{1}{u^3} \left( \frac{\partial u^1}{\partial x^2} - \frac{\partial u^2}{\partial x^1} \right).
\end{equation}
In particular, the local generality of proportionality factors $f$ admitting a nonzero Beltrami field is bounded above by the local generality of Beltrami fields---i.e., 3 functions of 2 variables.
\begin{remark}
Recall that the main result of \cite{EPS16} states that any proportionality factor $f$ admitting a nonzero Beltrami field must satisfy a certain partial differential equation of order at most 6. The function count above shows that this necessary condition is not sufficient, as the space of solutions to a 6th order PDE is locally parametrized by 6 functions of 2 variables.
\end{remark}
Conversely, we can give a heuristic argument suggesting that the space of proportionality factors $f$ admitting a nonzero Beltrami field is locally parametrized by precisely 3 functions of 2 variables, rather than by some smaller space. Starting with equation \eqref{f-from-solution} and making use of equations \eqref{Beltrami-sys-no-f}, we can compute expressions for $\frac{\partial f}{\partial x^3}$ and $\frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial (x^3)^2}$ in terms of the functions $u^1, u^2, u^3$ and their derivatives with respect to $x^1$ and $x^2$. Restricting to the initial plane $\{x^3 = 0 \}$ yields a system of the form
\begin{equation}\label{system-for-initial-conditions}
\begin{aligned}
f(x^1, x^2, 0) & = \frac{1}{\bar{u}^3} \left( \frac{\partial \bar{u}^1}{\partial x^2} - \frac{\partial \bar{u}^2}{\partial x^1} \right) , \\
\frac{\partial f}{\partial x^3}(x^1, x^2, 0) & = D_1(\bar{u}^1, \bar{u}^2, \bar{u}^3), \\
\frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial (x^3)^2}(x^1, x^2, 0) & = D_2(\bar{u}^1, \bar{u}^2, \bar{u}^3),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $D_1, D_2$ are partial differential operators involving only derivatives with respect to $x^1$ and $x^2$, applied to the initial data $\bar{u}^i$. Now suppose that we specify initial data for $f$ and its first two $x^3$-derivatives of the form
\[ f(x^1, x^2, 0) = \bar{f}_0(x^1, x^2), \qquad \frac{\partial f}{\partial x^3}(x^1, x^2, 0) = \bar{f}_1(x^1, x^2), \qquad \frac{\partial^2 f}{\partial (x^3)^2}(x^1, x^2, 0) = \bar{f}_2(x^1, x^2), \]
where the functions $\bar{f}_0, \bar{f}_1, \bar{f}_2$ are arbitrary. Substituting these expressions into the system \eqref{system-for-initial-conditions} yields a system of 3 PDEs for the 3 unknown functions $\bar{u}^1, \bar{u}^2, \bar{u}^3$. Generically, we might expect this system to admit local solutions---at least in the real analytic category---for arbitrary choices of the functions $\bar{f}_i$; moreover, these solutions should be unique up to the choice of some initial data along a submanifold of strictly lower dimension (e.g., a curve in the $(x^1, x^2)$ plane). The functions $\bar{u}^1, \bar{u}^2, \bar{u}^3$ then determine a unique solution ${\mathbf u} = (u^1, u^2, u^3)$ of the Cauchy system \eqref{Beltrami-sys-no-f}, which in turn determines a unique proportionality factor $f$ via equation \eqref{f-from-solution}.
This argument provides evidence for the first statement in Conjecture \ref{nonconstant-Beltrami-conjecture}, strongly suggesting that the space of proportionality factors admitting a nonzero Beltrami field is locally parametrized by exactly 3 functions of 2 variables.
\section{Beltrami fields with constant proportionality factor}\label{f-constant-sec}
In this section, we give a proof of Theorem \ref{constant-Beltrami-theorem}. To this end, suppose that $f$ is a constant function.
First, suppose that $f=0$. In this case, it is straightforward to show that the general solution to \eqref{Beltrami-def} is
\[ {\mathbf u} = \nabla F, \]
where $F: U \to \mathbb{R}$ is a harmonic function on $U$; i.e., $\Delta F = 0$. The space of harmonic functions---and hence the space of Beltrami fields with $f=0$---is locally parametrized by 2 functions of 2 variables.
Next, suppose that $f = c$ is a nonzero constant. In this case, the first, second, and fourth equations of \eqref{Beltrami-sys-expanded} may be written as a system in Cauchy form with respect to the derivatives in the $x^3$ direction, with the third equation representing a constraint on the initial data. A straightforward computation shows that this overdetermined system is {\em compatible}: If the initial data satisfies the constraint, then this constraint holds throughout the entire solution to the Cauchy system. Since the constraint on the initial data is given by a first-order PDE, the space of solutions again depends locally on 2 functions of 2 variables.
For purposes of measuring the size of the solution space, this collection of ``2 functions of 2 variables for each constant $c \in \mathbb{R}$" still counts as 2 functions of 2 variables; the additional real constant $c$ in the initial data may be thought of as ``1 function of 0 variables," which contributes negligibly to the size of the solution space. Thus, the space of all Beltrami fields with constant proportionality factor is locally parametrized by 2 functions of 2 variables. This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{constant-Beltrami-theorem}.
Taken together, Theorems \ref{all-Beltrami-theorem} and \ref{constant-Beltrami-theorem} imply that the space of Beltrami fields with constant proportionality factor has ``measure zero" in the overall space of solutions to the system \eqref{Beltrami-sys-no-f}. (This is an infinite-dimensional analog to the notion that a 2-dimensional submanifold of a 3-dimensional manifold has measure zero inside the larger manifold.)
Therefore, a generic Beltrami field must have nonconstant proportionality factor $f$. For the remainder of this paper, we will assume that $f$ is a given, nonconstant function and restrict to the open set $U$ where $f$ and $\nabla f$ are both nonzero.
\section{A geometric approach via adapted frame fields}\label{setup-sec}
In order to recast the system \eqref{Beltrami-def} in the language of exterior differential systems, we will make use of the canonical identifications between vector fields and differential forms in $\mathbb{R}^3$. Specifically, a vector field
\[ {\mathbf v} = v^1 \frac{\partial}{\partial x^1} + v^2 \frac{\partial}{\partial x^2} + v^3 \frac{\partial}{\partial x^3} \]
may be canonically identified with either the 1-form
\[ \alpha_{{\mathbf v}} = v^1\, dx^1 + v^2\, dx^2 + v^3 \, dx^3 \]
or the 2-form
\[ \beta_{{\mathbf v}} = v^1\, dx^2 \wedge dx^3 + v^2\, dx^3 \wedge dx^1 + v^3\, dx^1 \wedge dx^2. \]
Similarly, a real-valued function $f$ may either be regarded as a 0-form or canonically identified with the 3-form $\gamma_f = f\, dx^1 \wedge dx^2 \wedge dx^3$.
Moreover, these identifications may be described more generally with respect to any orthonormal frame field:
Let $({\mathbf e}_1, {\mathbf e}_2, {\mathbf e}_3)$ be any oriented, orthonormal frame field on an open set $U \subset \mathbb{R}^3$, with dual coframe field $(\omega^1, \omega^2, \omega^3)$. If ${\mathbf v}$ is a vector field on $U$ given by ${\mathbf v} = v^i {\mathbf e}_i$, then these identifications take the form
\begin{gather*}
\alpha_{{\mathbf v}} = v^1\, \omega^1 + v^2\, \omega^2 + v^3\, \omega^3, \\
\beta_{{\mathbf v}} = v^1\, \omega^2 \wedge \omega^3 + v^2\, \omega^3 \wedge \omega^1 + v^3\, \omega^1 \wedge \omega^2.
\end{gather*}
Similarly, if $f$ is a real-valued function on $U$, then
\[ \gamma_f = f\, \omega^1 \wedge \omega^2 \wedge \omega^3. \]
Under these identifications, the usual differential operators of vector calculus are all given by exterior differentiation:
\begin{itemize}
\item For any smooth function $f$, the vector field $\nabla f$ is identified with the 1-form $df$.
\item For any vector field ${\mathbf v}$ identified with the 1-form $\alpha_{{\mathbf v}}$, the vector field $\nabla \times {\mathbf v}$ is identified with the 2-form $d\alpha_{{\mathbf v}}$.
\item For any vector field ${\mathbf v}$ identified with the 2-form $\beta_{{\mathbf v}}$, the vector field $\nabla \cdot {\mathbf v}$ is identified with the 3-form $d\beta_{{\mathbf v}}$.
\end{itemize}
It follows that the system \eqref{Beltrami-def} is equivalent to the equations
\begin{equation}\label{Beltrami-eqs-form-version}
d\alpha_{{\mathbf u}} = f \beta_{{\mathbf u}}, \qquad d\beta_{{\mathbf u}} = 0,
\end{equation}
where $\alpha_{{\mathbf u}}, \beta_{{\mathbf u}}$ represent the canonical identifications of ${\mathbf u}$ with a 1-form and 2-form, respectively. As written, these equations are basis-independent, but they can be expressed in terms of the dual coframe field $(\omega^1, \omega^2, \omega^3)$ to any orthonormal frame field $({\mathbf e}_1, {\mathbf e}_2, {\mathbf e}_3)$ on $U$. In order to exploit this freedom, we will choose an orthonormal frame field that is nicely adapted to the geometry of the level surfaces of $f$.
The price of using such an adapted frame field is that the dual 1-forms $(\omega^1, \omega^2, \omega^3)$ are typically not exact. Rather, there exist unique 1-forms $\{\omega^i_j = -\omega^i_j,\ 1 \leq i,j \leq 3\}$, called the {\em connection forms}, defined by the equations
\[ d{\mathbf e}_i = {\mathbf e}_j \omega^j_i, \qquad i = 1,2,3. \]
(Here and subsequently we use the Einstein summation convention, so the repeated index $j$ is summed from 1 to 3.)
The dual and connection forms satisfy the {\em Cartan structure equations}
\begin{equation}\label{structure-equations}
\begin{aligned}
d\omega^i & = -\omega^i_j \wedge \omega^j, \\
d\omega^i_j & = -\omega^i_k \wedge \omega^k_j.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
In order to choose our adapted frame field, first observe that equations \eqref{Beltrami-def} imply that
\[ \nabla \cdot (f{\mathbf u}) = \nabla \cdot {\mathbf u} = 0 ,\]
which in turn implies that $\nabla f \cdot {\mathbf u} = 0$, and hence that ${\mathbf u}$ is orthogonal to $\nabla f$. So, we start by considering orthonormal frame fields $({\mathbf e}_1, {\mathbf e}_2, {\mathbf e}_3)$ on $U$ with the property that
\[ {\mathbf e}_3 = \frac{\nabla f}{|\nabla f|}. \]
Then the vector fields $({\mathbf e}_1, {\mathbf e}_2)$ will be tangent to the level surfaces of $f$ at each point of $U$, and the dual forms $(\omega^1, \omega^2, \omega^3)$ must satisfy
\[ \omega^3 = \frac{df}{|\nabla f|}. \]
Let $g:U \to \mathbb{R}$ be defined by $|\nabla f| = e^{-g}$, so that we have $\omega^3 = e^g\, df$. Then differentiating yields
\begin{equation} \label{d-omega3-eq}
d\omega^3 = dg \wedge \omega^3.
\end{equation}
If we write
\[ dg = g_1 \omega^1 + g_2 \omega^2 + g_3\omega^3 \]
(i.e., $g_i$ represents the covariant derivative of $g$ with respect to the vector field ${\mathbf e}_i$),
then equation \eqref{d-omega3-eq} together with the Cartan structure equation
\[ d\omega^3 = -\omega^3_1 \wedge \omega^1 - \omega^3_2 \wedge \omega^2 \]
imply that
\begin{equation}\label{some-connection-forms}
\begin{aligned}
\omega^3_1 & = h_{11} \omega^1 + h_{12} \omega^2 + g_1 \omega^3 ,\\
\omega^3_2 & = h_{12} \omega^1 + h_{22} \omega^2 + g_2 \omega^3
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
for some functions $h_{11}, h_{12}, h_{22}:U \to \mathbb{R}$.
These functions may be interpreted as follows: Because $\omega^3$ is well-defined and integrable on $U$, it defines a (local) foliation of $U$, the leaves of which are the level surfaces of $f$. At any point ${\mathbf x} \in U$, the matrix $[h_{ij}({\mathbf x})]$ is the second fundamental form of the level surface $\Sigma$ of $f$ passing through the point ${\mathbf x}$ with respect to the orthonormal basis $({\mathbf e}_1, {\mathbf e}_2)$ for the tangent plane $T_{\mathbf x} \Sigma$.
By choosing $({\mathbf e}_1, {\mathbf e}_2)$ to be principal directions for this level surface at each point, we can arrange that this matrix is diagonal, i.e., that $h_{12} = 0$.
In order to ensure that principal vector fields $({\mathbf e}_1, {\mathbf e}_2)$ can be chosen smoothly, we need to make a {\em constant type} assumption. Specifically, we will assume that either:
\begin{itemize}
\item the level surfaces of $f$ contain no umbilic points in $U$, or
\item the level surfaces of $f$ in $U$ are all totally umbilic.
\end{itemize}
If neither condition holds identically on $U$, then we will restrict to the open subset of $U$ where the first condition holds.
Now, since any solution ${\mathbf u}$ to equations \eqref{Beltrami-def} has the property that ${\mathbf u} \cdot \nabla f = 0$, we can write ${\mathbf u}$ as
\[ {\mathbf u} = u^1 {\mathbf e}_1 + u^2 {\mathbf e}_2 \]
for some smooth functions $u^1, u^2:U \to \mathbb{R}$. Then we have
\[ \alpha_{{\mathbf u}} = u^1\, \omega^1 + u^2\, \omega^2, \qquad \beta_{{\mathbf u}} = (-u^2\, \omega^1 + u^1\, \omega^2) \wedge \omega^3, \]
and equations \eqref{Beltrami-eqs-form-version} may be written as
\begin{equation}\label{Beltrami-form-eqs-expanded}
\begin{gathered}
d(u^1\, \omega^1 + u^2\, \omega^2) = f(-u^2\, \omega^1 + u^1\, \omega^2) \wedge \omega^3, \\
d((-u^2\, \omega^1 + u^1\, \omega^2) \wedge \omega^3) = 0.
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
In order to interpret equations \eqref{Beltrami-form-eqs-expanded} as a PDE system for the functions $u^1, u^2$, define the covariant derivatives $u^i_j$ by the equations
\begin{equation}\label{introduce-u-derivs}
\begin{aligned}
du^1 & = u^1_1 \omega^1 + u^1_2 \omega^2 + u^1_3 \omega^3 , \\
du^2 & = u^2_1 \omega^1 + u^2_2 \omega^2 + u^2_3 \omega^3.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Write the connection forms as
\begin{equation}\label{expanded-connection-forms}
\begin{aligned}
\omega^3_1 & = h_{11} \omega^1 + g_1 \omega^3, \\
\omega^3_2 & = h_{22} \omega^2 + g_2 \omega^3, \\
\omega^1_2 & = k_1 \omega^1 + k_2 \omega^2 + k_3 \omega^3.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Applying the Cartan structure equations \eqref{structure-equations} and substituting \eqref{introduce-u-derivs} and \eqref{expanded-connection-forms} into equations \eqref{Beltrami-form-eqs-expanded} yields
\begin{equation}\label{compute-PDE-sys}
\begin{aligned}
& (u^2_1 - u^1_2 - k_1 u^1 - k_2 u^2)\, \omega^1 \wedge \omega^2 \\
& + (u^1_3 - h_{11} u^1 + (k_3 - f) u^2)\, \omega^3 \wedge \omega^1 \\
& + (-u^2_3 + (k_3 - f) u^1 + h_{22} u^2)\, \omega^2 \wedge \omega^3 = 0, \\[0.05in]
& (u^1_1 + u^2_2 + (g_1 - k_2) u^1 + (g_2 + k_1) u^2)\, \omega^1 \wedge \omega^2 \wedge \omega^3 = 0.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
It follows that the functions $u^1, u^2:U \to \mathbb{R}$ must satisfy the overdetermined PDE system
\begin{equation}\label{first-order-PDE-sys}
\begin{aligned}
u^2_1 - u^1_2 & = k_1 u^1 + k_2 u^2, \\
u^1_1 + u^2_2 & = (k_2 - g_1) u^1 - (k_1 + g_2) u^2, \\
u^1_3 & = h_{11} u^1 + (f - k_3) u^2, \\
u^2_3 & = (k_3 - f) u^1 + h_{22} u^2.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Qualitatively, the first two equations say that the restrictions of the functions $u^1, u^2$ to each level surface of $f$ satisfy an elliptic PDE system, while the last two describe the evolution of the functions $u^1, u^2$ through the family of level surfaces of $f$.
This system is compatible if and only if the evolution described by the last two equations preserves the conditions prescribed by the first two.
\section{Examples}\label{example-sec}
In this section, we consider some examples of proportionality factors $f$ for which the solution space of the system \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys} can be analyzed directly.
\begin{example}\label{f=z-ex}
Suppose that $f:U \to \mathbb{R}$ has the form $f(x,y,z) = \phi(z)$. (Here we assume that $\phi$ is known.) Then we have
\[ {\mathbf e}_3 = \frac{\nabla f}{|\nabla f|} = \frac{\partial}{\partial z}. \]
The level surfaces of $f$ are horizontal planes, and we can take $({\mathbf e}_1, {\mathbf e}_2, {\mathbf e}_3)$ to be the standard basis for $\mathbb{R}^3$. Then the dual forms are given by
\[ \omega^1 = dx, \qquad \omega^2 = dy, \qquad \omega^3 = dz. \]
It follows from the structure equations that the connection forms are given by
\[ \omega^3_1 = \omega^3_2 = \omega^1_2 = 0. \]
In this case, the PDE system \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys} becomes:
\begin{equation}\label{first-order-PDE-sys-f=z}
\begin{aligned}
u^2_x - u^1_y & = 0, \\
u^1_x + u^2_y & = 0, \\
u^1_z & = \phi(z) u^2, \\
u^2_z & = -\phi(z) u^1 .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
This PDE system is compatible, and the solution space can be described explicitly: The last two equations in \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys-f=z} may be regarded as an ODE system with respect to the $z$ variable. The general solution to this subsystem is given by
\begin{equation}\label{f=z-partial-soln}
\begin{aligned}
u^1(x,y,z) & = v(x,y) \cos \Phi(z) + w(x,y) \sin \Phi(z), \\
u^2(x,y,z) & = -v(x,y) \sin \Phi(z) + w(x,y) \cos \Phi(z),
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $\Phi(z)$ satisfies $\Phi'(z) = \phi(z)$.
Substituting \eqref{f=z-partial-soln} into the first two equations in \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys-f=z} yields
\begin{align*}
(w_x - v_y) \cos \Phi(z) - (v_x + w_y) \sin \Phi(z) & = 0, \\
(v_x + w_y) \cos \Phi(z) + (w_x - v_y) \sin \Phi(z) & = 0.
\end{align*}
Therefore, \eqref{f=z-partial-soln} gives a solution to the system \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys-f=z} precisely when the functions $v(x,y), w(x,y)$ satisfy the PDE system
\[ w_x - v_y = v_x + w_y = 0. \]
These are the Cauchy-Riemann equations for the pair $(w(x,y), v(x,y))$, and solutions depend locally on 2 functions of 1 variable.
It follows that the space of Beltrami fields with proportionality factor $f = \phi(z)$ depend locally on 2 functions of 1 variable.
\begin{comment}
\begin{remark}
This function count is based on regarding the function $f = \phi(z)$ as a known function. Alternatively, we might think of $\phi(z)$ as an arbitrary function of 1 variable, in which case we could say that the space of {\em all} Beltrami fields of this form depends locally on 3 functions of 1 variable. Either way, we note that this solution space is strictly smaller than the solution space in the case where $f$ is constant.
\end{remark}
\end{comment}
\end{example}
\begin{example}\label{cylinders-ex}
Suppose that $f:U \to \mathbb{R}$ has the form $f(x, y, z) = \phi(\sqrt{x^2 + y^2})$, or, in cylindrical coordinates, $f(r, \theta, z) = \phi(r)$. (Again, we assume that $\phi$ is known.) Then we have
\[ {\mathbf e}_3 = \frac{1}{\sqrt{x^2 + y^2}} \left( x \frac{\partial}{\partial x} + y \frac{\partial}{\partial y} \right) = \frac{\partial}{\partial r}. \]
The level surfaces of $f$ are concentric circular cylinders, and a principal orthonormal frame field is given by
\[
{\mathbf e}_1 = \frac{1}{\sqrt{x^2 + y^2}} \left( -y \frac{\partial}{\partial x} + x \frac{\partial}{\partial y} \right) = \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta}, \qquad
{\mathbf e}_2 = \frac{\partial}{\partial z}.
\]
Then the dual forms are given by
\[ \omega^1 = r\, d\theta, \qquad \omega^2 = dz, \qquad \omega^3 = dr.\]
It follows from the structure equations that the connection forms are given by
\[ \omega^1_2 = \omega^3_2 = 0, \qquad \omega^3_1 = -d\theta. \]
In this case, the PDE system \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys} becomes:
\begin{equation}\label{first-order-PDE-sys-f=r}
\begin{aligned}
u^2_{\theta} - r u^1_z & = 0, \\
u^1_{\theta} + r u^2_z & = 0, \\
u^1_r & = - \frac{1}{r} u^1 + \phi(r) u^2, \\
u^2_r & = -\phi(r) u^1 .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
In order to explore the compatibility of the system \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys-f=r}, differentiate the 2nd equation with respect to $r$, the 3rd equation with respect to $\theta$, and the 4th equation with respect to $z$. This process yields
\begin{align*}
0 & = u^1_{r\theta} + u^2_z + r u^2_{rz} \\
& = \left( -\frac{1}{r} u^1_{\theta} + \phi(r) u^2_{\theta}\right) + u^2_z - r \phi(r) u^1_z \\
& = -\frac{1}{r} u^1_{\theta} + u^2_z.
\end{align*}
Together with the 2nd equation, this implies that $u^1_{\theta} = u^2_z = 0$.
Therefore, we have
\[ u^1 = u^1(r, z), \qquad u^2 = u^2(r, \theta). \]
Now consider the 3rd equation in \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys-f=r}:
\[ u^1_r = - \frac{1}{r} u^1 + \phi(r) u^2. \]
Differentiating with respect to $\theta$ yields $\phi(r) u^2_{\theta} =0$, and hence $u^2_{\theta} = 0$.
Similarly, differentiating the 4th equation in \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys} with respect to $z$ shows that $u^1_z = 0$.
It follows that $u^1$ and $u^2$ are functions of $r$ alone---and hence constant on each level surface of $f$---and that they satisfy the ODE system given by the 3rd and 4th equations in \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys-f=r}.
Therefore, the solution space of the system \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys-f=r} is a 2-dimensional space, parametrized by arbitrary initial values $(u^1(r_0), u^2(r_0))$ for $(u^1(r), u^2(r))$ on some cylinder $r = r_0$.
\end{example}
\begin{example}
Suppose that $f:U \to \mathbb{R}$ has the form $f(x, y, z) = \phi(\tan^{-1}(y/x))$, or, in cylindrical coordinates, $f(r, \theta, z) = \phi(\theta)$. The level surfaces of $f$ are open subsets of planes containing the $z$-axis (although our hypotheses exclude points of the $z$-axis from $U$), and
we can use the same orthonormal frame field as in Example \ref{cylinders-ex}, but in a different order:
\[ {\mathbf e}_1 = \frac{\partial}{\partial z}, \qquad {\mathbf e}_2 = \frac{\partial}{\partial r}, \qquad {\mathbf e}_3 = \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta}. \]
Then the dual forms are given by
\[ \omega^1 = dz, \qquad \omega^2 = dr, \qquad \omega^3 = r\, d\theta.\]
It follows from the structure equations that the connection forms are given by
\[ \omega^3_1 = \omega^1_2 = 0, \qquad \omega^3_2 = d\theta. \]
In this case, the PDE system \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys} becomes:
\begin{equation}\label{first-order-PDE-sys-f=theta}
\begin{aligned}
u^2_z - u^1_r & = 0, \\
u^1_z + u^2_r & = -\frac{1}{r} u^2, \\
u^1_{\theta} & = r \phi(\theta) u^2, \\
u^2_{\theta} & = -r \phi(\theta) u^1 .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
In order to explore the compatibility of the system \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys-f=theta}, differentiate the 2nd equation with respect to $\theta$, the 3rd equation with respect to $z$, and the 4th equation with respect to $r$. This process yields
\begin{align*}
0 & = u^1_{z\theta} + u^2_{r\theta} + \frac{1}{r} u^2_{\theta} \\
& = r \phi(\theta) u^2_z + (-\phi(\theta) u^1 - r\phi(\theta) u^1_r) + \frac{1}{r}(-r \phi(\theta) u^1) \\
& = \phi(\theta) \left( r( u^2_z - u^1_r) - 2r u^1 \right).
\end{align*}
Taking the 1st equation in \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys-f=theta} into account, this becomes
\[ 0 = -2r \phi(\theta) u^1; \]
therefore, we must have $u^1 = 0$. But then the 3rd equation in \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys-f=theta} implies that $u^2=0$ as well. Hence there are no nonzero Beltrami fields with proportionality factor $f = \phi(\theta)$.
\end{example}
\section{Exterior differential system analysis}\label{analysis-sec}
The PDE system \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys} may be reformulated as an exterior differential system as follows. Observe that, algebraically, we may solve the first two equations in \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys} by setting
\begin{equation}\label{solve-for-some-derivatives}
\begin{aligned}
u^1_1 & = p_1 + (k_2 - g_1)u^1, \\
u^1_2 & = p_2 - k_2 u^2, \\
u^2_1 & = p_2 + k_1 u^1, \\
u^2_2 & = -p_1 - (k_1 + g_2) u^2
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
for some arbitrary functions $p_1, p_2:U \to \mathbb{R}$. So, let $M = U \times \mathbb{R}^4$, with coordinates $(u^1, u^2, p_1, p_2)$ on the $\mathbb{R}^4$ factor, and
let ${\mathcal I}$ be the differential ideal on $M$ generated by the 1-forms
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\theta^1 & = du^1 - (p_1 + (k_2 - g_1)u^1)\,\omega^1 - (p_2 - k_2 u^2)\,\omega^2 - (h_{11} u^1 + (f - k_3) u^2)\, \omega^3, \\
\theta^2 & = du^2 - (p_2 + k_1 u^1)\,\omega^1 - (-p_1 - (k_1 + g_2) u^2)\,\omega^2 - ((k_3 - f) u^1 + h_{22} u^2)\,\omega^3,
\end{aligned} \label{define-I}
\end{equation}
and their exterior derivatives. An {\em integral manifold} of $(M, {\mathcal I})$ is a submanifold $\iota:N \hookrightarrow M$ with the property that $\iota^*({\mathcal I}) = (0)$.
Three-dimensional integral manifolds of $(M, {\mathcal I})$ satisfying the independence condition $\iota^*(\omega^1 \wedge \omega^2 \wedge \omega^3) \neq 0$ are in one-to-one correspondence with solutions of the PDE system \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys} on $U$, and hence with Beltrami fields on $U$ with proportionality factor $f$.
Cartan's algorithm for computing the space of integral manifolds of the exterior differential system $(M, {\mathcal I})$ with independence condition $\Omega = \omega^1 \wedge \omega^2 \wedge \omega^3$ begins by computing the 2-forms $d\theta^1, d\theta^2$ modulo the {\em algebraic} ideal generated by $\{\theta^1, \theta^2\}$. This yields expressions of the form
\begin{equation}\label{dthetas-first-pass}
\begin{aligned}
d\theta^1 & \equiv -dp_1 \wedge \omega^1 - dp_2 \wedge \omega^2 + T^1_{ij} \omega^i \wedge \omega^j , \\
d\theta^2 & \equiv -dp_2 \wedge \omega^1 + dp_1 \wedge \omega^2 + T^2_{ij} \omega^i \wedge \omega^j,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where the $T^k_{ij}$ are functions on $M$ involving the known functions $f, g, h_{ij}, k_i$ on $U$ and their derivatives, as well as the unknowns $u^1, u^2, p_1, p_2$ on $M$. The functions $T^k_{ij}$ are called {\em torsion} functions for the exterior differential system $(M, {\mathcal I})$.
The next step is to determine whether there exist functions $p_{ij}$ on $M$ such that the 1-forms $\pi_1, \pi_2$ defined by
\[ \pi_i = dp_i - p_{ij} \omega^j \]
satisfy
\begin{equation}\label{dthetas-first-pass-absorbed}
\begin{aligned}
d\theta^1 & \equiv -\pi_1 \wedge \omega^1 - \pi_2 \wedge \omega^2 , \\
d\theta^2 & \equiv -\pi_2 \wedge \omega^1 + \pi_1 \wedge \omega^2.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
(Note that these are affine linear equations for the functions $p_{ij}$, so the existence of such functions can be determined via linear algebra.)
If no such functions $p_{ij}$ exist, then the system $(M, {\mathcal I}, \Omega)$ has no 3-dimensional integral manifolds, and hence there are no Beltrami fields with with proportionality factor $f$. (In more common PDE terminology, the nonexistence of such functions means that imposing the condition that mixed partial derivatives commute produces a contradiction.)
If, on the other hand, such functions $p_{ij}$ do exist, we say that {\em the torsion can be absorbed}.
A straightforward\footnote{While straightforward in principle, most of the computations in this algorithm are impractical to carry out by hand. We have used {\sc Maple} for all computations, along with the {\sc Cartan} package developed by the first author and available for free download at http://euclid.colorado.edu/$\tilde{\ }$jnc/Maple.html.} computation shows that the torsion can be absorbed if and only if
\begin{equation}\label{torsion-first-pass}
\begin{aligned}
2(& h_{11} - h_{22}) p_1 \\
& + (g_{13} + (h_{11})_1 -(h_{22})_1 - g_1 h_{22} + g_2(k_3 - 2f)) u^1 \\
& \ \ \ + (g_{23} + (h_{22})_2 - (h_{11})_2 - g_1(k_3 - 2f) - g_2 h_{11}) u^2 \\
& \ \ \ \ \ = 0,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where subscripts indicate covariant derivatives with respect to the vector fields ${\mathbf e}_i$.
This equation should be regarded as a linear equation for the unknown quantities $p_1, u^1, u^2$ on $M$, with coefficients depending on known quantities on $U$.
At this point, there are three possibilities to consider:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Equation \eqref{torsion-first-pass} holds identically on $M$. This happens if and only if the coefficients of $p_1, u^1$, and $u^2$ each vanish identically on $U$.
\item The coefficient of $p_1$ vanishes identically on $U$, but at least one of the other two coefficients does not.
\item The coefficient of $p_1$ is nonzero on $U$.
\end{enumerate}
We will consider each of these cases in separate subsections below.
\subsection{Case 1: Equation \eqref{torsion-first-pass} holds identically on $M$}
This condition means that the coefficients of $p_1, u^1$, and $u^2$ in \eqref{torsion-first-pass} must all vanish identically on $U$.
From the vanishing of the coefficient of $p_1$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{tot-umbilic-cond}
h_{11} - h_{22} = 0.
\end{equation}
This means that all the level surfaces of $f$ are totally umbilic (i.e., open subsets of either planes or spheres), and therefore the function $h = h_{11} = h_{22}$, which represents the normal curvature in each direction along the level surfaces of $f$, is constant on each level surface of $f$.
Taking this into account, the vanishing of the coefficients of $u^1$ and $u^2$ reduces to
\begin{equation}\label{umbilic-vanishing-torsion}
g_{13} - g_1 h + g_2(k_3 - 2f) = g_{23} - g_1(k_3 - 2f) - g_2 h = 0.
\end{equation}
\begin{lemma}\label{tot-umbilic-vanishing-torsion-lemma}
Equations \eqref{tot-umbilic-cond} and \eqref{umbilic-vanishing-torsion} imply that $g_1 = g_2 = 0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose not. Since the level surfaces of $f$ are totally umbilic, we can rotate the tangent frame vectors $({\mathbf e}_1, {\mathbf e}_2)$ at each point however we like without changing the condition that they form a principal adapted frame field for the level surfaces of $f$. Under such a rotation, the vector $[ g_1 \ g_2 ]$ is rotated through the same angle as the tangent frame vectors at each point. Thus we can choose an adapted frame field for which $g_2 = 0$ and $g_1 < 0$.
Under this assumption, the connection forms \eqref{expanded-connection-forms} may be written as
\begin{equation}\label{umbilic-expanded-connection-forms}
\begin{aligned}
\omega^3_1 & = h \omega^1 + g_1 \omega^3, \\
\omega^3_2 & = h \omega^2 , \\
\omega^1_2 & = k_1 \omega^1 + k_2 \omega^2 + k_3 \omega^3,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
and equations \eqref{umbilic-vanishing-torsion} become
\begin{equation*}
g_{13} - g_1 h = -g_1(k_3 - 2f) = 0.
\end{equation*}
Since $g_1 \neq 0$, it follows that
\begin{equation}\label{umbilic-vanishing-torsion-1}
g_{13} = g_1 h, \qquad k_3 = 2f.
\end{equation}
\begin{remark}\label{g1=curvature-remark}
Some of the functions appearing in the connection forms \eqref{umbilic-expanded-connection-forms} may be interpreted geometrically. (For instance, we have already seen that $h$ represents the normal curvature in each direction along the level surfaces of $f$.)
Let $\alpha:I \to U$ be any integral curve of the vector field ${\mathbf e}_3$. Then $\alpha$ is a unit speed curve with $\alpha'(s) = {\mathbf e}_3(\alpha(s))$. Its acceleration vector at the point $\alpha(s)$ is given by
\[ \alpha''(s) = \frac{d}{ds} {\mathbf e}_3(\alpha(s)) = d{\mathbf e}_3(\alpha'(s)) = d{\mathbf e}_3({\mathbf e}_3) = -{\mathbf e}_1 \omega^3_1({\mathbf e}_3) = -g_1 {\mathbf e}_1. \]
Therefore, ${\mathbf e}_1$ is the Frenet normal vector to $\alpha$, and the curvature of $\alpha$ is $\kappa = -g_1$. Similar reasoning applied to the Frenet binormal vector ${\mathbf e}_2$ shows that $\alpha$ has torsion $\tau = -k_3$.
\end{remark}
Now consider the structure equations \eqref{structure-equations}. Substituting \eqref{umbilic-expanded-connection-forms} into the structure equation
\[ d\omega^3_2 = -\omega^3_1 \wedge \omega^1_2 \]
yields
\[ -(g_1 k_1 \omega^1 + (h_3 + g_1 k_2 - h^2) \omega^2) \wedge \omega^3 = 0. \]
Since $g_1 \neq 0$, it follows that
\[ k_1 = 0, \qquad h_3 = h^2 - g_1 k_2. \]
Next, substituting \eqref{umbilic-expanded-connection-forms} into the structure equation
\[ d\omega^3_1 = -\omega^3_2 \wedge \omega^2_1 = \omega^3_2 \wedge \omega^1_2 \]
and taking \eqref{umbilic-vanishing-torsion-1} into account yields
\[ ((g_{11} + g_1^2 + g_1 k^2) \omega^1 + g_{12} \omega^2) \wedge \omega^3 = 0, \]
and hence
\[ g_{11} = -(g_1^2 + g_1 k_2), \qquad g_{12} = 0. \]
Now, substituting \eqref{umbilic-expanded-connection-forms} into the structure equation
\[ d\omega^1_2 = -\omega^1_3 \wedge \omega^3_2 = \omega^3_1 \wedge \omega^3_2 \]
and reducing modulo $\omega^2$ yields
\[ 2f (g_1 - k_2) \omega^1 \wedge \omega^3 \equiv 0 \mod{\omega^2}, \]
while computing $d(dg_1) \equiv 0$ modulo $\omega^1$ yields
\[ -2f g_1 (g_1 + k_2) \omega^2 \wedge \omega^3 \equiv 0 \mod{\omega^1}. \]
But since we have assumed that $f$ and $g_1$ are both nonzero, this implies that $g_1 = k_2 = 0$, which is a contradiction. Therefore, we must have $g_1 = g_2 = 0$, as claimed.
\end{proof}
Now, let $\alpha:I \to U$ be any integral curve of the vector field ${\mathbf e}_3$, as in Remark \ref{g1=curvature-remark}. The condition $g_1 = g_2 = 0$ implies that $\omega^3_1({\mathbf e}_3) = \omega^3_2({\mathbf e}_3) = 0$, which in turn implies that
\[ \alpha''(s) = d{\mathbf e}_3({\mathbf e}_3) = -{\mathbf e}_1 \omega^3_1({\mathbf e}_3) - {\mathbf e}_2 \omega^3_2({\mathbf e}_3) = 0. \]
Therefore, $\alpha$ is a straight line in $\mathbb{R}^3$.
To summarize, we have now shown that if equation \eqref{torsion-first-pass} holds identically on $M$, then:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Every level surface of $f$ is totally umbilic.
\item All integral curves of the vector field consisting of the unit normal vectors to the level surfaces of $f$ are straight lines.
\end{enumerate}
Conversely, these conditions on the level surfaces of $f$ suffice to guarantee that \eqref{torsion-first-pass} holds identically on $M$.
Together, these conditions are equivalent to the condition that the level surfaces of $f$ are contained either in parallel planes (if $h=0$) or concentric spheres (if $h \neq 0$). Note that in the latter case, our assumptions on the nonvanishing of $f$ and $\nabla f$ imply that the common center of these spheres is not contained in $U$.
Since \eqref{torsion-first-pass} holds identically on $M$, the torsion can be absorbed; thus there exist 1-forms $\pi_1, \pi_2$ on $M$ such that equations \eqref{dthetas-first-pass-absorbed} hold. We can write these equations in the form
\begin{equation}\label{totally-umbilic-tableau}
\begin{bmatrix} d\theta^1 \\[0.05in] d\theta^2 \end{bmatrix} \equiv
- \begin{bmatrix} \pi_1 & \pi_2 \\[0.05in] \pi_2 & -\pi_1 \end{bmatrix}
\wedge \begin{bmatrix} \omega^1 \\[0.05in] \omega^2 \end{bmatrix} \mod{ \{\theta^1, \theta^2\} }.
\end{equation}
In Cartan's algorithm, a straightforward computation shows that the matrix on the right-hand side of equation \eqref{totally-umbilic-tableau} is an {\em involutive tableau} with Cartan characters $s_1 = 2$, $s_2=0$. It follows from the Cartan-K\"ahler theorem that the space of integral manifolds of the system $(M, {\mathcal I})$ with independence condition $\Omega \neq 0$ is locally parametrized by 2 functions of 1 variable. (Note that the case $h=0$ is precisely the scenario of Example \ref{f=z-ex}.)
\begin{remark}
This case is the only time that we will need the full strength of the Cartan-K\"ahler theorem, and hence the only time when we truly need to assume that $f$ is real analytic. In all other cases, existence results will follow from the Frobenius theorem, while nonexistence results require only sufficient smoothness to compute enough derivatives to derive the necessary contradictions.
And in fact, as we saw in Example \ref{f=z-ex}, even in this case real analyticity of $f$ may not be strictly necessary: The Cartan-K\"ahler theorem is really only needed to prove existence of local restricted solutions on each level surface of $f$, which are open subsets of planes or spheres. The fact that these restricted solutions may be combined to produce a consistent solution on an open subset of $U$ may then be proved by ODE techniques, which only require finite
differentiability of $f$.
\end{remark}
\subsection{Case 2: The coefficient of $p_1$ in \eqref{torsion-first-pass} vanishes identically on $U$, but at least one of the other two coefficients does not}
As in the previous case, the vanishing of the coefficient of $p_1$ implies that $h_{11} = h_{22} = h$, and hence all the level surfaces of $f$ are totally umbilic. The nonvanishing of at least one of the other coefficients implies that at least one of $g_1, g_2$ is nonzero; thus, as in the proof of Lemma \ref{tot-umbilic-vanishing-torsion-lemma}, we may choose an adapted frame field $({\mathbf e}_1, {\mathbf e}_2, {\mathbf e}_3)$ on $U$ for which $g_2=0$ and $g_1 < 0$. Then the connection forms \eqref{expanded-connection-forms} may be written as in \eqref{umbilic-expanded-connection-forms}. We will consider separately the cases where $h=0$ and $h \neq 0$.
\subsubsection{Case 2.1: $h=0$.}
In this case, the torsion condition \eqref{torsion-first-pass} reduces to
\begin{equation}\label{torsion-umbilic=h=0}
g_{13}\, u^1 - g_1(k_3 - 2f) u^2 = 0.
\end{equation}
Let $\alpha:I \to U$ be any integral curve of the vector field ${\mathbf e}_3$. For ease of notation, let $f(s)$ and ${\mathbf e}_i(s)$ denote $f(\alpha(s))$ and ${\mathbf e}_i(\alpha(s))$, respectively.
As mentioned in Remark \ref{g1=curvature-remark}, we have $\alpha'(s) = {\mathbf e}_3(s)$, and the $\omega^3$ terms in the connection forms \eqref{umbilic-expanded-connection-forms} imply that
\begin{equation}\label{case-2-1-Frenet-eqs}
{\mathbf e}_3'(s) = -g_1{\mathbf e}_1(s), \qquad {\mathbf e}_1'(s) = g_1 {\mathbf e}_3(s) - k_3 {\mathbf e}_2(s), \qquad {\mathbf e}_2'(2) = k_3 {\mathbf e}_1(s).
\end{equation}
Therefore, the Frenet frame of $\alpha$ is given by $({\mathbf e}_3, {\mathbf e}_1, {\mathbf e}_2)$, and the curvature and torsion of $\alpha$ are given by
\[ \kappa(s) = -g_1(\alpha(s)), \qquad \tau(s) = -k_3(\alpha(s)). \]
Since $g_1 < 0$, we have $\kappa(s) > 0$; in particular, $\alpha$ is not a straight line.
The level plane of $f$ passing through the point $\alpha(s)$ is spanned by the vectors ${\mathbf e}_1(s), {\mathbf e}_2(s)$; note that, by definition, $f = f(s)$ at every point of this plane. Moreover, the adapted frame field $({\mathbf e}_1, {\mathbf e}_2, {\mathbf e}_3)$ on $U$ is identical at each point of this plane.
This suggests a geometrically natural local coordinate system $(s, v, w)$ on $U$ defined by
\[ {\mathbf x}(s,v,w) = \alpha(s) + v {\mathbf e}_1(s) + w {\mathbf e}_2(s). \]
Then we have
\[ d{\mathbf x} = {\mathbf e}_1(s) (dv - w \tau(s)\, ds) +
{\mathbf e}_2(s) ( dw + v \tau(s)\, d(s))
+ {\mathbf e}_3(s) (1 - v \kappa(s))\, ds,
\]
and so the dual forms are given by
\begin{equation}\label{case-2-1-dual-forms}
\omega^1 = dv - w \tau(s)\, ds, \qquad \omega^2 = dw + v \tau(s)\, d(s), \qquad \omega^3 = (1 - v \kappa(s))\, ds.
\end{equation}
The Cartan structure equations \eqref{structure-equations} may then be used to show that the connection forms are given by
\[ \omega^3_1 = -\frac{\kappa(s)}{1 - v\kappa(s)}\, \omega^3, \qquad \omega^3_2 = 0, \qquad \omega^1_2 = -\frac{\tau(s)}{1 - v\kappa(s)} \,\omega^3. \]
Thus we have
\[ g_1 = -\frac{\kappa(s)}{1 - v\kappa(s)}, \qquad k_3 = -\frac{\tau(s)}{1 - v\kappa(s)}, \]
and, since $g_{13}$ is defined by the covariant equation $dg_1 = g_{ij} \omega^j$, it is straightforward to compute that
\[ g_{13} = -\frac{\kappa'(s) + w \kappa(s)^2 \tau(s)}{(1 - v\kappa(s))^3}. \]
The torsion absorption condition \eqref{torsion-umbilic=h=0} may now be written (after clearing denominators) as
\begin{equation}\label{torsion-umbilic=h=0-coords}
A u^1 +B u^2 = 0,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{case-2-1-AB}
A = \kappa'(s) + w \kappa(s)^2 \tau(s), \qquad B = \kappa(s)(1 - v\kappa(s))(\tau(s) + 2f(s)(1 - v\kappa(s))).
\end{equation}
By hypothesis, at least one of the coefficients of $u^1, u^2$ in \eqref{torsion-umbilic=h=0-coords} is nonvanishing, so this equation defines a relation between the unknown functions $u^1, u^2$ that must hold on any integral manifold.
Next, we compute the covariant derivative of equation \eqref{torsion-umbilic=h=0-coords} in the direction of ${\mathbf e}_3$. From equations \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys}, in this case we have
\[ u^1_3 = (f(s) + \tau(s)) u^2, \qquad u^2_3 = -(f(s) + \tau(s)) u^1, \]
and so we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{torsion-deriv-umbilic=h=0-coords}
(A_3 -(f(s) + \tau(s)) B)u^1 + (B_3 + (f(s) + \tau(s))A)u^2 = 0.
\end{equation}
In order for equations \eqref{torsion-umbilic=h=0-coords} and \eqref{torsion-deriv-umbilic=h=0-coords} to admit a nonzero solution $(u^1, u^2)$, we must have
\begin{equation}\label{case-2-1-this-must-vanish}
A(B_3 + (f(s) + \tau(s))A) - B(A_3 -(f(s) + \tau(s)) B) = 0.
\end{equation}
From equations \eqref{case-2-1-dual-forms}, we can compute that for any function $F(s,v,w)$, the covariant derivative $F_3$ is given by
\[ F_3 = \frac{1}{1 - v \kappa(s)}\left(\frac{\partial F}{\partial s} + \tau(s) \left(w \frac{\partial F}{\partial v} - v \frac{\partial F}{\partial w} \right) \right). \]
Applying these formulas to compute $A_3$, $B_3$ and substituting these expressions (together with \eqref{case-2-1-AB}) into equation \eqref{case-2-1-this-must-vanish} yields a polynomial in the variables $(v,w)$ whose coefficients are functions of $s$ that must all vanish identically. In particular, the highest-order term of this polynomial is
\[ 4 f(s)^3 \kappa(s)^7 v^5. \]
Since $f(s) \neq 0$, we must have $\kappa(s) = 0$. But this contradicts the assumption that $\alpha$ is not a straight line; therefore, there are no nonzero Beltrami fields in this case.
\subsubsection{Case 2.2: $h \neq 0$.}
In this case, the torsion condition \eqref{torsion-first-pass} reduces to
\begin{equation}\label{torsion-umbilic-h-nonzero}
(g_{13} - g_1 h) u^1 - g_1(k_3 - 2f) u^2 = 0.
\end{equation}
Since the level spheres of $f$ are not concentric in this case, their centers form a regular curve in $\mathbb{R}^3$. (Note that this curve is generally not contained in $U$.) So, let $\alpha:I \to \mathbb{R}^3$ be the curve consisting of the centers of the level spheres of $f$, parametrized by arc length. Let $(T(s), N(s), B(s))$ denote the Frenet frame of $\alpha$ and $\kappa(s), \tau(s)$ the curvature and torsion of $\alpha$. (We allow for the possibility that $\alpha$ is a straight line, in which case we take $\kappa(s) = \tau(s) = 0$ and let $(T(s), N(s), B(s))$ be any smooth orthonormal frame field along $\alpha$ with $\alpha'(s) = T(s)$.)
Let $\rho(s)$ denote the radius of the level sphere of $f$ with center $\alpha(s)$, and let $f(s)$ denote the value of $f$ on this sphere. We can define a geometrically natural local coordinate system $(s,v,w)$ on $U$ by
\[ {\mathbf x}(s,v,w) = \alpha(s) + \rho(s) \left[ (\cos v) T(s) + (\sin v)((\cos w) N(s) + (\sin w) B(s)) \right]. \]
An adapted frame field on $U$ may then be defined by
\[ {\mathbf e}_1(s,v,w) = \frac{{\mathbf x}_v}{|{\mathbf x}_v|}, \qquad {\mathbf e}_2(s,v,w) = \frac{{\mathbf x}_w}{|{\mathbf x}_w|}, \qquad {\mathbf e}_3(s,v,w) = {\mathbf e}_1(s,v,w) \times {\mathbf e}_2(s,v,w). \]
The argument proceeds in a similar fashion to that in the previous case, although the computations are messier. Expressing the differential $d{\mathbf x}$ in terms of the basis $({\mathbf e}_1, {\mathbf e}_2, {\mathbf e}_3)$ shows that the dual forms are given by
\begin{equation}\label{case-2-2-dual-forms}
\begin{aligned}
\omega^1 & = \rho(s)\,dv +(\kappa(s) \rho(s) \cos w - \sin v) \, ds, \\
\omega^2 & = \rho(s) (\sin v)\, dw + \rho(s) (\tau(s) \sin v - \kappa(s) \cos v \sin w) \, d(s), \\
\omega^3 & = (\rho'(s) + \cos v)\, ds.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The Cartan structure equations \eqref{structure-equations} may then be used to show that the connection forms are given by
\begin{align*}
\omega^3_1 & = -\frac{1}{\rho(s)} \left( \omega^1 + \frac{\sin v}{(\rho'(s) + \cos v)} \omega^3 \right), \\
\omega^3_2 & = -\frac{1}{\rho(s)} \omega^2, \\
\omega^1_2 & = -\frac{\cos v}{\rho(s) \sin v} \omega^2 - \frac{\kappa(s) \sin w}{\sin v\, (\rho'(s) + \cos v)}\omega^3.
\end{align*}
Thus we have
\[ g_1 = -\frac{\sin v}{\rho(s) (\rho'(s) + \cos v)}, \qquad k_3 = -\frac{\kappa(s) \sin w}{\sin v\, (\rho'(s) + \cos v)}, \qquad h = \frac{1}{\rho(s)}, \]
and computing the covariant derivative of $g_1$ in the ${\mathbf e}_3$ direction shows that
\[ g_{13} = \frac{(\rho(s) \rho''(s) + \rho'(s)^2 - 1) \sin v + \rho(s) \kappa(s) (\rho'(s) \cos v + 1)\cos w }{\rho(s)^2(\rho'(s) + \cos v)^3}. \]
The torsion absorption condition \eqref{torsion-umbilic-h-nonzero} may now be written (after clearing denominators) as
\begin{equation}\label{torsion-umbilic-h-nonzero-coords}
A u^1 +B u^2 = 0,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}\label{case-2-2-AB}
\begin{aligned}
A & = (\rho(s) \rho''(s) - 2\rho'(s)\cos v - \cos^2 v - 1) \sin v + \rho(s) \kappa(s) (\rho'(s) \cos v + 1)\cos w,
\\
B & = -\rho(s) (\rho'(s) + \cos v)(2 f(s) (\rho'(s) + \cos v)\sin v + \kappa(s) \sin w) .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
As in the previous case, computing the covariant derivative of equation \eqref{torsion-umbilic-h-nonzero-coords} in the direction of ${\mathbf e}_3$ yields a second linear relation between $u^1$ and $u^2$. The analogous necessary condition for the existence of a common nonzero solution $(u^1, u^2)$ to this equation and \eqref{torsion-umbilic-h-nonzero-coords} is a large trigonometric polynomial in the variables $(v,w)$ whose coefficients are functions of $s$ that must all vanish identically. In particular, the highest-order term of this polynomial is
\[ \rho(s) f(s) (1 + 4 \rho(s)^2 f(s)^2)\sin v \cos^8 v. \]
Since $f(s)$ and $\rho(s)$ are nonzero, this term is never zero; therefore, there are no nonzero Beltrami fields in this case.
\subsection{Case 3: The coefficient of $p_1$ in \eqref{torsion-first-pass} is nonzero on $U$}
This condition means that $h_{11} \neq h_{22}$ on $U$, and so the level sets of $f$ have no umbilic points. In this case, we can choose an adapted frame field on $U$ as follows: let ${\mathbf e}_3 = \frac{\nabla f}{|\nabla f|}$ as before, and at each point ${\mathbf x} \in U$, let ${\mathbf e}_1, {\mathbf e}_2$ be tangent to the principal directions of the level surface $\Sigma$ of $f$ passing through ${\mathbf x}$.
It turns out to be convenient to set
\[ h_{11} = h_1 + h_2, \qquad h_{22} = h_1 - h_2, \]
with $h_2 \neq 0$. Then the connection forms \eqref{expanded-connection-forms} may be written as
\begin{equation}\label{nonumbilic-MC-forms}
\begin{aligned}
\omega^3_1 & = (h_1 + h_2) \omega^1 + g_1 \omega^3, \\
\omega^3_2 & = (h_1 - h_2) \omega^2 + g_2 \omega^3, \\
\omega^1_2 & = k_1 \omega^1 + k_2 \omega^2 + k_3 \omega^3.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Equation \eqref{torsion-first-pass} may be interpreted as defining a codimension 1 submanifold $M' \subset M$, diffeomorphic to $U \times \mathbb{R}^3$ (with coordinates $(u^1, u^2, p_2)$ on the $\mathbb{R}^3$ factor), with the property that any integral manifold of $(M, {\mathcal I})$ must be contained in $M'$.
Thus we must replace ${\mathcal I}$ with its pullback ${\mathcal I}'$ to $M'$ and consider the system $(M', {\mathcal I}')$. Algebraically, this simply means that we solve equation \eqref{torsion-first-pass} for $p_1$ and substitute the resulting expression into the differential forms in ${\mathcal I}$ to obtain the system ${\mathcal I}'$.
This system is still generated by $\theta_1, \theta_2$ as in \eqref{define-I}, with $p_1$ determined by equation \eqref{torsion-first-pass}. Modulo $\{\theta_1, \theta_2\}$, we now have
\begin{equation}\label{nonumbilic-dthetas-2}
\begin{aligned}
d\theta^1 & \equiv - dp_2 \wedge \omega^2 + T^1_{ij} \omega^i \wedge \omega^j , \\
d\theta^2 & \equiv -dp_2 \wedge \omega^1 + T^2_{ij} \omega^i \wedge \omega^j,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where now the $T^k_{ij}$ are functions on $M'$ involving the known functions $f, g, h_1, h_2, k_i$ on $U$ and their derivatives, as well as the unknowns $u^1, u^2, p_2$ on $M'$.
As before, the next step is to determine whether there exist functions $p_{21}, p_{22}, p_{23}$ on $M$ such that the 1-form
\[ \pi_2 = dp_2 - p_{2j} \omega^j \]
satisfies
\begin{equation}\label{dthetas-second-pass-absorbed}
\begin{aligned}
d\theta^1 & \equiv - \pi_2 \wedge \omega^2 , \\
d\theta^2 & \equiv -\pi_2 \wedge \omega^1.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Similarly to the previous case, a straightforward (but rather involved) computation shows that such functions exist (and hence the torsion can be absorbed) if and only if
\begin{equation}\label{torsion-second-pass}
(2 k_3 - f) p_2 - Z_1 u^1
- Z_2 u^2
= 0,
\end{equation}
where $Z_1, Z_2$ are long, complicated expressions involving the known functions $f, g, h_1, h_2, k_i$ on $U$ and their derivatives, and whose explicit form is not particularly enlightening.
At this point, there are (at least in principle) three possibilities to consider:
\subsubsection{Case 3.1: Equation \eqref{torsion-second-pass} holds identically on $M'$.}
This happens if and only if the coefficients of $p_2, u^1$, and $u^2$ each vanish identically on $U$. This system of 3 PDEs is overdetermined, and differentiating yields several additional PDEs that arise as compatibility conditions, and which must be differentiated in turn to check for still more compatibility conditions. Unfortunately, this process rapidly becomes computationally impractical to continue, and we have been unable to carry it to completion in order to determine definitively whether or not this PDE system admits solutions. However, we conjecture that it does not.
Nevertheless, suppose that there exists some function $f$ for which this condition holds. Then there is a unique integral element at each point of $M'$; however, the system $(M' {\mathcal I}')$ is not involutive and must be prolonged.
Because there exists a unique integral element at each point, this amounts to adding the 1-form
\[ \theta^3 = \pi_2 = dp_2 - p_{21} \omega^1 - p_{22} \omega^2 - p_{23} \omega^3 \]
to ${\mathcal I}'$, where $p_{21}, p_{22}, p_{23}$ are the (unique in this case) functions determined by the torsion absorption condition.
Then we must compute $d\theta^3 \equiv 0$ modulo $\{\theta^1, \theta^2, \theta^3\}$ to see whether this condition introduces any additional constraints.
\begin{itemize}
\item If $d\theta^3 \equiv 0 \mod{\{\theta^1, \theta^2, \theta^3\}}$ identically on $M'$, then the system ${\mathcal I}'^{(1)} = \{\theta^1, \theta^2, \theta^3\}$ is Frobenius of rank 3, and there is a 3-dimensional family of integral manifolds.
We note that the condition $d\theta^3 \equiv 0 \mod{\{\theta^1, \theta^2, \theta^3\}}$ represents 3 additional PDEs that must be satisfied by the known functions on $U$. Even if the PDE system given by the vanishing of equation \eqref{torsion-second-pass} were to be satisfied, it seems extremely unlikely that these additional PDEs and their compatibility conditions would be satisfied as well; however, we cannot rule out the possibility entirely.
\item If $d\theta^3 \not\equiv 0 \mod{\{\theta^1, \theta^2, \theta^3\}}$, then the equation $d\theta^3 \equiv 0 \mod{\{\theta^1, \theta^2, \theta^3\}}$ defines a (possibly empty) submanifold $M'' \subset M'$ to which the non-prolonged ideal ${\mathcal I}'$ must be pulled back. If this submanifold is not empty, then it is defined by a relation of the form
\[ Y_0 p_2 + Y_1 u^1 + Y_2 u^2 = 0. \]
(The fact that $M''$ is defined by a single equation is a consequence of some of the PDEs obtained by differentiating the equations given by the vanishing of \eqref{torsion-second-pass}.)
\begin{itemize}
\item If $Y_0 \neq 0$, then this equation can be solved for $p_2$, and the pullback of ${\mathcal I}'$ to $M''$ is a rank 2 system ${\mathcal I}''$ that is either Frobenius (which requires that additional PDEs be satisfied), in which case there is a 2-dimensional family of integral manifolds, or the conditions $d\theta^1 \equiv d\theta^2 \equiv 0 \mod{\{\theta^1, \theta^2\}}$ define one or two algebraic relations between $u^1$ and $u^2$, which must also be differentiated to check for additional compatibility conditions. In the latter case, there is at most a 1-dimensional space of integral manifolds.
\item If $Y_0 = 0$ (which represents an additional PDE), then this equation defines an algebraic relation between $u^1$ and $u^2$, and any solution $(u^1, u^2)$ to the PDE system \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys} must have the form
\[ u^1 = -Y_2 u, \qquad u^2 = Y_1 u \]
for some function $u:U \to \mathbb{R}$. Substituting these expressions into the PDE system \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys} yields a system of 4 first-order PDEs for the unknown function $u$. This system has both algebraic and differential compatibility conditions that must be satisfied in order for any nonzero solutions to exist. If all these conditions are satisfied, then there is exactly a 1-dimensional space of integral manifolds.
\end{itemize}
In either case, there are further PDEs in addition to the PDE system given by the vanishing of equation \eqref{torsion-second-pass} that must be satisfied in order for integral manifolds to exist.
Again, we consider it extremely unlikely that there exist any solutions of this form, but we cannot rule out the possibility entirely. This is the basis for the second statement in Conjecture \ref{nonconstant-Beltrami-conjecture}.
\end{itemize}
\subsubsection{Case 3.2: The coefficient $(2 k_3 - f)$ of $p_2$ in \eqref{torsion-second-pass} vanishes identically on $U$, but at least one of the other two coefficients does not.}
Then equation \eqref{torsion-second-pass} takes the form
\[ Z_1 u^1 + Z_2 u^2 = 0, \]
and the analysis is similar to that in the last bullet point above, with the result that there is at most a 1-dimensional family of integral manifolds. We do not know of any examples satisfying this condition, but we note that this condition imposes fewer PDEs on the known functions on $U$ than the previous case, so there may be examples of this form.
\subsubsection{Case 3.3: The coefficient $(2 k_3 - f)$ of $p_2$ in \eqref{torsion-second-pass} is nonzero on $U$.}
In this case, equation \eqref{torsion-second-pass} defines a codimension 1 submanifold $M'' \subset M'$, diffeomorphic to $U \times \mathbb{R}^2$ (with coordinates $(u^1, u^2)$ on the $\mathbb{R}^2$ factor), with the property that any integral manifold of $(M, {\mathcal I})$ must be contained in $M''$. Thus we must replace ${\mathcal I}'$ with its pullback ${\mathcal I}''$ to $M''$ and consider the system $(M'', {\mathcal I}'')$. This system is still generated by $\theta_1, \theta_2$ as in \eqref{define-I}, with $p_1$ and $p_2$ determined by equations \eqref{torsion-first-pass} and \eqref{torsion-second-pass}.
Modulo $\{\theta_1, \theta_2\}$, we now have
\begin{equation}\label{nonumbilic-dthetas-3}
\begin{aligned}
d\theta^1 & \equiv T^1_{ij} \omega^i \wedge \omega^j , \\
d\theta^2 & \equiv T^2_{ij} \omega^i \wedge \omega^j,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where now the $T^k_{ij}$ are functions on $M''$ involving the known functions $f, g, h_1, h_2, k_i$ on $U$ and their derivatives, as well as the unknowns $u^1, u^2$ on $M''$.
There is now nowhere to absorb the torsion functions $T^i_{jk}$ if they are nonzero. There are two scenarios under which the system $(M'', {\mathcal I}'')$ may have nontrivial integral manifolds:
\begin{itemize}
\item If $d\theta^1 \equiv d\theta^2 \equiv 0 \mod{\{\theta^1, \theta^2\}}$---i.e., if all the torsion functions $T^k_{ij}$ vanish identically on $M''$---then the system $(M'', {\mathcal I}'')$ is Frobenius of rank 2, and there is a 2-dimensional family of integral manifolds. This is precisely what happens in Example \ref{cylinders-ex}, where the level sets of $f$ are concentric circular cylinders.
\item If $d\theta^1, d\theta^2$ are not both identically zero modulo $\{\theta^1, \theta^2\}$, then the equations $T^k_{ij} = 0$ define a (possibly empty) submanifold $M''' \subset M''$ to which ${\mathcal I}''$ must be pulled back.
If this submanifold is nonempty, then it is defined by a single equation of the form
\[ X_1 u^1 + X_2 u^2 = 0, \]
where $X_1$ and $X_2$ are expressions involving the known functions $f, g, h_1, h_2, k_i$ on $U$ and their derivatives. The remaining analysis is then similar to that in Case 3.2, and there is at most a 1-dimensional family of integral manifolds.
\end{itemize}
This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{nonconstant-Beltrami-theorem}.
One important open question remains: Which of the possibilities above corresponds to the generic case, where we might expect to find a space of Beltrami fields parametrized by 3 functions of 2 variables? The third statement in Conjecture \ref{nonconstant-Beltrami-conjecture} reflects our belief that the generic case is the final case above, i.e., the case where $2k_3 - f \neq 0$ and the system $(M'', {\mathcal I}'')$ is not Frobenius. This conjecture is based on the observation that this case imposes the fewest constraints on $f$ and its associated functions on $U$. Moreover, as we shall see in the following section, it is consistent with the classification of Beltrami fields that possess either a translation symmetry or a rotation symmetry.
\section{Beltrami fields with symmetry}\label{symmetry-sec}
In this section, we consider the simpler problem of classifying Beltrami fields ${\mathbf u}$ that possess either a translation symmetry or a rotation symmetry. In both cases, we are able to give a complete classification of local Beltrami fields with the corresponding symmetry.
\subsection{Beltrami fields with a translation symmetry}\label{translation-subsec}
Assume that ${\mathbf u}$ is a Beltrami field that admits a translation symmetry. Without loss of generality, we will assume that
\[ \frac{\partial {\mathbf u}}{\partial x^3} = 0. \]
It follows that $\frac{\partial f}{\partial x^3} = 0$ as well, and so the level surfaces of $f$ are cylinders over curves in the $(x^1, x^2)$ plane, with rulings parallel to the $x^3$-axis. Moreover, the vector field ${\mathbf e}_1 = \frac{\partial}{\partial x^3}$ is a principal direction to each level surface of $f$ at every point ${\mathbf x}\in U$. Since this vector field is constant on $U$, we have
\[ \omega^1_2 = \omega^3_1 = 0. \]
The vector fields ${\mathbf e}_2, {\mathbf e}_3$ may be written as
\[ {\mathbf e}_2 = \cos(\phi) \frac{\partial}{\partial x^1} + \sin(\phi) \frac{\partial}{\partial x^2}, \qquad
{\mathbf e}_3 = -\sin(\phi) \frac{\partial}{\partial x^1} + \cos(\phi) \frac{\partial}{\partial x^2} \]
for some function $\phi(x^1, x^2)$. (Note that this function is determined by $f$; specifically, it is determined by the condition that $\nabla f$ is parallel to ${\mathbf e}_3$.)
The dual forms are
\[ \omega^1 = dx^3, \qquad \omega^2 = \cos(\phi)\, dx^1 + \sin(\phi) \,dx^2, \qquad \omega^3 = -\sin(\phi)\, dx^1 + \cos(\phi)\, dx^2, \]
and the remaining connection form is given by
\[ \omega^3_2 = d\phi = \phi_2 \omega^2 + \phi_3 \omega^3. \]
Thus we have
\[ h_{11} = g_1 = k_1 = k_2 = k_3 = 0, \qquad h_{22} = \phi_2, \qquad g_2 = \phi_3. \]
Since we now have $u^1_1 = u^2_1 = 0$ by assumption, the PDE system \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys} reduces to the system
\begin{equation}\label{first-order-PDE-sys-translation-invariant}
\begin{aligned}
u^1_1 = & \ u^2_1 = u^1_2 = 0, \\
u^2_2 & = - \phi_3 u^2, \\
u^1_3 & = f u^2, \\
u^2_3 & = \phi_2 u^2 - f u^1.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
In particular, all the first-order derivatives of $u^1$ and $u^2$ are determined, and we have a total differential system for these two unknown functions. So, let $M = U \times \mathbb{R}^2$, with coordinates $(u^1, u^2)$ on the $\mathbb{R}^2$ factor, and
let ${\mathcal I}$ be the differential ideal on $M$ generated by the 1-forms
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\theta^1 & = du^1 - f u^2\, \omega^3, \\
\theta^2 & = du^2 + \phi_3\,\omega^2 + (f u^1 - \phi_2 u^2)\,\omega^3,
\end{aligned} \label{define-I-translation-invariant}
\end{equation}
and their exterior derivatives. Direct computation shows that, modulo $\{\theta^1, \theta^2\}$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\begin{aligned}
d\theta^1 & \equiv 0 \\
d\theta^2 & = \left( 2 \phi_3 f u^1 - (\phi_{22} + \phi_{33}) u^2 \right) \omega^2 \wedge \omega^3.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation*}
Thus, the torsion absorption condition is
\begin{equation}\label{torsion-translation-invariant}
2 \phi_3 f u^1 - (\phi_{22} + \phi_{33}) u^2 = 0.
\end{equation}
There are two possibilities to consider.
\begin{enumerate}
\item Equation \eqref{torsion-translation-invariant} is satisfied identically on $M$, in which case the system $(M, {\mathcal I})$ is Frobenius and there is a 2-dimensional space of integral manifolds. This condition means that the coefficients of $u^1$ and $u^2$ must both vanish identically on $U$, which is the case if and only if
\[ \phi_3 = \phi_{22} + \phi_{33} = 0. \]
The condition $\phi_3 = 0$ implies that
\[ d{\mathbf e}_3({\mathbf e}_3) = {\mathbf e}_2 \omega^2_3({\mathbf e}_3) = 0, \]
and hence that the integral curves of the vector field ${\mathbf e}_3$ in the $(x^1, x^2)$ plane are straight lines. Moreover, $\phi_3 = 0$ implies that $\phi_{33} = 0$, and so the second equation reduces to $\phi_{22} = 0$. This equation implies that the rate of change $\phi_2$ of the angle $\phi$ is constant (as a function of arc length) along each level curve of $f$ in the $(x^1, x^2)$ plane.
Together, these conditions imply that the level curves of $f$ in the $(x^1, x^2)$ plane are either concentric circles (if $\phi_2 \neq 0$) or
parallel lines (if $\phi_2=0$). Hence, the level surfaces of $f$ are either concentric circular cylinders or parallel planes. In the former case, these are exactly the Beltrami fields of Example \ref{cylinders-ex}; in the latter case, this shows that the infinite-dimensional space of Beltrami fields in Example \ref{f=z-ex} contains precisely a 2-dimensional subspace of Beltrami fields that admit a translation symmetry.
\item If equation \eqref{torsion-translation-invariant} does not vanish identically on $U$, then it defines an algebraic relationship between $u^1$ and $u^2$. Any solution to the PDE system \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys-translation-invariant} must have the form
\begin{equation}\label{translation-invariant-general-solution}
u^1 = (\phi_{22} + \phi_{33}) u, \qquad u^2 = 2 \phi_3 f u
\end{equation}
for some function $u: U \to \mathbb{R}$. Note that neither $u^1$ nor $u^2$ may vanish identically on $U$, since the differential equations \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys-translation-invariant} would then imply that the other one vanishes as well. Thus, by restricting $U$ if necessary, we may assume that both coefficients $\phi_3, \phi_{22} + \phi_{33}$ are nonzero on $U$.
Substituting the expressions \eqref{translation-invariant-general-solution} into the PDE system \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys-translation-invariant} yields four algebraic equations for the two nontrivial first partial derivatives $u_2, u_3$. The algebraic compatibility conditions that must be satisfied in order for these equations to admit solutions are
\begin{equation}\label{compat-conds-translation-invariant}
\begin{gathered}
(\phi_{22} + \phi_{33})_2 = \frac{1}{\phi_3} (\phi_{23} - \phi_2^2)(\phi_{22} + \phi_{33}), \\
(\phi_{22} + \phi_{33})_3 = \left(\frac{e^{-g}}{f} - \phi_2\right) (\phi_{22} + \phi_{33}) + 2 \phi_3 f^2 + \frac{1}{2\phi_3}\left( \phi_{22}^2 + 4 \phi_{22} \phi_{33} + 3 \phi_{33}^2 + 4 \phi_3^2 f_2 \right).
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
Remarkably, these two PDEs for $\phi$, together with the equation $f_2 = 0$ (which says that $\nabla f$ is parallel to ${\mathbf e}_3$), are compatible, and the space of functions $f$ for which the associated function $\phi$ satisfies these equations is locally parametrized by 3 functions of 1 variable. Even more remarkably, for any such $f$, the corresponding total differential system for $u$ imposes no additional conditions, and so there exists a 1-dimensional space of integral manifolds.
\end{enumerate}
Thus we have the following classification result for Beltrami fields that possess a translation symmetry:
\begin{theorem}\label{translation-invariant-theorem}
The space of Beltrami fields that possess a translation symmetry is locally parametrized by 3 functions of 1 variable. Moreover:
\begin{itemize}
\item The space of proportionality factors $f$ admitting a nonzero Beltrami field with a translation symmetry is locally parametrized by 3 functions of 1 variable.
\item Any such function $f$ admits exactly a 1-dimensional space of Beltrami fields with a translation symmetry unless the level surfaces of $f$ are concentric circular cylinders or parallel planes, in which case $f$ admits exactly a 2-dimensional space of Beltrami fields with a translation symmetry.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
It turns out that we can actually describe these Beltrami fields fairly explicitly by working with the original coordinate-based PDE system \eqref{Beltrami-sys-expanded}. With the symmetry assumption, this system reduces to
\begin{equation}\label{Beltrami-sys-expanded-translation-invariant}
\begin{gathered}
-\frac{\partial u^3}{\partial x^2} = f u^1, \\
\frac{\partial u^3}{\partial x^1} = f u^2, \\
\frac{\partial u^1}{\partial x^2} - \frac{\partial u^2}{\partial x^1} = f u^3, \\
\frac{\partial u^1}{\partial x^1} + \frac{\partial u^2}{\partial x^2} = 0.
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
The last equation in \eqref{Beltrami-sys-expanded-translation-invariant} implies that we must have
\[ u^1 = -\frac{\partial H}{\partial x^2}, \qquad u^2 = \frac{\partial H}{\partial x^1} \]
for some function $H(x^1, x^2)$.
Substituting these expressions into the first two equations in \eqref{Beltrami-sys-expanded-translation-invariant} yields
\begin{equation}\label{translation-invariant-intermediate-step}
-\frac{\partial u^3}{\partial x^2} = -f \frac{\partial H}{\partial x^2},
\qquad
\frac{\partial u^3}{\partial x^1} = f \frac{\partial H}{\partial x^1}.
\end{equation}
In particular, $\nabla u^3$ is parallel to $\nabla H$, which implies that
\[ u^3 = \Phi \circ H \]
for some function $\Phi:I \subset \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$.
Moreover, equations \eqref{translation-invariant-intermediate-step} imply that
\[ f = \Phi' \circ H. \]
Finally, the third equation in \eqref{Beltrami-sys-expanded-translation-invariant} implies that
\[ \Delta H = -f u^3 = - (\Phi' \circ H) (\Phi \circ H). \]
So the general Beltrami field with a translation symmetry can be constructed as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Choose a function $\Phi: I \subset \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$.
\item Let $H:U \subset \mathbb{R}^2 \to \mathbb{R}$ be a solution of the PDE
\begin{equation}\label{Phi-H-PDE}
\Delta H = - (\Phi' \circ H) (\Phi \circ H).
\end{equation}
\item Then the vector field
\[ {\mathbf u} = -\frac{\partial H}{\partial x^2} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^1} + \frac{\partial H}{\partial x^1} \frac{\partial}{\partial x^2} + (\Phi \circ H) \frac{\partial}{\partial x^3} \]
is a Beltrami field with proportionality factor
\[ f = \Phi' \circ H. \]
\end{enumerate}
Note that this construction agrees with the function count given in Theorem \ref{translation-invariant-theorem}: The arbitrary function $\Phi$ represents 1 function of 1 variable, and for each function $\Phi$ the solution space of the PDE \eqref{Phi-H-PDE} for $H$ is locally parametrized by 2 functions of 1 variable, giving an overall solution space locally parametrized by a total of 3 functions of 1 variable.
\subsection{Beltrami fields with a rotation symmetry}\label{rotation-subsec}
Assume that ${\mathbf u}$ is a Beltrami field that admits a rotation symmetry.
Without loss of generality, we will assume that the $z$-axis is the axis of symmetry; then this assumption means that the components of ${\mathbf u}$ with respect to the standard orthonormal cylindrical frame field are independent of the angle coordinate $\theta$.
It follows that $\frac{\partial f}{\partial \theta} = 0$ as well, and so the level surfaces of $f$ are surfaces of revolution about the $z$-axis.
Moreover, the vector field ${\mathbf e}_1 = \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta}$ is a principal direction to each level surface of $f$ at every point ${\mathbf x}\in U$.
The vector fields ${\mathbf e}_2, {\mathbf e}_3$ may be written as
\[ {\mathbf e}_2 = \cos(\phi) \frac{\partial}{\partial r} + \sin(\phi) \frac{\partial}{\partial z}, \qquad
{\mathbf e}_3 = -\sin(\phi) \frac{\partial}{\partial r} + \cos(\phi) \frac{\partial}{\partial z} \]
for some function $\phi(r,z)$, which is determined by the condition that $\nabla f$ is parallel to ${\mathbf e}_3$.
The dual forms are
\[ \omega^1 = r\, d\theta, \qquad \omega^2 = \cos(\phi)\, dr + \sin(\phi) \,dz, \qquad \omega^3 = -\sin(\phi)\, dr + \cos(\phi)\, dz, \]
and the connection forms are
\[ \omega^1_2 = \frac{\cos(\phi)}{r}\omega^1, \qquad \omega^3_1 = \frac{\sin(\phi)}{r}\omega^1, \qquad \omega^3_2 = d\phi = \phi_2\, \omega^2 + \phi_3\, \omega^3. \]
Thus we have
\[ g_1 = k_2 = k_3 = 0, \qquad h_{11} = \frac{\sin(\phi)}{r}, \qquad k_1 = \frac{\cos(\phi)}{r}, \qquad
h_{22} = \phi_2, \qquad g_2 = \phi_3. \]
Since we now have $u^1_1 = u^2_1 = 0$ by assumption, the PDE system \eqref{first-order-PDE-sys} reduces to the system
\begin{equation}\label{first-order-PDE-sys-rotation-invariant}
\begin{aligned}
u^1_1 & = \ u^2_1 = 0, \\
u^1_2 & = -\frac{\cos(\phi)}{r} u^1, \\
u^2_2 & = - \left(\frac{\cos(\phi)}{r} + \phi_3\right) u^2, \\
u^1_3 & = \frac{\sin(\phi)}{r} u^1 + f u^2, \\
u^2_3 & = \phi_2 u^2 - f u^1.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The analysis of the corresponding exterior differential system is similar to that in the previous subsection, with the following results:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If there is a 2-dimensional space of integral manifolds, then
\[ \phi_3 = r^2 \phi_{22} - r \cos (\phi)\, \phi_2 + \cos(\phi) \sin(\phi) = 0. \]
Differentiating the second equation in the ${\mathbf e}_3$ direction (and taking into account that $\phi_3=0$) yields
\[ (2r\sin(\phi) - 3r^2 \phi_2) \phi_{22} + r\cos(\phi) \phi_2^2 - \cos(\phi) \sin(\phi) \phi_2 = 0. \]
Taken together, these equations imply that either $\cos(\phi)=0$, or
\begin{equation}\label{rot-inv-2d}
\phi_3 = \phi_{22} = 0, \qquad \phi_2 = \frac{\sin(\phi)}{r}.
\end{equation}
In the latter case, differentiating the last equation in \eqref{rot-inv-2d} in the ${\mathbf e}_2$ direction (and taking into account that $\phi_{22} = 0$) yields
\[ \cos(\phi) \sin(\phi) = 0. \]
Thus the only solutions are $\phi = \frac{\pi}{2}$, in which case the level surfaces of $f$ are concentric circular cylinders, or $\phi = 0$, in which case the level surfaces of $f$ are parallel planes. In the former case, these are exactly the Beltrami fields of Example \ref{cylinders-ex}; in the latter case, this shows that the infinite-dimensional space of Beltrami fields in Example \ref{f=z-ex} contains precisely a 2-dimensional subspace of Beltrami fields that admit a rotation symmetry.
\item The space of functions $f$ admitting a 1-dimensional space of integral manifolds is locally parametrized by 3 functions of 1 variable.
\end{enumerate}
Thus we have the following classification result for Beltrami fields that possess a rotation symmetry:
\begin{theorem}\label{rotation-invariant-theorem}
The space of Beltrami fields that possess a rotation symmetry is locally parametrized by 3 functions of 1 variable. Moreover:
\begin{itemize}
\item The space of proportionality factors $f$ admitting a nonzero Beltrami field with a rotation symmetry is locally parametrized by 3 functions of 1 variable.
\item Any such function $f$ admits exactly a 1-dimensional space of Beltrami fields with a rotation symmetry unless the level surfaces of $f$ are concentric circular cylinders or parallel planes, in which case $f$ admits exactly a 2-dimensional space of Beltrami fields with a rotation symmetry.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
Again, it turns out that we can actually describe these Beltrami fields fairly explicitly by working with the original PDE system \eqref{Beltrami-def} in cylindrical coordinates. If we write ${\mathbf u}$ in terms of the orthonormal cylindrical frame field as
\[ {\mathbf u} = u^1 \frac{\partial}{\partial r} + u^2 \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta} + u^3 \frac{\partial}{\partial z}, \]
then the system \eqref{Beltrami-def} is equivalent to the PDE system
\begin{equation}\label{Beltrami-sys-cylindrical}
\begin{gathered}
\frac{\partial u^3}{\partial \theta} - \frac{\partial (ru^2)}{\partial z} = f (r u^1), \\
\frac{\partial u^1}{\partial z} - \frac{\partial u^3}{\partial r} = f u^2, \\
\frac{\partial (r u^2)}{\partial r} - \frac{\partial u^1}{\partial \theta} = f (ru^3), \\
\frac{\partial (ru^1)}{\partial r} + \frac{\partial u^2}{\partial \theta} + \frac{\partial (ru^3)}{\partial z} = 0.
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
With the symmetry assumption, this system reduces to
\begin{equation}\label{Beltrami-sys-expanded-rotation-invariant}
\begin{gathered}
-\frac{\partial (ru^2)}{\partial z} = f (r u^1), \\
\frac{\partial u^1}{\partial z} - \frac{\partial u^3}{\partial r} = f u^2, \\
\frac{\partial (r u^2)}{\partial r} = f (ru^3), \\
\frac{\partial (ru^1)}{\partial r} + \frac{\partial (ru^3)}{\partial z} = 0.
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
The last equation in \eqref{Beltrami-sys-expanded-rotation-invariant} implies that we must have
\[ ru^1 = -\frac{\partial H}{\partial z}, \qquad ru^3 = \frac{\partial H}{\partial r} \]
for some function $H(r,z)$.
Substituting these expressions into the first and third equations in \eqref{Beltrami-sys-expanded-rotation-invariant} yields
\begin{equation}\label{rotation-invariant-intermediate-step}
-\frac{\partial (ru^2)}{\partial z} = -f \frac{\partial H}{\partial z},
\qquad
\frac{\partial (ru^2)}{\partial r} = f \frac{\partial H}{\partial r}.
\end{equation}
In particular, $\nabla (ru^2)$ is parallel to $\nabla H$, which implies that
\[ ru^2 = \Phi \circ H \]
for some function $\Phi:I \subset \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$.
Moreover, equations \eqref{rotation-invariant-intermediate-step} imply that
\[ f = \Phi' \circ H. \]
Finally, the second equation in \eqref{Beltrami-sys-expanded-rotation-invariant} implies that
\[ \frac{\partial}{\partial r} \left( \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial H}{\partial r}\right) + \frac{\partial}{\partial z} \left( \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial H}{\partial z}\right) = -f u^2 = -\frac{1}{r} (\Phi' \circ H) (\Phi \circ H). \]
So the general Beltrami field with a rotation symmetry can be constructed as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Choose a function $\Phi: I \subset \mathbb{R} \to \mathbb{R}$.
\item Let $H:U \subset \mathbb{R}^2 \to \mathbb{R}$ be a solution of the PDE
\begin{equation}\label{Phi-H-PDE-rot}
\frac{\partial}{\partial r} \left( \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial H}{\partial r}\right) + \frac{\partial}{\partial z} \left( \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial H}{\partial z}\right) = -\frac{1}{r} (\Phi' \circ H) (\Phi \circ H).
\end{equation}
\item Then the vector field
\[ {\mathbf u} = -\frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial H}{\partial z} \frac{\partial}{\partial r} + \frac{1}{r^2}(\Phi \circ H) \frac{\partial}{\partial \theta} + \frac{1}{r} \frac{\partial H}{\partial r} \frac{\partial}{\partial z} \]
is a Beltrami field with proportionality factor
\[ f = \Phi' \circ H. \]
\end{enumerate}
As in the translation symmetry case, this construction agrees with the function count given in Theorem \ref{rotation-invariant-theorem}: The arbitrary function $\Phi$ represents 1 function of 1 variable, and for each function $\Phi$ the solution space of the PDE \eqref{Phi-H-PDE-rot} for $H$ is locally parametrized by 2 functions of 1 variable, giving an overall solution space locally parametrized by a total of 3 functions of 1 variable.
\bibliographystyle{amsplain}
|
\section{Introduction}
The monitoring of large scale systems, such as smart grids and smart cities, requires the development of networks dedicated to Internet-of-Things (IoT) applications.
For instance, Low Power Wide Area Networks (LPWAN) \cite{Raza17}, as LoRaWAN or SigFox, are nowadays deployed in unlicensed bands to handle a large number of objects transmitting a few packets per day or week.
In order to reduce the energy consumption of end-devices, these networks rely on pure ALOHA-based Medium Access (MAC) protocols.
One of the challenges in the design of MAC solutions for the IoT is to design solutions which improve the performance of the network and reduce the Packet Loss Ratio (PLR), without reducing the end-devices battery life.
In particular, many IoT standards operate in unlicensed bands, that is why we have to find solutions that do not increase the PLR due to the interference caused by other standards and networks which share the same band, without coordination.
As this interfering traffic is generated by different standards and networks, it cannot be controlled, and it is not evenly distributed in the different channels.
Multi-Armed Bandit (MAB) algorithms \cite{bubeck2012regret} have been recently proposed as a solution to improve the performance of IoT networks and in particular in LPWAN \cite{Bonnefoi18,Azari18}.
In this paper, we describe the way we implemented a demo where we evaluate MAB algorithms \cite{bubeck2012regret}, used in combination with a pure ALOHA-based protocol (such as the ones employed in LPWAN).
This demonstration is the first implementation which aims at assessing the potential gain of MAB learning algorithms in IoT scenarios.
Following our recent work \cite{Bonnefoi17}, we propose to model this problem as Non-Stationary\footnote{~Note that non-stationarity only comes from the presence of more than one dynamic object, as the background traffic is assumed independent and identically distributed \emph{i.i.d.}.} MAB.
We suggest to use low-cost algorithms, focusing on two well-known algorithms: a frequentist one (\ensuremath{\mathrm{UCB}_1}{}) and a Bayesian one (TS).
We consider the Upper-Confidence Bound (\ensuremath{\mathrm{UCB}_1}{}) \cite{Auer}, and the Thompson Sampling (TS) algorithms \cite{Thompson33}. Both algorithms have already been applied with success in the context of wireless decision making, both empirically for Opportunistic Spectrum Access \cite{Jouini},
and more recently for multi-users Cognitive Radio problems \cite{BessonALT18} with a more theoretical approach.
We use a TestBed designed in 2017 by our team SCEE \cite{Bodinier17}, containing different USRP boards \cite{USRPDocumentation}, controlled by a single laptop using GNU Radio \cite{GNURadioDocumentation},
and where the intelligence of each object corresponds to a learning algorithm, implemented as a GNU Radio block \cite{GNURadioCompanionDocumentation} and written in Python or \texttt{C++}.
In our demo, we consider a simple wireless network, consisting of one gateway (radio access point), and a certain interfering background traffic, assumed to be stationary (\emph{i.i.d.}), which is generated by end-devices communicating in other networks.
Some dynamic intelligent objects (end-user or autonomous objects) try to communicate with the gateway, with a low-overhead protocol. This communication can be done in different channels which are also shared by devices using other networks.
Once the gateway receives a packet transmitted by a dynamic device in one channel, it transmits back to it an acknowledgement in the same channel, after a fixed-time delay, as it is done in the LoRaWAN standard.
This \emph{ACK} allows the device to learn about the channel quality and thus, to use learning algorithms for the purpose of best channel selection.
In this demo, we can generate scenarios with different parameters (number of channels, interfering traffic, etc) in order to evaluate the performance of learning in various settings.
Moreover, we compare the performance of learning with that of the random uniform access to channels, which is the current state-of-the-art of commercial LPWAN solutions.
This allows to check that in case of uniform traffic, when there is nothing to learn, the intelligent objects at least do not reduce their successful communication rate in comparison to the naive objects.
This also shows that in case of non-uniform stationary traffic, the MAB learning algorithms indeed help to increase the global efficiency of the network by improving the success rate of the intelligent objects.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. The system model is introduced in Section 2. In Section 3, we describe more formally both the \ensuremath{\mathrm{UCB}_1}{} and the TS algorithms. Our implementation is presented in Section 4, and results are given in Section 5.
\section{System Model}
We consider the system model presented in Figure~\ref{fig:system_model1}, where a set of object sends uplink packets to the network gateway, in the $433.5\;\mathrm{MHz}$ ISM band.
The communication between IoT devices and this gateway is done through a simple pure ALOHA-based protocol where devices transmit uplink packets of fixed duration whenever they want.
The devices can transmit their packets in $K\geq 1$ channels (\emph{e.g.}, $K=4$). In the case where the gateway receives an uplink in one channel, it transmits an acknowledgement to the end-device in the same channel, after a fixed delay (of $1$ s).
These communications operate in unlicensed ISM bands and, consequently, suffer from interference generated by uncoordinated neighboring networks. This interfering traffic is uncontrolled, and can be unevenly distributed over the $K$ different channels.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.90\columnwidth]{system_model1.eps}
\caption{In our system model, some dynamic devices transmit packets to a gateway and suffer from the interference generated by neighboring networks.}
\label{fig:system_model1}
\end{figure}
We consider the network from the point of view of one end-user. Every times the end-user has to communicate with the gateway,
it has to choose one channel (at each transmission $t \geq 1, t \in \mathbb{N}$), denoted as $C(t) = k \in\{1,\dots,K\}$.
Then, the end-users starts waiting in this channel $C(t)$ for an acknowledgement sent by the gateway.
Before sending another message (\emph{i.e.}, at time $t+1$), the end-user knows if it received or not this \emph{ACK} message.
For this reason, selecting channel (or arm) $k$ at time $t$ yields a (random) feedback, called a \emph{reward}, $r_k(t) \in \{0,1\}$, being $0$ if no \emph{ACK} was received before the next message, or $1$ if \emph{ACK} was successfully received.
The goal of the end-user is to minimize its packet loss ratio, or equivalently, it is to maximize its cumulative reward,
$r_{1 \dots T} := \sum_{t = 1}^T r_{C(t)}(t),$
as it is usually done in MAB problems \cite{Thompson33,Robbins52,LaiRobbins85}.
This problem is a special case of the so-called ``stochastic'' MAB, where the sequence of rewards drawn from a given arm $k$ is assumed to be \emph{i.i.d.}, under some distribution $\nu_k$, that has a mean $\mu_k$. Several types of reward distributions have been considered in the literature, for example distributions that belong to a one-dimensional exponential family (\emph{e.g.}, Gaussian, Exponential, Poisson or Bernoulli distributions).
Rewards are binary in our model, and so we consider only Bernoulli distributions, in which $r_k(t) \sim \mathrm{Bern}(\mu_k)$, that is, $r_k(t) \in \{0,1\}$ and $\mathbb{P}(r_k(t) = 1) = \mu_k \in [0,1]$.
Contrary to many previous work done in the CR field (\emph{e.g.}, Opportunistic Spectrum Access),
the reward $r_k(t)$ does \emph{not} come from a sensing phase before sending the $t$-th message, as it would do for any ``listen-before-talk'' model. Rewards come from receiving an acknowledgement from the gateway, between the $t$-th and $t+1$-th messages.
The problem parameters $\mu_1,\dots,\mu_K$ are of course unknown to the end-users, so to maximize its cumulated reward, it must learn the distributions of the channels, in order to be able to progressively focus on the best arm (\emph{i.e.}, the arm with largest mean).
This requires to tackle the so-called \emph{exploration-exploitation dilemma}: a player has to try all arms a sufficient number of times to get a robust estimate of their qualities, while not selecting the worst arms too many times.
\section{MAB Algorithms}
Before discussing the relevance of a MAB model for our IoT application, we present two bandit algorithms, \ensuremath{\mathrm{UCB}_1}{} and Thompson Sampling,
which are both known to be efficient for stationary \emph{i.i.d.} rewards and are shown to be useful in our setting (in Sec.~\ref{sec:results}).
\subsection{The \ensuremath{\mathrm{UCB}_1}{} Algorithm}\label{sub:UCB}
A naive approach could be to use an empirical mean estimator of the rewards for each channel, and select the channel with highest estimated mean at each time;
but this greedy approach is known to fail dramatically \cite{LaiRobbins85}. Indeed, with this policy, the selection of arms is highly dependent on the first draws:
if the first transmission in one channel fails and the first one on other channels succeed, the end-user will \emph{never} use the first channel again, even it is the best one (\emph{i.e.}, the most available, in average).
Rather than relying on the empirical mean reward, Upper Confidence Bounds algorithms
instead use a \emph{confidence interval} on the unknown mean $\mu_k$ of each arm,
which can be viewed as adding a ``bonus'' exploration to the empirical mean.
They follow the ``\emph{optimism-in-face-of-uncertainty}'' principle: at each step, they play according to the best model,
as the statistically best possible arm (\emph{i.e.}, the highest upper confidence bound) is selected.
More formally, for one end-user, let $N_k(t) = \sum_{\tau=1}^t \mathbbm{1}(C(\tau) = k)$ be the number of times channel $k$ was selected up-to time $t \geq 1$.
The empirical mean estimator of channel $k$ is defined as the mean reward obtained by selecting it up to time $t$, $\widehat{\mu_k}(t) = 1 / N_k(t) \sum_{\tau=1}^t r_k(\tau) \mathbbm{1}(C(\tau) = k) $.
For \ensuremath{\mathrm{UCB}_1}, the \emph{confidence} term is $B_k(t) = \sqrt{\alpha \log(t) / N_k(t)}$,
giving the upper confidence bound $U_k(t) = \widehat{\mu_k}(t) + B_k(t)$, which is used by the end-user to decide the channel for communicating at time step $t+1$: $C(t+1) = \arg\max_{1\leq k \leq K} U_k(t)$.
\ensuremath{\mathrm{UCB}_1}{} is called an \emph{index policy}.
The \ensuremath{\mathrm{UCB}_1}{} algorithm uses a parameter $\alpha > 0$, originally $\alpha$ was set to $2$ \cite{Auer}, but empirically $\alpha = 1/2$ is known to work better (uniformly across problems), and $\alpha > 1/2$ is advised by the theory \cite{bubeck2012regret}.
In our model, every dynamic end-user implements its own \ensuremath{\mathrm{UCB}_1}{} algorithm, \emph{independently}.
For one end-user, the time $t$ is the total number of sent messages from the beginning, as rewards are only obtained after a transmission.
\subsection{Thompson Sampling}
Thompson Sampling \cite{Thompson33} was introduced early on, in $1933$ as the very first bandit algorithm, in the context of clinical trials (in which each arm models the efficacy of one treatment across patients). Given a prior distribution on the mean of each arm, the algorithm selects the next arm to draw based on samples from the \emph{conjugated} posterior distribution, which for Bernoulli rewards is a Beta distribution.
A Beta prior $\mathrm{Beta}(a_k(0)=1,b_k(0)=1)$ (initially uniform) is assumed on $\mu_k \in [0, 1]$, and at time $t$ the posterior is $\mathrm{Beta}(a_k(t),b_k(t))$.
After every channel selection, the posterior is updated to have $a_k(t)$ and $b_k(t)$ counting the number of successful and failed transmissions made on channel $k$.
So if the \emph{ACK} message is received, $a_k(t+1) = a_k(t) + 1$, and $b_k(t+1) = b_k(t)$, otherwise $a_k(t+1) = a_k(t)$, and $b_k(t+1) = b_k(t) + 1$.
Then, the decision is done by \emph{sampling} an \emph{index} for each arm, at each time step $t$, from the arm posteriors: $X_k(t) \sim \mathrm{Beta}(a_k(t), b_k(t))$, and the chosen channel is simply the channel $C(t+1)$ with highest index $X_k(t)$. For this reason, Thompson Sampling is called a \emph{randomized index policy}.
The TS algorithm, although being simple and easy to implement, is known to perform well for stochastic problems, for which it was proven to be asymptotically optimal \cite{AgrawalGoyal11,Kaufmann12}.
It is known to be empirically efficient, and for these reasons it has been used successfully in various applications, including on problems from Cognitive Radio \cite{Toldov,Mitton}, and also in previous work on decentralized IoT-like networks \cite{Darak16}.
\section{GNU Radio Implementation}
In this section, we present our implementation of MAB algorithms in our model of IoT networks.
We first describe the simplified physical layer of this demo,
then we present our GNU Radio implementation.
\subsection{Physical Layer and Protocol}
In this paper, we implement a PHY/MAC layers solution in order to improve the performance of IoT communications in unlicensed bands. We could have used any physical layer and any ALOHA-based protocol.
We choose to implement our own physical layer and protocol, for both clarity and conciseness.
Regarding the physical layer, we consider a QPSK constellation. Moreover, we use simplified packets composed of two parts.
The first part is the \emph{preamble} which is used for the purpose of synchronization (phase correction).
Then, we have the \emph{index} of the user, which is a sequence of QPSK symbols.
For example, this index can be a simple QPSK symbol ($\pm1\pm1j$).
Once the gateway receives an uplink packet, it detects this index and transmits an acknowledgement which has the same frame structure, but where the index is the conjugate of the index of the uplink packet (\emph{e.g.}, $1+j \mapsto 1-j$).
Thanks to this index, we can have several devices communicating with the same gateway.
In turn, the end-device that receives the acknowledgement demodulates it, and checks if the index is the conjugate of its own index.
In this case, the \emph{ACK} was for him, and it knows that its packet has been received and decoded correctly by the gateway.
\subsection{Equipment}
We use USRP N210 boards \cite{USRPDocumentation}, from Ettus Research (National Instrument).
As illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:our_demo}, our implementation is composed of at least $3$ USRP.
The gateway, a USRP which emulates the interfering traffic, and at least one dynamic device.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.95\columnwidth]{our-demo.eps}
\caption{Schematic of our implementation that presents the role of each USRP card.}
\label{fig:our_demo}
\end{figure}
The boards have their own power supply, and are all connected to a local Ethernet switch, itself connected to a single laptop, running GNU/Linux and Ubuntu.
To ease the synchronization in both time and frequency between the boards representing the dynamic objects and the gateway, we use an Octoclock \cite{OctoclockProduct}, also by Ettus Research,
and coaxial cables connecting every card to the Octoclock for time (PPS) and frequency synchronization, but this is not mandatory.
\subsection{Implementation}
We used GNU Radio Companion (GRC, version $3.7$, $2017$),
and for the demonstration the laptop runs
one GRC design to configure and control each USRP card.
As such, a single laptop can run in parallel the control program of any number of boards\footnote{~Even if in practice, maximum efficiency is kept as long as there is not more than one GRC design by CPU core.}.
GNU Radio applications are a flow-graph: a series of signal processing blocks connected together to describe a data flow.
For maximum efficiency, we wrote all of our blocks in \texttt{C++}.
GNU Radio Companion is a graphical UI used to develop GNU Radio applications:
when a flow-graph is compiled in GRC, a Python code is produced, which can be executed to connect to the USRP,
create the desired GUI windows and widgets, and create and connect the blocks in the flow-graph.
\subsection{User Interface}
We have designed a user interface in order to visualize the results obtained with our experimental demonstration. This user interface is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:UI}.
We can see that it is made of three parts, one for each USRP, as highlighted in \textcolor{darkred}{red}:
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.68\textwidth]{UI.eps}
\caption{User interface of our demonstration.}
\label{fig:UI}
\end{figure*}
$(1)$ The first part is the interface of the IoT traffic generator, where we see the traffic generated by this USRP, presented in a waterfall view in the time vs frequency domain.
$(2)$ The second part is the interface of the intelligent device which is made of four parts.
At the top left, we observe the constellation of the transmitted packet \emph{(a)}.
At the bottom left, we have a time/frequency view of the lasts packets transmitted by the object \emph{(b)}.
We can see, in this view that the object transmitted its last $9$ packets in the two best channels (channel $\#3$ and $\#4$).
Then, at the top right of this interface \emph{(c)}, we can see the traffic observed by this device, where we have the interfering traffic (\textcolor{darkgreen}{green}), the uplink packets transmitted by this object (\textcolor{darkred}{red}) and the acknowledgements sent by the gateway (\textcolor{darkblue}{blue}).
Finally, at the bottom right \emph{(d)}, we have four histograms showing the performance indicators of the chosen MAB algorithm (number of transmissions, number of successful transmissions, UCB indexes and success rates, in each channel).
$(3)$ The last part is the interface of the gateway, where we can see the traffic observed by the gateway \emph{(a)} and the channels in which the last acknowledgements have been sent \emph{(b)}.
\section{Results and Discussions}\label{sec:results}
We compare the two algorithms described in Section~\ref{sub:UCB} against a uniform access algorithm, that uniformly selects its channel at random.
Three objects are compared by their mean successful communication rates, on a horizon of $2000$ communication slots, and were using three algorithms: uniform random access (in \textcolor{cyan}{cyan}), Thompson Sampling (in \textcolor{green}{green}) and \ensuremath{\mathrm{UCB}_1}{} (in \textcolor{red}{red}).
Figure~\ref{fig:plot_datafile_append_Uniform_vs_UCB_vs_TS} shows the results averaged on $10$ repetitions using the same conditions.
Each experiment takes about half a day, as we make objects generate one message every $5$ seconds, in order to artificially speed up the process and with no loss of generality.
Learning can be useful only when there is a large enough difference between ``good'' and ``bad'' channels,
Each object was learning to access $4$ different non-overlapping channels, that we chose to have occupancy rates of $[15\%, 10\%, 2\%, 1\%]$.
When facing the same stationary background traffic, we see that the learning objects are both very quickly more efficient than the naive uniform object.
We obtain an improvement in terms of successful communication rate from $40\%$ to about $60\%$ in only $100$ communications (about $16\;\mathrm{min}$), and up-to $80\%$ in only $400$ communications.
In stationary environments, both the TS and \ensuremath{\mathrm{UCB}_1}{} algorithms are very efficient and converge quickly, resulting in a very strong decrease in collisions and failed communication slots. \ensuremath{\mathrm{UCB}_1}{} is faster to learn but eventually TS gives a (slightly) better average performance.
Similar results are obtained for overlapping channels, when dynamic devices are learning in the presence of multiple devices, all using the same learning algorithm.
Empirical results confirm the simulations presented in our paper \cite[Fig.3]{Bonnefoi17}.
Such results are very encouraging, and illustrate well the various strong possibilities of MAB learning applied to IoT networks.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=8.0cm]{plot_datafile_append_Uniform_vs_UCB_vs_TS.eps}
\caption{Less than $400$ communication slots (\emph{i.e.}, less than $100$ trials in each channel) suffice for the two learning objects to reach a successful communication rate close to $80\%$, which is \textbf{twice as much} as the non-learning (uniform) object, which stays around $40\%$ of success. Similar gains of performance were obtained in many different scenarios.}
\label{fig:plot_datafile_append_Uniform_vs_UCB_vs_TS}
\end{figure*}
\section{Conclusion}
We presented in this article a demonstration,
by specifying the system model and explaining the two MAB algorithms used in practice.
We gave all the necessary details on both the PHY and the MAC layer, as well as details on the User Interface developed for the demo.
Results obtained in practice were discussed, to highlight the interest of using learning algorithms for radio online optimization problem, and especially multi-armed bandit learning algorithms.
By using such low-cost algorithms, we demonstrated empirically that a dynamically reconfigurable object can learn on its own to favor a certain channel, if the environment traffic is not uniform between the $K$ different channels.
Possible future extensions of this work include:
considering more dynamic objects (\emph{e.g.}, $100$),
implementing a real-world IoT communication protocol (like the LoRaWAN standard),
and studying the interference in case of other gateways located nearby.
We are also interested in studying the possible gain of using a learning step when the transmission model follows ALOHA-like retransmissions.
\subsection*{Availability of data and materials}
The source code of our demonstration is fully available online, open-sourced under GPLv3 license, at
{\small\texttt{bitbucket.org/scee\_ietr/malin-multi-arm-}}
{\small\texttt{bandit-learning-for-iot-networks-with-grc/}}.
It contains both the GNU Radio Companion flowcharts and blocks, with ready-to-use \texttt{Makefiles} to easily compile, install and launch the demonstration.
A $6$-minute \textbf{video} showing our demonstration is at \texttt{\url{youtu.be/HospLNQhcMk}}.
It shows examples of $3$ dynamic devices learning simultaneously, confirming the results of Fig.~\ref{fig:plot_datafile_append_Uniform_vs_UCB_vs_TS} for overlapping channels.
\subsection*{Acknowledgment}
The authors acknowledge the work of two CentraleSup{\'e}lec students,
Cl{\'e}ment Barras and Th{\'e}o Vanneuville, for their GNU Radio project in Spring 2017.
This work is supported by CentraleSupélec,
the French National Research Agency (ANR), under project SOGREEN (grant coded: \emph{N ANR-14-CE28-0025-02}),
R\'egion Bretagne, France,
CPER SOPHIE/STICS \& Ones,
the French Ministry of Higher Education and Research,
and ENS Paris-Saclay.
\bibliographystyle{ieeetr}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec1}
It is no secret that mechanical behavior is strongly influenced by the grain boundaries (GBs) within the material. The movement of dislocations, the main carriers of deformation in most metals, is inhibited by the material\textquotesingle s GBs, which can act as obstacles, sinks, or sources for dislocations \cite{Farkas:2013, Kacher:2014, Hasnaoui:2004, Voyiadjis:2016}. This influence can be observed in the Hall-Petch relationship, which shows that as the average grain size of a polycrystalline material decreases its yield strength increases \cite{Hall:1951, Petch:1953}.
This relationship has been exploited for years in the production of enhanced materials, such as nanocrystalline metals, which offer significantly increased hardness and strength \cite{Ovidko:2018, Koch:2003, Meyers:2006}. While the Hall-Petch relationship has been shown to match the macroscopic effects of reduced grain size, understanding of exactly how dislocation interactions at each GB cause the Hall-Petch relationship is still not well understood.
The work presented here is part of a collaborative effort involving experimental work \cite{Hansen:2017,Jackson:2016,Ruggles:2013,Ruggles:2016}, mesoscale modeling \cite{Bong:2017,Lim:2011}, and atomistic simulations \cite{Wyman:2017} aimed at better understanding how large populations of dislocations interact with GBs. The present work contributes by investigating the attributes that affect the GB-dislocation interactions at the atomic scale, which can then be used to inform the mesoscale modeling and interpret experimental observations.
Due to the relative paucity of characterized GBs to the vast number of possible GBs, characterizing such interactions remains a daunting task despite the work already done in this field. This stems from the 5-degrees of freedom that define the macroscopic character of a GB: three to define neighboring grains' relative rotation to one another and two to define the boundary plane\textquotesingle s orientation \cite{Olmsted:2009:energy, Sutton:1995}. Additional complexity is involved, since multiple types of GB-dislocation interactions are possible and can be summarized here in four main categories: 1) nucleation of a dislocation at the GB, 2) absorption of a dislocation into the GB, 3) slip transmission wherein the dislocation passes through the GB, and 4) reflection of the dislocation at the GB \cite{Shen:1988,Sangid:2012,Wang:2015,Wyman:2017,Clark:1989}, with the most studied being nucleation and transmission. Additional attributes, such as temperature, structure of the GB at the location of the interaction, the slip systems involved, etc., further complicate the ability to fully resolve the nature of GB-dislocation interactions. Finally, the time and length scales required to study dislocation-GB interactions make it difficult to capture all the attributes involved in such an interaction in a small number of experiments or simulations. Despite the daunting size of the task, several studies have made significant strides in understanding dislocation-GB interactions, as discussed below.
From experimental work, researchers have been able to gain a better understanding of the attributes involved in the dislocation-GB interactions responsible for effects such as the previously mentioned Hall-Petch relationship. Techniques such as transmission electron microscopy (TEM), electron back-scattered diffraction (EBSD), and digital image correlation (DIC) allow one to observe the dislocation activity present within a strained specimen and capture attributes involved in dislocations' interactions with GBs \cite{Shen:1988,Abuzaid:2012,Lim:1985, Koning:2003}. For example, Shen et al. observed dislocation transmission in 304 stainless steel, finding that geometrically well aligned slip systems at the GB are the preferred slip systems for transmission, with the resolved shear stress (RSS) being the deciding factor for transmission if two or more slip systems were equivalently aligned \cite{Shen:1988}. This work confirmed and refined Livingston and Chalmers' geometric criteria for predicting which slip system would be activated in a transmission event \cite{Livingston:1957}. By adding the stipulation that the residual Burgers vector (RBV) should be minimized to the geometric criteria of Livingston and Chalmers and the stress criteria from Shen et al., the commonly used LRB criteria was created \cite{Lee:1989}. Additionally, Abuzaid et al. used DIC in combination with EBSD to support the hypothesis that the RBV is frequently minimized when transmission occurs
\cite{Abuzaid:2012}. Lim and Raj observed more slip continuity through GBs with low $\Sigma$ value coincident site lattice (CSL) GBs as opposed to those with high $\Sigma$ values \cite{Lim:1985}. While significant understanding has been achieved through experimental techniques, these methods are limited in their capabilities to control the interactions observed. Two main shortcomings that restrict the abilities of experimental techniques to more fully explore this problem are their inability to observe interactions in a large variety of GBs, as well as the challenge of measuring additional attributes associated with the interaction, such as GB energies or the structure of the GB at the location of the interaction.
Researchers have developed mesoscale models, like the discrete dislocation dynamics model \cite{Weygand:2002, Zhang:2017, Li:2009} to model the dislocation-GB interactions seen experimentally and have shown that the Hall-Petch relationship is dependent on the ability of dislocations to transmit. Another model, developed by Lim et al., utilizes a two-scale model called the Superdislocation (SD) model, to model the Hall-Petch effect in polycrystals using Finite Element Method (FEM) techniques \cite{Lim:2011}. This method builds on work done by Shen et al. \cite{Shen:1986} to determine a GB\textquotesingle s resistance to dislocation absorption or transmission by calculating an effective critically resolved shear strength of the GB, termed the obstacle stress, \texttau\textsubscript{obs}, for a given dislocation-GB interaction, according to the equation
\begin{equation}
\tau_{obs} = (1-TF)\tau^*
\label{eqn:Tau_obs}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\tau^*$ was observed in stainless steel to be approximately five times the macroscopic yield strength and TF is the transmissivity factor (not to be confused with the Taylor Factor) which measures the relative alignment between the impinging dislocation slip system and the potential transmitted dislocation slip systems. In its current state, the SD model shows promise in predicting deformation behavior when the material response is based on the interactions between the dislocations at the microscale \cite{Lim:2011}.
The authors believe that the SD model's accuracy could be improved by inclusion of better information about GB-dislocation interactions.
Molecular dynamics (MD) tools provide a complementary approach to exploring the variety of attributes believed to affect the resulting interaction and to evaluate different criteria for transmission of dislocations. In a variety of MD simulations, a number of factors have been found to affect how dislocations interact with GBs, including: the static energy of the GB \cite{Sangid:2011}, ratio of RSS from outgoing dislocations to incoming dislocation \cite{Koning:2003}, Schmid vs. non-Schmid slip \cite{Dewald:2007:Screw}, temperature \cite{Chandra:2015}, misorientation \cite{Koning:2003, Koning:2002,Swygenhoven:2006, Bachurin:2010}, and location of the interaction \cite{Bachurin:2010}. However, in a separate study, Mrovec found that the geometric criteria commonly used to characterize transmission do not always hold \cite{Mrovec:2009}.
Of particular interest in this work is the ability to predict which slip system the emitted dislocation will transmit onto when transmission occurs. Several MD studies have confirmed experimental findings which suggest that selection should be made based upon the potential slip system with the maximum TF or upon minimization of the magnitude of the RBV left in the GB after transmission\cite{Sangid:2011,Sangid:2012,Koning:2003,Koning:2002}.
Also of interest is the ability to predict what kind of reactions will occur when an incident dislocation impinges on a GB. In several instances, researchers have suggested equations that help to determine the capability of a dislocation to transmit. For example, Sangid et al. were able to show that, in agreement with experiments \cite{Lee:1989, Lee:1990, Shen:1988}, the energy barrier to transmission is higher for low-energy GBs and lower for high-energy GBs \cite{Sangid:2011}. In a separate study, Li et al. demonstrated that a critical penetration stress for a dislocation can be calculated as a function of the grain boundary energy, the shear modulus, and the RBV \cite{Li:2009}. Although these models are effective in describing the roles that the respective attributes play in transmission, these studies focus more on creating rules to describe the observed interactions rather than creating rules to predict whether such reactions should have occurred. With the range of current results in the study of dislocation-GB interactions, some conflicting and some agreeing, it is apparent that this problem is far from resolved. To complement these studies, the current work is focused on studying a large population of dislocation-GB interactions in order to determine which attributes are important across the whole data set in affecting the interaction.
Much of the previous simulation work has focused on smaller numbers of GBs with single dislocation-GB interactions. The current work seeks to explore these behaviors in a larger study of dislocation-GB interactions utilizing a subset of Olmsted's 388 Ni bicrystals \cite{Olmsted:2009:energy}. The manuscript first describes the methods to simulate and analyze dislocation-GB interactions in the MD simulations of Ni bicrystals. In the results, a detailed analysis of a simulation is first demonstrated after which the large number of GB-dislocation interactions are examined. This is followed by a discussion of the results and their potential to improve models that describe GB-dislocation interactions. The work concludes with a machine learning model to predict transmission of dislocations through a GB.
\section{Method}
\label{sec2}
In order to better resolve some of the attributes that may influence a dislocation-GB interaction, individual interactions in simplified systems are desired. To simulate such interactions, Ni bicrystals with a flat and well-defined GB plane are loaded using the open source molecular dynamics code produced by Sandia National Laboratories, LAMMPS (Large Scale Atomic/Molecular Massively Parallel Simulator) \cite{Plimpton:1995}. During the simulation, dislocations periodically emerge from a notch and are driven towards the GB. The resulting analysis of each interaction observed in the simulations enables the examination of both geometric (i.e., the TF, RBV, and misorientation in this study) and non-geometric (i.e., the RSS and the static GB energy) attributes.
\subsection{Bicrystals}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=.75\linewidth]{Fig1_bicrystal}
\centering
\caption{Diagram of a standard bicrystal configuration used in the MD simulations. The two grains form a planar GB in the center of the bicrystal. Regions of atoms 2-6 lattice parameters (7-18\AA) on either side of the GB are shown in light green and are used to calculate the different properties of the dislocation-GB interaction. The average dimension for each bicrystal is 30x30x7nm with a total of approximately 5x10\textsuperscript{5} atoms. The bicrystal is pulled in tension along the X direction by applying a tensile force to the rigid body of atoms on either side of the bicrystal.}
\label{fig:Bicrystal_Diagram}
\end{figure}
A subset of 33 different bicrystals is chosen from the set of 388 minimized Ni bicrystals created by Olmsted et al. \cite{Olmsted:2009:energy}. To create the 388 GBs, Olmsted et al. found all possible GBs that have a periodic boundary interface within a cell size of L\textsubscript{max}=15a\textsubscript{o}/2 where a\textsubscript{o} is the lattice parameter. This resulted in 72 unique misorientations from which the 388 GBs were constructed. The selected bicrystals from this set of GBs are all symmetric tilt or symmetric twist GBs about the [100], [110], or [111] disorientation axes and cover a range of disorientation angles and corresponding static GB energies; a complete list of all 33 bicrystals is available in Supplemental Table S1. To induce slip on a variety of slip systems, each bicrystal is rotated 0\textdegree , 90\textdegree , 180\textdegree , and 270\textdegree ~around the GB plane normal prior to the construction of the simulation cell. Because the original bicrystals created by Olmsted et. al are of insufficient size to study dislocation-GB interactions, they were enlarged by adding atoms along the x-direction according to its periodic length in the x-direction, and then similarly enlarged in the y- and z-directions. The simulation cell is created with a notch in one grain, by simply removing atoms, to act as a stress concentrator, the geometry of which is illustrated in Figure \ref{fig:Bicrystal_Diagram}. Supplemental Figure S1 illustrates the construction process for the simulation cells. The simulation cell geometry also has a rounded edge in the opposite grain to discourage dislocation activity in that grain. This geometry is somewhat similar to that used by de Koning \cite{Koning:2002}.
With 33 bicrystals each rotated to 4 different orientations there are 132 unique simulation configurations. The average dimensions of each cell are approximately 30x30x7nm, containing approximately 5x10\textsuperscript{5} atoms.
\subsection{Molecular Dynamics Simulation}
Once the bicrystal geometries shown in Figure \ref{fig:Bicrystal_Diagram} are created, the structure is minimized using the conjugate gradient method and then equilibrated for 175ps to a simulation temperature of 10K using an NVT ensemble where the number of atoms, the volume, and the temperature are held constant. The Foiles-Hoyt EAM potential \cite{Hoyt:2005} is implemented as it is the potential used to create the Olmsted GB set \cite{ Olmsted:2009:energy}. Furthermore, this potential has been used to examine GB-dislocation interactions in a few cases \cite{Sangid:2012, Wyman:2017, Sangid:2011}~and shows good agreement with experimental values of intrinsic and unstable stacking fault energies \cite{Siegel:2005}, the latter of which has been shown to be important in the nucleation and mechanics of dislocations \cite{Rice:1992}. Non-periodic boundaries are implemented in all three dimensions to eliminate any potential bias against nucleation on slip systems with long periodic dimensions.
After equilibration, a constant tensile force is applied on rigid groups of atoms on either end of the bicrystal inducing a strain state on the bicrystal withan average strain rate of 7x10\textsuperscript{8}s\textsuperscript{-1}. The high strain rate is common in MD simulations, which for this type of study has been shown to give relatively equivalent results for a strain rate in the range of 10\textsuperscript{8} - 10\textsuperscript{10}s\textsuperscript{-1} \cite{Sangid:2011}. The tensile force is applied for up to 250ps, with the observed dislocation-GB interactions typically occurring within the first 150ps. The centrosymmetry parameter, Voronoi volume, slip direction, potential energy, and the Virial stress tensor (averaged over the previous 0.3ps) are output every picosecond for all atoms within five lattice parameters of the GB and for all other atoms with a centroysmmetry value greater than 1.0 which captures defects, such as dislocations, in the system. Since the GB structure influences the stress on the atoms immediately surrounding it and we desired to know the stress on the dislocations, only atoms 2-5 lattice parameters (or 7-18\AA) away from the GB plane are considered in the subsequent calculations; this region is indicated by the green regions of atoms in Figure \ref{fig:Bicrystal_Diagram}. Similarly, atoms within 2 lattice parameters of any free surface are ignored in subsequent calculations to reduce the influence of the free surface.
\subsection{Analysis Techniques}
Because of the potential uniqueness of each interaction, substantial effort is made to create a systematic and objective method to analyze the interactions. We first define the methods used to identify the incident and emitted dislocations. This is followed by a brief description of the various types of events observed and identified at the GB. Finally, we detail the different geometric and non-geometric attributes that are recorded for each interaction.
\subsubsection{Incident/Emitted Dislocations}
While similar studies have focused primarily on full dislocations only \cite{Shen:1988,Abuzaid:2012, Livingston:1957, Dahlberg:2017}, for the FCC nickel bicrystals we observe slip along \{111\} planes in both $\langle110\rangle$ (full dislocation) and $\langle211\rangle$ (partial dislocation) directions. Therefore, each interaction is identified as involving either a partial or a full dislocation. This decision affects the analysis detailed below so the analysis is run twice, once examining only the full dislocation interactions and again examining both the partial and full dislocation interactions. It is worth noting that in several cases (25) we observe the recombination of leading and trailing partial dislocations in the GB. When this recombination occurs before any dislocation emission at the GB, the incident dislocation is classified as a full dislocation.
\begin{figure}[t
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{Fig2_RBV_TF_graphic}
\end{center}
\caption{Example transmission event involving an impinging dislocation in grain 1 with a slip direction of $\vec{b}_{1}$ and a line intersection with the GB of $\vec{L}_{1}$. The emitted dislocation travels in grain 2 in the $\vec{b}_{i}$ direction and has a line intersection with the GB of $\vec{L}_{i}$. The angle between $\vec{L}_{1}$ and $\vec{L}_{i}$ is $\theta$.}
\label{fig:RBV_and_TF_graphic}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{GB Events}
Simulations and the resulting dislocation-GB interactions are visualized using the OVITO (Open Visualization Tool) software \cite{Alexander:2010} and each timestep of the simulation and its dislocation-GB interactions is observed. These interactions are classified as either transmission, reflection, or absorption, depending on what happens first. Transmission occurs when a dislocation emits from the GB and propagates at least 7\AA~into the body of the second grain without getting reabsorbed back into the GB after nucleating at or near the point of impact from the dislocation in grain 1. Reflection of a dislocation is defined in a similar way to transmission except that following absorption of an incident dislocation, the GB emits a dislocation \textit{back} into grain 1. Finally, a dislocation is classified as having been absorbed when the incident dislocation is absorbed and neither transmission nor reflection are subsequently observed.
All subsequent activity, such as additional transmission events, following each interaction is not tracked because of the difficulty in correlating it with any incident behavior.
Furthermore, it should be noted here that what occurs in the GB following any event is not tracked due to the complex nature of and the difficulty in characterizing changes in the GB structure, despite the fact that significant activity can occur. For example, in simple GB structures like the twin boundary, one can observe glide of a dislocation in the GB following absorption \cite{Xu:2016}. The GBs in the present work, while highly symmetric, are sufficiently complex in their atomic structure that tracking dislocation activity through the GB is not pursued.
\subsubsection{Geometric Attributes}
As previously discussed, the most common geometric criteria that have been used to describe the dislocation-GB interaction include the alignment of impinging and potentially emitted slip planes and slip directions as well as the disorientation between the two grains. The geometric attributes considered in this study include the residual Burgers vector (RBV), the transmissivity factor (TF), and disorientation angle. The calculation of the RBV and the TF are briefly discussed here. Figure \ref{fig:RBV_and_TF_graphic} illustrates two slip planes, their respective Burgers vectors, and their line of intersection, which are used to calculate the RBV and the TF for transmission of a dislocation from grain 1 to 2.
Upon transmission through a GB, the total Burgers vector of a dislocation is conserved, with a fragment of it typically being trapped in the GB \cite{Sangid:2012}. This fragment is known as the RBV. According to Shen et al. and others \cite{Sangid:2012,Abuzaid:2012,Koning:2003,Lim:1985,Li:2009, Koning:2002}, the dislocation most likely to transmit is the one which minimizes the magnitude of the RBV. The RBV, reported in this study in units of the lattice parameter $a$, is calculated according to
\begin{equation}
\vec{b}_{residual} = \vec{b}_{1}-\vec{b}_{i}
\label{eqn:RBV}
\end{equation}
for the Burgers vectors of the impinging dislocation, $\vec{b}_{1}$ and potential emitted dislocation, $\vec{b}_{i}$, defined in the same reference frame. For each interaction, the RBV is used to predict the slip direction of the outgoing dislocation.
To predict the full slip system, i.e., slip plane and slip direction, the TF is used. Calculation of a TF for each interaction is defined as
\begin{equation}
TF=(\vec{L}_{1}\cdotp \vec{L}_{i})*(\vec{b}_{1}\cdotp \vec{b}_{i})
\label{eqn:Trans_factor}
\end{equation}
where $\vec{L}\textsubscript{1}$ and $\vec{L}\textsubscript{i}$ are the line intersections between the GB and the impinging or outgoing slip plane, respectively, $\vec{b}\textsubscript{1}$ and $\vec{b}\textsubscript{i}$ are the slip directions, and TF is the transmissivity factor \cite{Shen:1988}. Each potential slip system is considered and the emitted slip system that maximizes the value of the TF, ranging from 0 to 1, is the most geometrically aligned with the impinging dislocation. Given a set of potential slip systems, the one with the highest TF is the predicted dislocation slip system to transmit \textit{if} transmission occurs \cite{Shen:1988} and can be seen graphically in Figure \ref{fig:RBV_and_TF_graphic}.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[c]{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{Fig3a_atom_stressdists}
\caption{}
\label{fig:Atom_stress_distribution}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[c]{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{Fig3b_Error_Bars_NI36_6_stress}
\caption{}
\label{fig:RSS_error_bars_36p6}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{a.) The RSS on each individual atom that is slipping within the GB region and within 15\AA~of the dislocation normal. The light blue crosses indicate the 5\% of atoms that have the highest RSS. b.) Average RSS, as calculated using the top 5\% of atoms, on a particular dislocation as a function of time. As can be seen, the associated error with the RSS is significant after the dislocation impacts the GB.}
\label{fig:Atom_stress_dist_and_Error_bars}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[t]
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{Fig4_Ni_36_6and7_snapshots_RSS}
\centering
\caption{Snapshots of the simulation of the [100] Tilt $\Sigma$25a bicrystal. Two dislocations of the same slip plane but different slip directions impact the GB at different locations and at different times. The first dislocation, indicated by a dark blue label, transmits and the second dislocation, indicated by a light orange label, reflects. Here the RSS associated with each event for the discussed dislocations are shown beneath the snapshots and are labelled accordingly.}
\label{fig:NI36_dislocation_snapshots}
\end{figure*}
The final geometric attribute considered is the disorientation between the two grains. Bachurin et al. and others found that the propensity to transmit dislocations is dependent on the disorientation angle between the two grains, \cite{Li:2009,Koning:2002, Hamid:2017, Bachurin:2010,Dahlberg:2017, Aust:1954, Davis:1966, Gao:2017}. In their study, Li et al. found that this could partially be explained by the fact that the grain boundary energy is a function of the misorientation angle, thus affecting the stress required to push a dislocation through the GB, with increasing misorientation requiring higher stresses \cite{Li:2009}. To test this dependence, GBs with a wide range of disorientation angles are selected for this study.
\subsubsection{Non-geometric Attributes}
Since several publications have shown the static GB energy to correlate with dislocation-GB interactions \cite{Sangid:2011,Sangid:2012} it is examined here as well. The static GB energy is available for each of the GBs as obtained by Olmsted et al. \cite{Olmsted:2009:energy}.
In addition to the GB energy, we also examine the stresses associated with the dislocation-GB interactions. Specifically, we calculate the resolved shear stress (RSS) on the incident dislocation. From this measured stress we can define an event stress associated with the interaction. The event stress is measured as the maximum RSS that 1) is between the time the dislocation impacts the GB and the time the event occurs \textit{and} 2) occurs within 1-10ps before the event. By imposing these two rules, we are able to maintain a consistent and objective way to determine the event stress. The rationale for picking the maximum stress before the event occurs is because it is believed that the dislocation would be less likely to transmit, reflect, or be absorbed at a lower stress. Therefore, the maximum stress provides an estimate for a potential critically resolved shear stress on a given dislocation required to cause transmission, absorption, or reflection.
Care is taken to calculate the event stress in a manner that minimizes the uncertainty of averaging stress in MD calculations. To demonstrate the uncertainty, Figure \ref{fig:Atom_stress_distribution} shows the stress on individual atoms that are within 15\AA~normal to the slip plane on which a dislocation is traveling. As can be seen, there is a large range of stresses seen in the region of the dislocation, with a bifurcation of the stress visibly present, which occurs near the dislocation core. The two peaks in Figure \ref{fig:Atom_stress_distribution}, positive and negative, show the stress on the dislocation in the region of atoms being measured. The positive stress is used because it represents the atoms that are slipping. Therefore, in order for the bifurcation to not report an average stress around zero, we average the stress of the atoms with the top 5\% RSS values. This average simultaneously reduces the noise present in the analysis and is less sensitive to the stress of nearby dislocations. Even with this filtering process, significant uncertainty is still present, as indicated by the plot in Figure \ref{fig:RSS_error_bars_36p6} where the averaged RSS and its standard deviation of the top 5\% of stress values are plotted as a function of time. This level of uncertainty proves to be a challenge in our efforts to extract correlations of interactions with the event stress. In spite of this, we do find that there may be trends for individual slip systems.
\begin{table}[t!]
\centering
\caption{Table of all possible TFs and RBVs (in units of lattice parameter, a) for the first interaction shown in Figure \ref{fig:NI36_dislocation_snapshots}, sorted according to the TF. The transmitted slip system is shown in bold font and has the highest TF and lowest RBV for any of the potential full dislocations. For a complete table of all considered full and partial slip systems, see Table S2 in the supplemental material.}
\small
\begin{tabular}{@{}*{4}{c}@{}}
\hline
\thead{Potential\\Slip System} & \thead{Transmissivity \\Factor, TF} & \thead{Transmitted RBV (a) } & \thead{Reflected RBV (a)} \\ [0.5ex]
\hline
$[1\bar{1}2](\bar{1}11)$ & 0.654 & 0.216 & 0.408 \\
$[1\bar{2}1](111)$ & 0.632 & 0.105 & 0.333 \\
$\mathbf{[1\bar{1}0](111)}$ & \textbf{0.596} & \textbf{0.374} & \textbf{0.707}\\
$[01\bar{1}](\bar{1}11)$ & 0.579 & 1.052 & 1.080\\
...&...&...&...\\
$[21\bar{1}](1\bar{1}1)$ & 0.006 & 0.558 & 0.782 \\
$[112](\bar{1}\bar{1}1)$ & 0.004 & 0.479 & 0.624 \\
$[110](1\bar{1}1)$ & 0.003 & 0.827 & 1.080\\
$[011](\bar{1}\bar{1}1)$ & 0.003 & 0.879 & 0.913\\[1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{table:dislocation 36.6 RBVs and TFs}
\end{table}
\section{Results}
\label{sec3}
The results are divided into three sections. The first section analyzes two dislocation-GB interactions of a single simulation in detail in order to illustrate the significance and meaning of all the attributes measured during the large number of simulations. Following this, statistics relating to the dislocation-GB interactions are examined. The final section focuses just on transmission events and the attributes involved in transmission.
\subsection{Case Study of Tilt GB}
To illustrate what individual interactions look like, we examine the 16.26\textdegree~[100] Tilt ($\Sigma$25a CSL with $(0\,\bar{1}\,7)$/$(0\,\bar{1}\,\bar{7})$ boundary plane normals) bicrystal simulation in detail. This simulation exhibits multiple interactions of the same slip plane and contains two of the three types of events analyzed in this study: transmission and reflection.
Figure \ref{fig:NI36_dislocation_snapshots} shows snapshots of the simulation at selected times to show the different events associated with the dislocation-GB interactions. Atoms with a centrosymmetry parameter less than 1.0 are not shown for clarity. Figure \ref{fig:NI36_dislocation_snapshots} also labels the slip systems of each dislocation and plots the RSS (as calculated following the procedure outlined in 2.3.4) for each interaction as a function of time.
In the first interaction at 112ps, indicated by a dark blue label in Figure \ref{fig:NI36_dislocation_snapshots}, the activated dislocation is on the $[12\bar{1}](1\bar{1}\bar{1})$ slip system. Here, the first dislocation is followed by an identical partial dislocation (therefore, it is treated as a partial rather than two partials that make a full dislocation) which impacts the GB about 1ps after the first impact.
The RSS increases as the second partial dislocation approaches and impacts the grain boundary. Between impact and transmission, which occur at 115ps and 126ps respectively, the RSS on the incident slip system reaches a magnitude of approximately 3GPa just before it transmits through the GB onto the $[1\bar{1}0](111)$ slip system in grain 2. This stress of 3GPa is interpreted as the event stress for this dislocation-GB interaction as it is the maximum RSS on the dislocation after impact with the GB \textit{and} within the 10ps before the transmission event.
The TF and the magnitude of the RBV for the 12 potential full and 12 potential partial emitted slip systems are calculated and compared with the actual slip system of the transmitted dislocation. For brevity, Table \ref{table:dislocation 36.6 RBVs and TFs} only lists the values for the slip systems with the 4 highest and 4 lowest TF values; the complete list for all full and partial slip systems is available in Supplemental Table S2. The slip system on which transmission actually occurred is listed in bold in Table \ref{table:dislocation 36.6 RBVs and TFs}. It can be seen that according to the TF and transmitted RBV, there are two more-geometrically favorable partial slip systems that were not activated. However, the transmitted dislocation does have the highest TF and lowest RBV of the available full slip systems.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[c]{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth, height=6cm]{Fig5a_Classification_incident}
\caption{}
\label{fig:Classification_incident_dislocations}
\end{subfigure}
\hfill
\begin{subfigure}[c]{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth, height=6cm]{Fig5b_Classification_emitted}
\caption{}
\label{fig:Classification_emitted_dislocations}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{a.) Classification of the type of incident dislocations and corresponding dislocation-GB event. As can be seen, the most common event is transmission, followed by absorption with reflection being the least common. b.) Classification of the type of transmitted dislocations and the corresponding type of incident dislocation that transmitted. It is obvious that the vast majority of transmitted dislocations slip along the $\langle110\rangle$ direction and are a result of full dislocations impinging on the GB. }
\label{fig:Classication_of_interactions}
\end{figure*}
During the time of the first interaction, a second dislocation, indicated by a light orange label in Figure \ref{fig:NI36_dislocation_snapshots}, is seen to impact the GB approximately 70\AA~away from the first dislocation and closer to the middle of the bicrystal. This second dislocation impacts the GB at 121ps and involves an incident dislocation of the $[110](1\bar{1}\bar{1})$ slip system. For this second interaction, the stress in the region continues to rise to $\sim$3.7GPa immediately before the dislocation is reflected back onto the $[\bar{1}01](111)$ slip system in grain 1. Curiously, although it has the same slip plane as the first dislocation, a potential transmission slip system with a higher maximum potential TF of 0.627, a smaller potential RBV of 0.2, and a higher RSS than the first interaction discussed above, this dislocation interaction causes a dislocation to reflect back into grain 1.
The case study is useful in illustrating the complex nature of these interactions. In contrast to some previous works, we aim to analyze numerous dislocation-GB interactions across a number of different GBs. This enables an informed statistical study to be performed with the trade off of having less control of the interactions present in the simulations and higher uncertainty in measuring attributes like the RSS.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{Fig6_ParameterHistogram}
\caption{Histograms showing the distribution of the Event Stress, Minimum RBV, Maximum Transmissivity Factor, Static GB Energy, and Disorientation Angle separated for each different event type: Transmission, Absorption, and Reflection. The Minimum RBV and Maximum Transmissivity Factor were calculated considering both full and partial dislocations as potential emitted dislocations.}
\label{fig:RSS_RBV_TF_GBeng_Diso_histograms}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Entirety of Interactions}
In all 132 simulations, 189 meaningful dislocation-GB interactions were observed for 31 of the 33 different GB structures tested. The number of dislocation interactions with each unique GB ranges from 2 to 13 with an average of 6 interactions, but since each GB has 4 simulations for different orientations of the notch, the average per simulation is 1.5 interactions. These interactions are classified as either transmission, reflection, or absorption, depending on which happens first and are subsequently analyzed in the same way presented in the case study.
Overall, 86 transmission events, 63 absorption events, and 40 reflection events are observed. These interactions are further sorted, as shown in both Figures \ref{fig:Classification_incident_dislocations} and \ref{fig:Classification_emitted_dislocations}, into the type of incident dislocation for a given interaction based on its respective slip direction: $\langle110\rangle$ (full) or $\langle211\rangle$ (partial).
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[c]{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{Fig7a_Estress_diso_slip_110tilt}
\caption{}
\label{fig:Event_Stress_vs_dis_vs_SS_110Tilt}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[c]{0.49\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{Fig7b_Estress_diso_slip_111twist}
\caption{}
\label{fig:Event_Stress_vs_dis_vs_SS_111Twist}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Event stress vs disorientation for activated slip systems for a.) bicrystals with [110] Tilt GBs and b.) biscrystals with [111] Twist GBs. There seems to be some degree of dependence of the event stress on the slip system, as evidenced by the event stress having a positive correlation with the disorientation angle for slip systems 11, 7, and 22 but a negative correlation for slip systems 16 and 19. A more controlled study with more data is required to elucidate such relationships with confidence.}
\label{fig:Event_Stress_vs_dis_vs_SS}
\end{figure*}
As is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:Classification_incident_dislocations}, the most common event is transmission with absorption a close second. While reflection events are the least common, the large number of events was surprising, not least of all because of the large RBV required for reflection. Examples of the large RBV vectors can be seen in Table \ref{table:dislocation 36.6 RBVs and TFs}. When examined by incident dislocation type, it can be seen that 53.5\% of partial dislocations transmitted and 43.2\% of full dislocations transmitted. The majority of incident and transmitted dislocations were full dislocations, accounting for 77.2\% of all 189 incident dislocations and 81.4\% of all 86 transmitted dislocations.
As discussed in section 2.3, the event stress, minimum RBV, and maximum TF are calculated for each dislocation-GB interaction; both full and partial dislocations are considered in determining the minimum RBV and maximum TF. Histograms of these values, along with the properties of the GBs involved in the interactions, i.e., GB energy and disorientation angle, are given in Figure \ref{fig:RSS_RBV_TF_GBeng_Diso_histograms}. The values are divided between the types of events to gauge whether any correlations exist. From these plots, it is easy to see that, while there are significant populations present for each attribute considered, there is too much overlap between the respective values to discriminate between the interaction types based on any single attribute. In other words, even with the large number of events, none of these attributes can be used alone to predict the type of event that will occur.
Since the original motivation of the study was to determine whether a critical GB obstacle stress was associated with transmission events, this aspect is analyzed in more detail. Due to the noise present in the measurements of RSS as a result of the unavoidable interference from nearby dislocations, correlations are difficult to glean. However, potential correlations between the event stress and the event are found when comparing the event stress for activated slip systems as a function of disorientation angle. In Figure \ref{fig:Event_Stress_vs_dis_vs_SS_110Tilt} it can be seen that there is scatter among the data even for events on the same slip system. However, for three slip systems in [110] tilt GBs and two slip systems in [111] twist GBs, in Figures \ref{fig:Event_Stress_vs_dis_vs_SS_110Tilt} and \ref{fig:Event_Stress_vs_dis_vs_SS_111Twist} respectively, we are able to show the existence of some trend with disorientation angle. With the little data we have at present, we are unable to draw definitive conclusions. It is possible that alternate approaches, such as that performed by Wyman et al. to investigate dislocation nucleation from GBs \cite{Wyman:2017}, could elucidate new criteria related to transmission.
\subsection{Transmission}
A significant focus of this research is on the attributes involved in the transmission of dislocations. As such, the remainder of this section emphasizes results found relating to transmission vs no transmission (i.e., absorption and reflection). The first matter addressed is the dependence of the frequency of transmission on different attributes. This is followed by the ability of the TF and the RBV to predict a transmitted dislocation's slip system.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\textwidth]{Fig8_transfreq_parameters}
\caption{Frequency of transmission as a function of mean event stress, mean minimum RBV, mean max TF, static GB energy, and disorientation. The size of each point correlates to the number of data points used to calculate the frequency of transmission for the corresponding x value. There seems to be a negative correlation between disorientation and transmission frequency. Next, for twist GBs, there appears to be an energy barrier around 950 mJ/m\textsuperscript{2}, above which transmission no longer occurs. No obvious correlations exist between the event stress or mean max TF and transmission frequency. As expected, transmission seems to favor smaller magnitudes of RBV, especially for twist GBs.}
\label{fig:trans_freq_vs_dis_and_eng}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Frequency of Transmission}
In Figure \ref{fig:trans_freq_vs_dis_and_eng}, the frequency of transmission for each GB is plotted against the attributes considered in an effort to elucidate relationships that might correlate with transmission. Tilt and twist GBs have been shown to affect the dislocation-GB interaction differently \cite{Sangid:2012, Chandra:2017}, therefore the relationships are plotted for the two types in separate graphs. The size of each of the markers is proportional to the number of interactions used to calculate the frequency of transmission for that GB. Since there are multiple interactions for each point, we simply plot the average value of each, e.g. average event stress from each of the interactions of dislocations with that GB and average value of all the miminum RBV from each of the interactions, etc. While there do not appear to be any strong trends, there are subtle trends that would suggest disorientation angle, static GB energy, and the GB type (i.e., tilt vs twist) may be distinguishing attributes in transmission of dislocations through GBs. First, for GBs with twist or tilt about the [100] axis, the frequency of transmission appears to be negatively correlated with the disorientation angle, though there are GBs with high transmission frequency at high disorientation angles. Second, for twist GBs, the existence of a GB energy barrier to transmission seems to affect the ability of dislocations to transmit. Transmission frequency is typically high for GBs with a static energy less than 950 mJ/m\textsuperscript{2} at which point there is a steep drop in transmission frequency such that no transmission occurs for twist GBs with energy above 950mJ/m\textsuperscript{2}. No such barrier is readily visible for the tilt GBs. To determine whether or not this is due to the GB energy or the different type of GB would require further research.
Third, there is a surprising lack of correlation between the TF and the frequency of transmission. It was expected that as the alignment of incident and transmitted slip systems increases, corresponding to a larger TF, the propensity to transmit would increase. There appears to be no such trend for twist or tilt GBs. Similarly, it was anticipated that transmission would occur more readily with a smaller available RBV, which in this case may be true. Finally, no apparent relationship between the event stress and transmission frequency is easily discernible for either twist or tilt GBs. Reasons for this lack of correlation are explored later.
\subsubsection{Predicted Slip System}
Although one cannot definitively predict the likelihood of transmission using the TF and RBV, these two attributes prove to be very effective at predicting the slip system of the transmitted dislocation. This is in accordance with earlier mentioned studies involving smaller numbers of dislocation-GB interactions \cite{Shen:1988,Sangid:2012,Abuzaid:2012,Lim:1985,Koning:2003, Li:2009, Lee:1990, Koning:2002, Kacher:2012}.
In the cases of transmission observed in this work, 70 full dislocations and 16 partial dislocations were observed. If the slip system predicted to emit is the one with the the maximum TF, then the correctness depends on whether full and partial dislocations are included in the list of potential outcomes. Predicting the slip system of all 86 full and partial dislocations using a potential list of 24 full and partial dislocation slip systems results in an accuracy of 55.8\% (48/86). However, if all 86 are predicted using only a potential list of 12 full dislocation slip systems the accuracy increases to 67.4\% (58/86). Finally, if only the 70 full dislocations are considered and the potential list only includes 12 full dislocations, the accuracy is 82.9\% (58/70).
We learn some important lessons from these different levels of accuracy. Trying to predict the emitted slip system of a transmitted dislocation is not great when one attempts to include both full and partial dislocations. The partial dislocations provide so many additional options which are not likely to be selected, some of which may even have a higher TF than the full dislocations. Therefore, their inclusion initially leads to low accuracy predictions (see Table \ref{table:dislocation 36.6 RBVs and TFs}). If we predict only full slip systems but compare the prediction against the emitted full and partial dislocation slip systems, we can never get to 100\% accuracy. This is a result of attempting to predict full dislocations for some interactions where the dislocation transmitted onto a partial slip system. Since full dislocations dominate the simulations, it makes sense to predict only full slip systems for simulations that actually transmit full dislocations. In these cases, the accuracy is noteworthy.
In many cases, the TF of the slip system which actually transmits is the second or third highest predicted slip system according to TF. However, in many cases, the top three or so TFs are similar in magnitude, with the main difference typically being a result of a different slip direction rather than a different slip plane; this can be seen in Table \ref{table:dislocation 36.6 RBVs and TFs} where the top four dislocations according to TF have only two unique slip planes and have a range of 0.075. To illustrate how the ability to correctly select the slip system improves as more slip systems are considered acceptable, we plot the frequency of correct predictions in Figure \ref{fig:MaxTF_accuracy}. Intuitively, the predictive capability of the TF would increase as the stipulation that the predicted transmitted slip system maximize the TF is relaxed to include the top two (or more) slip systems with the largest values of TF. This trend is shown by the solid lines in Figure \ref{fig:MaxTF_accuracy}. Here there are two solid lines, blue for predictions of full dislocations only, and red for predictions of full and partial dislocations. It should be noted that because of the 16 dislocations that emit on partial slip systems, the full slip system predictions can never get higher than 81.4\%. Interestingly, the prediction capability using the 24 full and partial slip systems increases rapidly as more slip systems are considered, reaching a frequency of 80.2\% when the prediction is considered correct if the actual TF is one of the top three values of TF possible; this is likely a sign that the full dislocations that actually transmit are simply near the partial slip systems that are predicted as in Table \ref{table:dislocation 36.6 RBVs and TFs}, so once we consider up to top three possible slip systems, it is likely to encompass the full slip system on which the dislocation transmitted.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering\begin{subfigure}{0.45\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width= 1\textwidth]{Fig9a_TF_predict}
\caption{}
\label{fig:MaxTF_accuracy}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width= 1\textwidth]{Fig9b_RBV_predict}
\caption{}
\label{fig:MinRBV_accuracy}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Ability of the a.) TF and b.) RBV to correctly predict the transmitted slip system/plane and slip direction respectively. The frequency is displayed as a function of how many slip systems/planes that produce the highest TF-values or slip directions that produce the lowest RBVs are considered for the prediction to be considered as correct. The frequency increases as additional slip systems/planes and slip directions are considered correct. The dotted black line indicates the maximum frequency capable of being achieved when only full dislocations are considered in the calculations, which is less than 100\% because 16 of the 86 transmitted slip systems were partials.}
\label{fig:MaxTF_and_MinRBV_accuracy}
\end{figure*}
Although the TF is reasonably accurate in predicting the correct slip system in the event of a transmitted dislocation, its accuracy is higher if we are only concerned with predicting the slip plane on which the dislocation transmits. By ignoring the slip direction and assigning the maximum TF for each unique slip plane to all slip directions on the same slip plane, the accuracy increases to 73.3\% (63/86) if only full slip systems are considered and 74.4\% (64/86) if both full and partial slip systems are considered. This is demonstrated by the dotted lines in \ref{fig:MaxTF_accuracy}. Since there are only four unique slip planes for FCC material, these lines reach their maximum once the four slip planes are considered.
Since the accuracy of prediction goes up as additional slip systems that may be near the ``optimal'' slip system are considered, a separate analysis is done to determine how close in magnitude the TF of the actual transmitted dislocation is to the maximum TF available for each given interaction. It is found that in 62 of the 86 cases of transmission, and when considering only full dislocations, the actual transmitted dislocation has a TF with a magnitude within 20\% of the value of the maximum possible TF. However, this frequency increases to 70/86 occurrences if both full and partial dislocations are considered. This kind of information may be relevent in continuum models \cite{Lim:2011} that rely on the calculation of the obstacle stress according to equation (\ref{eqn:Tau_obs}); by knowing that the correct TF is often within 20\% of the maximum possible TF, a range for TF could be used in the calculation of the obstacle stress for a given GB.
While the slip plane can be predicted using the TF, the slip direction is similarly predicted by minimizing the RBV. A smaller RBV means that the disorder left behind in the GB is reduced for a transmission event and therefore the energy can be minimized as well. A similar analysis to the TF just discussed is repeated for the minimum predicted RBV of potential slip systems.
As expected, the solid light blue line in Figure \ref{fig:MinRBV_accuracy} shows that when only full dislocations are considered, the RBV effectively predicts the transmitted slip direction in 72.1\% (62/86) of the cases of transmission. When more partial slip directions are also included, the accuracy decreases to 64.0\% (55/86), shown by the solid dark red line in Figure \ref{fig:MinRBV_accuracy}. Once again, predictions using only full dislocation slip directions can only ever achieve an accuracy 81.4\% due to the fact that some events transmitted onto partial slip systems. Similar to TF, the ability of the RBV to predict the transmitted slip direction improves as other slip directions close to the minimum are considered.
\section{Discussion}
\label{sec4}
The discussion of the results is organized into 3 sections. First, we examine criteria to predict the slip systems of transmitted dislocations. Second, we analyze attributes and their correlations with likelihood of observing a transmission event. Third, we employ machine learning to find correlations associated with different types of dislocation-GB interactions and their ability to predict the resulting event.
\subsection{Prediction of Transmission Slip Systems}
The survey of dislocation-GB interactions confirms the trends related to transmission slip systems that others have seen in regards to the geometric attributes TF and RBV. First, Shen et al.~found that the transmitted slip system could be correctly predicted in three of five experimental cases of transmission using just the TF \cite{Shen:1988}. Consistent with these experimental results, this study also shows that the TF presents an effective way to predict the slip system of a transmitted dislocation, and is even more effective in predicting just the slip plane (Figure \ref{fig:MaxTF_accuracy}). Furthermore, this study, performed on many more dislocation-GB interactions, also suggests that predictions using the maximum TF will never achieve an accuracy of 100\% because transmission on other slip systems with good alignment are consistently observed. Second, this study confirms the research done by others which shows that minimizing the RBV allows one to predict the correct slip direction for transmitted dislocations in most cases, though again, not at an accuracy of 100\% \cite{Sangid:2012,Abuzaid:2012,Lim:1985,Koning:2003,Li:2009, Lee:1990, Koning:2002, Kacher:2012}.
The importance of geometric criteria used to predict the slip systems involved in both experimental work and simulations is emphasized by the accuracy of the TF and the RBV. However, Table \ref{table:dislocation 36.6 RBVs and TFs} and Figure \ref{fig:MaxTF_and_MinRBV_accuracy} show that such geometric criteria are more capable when only considering full dislocations since the predictive capabilities of TF and RBV initially decrease when partial slip systems are also considered. This observation may have little effect if using RBV and TF to predict the slip system in metals with a high stacking fault energy, such as aluminum, where partial dislocations are rarely observed \cite{Nabarro2002}. In such materials, it would be easily justifiable to exclude any partial dislocations from predictions made for the transmitted slip system. By shifting the analysis to only consider the 55 full dislocations that transmitted onto full slip systems (see the far left bar in Figure \ref{fig:Classification_emitted_dislocations}), the frequency of the maximum TF predicting the correct slip plane improves to 89.1\% (49/55) and the frequency of the minimum RBV predicting the correct slip direction similarly improves to 92.7\% (51/55).
\subsection{Predicting Transmission Events}
Determining the attributes that influence a dislocation's ability to transmit through a GB is required for robust mesoscale modeling. As such, this section first describes the different trends observed that are associated with being able to predict transmission and then discusses potential complications in finding expected trends regarding the RSS.
First, as discussed in the Results, it is found that the frequency of transmission is higher for dislocations that interact with a GB that has a low static GB energy and a low disorientation angle (Figure \ref{fig:trans_freq_vs_dis_and_eng}). It is possible that GB energy is the cause while disorientation angle is correlated with GB energy. For example, for both twist and tilt GBs, there exists a GB which has high frequency of transmission despite it having the highest disorientation angle of the simulated twist or tilt GBs. However, these two high disorientation and high transmission frequency GBs also have a relatively low GB energy. Additional data would be needed to confirm this assertion.
This result initially seems in conflict with the work done by Sangid et al.~that found the energy barrier to transmission is negatively correlated to the GB energy \cite{Sangid:2011}. He proposes that a more ordered and stable GB with lower interfacial energy provides a stronger barrier to slip transmission and nucleation. However, this study does not attempt to measure the energy barrier to transmission, but rather the frequency of transmission correlated with the GB energy. Although a low energy GB may have a higher energy barrier, this could be interpreted as requiring a higher stress for transmission and not necessarily mean the GB is more or less likely to allow things through. It is worth noting that in Sangid's work, the highest energy barrier for transmission was about 4 times higher than the lowest barrier, but that the highest GB energy was more than 10 times higher than the lowest GB energy. Thus, the trend is not linear and a small change in GB energy would require an even smaller increase or decrease in barrier energy. To compare with this possible scenario, Figure \ref{fig:Event_Stress_vs_GBeng} plots the event stress as a function of the static GB energy for the different event types. As can be seen, no trend is immediately obvious. Thus, at this point, it is not clear why low energy GBs would simultaneously exhibit a high energy barrier to transmission (as demonstrated by Sangid) while allowing more dislocations to transmit.
Second, the influence of the GB type (twist vs tilt) and the disorientation angle on a particular GB structure may also provide an explanation for why some dislocations transmit and others do not.~Twist GBs reflected dislocations more often than tilt GBs (25\% vs 19\%) and transmitted less than tilt GBs (42\% vs 47\%).
This difference could be due to the orthogonal network of dislocations found within the twist GBs which are more dense and could offer a more significant physical barrier to transmission than the linear array of dislocations present in tilt GBs \cite{Chandra:2017, Sutton:1983}. Furthermore, the propensity to reflect increases slightly as the disorientation angle between the two grains increases. Based on the previous observations, this correlation would be expected as the density of the dislocation network increases with increasing disorientation for the GBs studied here. Li et al. also suggested that the difficulty for a dislocation to transmit is directly related to the misorientation angle \cite{Li:2009}, agreeing with the results seen in this study (c.f. Figure \ref{fig:trans_freq_vs_dis_and_eng}). Chandra et al.~also found that twist GBs offered significant resistance to transgranular crack growth, confirming the understanding that twist GBs are more resistant to such crack growth as compared to tilt GBs \cite{Chandra:2017}.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}{0.45\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{Fig10a_Estress_GBenergy}
\caption{}
\label{fig:Event_Stress_vs_GBeng}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{0.425\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{Fig10b_Estress_TF}
\caption{}
\label{fig:Event_Stress_vs_TF}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{The event stress for each dislocation-GB interaction as a function of a.) the static GB energy and b.) the TF. In b.) the dotted black line indicates the theoretical obstacle stress assuming a macroscopic yield stresngth of 500 MPa. As can be seen, nearly every dislocation-GB interaction experienced an event stress that far exceeded the theoretical obstacle stress.}
\end{figure*}
Third, as demonstrated by Dewald et al.~and Bachurin et al., the actual location of the interaction between the dislocation and the GB affects the ability of the dislocation to transmit \cite{Bachurin:2010, Dewald:2007:Screw}. This suggests that the dislocation network within a GB results in regions of the GB that could present stronger physical barriers than others. This difference can lead to different outcomes for seemingly identical interactions. For example, in a simulation of the 22.62\textdegree~[100] twist GB two dislocations of the same [11$\bar{1}$](101) slip system impact the GB approximately 80\AA~apart, yet one readily transmits and the other eventually reflects off the GB. To more fully understand to what extent the location of impact and the associated atomic structure of the GB influence the interaction, a more detailed analysis would be required. Morvec et al. have shown that common geometric criteria, especially the alignment between slip planes in neighboring grains, used for the prediction of the results of dislocation-GB interactions does not always hold as the resulting event also depends on how the atoms rearrange at the event site \cite{Mrovec:2009}. While we do not dispute this fact and this may account for some of the erroneous predictions, the fact that the geometric attributes hold as well as they do, in spite of the many different atomic arrangements in all the simulations, is noteworthy.
At the outset of this work, it was hypothesized that transmission events would be correlated with the stress present on the dislocation, which would be reasonable considering Sangid's observations \cite{Sangid:2011, Sangid:2012}. However, such trends remained elusive as indicated by Figure \ref{fig:Event_Stress_vs_GBeng}. In his mesoscale model, Wagoner also proposed a similar prediction of transmission stress, given in equation \ref{eqn:Tau_obs}, but based his on the alignment of slip systems for a potential transmission event.
To demonstrate this, the event stress for each interaction is plotted as a function of the maximum TF available for the interaction in Figure \ref{fig:Event_Stress_vs_TF}. Equation \ref{eqn:Tau_obs} is plotted as a dotted line (for a yield strength of 500 MPa), and according to Wagoner's model, stresses in excess of this value would be sufficient to cause transmission. It is clear that transmission stresses cannot be predicted so easily as nearly every point, regardless of the event that occurs at the GB, exceeds the theoretical obstacle stress for the given TF. Furthermore, there is no general trend of event stress with TF or static GB energy.
It is possible that the nature of these simulations complicates the ability to see trends in the recorded stresses. For example, the short simulation times, and corresponding high strain rates, required for molecular dynamics simulations means that driven systems can behave differently than thermally activated systems. If not driven at high stresses, thermal fluctuations over a long time period may only be able to access a preferred event. But driven systems at high stresses may have thermal fluctuations that can access not only a preferred event, but a number of newly accessible events as well. For example, a recent study has shown that a different deformation mechanism can occur in simulations at a slower strain rate of 10\textsuperscript{6}s\textsuperscript{-1}: slip on lower Schmid factor slip systems \cite{Dupraz:2018}. Thus, if it were possible, lower strain rate simulations might observe different sets of events at different stresses, which might then exhibit a correlation in stresses not observed in the present work.
Finally, the process of transmission is likely not deterministic and more attention should be given to models that account for this fact. Modeling the process in a stochastic manner may allow a more accurate representation of activated slip systems observed here by allowing the occasional poorly aligned slip system to be activated upon transmission. Others have already applied this concept in other aspects of deformation in a quantized crystal plasticity finite element model \cite{Li:2009:Stochastic} or in the modeling of twin nucleation and/or transmission in HCP metals using a viscoplastic self-consistent model \cite{Chelladurai:2018, Niezgoda:2014, Beyerlein:2011}.
\subsection{Machine Learning Dislocation-GB Interactions}
One of the major shortcomings of the criteria used to predict the slip system of a transmitted dislocation, which is made more apparent in this study, is their current inability to predict \textit{if} a dislocation will transmit or not. For example, based on the previously discussed criteria, it is not entirely clear as to why a dislocation would prefer to reflect over transmitting if the geometrical criteria almost always favors transmission. Furthermore, as seen in Figure \ref{fig:RSS_RBV_TF_GBeng_Diso_histograms}, each criterion, when individually considered, reveal little about the interaction event. However, machine learning processes provide promising potential for the extraction of correlations between multiple attributes that aren't readily seen. Therefore, two different analyses are performed using the WEKA machine learning software \cite{Witten:2016}. First, a decision tree is used to create a predictive model for transmission. Second, the determination of which attributes play the most significant role in determining whether or not a dislocation transmits is made by finding the gain ratio for each considered attribute.
Three separate analyses were performed on the data set to predict transmission, absorption, and reflection. It was found that the analyses to predict transmission and absorption reveal similar trends whereas the analysis to predict reflection was unsuccessful due to only a marginal increase in predictive capabilities given the attributes considered in this study.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{Fig11_J48_Transmission}
\centering
\caption{J48 decision tree starting at the root (box with rounded corners) which produces 4 branches (ellipses) and ends with 6 leafs (boxes). The fraction inside each leaf is the number of instances that reached the leaf over how many of those instances were incorrectly classified (e.g., (46.6/4.4) means 46.6 instances made it to that branch and 4.4 were incorrectly classified where the decimals are a result of the class balancing).}
\label{fig:J48}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Decision Tree Prediction of Transmission Events}
For this study, we employ the J48 method within the AttributeSelectedClassifier in WEKA which produces a simple-to-understand decision tree in order to predict a certain outcome (in this case transmission) given certain input attributes by evaluating at each branch the most important attribute of the remaining data. The J48 process is explained in more detail in \cite{Orme:2016} and \cite{Quinlan:1993}. The attributes used in the creation of the decision tree included numeric values for disorientation angle, static GB energy, maximum TF, minimum RBV, and the event stress. Attributes with nominal values for the GB type, i.e., twist vs. tilt, and for the incident dislocation type, i.e., full vs. partial, were also included. The minimum leaf size in the tree is set to 10 (meaning that each split will contain at least 10 instances), which ensures that the tree is not over constrained. In order to avoid obtaining an artificially high accuracy due to an uneven distribution of the event being predicted, class balancing is used. The GainRatioAttributeEvaluator method in WEKA is used to produce a tree based on the most relevant attributes for this study. The standard 10-fold cross validation technique is used (meaning the data is split into 10 parts, i.e., folds, then trained on 9 parts and tested on the remaining part, repeating so that each part is tested once). This produces a decision tree whose accuracy is the average of the 10 different tests. To further reduce the potential for a particular split to produce incorrectly high or low prediction accuracies, the cross-validation technique was repeated 10 times, each time using a new seed to randomly split the data differently. Using this technique, i.e., using 10-fold cross validation 10 times and averaging their accuracies, we produce the J48 decision tree shown in Figure \ref{fig:J48}, which has an average accuracy of 75.5\% with a standard deviation of 1.65\%. By comparing this result to the baseline accuracy (i.e., making the prediction based solely on the most popular outcome) of 47.7\% we find that the J48 decision tree improves the prediction of transmission vs. non-transmission by nearly 30\%. Other techniques, such as Random Forrest, could be used to improve the accuracy, but such black box methods do little to give insight into what attributes are affecting its decision process. Intuitively, the level of importance of each attribute included in the tree decreases as one travels down the decision tree.
Several observations of the tree should be noted. First, of the seven attributes included in the creation of the tree, only three of them appear in the resulting tree. In order of importance, these attributes are disorientation angle, static GB energy, and minimum RBV. The significance of the disorientation angle is emphasized by its appearing in the tree multiple times. Second, the tree is relatively clean with only six leaves and four branches needed to predict transmission. Further measures could be made to reduce the size of the tree and simplify the results at the sacrifice of accuracy. Alternatively, accuracy could be improved by allowing a smaller leaf size, but this might over constrain the tree making the result too specific to certain results in the dataset instead of a result that is general to the majority of the data.
Biases enter the model as a result of the uneven distribution of attributes tested, as seen in Figure \ref{fig:trans_freq_vs_dis_and_eng} where, for example, certain GB energies or disorientation angles have more data points available. Despite this bias, a number of insights are gained from the J48 analysis in determining which of the investigated attributes most prominently affect transmission. First, the decision tree visually reinforces the earlier observation that, in general, GBs with a lower disorientation angle allow for transmission to occur more frequently. This is consistent with the findings by others \cite{Lim:1985,Chandra:2015,Dahlberg:2017,Davis:1966} and further supports the discrimination between high angle and low angle grain boundaries, which is commonly believed to occur at a disorientation angle of 15\textdegree \cite{Gottstein:2013}. In fact, as seen by the first branch of the decision tree, for GBs with a disorientation angle of less than 18\textdegree, none of the other attributes have an affect on transmission. It should be noted that there are only 9 GBs with a disorientation angle less than 18\textdegree. However, for some GBs that have higher disorientation angles, above 18\textdegree, a lower static GB energy is preferable for transmission. Second, as expected, transmission is predicted to occur more frequently when the minimum available RBV is smaller. Finally, for dislocations that interact with a GB that has high energy and a disorientation angle above 26\textdegree, transmission is never predicted.
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{Gain Ratio for each of the considered attributes for predicting transmission. Not surprisingly, minimum RBV and disorientation angle provide the most information.}
\label{table:Information_gain_table}
\small
\begin{tabular}{@{}*{2}{c}@{}}
\hline
\thead{Attribute} & \thead{Transmission\\Gain Ratio}\\ [0.5ex]
\hline
Disorientation Angle & 0.1675\\
Minimum RBV & 0.1482\\
Static GB Energy & 0.1314\\
Max Transmissivity Factor & 0.0756\\
Partial vs. Full & 0.0070\\
Twist vs. Tilt GB & 0.0018\\
Event Stress & 0.0000\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Attribute Evaluation of Transmission Events}
WEKA is also capable of determining the relative importance in predicting the defined class for each included attribute by using the Gain Ratio Attribute Evaluator. This function measures the amount by which each attribute decreases the overall entropy \cite{Sharma:2012}. Attributes which result in a larger decrease in entropy, or reduce the uncertainty in the outcome, are said to provide more information. An important distinction that should be made between this method and the J48 decision tree is that the Gain Ratio Attribute Evaluator considers the whole data set when calculating the gain ratio for each attribute. This is different from J48 in that the J48 method only considers the data available at each node in the branch to determine which is the most important attribute at that point. The gain ratio for each attribute is displayed in Table \ref{table:Information_gain_table}. This result agrees well with the decision tree created earlier in that the top three attributes according to their gain ratio are the three attributes present in the tree. Furthermore, the importance of the disorientation angle is reinforced by its being both the root of the tree and the most informative attribute. Finally, it is shown that in this study, the event stress does not contribute at all to predicting whether or not transmission will occur as it has a gain ratio of 0.0.
\subsubsection{Machine Learned Attributes Affecting Transmission Events}
The machine learning process provides unique insight into the transmission process. It is significant that such an accurate model to predict transmission can be created using predominately geometric attributes, especially RBV and disorientation. The machine learning is not able to find any correlations to event stress. The question then is whether this is a result of the approach used in this work as discussed above, or if the stress simply plays a secondary role to other attributes like the prominent geometric criteria. However, that is not to say that improvements to the model could not be made. By including a larger variety of attributes in the transmission model created, the ability to predict transmission improves. Perhaps there are other attributes not included in this study, such as temperature, that, if included in the model, could further improve its ability to predict transmission. Therefore, the value of this model lies in demonstrating the potential of more thorough studies which consider more attributes to produce a superior model to predict transmission.
\subsubsection{Machine Learning of Absorption/Reflection}
The same procedures used to create the decision tree and gain ratio table for predicting transmission are performed for the creation of decision trees to predict absorption and reflection of dislocations as well as to determine which attributes were most informative of the subsequent GB event. For brevity, the results of this analysis are discussed here and the resulting J48 decision trees and gain ratio tables are included in the supplemental material (Figures S4 and S5 and Tables S3 and S4).
Similar to transmission, absorption of a dislocation is correctly predicted 77.0\% of the time with a standard deviation of 1.29\% using a J48 decision tree, an improvement of about 30\% from the baseline accuracy of 47.6\%. Unsurprisingly, the absorption decision tree reinforces the trend found for transmission that disorientation angle plays a significant role in the event. Here, a higher disorientation angle is found to be the best indicator that a dislocation will absorb rather than reflect or transmit. Furthermore, the gain ratio table for absorption is similar in order of the more influential attributes to that of the attributes for transmission, with disorientation angle and minimum RBV being the two most informative attributes. The trends displayed here are nearly equivalent to those found in the transmission tree and information table, confirming that transmission prefers smaller minimum RBVs and lower disorientation angles.
In contrast to transmission and absorption, reflection of a dislocation was unsuccessfully predicted using machine learning. The J48 decision tree for reflection improved the baseline accuracy by only 11.5\% , from 49.7\% to 60.2\% with a standard deviation of 3.2\%. After considering the decision tree and the gain ratio for each of the given variables, this is not surprising. Unlike the other two decision trees, the decision tree to predict reflection has nine branches and 11 leaves, meaning it has many more frequent and smaller splits of the data, resulting in an over-constrained tree. Furthermore, the root of the tree and the highest gain ratio value of any variable used to predict reflection is the event stress, which is already known to contain some uncertainty. Finally, none of the other variables associated with transmission or absorption are correlated with reflection, casting doubt on the ability to create an effective predictive model of reflection with the current data set. Significantly more data is required to understand what attributes influence reflection of dislocations at grain boundaries.
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec5}
This study utilizes molecular dynamics to contribute new insights into dislocation-GB interactions through the study of numerous interactions occurring in a large variety of Ni bicrystals. Geometric attributes as well as stresses and energies are used to characterize the interactions. The major goal of the study is to understand and ultimately predict whether a given dislocation will transmit through a GB and if so, onto what slip system. We find, as others do, that dislocation-GB interactions are an extremely complex process. Despite this inherent difficulty, the following general conclusions can be made.
\noindent \emph{Prediction of Transmitted Slip Systems}
\begin{enumerate}
\item Transmissivity Factor (TF) predicts with reasonable accuracy the slip system for transmission; an accuracy of 67.4\% is obtained if only considering transmitted full dislocations and 55.8\% if transmitted partial dislocations are also considered.
\item The accuracy of the TF improves if used to only predict the slip plane of the transmitted dislocation, 73.3\% correct if only considering transmitted full dislocations and 74.4\% accurate if transmitted partials are also considered.
\item For the majority of transmitted dislocations, the TF is within 20\% of the maximum TF capable for the given dislocation-GB interaction.
\item RBV predicts well the slip direction for transmission. It correctly predicts the slip direction 72.1\% of the time when only full transmitted dislocations are considered, decreasing to 64.0\% when transmitted partials are included.
\item Predicting the slip system of a transmitted dislocation is more accurate when only considering full transmitted dislocations as possible transmitted dislocations. Past studies have focused solely on full dislocations \cite{Abuzaid:2012, Shen:1988, Livingston:1957, Dahlberg:2017}, though their reasoning for doing so is not discussed, but it may be due to the fact that they observed very little partial slip activity.
\item The TF can be used to predict the correct slip plane 89.1\% of the time and the RBV can be used to predict the correct slip direction 92.7\% of the time for a transmitted dislocation when only accounting for full incident dislocations that transmitted as full dislocations.
\item While no correlation betweeen event stresses of dislocation-GB interactions appear for the entire dataset, some consistency in event stresses for the same slip system over several GBs is observed.
\end{enumerate}
\noindent \emph{Prediction of Dislocation-GB Events}
\begin{enumerate}
\item The expected geometric trends in regards to transmission, e.g. increased transmission frequency for smaller disorientation angles, hold for a large variety of GBs.
\item Reflection of dislocations occurs more frequently at twist GBs than tilt GBs while the opposite is true of transmission. Both twist and tilt GBs are equally likely to absorb dislocations.
\item Partial dislocations are more likely to transmit than full dislocations; 53.5\% of partial dislocations transmit and 43.2\% of full dislocations transmit.
\item Twist GBs appear to have a GB energy barrier to transmission; approximately 950 mJ/m\textsuperscript{2} for the GBs studied here.
\item Utilizing machine learning to create a simple J48 decision tree, transmission can be correctly predicted 75.5\% of the time and absorption can be correctly predicted 77\% of the time. Reflection is not effectively predicted in this study.
\item The relative importance of the studied attributes influence on the interaction event is provided, also confirming that transmission favors low-angle GBs.
\item Improvements to predictive capabilities can be achieved by including more attributes in the model. This demonstrates the potential for a physics based model that can predict transmission/absorption.
\item Transmission can be reasonably predicted by knowing just the dislocation type of the incident dislocation (full vs partial) and the minimum RBV possible.
\item Although this study reveals important geometrical relationships between transmission and other dislocation-GB events, it does not do a good job of measuring stress and does not reveal conclusive relationships between RSS and the resulting event.
However, Figure \ref{fig:Event_Stress_vs_dis_vs_SS} reveals the potential for elucidating relationships between the incident slip system, the disorientation angle, and the given stress. A more carefully controlled study of the stresses involved, like \cite{Wyman:2017}, would need to be conducted for such relationships to be revealed.
\end{enumerate}
Although there remains much work to be done to fully understand dislocation-GB interactions, the current work offers new insights into attributes that affect the transmission of dislocations and the potential challenges in more accurately modeling such interactions.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
\label{sec6}
This work was funded by the U.S. Department of Energy grant number DE-SC0012587. The author also wishes to acknowledge the support provided by Ricky Wyman and Adam Herron and their vital contributions in the early stages of the project.
\section*{Data Availability}
\label{sec7}
The raw data required to reproduce these findings is not archived due to its inherently large size. The processed data required to reproduce these findings are available to download from \url{http://dx.doi.org/10.17632/m7k9fzwyyr.1}.
\bibliographystyle{elsarticle-num}
|
\section{Introduction}
It is well known that the would-be Cauchy horizon (CH) in asymptotically flat black holes (BHs) is a singular boundary \cite{Simpson:1973ua,Hartle,Poisson:1990eh}. The remnant fields of gravitational collapse have an inverse power-law decay behavior in the exterior
of asymptotically flat BHs \cite{Price1,Price2}, and will be amplified when propagating along the CH due to the
exponential blueshift effect occurring there. The gravitational collapse of matter fields cannot go beyond the CH to the timelike singularity in the eternal asymptotically flat BH, leading to the preservation of the deterministic power of physical laws and the Strong Cosmic Censorship (SCC) hypothesis, proposed by Penrose.
However, for de Sitter (dS) BH spacetimes, due to the change of the boundary conditions, remnant perturbation fields outside de Sitter BHs decay exponentially instead of polynomially \cite{Brady2, Brady3, Molina1, Abdalla1,Du:2004jt}. The extendibility of the metric at the CH depends delicately on the competition
between the exponential decay outside the BH and the exponential blueshift
amplification along the CH. In such a scenario, the decay of perturbations could be fast enough such that the CH singularity can be so weak that the spacetime metric will be extendible beyond it as a weak solution to the Einstein field equations \cite{Chris1}, meaning that SCC may be violated! Mathematically, it was proven \cite{Maeda1,Dafermos1,Costa1,Costa2,Costa3,Hintz1,Hintz2,Hintz3,Cardoso1} that SCC will not be respected under massless neutral scalar perturbations if the following condition is satisfied
\begin{equation}
\beta\equiv-\frac{\mathrm{Im}(\omega)}{\kappa_{-}}>\frac{1}{2},\label{eq15}
\end{equation}
where $\kappa_{-}$ is the surface gravity of the CH and $\mathrm{Im}(\omega)$ is the imaginary part of the lowest-lying/dominant quasinormal mode (QNM) of the perturbation in the external region of the BH.
In particular, for near-extremal Reissner-Nordstrom-de Sitter (RNdS) BHs, it was shown \cite{Cardoso1} that neutral massless scalar perturbations are extendible past the CH, since the blueshift amplification along the CH is dwarfed by the exponential decay behavior outside of the dS BH. Such a violation of SCC
becomes even more severe in the case of the coupled electromagnetic and gravitational perturbations \cite{Dias3}. Later on, it was shown that the violation of SCC can be alleviated by considering a sufficiently charged scalar field on the exterior of RNdS BHs \cite{Hod1,Cardoso2,Zhang1,Dias1}, although there was still a region in the parameter space where SCC may be violated. Similar results have been obtained for Dirac field perturbations \cite{Zhang2,Destounis1}. On the other hand, the nonlinear evolution of massive neutral scalar fields in RNdS space revealed that SCC might not be saved by such nonlinear effects \cite{Luna1}. In addition, by investigating SCC in lukewarm RNdS and Martnez-Troncoso-Zanelli (MTZ) BH spacetimes, under non-minimally coupled massive scalar perturbations, it was demonstrated that the validity of the hypothesis depends on the characteristics of the scalar field \cite{Gwak1}.
Besides charged BHs, SCC has been examined in Kerr-de Sitter BH backgrounds and interestingly enough no violation was found for linear scalar and gravitational perturbations \cite{Dias2}.
All available studies of SCC in RNdS BH backgrounds are limited in 4 dimensions even though it has been found that in higher dimensions, physics becomes richer. In contrast to the 4-dimensional results,
various instabilities have been found in higher-dimensional spacetimes. In a wide class of $d\geq 4$ configurations, such as black
strings and black branes, the Gregory-Laflamme instability against linear perturbations was discussed in
\cite{Gregory1, Gregory2}. For higher-dimensional BHs in the Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet theory, it was found
that instabilities occur for large angular quantum numbers $l$, while the lowest lying QNMs of the first few angular quantum numbers were found stable \cite{Konoplya2,Beroiz1}. In particular, numerical investigations have uncovered
the surprising result that RNdS BH backgrounds are unstable for $d\geq 7$, if the values of black hole mass and charge are large enough \cite{Konoplya1}, followed by the analytic confirmation of \cite{Cardoso3}. Moreover, it was argued that the Weak Cosmic Censorship hypothesis could be restored easier in higher dimensions \cite{Mken} by examining the gravitational collapse of spherically symmetric generalized Vaidya spacetimes.
It is, thus, of great interest to generalize the discussion of SCC to higher-dimensional RNdS BHs and explore whether and how they affect the validity of the conjecture.
\section{Scalar fields in higher-dimensional RNdS spacetime}
The $d$-dimensional RNdS spacetime is described by the metric \cite{Chabab1}
\begin{equation}
\label{dspace}
ds^2=-f(r)dt^2+\frac{1}{f(r)} dr^2+r^2 d\Omega_{d-2}^2,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{align}\label{metric}
f(r)=1-\frac{m}{r^{d-3}}+\frac{q^2}{r^{2(d-3)}}-\frac{2\Lambda}{(d-2)(d-1)}r^2,
\end{align}
and
\begin{equation}
\Lambda=\frac{(d-2)(d-1)}{2L^2}, \quad d\Omega^2_{d-2}=d\chi_2^2+\prod_{i=2}^{d-2}\sin^2\chi_i\, d\chi_{i+1}^2,
\end{equation}
in which $q$ and $m$ are related to the electric charge $Q$ and the ADM mass $M$ of the BH, and $L$ is the cosmological radius. $M$ and $Q$
are expressed as
\begin{equation}
M=\frac{d-2}{16\pi}\omega_{d-2}m,\quad Q=\frac{\sqrt{2(d-2)(d-3)}}{8\pi}\omega_{d-2}q,\quad \omega_{d}=\frac{2\pi^{\frac{d+1}{2}}}{\Gamma(\frac{d+1}{2})},
\end{equation}
with $\omega_{d}$ being the volume of the unit $d$-sphere. The causal structure of a sub-extremal $d$-dimensional BH described by (\ref{metric}) admits three distinct horizons, where $r_-<\,r_+<\, r_c$ are the Cauchy, event and cosmological horizon radius, respectively. We denote the extremal electric charge of the BH as $Q_{\text{max}}$ at which the CH and event horizon coincide. The maximal cosmological constant is denoted as $\Lambda_{\text{max}}$ for each dimension,\footnote{e.g. for $d=4$, $\Lambda_\text{max}=2/9$, for $d=5$, $\Lambda_\text{max}=3\pi/4$ and for $d=6$, $\Lambda_{\text{max}}=\left(648\pi^2/25\right)^{\frac{1}{3}}$ provided that the black hole mass is set to $M=1$.} meaning that if $\Lambda>\Lambda_{\text{max}}$ holds then the spacetime would admit at most one horizon with positive radius, thus rendering our discussion irrelevant. To ensure the existence of three distinct horizons, the cosmological constant must be restricted to $\Lambda<\Lambda_{\text{max}}$.
The surface gravity of each horizon is then
\begin{equation}
\label{surfGrav}
\kappa_h= \frac{1}{2}|f'(r_h)|\;\;,\; h\in\{-,+,c\}.
\end{equation}
The propagation of a neutral massless scalar field $\psi$ on a fixed $d$-dimensional RNdS background is described by the Klein-Gordon equation \cite{Berti:2009kk}. By expanding our field in terms of spherical harmonics
\begin{equation}
\psi=\sum_{lm}e^{-i\omega t}\frac{\phi(r)}{r^{\frac{d-2}{2}}}Y_{lm}(\chi)\label{eq3},
\end{equation}
we end up with the master equation
\begin{equation}
\frac{d^2\phi(r)}{dr_{\ast}^{2}}+(\omega^2-V_\text{eff})\phi(r)=0,\label{eq7}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
V_\text{eff}=f(r)\left(\frac{l(d+l-3)}{r^2}+\frac{(d-2)f'(r)}{2r}+\frac{f(r)(d-4)(d-2)}{4r^2}\right),\label{eq9}
\end{equation}
and $dr_{\ast}=\frac{dr}{f(r)}$ the tortoise coordinate. By imposing the boundary conditions
\begin{equation}\phi(r\rightarrow r_+)\sim e^{-i\omega r_*},\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\phi(r\rightarrow r_c)\sim e^{i\omega {r}_*},\label{eq4}
\end{equation}
we select a discrete set of quasinormal frequencies called QNMs. Due to the similarity of characteristics of (\ref{eq9}) and the effective potential for odd (Regge-Wheeler \cite{Regge}) and even (Zerilli \cite{Zerilli,Zerilli2}) gravitational perturbations, the study of massless neutral scalar fields propagating on spherically symmetric backgrounds is a good proxy for more physically relevant gravitational field perturbations.
As shown in Appendix \ref{appA}, for $d\geq 4$ the stability of the CH continues to be determined by (\ref{eq15}). The results shown in the following sections were obtained with the Mathematica package of \cite{Jansen:2017oag}, the asymptotic iteration method (AIM) \cite{AIM,Cho1}, and checked in various cases with a Wentzel-Kramers-Brillouin (WKB) approximation \cite{Iyer} and with a code developed based on the matrix method \cite{KaiLin1}.
\section{Dominant families of modes in higher-dimensional RNdS spacetime}
According to \cite{Cardoso1}, the region of interest in 4-dimensional RNdS, where violation of SCC may occur, lies close to extremality. There, the decay rate of perturbations in the exterior becomes comparable with the surface gravity of the CH $\kappa_-$ leading to $\beta>1/2$. We accumulate this result and scan the parameter space of higher-dimensional RNdS spacetimes for near-extremal parameters. By applying our numerics in the region of interest we discover three distinct families of modes.
The photon sphere (PS) is a spherical trapping region of space where gravity is strong enough that photons are forced to travel in unstable circular orbits around a BH. This region has a strong pull in the control of decay of perturbations and the QNMs with large frequencies. For instance, the decay timescale is related to the instability timescale of null geodesics near
the photon sphere. For asymptotically dS BHs, we find a family that can be traced back to the photon sphere and refer to them as PS modes. The dominant modes of this family are approached in the eikonal limit, where $l\rightarrow\infty$, and can be very well approximated with the WKB method (see Appendix \ref{appB}). For vanishing $\Lambda,\,Q$ they asymptote to the Schwarzschild BH QNMs in $d\geq 4$ dimensions. We find that $l=10$ provides a good approximation of the imaginary parts of the dominant modes which we depict in our plots with solid blue lines.
Our second family of modes, the BH de-Sitter (dS) family, corresponds to purely imaginary modes which can be very well approximated by the pure $d$-dimensional scalar dS QNMs \cite{Du:2004jt,LopezOrtega:2006my}:
\begin{align}
\label{dS1}
\omega_{\text{pure dS}}/\kappa_c^\text{dS}&=-i (l+2n),\\
\label{dS2}
\omega_{\text{pure dS}}/\kappa_c^\text{dS}&=-i (l+2n+d-1).
\end{align}
The dominant mode of this family ($n=0,\,l=1$) is almost identical to (\ref{dS1}) which we denote in our figures with red dashed lines. These modes are intriguing, in the sense that they have a surprisingly weak dependence on the BH charge and seem to be described by the surface gravity of $d$-dimensional dS $\kappa_c^{\text{dS}}=\sqrt{2\Lambda/(d-2)(d-1)}$ of
the cosmological horizon of pure $d$-dimensional dS space, as opposed
to that of the cosmological horizon in the RNdS BH under consideration.
Finally, as the CH approaches the event horizon, a new family of modes appears to dominate the dynamics. In the extremal limit of a $d$-dimensional RNdS BH the dominant ($n=l=0$) mode of this family approaches (see Appendix \ref{appC})
\begin{equation}
\label{NE}
\omega_\text{NE}=-i\kappa_{-}=-i\kappa_{+},
\end{equation}
where $\kappa_-,\,\kappa_+$ the surface gravity of the Cauchy and event horizon in $d$-dimensional RNdS spacetime. We call this family the near-extremal (NE) family of modes. Higher angular numbers $l$ admit larger (in absolute value) imaginary parts, thus rendered subdominant. In the asymptotically flat case, these modes seem to have been described analytically in the eikonal limit \cite{Zhang:2018jgj}.
\section{Strong Cosmic Censorship in higher-dimensional RNdS spacetime}
In Fig. \ref{beta} we depict the dominant modes of each of the previous families versus $\kappa_-$. We have chosen $d=4,\,5,$ and $6$-dimensional near-extremal RNdS BHs with various $\Lambda/\Lambda_\text{max}$. It is evident that for sufficiently "small" BHs\footnote{Usually we take $r_+/r_c$ to measure the size of small/big black hole, but in our discussion we compare black holes in different dimensions by fixing $\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}$ which has some connection with the size of black holes. It turns out that the value of $r_+/r_c$ would be notably influenced by $Q/Q_{\text{max}}$. On the other hand, if $Q/Q_{\text{max}}$ is fixed, one can find that the difference between $r_c$ and $r_+$ would increase with the decrease of $\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}$. For these reasons, the "small/large" black holes in this paper are only referred to black holes with small/large $\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}$.} (very small $\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}$), the increment of dimensions fortifies SCC for a larger region of the parameter space of $Q/Q_\text{max}$. On the other hand, for sufficiently "large" BHs (large $\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}$), the increment of dimensions work against the validity of SCC admitting violations for smaller $Q/Q_\text{max}$. To deepen into the understanding of this complex situation we denote the degree of difficulty of SCC violation with $d_4$ for $d=4$, $d_5$ for $d=5$ and $d_6$ for $d=6$. For example, for the case of $\Lambda/\Lambda_\text{max}=0.05$, the degree of difficulty of SCC violation follows $d_6>d_5>d_4$, meaning that 6-dimensional RNdS BHs require the highest BH charge to be violated. The second hardest BH to be violated is the 5-dimensional and, finally, the easiest to be violated is the 4-dimensional.
In the "intermediate" region, where $\Lambda/\Lambda_\text{max}$ is neither too small nor too large, the picture becomes obscured by the delicate interplay of the QNMs of the dominant PS and dS family. To that end, we have depicted two interesting cases. In the first case, for $\Lambda/\Lambda_\text{max}=0.15$, the degree of difficulty to violate SCC follows $d_6>d_4>d_5$, while in the second case for $\Lambda/\Lambda_\text{max}=0.25$ we have $d_4>d_6>d_5$. This perplex picture appears due to the opposite behavior that the dominant PS and dS family possess. As shown in Fig. \ref{beta}, higher dimensions oblige $\beta_\text{PS}$, as it gets determined by the dominant modes of the PS family ($l=10$), to move upwards in the plots, thus becoming subdominant, while $\beta_\text{dS}$, as it gets determined by the dominant modes of the dS family ($l=1$), moves downwards. On the other hand, the increment of $\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}$ has the opposite effect on these families as expected by \cite{Cardoso1}. It is easy to realize (see the pattern in Fig. \ref{beta}) that the inclusion of even higher than 6 dimensions will make the picture of "intermediate" and "large" BHs even richer and much more perplex\footnote{E.g. for $\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}=0.4$ we can see that if $d=7$ or 8 where to be included, then the dS family would eventually dominate for such dimensions, thus changing the picture into a richer version of $\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}=0.15$ or $0.25$.}. The only solid case is the one for "small" BHs. There, $\beta$ is essentially (for the largest part of the parameter space) determined by the dominant modes of the dS family which will become even more dominant for increasing dimensions if no new families or instabilities occur in $d>6$ dimensions.\footnote{It is natural to question whether more slowly decaying modes might appear in the dimensions considered. For this purpose, we have used calculations of very high accuracy to rule out the possibility of lost dominant modes. This means that, if more families do exist, they should be subdominant thus are irrelevant for SCC.}
To distinguish between "small", "intermediate" and "large" BHs, we scan thoroughly the parameter space of $d=4,\,5$ and 6-dimensional RNdS BHs to find critical values of $\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}$ where different violation configurations are introduced. We find 3 critical values which divide the range of $0<\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}\leq 1$ into 4 regions. In Table \ref{table2}, we summarize the division of our parameter space into the regions of interest and display the degree of difficulty of SCC violation at each region. We realize that region I corresponds to "large" BHs, regions II and III correspond to "intermediate" BHs and, finally, region IV corresponds to "small" BHs. These regions can be directly seen in Fig. \ref{beta} and arise due to the existence and competition between the dominant PS and dS family, as discussed above.
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{||c|c||}
\hline
parameter regions & degree of difficulty of SCC violation\\
\hline
\text{\bf I.\,\,}$\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}\gtrsim 0.279$ & $d_4>d_5>d_6$ \\
\hline
\text{\bf II.\,\,}$0.179\lesssim\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}\lesssim 0.279$ & $d_4>d_6>d_5$ \\
\hline
\text{\bf III.\,\,}$0.135\lesssim\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}\lesssim 0.179$ & $d_6>d_4>d_5$\\
\hline
\text{\bf IV.\,\,\,}$\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}\lesssim 0.135$ & $d_6>d_5>d_4$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Comparison of $\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}$ with respect to the degree of difficulty of SCC violation in $d=4,\,5$ and 6-dimensional RNdS BHs.
\label{table2}}
\end{table}
In any case, we clearly see that $\beta>1/2$ above some value of the BH charge, no matter the choice of the cosmological constant. This leads to CHs which upon scalar perturbations maintain enough regularity for the scalar field (and thus the metric) to be extendible past it, resulting to a potential violation of SCC. Moreover, if it was up to the PS and dS family, $\beta$ would always diverge at extremality. However, the dominant modes of the NE family ($l=n=0$) will always take over to keep $\beta$ below 1.
\begin{figure}[thbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=1.55in,width=2.15in]{d4L005}
\hskip -4.5ex
\includegraphics[height=1.55in,width=2.15in]{d5L005}
\hskip -4.5ex
\includegraphics[height=1.55in,width=2.15in]{d6L005}
\vskip -4ex
\includegraphics[height=1.55in,width=2.15in]{d4L015}
\hskip -4.5ex
\includegraphics[height=1.55in,width=2.15in]{d5L015}
\hskip -4.5ex
\includegraphics[height=1.55in,width=2.15in]{d6L015}
\vskip -4ex
\includegraphics[height=1.55in,width=2.15in]{d4L025}
\hskip -4.5ex
\includegraphics[height=1.55in,width=2.15in]{d5L025}
\hskip -4.5ex
\includegraphics[height=1.55in,width=2.15in]{d6L025}
\vskip -4ex
\includegraphics[height=1.55in,width=2.15in]{d4L04}
\hskip -4.5ex
\includegraphics[height=1.55in,width=2.15in]{d5L04}
\hskip -4.5ex
\includegraphics[height=1.55in,width=2.15in]{d6L04}
\vskip -4ex
\includegraphics[height=1.54in,width=2.14in]{d4L08}
\hskip -4.5ex
\includegraphics[height=1.54in,width=2.14in]{d5L08}
\hskip -4.5ex
\includegraphics[height=1.54in,width=2.14in]{d6L08}
\caption{Dominant modes of different families, showing the (nearly) dominant complex PS mode (blue, solid) at $l=10$, the dominant BH dS mode (red, dashed) at $l=1$ and the dominant NE mode (green, dashed) at $l=0$ for $d=4,\,5$ and $6$-dimensional RNdS spacetime with $M=1$. The two dashed vertical lines designate the points where $\beta=-\text{Im}(\omega)/\kappa_-=1/2$ and where the NE mode becomes dominant. The dS family in the final row of plots is too subdominant, thus lying outside of the region of interest.}
\label{beta}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions and Discussions}
The studies of \cite{Costa3,Hintz1,Hintz3} indicate that the stability of the CH in asymptotically dS spacetimes is governed by $\beta$ defined in (\ref{eq15}). Subsequently, the results of \cite{Cardoso1} indicate a potential failure of determinism in General Relativity when near-extremal 4-dimensional RNdS BHs are considered. Under massless neutral scalar perturbations, the CH might seem singular, due to the blow-up of curvature components, but maintain enough regularity as to allow the field equations to be extended beyond a region where the evolution of gravitation is classically determined in a highly non-unique manner.
Here, we extend our study to higher-dimensional RNdS BHs and find that the same picture occurs when scalar fields are considered. We have proven that (\ref{eq15}) remains unchanged for $d$-dimensions. By inferring to $d=4,\,5$ and 6-dimensional RNdS BHs we realize that the introduction of higher dimensions will fortify SCC for sufficiently "small" BHs ($\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}\lesssim 0.135$), by the introduction of higher BH charges beyond which $\beta>1/2$. Moreover, we observe that "intermediate" and "large" BHs ($\Lambda/\Lambda_{\text{max}}\gtrsim 0.135$) possess a much more complex picture with some dimensions being preferred over others to fortify SCC. This perplexity arises due to the delicate competition of the PS and dS family of modes. Even though for "large" BHs we see that the preferred dimension to fortify SCC, with higher $Q/Q_\text{max}$ beyond which $\beta>1/2$, is $d=4$, we understand that the introduction of even higher than 6 dimensions will eventually change the picture due to the behavior of the dS family demonstrated in Fig. \ref{beta}, if no instabilities occur in our region of interest \cite{Konoplya1}.
In any case, we can always find a region in the parameter space of the higher-dimensional RNdS BHs in study for which $\beta$ exceeds $1/2$, but still not exceeding unity\footnote{$\beta>1$ would correspond to extensions of the scalar field in $C^1$ at the CH, thus the coupling to gravity should lead to the existence of solutions with bounded curvature.}. This still leaves as with CHs which upon perturbations might seem singular, due to the blow-up of curvature components, but that doesn't imply the breakdown of Einstein's field equations \cite{Klainerman:2012wt} nor the destruction of macroscopic observers \cite{Ori} at the CH.
It is important to mention that SCC in higher-dimensional RNdS spacetime was also discussed in \cite{Rahman}, with a wishful premise that the large $l$ mode always dominates, i.e., the value of $\beta$ always decreases monotonously with the increase of angular number $l$. However, this is not the case, as we have seen in Fig. \ref{beta}, due to the existence of three different families of modes. In fact, the existence of more families highly affects $\beta$ according to the choice of our cosmological constant and the dimensions of our spacetime, thus rendering the study in \cite{Rahman} incomplete.
{\bf Note added:} An updated version of \cite{Rahman} was published recently. In the new modified version, their improved results are in agreement with ours, thus confirming our findings.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We are grateful to Zhen Zhong for his helpful discussions in the early stage of this project. This work is partially supported by NSFC with Grant No.11475179, No. 11675015, No. 11775022, and No. 11875095 as well as by FWO-Vlaanderen through the project G020714N, G044016N, and G006918N. BW acknowledges the support by NSFC with Grant No.11575109. HZ is an individual FWO Fellow supported by 12G3515N and by the Vrije Universiteit Brussel through the Strategic Research Program High-Energy Physics. KD acknowledges financial support provided under the European Union's H2020 ERC Consolidator Grant "Matter and strong-field gravity: New frontiers in Einstein's theory" grant agreement no. MaGRaTh--646597. KD, also, acknowledges networking support by the GWverse COST Action CA16104, "Black holes, gravitational waves and fundamental physics".
\begin{appendix}
\section{The definition of $\beta$ in higher-dimensional spherically symmetric spacetimes}\label{appA}
In \cite{Cardoso2,Destounis1} a justification of searching for $\beta>1/2$ was provided, leading to potential violation of SCC in 4-dimensional RNdS BHs under charged scalar and fermionic perturbations. Here, we prove that the same holds for neutral massless scalar perturbations in $d$-dimensional RNdS spacetime. To determine the regularity of the metric up to the CH we study the regularity of QNMs at the CH. To do so, we change to outgoing Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates which are regular there. The outgoing Eddington-Finkelstein coordinates are obtained by replacing $t$ with $u=t-r_*$ in (\ref{dspace}) to get
\begin{equation}
\label{outgoing}
ds^2=-f(r)du^2-2du dr +r^2d\Omega_{d-2}^2.
\end{equation}
By expanding the Klein-Gordon equation
\begin{equation}
\Box\psi=0,
\end{equation}
we get $P\psi=0$ where the operator $P$ reads
\begin{equation}
\label{int1}
P\psi=-2\partial_u\partial_r\psi-\frac{d-2}{r}\partial_u\psi+\frac{1}{r^{d-2}}\partial_r\left(f r^{d-2}\partial_r\psi\right)+\frac{\Delta_{\Omega_{d-2}}}{r^{d-2}}\psi,
\end{equation}
where $\Delta_{\Omega_{d-2}}$ the Laplace-Beltrami operator \cite{Berti:2009kk}. By acting on mode solutions of the form $\psi\sim e^{-i\omega u} \phi$ we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{int}
f P\psi=2i\omega f\partial_r\phi +\frac{i\omega(d-2)}{r^{d-2}}f\phi+\frac{1}{r^{d-2}}f\partial_r\left(f r^{d-2}\partial_r\phi\right)+\frac{\Delta_{\Omega_{d-2}}}{r^{d-2}}f\phi.
\end{equation}
It can be shown that the mode solutions of (\ref{int}) are conormal at $r=r_-$, meaning that they grow at the same rate $|r-r_-|^\lambda$. Thus, if $\phi\sim|r-r_-|^\lambda$ then the second and last term have higher regularity than the rest, since $f \sim |r-r_-|$ near the CH. This means that these terms can be neglected, which leads to a regular-singular ordinary differential equation near $r=r_-$ of the form $\tilde{P}\phi=fP\phi=0$ with the operator
\begin{equation}
\label{operator}
\tilde{P}=2i\omega f\partial_r+\left(f\partial_r\right)^2.
\end{equation}
It is convenient to use $f$ as a radial coordinate instead of $r$, so $\partial_r=f^\prime\partial_f=f^\prime(r_-)\partial_f$ near the CH modulo irrelevant terms. Moreover, the surface gravity at the CH is $\kappa_-=-f^\prime(r_-)/2$ so $f\partial_r=-2\kappa_-(f\partial_f)$. Thus, (\ref{operator}) becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{indicial}
\frac{\tilde{P}}{4\kappa_-^2}=(f\partial_f)^2-\frac{i\omega}{\kappa_-}\left(f\partial_f\right)=f\partial_f\left(f\partial_f-\frac{i\omega}{\kappa_-}\right).
\end{equation}
It remains to calculate the allowed growth rates $\lambda$, i.e. indicial roots of the differential operator (\ref{indicial}). Acting with $|f|^\lambda$ we get
\begin{equation}
\label{polynomial}
\frac{{P}}{4\kappa_-^2}|f|^\lambda=\lambda\left(\lambda-\frac{i\omega}{\kappa_-}\right)|f|^\lambda.
\end{equation}
The indicial roots are the roots of the quadratic polynomial (\ref{polynomial}), namely
\begin{equation}
\lambda_1=0,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\lambda_2=\frac{i\omega}{\kappa_-}.
\end{equation}
The root $\lambda_1=0$ corresponds to mode solutions which are approximately constant, i.e. remain smooth at the CH and are irrelevant for SCC, while $\lambda_2$ corresponds to asymptotics
\begin{equation}
|f|^{\lambda_2}\sim|r-r_-|^{\frac{i\omega}{\kappa_-}}.
\end{equation}
If we consider QNMs of the form $\omega=\omega_R-i\omega_I$ then
\begin{equation}
|f|^{\lambda_2}\sim|r-r_-|^\frac{\omega_I}{\kappa_-}|r-r_-|^\frac{i\omega_R}{\kappa_-}.
\end{equation}
The second factor is purely oscillatory, so the only relevant factor for SCC is $|r-r_-|^\frac{\alpha}{\kappa_-}$ with $\alpha:=-\text{Im}({\omega})$ the spectral gap defined in \cite{Cardoso1}. This function lies in the Sobolev space $H^s$ for all $s<\frac{1}{2}+\frac{\alpha}{\kappa_-}$.
Since we are considering scalar fields, we require locally
square integrable gradient of the scalar field at the CH\footnote{The energy-momentum tensor for scalar fields is $T_{\mu\nu}\sim \partial_\mu\psi\partial_\nu\psi$ which with proper manipulation can be bounded by squares of the gradient of $\psi$.}, i.e., the mode solutions should belong to the Sobolev space $H^1_\text{loc}$ for the Einstein's field equations to be satisfied weakly at the CH. This justifies our search for $\beta=-\text{Im}(\omega)/\kappa_->1/2$.
\section{WKB approximation of the dominant photon sphere modes}\label{appB}
The WKB method can provide accurate approximation of QNMs in the eikonal limit. The QNMs of BHs in the eikonical limit under massless scalar perturbations are related to the Lyapunov exponent $\lambda$ of the null unstable geodesic, which is inversely-proportional to the instability timescale associated with the geodesic motion of null particles near the photon sphere. For $d$-dimensions we have \cite{Cardoso4}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\omega_\text{WKB}&=l\sqrt{\frac{f(r_s)}{r_s^2}}-i\left(n+\frac{1}{2}\right)\sqrt{-\frac{1}{2}\frac{r_s^2}{f(r_s)}\left(\frac{d^2}{dr_\ast^2}\frac{f(r)}{r^2}\right)_{r_s}}\\
&=\Omega_c l-i\left(n+\frac{1}{2}\right)\left|\lambda\right|,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where $r_s$ is the radius of the null circular geodesic, and $\Omega_c$ the coordinate angular velocity of the geodesic. By focusing on the modes with overtone number $n=0$, we have $\beta=\left|\lambda\right|/{2\kappa_-}$ for the dominant PS modes at the eikonical limit.
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{||c|c|c|c||}
\hline
$\beta_\text{PS}$& $d=4$& $d=5$&$d=6$\\
\hline
$\beta_\text{WKB}\,\,\,\,\,\,(l\rightarrow\infty)$&0.328192 & 0.687518 & 0.775677\\
\hline
$\beta_\text{AIM}\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,(l=10)$&0.328304& 0.689089 & 0.778164\\
\hline
$\beta_\text{spectral} \,(l=10)$& 0.328304&0.689089&0.778164\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Comparison of $\beta_\text{PS}$ obtained with WKB, AIM and a spectral method for a RNdS BH with $M=\frac{1}{3\sqrt{2}}$, $\Lambda=3$ and $Q/Q_\text{max}=0.992$.}\label{table1}
\end{table}
In Table \ref{table1}, we compare the value of $\beta$ obtained by AIM and the spectral method \cite{Jansen:2017oag} at $l=10$ and the value evaluated by the WKB method at large $l$ for the same BH parameters. We observe that the difference between $\beta_\text{WKB}$, $\beta_\text{spectral}$ and $\beta_\text{AIM}$ is very small, meaning that the choice of $l=10$ in our numerics can be regarded as a good approximation of $\beta_\text{WKB}$ of the dominant PS modes at the large $l$ limit.
\section{Approximation of the dominant near-extremal modes}\label{appC}
In \cite{Hod:2017gvn} it has been proven that long-lived modes (or quasi-bound states) can be supported by a 4-dimensional near-extremal RN BH. In \cite{Cardoso1} it was realized that this family of modes exist in near-extremal RNdS BHs and is weakly dependent on the choice of $\Lambda$. Particularly, for neutral massless scalar fields, these modes can be very well approximated as
\begin{equation}
\omega_\text{d=4,NE}=-i(l+n+1)\kappa_-=-i(l+n+1)\kappa_+
\end{equation}
when $r_-=r_+$. Motivated by this result, we realize that for any dimension the dominant NE modes should be approximated by Eq. (\ref{NE}). For the sake of proving the validity of our approximate results, in Table \ref{table3} we show various dominant NE modes extracted from our spectral code versus the approximate Eq. (\ref{NE}). Higher overtones and angular numbers are not approximated by (\ref{NE}) anymore, but in any case, they are subdominant, thus they do not play any role for SCC.
\begin{table}[!htbp]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{||c|c|c|c||}
\hline
$\beta_\text{NE}$& $d=4$& $d=5$& $d=6$\\
\hline
$\beta_\text{approx}$&1 & 1 & 1\\
\hline
$\beta_\text{spectral}\,\,(l=n=0)$& 0.996&0.997&0.999\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Comparison of $\beta_\text{approx}$ derived from (\ref{NE}) versus $\beta_\text{spectral}$ obtained with a spectral method for a $d$-dimensional RNdS BH with $M=1$, $\Lambda=0.1$ and $Q/Q_\text{max}=0.999999$.}\label{table3}
\end{table}
\end{appendix}
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sec:intro}
The evolution of molecular clouds and their ability to form stars is a fundamental process in astrophysics, shaping the stellar populations and galaxies that populate the Universe. Over the past decades, star formation within molecular clouds has been studied in extensive detail in the solar neighbourhood, the Galactic disc, and the Magellanic Clouds (see e.g.~\citealt{kennicutt12} for a review). However, when considered in a cosmological context, this range of environments is extremely limited and unrepresentative of the conditions under which most stars in the Universe formed. For instance, the gas densities, pressures, and velocity dispersions in these local-Universe environments \citep[e.g.][]{heyer15} are factors-of-several to orders of magnitude lower than at the time of the peak cosmic star formation history \citep[e.g.][]{swinbank12}.
Thanks to major Galactic plane surveys across a wide wavelength range \citep[e.g.][]{oka98,schuller09,schuller17,molinari10b,bally10,aguirre11,walsh11,purcell12,jones12,ginsburg13,jackson13,krieger17,longmore17}, as well as the arrival of the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA), it is now possible to study cloud evolution and star formation near the Galactic Centre, i.e.~in the Central Molecular Zone (CMZ, the central $\sim500~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$) of the Milky Way. This represents a major extension of the conditions probed traditionally and is crucial for a fundamental understanding of cloud evolution and star formation for the following reasons.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
The gas densities \citep[e.g.][]{bally87,rathborne15}, pressures \citep[e.g.][]{oka01,rathborne14b}, temperatures \citep[e.g.][]{huettemeister93,ao13,mills13,ginsburg16,krieger17}, and velocity dispersions \citep[e.g.][]{shetty12,henshaw16,kauffmann17} of CMZ clouds are similar to those in high-redshift galaxies at the time of the peak cosmic star formation rate \citep{kruijssen13c}. Insights drawn from star formation within CMZ clouds are thus likely to be more representative for how most stars in the Universe formed than those from solar neighbourhood studies.
\item
The evolution of CMZ clouds and their ability to form stars has been suggested to be closely coupled to galactic (and orbital) dynamics and strong shearing motions \citep{longmore13b,kruijssen14b,krumholz15,federrath16,meidt18b}. This close relation may give rise to episodic star formation \citep[e.g.][]{krumholz17} and places the current CMZ near a star formation minimum, plausibly explaining why the CMZ has an unusually low star formation efficiency \citep[also see \citealt{guesten83,taylor93,kauffmann13,kauffmann17,lu19}]{longmore13,barnes17}. A similar underproduction of stars per unit `dense' ($\rho\ga10^4~\mbox{${\rm cm}^{-3}$}$) gas has recently been found in extragalactic centres \citep{usero15,bigiel16,gallagher18}, implying that the results found for the Galactic CMZ also extend to other galaxies. The relation between star formation activity and galactic dynamics may play an important role in setting the bottlenecks (or avenues) towards feeding supermassive black holes in galactic nuclei \citep[e.g.][]{kruijssen17} and may apply more generally to galactic discs \citep[e.g.][]{meidt18}. The highly dynamical environment of the CMZ provides the best opportunity for characterising the pertinent physics, especially thanks to its close proximity.
\item
A subset of the CMZ clouds, i.e.~the `dust ridge' (\citealt{lis94}, also see Section~\ref{sec:maps}), may follow an absolute evolutionary time sequence, potentially providing the unique opportunity of studying cloud evolution, star formation, and feedback as a function of absolute time \citep[e.g.][]{longmore13b}. A variety of recent papers have shown that the gas in the inner CMZ ($R<120~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$) is situated on a stream that follows an eccentric orbit \citep{molinari11,kruijssen15,henshaw16} and marks the transition from highly supervirial gas at larger radii to nearly virialised gas on the stream \citep[e.g.][]{kruijssen14b,walker15,henshaw16b,kauffmann17b}. Similar structures are found in extragalactic observations \citep[e.g.][]{peeples06} and numerical simulations of galactic centres \citep{emsellem15,sormani18}. The tidal field at the radii spanned by this `100-pc stream' is fully compressive due to the steep slope of the enclosed mass distribution \citep{kruijssen15}.\footnote{Appendix~A of \citet{kruijssen15} shows that the enclosed stellar mass $\mbox{$M_{\rm encl}$}\propto r^{2.2}$ for the galactocentric radii of interest, yielding a radial tidal force of $T_{rr}=-\partial/\partial r (G\mbox{$M_{\rm encl}$}/r^2)=-0.2G\mbox{$M_{\rm encl}$}/r^3<0$. The azimuthal and vertical tidal forces are more compressive by definition in axisymmetric potentials.} The strength of this tidal compression peaks when clouds pass through pericentre, which has led to the suggestion that the pericentre passage may nudge the clouds into gravitational collapse as they condense out of the supervirial, diffuse medium \citep{longmore13b,rathborne14,kruijssen15}. This idea is supported by observations showing trends of increasing gas temperatures \citep{ginsburg16,krieger17} and possibly star formation activity \citep{immer12b,schmiedeke16,barnes17,walker18,ginsburg18} after pericentre passage, as well as by theoretical results showing that epicyclic perturbations (i.e.~pericentre passages) may influence cloud evolution in the CMZ prior to gravitational free-fall taking over \citep{jeffreson18b}. If true, these results have the major implication that the position along the 100-pc stream is an indicator of evolutionary age. However, such evolutionary sequences along the 100-pc stream are not always monotonic \citep{kauffmann17b}, prompting the question whether deviations from monotonicity may reflect differences in initial conditions \citep{kruijssen17}, or if other events may induce cloud collapse and subsequent star formation.
\end{enumerate}
In this paper, we present hydrodynamical simulations of gas clouds on the best-fitting orbit of the 100-pc stream from \citet{kruijssen15}. There exists a rich literature on simulations of isolated clouds, but studies on the evolution of single clouds in external potentials are limited in number. We discuss in detail how the gravitational potential and the pericentre passage affect the morphology and kinematics of the simulated clouds and compare the results to observed CMZ clouds. This way, we characterise the interplay between orbital dynamics and cloud evolution in the CMZ and find that the arrival of gas onto the 100-pc stream and its subsequent pericentre passage mark a transformational event that reproduces several key features of observed CMZ clouds. In a companion paper \citep{dale19}, we present the simulations in detail, discuss the general properties of clouds orbiting in external potentials relative to several control experiments, and investigate how the external potential affects the star formation activity of the orbiting clouds.
\section{Numerical simulations of gas clouds on an eccentric orbit in the CMZ potential} \label{sec:sims}
\subsection{Summary of the numerical model} \label{sec:model}
We carry out simulations of massive gas clouds in the CMZ environment \citep{dale19} using the state-of-the-art smoothed particle hydrodynamics (SPH) code {\sc gandalf} \citep{hubber18}. The simulations considered here include self-gravity using an octal tree, as well as hydrodynamics and artificial viscosity \citep{monaghan97}, with the gas following a barytropic equation of state with a critical density of $2.5\times10^7~\mbox{${\rm cm}^{-3}$}$ (assuming a mean molecular weight per particle of $\mu_{\rm p}=2.35$). Gas above a density of $2.5\times10^6~\mbox{${\rm cm}^{-3}$}$ is converted into sink particles, implying that the effective equation of state is isothermal, with an adopted temperature of $T=65~{\rm K}$ to represent the high temperature of CMZ gas \citep[e.g.][]{ao13,ginsburg16,krieger17}. At the adopted numerical resolution (see below), these sink particles do not represent individual stars, but stellar subclusters. We assign no further physical meaning to these particles, because we are interested in following the large-scale morphology and kinematics of the clouds. The sink particles are only included to prevent the simulations from reaching excessively high (and computationally costly) densities.
The presented simulations do not include stellar feedback or magnetic fields, because we aim to study the pure gravo-hydrodynamics of gas clouds on an eccentric orbit around the Galactic Centre. These mechanisms would act to slow down or truncate star formation. As a result, the simulated clouds will always collapse to form stars at an efficiency much higher than observed or obtained by simulations that do include feedback and/or magnetic fields. While the present paper does not report on any of the star formation characteristics of the simulations, we quantify the relative influence of orbital dynamics on the star formation efficiency in \citet{dale19}.
The full suite of simulations presented in \citet{dale19} contains 36 models of $10^6$ SPH particles each, consisting of 12 different sets of initial conditions followed in three different tidal environments. Here we consider a total of 5 different simulations that represent the subset of `tidally-virialised' clouds from \citet[also see below]{dale19} and are moving on the \citet{kruijssen15} orbit in the gravitational potential generated by the mass distribution from \citet{launhardt02}, with a vertical flattening parameter $q_\Phi=0.63$ (see Appendix~A of \citealt{kruijssen15}). For comparison, we also consider five `control runs', in which the clouds are moving on a circular orbit in the same background potential. These simulations follow the evolution of spherical clouds with a Gaussian initial density profile, which we truncate at the radius $R_{\rm t}$, where the local volume density has dropped to 5~per~cent of the central value (corresponding to 2.45 standard deviations or 1.70 times the half-mass radius $R_{\rm h}$ of the truncated Gaussian). The clouds have a divergence-free initial turbulent velocity field, i.e.~without any net compression or expansion. We have carried out several random realisations of the velocity field and select the one with a net angular velocity opposite to the orbital motion of $1~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}^{-1}$. This way, the spin angular momentum and angular velocity are roughly consistent with what a cloud would have if it were given an infinitesimal perturbation to induce its contraction towards its centre of mass within the shearing interstellar medium in the CMZ potential (cf.~its shear-driven angular velocity of $r{\rm d}\Omega/{\rm d}r\approx-0.7~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}^{-1}$, caused by the fact that the circular velocity increases sub-linearly with galactocentric radius). This is also consistent with the regular spacing of clouds observed on the 100-pc stream \citep{henshaw16b}.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{77mm}
\caption{Initial conditions of the simulations.}
\label{tab:ics}
\begin{tabular} {@{}lccccccc@{}}
\hline
Simulation & $M$ & $R_{\rm t}$ & $\sigma$ & $\mbox{$\alpha_{\rm vir}$}$ & $\rho$ & $\Sigma$ & $\mbox{$t_{\rm ff}$}$ \\
\hline
fiducial & 7.7 & 13.6 & 24.1 & 9.4 & 1.3 & 1.3 & 0.94 \\
low density & 13.4 & 23.5 & 41.2 & 27.4 & 0.4 & 0.8 & 1.63 \\
high density & 4.5 & 7.8 & 13.9 & 3.1 & 3.8 & 2.3 & 0.54 \\
low vel.~disp. & 1.0 & 6.8 & 12.1 & 9.4 & 1.3 & 0.7 & 0.94 \\
high vel.~disp. & 26.1 & 20.4 & 36.2 & 9.4 & 1.3 & 2.0 & 0.94 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
Note: All listed quantities are evaluated over the full volume of the clouds, i.e.~out to the truncation radius $R_{\rm t}$, which is about 1.7 times the half-mass radius. Units: $M$ in $10^5~\mbox{M$_\odot$}$, $R_{\rm t}$ in $\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$, $\sigma$ in $\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}$, $\rho$ in $10^3~\mbox{${\rm cm}^{-3}$}$, $\Sigma$ in $10^3~\mbox{M$_\odot$}~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}^2$, and $\mbox{$t_{\rm ff}$}$ in $\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$.
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
The global properties of the clouds are uniquely set by the mean volume density $\rho$, virial parameter $\mbox{$\alpha_{\rm vir}$}\equiv 2T/|V|$ (with $T$ the kinetic energy and $V$ the gravitational potential energy),\footnote{For this definition, virial equilibrium is achieved at $\mbox{$\alpha_{\rm vir}$}=1$.} and velocity dispersion $\sigma$, implying that the masses and radii vary. We first generate clouds with $\rho=\{0.4, 1.3, 3.8\}\times10^3~\mbox{${\rm cm}^{-3}$}$, $\mbox{$\alpha_{\rm vir}$}=\{0.87, 2.6, 7.8\}$, and $\sigma=\{6.3, 12.7, 19.0\}~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}$, with the intermediate values representing the fiducial model (these choices are justified below). Relative to the fiducial model, we obtain six non-fiducial models by changing one parameter at a time. All non-fiducial models are derived from the fiducial model by scaling the particle masses, as well as their position and velocity vectors, such that the resulting set of initial conditions is homologous. We then isotropically adjust the velocity dispersions such that the internal turbulent energy balances the compressive tidal energy due to the background potential. Without such a `tidal virialisation' (as in the `self-virialised' models of \citealt{dale19}) by elevating the turbulent velocity dispersion and the corresponding virial ratio, the clouds undergo rapid gravitational collapse. This tidal virialisation fixes the virial parameter, because it becomes inversely related to the cloud density, thus leaving us with five models in total. The resulting initial velocity dispersions and virial parameters of the clouds span $\sigma=12.1$--$41.2~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}$ and $\mbox{$\alpha_{\rm vir}$}=3.1$--$27.4$. All parameters describing the initial conditions are summarised in \autoref{tab:ics}.
The initial column and volume densities are chosen to be similar to those observed in the CMZ upstream of the dust ridge (at $-0\fdg7<l<0\fdg0$ and $-0\fdg1<b<0\fdg1$), which are thought to have recently condensed out of the diffuse medium \citep{henshaw16b}, spanning $\Sigma=0.5$--$1.5\times10^3~\mbox{M$_\odot$}~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}^{-2}$ and $\rho=2$--$7\times10^3~\mbox{${\rm cm}^{-3}$}$, respectively \citep{henshaw17}. While these densities are already similar to those used in our initial conditions, it is important to note that these observations probe projected radii smaller by a factor of $\sim7$. Using the observed size-linewidth relation $\sigma\propto R^{0.7}$ \citep[e.g.][]{shetty12,kauffmann17} and assuming virial equilibrium ($M\propto R\sigma^2$), we expect that $\Sigma\propto R^{0.4}$ and $\rho\propto R^{-0.6}$. Extrapolating the densities of all clouds from \citet{henshaw17} to the spatial scales of the simulated clouds, we obtain $\Sigma=0.8$--$3.3\times10^3~\mbox{M$_\odot$}~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}^{-2}$ and $\rho=0.6$--$3.2\times10^3~\mbox{${\rm cm}^{-3}$}$, in excellent agreement with \autoref{tab:ics}. Similarly, the velocity dispersions are consistent with the observed size-linewidth relation \citep[e.g.][]{shetty12,kruijssen13c,kauffmann17}, which at the radii listed in \autoref{tab:ics} require $\sigma=5$--$40~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}$. Again, this matches the range spanned by our set of initial conditions, indicating that the simulations capture the full range of physical conditions observed upstream of the dust ridge.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{64mm}
\caption{Simulations, snapshots, and corresponding orbital positions in the \citet{kruijssen15} model used for generating \autoref{fig:map}.}
\label{tab:snaps}
\begin{tabular} {@{}lcccc@{}}
\hline
Cloud & Simulation & $t-t_0$ & $l_{\rm orb}$ & $b_{\rm orb}$ \\
& & [$\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$] & [$\degr$] & [$\degr$] \\
\hline
Pebble & low density & 0.58 & 0.04 & 0.03 \\
Brick & high density & 0.74 & 0.25 & 0.02 \\
Clouds c/d & low vel.~disp. & 0.84 & 0.37 & 0.01 \\
Clouds e/f & fiducial & 0.87 & 0.41 & 0.01 \\
Sgr B2 & high vel.~disp. & 1.14 & 0.64 & $-$0.05 \\
Sgr B2+ & fiducial & 1.27 & 0.71 & $-$0.07 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
Note: The simulated clouds' centres of mass may deviate from the above orbital $\{l,b\}$ coordinates by up to $0\fdg06$, depending on their spatial extent and fragmentation. The time $t_0$ indicates the time at which the simulations start, such that $t-t_0$ represents the time since the beginning of the simulations.
\end{minipage}
\end{table}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.98\hsize]{figures/colours.pdf}%
\vspace{-2mm}\caption{
\label{fig:colours}
Illustration of how the simulations in the $\{l,b\}$ plane at several different snapshots are combined to represent the observed `dust ridge' of the Galactic CMZ (see the text). The colours highlight how this map is constructed from the different simulations listed in \autoref{tab:ics}, using the snapshots listed in \autoref{tab:snaps}. Specifically, \{red, green, blue, grey, purple\} indicates the \{fiducial, low density, high density, low velocity dispersion, high velocity dispersion\} simulation. The resulting composite column density maps are shown in \autoref{fig:map}. For reference, the annotations show the locations of various {\it observed} dust ridge clouds.
}
\end{figure*}
We deliberately model clouds with masses higher than those of most of the observed CMZ clouds, so that we can model the condensation of such clouds out of a more extended gas reservoir \citep[cf.][]{henshaw16b}. We initialise the clouds shortly after the apocentre passage preceding the dust ridge in the \citet{kruijssen15} model, at coordinates $\{l,b\}=\{-0\fdg65,-0\fdg07\}$ and a radius of $r_0=90~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$ \citep[corresponding to $t_0=-2.46~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$ in Appendix~C of][]{kruijssen15}. Each simulation then follows a single cloud through pericentre, across the dust ridge, past the position of Sgr~B2. This way, the simulations capture the evolution of the clouds across a complete radial orbital oscillation, from their diffuse state near apocentre through the dynamical perturbations induced by their orbit in the gravitational potential. Throughout the paper, we use a non-rotating coordinate system centred on the origin of the Galactic coordinate system, i.e.~on $\{l,b\}=\{0\fdg0,0\fdg0\}$, with the $x$-axis pointing towards negative Galactic longitudes, the $y$-axis pointing from the observer to the Galactic centre (with Sgr~A$^*$ at $y=0$), and the $z$-axis pointing towards positive Galactic latitudes.
\subsection{Column density maps} \label{sec:maps}
In order to perform a first, visual comparison of the simulated clouds to the observed CMZ clouds on the dust ridge, we combine a number of snapshots from the different simulations, taken at different times to match the positions of the observed clouds, and generate column density maps of the gas with densities $\rho\geq10^4~\mbox{${\rm cm}^{-3}$}$. This density threshold is chosen to suppress the (initially) extended cloud envelopes in the simulations and represent the high-density gas found in the CMZ, as traced by the bulk of the dust emission \citep[e.g.][]{longmore13} and molecules such as HCN and NH$_3$ \citep[e.g.][]{mills13,rathborne14,krieger17}. We consider three projections of the simulation snapshots, i.e. top-down $\{l,y\}$, plane-of-sky $\{l,b\}$, and position-velocity $\{l,\mbox{$v_{\rm los}$}\}$.\footnote{Throughout this paper, we adopt a distance to the Galactic Centre of $d=8.3~\mbox{${\rm kpc}$}$ \citep{reid14} when converting between angular and physical sizes, for which $\{1\degr,1\arcmin,1\arcsec\}\approx\{145,2.41,0.040\}~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$.}
The snapshots are selected to visually best represent the real CMZ clouds in the $\{l,b\}$ plane in terms of their spatial extents, column densities, and orientations. This is a necessary step, because there are no constraints on the initial conditions of the clouds. The relevant question to ask is thus whether any of them reproduce the $\{l,b,\mbox{$v_{\rm los}$}\}$ structure of the observed dust ridge clouds. Even though this optimises the agreement between simulations and observations, it is an interesting comparison to make, because the initial conditions of the simulations span the full range of physical conditions seen in the progenitors of the dust ridge clouds. As we will see below, the simulated evolution of this variety of progenitors reproduces the observed variety of dust ridge clouds, which is an important test of the model's self-consistency. This enables the interpretation of several key observables in terms of the underlying physical processes. In doing so, we caution that this interpretation should be carried out in terms of global characteristics or systematic trends only. Direct comparisons between any observed and simulated cloud should be made with caution, as the detailed structure (e.g.~individual filamentary structures and positions of protostellar cores) is determined entirely by the specific realisation of the initial conditions.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.97\hsize]{figures/map.pdf}%
\vspace{-2mm}\caption{
\label{fig:map}
Combined column density maps of the simulations at several different snapshots, chosen to best represent the observed clouds on the CMZ `dust ridge' (see the text). The orbital solution of \citet{kruijssen15} is shown as the light grey line, with the segment thereof covered by the simulations shown in a brighter shade and arrows indicating the direction of motion. Top panel: top-down projection. Middle panel: plane-of-sky projection. For comparison, the observed column density map of the gas traced by cold dust (from HiGAL, see Battersby et al.~in prep.) is shown by contours at $\Sigma_{xz}=\{2.5,5,7.5,10\}\times10^3~\mbox{M$_\odot$}~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}^{-2}$ (black lines in the colour bar). Bottom panel: position-velocity projection. This figure shows that the main morphological and kinematic features of the observed dust ridge clouds can be reproduced by drawing a population of clouds from the initial conditions of \autoref{tab:ics} (see \autoref{tab:snaps}) and simulating their dynamical evolution in the gravitational potential of the CMZ. For comparison, the observed position-velocity distribution of the molecular gas in the dust ridge traced by $^{13}$CO(2-1) \citep{ginsburg16} is shown by contours at $\Sigma_{xv_y}=\{0.75,1.5\}\times10^3~\mbox{M$_\odot$}~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}^{-1}~{\rm km}^{-1}~{\rm s}$ (black lines in the colour bar). An animated version of this figure is available as online Supporting Information.
}
\end{figure*}
The adopted snapshots are summarised in Table~\ref{tab:snaps} and their relative positioning in the $\{l,b\}$ plane is shown in \autoref{fig:colours}. These clouds represent the main ingredients of the dust ridge (the Brick or G0.253+0.016, Clouds c/d/e/f, and Sgr~B2), and also include a low-density cloud upstream of the Brick (which we dub the `Pebble', at $\{l,b\}=\{0\fdg11,0\fdg00\}$) and the downstream continuation of the Sgr~B2 complex (`Sgr~B2+', at $\{l,b\}=\{0\fdg72,-0\fdg08\}$). Three different projections of the combined maps are shown in \autoref{fig:map}. An animated version of this figure is available as online Supporting Information. For comparison, \autoref{fig:map} also includes contours showing the observed gas column densities derived from the cold dust (HiGAL, Battersby et al.~in prep.) and contours showing the observed position velocity structure in $^{13}$CO(2-1) \citep{ginsburg16}.\footnote{Throughout this work, we transform velocities from the local standard of rest to the rest frame of Sgr~A* by adding $U_\odot=14~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}$ \citep{schoenrich12}, consistently with \citet{kruijssen15}.} These have considerably lower spatial resolutions ($25\arcsec$ and $30\arcsec$, respectively, corresponding to $1.0~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$ and $1.2~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$) than the simulations ($\sim0.1~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$), which leads to trivial differences in spatial structure between the simulations and observations. None the less, these maps provide a good point of reference, because they can be converted into physical units with relatively few assumptions.\footnote{ We adopt a mean molecular weight per ${\rm H}_2$ molecule of $\mu_{{\rm H}_2}=2.8$ to convert dust column densities to mass densities. To translate the $^{13}$CO flux to a mass density, we assume a $^{13}$CO-to-H$_2$ conversion factor of $\alpha({\rm ^{13}CO})=22.8~\mbox{M$_\odot$}~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}^{-2}~({\rm K}~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$})^{-1}$ \citep{schuller17,cormier18}, which is particularly appropriate in high-column density environments like the CMZ.} A number of qualitative properties of the simulated clouds immediately stand out. We list these here and quantify several of them further in Section~\ref{sec:quant} below.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
{\it Fragmentation and line-of-sight extension}: The top panel of \autoref{fig:map} shows that the clouds collapse and fragment as the turbulent energy dissipates. At the same time, the external gravitational potential causes the fragments within each cloud to roughly maintain their mutual separation, thus inhibiting global collapse across the full $2R_{\rm t}=15$--$50~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$ size scales modelled here. The most massive of these fragments match the masses of young massive cluster progenitors observed on the dust ridge \citep[see e.g.][]{walker15} and proceed to collapse. The extensions towards the observer at high longitudes result from the shear-driven dispersal of the outer layers of the clouds, which may explain observational hints of expanding outer layers in the Brick \citep{rathborne14,bally14}. These extensions are a common feature across most of our simulations after a few cloud dynamical times, which strongly suggests that the real CMZ clouds at positive Galactic longitudes may have significant depth along the line of sight, spanning a typical length scale comparable to their major axis in the plane of the sky. Similar, radially extended `feathers' are prevalent in dust extinction maps of gas clouds in extragalactic centres \citep[e.g.][]{peeples06}. Our simulations suggest that such feathers arise due to shearing motions in the galactic potential. When projected along the line of sight, these feathers could plausibly be (mis)interpreted as e.g.~the base of a spiral arm or a cloud-cloud collision due to line-of-sight confusion or multiple velocity components.
\item
{\it Vertical compression, large-scale filamentary structure, and inclination}: The middle panel of \autoref{fig:map} shows that the clouds attain a vertically compressed morphology just after they have passed through pericentre (which occurs at $l=-0\fdg16$). This is mainly caused by the tidal field, which is considerably more compressive in the vertical direction than azimuthally (see Section~\ref{sec:struc}). The compression generates layers and leaves the clouds highly substructured, with flocculent filamentary features running in the longitudinal direction, much akin to the structure of the Brick as observed with ALMA \citep{rathborne15} and of clouds b, d, and e as observed with the Submillimeter Array \citep[SMA,][]{walker18}. The tilt of the clouds towards positive longitudes and latitudes arises due to a torque experienced by the clouds as they move through pericentre above the Galactic plane. On its approach to pericentre passage, the leading end of the cloud arrives first and is pulled upwards. This combination of inclination and flattening is a common feature across all of our simulations and matches that of the observed contours at the positions of the Brick, clouds e/f, Sgr~B2, and Sgr~B2+.
\item
{\it Velocity gradient, shear, and kinematic complexity}: The bottom panel shows that the clouds develop a velocity gradient with a direction opposite to the orbital motion. This counter-gradient is driven by shear, which causes the side of the cloud facing the Galactic centre to move faster than the side facing away from the Galactic centre (see Section~\ref{sec:kin}). Again, this is a common feature of all models and qualitatively matches the velocity gradient of the Brick, clouds e/f, and the Sgr~B2 complex. However, it is also quite sensitive to the realisation of the initial velocity field, which was chosen to be consistent with the onset of contraction from a shearing gas reservoir (see Section~\ref{sec:model}). Clouds with zero initial spin angular momentum exhibit significantly weaker velocity gradients. Finally, this panel also reveals significant kinematic complexity in the Sgr~B2 region, which is caused by the superposition of clouds along the line of sight as the orbit curves off, away from the observer. This matches the observed, complex kinematic structure of the cloud complex spanned by Sgr~B2 and Sgr~B2+ \citep[e.g.][]{henshaw16} and provides a plausible alternative to the currently canonical interpretation of this complexity as a key piece of evidence for a cloud-cloud collision \citep[e.g.][]{mehringer93,hasegawa94,sato00,jones08}. We find that no such collision is necessary to generate the large degree of kinematic complexity in the Sgr~B2 region. Instead, this is naturally reproduced by the combination of fragmentation and the orbital geometry.
\end{enumerate}
In summary, the clouds' evolution in a background potential and the pericentre passage initially turns them into inclined, sub-structured, spinning pancakes, before the combination of fragmentation and orbital curvature generates highly complex $\{l, b, \mbox{$v_{\rm los}$}\}$ structures. We find that a wide range of properties of the observed dust ridge clouds (contours in \autoref{fig:map}) are reproduced by making a suitable selection from the set of simulations. As stated before, this is an interesting result, because the initial conditions of the simulations were chosen to be representative of the observed range of physical conditions (i.e.~column densities, volume densities, and velocity dispersions) in the clouds upstream from pericentre (see Section~\ref{sec:model}). This shows that the morphology and kinematics of the dust ridge clouds are consistent with their deformation due to the background potential and the preceding pericentre passage as modelled here, under the plausible condition that their initial properties were similar to those currently observed upstream.
More broadly, \autoref{fig:map} illustrates how the evolution of molecular clouds in the CMZ is closely coupled to their orbital dynamics. As will be quantified further in the next sections, these results can be generalised to any (extra)galactic centre where the rotation curve turns over from being flat to $v\propto r^\beta$ with $1/2<\beta<1$, which is far from unusual \citep[see e.g.][]{miyamoto75,rubin80,persic95,errozferrer16}. For any rotation curve with such a turnover, the inflow of gas from larger galactocentric radii is predicted to stall due to a decrease of the shear, which leads to the accumulation of the gas in a ring-like structure like the 100-pc stream \citep{krumholz15}. During this accumulation, the orbital motion of the gas is synchronised by hydrodynamic forces, after which the stream fragments into clouds undergoing synchronised, semi-ballistic motion on an eccentric orbit that retains some memory of the non-zero radial inflow velocity \citep[this behaviour has also been found in three-dimensional simulations, see e.g.][]{emsellem15}.\footnote{The eccentric stream thus exists within the ring-like region of minimal (but non-zero) shear, which is $45<r/\mbox{${\rm pc}$}<115$ in the gravitational potential of \citet[see Section~\ref{sec:kin} below and \citealt{krumholz15}]{launhardt02} and closely matches the pericentre and apocentre radii of the stream ($r_{\rm p}=60~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$ and $r_{\rm a}=120~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$, respectively).}
Our simulations show the clouds on the stream are torqued, compressed, and stretched, each of which has the potential to fundamentally change their subsequent evolution. Given the strength of these interactions, the dynamical coupling with the host galaxy may induce collapse and star formation in certain `hotspots', which appear as evolutionary streamlines of progressively advanced states of star formation and feedback. Such evolutionary sequences may be ubiquitous in extragalactic centres too, but they are unlikely to be strictly monotonic -- \autoref{tab:snaps} and \autoref{fig:map} show that some diversity of initial conditions is needed to reproduce the observed CMZ clouds, indicating that the responses of these clouds to the background potential and pericentre passage may differ. In the next section, we quantify how the morphology and kinematics of the clouds are affected by their orbital dynamics.
\section{Quantitative properties of simulated clouds} \label{sec:quant}
We now turn to a quantitative discussion of the simulations, focussing on the spatial structure and kinematics of the clouds. In addition to an extensive discussion of the simulations following clouds on eccentric orbits, we also include a brief comparison to a set of control simulations of clouds on circular orbits. The full set of clouds on circular orbits is presented in Appendix~\ref{sec:circ}.
\subsection{Spatial structure} \label{sec:struc}
The morphological evolution of the clouds is quantified in \autoref{fig:struc} for all five simulations. For reference, a colour composite of the inner CMZ with the orbital model highlighted is included as the top panel. The figure shows several key (observable) properties of the simulated clouds as a function of Galactic longitude, i.e.~the dimensions of the clouds in the plane of the sky, their aspect ratios, and their plane-of-sky column densities. All quantities are calculated using the gas with densities $\rho\geq10^4~\mbox{${\rm cm}^{-3}$}$ as in \autoref{fig:map}, which represents the centrally concentrated components of the clouds and is traced by most of the dust emission \citep{longmore13}, as well as molecular line tracers \citep[such as HCN and NH$_3$, see e.g.][]{mills13,rathborne14}. The dimensions of the clouds in the Galactic longitudinal ($\delta x$) and latitudinal ($\delta z$) directions are obtained by calculating the centre of mass in each coordinate ($x_{\rm cm}$ or $z_{\rm cm}$) and finding the corresponding intervals that enclose half of the mass (i.e.~$x_{\rm cm}\pm\delta x$ or $z_{\rm cm}\pm\delta z$). The aspect ratios follow as $\delta z/\delta x$.\footnote{Note that we use Cartesian coordinates $\{x,z\}$ to denote positions within a given simulation snapshot, whereas $\{l,b\}$ refer to position along the orbit and thus include the motion and time evolution of the clouds.} Finally, the average column densities of the clouds ($\Sigma$) are calculated in a mass-weighted fashion over the rectangle spanned by a cloud's half-mass intervals (thus together enclosing less than half of its mass) as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:column}
\Sigma = \frac{\int_{x_{\rm cm}-\delta x}^{x_{\rm cm}+\delta x}\int_{z_{\rm cm}-\delta z}^{z_{\rm cm}+\delta z} \Sigma_{\rm local}(x,z)^2 {\rm d}x{\rm d}z}{\int_{x_{\rm cm}-\delta x}^{x_{\rm cm}+\delta x}\int_{z_{\rm cm}-\delta z}^{z_{\rm cm}+\delta z} \Sigma_{\rm local}(x,z) {\rm d}x{\rm d}z} ,
\end{equation}
with $\Sigma_{\rm local}(x,z)$ the local column density at the coordinate $\{x,z\}$. The weighting by mass emphasises the column density at which most of the mass resides and makes it insensitive to the total spatial extent of the clouds. This is desirable, because the simulations follow the condensation of clouds from a gas reservoir that is initially larger than the observed clouds (see \autoref{tab:ics} and Section~\ref{sec:model}). In addition, we prevent dilution by focussing a window on the cloud centre of mass. By taking a mass-weighted average over this region of interest rather than an area-weighted one, we predict the typical column density expected to be observed in CMZ clouds.
\subsubsection{Cloud dimensions and aspect ratios}
Focusing on the cloud dimensions and aspect ratios (second and third panels of \autoref{fig:struc}), we see that they all exhibit a very similar evolution. In the Galactic longitudinal direction, the clouds are stretched by a factor of 2 as they pass through pericentre. This is a combined result of the clouds' orbital rotation and the fact that shear extends them further in the azimuthal direction than the radial direction. The vertical extent of the clouds is affected differently -- in the Galactic latitudinal direction, the clouds are flattened by a factor of 0.5. This arises due to a combination of two effects.
Firstly, geometric convergence of the orbital structure towards pericentre implies that all dimensions perpendicular to the direction of motion are compressed by a factor of $r_{\rm p}/r_0\approx0.67$, with $r_0=90~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$ the initial radius and $r_{\rm p}=60~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$ the pericentric radius. Radially, this occurs because all orbits of individual mass elements within a cloud are compressed into a smaller radial interval as the cloud approaches pericentre. In the vertical direction, pericentre represents the convergence point for mass elements that are vertically offset initially. In itself, this factor of $r_{\rm p}/r_0$ is capable of explaining the behaviour found in the simulations. It naturally leads to extreme aspect ratios (combining differential acceleration and geometric convergence yields $v_{l,0}r_{\rm p}/v_{l,{\rm p}}r_0\approx0.39$) as found in the second panel, which reach latitudinal-to-longitudinal size ratios as low as $\delta z/\delta x=0.25$.
A second, possibly more important mechanism leading to a vertical compression is provided by the tidal field. Assuming a power law enclosed mass profile $\mbox{$M_{\rm encl}$}\propto r^\alpha$ and hence a rotation curve $v\propto r^{(\alpha-1)/2}$ with angular velocity $\Omega=v/r\propto r^{(\alpha-3)/2}$, the tidal tensor in the CMZ is given by:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:tides}
T_{ij} = \frac{\partial^2\Phi}{\partial x_i\partial x_j} =
\begin{bmatrix}
(2-\alpha)\Omega^2 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & -\Omega^2 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & -q_\Phi^{-2}\Omega^2
\end{bmatrix} ,
\end{equation}
where $\Phi$ is the gravitational potential, $x_i$ is the $i$th component of the position vector, $q_\Phi$ is the vertical-to-planar axis ratio of the background potential, which indicates its degree of flattening, and we have chosen the coordinate system such that the tensor follows the order of the radial ($r$), tangential ($\phi$), and vertical ($z$) directions.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\hsize]{figures/struc.pdf}%
\vspace{-2mm}\caption{
\label{fig:struc}
Morphological evolution of the five simulated clouds. Panel~1: three-colour composite reference image of the CMZ, with HOPS NH$_3(1,1)$ in red \citep{walsh11,purcell12}, MSX 21.3~$\mu$m in green \citep{egan98,price01}, and MSX 8.3~$\mu$m in blue. The orbital model is shown as the dotted line, with the opaque white part indicating the trajectory covered by the simulated clouds. The top axis indicates the time along this section of the orbit. The area shown in the middle panel in \autoref{fig:map} is shown as a white box. The labels indicate several key objects in the CMZ. Panel~2: evolution of the cloud dimensions, represented by their longitudinal ($\delta x$, blue) and latitudinal ($\delta z$, red) half-mass radii. Panel~3: evolution of the cloud aspect ratios, i.e. $\delta z/\delta x$. Panel~4: evolution of the mass-weighted cloud column densities. In all panels, the lines encode the different simulations and filled symbols mark the values predicted at the observed longitudes of several dust ridge clouds (obtained by connecting each of them to a simulation as in \autoref{tab:snaps} and \autoref{fig:map}), as indicated by the legends in panel~3. To quantify the effect of the non-zero orbital eccentricity, transparent lines show the fiducial cloud on a circular orbit for comparison. The vertical dotted line marks the position of pericentre. This figure quantifies how the morphological evolution of the clouds is shaped by their orbital motion through the gravitational potential of the CMZ.
}
\end{figure}
For the eccentric orbit under consideration, with $q_\Phi=0.63$ and $\alpha=2.2$ \citep{kruijssen15}, all terms on the diagonal of the tidal tensor are negative and the tidal field is fully compressive. A fully compressive tidal field exists where $\alpha>2$. In the CMZ potential derived by \citet{launhardt02} that we use here, this corresponds to the radial range $45<r/\mbox{${\rm pc}$}<115$ \citep{kruijssen15}. This nearly exactly matches the radial extent of the gas stream,\footnote{This may not be a coincidence. In the galactic centre models by \citet{krumholz15} and \citet{krumholz17}, the inward transport of gas is driven by shear, which exists for $\alpha<3$. The closer the rotation curve is to solid-body ($\alpha=3$), the slower the radial transport. In the CMZ, shear is minimal at a peak value of $\alpha\approx2.3$, which is reached in the compressive region $45<r/\mbox{${\rm pc}$}<115$. As a result, the inflow slows down and gas accumulates, thus forming the observed gas stream, where it is capable of reaching high densities and becomes prone to gravitational collapse and star formation. Observations of the CMZ match this picture, as the gas on the 100-pc stream is only marginally stable, whereas the gas at larger radii is characterised by a \citet{toomre64} parameter $Q>5$ \citep{kruijssen14b}.} giving rise to the somewhat unusual situation in which there is non-zero shear, but the tidal radii of the clouds are elevated relative to those in an extensive tidal field. The radial, azimuthal, and vertical components of the tidal field have relative strengths $(T_{rr}:T_{\phi\phi}:T_{zz})=(0.2:1:2.6)$, indicating that the strongest compression takes place in the vertical direction. The compressive tidal field in the azimuthal direction partially cancels the orbital stretching by shear described above, which explains why the vertical extent of the clouds gets compressed more steeply than their longitudinal extent increases. Put simply, the evolution in a background potential turns the clouds into pancakes.
Even on a circular orbit, the geometry of the tidal field causes the clouds to be strongly flattened \citep[grey solid line in \autoref{fig:struc}, also see][]{dale19}, with an aspect ratio $\delta z/\delta x=1/2.6\approx0.38$. This compression is enhanced by shear-driven azimuthal extension of the clouds. In addition, each of the components of the tidal tensor increases in strength by a factor of $(r_{\rm p}/r_0)^{\alpha-3}\approx1.4$ as the cloud moves from apocentre to pericentre. This amplifies the tidal compression and causes clouds on eccentric orbits to be flattened more quickly (by up to $0.2~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$) than those on circular orbits. In the simulations, the tidal field thus sets the minimum aspect ratio of $\delta z/\delta x=0.25$, whereas the pericentre passage accelerates the time by which this is achieved. Note that the Galactic longitude at which the pericentre passage takes place generally does not mark maxima or minima in any of the observables. The clouds respond to external perturbations on a crossing time, which means that they `overshoot' the time of pericentre passage in terms of their structural (and kinematic, see Section~\ref{sec:kin}) evolution.
Because the dimensions of the clouds are directly observable, we do not normalise their size evolution by the initial dimensions in the second panel of \autoref{fig:struc}. However, it is clear that the relative size evolution exhibited by the range of modelled clouds is nearly identical, independently of the initial conditions (e.g.~density, velocity dispersion, or virial state). The high-density simulation represents the only exception, in that it evolves much more quickly than the other clouds, reaching its most extreme aspect ratio some $0\fdg2$ in longitude before the other simulations do. The more rapid evolution seen in this simulation is a simple result of its high density and short dynamical time -- the cloud initiates its collapse prior to the pericentre passage, dynamically decouples from the background potential and, as a result, amplifies the initial perturbation imposed by its orbital motion on a shorter time-scale.\footnote{The same dynamical decoupling due to a local dominance of self-gravity takes place in the other clouds on the scales of individual, dense fragments. The high-density simulation is the only model in which the global density is sufficiently high for the entire cloud to achieve this.} Given that the presented simulations are drawn from a representative set of initial conditions, the range spanned by the simulations provides a prediction for the dimensions expected to be observed for real CMZ clouds.
After the minimum aspect ratio has been reached, $\delta z/\delta x$ increases again, because the azimuthal extension of the clouds is projected along the line of sight as the orbit curves away from the observer. However, this proceeds more rapidly for the clouds on eccentric orbits, due to the torque experienced towards their off-plane pericentre passage as the leading end of the cloud arrives first and is pulled upwards (see Section~\ref{sec:maps}), which induces a slow clockwise rotation around the line of sight. As a result, the flattened clouds become inclined relative to the Galactic plane (see \autoref{fig:map}), which causes the aspect ratio along the $\{x,z\}$ coordinates to return to unity even when the clouds are still tidally flattened. This has a pronounced effect on the snapshot representing the Brick -- the cloud in \autoref{fig:map} is clearly flattened, with a minor-to-major axis ratio of $\sim0.3$, but is inclined relative to the Galactic plane by $\sim35\degr$, resulting in the elevated aspect ratio of $\delta z/\delta x\sim0.65$ in the third panel of \autoref{fig:struc} (indicated by the black square). Eventually, the flattening is erased altogether, most likely by turbulent mixing during the collapse of the clouds.
\subsubsection{Cloud column densities}
Finally, the bottom panel of \autoref{fig:struc} shows the evolution of the cloud column densities observed in the plane of the sky. We note that these densities represent simulations of single clouds and do not accurately reflect the stacked composite image of \autoref{fig:map}. With the exception of the high-density simulation, in which the column density decreases due to its rapid conversion into sink particles (see below), most clouds exhibit a similar evolutionary progression. Initially, the column density decreases due to the differential acceleration and shear along the orbit (which primarily takes place in the plane of the sky) and the corresponding longitudinal stretching of the clouds. However, eventually the compressive tidal field takes over, resulting in a significant (factor-of-several) increase of the column density that commences during the pericentre passage. By contrast, the models with circular orbits undergo a weaker column density increase ($<0.3~\mbox{${\rm dex}$}$) that sets in $\sim0.1~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$ later. Near the position of the Brick, the column density reaches a local maximum, after which the cloud slowly expands in the latitudinal direction as it emerges from the bottom of the gravitational potential along its orbit. Due to this expansion, the global column density decreases slightly by 25--50~per~cent (naturally, this does not occur for the clouds evolving on circular orbits).
After the clouds reach the longitude of cloud e/f ($l\sim0\fdg5$), the column density monotonically increases. The cause for this increase is twofold. Firstly, the orbital curvature away from the observer geometrically compresses the projected dimensions of the clouds, because their radial extents at the end of the simulations are generally smaller than their azimuthal dimensions (cf.~\autoref{fig:map} and see \citealt{dale19}). The resulting orientation of the clouds along the line of sight is the main driver for the sharp upturn of the column density near the position of Sgr~B2. Secondly, the dynamical perturbation from the background potential weakens at larger galactocentric radii, allowing the velocity dispersion to decrease (see Section~\ref{sec:kin}) and gravitational collapse to set in.
In all simulated clouds, the most tightly bound clumps proceed to collapse and form sink particles at a high rate. Given the dimensions and column densities shown in \autoref{fig:struc}, the cloud-averaged free-fall time follows directly as $\mbox{$t_{\rm ff}$}\propto(\delta y/\Sigma)^{1/2}$ and for the clouds considered here ($\delta y\approx5~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$ and $\Sigma\approx2\times10^3~\mbox{M$_\odot$}~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}^{-2}$) has typical values of $\mbox{$t_{\rm ff}$}\sim0.4~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$. Relative to the orbital dynamical time at pericentre $\Omega^{-1}=r_{\rm p}/v_{\rm orb,p}\approx0.3~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$ (which is the minimum along the orbit), this time-scale is comparable, implying that gravitational collapse proceeds rapidly once it has set in. While this rapid collapse is physical in nature, it leads to an unphysical bias towards a nearly monotonically decreasing column density in the high-density simulation. In the absence of feedback or magnetic fields, it is the only simulation to reach a star formation efficiency of 90~per~cent by the time the cloud reaches apocentre at the end of the simulation. The column densities of the other clouds are not significantly affected by the conversion of gas into sink particles, because the star formation efficiencies stay considerably lower, at 15--50~per~cent.
Combining the range of column densities spanned by all simulations, we see that any systematic evolutionary trends with Galactic longitude or time span a factor of 1.5--4 between the minimum column density and that at the end of the simulation. This is smaller than the total range of column densities spanned by the initial conditions, which is a factor of $\sim6$ and is representative for the variety of clouds observed upstream of the dust ridge (see Section~\ref{sec:model}). This difference in dynamic range means that, analogously to the cloud dimensions in the second panel of \autoref{fig:struc}, variations in column density along the dust ridge primarily trace variations in the initial conditions of the clouds. It also explains why observational studies have found only limited evidence for trends of the column density with Galactic longitude \citep[e.g.][]{krieger17}. A comparison between these results and the observed column densities is presented in Section~\ref{sec:comp}.
In summary, the morphological characteristics of the simulations all sketch a similar picture, across the full range of initial conditions. Driven by the background potential and the orbital eccentricity, the combination of geometric convergence during pericentre passage and the compressive tidal field result in a flattened and inclined, pancake-like cloud morphology and enhanced densities, eventually leading to fragmentation and gravitational collapse once the clouds have passed pericentre. The role of the pericentre passage is to accelerate this evolution relative to clouds evolving on circular orbits.
\subsection{Kinematics and dynamics} \label{sec:kin}
The kinematic evolution of the clouds is quantified in \autoref{fig:kin} for all five simulations. For reference, a colour composite of the inner CMZ with the orbital model highlighted is included as the top panel. The figure shows several key properties of the simulated clouds as a function of Galactic longitude, i.e.~their line-of-sight velocity dispersions, their line-of-sight velocity gradients in Galactic longitude, and their spin angular momenta. As before, the quantities are calculated for the gas with densities $\rho\geq10^4~\mbox{${\rm cm}^{-3}$}$ (cf.~\autoref{fig:map}), except for the spin angular momentum (see below). The line-of-sight velocity dispersions ($\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$}$) are obtained by calculating the standard deviation of the line-of-sight velocities of the particles within the rectangle spanned by the one-dimensional half-mass extents, i.e.~$\{x_{\rm cm}\pm\delta x,z_{\rm cm}\pm\delta z\}$. This is equivalent to taking the mass-weighted average of the line-of-sight velocity dispersion at each coordinate $\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los,local}$}(x,z)$ as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:sigma}
\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$} = \frac{\int_{x_{\rm cm}-\delta x}^{x_{\rm cm}+\delta x}\int_{z_{\rm cm}-\delta z}^{z_{\rm cm}+\delta z} \Sigma_{\rm local}(x,z)\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los,local}$}(x,z) {\rm d}x{\rm d}z}{\int_{x_{\rm cm}-\delta x}^{x_{\rm cm}+\delta x}\int_{z_{\rm cm}-\delta z}^{z_{\rm cm}+\delta z} \Sigma_{\rm local}(x,z) {\rm d}x{\rm d}z} .
\end{equation}
Likewise, we calculate the line-of-sight velocity gradient ($\mbox{${\rm d}\vlos/{\rm d}l$}$) by carrying out an orthogonal linear regression to the $\{l,\mbox{$v_{\rm los}$}\}$ distribution of the gas map within $\{x_{\rm cm}\pm\delta x,z_{\rm cm}\pm\delta z\}$ \citep{boggs90}. Again, this is equivalent to a mass-weighted fit to the position-velocity image. Finally, the spin angular momenta ($L_z$) are calculated without making any cuts in density or position, because this is a physical quantity used to describe the entire cloud and interpret the predicted velocity gradients, rather than an observable quantity. Given a population of $N_{\rm part}$ particles, we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:angmom}
L_z = \sum_{N_{\rm part}}m_i(\mathbfit{r}_{xy,i}\times\mathbfit{v}_{xy,i}) ,
\end{equation}
where $m_i$ is the particle mass, $\mathbfit{r}_{xy,i}$ is the position vector in the Galactic plane relative to the cloud's centre of mass, and $\mathbfit{v}_{xy,i}$ is the velocity vector in the Galactic plane relative to the cloud's centre of motion.
\subsubsection{Cloud line-of-sight velocity dispersions} \label{sec:sigmalos}
First focusing on the line-of-sight velocity dispersions (second panel of \autoref{fig:kin}), we see that the clouds initially lose internal kinetic energy, reach a minimum near the onset of the dust ridge at $l\approx0\fdg1$, and increase again towards Sgr~B2. The initial decline of $\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$}$ is not surprising, because we do not include any explicit turbulent energy driving in the simulations. Over time, the internal kinetic energy of the clouds should decrease. The only possible source of internal kinetic energy is the shear and associated tidal torques generated by the background potential, which effectively set a (cloud radius-dependent) velocity dispersion floor. Across the radii of the clouds shown in \autoref{fig:struc}, the shear-driven velocity differential across a cloud of scale $R_{\rm h}$, in a frame that orbits the Galactic centre with the cloud centroid, is given by\footnote{Because the velocity dispersion is a mass-weighted quantity, this expression requires the characteristic radius within the cloud where its mass resides, i.e.~the half-mass radius $R_{\rm h}$ rather than the truncation radius $R_{\rm t}$.}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:dv}
\begin{aligned}
\delta v&=(A+B) R_{\rm h}=-r\frac{{\rm d}\Omega}{{\rm d}r}R_{\rm h}=\frac{3-\alpha}{2}\Omega R_{\rm h} \\
&\approx 5.0~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}~\left(\frac{\Omega}{1.7~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}^{-1}}\right) \left(\frac{R_{\rm h}}{7.5~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}}\right) ,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $A$ and $B$ are the \citet{oort27} constants, $\Omega=1.7~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}^{-1}$ is the average angular velocity of the orbital model \citep[Table~1 of][]{kruijssen15}, and $R_{\rm h}$ is normalised to a value typical for the simulated clouds at the onset of the dust ridge ($l\approx0\fdg1$), where $R_{\rm h}=3$--$12~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$. The resulting velocity differential is similar to the lowest velocity dispersions reached by the simulations, even to the extent that the minimum $\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$}$ of the clouds is linearly related to their radii (compare \autoref{fig:kin} to the average of $\delta x$ and $\delta z$ in \autoref{fig:struc}), as predicted by equation~(\ref{eq:dv}). This shows that cloud collapse and fragmentation from a shearing medium is significantly affected by galactic dynamics. The linear relation between the velocity differential $\delta v$ and cloud radius $R_{\rm h}$ may thus explain why the size-linewidth relation of CMZ clouds is steeper \citep[$\sigma\propto R^{0.7}$,][]{shetty12,kauffmann17} than the classical slope \citep[$\sigma\propto R^{0.5}$, e.g.][]{larson81,heyer15} found in the Galactic disc \citep[also see][]{dale19}. We intend to quantify this possibility further in a future paper.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\hsize]{figures/kin.pdf}%
\vspace{-2.4mm}\caption{
\label{fig:kin}
Kinematic evolution of the five simulated clouds. Panel~1: three-colour composite image of the CMZ as in \autoref{fig:struc}. Panel~2: evolution of the cloud velocity dispersions along the line of sight. Panel~3: evolution of the cloud line-of-sight velocity gradients in Galactic longitude, i.e. $-\mbox{${\rm d}\vlos/{\rm d}l$}$. The lines are interrupted at longitudes where $-\mbox{${\rm d}\vlos/{\rm d}l$}$ is negative (see the text). Panel~4: evolution of the cloud spin angular momenta $L_z$, normalised to the initial $L_z(0)$. In all panels, the lines and symbols have the same meaning as in \autoref{fig:struc}, as indicated by the legends. This figure quantifies how the kinematic evolution of the clouds is shaped by their orbital motion through the gravitational potential of the CMZ.
}
\end{figure}
The time-scale on which the minimum $\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$}$ is reached varies. If we assume that most of the velocity dispersion seen in the simulations reflects turbulent motion, the relevant time-scale is the turbulence dissipation time-scale, which in the absence of turbulence driving or other external perturbations is $\mbox{$t_{\rm diss}$}=R/\sigma$, with $R$ the scale on which the initial turbulence is driven \citep[e.g.][]{maclow04}. If instead the velocity dispersion reflects ordered motion, it is expected to evolve on a crossing time, which is also given by $t_{\rm cr}=R/\sigma$. In both expressions, we take $R$ to represent the initial cloud truncation radius $R_{\rm t}$ as in \autoref{tab:ics}, resulting in $\mbox{$t_{\rm diss}$}=t_{\rm cr}\approx0.56~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$ for all simulations. As expected, this is similar to the initial e-folding time of the velocity dispersions in \autoref{fig:kin}. Perhaps unsurprisingly in view of the varying external potential of our simulated clouds, the decay does not continue, but eventually a minimum $\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$}$ is reached. The time-scale required for reaching this minimum is shortest for the high-density simulation at $t-t_0\approx0.4~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$, which is similar to $\mbox{$t_{\rm diss}$}$ and also closely matches the cloud's initial free-fall time (see \autoref{tab:ics}). The other simulations reach their minimum $\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$}$ at around $t-t_0=0.6$--$0.8~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$. Given that the evolution of the cloud in the high-density simulation is largely decoupled from the background potential, as the cloud is undergoing collapse anyway (cf.~Section~\ref{sec:struc}), the correspondence between the minimum $\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$}$ and the initial free-fall time is to be expected. However, the evolution of the other clouds is affected more strongly by their interaction with the background potential, indicating that the additional internal kinetic energy driven by their motion in a shearing potential may be responsible for increasing $\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$}$.\looseness=-1
The above interpretation is underlined by the circular-orbit control experiments presented in Appendix~\ref{sec:circ} and \citet{dale19}. Clouds on circular orbits experience a similar evolution to the eccentric simulations discussed here, albeit somewhat more slowly -- as in Section~\ref{sec:struc}, we find that the pericentre passage accelerates the evolution of the clouds, driving an increase of their velocity dispersion in less than $0.2~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$ post-pericentre. However, our additional, isolated control runs that do not include an external potential at all reach their minimum $\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$}$ even more quickly \citep{dale19}, showing that the presence of shear is key in extending the clouds' resilience against internal kinetic (or turbulent) energy dissipation and collapse.
Once collapse eventually sets in, it leads to a clear increase of the line-of-sight velocity dispersion, which is primarily driven by the conversion of potential energy into internal kinetic energy \citep[as reported for simulations of isolated clouds by e.g.][]{vazquezsemadeni07,ibanezmejia16}. In our simulations, this happens at high Galactic longitudes, where the perceived increase of $\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$}$ is boosted further by orbital curvature. As quantified by \citet{dale19}, the azimuthal velocity dispersion (i.e.~along the orbital direction of motion) is enhanced by shear and typically exceeds the radial velocity dispersion. Towards high longitudes, the orbital motion becomes parallel to the line of sight and $\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$}$ becomes dominated by the azimuthal component of the velocity dispersion, thus adding to its increase. As in the discussion of the bottom panel in \autoref{fig:struc}, we note that these velocity dispersions represent simulations of single clouds and do not accurately reflect the stacked composite image of \autoref{fig:map}. The superposition of multiple clouds along the line of sight would lead to an even larger increase of the line-of-sight velocity dispersion than reported in \autoref{fig:kin}, which shows the velocity dispersions of the single clouds in each of our simulations.
Altogether, we see that our model makes the strong prediction that the line-of-sight velocity dispersion should increase steeply with longitude for $l\ga0\fdg5$. Given that the presented simulations are drawn from a representative set of initial conditions, the range in $\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$}$ spanned by the simulations provides a prediction for the velocity dispersions expected to be observed for real CMZ clouds. We reiterate that the superposition of multiple clouds along the line of sight may cause deviations upward of our predicted range of velocity dispersions. A comparison between these results and the observed velocity dispersions is presented in Section~\ref{sec:comp}.
\subsubsection{Cloud velocity gradients and spin angular momenta} \label{sec:spin}
The third panel of \autoref{fig:kin} shows the evolution of the line-of-sight velocity gradient in Galactic longitude ($-\mbox{${\rm d}\vlos/{\rm d}l$}$), which evolves substantially along the orbit. For all simulations, the velocity gradient generally has the opposite sign of the orbital rotation, in that $\mbox{$v_{\rm los}$}$ decreases with Galactic longitude. This is also evident in the bottom panel of \autoref{fig:map}, which shows that the line tracing the orbital motion in $\{l,\mbox{$v_{\rm los}$}\}$ space is nearly perpendicular to the $\{l,\mbox{$v_{\rm los}$}\}$ orientations of the individual clouds. We interpret this counter-gradient as the imprint of shear, which causes the inside of the cloud to overtake the outside, thus generating anti-clockwise rotation for the clockwise orbital motion modelled here.
Using equation~(\ref{eq:dv}), it is straightforward to estimate the magnitude of the shear-driven velocity gradient in the idealised case of a cloud in virial equilibrium without internal kinetic (or turbulent) energy dissipation. At the adopted distance of the Galactic Centre, $1\arcmin\approx2.41~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$, implying that we expect a typical shear-driven velocity gradient of $-\mbox{${\rm d}\vlos/{\rm d}l$}=1.6~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}~\mbox{${\rm arcmin}$}^{-1}$ or $-\mbox{${\rm d}\vlos/{\rm d}l$}=0.7~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}^{-1}$. However, deviations from this gradient are expected in a dynamically evolving, turbulent cloud. Because the gradient is expected to be driven by shear, it manifests itself mainly as an azimuthal velocity differential between radially displaced mass elements. The resulting line-of-sight velocity gradient naturally vanishes close to $l=0\degr$, where the azimuthal motion is perpendicular to the line of sight. In addition, the pericentre passage on the eccentric orbits is accompanied by a vertical compression and torques (see Section~\ref{sec:maps}), which can cause the driven internal kinetic energy to be dissipated. Indeed, \autoref{fig:kin} shows that the velocity gradient at pericentre is weaker than the reference value estimated above. However, after the clouds climb out of the bottom of the gravitational potential and eventually undergo gravitational collapse, the conservation of angular momentum causes the clouds to increase their angular velocity, thus steepening the velocity gradient. This too can be seen in \autoref{fig:kin}, in which the velocity gradients steepen more strongly for the eccentric orbits than the circular-orbit control run and reach extreme values of $-\mbox{${\rm d}\vlos/{\rm d}l$}=3$--$10~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}~\mbox{${\rm arcmin}$}^{-1}$ near the position of Sgr~B2.
As shown by the full set of model lines in \autoref{fig:kin}, the initial velocity gradients are nearly indistinguishable, but quickly diverge during their subsequent evolution. The initial similarity of $\mbox{${\rm d}\vlos/{\rm d}l$}$ is by construction, because each of the simulated clouds has been initialised with a velocity field that is consistent with having formed out of the shearing medium, which effectively sets their initial angular velocity and thus their velocity gradient. For an incompressible cloud, the shear from the external potential would maintain this gradient during the simulation. However, the conservation of spin angular momentum (which is only satisfied to within 20~per~cent for $l\la0\fdg5$ due to tidal shear-driven torques, see below) during cloud collapse and the corresponding steepening of the velocity gradient implies a strong dependence on the initial cloud density. \autoref{fig:struc} shows that differences in the cloud density determine when collapse sets in, causing the high-density cloud to have become a factor of $\sim5$ smaller than the fiducial one by the end of the simulation. The same factor of $\sim5$ offset appears in the velocity gradient, as the high-density cloud has been spun up by its gravitational collapse.\footnote{The critical role of collapse in increasing the magnitude of the velocity gradient in the high-density simulation at $l\ga0\fdg2$ is underlined by the fact that the spin angular momentum decreases for these Galactic longitudes (again due to torques from the background potential, see below). This means that the evolution of the gradient must be dominated by a combination of change in the moment of inertia (i.e.~contraction) and viewing angle (i.e.~the azimuthal motion getting projected along the line of sight due to orbital curvature).} While all simulations exhibit some degree of counter-rotation, we thus find that the magnitude of the resulting velocity gradient is set by the initial volume density.
Due to the stochastic evolution of the clouds' substructure, the fitted velocity gradients occasionally flip sign, especially at the shallow gradients near $l=0\degr$ and in the high-density simulation, which is characterised by rapidly evolving substructure due to its short dynamical time. Over the course of the simulation, it is the only cloud in which the vast majority of the dense fragments end up accreting onto its centre of mass, causing its mass to grow while inducing major fluctuations of most quantities shown in \autoref{fig:struc} and \autoref{fig:kin}. In the velocity gradients, these brief episodes manifest themselves as interruptions of the lines.
The Brick is known to have a strong velocity gradient in the direction opposite to its orbital motion \citep{rathborne14}. Using the high-density simulation (which best represents the Brick, see \autoref{tab:snaps}), we carry out a linear regression to the position-velocity distribution to quantify this gradient in the simulation. \autoref{fig:map} shows that the cloud is lopsided, with the main gas concentration located off-centre at $\{l,y\}=\{0\fdg27,-65~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}\}$. Centring the window on this concentration and increasing its width to $l=\{0\fdg303,0\fdg248\}$ such that it encloses the observed $\sim8~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$ size of the Brick (see Section~\ref{sec:brick}), we obtain a line-of-sight velocity gradient of $-\mbox{${\rm d}\vlos/{\rm d}l$}\approx5.9~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}~\mbox{${\rm arcmin}$}^{-1}$. This is similar to the observed velocity gradients reported in the literature, which range from $-\mbox{${\rm d}\vlos/{\rm d}l$}=7.43\pm0.34~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}~\mbox{${\rm arcmin}$}^{-1}$ \citep{rathborne14}\footnote{The value we provide here differs from that quoted by \citet{rathborne14}, because we correct a small conversion error. The gradient $-\mbox{${\rm d}\vlos/{\rm d}l$}=7.43\pm0.34~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}~\mbox{${\rm arcmin}$}^{-1}$ is obtained directly from the intensity-weighted velocity field of the Brick in the MALT90 HNCO~4(0,4)--3(0,3) emission provided by \citet{rathborne14}.} to $-\mbox{${\rm d}\vlos/{\rm d}l$}=9.50\pm0.34~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}~\mbox{${\rm arcmin}$}^{-1}$ \citep[where the error bars correspond to the propagated distance uncertainty]{federrath16}. Given that the high-density simulation reproduces the observed value to within $\sim25$~per~cent, we propose that the Brick's velocity gradient opposite to the orbital direction of motion is explained by shear. At least qualitatively, shear likely also explains why clouds e/f and the Sgr~B2 complex show signs of counter-rotation in their observed $\{l,\mbox{$v_{\rm los}$}\}$ distribution (see the bottom panel of \autoref{fig:map}).
Finally, the bottom panel of \autoref{fig:kin} illustrates the effect of shear during the clouds' pericentre passages on their spin angular momentum $L_z$. As discussed in Section~\ref{sec:model}, the initial velocity fields of the clouds were chosen to match the expected net rotation due to shear. However, the spin angular momenta in the simulations increase further, reaching a maximum at the position of the Brick ($l\sim0\fdg2$), briefly after pericentre. Up to the point of maximum $L_z$, the five simulations are nearly indistinguishable, indicating that the increase of the spin angular momentum is insensitive to the initial conditions. This is a natural result of the fact that the clouds all experience the same tidal shear-induced torques during their orbital motion and their pericentre passage, while the initial evolution of their moments of inertia is very similar (see the homologous radius evolution at these longitudes in \autoref{fig:struc}).
As the clouds recede from the Galactic Centre after pericentre passage, the spin angular momentum decreases again. However, it does so much more quickly than the increase towards the maximum and drops below the initial value of $L_z$. This is caused by the influence of tidal shear-driven torques on the clouds. The magnitudes of these torques (and hence the rate at which the spin angular momentum changes) are affected by cloud collapse, as illustrated by the difference between the five simulations. The fiducial and low/high velocity dispersion simulations are indistinguishable, because they have the same free-fall times (see \autoref{tab:ics}) and a largely homologous radius evolution. However, the low-density simulation (which collapses relatively slowly) loses its spin angular momentum even more quickly than the fiducial simulation, whereas the high-density simulation (which achieves collapse relatively quickly) loses spin angular momentum more slowly. This difference reflects the contrasting moments of inertia of the clouds. As the high-density simulation collapses more quickly, it is less affected by the torque driven by tidal shear. Finally, the cloud on a circular orbit does not experience an enhanced tidal torque at pericentre, retaining $L_z/L_z(0)>1$ some $0.3~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$ longer than the other clouds.
In summary, the kinematic and dynamical characteristics of the simulations all sketch a similar picture. Driven by the presence of the background potential, the associated tidal shear, and the resulting torques, the clouds exhibit net rotation and a sustained floor of their internal kinetic energies, part of which may be translated into turbulent motion. The corresponding spin angular momentum increases somewhat (by 20~per~cent) due to continued tidal shear-driven torques, which affect the clouds more rapidly due to the pericentre passage. Observationally, these processes manifest themselves through elevated velocity dispersions once gravitational collapse has set in (at $l\ga0\fdg5$), which at these longitudes are increased further by shear acting along the line of sight due to orbital curvature, and strong velocity gradients opposite to the orbital direction of motion. Indeed, both of these features are observed in the real CMZ, in the form of extreme velocity dispersions towards Sgr~B2 \citep[e.g.][]{henshaw16} and a strong velocity gradient in the Brick opposite to the orbital rotation \citep[e.g.][]{rathborne14,federrath16}.
\section{Discussion} \label{sec:disc}
\begin{table*}
\centering
\begin{minipage}{116mm}
\caption{Physical mechanisms in the model and their effect on the cloud dimensions ($\delta r$, $\delta\phi$, $\delta z$), aspect ratio ($\delta z/\delta\phi$), column density ($\Sigma$), velocity dispersion ($\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$}$), velocity gradient ($\mbox{${\rm d}\vlos/{\rm d}l$}$), and spin angular momenta around the radial ($L_r$) and vertical ($L_z$) directions.}
\label{tab:effects}
\begin{tabular} {@{}lccccccccc@{}}
\hline
Physical element & $\delta r$ & $\delta \phi$ & $\delta z$ & $\delta z/\delta\phi$ & $\Sigma$ & $\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$}$ & $\mbox{${\rm d}\vlos/{\rm d}l$}$ & $L_r$ & $L_z$ \\
\hline
Compressive tidal field & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $-$ & $+$ & $+$ & $+$ & $0$ & $0$ \\
Shear (and associated torques) & $+$ & $+$ & $0$ & $-$ & $-$ & $+$ & $+$ & $0$ & $+/-$ \\
Geometric convergence$^\star$ & $-$ & $+$ & $-$ & $-$ & $+$ & $+$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ \\
Torque at pericentre$^\star$ & $0$ & $-$ & $+$ & $+$ & $0$ & $0$ & $0$ & $-$ & $0$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}\\
Note: The symbols ($-$, $0$, $+$) indicate the sign of the change induced by each physical mechanism on the variable in each column. Mechanisms unique to eccentric orbits are marked with a star. A positive change of the spin angular momentum implies anti-clockwise rotation when looking towards negative values of the specified axis. `Geometric convergence' includes the effect of `differential acceleration' towards pericentre. Because the listed physical mechanisms are all related to the background potential, we adopt a polar coordinate system centred on Sgr~A*. We encourage the reader interested in a particular element of this table to consult the discussion in Section~\ref{sec:quant}, which presents the projection of the polar coordinates relative to the line of sight due to orbital curvature, as well as the detailed time evolution of these quantities.
\end{minipage}
\end{table*}
This paper presents the structural and kinematic properties of five different numerical simulations of molecular clouds following the best-fitting eccentric orbit in the gravitational potential of the CMZ from \citet{kruijssen15}. It is found that the evolution of the clouds is closely coupled to the orbital dynamics. Specifically, their sizes, aspect ratios, column densities, velocity dispersions, line-of-sight velocity gradients, and spin angular momenta are demonstrated to be strongly influenced by the background potential and the pericentre passage. Following the discussion in Section~\ref{sec:quant}, we summarise in \autoref{tab:effects} how the various physical mechanisms included in our model affect the observables discussed in this work. In this section, we briefly discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the model, present a brief comparison to observations, and provide its key predictions for future observational work.
\subsection{Strengths and shortcomings of the model} \label{sec:fails}
The presented simulations capture the orbital and internal dynamics of the clouds, but omit several physical mechanisms that are potentially important, such as magnetic fields, cosmic rays, detailed chemistry, and stellar feedback. While this may obstruct drawing any conclusions concerning the absolute star formation rates and efficiencies of the clouds, it does allow us to isolate and characterise the morphological and dynamical evolution of the clouds, which is the main focus of this paper. Above all, this enables us to perform controlled experiments and obtain a systematic understanding of the interplay between cloud evolution and galactic dynamics in the CMZ, with implications for galactic centres in general.
Stellar feedback is not expected to strongly affect the structure and dynamics of the clouds prior to advanced gravitational collapse and widespread star formation, which is not achieved until the position of Sgr~B2. Therefore, it is a reasonable omission in the context of this work. Chemistry is an important ingredient when generating synthetic line emission maps for direct comparison to observations \citep[in the context of the CMZ, see e.g.][]{bertram16}. Clearly, a detailed chemical network and appropriate radiative transfer modelling enables the generation of considerably more realistic maps than the volume density limit of $\rho\geq10^4~\mbox{${\rm cm}^{-3}$}$ that we adopted to create \autoref{fig:map}. However, we note that the CMZ clouds host notoriously complex chemistry, excitation conditions, and optical depth effects, to the extent that clouds have a different appearance in each molecular line \citep[e.g.][]{rathborne15}. Accurately modelling the molecular chemistry necessary for following the high-density gas tracers often used to observed CMZ clouds remains out of reach for the foreseeable future. Importantly, a considerable part of our analysis focuses on kinematics. Observational velocity measurements are less affected by molecular abundances or chemistry than integrated intensity measurements. Finally, magnetic fields have been suggested to affect the dynamics of CMZ clouds on sub-pc scales \citep[e.g.][]{pillai15}. However, this is based on the total magnetic field strength. In the absence of a coherent magnetic field, the unordered (turbulent) magnetic field mainly acts as a source of pressure \citep[for recent discussions, see e.g.][]{li11,pillai15,federrath16}. Estimates of the turbulent magnetic field strength yield Alfv\'{e}nic Mach numbers ${\cal M}_{\rm A}>1$ \citep{federrath16}, indicating that supersonic turbulence dominates the cloud structure. Our results substantiate this finding -- the fact that our simulations reproduce the observed spatial structure and kinematics of CMZ clouds, suggests that magnetic fields may not be dynamically important, but instead trace the turbulent flow in the CMZ clouds.
Another assumption worth discussing is the initial density profile of the clouds. The adopted Gaussian density profile does not represent a hydrostatic equilibrium solution, meaning that some part of the clouds' evolution may be caused by their initial progression towards equilibrium. Unfortunately, the presence of an external gravitational potential implies that even density profiles satisfying hydrostatic equilibrium in isolation, such as cored power laws \citep[e.g.][]{mckee07,keto10}, would still require an initial equilibration phase. To answer whether a significant part of the observed cloud evolution is caused by the choice of initial density profile, we therefore compare the simulations discussed here to isolated control runs in \citet{dale19},\footnote{Note that these control runs do not include any background potential and are distinct from the circular-orbit control runs discussed in Appendix~\ref{sec:circ}.} finding that the evolutionary trends presented in this work are unique to the clouds evolving in the background potential of the CMZ. Reassuringly, this shows that any influence of the initial density profile on the results is subdominant relative to the role of the external potential in governing cloud evolution.
A final caveat is the choice of orbital model. Other parameterisations or dynamical models for the 100-pc stream in the CMZ exist \citep[e.g.][]{sofue95,molinari11,ridley17}. However, out of all these models, the \citet{kruijssen15} model provides the closest match to the position-position-velocity structure of the dust ridge \citep[and the 100-pc stream in general, also see][]{henshaw16}, which motivates its use in this paper. Perhaps most importantly, many of the identified ways in which the orbital dynamics affect cloud evolution are not sensitive to the details of the orbital solution, but are set by the global properties of the gravitational potential. For instance, the sizes, aspect ratios, velocity dispersions, velocity gradients, and spin angular momenta are all most strongly affected by the instantaneous tidal field and shear, while carrying second-order imprints of the pericentre passage on the adopted orbital model. Therefore, we predict that many of our findings should also persist in alternative orbital geometries \citep[e.g.][]{sormani18}.
\subsection{Comparison to observed column densities and velocity dispersions} \label{sec:comp}
We now briefly compare the properties of the simulated clouds to those of the observed dust ridge clouds. The first of these comparisons is quantitative, as it considers the column densities and velocity dispersions as a function of position along the dust ridge as in \autoref{fig:struc} and \autoref{fig:kin}, mirroring the evolution with orbital time in our simulations. The second comparison follows in Section~\ref{sec:brick} and focuses on a single snapshot of our high-density simulations at the position of the Brick.
For the first of the above two comparisons, we derive observed column densities from the HiGAL cold dust map (Battersby et al.~in prep.; see the middle panel of \autoref{fig:map}) and velocity dispersions from the HNCO $4(0,4)-3(0,3)$ data obtained with the Mopra CMZ survey \citep{jones12}. \citet{henshaw16} selected this molecular line as their primary tracer of the gas kinematics, because HNCO is widespread in the CMZ, suffers minimally from self-absorption in high column density regions, and does not exhibit hyperfine structure.\footnote{Note that the latter two points minimise any spurious broadening of the spectral line profiles when fitting them with a Gaussian.} Due to its widespread nature, it likely traces the bulk of the gas in clouds \citep{jones12}, necessitating that we include all gas present in the simulations, instead of imposing a density cut as before. To ensure an appropriate comparison between the column densities and velocity dispersions of observed and simulated clouds, we subject them to a highly analogous analysis. The observations and simulations are first convolved to a common spatial resolution of $1\arcmin$. The column densities are then evaluated at a single $\{l,b\}$ coordinate per cloud. For the simulations, we select the coordinate with the highest column density within a $5\times5~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$ area centred on the cloud centre of mass. For the observations, this coordinate is taken to correspond to the cloud centre, which is identified by fitting a two-dimensional Gaussian to each cloud in the HiGAL column density map. The column densities are then obtained directly from the simulated and observed maps, at the pixel closest to the the selected coordinate. The uncertainty on the observed column densities is taken to be a factor of 2.
The velocity dispersions of the simulated clouds are measured by calculating the mass-weighted line-of-sight velocity dispersion within a square of $7.2~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$ (i.e.~$0\fdg05$) in width, again centred on the cloud centre of mass. This averaging scale matches that over which the observed velocity dispersions are extracted. When measuring the observed velocity dispersions, it is crucial to avoid contamination by the complex large-scale kinematic structure of the CMZ, with multiple streams intersecting along the line of sight \citep[e.g.][]{kruijssen15,henshaw16}. Therefore, we fit the HNCO spectra across the entire CMZ obtained using the spectral line fitting code {\sc SCOUSE} \citep{henshaw16}. For these fits, we adopt a spectral averaging area with a width of $7.2~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$ (i.e.~$0\fdg05$). We centre the spectral averaging areas on the cloud coordinates obtained above, reject velocity components unassociated with the clouds,\footnote{Specifically, we remove components with negative line-of-sight velocities relative to the local standard of rest, or velocities offset from the \citet{kruijssen15} orbit by more than $40~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}$. We also exclude components containing less than 25~per~cent of the flux of the brightest component.} and calculate the intensity weighted average velocity dispersion of these components.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\hsize]{figures/obs.pdf}%
\vspace{-2mm}\caption{
\label{fig:obs}
Comparison of the simulations to observed dust ridge clouds. Panel~1: three-colour composite image of the CMZ as in \autoref{fig:struc}. Panel~2: column densities. Panel~3: line-of-sight velocity dispersions. The symbols represent the observed properties of the dust ridge clouds, whereas the grey-shaded area indicates the range spanned by the simulated clouds for the five different initial conditions from \autoref{tab:ics}. For the models, the column densities and velocity dispersions are calculated differently from those in \autoref{fig:struc} and \autoref{fig:kin} to facilitate an appropriate comparison to the observations (see the text). They are also averaged over a $0.3~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$ time window to reduce stochasticity. This figure shows that most of the observed column densities and velocity dispersions of dust ridge clouds are reproduced by drawing from the range of cloud properties observed upstream and simulating their evolution. Only the column density of Sgr~B2 exceeds the range covered by the simulations.
}
\end{figure}
The middle panel of \autoref{fig:obs} compares the observed column densities in the Brick, clouds~b, c, d, e, and f, Sgr~B2, and Sgr~B2+ to the total range spanned by the simulations (grey-shaded area) at each Galactic longitude or time. Neither the observations nor the simulations show any significant trends of increasing or decreasing column density with longitude (with the exception of the single data point marking Sgr~B2). For the simulations, we see that the total range spanned by the five different sets of initial conditions from \autoref{tab:ics} is wider than the amplitude of any trend across the full longitude range (as in \autoref{fig:struc}). The absolute column densities found in the simulations reproduce the observed range, with the exception of Sgr~B2. There are two possible reasons for this. Firstly, it may indicate the superposition of several clouds along the line of sight (as found in Section~\ref{sec:maps}). Secondly, our high-density simulation achieves an extreme star formation efficiency of nearly 90~per~cent near the position of Sgr~B2. This is unphysical and results from the absence of mechanisms that may slow down collapse and star formation, such as stellar feedback and magnetic fields. Including the mass locked in sink particles increases the upper envelope of the grey-shaded area by a factor of 5--10, making it consistent with Sgr~B2. Therefore, we conclude that the high column density of Sgr~B2 should be addressed in future simulations employing a more complete physical model.
In the bottom panel of \autoref{fig:obs}, we compare the observed velocity dispersions of the same set of clouds to the range covered in our simulations, again as a function of Galactic longitude. The observed velocity dispersions fall within the total range of simulated velocity dispersions. In addition, both the simulations and the observed clouds suggest a weak increase of $\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$}$ at $l>0\fdg2$, with Pearson and Spearman correlation coefficients for the observed data points of $r\approx0.5$. In the simulations, this is caused by a combination of (tidally-induced) gravitational collapse and shear (see Section~\ref{sec:sigmalos}). The generally good agreement at these longitudes contrasts with a slight ($2$--$3~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}$) underprediction of the observed velocity dispersion of cloud~c. It is plausible that the difference results from differences in the initial conditions. If true, this would imply that cloud~c had initial conditions similar to the high-density and high-velocity dispersion simulations in \autoref{tab:ics}, which exhibit the highest velocity dispersions and define the upper bound on the grey-shaded area in the bottom panel of \autoref{fig:obs}. However, two important caveats are in order. Firstly, the observed velocity dispersions of CMZ clouds may vary by up to a factor of $\sim2$ depending on the spectral line used, even if they have comparable critical excitation densities \citep[e.g.][]{rathborne15}. With HNCO, we use a tracer showing widespread emission in the CMZ that likely traces most mass in clouds. It thus provides a good match to the simulations presented here, but it remains possible that other spectral lines are more appropriate. Secondly, we reiterate that the presented simulations capture a limited number of physical processes. The inclusion of additional physics, such as stellar feedback or chemistry, may add further scatter and widen the predicted ranges represented by the grey-shaded areas in \autoref{fig:obs}. We plan to address the influence of these processes in future work.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=0.98\hsize]{figures/brick_comp.pdf}%
\vspace{-2mm}\caption{
\label{fig:brick}
Comparison of dust continuum observations of the `Brick' obtained with ALMA at 3~mm (89~GHz) to a simulated observation of the high-density simulation at the same position as the real Brick (cf.~\autoref{tab:snaps}). Panel~1: column density map of the native simulation, restricted to the high-density part of the gas reservoir associated with the cloud. Panel~2: simulated observation of panel~1, mimicking the precise setup of the ALMA observations (see the text). Panel~3: real ALMA observation from \citet{rathborne15}. All maps are scaled to the same units as indicated by the colour bar and described in the text. The ellipse in the bottom-left corners of panels~2 and~3 illustrates the beam shape and size. This figure shows that the morphology and typical peak brightness of the simulated cloud are similar to those of the observed Brick.
}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Comparison to ALMA observations of the Brick} \label{sec:brick}
We now turn to a qualitative comparison of the observed 3~mm (89~GHz) dust continuum ALMA observations of the Brick \citep{rathborne15} to the high-density simulation snapshot at the position listed in \autoref{tab:snaps}, which provides the best match to the Brick among the simulations and snapshots presented in this work. To carry out this comparison, we generate a `simulated' ALMA observation using the {\sc CASA}\xspace software package \citep{mcmullin07}, adopting the same setup with which the Brick was observed by \citet{rathborne15}. This is done using the {\tt simobserve} and {\tt simanalyze} tasks in {\sc casa}. These tasks allow us to perform synthetic ALMA observations of an input image by first simulating the observation based on user-defined input parameters and subsequently generating a set of corresponding visibilities. These visibility data are then imaged using the {\tt clean} task.
To prepare the simulated map, we first convert it from units of $\mbox{M$_\odot$}~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}^{-2}$ to Jy. To do this, we assume a distance of $d=8.3~\mbox{${\rm kpc}$}$ as in the rest of this paper, a dust temperature of $T=20~{\rm K}$, an observing frequency of $\nu=89~{\rm GHz}$, a gas-to-dust ratio of 100, and an emissivity index of $\beta=1.75$. The input parameters for this simulated observation are based on those presented in \citet[ALMA project ID 2011.0.00217.S]{rathborne15}. We use the {\tt buildConfigurationFile} task to generate antenna configuration files from the measurement sets of the real data. The data were taken across six execution blocks, each with varying antenna configurations. To replicate the observations, we simulate six separate observations, each corresponding to a different configuration. A mosaic of $72\arcsec\times162\arcsec$ with a central position of $\{l,b\} = \{0.275, 0.030\}$ is `observed',\footnote{Because the simulated cloud is lopsided (see \autoref{fig:map}), the central coordinates are offset from the centre of the Brick by $0\fdg026$. That way, the field of view is focused on where most of the mass resides in the simulation.} with four spectral bands set at 87.2, 89.1, 99.1, and 101.1~GHz, each with 1875~MHz bandwidth, thus providing a combined bandwidth of 7.5~GHz. Each execution is run for 40 minutes on-source and assumes a precipitable water vapour of ${\rm PWV}=1.5~{\rm mm}$.
\autoref{fig:brick} shows the original column density map of the high-density simulation at the position of the Brick, its simulated observation that has been generated with {\sc CASA}\xspace according to the procedure above,\footnote{For consistency with most of the analysis presented in this work, we have used the same density threshold of $\rho\geq10^4~\mbox{${\rm cm}^{-3}$}$ to produce the images of the simulation. Material at lower densities is unlikely to contribute strongly to the ALMA maps, because emission on large angular scales is filtered out by the interferometer.} and the dust continuum ALMA image of the real Brick from \citet{rathborne15}, all on the same (linear) intensity scale indicated by the colour bar. This comparison provides several relevant insights. Firstly, the setup used to observe the Brick with ALMA only recovers part of the flux and structure from the simulation. Relative to the left-hand panel of \autoref{fig:brick}, the middle panel especially misses emission near the edges of the field of view, where the sensitivity drops. However, the brightest cores and filamentary structures are recovered well. A qualitative\footnote{We reiterate that a one-to-one, absolute comparison between the simulated and observed maps is not meaningful, because the precise structure of the simulated map depends entirely on the specific realisation of the simulation's initial conditions. Even between identical realisations of the initial conditions, differences will develop during the simulation due to micro-scale chaos and stochasticity \citep[e.g.][]{keller19}.} comparison of these to the true Brick dust column density map in the right-hand panel shows remarkable agreement. Other than the observed core at $\{l,b\}=\{0\fdg261,0\fdg016\}$, which is known to host a water maser marking the onset of star formation and is saturated on the colour scale of \autoref{fig:brick} at $2.4~{\rm mJy}~\mbox{${\rm arcsec}$}^{-2}$, the brightest cores in both the simulated and real Brick are of the order $0.5~{\rm mJy}~\mbox{${\rm arcsec}$}^{-2}$. In addition, both maps show core sizes of $0.1$--$0.2~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$, connected by pc-scale, flocculent filamentary structures. Globally, they also follow a similar morphology, which manifests itself in the form of comparable inclinations, aspect ratios, and curvature. In both maps, the filamentary structures run along the major axis near the middle of the cloud (which we attribute to the vertical tidal compression in Section~\ref{sec:maps}) and fan out to cover the full width of the cloud towards its extremities in the top left and bottom right.
The above, cursory comparison of the simulated and real Brick clouds will be followed up with a more detailed analysis in future work. For instance, the size-linewidth relation, spatial and velocity power spectra, fractal dimension, and column density PDF are ideally suited observables for a thorough, quantitative comparison of these simulations to the observed CMZ clouds. In particular, an ALMA Large Programme covering the entire CMZ with a spatial resolution, sensitivity, and spectral setup as in \autoref{fig:brick} is both observationally feasible and would enable systematic comparisons of these quantities as a function of (orbital) position to the simulations.
\subsection{Predictions for future observational tests} \label{sec:pred}
Throughout this paper, we have drawn a direct comparison between the simulated clouds and observations of real CMZ clouds. This comparison shows that the presented simulations quantitatively reproduce a surprising variety of properties of the observed dust ridge clouds, from their column densities and velocity dispersions (Section~\ref{sec:comp}) to the velocity gradient (Section~\ref{sec:spin}) and spatially-resolved structure (Section~\ref{sec:brick}) of the Brick. These results add to the qualitative discussion of a much wider variety of observables in Section~\ref{sec:maps} and justify the use of these simulations as interpretative tools for constraining which physical mechanisms govern the baryon cycle in the CMZ. The quantitative character of these simulations opens up a variety of future observational tests of the physical predictions and hypotheses put forward in this work. Here, we focus on predictions of our models that would benefit from additional observational follow-up work. In addition, we discuss how broadly the predictions of our models should apply.
In principle, the physical processes modelled in this work should apply generally. We have adopted initial conditions representative of the clouds some $0.75~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$ upstream of the dust ridge, situated on the other side of the preceding pericentre passage, at negative Galactic longitudes and positive Galactic latitudes \citep[cf.][]{henshaw16b}. Based on their relatively low densities relative to other CMZ clouds, these clouds are assumed to have recently condensed out of the diffuse medium, possibly due to their recent arrival on the 100-pc stream. If the progenitors to other dense, dust ridge-like gas structures have similar properties, we would expect that these sequences of dense gas clouds also follow the behaviour found in our simulations. In this context, specific targets of interest could be the $20$ and $50~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}$ clouds. These clouds are passing through pericentre at a radius of $r=60$--$70~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$ \citep{kruijssen15}, represent the high-density end of a part of the 100-pc stream that starts more diffusely near Sgr~C, and exhibit signs of star formation \citep[e.g.][]{ho85,mills11,lu15,lu17}. It is quite plausible that the morphological and kinematic trends with longitude identified in this work are found not only in the dust ridge, but at least qualitatively also in the $20$ and $50~\mbox{${\rm km}~{\rm s}^{-1}$}$ clouds.
We emphasise that the trends with Galactic longitude (or equivalently with time relative to accretion or pericentre passage) predicted by \autoref{fig:struc} and \autoref{fig:kin} are not necessarily monotonic. The range of initial conditions was chosen to represent a reasonable range based on the plausible precursor clouds to the dust ridge. As such, the spread between the model curves in \autoref{fig:struc} and \autoref{fig:kin} provides an uncertainty range. For some quantities (e.g.~the column density and velocity dispersion, see Section~\ref{sec:comp}), this range exceeds the total magnitude of the trend, implying that even opposite trends may be observed if the initial conditions of the clouds vary systematically with longitude. Notwithstanding this caveat, we do predict a weak, but measurable trend of increasing velocity dispersions towards the highest longitudes, which is tentatively confirmed by the observations shown in \autoref{fig:obs} (also see \citealt{krieger17}). Other quantities (e.g.~the aspect ratio and spin angular momentum) exhibit well-defined trends that represent firm predictions of this work. A systematic study of the presented observables as a function of position along the 100-pc stream should allow recently-condensed sequences of clouds to be identified. These sequences may cover any range of evolutionary phases between the initial condensation out of the diffuse medium and their eventual disruption by stellar feedback. However, the finite lengths of such correlated segments mean they are unlikely to span the complete evolutionary timeline at a single moment in time. Correlating the occurrence of these sequences with pericentre passages will show whether the eccentricity of the orbit plays a defining role in regulating cloud morphology in kinematics or, as expected based on these simulations, plays a relevant yet sub-dominant role next to the presence of the external gravitational potential.
Finally, the advent of ALMA now enables extragalactic CMZs to be observed at a sensitivity and spatial resolution similar to those obtained of the Galactic CMZ in the pre-ALMA era. Provided that the gravitational potential, as parameterised through the power law slope of the enclosed mass profile, and the orbital eccentricity of the gas streams in such CMZs are similar to those adopted here, our predictions should apply directly to these systems too. Discussed observables that may feasibly be obtained in face-on CMZs are the clouds' longitudinal extents ($\delta x$) and velocity dispersions ($\mbox{$\sigma_{\rm los}$}$, under the assumption that the trends with longitude are stronger than the deviations from velocity isotropy). In addition, galaxies with low inclinations provide a unique opportunity to quantify the extents of clouds in the galactic plane, which we predict to be substantial. The predictions for the cloud aspect ratios, column densities, and velocity gradients are specific to observations through the orbital plane. Highly-inclined, edge-on galaxies such as NGC~253 \citep[e.g.][]{sakamoto11} would enable a comparison to these observables, in addition to the clouds' longitudinal extents and velocity dispersions.
Above all, the simulations presented in this paper constitute a rich data set that can be used to shed light on a wide range of open questions. While we have considered several key quantities and observables here, future work will extend our analysis to e.g.~the star formation efficiencies, virial parameters, and size-linewidth relations. Together with its companion paper \citep{dale19}, the present work sets the first step towards an in-depth physical understanding of the close interaction between galactic dynamics, cloud evolution, and star formation, both in the CMZ of the Milky Way and in extragalactic centres.
\section{Conclusions and implications} \label{sec:concl}
We have presented a set of five numerical simulations of gas clouds orbiting on the 100-pc stream of the CMZ, spanning a representative range of initial conditions, with the goal of characterising their morphological and kinematic evolution in response to the external gravitational potential and their passage through pericentre.\footnote{A detailed discussion of the simulations is presented in a companion paper \citep{dale19}, in which we also discuss the general properties of clouds orbiting in external potentials and investigate how the background potential affects the star formation activity of the orbiting clouds.} This represents the first set of numerical simulations specifically aimed at modelling the clouds in the CMZ dust ridge, thus enabling direct comparisons to observations. Indeed, we find that the inclusion of the background potential and the orbital motion allow our models to reproduce several key features of the observed CMZ clouds. The main results of this work are as follows.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[{\it Background potential}:]
The presence of a background potential and the clouds' motion through pericentre represent a transformational event, affecting several of the cloud properties. The potential generates a fully compressive tidal field in the galactocentric radius range $45<r/\mbox{${\rm pc}$}<115$, most strongly so in the vertical direction, and also imposes a significant amount of shear. The pericentre passage increases the strengths of both these effects by several tens of per~cent. Additionally, the motion from apocentre towards pericentre on an eccentric orbit causes a geometric compression perpendicular to the direction of motion due to the convergence of the orbital trajectories, as well as a geometric extension along the orbit due to differential acceleration.
\item[{\it Global morphology}:]
The combination of the compressive tidal field and geometric convergence towards pericentre causes the clouds to be compressed vertically, leading to a factor 2 decrease of their vertical extent. In addition, the presence of shear and differential acceleration along the orbit stretches the clouds in the Galactic longitude direction by up to a factor of 2. Together, these effects turn the clouds into pancake-like structures, reaching an extreme aspect ratio of $\delta z/\delta x=0.25$ between pericentre and the position of the Brick, after which the aspect ratio gradually returns to unity by the position of Sgr~B2. These galactic-dynamical deformations affect the simulated clouds down to the scales below which self-gravity dominates, causing them to dynamically decouple from the background potential. Quantitatively, the decoupling scale varies with the cloud density.
\item[{\it Column densities}:]
Due to the vertical compression, the (mass-weighted) column densities of the simulated clouds reach a local maximum at the position of the Brick. The global column density subsequently briefly decreases, but the densities of individual sub-clumps proceed to increase as the clouds emerge from the bottom of the potential at pericentre and gravitational collapse sets in. The curvature of the orbit away from the observer projects the azimuthally-stretched clouds along the line of sight, driving up the column density. However, the combined magnitude of these evolutionary trends is smaller than the range of column densities encompassed by our suite of simulations, which were chosen to be representative of the gas upstream from the dust ridge. Therefore, column density variations among the dust ridge clouds primarily trace variations in their initial conditions. We also find that the observed rise of the global column density towards high Galactic longitudes at the Sgr~B2 complex indicates the superposition of multiple clouds along the line of sight.
\item[{\it Spatial structure}:]
As the clouds orbit the Galactic Centre, their central regions fragment and undergo local gravitational collapse, whereas their outer layers disperse under the influence of shear. This causes the clouds to develop flocculent filamentary structures oriented perpendicularly to the vertical compression, and form $10~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$-scale extensions pointing towards the observer. Due to the torque experienced by the clouds as they pass through pericentre, these extensions are offset towards high Galactic longitudes and latitudes, resulting in clouds that appear inclined in the plane of the sky. Some of these extensions are (partially) accreted by the cloud centres over time, causing them to grow in mass. This more strongly affects the higher-density clouds.
\item[{\it Kinematics and dynamics}:]
The kinematics of the clouds are driven by a combination of shear and gravitational collapse due to the compressive tidal field. The dissipation of the initial turbulent energy and the corresponding decrease of the line-of-sight velocity dispersion are slowed down by shear-generated motions. These motions cause the clouds to counter-rotate relative to the orbital motion, turning them into spinning pancakes with velocity gradients opposite to the orbital rotation. Eventually, gravitational collapse sets in and causes the velocity dispersions to increase. Our models make a strong prediction that the velocity dispersion should increase steeply with longitude between $0\fdg5\leq l\leq0\fdg8$. As the orbit curves off at high longitudes, the superposition of clouds along the line of sight leads to extreme kinematic complexity, with large numbers of velocity components. Another consequence of the collapse is that the clouds' velocity gradients increase in strength between pericentre passage and the position of Sgr~B2 due to the collapse-driven increase of their angular velocity. The clouds' spin angular momenta are not conserved during this collapse. They reach a peak value at the position of the Brick due to the preceding pericentre passage, but decrease during collapse due to tidal shear-driven torques from the background potential.
\item[{\it Comparison to observations}:]
The above quantities and their evolution naturally explain a number of key observations of CMZ clouds. Below, we list the main ones, indicate the responsible mechanisms in parentheses, and provide key observational references where appropriate. The simulations reproduce the Brick's high column density (compressive tidal field and pericentre passage, cf.~\citealt{longmore12}), its velocity gradient opposite to the orbital rotation (shear, enhanced by collapse due to the compressive tidal field, cf.~\citealt{rathborne14,federrath16}), its flattened morphology (compressive tidal field and geometric deformation during pericentre passage, cf.~\citealt{lis98}), its inclination in the plane of the sky (torque during pericentre passage), its expanding outer layers (shear, cf.~\citealt{rathborne14}), and its filamentary structure along its major axis (compressive tidal field, cf.~\citealt{rathborne15}; also seen in clouds b, d, and e by \citealt{walker18}). They also reproduce the evolution along the dust ridge of the clouds' inclination angles (torque during pericentre passage), as well as the increase of the velocity dispersion along the dust ridge towards Sgr~B2 (compressive tidal field and shear, cf.~\citealt{henshaw16}), the increased kinematic complexity of the Sgr~B2 complex (shear and orbital curvature, cf.~\citealt{mehringer93}), and the range of cloud column densities found along the dust ridge (initial conditions, compressive tidal field, shear, orbital curvature, and pericentre passage, cf.~Battersby et al.~in prep.). Taken together, the reproduction of such a wide range of observables strongly suggests that the dynamical ingredients of the presented models are critical for understanding the properties, formation, and evolution of the CMZ clouds.
\item[{\it Background potential vs.~pericentre passage}:]
\citet{dale19} compare the simulations discussed here to a set of control experiments of clouds on a circular orbit within the same gravitational potential (thus `switching off' the pericentre passage), as well as of clouds in complete isolation. We provide analogues to \autoref{fig:struc} and \autoref{fig:kin} for the circular control runs in Appendix~\ref{sec:circ}, but refer to \citet{dale19} for further details and summarise the conclusions relevant to the results of this work here. We find that the presence of the background potential is the main factor in setting the behaviour of most of the observables discussed above. The potential generates shear and shapes the tidal field, thereby setting the cloud radii, aspect ratios, the onset of gravitational collapse and the corresponding rise of the column densities, velocity dispersions, velocity gradients, and absolute spin angular momenta. However, the pericentre passage accelerates the evolution of all of the above observables by $0.1$--$0.3~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$ and additionally drives the temporary decrease of the column densities downstream from the Brick due to post-pericentre expansion, as well as the rise of the spin angular momenta just after pericentre. The extent to which these effects manifest themselves in practice depends on the timing of pericentre passage relative to cloud condensation or accretion (see below).
\item[{\it Collapse triggered by pericentre passage:}]
As a result of the above comparison between the background potential and the pericentre passage, we find that the pericentre passage may act as a trigger for collapse (and possibly star formation) if the gas enters the 100-pc stream (either by accretion or by condensing out of the diffuse medium) less than one free-fall time before pericentre (i.e.~$\Delta t\la0.5~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$ or $\Delta l\la0\fdg5$ for the gas upstream from the dust ridge, see \citealt{henshaw16b}). This can manifest itself as an evolutionary progression of clouds as a function of Galactic longitude downstream from pericentre. However, if the gas enters the stream earlier, it may collapse without the aid of the `nudge' provided by the pericentre passage, thus interrupting any evolutionary sequence. Note that the apocentre radius of the \citet{kruijssen15} orbit ($r_{\rm a}=120~\mbox{${\rm pc}$}$) lies on the outer edge of the compressive region ($45<r/\mbox{${\rm pc}$}<115$), which implies that clouds orbiting on the gas stream may alternate between mildly extensive and strongly compressive tidal fields. Given the time difference between apocentre and pericentre of $\Delta t=1~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$, any self-gravitating gas with volume densities $\rho\la10^3~\mbox{${\rm cm}^{-3}$}$ (corresponding to free-fall times $\mbox{$t_{\rm ff}$}\ga1.1~\mbox{${\rm Myr}$}$) will thus undergo collapse triggered by the pericentre passage. For higher-density gas, this depends on the time of cloud condensation or its accretion onto the 100-pc stream relative to pericentre.
\item[{\it Collapse triggered by accretion onto the 100-pc stream:}]
We find that the strong influence of the compressive tidal field causes major changes to the evolution of clouds orbiting in the CMZ potential. Any gas flows that enter the compressive region at $45<r/\mbox{${\rm pc}$}<115$ will be subject to the sudden presence of a fully compressive tidal field and are therefore likely to follow the evolutionary streamline identified in this paper. The subsequent evolution of the condensing clouds should follow the general predictions made by our simulations. This means that evolutionary sequences of CMZ clouds may follow from a preceding pericentre passage if the timing is right, but are not restricted to such `hotspots'. Instead, any evolutionary progression found among segments of the 100-pc stream may be used to infer sites of cloud condensation or accretion upstream from such segments and can plausibly be translated into an absolute timeline by using the simulations presented here. This channel for collapse is most important for clouds that condense or accrete onto the 100-pc stream more than a free-fall time before the next pericentre passage. We thus expect evolutionary sequences along the 100-pc stream to appear segmented, with a fraction of them being triggered by pericentre passage and another fraction being triggered by entering the stream.\looseness=-1
\item[{\it General implications}:]
The results presented in this paper reveal that the evolution of molecular clouds near galactic centres is closely coupled to their orbital dynamics. As galactic rotation curves must turn over at small radii, such that $v\propto r^{(\alpha-1)/2}\equiv r^\beta$ with $\alpha>2$ and $\beta>1/2$, a fully compressive tidal field is predicted to be present in most galactic centres. As a result, the accretion of gas onto these galactic centres will be accompanied by transformative dynamical changes to the clouds, which likely lead to their collapse and associated star formation. During their subsequent evolution, the clouds are shaped by high levels of shear, as well as tidal and geometric deformation. Together, these processes naturally give rise to the starbursts observed in numerous galactic nuclei \citep[e.g.][also see \citealt{krumholz15,krumholz17,torrey17}]{jogee05,davies07,leroy13}.
\end{enumerate}
By zooming in on individual, simulated clouds that orbit in a realistic gravitational potential of a galactic nucleus, we have identified several key physical processes that govern the lifecycle of gas and star formation in such nuclei. It is not unlikely that these mechanisms set important bottlenecks (or avenues) for gas accretion onto supermassive black holes, thus affecting the large-scale evolution of the host galaxy. For instance, the tidally-induced, efficient circumnuclear star formation may represent an important accretion bottleneck and explain why there is no correlation between supermassive black hole growth and the presence of galactic bars \citep[e.g.][]{goulding17}. In the future, it will be beneficial to expand our models to a broader range of spatial scales and observables, to further increase their predictive power and facilitate additional, direct comparisons to the Galactic CMZ and extragalactic nuclei.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
JMDK and SMRJ gratefully acknowledge funding from the German Research Foundation (DFG) in the form of an Emmy Noether Research Group (grant number KR4801/1-1). JMDK and MAP gratefully acknowledge funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme via the ERC Starting Grant MUSTANG (grant agreement number 714907) and from Sonderforschungsbereich SFB 881 ``The Milky Way System'' (subproject P1) of the DFG.
ATB gratefully acknowledges funding from the ERC under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement number 726384).
ASM and STS acknowledge funding by the DFG via the Sonderforschungsbereich SFB 956 ``Conditions and Impact of Star Formation'' (subproject A4 and A6) and the Bonn-Cologne Graduate School.
This work has made use of the Python libraries Matplotlib \citep{hunter07}, Numpy \citep{vanderwalt11}, Scipy \citep{jones01}, and Astropy \citep{astropy13}.
We thank Christoph Federrath, Simon Glover, Ralf Klessen, Jill Rathborne, and Mattia Sormani for insightful comments and discussions during the development of this work, and Henrik Beuther, Jens Kauffmann, and Peter Schilke for their helpful feedback on an early draft. We thank an anonymous referee for constructive comments that improved this paper. JMDK and SNL thank Schlo\ss\ Weitenburg for their kind hospitality during the development of this work.
\bibliographystyle{mnras}
|
\section{Introduction}
General relativity describes the geometry of gravity in terms of a dynamical (pseudo-)Riemannian metric.
String theory and M-theory provide a route towards a quantum mechanical understanding of gravity.
At low energies, the classical geometry of string theory/M-theory is again described by a metric, whose dynamics is governed by a supergravity theory in which the metric is accompanied by a collection of scalars and $p$-form gauge fields, plus fermions.
The presence of duality in these theories means that they exhibit a (hidden) symmetry which mixes metric and form field components.
Inspired in large part by a desire to capture and explain this symmetry more fundamentally, and to find new notions of intrinsically ``stringy'' or ``M-theoretic'' geometry treating all the massless states of the theory on a more egalitarian footing, reformulations of the dynamics of supergravity have been found in which the geometry and the fields living in the geometry are united and covariance under the duality groups of string/M-theory is made manifest. These efforts have led to the modern development of double field theory (DFT) and exceptional field theory (ExFT) \cite{Hull:2009mi,Hillmann:2009ci, Berman:2010is,Berman:2011cg, Berman:2011jh, Berman:2012vc, Hohm:2013vpa, Hohm:2013uia, Hohm:2014fxa}, building on pioneering earlier work such as \cite{Duff:1989tf,Tseytlin:1990nb, Siegel:1993th, Siegel:1993xq, West:2001as, West:2003fc} and on the introduction of generalised geometry \cite{Gualtieri:2003dx, Hitchin:2004ut}.
The starting point for these theories is to observe that the bosonic degrees of freedom of supergravity in a certain $(n+d)$-dimensional split can be recombined into multiplets of the groups $\mathrm{O}(d,d)$ (when $n+d=10$ \cite{Hohm:2013nja} with the original construction applicable to $n=0$ \cite{Hull:2009mi,Hohm:2010pp}) or $E_{d(d)}$ (when $n+d = 11$, and so far allowing for $d=2,\dots,9$ \cite{Hohm:2013vpa, Hohm:2013uia, Hohm:2014fxa, Hohm:2015xna, Abzalov:2015ega, Musaev:2015ces, Berman:2015rcc, Bossard:2018utw}).
Then the full dynamics and local symmetries of 10- or 11-dimensional supergravity can be encoded in a formulation with a manifest covariance under $\mathrm{O}(d,d)$ or $E_{d(d)}$.
The usual diffeomorphism symmetry, which is associated to the group $\mathrm{GL}(d)$, is extended to a notion of generalised diffeomorphisms involving local $G$ ($=\mathrm{O}(d,d)$ or $E_{d(d)}$) transformations and realised using an extended set of coordinates $Y^M$ transforming under a particular representation of $G$. The original theories are recovered by solving a constraint known as the ``section condition'' which restricts the dependence of all fields in the theory to a subset of the $Y^M$.
Different solutions of the section condition lead to different parametrisations of the fundamental DFT/ExFT variables in terms of standard supergravity fields, depending on different choices of the physical coordinates amongst the $Y^M$. In this way, for instance, ExFT admits inequivalent solutions of the section condition giving either 11-dimensional supergravity or the 10-dimensional type IIB supergravity \cite{Hohm:2013vpa, Blair:2013gqa}. One can think of the usual supergravity theories as following from the single unifying ExFT formulation on solving the consistency conditions of the latter.
A more ambitious interpretation of the geometry of DFT/ExFT is to allow for solutions of the section condition, or parametrisations of the fields, which \emph{do not reduce to conventional supergravity}. A number of avenues have been explored, often involving notions of ``non-geometry'' in one form or another (for lots on non-geometry, see the review \cite{Plauschinn:2018wbo}).
This includes the possibility of relaxing the section condition in order to carry out Scherk-Schwarz type reductions where the twist matrices may depend on dual coordinates.
This leads to lower-dimensional gauged supergravities including those that are not possible to lift to ten- or eleven-dimensional geometries \cite{Dibitetto:2012rk} as well as, in ten dimensions, the massive IIA theory \cite{Hohm:2011cp, Ciceri:2016dmd} and the so-called ``generalised supergravity''. The latter was remarkably only discovered as a type IIB string background less than three years ago \cite{Wulff:2016tju} (from examining in close detail the relationship between kappa symmetry and the string beta function) and was almost immediately shown to have a simple DFT and ExFT picture \cite{Sakatani:2016fvh, Baguet:2016prz}. Furthermore, the DFT/ExFT geometry also provides a home for explicit solutions corresponding to strongly non-perturbative states known as exotic branes -- whose existence is predicted by U-duality \cite{Obers:1998fb,deBoer:2012ma} -- that have no global description in supergravity \cite{Blair:2014zba, Bakhmatov:2017les,Fernandez-Melgarejo:2018yxq,Berman:2018okd}.
In some instances it is possible to describe non-geometry by using alternative spacetime parametrisations of the DFT/ExFT fields, for instance in terms of a metric and bivector \cite{Grana:2008yw,Andriot:2012an}, rather than a metric and two-form.
The examples of the previous paragraph are still based on the idea that there is some spacetime description involving (possibly only locally) a Riemannian metric and some set of forms or bivectors. The novelty in the exotic backgrounds arises from global data as we ``glue'' patches using $E_{d(d)}$ transformations, rather than traditional diffeomorphisms, but locally there is a supergravity description of some sort though perhaps gauged or ``generalised'' due to a Scherk-Schwarz twist. These non-geometric aspects of DFT/ExFT are of course of crucial importance. There is, however, a further generalisation we can make that will be the subject of this paper.
This is the, perhaps rather unexpected, observation that DFT/ExFT also accommodates descriptions of non-Riemannian geometry. These are backgrounds where there is not an invertible spacetime metric but instead a non-relativistic geometry, or even no intrinsic geometric structure at all. Examples of such geometries go back to Newton-Cartan geometry \cite{Cartan:1923zea, Cartan:1924yea}, and include the non-relativistic limit of string theory studied by Gomis and Ooguri \cite{Gomis:2000bd} and Danielsson, Guijosa and Kruczenski \cite{Danielsson:2000gi, Danielsson:2000mu}.
The exploration of non-Riemannian string theory geometries using DFT was pioneered in \cite{Lee:2013hma,Ko:2015rha,Morand:2017fnv,Cho:2018alk}, leading to a classification of allowed non-Riemannian backgrounds \cite{Morand:2017fnv}. The starting point of these papers was the realisation that backgrounds defined by a generalised metric without a conventional spacetime interpretation \cite{Lee:2013hma} could still be studied using the doubled sigma model \cite{Tseytlin:1990nb, Hull:2004in}, which describes a string whose target space is the doubled geometry of DFT. This was connected to the non-relativistic Gomis-Ooguri string in \cite{Ko:2015rha}, including an analysis of the spectrum using spacetime DFT techniques. The paper \cite{Morand:2017fnv} then offered a \emph{classification} of non-Riemannian parametrisations of $\mathrm{O}(d,d)$ generalised metrics, as well as a study of particle and string actions in these backgrounds.
In this paper, we will study examples of M-theory non-Riemannian geometry in the context of exceptional field theory,\footnote{Previously in \cite{Park:2014una} there was a limited discussion of some example non-Riemannian parametrisation in a class of theories generalising the internal part of the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT to $\mathrm{SL}(N)$.} showing that they provide connections to non-relativistic and topological theories within a framework originally intended to describe maximal supergravity.
\subsubsection*{Non-Riemannian backgrounds in $\mathrm{O}(d,d)$: a first encounter}
To set the scene, let us give a brief review of the ideas appearing in the non-Riemannian $\mathrm{O}(d,d)$ backgrounds studied in \cite{Lee:2013hma,Ko:2015rha,Morand:2017fnv,Cho:2018alk}.
We will focus on ``generalised metric'', which may be interpreted as describing the geometry of the extended spacetime with coordinates $Y^M$, with $M=1,\dots, 2d$, in the fundamental representation of $\mathrm{O}(d,d)$.
We can define the generalised metric solely by the properties of being symmetric and compatible with the $\mathrm{O}(d,d)$ structure $\eta$.
Hence, denoting it by $\mathcal{H}_{MN}$, it obeys:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{H} \eta^{-1} \mathcal{H} = \eta \, , \label{comptcon}
\end{equation} where
\begin{equation}
\eta_{MN} = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & I \\ I & 0 \end{pmatrix} \,.
\end{equation}
In the usual DFT formulation, one then solves the compatibility condition (\ref{comptcon}) by parametrising $\mathcal{H}$ as follows:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{H}_{MN} = \mathcal{H}_{MN}(g,B_2) =
\begin{pmatrix} g - B g^{-1} B & B g^{-1} \\ - g^{-1} B & g^{-1} \end{pmatrix} \,,
\label{Hnormal}
\end{equation}
so that subsequently it is possible to interpret $g$ as the spacetime metric and $B_2$ the Kalb-Ramond two-form of a $d$ dimensional space.
This generalised metric is also encountered in the usual string worldsheet theory, where it appears in the Hamiltonian form of the string worldsheet action:
\begin{equation}
S = \int d^2\sigma \dot{X}^i P_i - \frac{1}{2} Z^M \mathcal{H}_{MN} Z^N
\,,\quad
Z^M \equiv \begin{pmatrix} {X}^{\prime i} \\ P_i \end{pmatrix} \,.
\end{equation}
Here, if we integrate out the momenta $P_i$ we recover the usual Polyakov string action in conformal gauge, with background metric and $B$-field.
This Hamiltonian action is actually very closely related to the doubled approach to the string sigma model, in which the target space has doubled coordinates $X^M = ( X^i, \tilde X_i)$ and $\tilde X_i^\prime = P_i$.
However, to illustrate how the generalised metric describes ``non-Riemannian'' backgrounds, we will continue here to think in terms of the Hamiltonian of the usual string, rather than in DFT.
One of the advantages of the Hamiltonian picture is that it frequently allows one to take limits which would be singular in the Lagrangian formulation.
Here, this manifests itself in the ability to choose $\mathcal{H}_{MN}$ to have a degenerate bottom right $d \times d$ block. This is the block that would normally be interpreted as describing the inverse spacetime metric. However, the non-degeneracy of this block is compensated within $\mathcal{H}_{MN}$ such that the whole generalised metric remains well-defined.
An example of such a situation in the case $d=2$ (suppressing the other target space coordinates) is given by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{H}_{MN} = \begin{pmatrix} 2 \mu \eta_{ij} & Z_i{}^j \\ Z_j{}^i & 0 \end{pmatrix}
\,,\quad
\eta_{ij} = \text{diag}\,(-1,1)
\,,\quad
Z_i{}^j = \begin{pmatrix} 0 &1 \\ 1 & 0 \end{pmatrix}\,.
\end{equation}
The momenta $P_i$ cannot be integrated out but, rather, act to impose chirality conditions:
\begin{equation}
S = \int d^2 \sigma P_i ( \dot{X}^i - Z_j{}^i X^{\prime j} ) - \mu \eta_{ij} X^{\prime i} X^{\prime j} \,.
\end{equation}
The generalised metric is that which you obtain in the non-relativistic limit of string theory due to Gomis and Ooguri \cite{Gomis:2000bd}.
A more striking example is to set $\mathcal{H}_{MN} = \eta_{MN}$ (for any $d$). This choice clearly solves (\ref{comptcon}) but is not expressible as parameterised in (\ref{Hnormal}).
In the classification of \cite{Morand:2017fnv}, this has the special position of being ``maximally non-Riemannian''.
The resulting sigma model is described by
\begin{equation}
S = \int d^2 \sigma P_i ( \dot{X}^i - X^{\prime i} )
\end{equation}
an entirely chiral theory, which appears to be related to recent work on certain chiral or ``twisted'' string theories with unusual properties \cite{Siegel:2015axg,Casali:2016atr, Casali:2017mss,Lee:2017utr,Lee:2017crr} or a beta-gamma system \cite{Nekrasov:2005wg}. The full quantum consistency of this model and its possible supersymmetrisation is a fascinating topic for future work.
Viewed as an admissible background in DFT, this case has some very interesting properties: for instance, arbitrary variations $\delta \mathcal{H}_{MN}$ evaluated on this background are automatically projected to zero \cite{Cho:2018alk}. Thus the maximally non-Riemannian space has no moduli!
\subsubsection*{Outline of this paper}
The goal of this paper is to study the M-theory theory analogues of such backgrounds via exceptional field theory.
This will involve re-analysing the consistency conditions on the generalised metrics of ExFT.
Although in the string theory case, we have access to sigma models (either the Hamiltonian form presented above or the truly doubled sigma models such as \cite{Tseytlin:1990nb, Hull:2004in}) with which to explore the non-Riemannian background, the nature of $E_{d(d)}$ covariant worldvolume theories for M-branes (if such theories exist) is mysterious \cite{Duff:2015jka} (though see \cite{Arvanitakis:2017hwb,Arvanitakis:2018hfn, Sakatani:2017vbd} for some ExFT inspired approaches).
Nevertheless, some of the first examples of $E_{d(d)}$ generalised metrics (for $d=4$, i.e. $\mathrm{SL}(5)$) were found by studying the M2 worldvolume theory \cite{Duff:1990hn, Berman:2010is} (in fact they appear also in the M2 Hamiltonian). We therefore expect, or hope, that the geometry of ExFT more generally tells us something about the structure of M-theory backgrounds beyond the conventional geometry.
We will also focus on the generalisation of the DFT maximally non-Riemannian background $\mathcal{H}_{MN} = \eta_{MN}$. This depends on the presence of an invariant tensor in the symmetric product of $R_1 \otimes R_1$.
For the exceptional generalised diffeomorphism groups $E_{d(d)}$, the representation theory precludes the existence of such a tensor in all finite dimensional cases except that of $E_{8(8)}$.
In this case, $R_1 = \mathbf{248}$ is the adjoint (also the fundamental), and we therefore can define $\mathcal{M}_{MN}$ to be proportional to the Killing form $\kappa_{MN}$.
We propose to view the $E_{8(8)}$ ExFT on the background $\mathcal{M}_{MN} = - \kappa_{MN}$ as the definition of the topological ``phase'' introduced in \cite{Hohm:2018ybo} and used to study three-dimensional superconformal field theories \cite{Hohm:2018git}.
In that work, an \emph{ad hoc} truncation was taken by setting $\mathcal{M}_{MN} = 0$ in order to preserve the full $E_{8(8)}$ symmetry. By extending the set of allowed backgrounds to include non-Riemannian generalised metrics, we obtain a non-singular definition of the topological theory.
It is tempting to speculate that this is connected to an old idea (touched upon in for instance \cite{Tseytlin:1981ks, Witten:1988xj, Horowitz:1989ng}) that there should be some underlying topological phase of gravity and that the geometry may emerge through spontaneous breaking. What is interesting about the proposal using DFT and ExFT is that the topological phase exists not with a vanishing metric, as originally envisaged, but via a moduli-free maximally non-Riemannian metric.
This paper is structured as follows.
After the description of the main result of the topological $E_8$ vacuum in section two, we discuss the non-Riemannian backgrounds in $O(d,d)$ DFT and the relationship to Newton-Cartan geometry and the Gomis-Ooguri geometry for the closed string.
Our intention is to lift these ideas to ExFT. Hence we first in section four introduce the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT and its various parameterisations.
This allows us in section five to extend what was done in terms of DFT to the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ theory.
In particular, we first play with some simple examples of ExFT backgrounds which lead to non-Riemannian parametrisations, including the Gomis-Ooguri limit for M2 branes, the (timelike) U-dual of the M2 brane solution, and related examples on the IIB side.
We then establish a general parametrisation of the generalised metric of the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ theory which can be used to describe such examples. We discuss the symmetries of this parametrisation, including some ambiguities involving shift symmetries that are inherent to the non-Riemannian parametrisation. We further relate our parametrisation to the DFT case by reducing from $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ to $O(3,3)$.
Finally, we offer a number of ways to embed (M-theoretic versions of) Newton-Cartan non-relativistic geometry in the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT.
Our intention is thus to demonstrate the utility of the ExFT formulation for describing backgrounds of more general theories than the standard supergravities for which the theory was initially introduced.
This leads to non-relativistic theories of gravity, topological three-dimensional theories, and more. We hope that this paper will stimulate further interest in these uses of DFT/ExFT and provide a starting point to study features of theories with non-Riemannian or non-relativistic geometries.
\section{Generalised metrics, projectors and the topological $E_{8(8)}$ vacuum}
\subsection{Generalised metrics and diffeomorphisms}
The local symmetries of general relativity, double field theory and exceptional field theory can all be treated in same manner, by defining (generalised) diffeomorphisms associated to a group $G$.
For general relativity, this group is $G = \mathrm{GL}(d)$, for DFT, it is $G = \mathrm{O}(d,d)$, and for ExFT, it is $E_{d(d)}$.
We work with coordinates $(X^\mu, Y^M)$, where $\mu = 1,\dots,n$ and $Y^M$ transform in what we call the $R_1$ representation of $G$. In DFT and ExFT, we will call the $X^\mu$ coordinates ``external'' and the $Y^M$ ``internal'' or ``extended'', mimicking the language we would use if we reduced to an $n$-dimensional theory (however no compactification is assumed or needed to formulate these theories).
The $R_1$ representation is the $d$-dimensional fundamental of $\mathrm{GL}(d)$ in the case of general relativity, the $2d$-dimensional fundamental in the case of $\mathrm{O}(d,d)$, and for $E_{d(d)}$ the representations are listed in table \ref{GHR} (the rule is that $R_1$ is the representation whose highest weight is the fundamental weight associated to the rightmost node on the Dynkin diagram).
We define (generalised) diffeomorphisms associated to the transformation of the coordinates $\delta Y^M = - \Lambda^M$ in terms of a (generalised) Lie derivative acting on vectors $\delta_\Lambda V^M = \mathcal{L}_\Lambda V^M$ by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_\Lambda V^M = \Lambda^N \partial_N V^M - \alpha \mathbb{P}_{adj}{}^M{}_K{}^N{}_L \partial_N \Lambda^L V^K + \lambda_V \partial_K \Lambda^K V^M\,,
\label{gldproj}
\end{equation}
where $\mathbb{P}_{adj}{}^M{}_K{}^N{}_L$ denotes the projector from $R_1 \otimes \bar{R}_1$ onto the adjoint representation, $\alpha$ is a constant which depends on the group under consideration (see table \ref{GHR}) and $\lambda_V$ denotes the weight of $V^M$.
It is often useful to expand the projector to obtain an equivalent form of the generalised Lie derivative:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{L}_\Lambda V^M = \Lambda^N \partial_N V^M - V^N \partial_N \Lambda^M + Y^{MN}{}_{KL} \partial_N \Lambda^K V^L + ( \lambda_V + \omega) \partial_K \Lambda^K V^M \,,
\label{gldY}
\end{equation}
which makes apparent how the structure differs from the ordinary Lie derivative (which is given by the first two terms).
The modification involves the so-called $Y$-tensor, which is constructed out of group invariants \cite{Berman:2012vc} (for instance, for $\mathrm{O}(d,d)$, $Y^{MN}{}_{KL} =\eta^{MN} \eta_{KL}$), and also a constant $\omega$ which can be thought of as an intrinsic weight. When $G = \mathrm{GL}(d)$, clearly $Y^{MN}{}_{KL} = 0$ and $\omega = 0$.
\begin{table}\centering
\begin{tabular}{ccccccc}
$G$ & $H$ & $H^*$ & $\alpha$ & $\omega$ & $R_1$ & $R_2$ \\\hline
$\mathrm{GL}(d)$ & $\mathrm{SO}(d)$ & $\mathrm{SO}(1,d-1)$ & 1 & 0 & $\mathbf{d}$ & n/a \\
$\mathrm{O}(D,D)$ & $\mathrm{O}(D) \times \mathrm{O}(D)$ & $\mathrm{O}(1,D-1) \times \mathrm{O}(1,D-1)$ & $2$ & $0$ & $\mathbf{2D}$ & $\mathbf{1}$ \\
$\mathrm{SL}(5)$ & $\mathrm{SO}(5)$ & $\mathrm{SO}(2,3)$ & $3$ & $-1/5$ & $\mathbf{10}$ & $\mathbf{\bar{5}}$ \\
$\mathrm{SO}(5,5)$ & $\mathrm{SO}(5)\times \mathrm{SO}(5)$ & $\mathrm{SO}(5, \mathbb{C})$& $4$ & $-1/4$ & $\mathbf{16}$ & $\mathbf{10}$\\
$E_{6(6)}$ & $\mathrm{USp}(8)$ & $\mathrm{USp}(4,4)$ & $6$ & $-1/3$ & $\mathbf{27}$ & $\mathbf{\bar{27}}$\\
$E_{7(7)}$ & $\mathrm{SU}(8)$ & $\mathrm{SU}^*(8)$& $12$ &$-1/2$ &$\mathbf{56}$ & $\mathbf{133}$\\
$E_{8(8)}$ & $\mathrm{SO}(16)$ & $\mathrm{SO}^*(16)$& $60$ & $-1$ & $\mathbf{248}$ & $\mathbf{1 \oplus 3875}$\\
\end{tabular}
\caption{The vital statistics of ordinary geometry, DFT and ExFT. The (generalised) metric lives in $G/H$ (Euclidean case) or $G/H^*$ (Lorentzian case) \cite{Hull:1998br}, (generalised) vectors are valued in $R_1$, and the section condition in $R_2$. The intrinsic weight is given by $\omega = -1/(n-2)$ in ExFT and $\omega = 0$ in DFT.}
\label{GHR}
\end{table}
The crucial distinction between the $\mathrm{GL}(d)$ Lie derivative of usual Riemannian geometry and the $\mathrm{O}(d,d)$ or $E_{d(d)}$ generalised Lie derivative is that though the former leads to a closed symmetry algebra (closed under the Lie bracket), the algebra of generalised Lie derivatives turns out to be obstructed. The root cause of this obstruction is the dependence of the fields and gauge parameters on the coordinates $Y^M$. One way to guarantee closure is then to impose the \emph{section condition} on the coordinate dependence of all fields and gauge parameters, which can be realised as the condition that $\partial_M \otimes \partial_N \big|_{R_2} = 0$ or (in most cases) simply that $Y^{MN}{}_{KL} \partial_M \otimes \partial_N = 0$. Here the derivatives may act on separate quantities or on a single quantity.
Solutions to the section condition will break the (global and local) $G$-symmetry and amount to a choice of $d$ coordinates $Y^i$ from amongst the $Y^M$ which are taken to be physical. This is how one reduces the formulation with manifest $G$-covariance to the standard geometric description. When further isometries are present such that $\partial_M =0$ then the global group $G$ remains a symmetry and is identified with a usual duality group. Essentially, duality arises from the ambiguity in identifying the physical spacetime inside the extended space when there are isometries.
The geometry of general relativity is, of course, described by a metric. Similarly the generalised, or ``extended'', geometry of DFT/ExFT will be described by a generalised metric.
We define this to be a symmetric matrix, $\mathcal{M}_{MN}$, which is an element of $G$ and so preserves the appropriate invariant tensors. The generalised Lie derivative of the generalised metric follows from \eqref{gldproj} or \eqref{gldY} using the Leibniz property. It takes the form:
\begin{equation}
\delta_\Lambda \mathcal{M}_{MN} = \Lambda^P \partial_P \mathcal{M}_{MN} + 2 \alpha P_{MN}{}^{KL} \partial_K \Lambda^P \mathcal{M}_{LP} \,,
\label{lgm}
\end{equation}
in which the following projector appears:
\begin{equation}
P_{MN}{}^{KL} = \frac{1}{\alpha} \left( \delta^{(K}_M \delta^{L)}_N - \omega \mathcal{M}_{MN} \mathcal{M}^{KL} - \mathcal{M}_{MQ} Y^{Q(K}{}_{RN} \mathcal{M}^{L) R}\right) \, ,
\label{cosetPY}
\end{equation}
or in terms of the adjoint projector,
\begin{equation}
P_{MN}{}^{KL} = \mathcal{M}_{MQ} \mathbb{P}_{adj}{}^Q{}_N{}^{(K}{}_R \mathcal{M}^{L) R} \,.
\label{cosetPP}
\end{equation}
Note that as the $Y$-tensor, or equivalently the adjoint projector, is a group invariant it is preserved by the simultaneous action of $\mathcal{M}$ and $\mathcal{M}^{-1}$ on all four indices, which can be used to check that $P_{MN}{}^{KL}$ is actually symmetric in both its upper and lower pairs of indices.
We can think of equation \eqref{lgm} as expressing the variation of the generalised metric, in terms of a parameter $\partial_{(K} \Lambda^P \mathcal{M}_{L) P}$, which is then projected from the symmetric tensor product of $R_1$ with itself into the space in which $\mathcal{M}_{MN}$ lives by means of $P_{MN}{}^{KL}$. Generically, $\mathcal{M}_{MN}$ is in fact valued in a coset $G/H$.
We can calculate the trace of the projector to compute the number of independent components of the generalised metric, i.e. the dimension of the coset $G/H$ in which it lives.
In general, we find:
\begin{equation}
P_{MN}{}^{MN} = \frac{1}{2 \alpha} \left(
\mathrm{dim} R_1 ( \mathrm{dim} R_1 + 1 - 2 \omega ) - Y^{MN}{}_{MN} - \mathcal{M}_{MN} Y^{MN}{}_{PQ} \mathcal{M}^{PQ}
\right)\,.
\label{traceP}
\end{equation}
Evidently, in general relativity we have $\alpha = 1$, and the terms in \eqref{cosetPY} involving $\omega$ and the $Y$-tensor do not appear. Hence we find $P_{MN}{}^{MN} = \frac{1}{2} d (d+1)$ which is the number of independent components of a symmetric matrix and also the dimension of the coset $\mathrm{GL}(d)/\mathrm{SO}(d)$.
In DFT and ExFT the situation is rather more interesting.
Part of the trace \eqref{traceP} is independent of the generalised metric and follows from representation theory as the Y-tensor can be related to the projector onto the $R_2$ representation \cite{Berman:2012vc}.
For $d=4$ to $d=6$ it is directly proportional to this projector, and we find that its trace is $ Y^{MN}{}_{MN} = 2(d-1) \mathrm{dim}\,R_2$.
For $d=7$, an additional term appears in the Y-tensor involving the antisymmetric invariant of $E_{7(7)}$ (i.e. a projector onto also the trivial representation) and in this case $Y^{MN}{}_{MN} = 2(d-1)\mathrm{dim}\,R_2 - \mathrm{dim}\, R_1/2$. For $d=8$, the situation changes again and the trace does not have quite such a simple expression.
The crucial information about the coset then appears in the very final term in \eqref{traceP}, which we may single out and define as
\begin{equation}
r \equiv \frac{1}{2\alpha} \mathcal{M}_{MN} Y^{MN}{}_{KL} \mathcal{M}^{KL}\,.
\label{r}
\end{equation}
One finds, as summarised in table \ref{projconstants}, that for all groups except $E_{8(8)}$ the trace of the projector gives exactly the dimension of the usual $G/H$ coset minus $r$. For $E_{8(8)}$ we obtain the dimension of $E_{8(8)}/\mathrm{SO}(16)$ plus $2/15$ minus $r$.
It follows that non-zero $r$, if possible, generically corresponds to parametrisations in which there are fewer independent components of the generalised metric, signalling a coset $G/H$ of lower dimension.
Information about $H$ can be introduced in the form of a generalised vielbein, $E_M{}^{\mathcal{A}}$, with a flat index $\mathcal{A}$ transforming under $H$.
The generalised metric is then given $\mathcal{M}_{MN} = E_M{}^{\mathcal{A}}E_N{}^{\mathcal{B}} \mathcal{H}_{AB}$, with the flat metric $\mathcal{H}_{AB}$ which is left invariant by local $H$ transformations.
Using the group properties of the generalised vielbein (it must preserve the Y-tensor), it is then possible to explicitly evaluate $r$, as we will see below for $E_{8(8)}$ in section \ref{8} (and for $E_{7(7)}$ and $E_{6(6)}$ in section \ref{usualcosets}).
\begin{table}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lllllll}
$G$ & $\alpha$ & $\omega$ & $\gamma$ & $\mathrm{dim} \,R_1$ & $P_{MN}{}^{MN}$ \\\hline
$\mathrm{O}(D,D)$ & 2 & 0 & 1 & $2D$ & $D^2 - r$ \\
$\mathrm{SL}(5)$ & 3 &$ - 1/5 $ & 3 & 10 & $14 - r$ \\
$\mathrm{SO}(5,5)$ & 4& $- 1/4$ & 5 & 16 & $25 - r$\\
$E_{6(6)}$ & 6& $- 1/3$ & 10 & 27 & $42 - r$\\
$E_{7(7)}$ & 12& $- 1/2$ & 28 & 56 & $70 - r$ \\
$E_{8(8)}$ & 60& $- 1$ & 189 & 248 & $128 + \frac{2}{15}- r$
\end{tabular}
\caption{Constants appearing in the projector. Here $\gamma \equiv Y^{MN}{}_{MN} / \mathrm{dim}\, R_1$ and $r$ is defined in \eqref{r}.
For the usual cosets $r = 0$ for all cases except $E_{8(8)}$, when $r = \frac{2}{15}$.
}
\label{projconstants}
\end{table}
However, this does not rule out the possibility of finding alternative parametrisations of the generalised metric which correspond to new cosets $G/H$ of lower dimension. Indeed, this underlies the non-Riemannian parametrisations of \cite{Morand:2017fnv}, which we will review from the perspective of the projector $P_{MN}{}^{KL}$ in section \ref{DFTnonRie}, and will appear below in an interesting context for the $E_{8(8)}$ ExFT.\footnote{Indeed, the general situation may be that one can extend the definition of the generalised metric such that $\mathcal{M}_{MN} =E_M{}^{\mathcal{A}}E_N{}^{\mathcal{B}} \mathcal{H}_{AB}$ where now $\mathcal{H}_{AB}$ is specified by a choice of Cartan involution of the group. We thank Martin Cederwall and the anonymous referee for making this point to us.}
\subsection{The action and equations of motion}
Let us now discuss the dynamics of the generalised metric.
Its equations of motion follow from the ExFT action, which is constructed using the requirement of invariance under the local symmetries of ExFT.
These include not only generalised diffeomorphisms but also external diffeomorphisms associated to transformations of the coordinates $X^\mu$, and various generalised gauge transformations of gauge fields that also appear in the theory.
The projector then plays a vital role in the equations of motion for the generalised metric. (Here we are thinking only of the bosonic part of the action: if we include fermions then we will have to use a projector onto the variation of the generalised vielbein. We will comment more on this later.)
In fact, it was in this context that the projector was first written down in \cite{Berkeley:2014nza} (where it was obtained for the groups $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ and $\mathrm{SO}(5,5)$ by explicitly varying known parametrisations of the generalised metric).
When one varies the action with respect to $\mathcal{M}_{MN}$, one naively obtains an expression of the form
\begin{equation}
\delta S = \int \delta \mathcal{M}^{MN} \mathcal{K}_{MN}\, , \qquad \mathcal{K}_{MN} \equiv \frac{\delta S}{\delta \mathcal{M}^{MN}}
\end{equation}
but the true equations of motion are
\begin{equation}\label{eq:EoM}
P_{MN}{}^{KL} \mathcal{K}_{KL}=0\,.
\end{equation}
The reason for this is that one must insist that the variations of the generalised metric $\delta \mathcal{M}^{MN}$ are still compatible with $G$ and so we impose this by a projector. In the standard formulation of ExFT, the actions do not explicitly impose this and so one needs to include these projectors by hand though it is equivalent to just calculating the variations of the action subject to $G$-compatibility.
Now, recalling that the projector depends on $\mathcal{M}_{MN}$, we might consider whether it is possible to find a generalised metric such that the projector vanishes:
\begin{equation}
P_{MN}{}^{KL} = 0 \,,
\end{equation}
meaning the equations of motion \eqref{eq:EoM} are trivially obeyed. This is evidently a very special possibility. It corresponds to changing the structure of the theory such that the coset is $G/G$. Furthermore, as \emph{any} variation of the generalised metric must be projected, $\delta \mathcal{M}_{MN} = P_{MN}{}^{KL} \delta \mathcal{M}_{KL}$, there can be no fluctuations about such a background \cite{Cho:2018alk}.\footnote{The idea of looking for generalised metrics such that $P_{MN}{}^{KL} = 0$ was originally suggested to us in this context by Diego Marqu{\'e}s.}.
For $\mathrm{O}(d,d)$, the ``maximally non-Riemannian'' background $\mathcal{H}_{MN} = \eta_{MN}$ is of this type \cite{Morand:2017fnv}.
This background is invariant under $\mathrm{O}(d,d)$, i.e. it corresponds to a symmetric invariant tensor of the group.
This characterisation is easy to search for in ExFT, where the symmetric product of $R_1$ with itself does not contain the trivial representation for any $E_{d(d)}$ except for $d=8$. For $E_{8(8)}$ we have $R_1 = \mathbf{248}$, which is the adjoint representation and there is an obvious symmetric quadratic invariant given by the Killing form.
We will now discuss this ExFT and what one can say about the non-Riemannian background where the generalised metric is proportional to the Killing form.
\subsection{The $E_{8(8)}$ ExFT and its topological phase}
\label{8}
\subsubsection*{Generalised Diffeomorphisms and the Action}
The $E_{8(8)}$ ExFT \cite{Hohm:2014fxa} is based on an extended geometry parametrised by 248 coordinates $Y^M$ valued therefore in the adjoint of $E_{8(8)}$.
Denoting its generators as $T^M$, we define structure constants $f^{MN}{}_K$ with the convention $[T^M, T^N] = - f^{MN}{}_K T^K$, and the Killing form by
\begin{align}\label{eq:Killing}
\kappa^{MN} \equiv \frac{1}{60} \operatorname{Tr} (T^M T^N) = \frac{1}{60} f^{MP}{}_Q f^{NQ}{}_P\,.
\end{align}
We freely raise and lower all indices using $\kappa^{MN}$ and its inverse $\kappa_{MN}$.
The generalised Lie derivative of an adjoint vector of weight $\lambda$ is explicitly given by
\begin{align}
\mathcal{L}_\Lambda V^M = \Lambda^K \partial_K V^M - 60 {\left( \mathbb{P}_{\mathbf{248}} \right)}^M{}_K{}^N{}_L \partial_N \Lambda^LV^K + \lambda(V) \partial_N \Lambda^N V^M
\label{E8gld}
\end{align}
in which we have used the projector onto the adjoint representation ${\left( \mathbb{P}_{\mathbf{248}} \right)}^M{}_K{}^N{}_L$ defined by
\begin{align}
{\left( \mathbb{P}_{\mathbf{248}} \right)}^M{}_K{}^N{}_L = \frac{1}{60} f^M{}_{KP} f^{PN}{}_L.
\end{align}
Alternatively, one can write the part of this transformation involving $\Lambda^M$ in the form \eqref{gldY} involving the Y-tensor, given here by
\begin{equation}
Y^{MN}{}_{KL} = - f^M{}_{LP} f^{PN}{}_K + 2 \delta^{(M}_K \delta^{N)}_L \,.
\end{equation}
A special feature of the $E_{8(8)}$ ExFT is that it includes additional gauge transformations which appear alongside the conventional generalised Lie derivative.
Under this extra gauge symmetry, generalised vectors transform as
\begin{equation}
\delta_\Sigma V^M = - \Sigma_L f^{LM}{}_N V^N \,,
\label{constrainedgaugetransformation}
\end{equation}
where the gauge parameter $\Sigma_M$ is not an arbitrary covector but is constrained as part of the section condition of the $E_{8(8)}$ ExFT.
This section condition applies to any two quantities $F_M$, $F^\prime_M$ which are said to be ``covariantly constrained'' meaning that they vanish when their tensor product is projected into the $\mathbf{1 \oplus 248 \oplus3875} \subset \mathbf{248 \otimes 248}$, i.e.
\begin{equation}
\kappa^{MN} F_M \otimes F^\prime_N = 0\,,\quad
f^{MNK} F_N \otimes F^\prime_K = 0\,,\quad
{(\mathbb{P}_{\mathbf{3875}})}^{KL}{}_{MN} F_K \otimes F^\prime_L = 0\,.
\label{E8section}
\end{equation}
These quantities include derivatives, $\partial_M$, as usual, the gauge parameters $\Sigma_M$, and a number of other gauge parameters and field \cite{Hohm:2014fxa}.
This section condition guarantees closure of the algebra of the combined action of generalised diffeomorphisms and constrained $\Sigma_M$ transformations, which we denote by
\begin{equation}
\mathbb{L}_{( \Lambda, \Sigma )} \equiv \mathcal{L}_\Lambda + \delta_\Sigma\,.
\end{equation}
The inclusion of the $\Sigma_M$ transformations is in fact necessary for closure: the algebra based on the ordinary generalised Lie derivative \eqref{E8gld} alone cannot be made to close on its own.
The underlying physical reason for the extra gauge transformation \eqref{constrainedgaugetransformation} is the appearance of dual graviton degrees of freedom in the generalised metric of the $E_{8(8)}$ ExFT.
For further details on these subtleties, we refer the reader to the original paper \cite{Hohm:2014fxa} or the recent review \cite{Hohm:2018qhd}.
We proceed to discuss the field content of the theory. This consists of the generalised metric, $\mathcal{M}_{MN}$, an external metric, $g_{\mu\nu}$, and a pair of gauge fields $(\mathcal{A}_\mu{}^M , \mathcal{B}_{\mu M})$, with $\mathcal{B}_{\mu M}$covariantly constrained as in \eqref{E8section}.
These gauge fields have field strengths $(\mathcal{F}_{\mu\nu}{}^M,\mathcal{G}_{\mu\nu M})$ whose precise forms can be found in \cite{Hohm:2014fxa}. All these fields depend on the three-dimensional coordinates $X^\mu$ as well as the 248-dimensional coordinates $Y^M$, subject to the section condition. The gauge field $\mathcal{A}_\mu{}^M$ can be thought of as serving as a gauge field for generalised diffeomorphisms while $\mathcal{B}_{\mu M}$ is a gauge field for the constrained $\Sigma_M$ transformations. We define an improved derivative $D_\mu \equiv \partial_\mu - \mathbb{L}_{( \mathcal{A}_\mu, \mathcal{B}_\mu)}$ which is used in place of $\partial_\mu$.
The action for the $E_{8(8)}$ ExFT is constructed in \cite{Hohm:2014fxa} and is given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
S & = \int \textrm{d}^{3}x \textrm{d}^{248} Y \sqrt{|g|} \,\Bigg(
\hat R[g] + \frac{1}{240} g^{\mu \nu} D_\mu \mathcal{M}_{MN} D_\nu \mathcal{M}^{MN}
- V( \mathcal{M},g ) + \frac{1}{\sqrt{|g|}} \mathcal{L}_{CS}
\Bigg)
\end{split}
\label{actionE8}
\end{equation}
where $\hat R[g]$ is the usual Ricci scalar for the metric $g_{\mu\nu}$, except constructed in terms of $D_\mu$ instead of $\partial_\mu$.
The two terms at the end are:
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}
V (\mathcal{M}, g) & = - \frac{1}{240} \mathcal{M}^{MN} \partial_M \mathcal{M}^{KL} \partial_N \mathcal{M}_{KL} + \frac{1}{2} \mathcal{M}^{MN} \partial_M \mathcal{M}^{KL} \partial_L \mathcal{M}_{NK}\\
& \qquad + \frac{1}{7200} f^{NQ}{}_P f^{MS}{}_R \mathcal{M}^{PK} \partial_M \mathcal{M}_{QK} \mathcal{M}^{RL} \partial_N \mathcal{M}_{SL}\\
& \qquad - \frac{1}{2} \partial_M \ln |g| \partial_N \mathcal{M}^{MN} - \frac{1}{4} \mathcal{M}^{MN} \left( \partial_M \ln |g| \partial_N \ln |g| + \partial_M g^{\mu \nu} \partial_N g_{\mu \nu} \right)\,,
\label{V8}
\end{aligned}
\end{align}
which is usually referred to as the ``potential'', taking the point of view of the external three-dimensional space,
and the Chern-Simons term:
\begin{align}
S_{\text{CS}} \sim \int_{\Sigma^4} \textrm{d}^4x \int \textrm{d}^{248} Y \left( \mathcal{F}^M \wedge \mathcal{G}_M - \frac{1}{2} f_{MN}{}^K \mathcal{F}^M \wedge \partial_K \mathcal{G}^{\mathcal{N}} \right)
\end{align}
written here in a manifestly gauge invariant form using the usual construction of an auxiliary space $\Sigma^4$ whose boundary $\partial \Sigma^4$ is the physical three-dimensional space, and where $\wedge$ denotes the usual product with respect to the external indices, $\mu,\nu,\dots$.
\subsubsection*{Generalised metric and projector}
Conventionally, we view the generalised metric as being an element of $E_{8(8)} / H$, with $H=\mathrm{SO}(16)$, and then this coset is parametrised in terms of a spacetime metric and $p$-form fields. Instead, following the intuition from the DFT approach of \cite{Morand:2017fnv} where the generalised metric was defined as a symmetric two index object obeying the $\mathrm{O}(d,d)$ compatibility condition \eqref{comptcon}, we will define the $E_{8(8)}$ generalised metric by the properties that are needed in \cite{Hohm:2014fxa} to ensure the invariance of the action \eqref{actionE8}.
Thus we define the $E_{8(8)}$ generalised metric to be the symmetric two index object that obeys the constraints:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}_{MK} \mathcal{M}_{NL} \mathcal{M}_{PQ} f^{KLQ} = - f_{MNP} \,,\quad \mathcal{M}_{MK} \kappa^{KL} \mathcal{M}_{LN} = \kappa_{MN} \, .
\label{8Mdef}
\end{equation}
One can check that the conventional coset parametrisation of $\mathcal{M}_{MK}$ obeys these constraints but new results will follow from a solution to these constraints that does not obey the coset parametrisation.
The full generalised Lie derivative (including the additional transformations involving $\Sigma_M$) of the generalised metric takes the form
\begin{align}
\mathbb{L}_{(\Lambda,\Sigma)}
\mathcal{M}_{MN} = \Lambda^P \partial_P \mathcal{M}_{MN} + 2 \cdot 60 P_{MN}{}^{KL} \left(
\partial_K \Lambda^P
+\frac{1}{60} f^{QP}{}_{K} \Sigma_Q\right)
\mathcal{M}_{PL}\,,
\end{align}
with the projector given simply by
\begin{equation}
P_{MN}{}^{KL} =\frac{1}{60} \mathcal{M}_{MQ} f^Q{}_{NP} f^{P (K }{}_R \mathcal{M}^{L) R} \,.
\end{equation}
The trace is
\begin{equation}
P_{MN}{}^{MN} = \frac{1}{2} \left( \kappa^{MN} \mathcal{M}_{MN} + 248 \right) \,.
\end{equation}
Now, for the usual $E_{8(8)} / \mathrm{SO}(16)$ coset, we introduce a generalised vielbein $E_M{}^{\mathcal{A}}$ such that \cite{Baguet:2016jph}
\begin{equation}
E_M{}^{\mathcal{A}} \equiv ( E_M{}^A, E_M{}^{IJ})\,,\quad \kappa^{MN} E_M{}^A E_N{}^B = \delta^{AB} \,,\quad \kappa^{MN} E_M{}^{IJ} E_N{}^{KL} = - 2 \delta^{I[K} \delta^{L]J} \,,
\end{equation}
where $A$ is a spinor index corresponding to the $\mathbf{128}$ of $\mathrm{SO}(16)$, and $I$ the 16-dimensional vector representation, with $E_M{}^{IJ} = - E_M{}^{JI}$ in the $\mathbf{120}$ of $\mathrm{SO}(16)$.
The generalised metric is then given by $\mathcal{M}_{MN} = E_M{}^A E_N{}^B \delta_{AB} + \frac{1}{2} E_M{}^{IJ} E_N{}^{KL} \delta_{IK} \delta_{JL}$ and it follows from the defining properties of the vielbein that $\kappa^{MN} \mathcal{M}_{MN} = 128 - 120 =8$.
Thus we find $P_{MN}{}^{MN} = 128$ as expected.
Now we can consider whether there are alternative parametrisations of $\mathcal{M}_{MN}$ such that $P_{MN}{}^{MN} \neq 128$.
Remarkably, we can immediately write down a choice of $\mathcal{M}_{MN}$ such that $P_{MN}{}^{KL}$ vanishes identically, given by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}_{MN} = - \kappa_{MN} \, .
\end{equation}
This is easily checked to be compatible with the defining constraints \eqref{8Mdef} for $\mathcal{M}_{MN}$ (no other multiple of the Killing form is).
The projector then vanishes as $f^{P (KL)} = 0$.
\subsubsection*{Restricting to the ``topological phase''}
Now let us consider what this implies for the equations of motion.
On general grounds, as we have explained, the equations of motion of $\mathcal{M}_{MN}$ itself will be of the form $P_{MN}{}^{KL} \mathcal{K}_{KL} = 0$, where $\mathcal{K}_{MN}$ is the result of varying the action with respect to $\mathcal{M}^{MN}$.
As the projector vanishes for $\mathcal{M}_{MN} = - \kappa_{MN}$, the equations of motion are trivially obeyed.
Now consider the variation of the other fields in the action.
For instance, the equation of motion of the external metric is:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
0 & =
\hat R_{\mu \nu} - \frac{1}{2} g_{\mu\nu} \left( \hat R[g] + \frac{1}{240} g^{\rho\sigma} D_\rho \mathcal{M}_{MN} D_\sigma \mathcal{M}^{MN} - V( \mathcal{M},g )\right)
\\ & \qquad
+ \frac{1}{240} D_\mu \mathcal{M}_{MN} D_\nu \mathcal{M}^{MN}
+ \frac{1}{2}\sqrt{|g|}^{-1} g_{\mu\nu} \partial_M \left( \sqrt{|g|} ( \partial_N \mathcal{M}^{MN} + \mathcal{M}^{MN} \partial_N \ln |g| )\right)
\\ & \qquad
- \frac{1}{2} \sqrt{|g|}^{-1} \partial_M ( \sqrt{|g|} \mathcal{M}^{MN} ) \partial_N g_{\mu\nu}
- \frac{1}{2} \mathcal{M}^{MN} g_{\mu \rho} \partial_M g^{\rho \sigma} \partial_N g_{\sigma \nu}
- \frac{1}{2} \mathcal{M}^{MN} \partial_M \partial_N g_{\mu\nu}
\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Here $\hat R_{\mu\nu}$ is defined to be the result of varying $\hat R[g]$ with respect to $g_{\mu\nu}$.
Now, when $\mathcal{M}_{MN} = - \kappa_{MN}$ all terms involving the generalised metric vanish identically, either because $D_\mu \kappa_{MN} = 0$ (as the generalised Lie derivative appearing in the definition of $D_\mu$ preserves the Killing form) or because of the section condition $\kappa^{MN} \partial_M \otimes \partial_N = 0$.
Similarly, the equations of motion of the gauge fields $\mathcal{A}_{\mu}{}^M$, $\mathcal{B}_{\mu M}$ will involve $\mathcal{M}_{MN}$ only in the form of (derivatives of) $D_{\mu} \mathcal{M}_{MN}$, and so the contribution of the generalised metric to these equations of motion also vanishes identically.
We can conclude that the equations of motion for $(g_{\mu\nu}, \mathcal{A}_{\mu}{}^M, \mathcal{B}_{\mu M})$ when $\mathcal{M}_{MN} = - \kappa_{MN}$ are those that are obtained from the truncation of the ExFT action obtained by setting $\mathcal{M}_{MN}
= - \kappa_{MN}$ within the action, i.e. in this background the dynamics of the resulting fields are governed by:
\begin{align}
\begin{aligned}
S = \int \textrm{d}^3x \,\textrm{d}^{248} Y \sqrt{|g|} \hat R[g] + \int_{\Sigma^4} \textrm{d}^4x \,\textrm{d}^{248} Y \left( \mathcal{F}^M \wedge \mathcal{G}_M - \frac{1}{2} f_{MN}{}^K \mathcal{F}^M \wedge \partial_K \mathcal{G}^{\mathcal{N}} \right)\,.
\end{aligned}
\label{truncaction}
\end{align}
Now, ordinary three-dimensional gravity is topological, so this action naively resembles that of a topological gravity theory plus a Chern-Simons term, though matters are complicated by the dependence on the coordinates $Y^M$ and the modified partial derivative used in the construction of the Ricci scalar.
Remarkably, however, the entire truncation \eqref{truncaction} including the external metric and the gauge fields is indeed a novel sort of topological theory.
This was shown in \cite{Hohm:2018ybo} where the theory described by the action \eqref{truncaction} was reformulated as a Chern-Simons theory based on a ``Leibniz algebra''\footnote{A generalisation of a Lie algebra in which the product (replacing the Lie bracket) is not necessarily antisymmetric.} incorporating both the three-dimensional Poincar\'e symmetry and the generalised diffeomorphisms of the $E_{8(8)}$ ExFT. (To think of this theory as being topological in the three-dimensional sense, we can view the gauge group of the Chern-Simons theory as being infinite dimensional due to the dependence on the $Y^M$ coordinates, while the integration over these coordinates in the action is part of the definition of an inner product on this infinite dimensional gauge group).
This was termed the ``topological phase'' of the $E_{8(8)}$ ExFT, and was achieved by the perhaps ad hoc elimination of the generalised metric by setting $\mathcal{M}_{MN} = 0$. This was motivated by a desire to eliminate the degrees of freedom in the generalised metric while maintaining unbroken $E_{8(8)}$ (a truncation to the more natural vacuum $\mathcal{M}_{MN} = \delta_{MN}$ would break $E_{8(8)}$ to $\mathrm{SO}(16)$, for example).
We propose that the true, non-singular origin of the topological phase is in fact the maximally non-Riemannian background $\mathcal{M}_{MN} = -\kappa_{MN}$.
We expect that this can be consistently viewed as taking the defining coset to be $E_{8(8)}/E_{8(8)}$, with no internal bosonic degrees of freedom.
It is interesting to realise that the consistency of this truncation depends crucially on the fact that $\kappa^{MN} \partial_M \otimes \partial_N = 0$ by the section conditions of the $E_{8(8)}$ ExFT. Thus, the remaining fields in \eqref{truncaction} may still depend on the extended coordinates $Y^M$ subject to this constraint.
Let us make a short comment about the fermions of the $E_{8(8)}$ ExFT.
We would expect that after truncating the generalised metric degrees of freedom that we should also truncate out the internal fermions.
At this point the supersymmetry of the non-Riemannian background is a little mysterious since usually in ExFT the fermions should transform in a representation of $H$. What this means when $H=E_{8(8)}$ is uncertain but what is apparent is that one cannot just naively insert the condition $\mathcal{M}_{MN} = -\kappa_{MN}$ into the generalised Killing spinor equations. The realisation of fermions in the non-Riemannian background has yet to be determined. Note that the variation of the action with respect to the generalised vielbein, $E_M{}^A$, requires a projector to ensure that $\delta E_M{}^A$ is not arbitrary. Evidently this projector will depend explicitly on the precise form of $H$ (whereas the projector $P_{MN}{}^{KL}$ acting on variations of the generalised metric only knew about $H$ implicitly, through the term $\mathcal{M}_{MN} Y^{MN}{}_{KL} \mathcal{M}^{KL}$) and so must be constructed on a case-by-case basis when starting from a particular non-Riemannian parametrisation of $\mathcal{M}_{MN}$.
A related technical comment is to note that setting $\mathcal{M}_{MN} = - \kappa_{MN}$ is consistent with the invariance of the ExFT action under external diffeomorphisms with parameter $\xi^\mu(X,Y)$, which includes a generalised metric dependent transformation of $\mathcal{A}_\mu{}^M$, namely
\begin{equation}
\delta_\xi \mathcal{A}_\mu{}^M \supset \mathcal{M}^{MN} g_{\mu\nu} \partial_N \xi^\nu \,.
\label{thistransf}
\end{equation}
Normally, this requires cross-cancellation between the scalar potential and the other parts of the action. If this vanishes, $V(\mathcal{M} = -\kappa, g) = 0$, then one might be concerned whether the action is still invariant.
However, when one inspects the calculation in \cite{Hohm:2014fxa} of the variation of the action under these transformations, one finds that all possible terms that could spoil invariance vanish by the section condition on setting $\mathcal{M}^{MN} = - \kappa^{MN}$.
\section{Non-Riemannian backgrounds in $\mathrm{O}(D,D)$ DFT}
\label{DFTnonRie}
In this section we first revisit the possible parametrisations of $\mathrm{O}(D,D)$ generalised metrics from the perspective of the coset projector.
We demonstrate how the classification of $\mathrm{O}(D,D)$ non-Riemannian parametrisations of Morand and Park \cite{Morand:2017fnv} fits into this picture.
Then, we will review the explicit details of these parametrisations and look at some examples which will inspire us in our later study of the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT.
\subsection{Generalised metric and coset projectors}
Let us first recall that the generalised metric of DFT may be defined as a symmetric matrix $\mathcal{H}_{MN}$ obeying the compatibility condition $\mathcal{H}_{MK} \eta^{KL} \mathcal{H}_{LN} = \eta_{MN}$ with the $\mathrm{O}(D,D)$ structure.
It transforms under $\mathrm{O}(D,D)$ generalised diffeomorphisms generated by a generalised vector $\Lambda^M = ( \Lambda^i , \lambda_i )$ according to the generalised Lie derivative \eqref{gldY} with the Y-tensor $Y^{MN}{}_{PQ} = \eta^{MN} \eta_{PQ}$ and $\omega = 0$.
The $\mathrm{O}(D,D)$ section condition $\eta^{MN} \partial_M \otimes \partial_N = 0$ may be solved by $\partial_i \neq 0 , \tilde \partial^i = 0$, where the doubled coordinates are $Y^M = (Y^i, \tilde Y_i)$,
After solving the section condition in this way, generalised diffeomorphisms produce $D$-dimensional diffeomorphisms generated by $\Lambda^i$ and $B$-field gauge transformations with parameter $\lambda_i$.
This leads to the usual parametrisation given in \eqref{Hnormal} in terms of the spacetime metric, $g_{ij}$, in string frame, and the $B$-field. The generalised dilaton may then be identified as $e^{-2\mathbf{d}} = e^{-2\Phi} \sqrt{|g|}$, where $\Phi$ is the spacetime dilaton. There is an implicit assumption in \eqref{Hnormal} that the $D \times D$ block $\mathcal{H}^{ij}$, which is identified with the inverse spacetime metric, is invertible.
The $\mathrm{O}(D,D)$ compatibility condition implies the existence of two projectors
\begin{equation}
P_M^N = \frac{1}{2} ( \delta_M^N + \eta^{NP} \mathcal{H}_{PM} )\,,\quad \bar P_M^N = \frac{1}{2} ( \delta_M^N - \eta^{NP} \mathcal{H}_{PM} )\, ,
\end{equation}
such the projector $P_{MN}{}^{KL}$, that appears in the generalised Lie derivative of the generalised metric \eqref{lgm}, factorises as
\begin{equation}
P_{MN}{}^{KL} = 2 P_M^{(K} \bar P_N{}^{L)} \,.
\end{equation}
In the usual parametrisation \eqref{Hnormal}, the trace $\eta^{MN} \mathcal{H}_{MN}$ is zero, and hence $P_{MN}{}^{MN} = D^2$, as expected for the $\mathrm{O}(D,D) / \mathrm{O}(D) \times \mathrm{O}(D)$ coset.
Let us suppose instead that the trace is not necessarily zero.
Then, as $P_M^N$ and $\bar P_M^N$ are still projectors, we can have $\eta^{MN} \mathcal{H}_{MN} = 2 y$, for some integer $y$, with $-D\leq y \leq D$,
such that $P_M^M = D + y$, $\bar P_M^M = D - y$.
We can define ``square roots'' of the projectors, namely matrices $V_{M A}$ and $\bar{V}_{M \bar{A}}$, where $A = 1 , \dots , D+y$, $\bar{A} = 1 , \dots D-y$.
These obey
\begin{equation}
V_{M A } h^{A B } V_{N B } = \frac{1}{2} ( \mathcal{H}_{MN} + \eta_{MN} )\,,\quad
V_{MA } \eta^{MN} V_{N B } = h_{A B } \,,\quad
\mathcal{H}^{MN} V_{N A } = \eta^{MN} V_{NA } \,,
\label{viel1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\bar{V}_{M{\bar{A}}} \bar{V}_{N{\bar{B}}} \bar{h}^{\bar{A} \bar{B}} = \frac{1}{2} ( \mathcal{H}_{MN} - \eta_{MN} )\,,\quad
\bar{V}_{M\bar{A} } \eta^{MN} \bar{V}_{N \bar{B} } = -\bar{h}^{\bar{A} \bar{B} } \,,\quad
\mathcal{H}^{MN} \bar{V}_{N \bar{A}} = - \eta^{MN} \bar{V}_{N \bar{A}} \,,
\label{viel2}
\end{equation}
where $h_{A B}$ and $\bar{h}_{\bar{A} \bar{B}}$ are respectively $(D+y) \times (D+y)$ and $(D-y) \times (D-y)$ diagonal matrices of signatures $(p,q)$ and $(\bar p, \bar q)$. This is quite general; we will see how different choices of signature allow for different coset descriptions and constrains $(p,q)$ and $(\bar p, \bar q)$.
Constructing a vielbein for the full generalised metric,
\begin{equation}
E_M{}^{\mathcal{A}} = ( V_M{}^A , \bar{V}_M{}^{\bar A} ) \,,\quad \mathcal{H}_{MN} = E_M{}^{\mathcal{A}} E_N{}^{\mathcal{B}} \mathcal{H}_{\cal{A}\cal{B}} \,,
\end{equation}
where the $2D \times 2D$ flat metric,
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{H}_{\cal{A} \cal{B}} \equiv \begin{pmatrix}
h_{A B} & 0 \\
0 & \bar h_{\bar{A} \bar{B}}
\end{pmatrix} \,,
\end{equation}
is of signature $(p+\bar p, q + \bar q)$ we can check that
\begin{equation}
\eta^{\mathcal{A} \mathcal{B} } \equiv E_M{}^{\mathcal{A}} E_N{}^{\mathcal{B}} \eta^{MN} = \begin{pmatrix}
h^{A B} & 0 \\
0 &- \bar h^{\bar{A} \bar{B}}
\end{pmatrix} \,
\end{equation}
then has signature $(p+\bar q,q+\bar p)$.
Now, $E_M{}^{\mathcal{A}}$ must be an $\mathrm{O}(D,D)$ group element. This means that $\eta^{\cal{A}\cal{B}}$ should have signature $(D,D)$ and so be equivalent (by a choice of basis for the flat indices) to $\eta^{MN}$.
Hence the only possibilities obey $p+\bar q = D$, $q+\bar p = D$. This means that $p-\bar p = q - \bar q = y$ which is consistent with the trace being $\eta^{MN} \mathcal{H}_{MN} = \eta^{\cal{A} \cal{B}} \mathcal{H}_{\cal{A}\cal{B}} = p+q - \bar p - \bar q = 2y$.
The conclusion is that when $\eta^{MN} \mathcal{H}_{MN} = 2y$, the allowed denominator groups are $H = \mathrm{O}(p,q) \times \mathrm{O}(p-y,q-y)$ with $p+q-y=D$ and $-D \leq y \leq D$.
To connect with the results of \cite{Morand:2017fnv}, we can trade the integer $y$ for a pair of non-negative integers $(n, \bar n)$ such that $y = n - \bar n$.
We also let $t = p - n$, $s=q-n$, and $d=t+s$, such $D= d+ n+\bar{n}$.
Then instead of the usual $\mathrm{O}(D,D)/\mathrm{O}(D) \times \mathrm{O}(D)$ coset we have
\begin{equation}
\frac{ \mathrm{O}(d+n+\bar{n}, d+n+\bar{n} ) }{\mathrm{O}(t+n,s+n) \times \mathrm{O}(t+\bar{n} , s+\bar{n} )} \,.
\label{ODDcoset}
\end{equation}
The denominator agrees with the generalised Lorentz factors established in \cite{Morand:2017fnv}.
Note that this coset has dimension $d^2 + 2d(n+\bar n) + 4 n \bar n = D^2 - (n-\bar{n})^2$. There are thus $(n-\bar{n})^2$ fewer components than would ordinarily be present.
Note that the explicit parametrisation that will be used in the subsequent subsection does not make this component counting manifest, as it uses variables which are written in a $D$-dimensionally covariant manner. As a result, there are shift symmetries present (see \eqref{dftshift} below) which complicate the choice of what should be regarded as the true independent variables. This suggests there ought to be an alternative formulation which exhibits the coset structure \eqref{ODDcoset} more clearly.\footnote{We thank Jeong-Hyuck Park for detailed discussions on this issue and for sharing an alternative derivation of the fact there are $D^2-(n-\bar n)^2$ independent components.}
\subsection{Review of Morand-Park classification}
\label{MorandPark}
Dropping the assumption of the invertibility of the $D \times D$ block $\mathcal{H}^{ij}$ in the normal parametrisation \eqref{Hnormal} led to the classification of
$\mathrm{O}(D,D)$ generalised metrics in \cite{Morand:2017fnv}. Taking the section condition solution, $\partial_i \neq 0$, $\tilde \partial^i = 0$, they found that the most general parametrisation of the generalised metric is given by
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{H}_{MN} = \begin{pmatrix} 1 & B \\ 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
K_{ij} & X_i^a Y^j_a - \bar{X}_i^{\bar{a}} \bar{Y}^j_{\bar{a}} \\
X_j^a Y^i_a - \bar{X}_j^{\bar{a}} \bar{Y}^i_{\bar{a}} & H^{ij}
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0 \\ -B & 1
\end{pmatrix} \,.
\label{HnonRie}
\end{equation}
Here both $H^{ij}$ and $K_{ij}$ are symmetric $D \times D$ matrices which may be non-invertible, with $\{X, \bar{X} \}$ spanning the kernel of $H^{ij}$ and $\{ Y , \bar{Y} \}$ spanning the kernel of $K_{ij}$.
Both kernels have dimensions $n+\bar{n}$, and we index the zero vectors by $a=1,\dots,n$ and $\bar{a} =1 ,\dots \bar{n}$.
Explicitly,
\begin{equation}
H^{ij} X_j^a = 0 \,,\quad
H^{ij} \bar{X}_j^{\bar{a}} = 0 \,,\quad
K_{ij} Y^j_a = 0 \,,\quad
K_{ij} \bar{Y}^j_{\bar{a}} = 0 \,.
\end{equation}
We have some completeness relations which are necessary for the invertibility of $\mathcal{H}_{MN}$, namely
\begin{equation}
H^{ik} K_{kj} + Y^i_a X_j^a + \bar{Y}^i_{\bar{a}} \bar{X}_j^{\bar{a}} = \delta^i_j\,,
\quad
Y^i_a X_i^b = \delta_a^b \,,\quad \bar{Y}^i_{\bar{a}} \bar{X}_i^{\bar{b}} = \delta_{\bar{a}}^{\bar{b}}
\,,\quad
Y_a^i \bar{X}_i^{\bar{b}} = 0 = \bar{Y}^i_{\bar{a}}X_i^b \,,
\end{equation}
which imply $H^{ik} K_{kl} H^{lj} = H^{ij}$, $K_{ik} H^{kl} K_{lj} = K_{ij}$.
These objects are all tensors under diffeomorphisms and invariant under $B$-field gauge transformations.
We see that the trace of the generalised metric is no longer zero, but given by $\mathcal{H}^M{}_M = 2(n-\bar{n})$, in agreement with the analysis of the previous subsection, with $0 \leq n+\bar{n} \leq D$.
Note that ${X,\bar{X}}$ and ${Y,\bar{Y}}$ are a preferred basis for the zero vectors of $H$ and $K$.
Any other basis $X^{\prime u}_i$, $Y^{\prime i}_{u}$, where $u=1,\dots n+\bar{n}$, would be such that
\begin{equation}
Z_i{}^j \equiv X_i^a Y^j_a - \bar{X}_i^{\bar{a}} \bar{Y}^j_{\bar{a}} = X^{\prime u}_i \sigma_u{}^v Y^{\prime j}{}_v
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_u{}^v$ is conjugate to $\mathrm{diag}( \delta^a_b , - \delta^{\bar{a}}_{\bar{b}} )$. Thus ${X,\bar{X}}$ and ${Y,\bar{Y}}$ diagonalise $\sigma_u{}^v$.
Finally, note there is also a shift symmetry preserving the parametrisation \eqref{HnonRie}, involving arbitrary parameters $b_{i a}$, $\bar b_{i \bar a}$:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
Y_{a}^{i } \rightarrow& Y_{a}^{i }+H^{i j }b_{j a}\,,\\
\bar{Y}_{\bar{a} }^{i } \rightarrow& \bar Y_{\bar{a} }^{i }+H^{i j }\bar{b}_{j \bar{a} }\,,\\
K_{i j } \rightarrow& K_{i j }
-2X^{a}_{(i }K_{j )k}H^{kl}b_{l a}
-2\bar{X}^{\bar{a} }_{(i }K_{j )k}H^{kl}\bar{b}_{l\bar{a} }
+(X_{i }^{a}b_{k a} +\bar{X}_{i }^{\bar{a} }\bar{b}_{k\bar{a} })H^{kl}(X_{j }^{b}b_{l b}+\bar{X}_{j }^{\bar{b}}\bar{b}_{l\bar{b}})\,,\\
B_{i j } \rightarrow& B_{i j }
-2X^{a}_{[i }b_{j ]a}+2\bar{X}^{\bar{a} }_{[i }\bar{b}_{j ]\bar{a} }
+2X^{a}_{[i }\bar{X}^{\bar{a} }_{j ]}\left(Y_{a}^{k}\bar{b}_{k\bar{a} }
+\bar Y_{\bar{a} }^{k}b_{k a}+b_{k a}H^{kl}\bar{b}_{l\bar{a} }\right)\,,
\label{dftshift}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
which we can view as eliminating some components of the $B$-field in the non-Riemannian geometry.
A variety of interesting example have been considered in \cite{Morand:2017fnv}. For instance,
$(n,\bar{n}) = (D,0)$ corresponds to the maximally non-Riemannian case, $\mathcal{H}_{MN} = \eta_{MN}$.
When $n = \bar{n}$ the parametrisations may be connected by $\mathrm{O}(D,D)$ transformations to Riemannian parametrisations. An example, which we will discuss below, is the $(1,1)$ non-Riemannian metric corresponding to the Gomis-Ooguri limit of string theory, or to the T-dual of a supergravity solution.
The case $(n,\bar{n}) = (D-1,0)$ gives an ultra-relativistic (Carroll) geometry, while $(n,\bar{n}) = (1,0)$ or $(0,1)$ provides a version of non-relativistic Newton-Cartan geometry. (In this case, the transformation \eqref{dftshift} in fact reduces to known non-relativistic transformations termed Milne transformations or Galilean boosts \cite{Morand:2017fnv}.)
In general, the non-Riemannian background \eqref{HnonRie} can be studied using the doubled sigma model, and it was shown in \cite{Morand:2017fnv} that the zero vectors $X_i{}^a$ pick out $n$ string target space coordinates which become chiral, while the $\bar X_i{}^{\bar a}$ lead to $\bar n$ antichiral directions.
The paper \cite{Morand:2017fnv} also introduced generalised vielbeins as follows.
Let $d$ denote the rank of $H^{ij}$ and $K_{ij}$, such that $D=d+n+\bar{n}$.
Suppose that $H^{ij}$ and $K_{ij}$ have signature $(t,s, n+\bar n)$, and define the flat matrices
\begin{equation}
h_{A B } = \begin{pmatrix} \eta_{mn} & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & - \delta_{ab} & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & \delta_{ab} \end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
\bar{h}_{\bar{A} \bar{B}} = \begin{pmatrix} \eta_{\bar m \bar n} & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & - \delta_{\bar{a}\bar{b}} & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & \delta_{\bar{a}\bar{b}} \end{pmatrix}\,,
\end{equation}
for the $\mathrm{O}(t+n,s+n)$ and $\mathrm{O}(t+\bar n, s+\bar n)$ factors respectively.
We have two types of flat indices, one for each factor, which we write as $A = ( m, a, a)$ where $m=1,\dots,D-n-\bar{n}$ and $a=1,\dots,n$, and $\bar{A} = ( \bar m, \bar a, \bar a)$ where $m=1,\dots,D-n-\bar{n}$ and $\bar a=1,\dots,\bar n$. The matrices $\eta_{mn}$ and $\eta_{\bar m \bar n}$ are separate copies of the Minkowski metric of signature $(t,s)$.
Using these, we can introduce vielbeins for the degenerate matrices $K$ and $H$:
\begin{equation}
K_{ij} = k_i{}^{m} k_j{}^{n} \eta_{mn} = \bar{k}_i{}^{\bar{m}} \bar{k}_j{}^{\bar{n}} \eta_{\bar{m}\bar{n}} \,,\quad
H^{ij} = h^i{}_{m} h^j{}_{n}\eta^{mn} = \bar{h}^i{}_{\bar{m}} \bar{h}^j{}_{\bar{n}}\eta^{\bar{m}\bar{n}} \,,
\end{equation}
which obey
\begin{equation}
X_i^a h^i{}_{m} = \bar{X}_i^a h^i{}_m = 0 = Y^i_a k_i{}^{m} = \bar{Y}^i_a k_i{}^m \,,\quad
h^{i}{}_{m} k_{i}{}^{n} = \delta_{m}^{n}\,,\quad
h^{i}{}_{m} k_{j}{}^{m} + X_j^a Y^i_a + \bar{X}_j^{\bar{a}} \bar{Y}^i_{\bar{a}} = \delta^i_j
\end{equation}
and similarly for the barred quantities.
Now define
\begin{equation}
k_i{}^A = \begin{pmatrix} k_i{}^{m} & X_i^{a} & X_i^{a} \end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
h^i{}_A = \begin{pmatrix} h^i{}_{m} & Y^i_{a} & Y^i_{a} \end{pmatrix} \,,
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\bar k_i{}^{\bar{A}} = \begin{pmatrix} \bar k_i{}^{\bar{m}} & \bar X_i^{\bar a} & \bar X_i^{\bar a} \end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
\bar h^i{}_{\bar{A}} = \begin{pmatrix} \bar h^i{}_{\bar{m}} & \bar Y^i_{\bar a} & \bar Y^i_{\bar a} \end{pmatrix} \,,
\end{equation}
out of which we construct
\begin{equation}
V_{M A } = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \begin{pmatrix} k_i{}_{A} + B _{ij} h^{j}{}_A \\ h^i{}_A \end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
\bar{V}_{M \bar{A}} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \begin{pmatrix}
- \bar k_{i \bar{A}} + B_{ij} \bar h^{j}{}_{\bar{A}} \\
\bar h^{i}{}_{\bar{A}}
\end{pmatrix} \,,
\end{equation}
obeying \eqref{viel1} and \eqref{viel2} as required.
\subsection{Examples: Gomis-Ooguri limit and timelike duality}
\label{DFTGO}
Here we review two closely linked examples of DFT non-Riemannian geometry.
\subsubsection*{Gomis-Ooguri}
The original idea of Gomis-Ooguri \cite{Gomis:2000bd} is to consider the string sigma model in a special background for which one take a certain scaling limit leading to a description of string theory in a non-relativistic background geometry. This limit can be taken starting with the flat background
\begin{equation}
ds^2 = G(-dt^2 + dz^2) + d\vec{x}_8^2 \,,\quad B = (G-\mu) dt \wedge dz \,,
\label{GOstart}
\end{equation}
where $G$ and $\mu$ are parameters which we can tune. The choice of the $B$-field here is vital in order to take $G \rightarrow \infty$. Although this is singular in the standard Polyakov action it is non-singular in equivalent descriptions and, in particular, in the Hamiltonian or doubled approach to the string.
This can be seen by constructing the generalised metric describing the background \eqref{GOstart} by doubling only the worldsheet directions $t$ and $z$:
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{H}_{MN} = \begin{pmatrix}
-2 \mu + \mu^2 G^{-1} & 0 & 0& 1 - \mu G^{-1} \\
0 & 2\mu - \mu^2 G^{-1} & 1 - \mu G^{-1}& 0 \\
0 & 1 - \mu G^{-1} & - G^{-1} & 0 \\
1 - \mu G^{-1} & 0 & 0 & G^{-1}
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
which, for $G \rightarrow \infty$, is non-singular but non-Riemannian. We have
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{H}_{MN} = \begin{pmatrix}
-2 \mu & 0 & 0& 1 \\
0 & 2\mu & 1 & 0 \\
0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\
1 & 0 & 0& 0
\end{pmatrix} \,,
\quad
H^{ij} = 0 \,,\quad K_{ij} = 0 \,,\quad B_{ij} = - \mu \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 1 \\ -1 & 0 \end{pmatrix} \,,
\label{GOH}
\end{equation}
and the preferred basis of zero vectors is
\begin{equation}
X_i = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \begin{pmatrix} 1\\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
Y^i = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
\bar{X}_i = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ -1 \end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
\bar{Y}^i = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \begin{pmatrix} 1 \\ -1 \end{pmatrix} \,.
\end{equation}
\subsubsection*{Non-Riemannian geometry from timelike duality}
\label{DFTtimelike}
We can also obtain a non-Riemannian generalised metric by acting with T-duality on the supergravity solution corresponding to a fundamental string solution.
This appeared in the DFT context first in \cite{Lee:2013hma}, although the timelike dual of the F1 solution was studied long ago in \cite{Welch:1994qm}. The F1 solution is:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
ds^2 = H^{-1} ( - dt^2 + dz^2 ) + d\vec{x}_8{}^2 \,,\quad
B_{tz} = H^{-1} + c \,,\quad
e^{-2\phi} & = H \,,\quad
H = 1 + \frac{h}{r^6} \,,\quad r \equiv |\vec{x}_8|
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Normally one takes $c = -1$ such that the B-field vanishes at infinity: in general it should lie in the range $0 > c > -2$ \cite{Park:2015bza}.
After constructing the doubled generalised metric and dilaton using the usual parametrisation \eqref{Hnormal}, we can T-dualise in both the $t,z$ directions, giving the T-dual generalised metric (the part of the generalised metric describing the transverse space with coordinates $\vec{x}_8$ is trivial so we do not write it)
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\mathcal{H}}_{MN} = \begin{pmatrix}
-H& 0 & 0 & 1+cH \\ 0 & H & 1+cH &0 \\ 0 & 1+cH & 2c + c^2H & 0 \\ 1+cH & 0 & 0 & -2c - c^2H \end{pmatrix} \,,
\label{negF1H}
\end{equation}
while the generalised dilaton is invariant and is $e^{-2 \mathbf{d}} = 1$.
Defining
\begin{equation}
\tilde H \equiv - c(2+cH) = - ( c^2+2c) - \frac{c^2 h}{r^6}\,,
\end{equation}
the corresponding spacetime geometry is
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
ds^2 =\tilde H^{-1}( - d \tilde t^2 + d \tilde z^2 ) + d\vec{x}_8{}^2 \,,\quad
B_{\tilde t \tilde z} = -\tilde H^{-1} + c^{-1} \,,\quad
e^{-2\phi} = |\tilde H| \,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The ADM mass of the solution is $M_{ADM} = \frac{R_{\tilde z}}{l_s^2} \frac{c}{c+2}$ \cite{Park:2015bza}.
Let us focus on what happens for the special values $c=-1$ and $c=0$.
\begin{itemize}
\item $c=-1$ corresponds to the usual asymptotically flat F1 solution, and gives rise here to a dual solution which is automatically asymptotically flat with $\tilde H = 2 -H$ being given by
\begin{equation}
\tilde H = 1 - \frac{h}{r^6} \,.
\end{equation}
The ADM mass is \emph{minus} that of the F1, and the solution can be interpreted as in \cite{Dijkgraaf:2016lym} as describing a \emph{negative tension F1}, or negative F1 for short. There is a singularity at $\tilde H=0$, which can be thought of as marking the position of a ``bubble'' surrounding the negative tension brane, inside which the spacetime signature flips and we should use an exotic variant of string theory, of the type investigated by Hull \cite{Hull:1998vg,Hull:1998ym}, to describe its physics.
As the generalised metric is non-singular at $\tilde H = 0$, the DFT description is perfectly well-defined (see \cite{Hohm:2011dv, Blair:2016xnn} for some discussion of such exotic theories in DFT). Indeed, we see that in this case the generalised metric is
\begin{equation}
\tilde \mathcal{H}_{MN} = \begin{pmatrix} \tilde H - 2 & 0 & 0 & \tilde H -1 \\ 0 & 2-\tilde H & \tilde H - 1 & 0 \\ 0 & \tilde H - 1 & \tilde H & 0 \\ \tilde H - 1 & 0 & 0 & \tilde H \end{pmatrix}
\Rightarrow
\tilde \mathcal{H}_{MN}\Big|_{\tilde H = 0} = \begin{pmatrix}
-2 & 0 & 0 & -1 \\
0 & 2 & -1 & 0 \\
0 & -1 & 0 & 0 \\
-1 & 0 & 0 & 0
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
which is in fact exactly of the non-Riemannian type appearing in the Gomis-Ooguri limit, and so is described by the same parametrisation with $\mu=1$ and $(X,Y)$ interchanged with $(\bar X, \bar Y)$ (we could also change the sign of the original $B$-field). This maybe provides an interesting interpretation of the singularity in the background of a negative brane: the string theory becomes non-relativistic at the special point $\tilde H = 0$.
\item $c=0$ corresponds to $\tilde H=0$ and the spacetime is singular. We see though that the generalised metric \eqref{negF1H} is well-defined, and given by
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\mathcal{H}}_{MN} = \begin{pmatrix}
-H& 0 & 0 & 1 \\ 0 & H & 1 &0 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix} \,.
\label{Hnrex}
\end{equation}
which clearly describes the same type of non-Riemannian background as the Gomis-Ooguri limit, identifying $H = + 2\mu$.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Example: Newton-Cartan non-relativistic geometry from null duality}
\label{DFTNewtonCartan}
As well as the Gomis-Ooguri limit, the Morand-Park classification can be used to describe various non-relativistic backgrounds.
Here we will discuss an example which did not in fact appear in \cite{Morand:2017fnv}, namely a version of non-relativistic Newton-Cartan geometry which can be obtained from a Lorentzian geometry by a null T-duality.
This was used in \cite{Harmark:2017rpg, Harmark:2018cdl} to obtain the Polyakov action for a string in the Newton-Cartan geometry (see also the description of T-duality in the ``string Newton-Cartan'' background of \cite{Bergshoeff:2018yvt}, which showed that a non-relativistic string was T-dual to a Lorentzian background with a null isometry).
This procedure naturally lives in the doubled formalism.
Note that this will therefore again be an example of a $(1,1)$ non-Riemannian generalised metric (whereas the non-relativistic examples in \cite{Morand:2017fnv} had $n\neq \bar n$): one of the advantages of starting with a $(0,0)$ generalised metric and dualising is that we know what happens to the generalised dilaton and can therefore uplift to ExFT later on.
Here we follow the notation and conventions of \cite{Harmark:2017rpg, Harmark:2018cdl}. We start with the metric for a $d+1$ dimensional Lorentzian spacetime with a null isometry, which can always be put in the form
\begin{equation}
ds^2 = g_{ij} dx^i dx^j = 2 \tau_\mu dx^\mu ( du - m_\mu dx^\mu ) + h_{\mu\nu} dx^\mu dx^\nu \,,
\label{metric1}
\end{equation}
where $u$ denotes the null direction, and the $d$ dimensional matrix $h_{\mu\nu}$ has rank $d-1$.
The fields $\tau_\mu, m_\nu$ and $h_{\mu\nu}$ together describe a torsional Newton-Cartan geometry and transform under Galilean local symmetries in a particular way that need not concern us here. We also introduce a vector $v^\mu$ and a rank $d-1$ matrix $h^{\mu\nu}$ such that
\begin{equation}
h_{\mu\nu} v^\nu = 0 \,,\quad v^\mu \tau_\mu = -1 \,,\quad
h^{\mu\nu} \tau_\nu = 0 \,,\quad h^{\mu\rho} h_{\rho\nu} - v^\mu \tau_\nu = \delta^\mu_\nu \,.
\end{equation}
It is convenient to also define
\begin{equation}
\bar{h}_{\mu\nu} \equiv h_{\mu\nu} - \tau_\mu m_\nu - \tau_\nu m_\mu \,,\quad
\hat{v}^\mu \equiv v^\mu - h^{\mu\nu} m_{\nu} \,,\quad
\tilde \Phi \equiv - v^\mu m_\mu + \frac{1}{2} h^{\mu\nu} m_\mu m_\nu \,,
\end{equation}
which are invariant under Galilean boosts and rotations, but not under $\mathrm{U}(1)$ gauge transformations of $m_\mu$, $\delta m_\mu = \partial_\mu \lambda$.
In fact, the completeness relation holds with these variables, $h^{\mu\rho} \bar{h}_{\rho\nu} - \hat{v}^\mu \tau_\nu = \delta^\mu_\nu$.
We can then compute the inverses of $g_{ij}$ and $\bar{h}_{\mu\nu}$:
\begin{equation}
g^{ij} = \begin{pmatrix}
h^{\mu \nu} & - \hat{v}^\mu \\
- \hat{v}^\nu & 2 \tilde \Phi
\end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
\bar{h}^{\mu\nu} = h^{\mu\nu} - \frac{1}{2\Phi} \hat{v}^\mu \hat{v}^\nu \,.
\end{equation}
We embed the Lorentzian background in the generalised metric $\mathcal{H}_{MN} = \mathrm{diag}\,( g_{ij}, g^{ij})$. We exchange the direction $u$ for a dual direction $\tilde u$ using the analogue of a Buscher transformation (on the components of the generalised metric, this amounts to swapping the ${}^u$ and ${}_u$ indices). The dual generalised metric is
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{H}_{MN} = \begin{pmatrix}
\bar{h}_{\mu\nu} & 0 & 0 & \tau_\mu \\
0 & 2 \tilde \Phi & - \hat{v}^\nu & 0 \\
0 & - \hat{v}^\mu & h^{\mu\nu} & 0 \\
\tau_\nu& 0 & 0 & 0
\end{pmatrix} \,.
\label{NCGM}
\end{equation}
This does not admit a Riemannian parametrisation.
Instead, it is again of type $(1,1)$, with:
\begin{equation}
K_{ij} = \begin{pmatrix} h_{\mu\nu} & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix}
\,,\quad
H^{ij} = \begin{pmatrix} h^{\mu\nu} & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix}
\,,\quad
B_{ij} = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & -m_\mu \\ m_\nu & 0 \end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
Z_i{}^j =
\begin{pmatrix}
0 & \tau_\mu \\
- v^\nu & 0
\end{pmatrix}\,,
\end{equation}
where $Z_i{}^j = X_i Y^i - \bar X_i \bar Y^i$ with
\begin{equation}
X_i = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \begin{pmatrix} \tau_\mu \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
\bar{X}_i = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}}\begin{pmatrix} \tau_\mu\\ -1 \end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
Y^i = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \begin{pmatrix} - v^\mu \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
\bar{Y}^i = \frac{1}{\sqrt{2}} \begin{pmatrix} - v^\mu \\ - 1 \end{pmatrix} \,.
\end{equation}
Observe that generalised diffeomorphisms include gauge transformations $\delta B_{ij} = 2 \partial_{[i} \lambda_{j]}$, which provide the $\mathrm{U}(1)$ transformations of $m_\mu$ on noting we have $\partial_i = (\partial_\mu, \partial_{\tilde u})$ and $\partial_{\tilde u} = 0$ (i.e. we do not depend on the direction dual to the original isometry direction). This is as expected, as prior to dualising these transformations were part of the diffeomorphism symmetry of the original metric.
The other DFT field which is present is the generalised dilaton, which is invariant under $\mathrm{O}(D,D)$ and so given by $e^{-2\mathbf{d}} = \sqrt{|\det g|}$, where
\begin{equation}
\det g =
- \frac{1}{(d-1)!} \tau_\mu \tau_\nu \eta^{\mu\mu_1\dots\mu_d}\eta^{\nu\nu_1\dots\nu_d} h_{\mu_1\nu_1} \dots h_{\mu_d \nu_d}\,,
\label{detgNC}
\end{equation}
which if we define the $d \times d$ matrix $e_\mu{}^A \equiv ( \tau_\mu, h_\mu{}^a)$, with a $d \times (d-1)$ vielbein $h_\mu{}^a$ such that $h_{\mu\nu} = h_\mu{}^{a} \delta_{ab} h_\nu{}^b$ is just $\det g = - (\det e)^2$.\footnote{Alternatively we can evaluate \eqref{detgNC} by replacing $h_{\mu\nu}$ with $\bar{h}_{\mu\nu}$ so that $\det g = - \det \bar{h} \,\bar{h}^{\mu\nu} \tau_\mu \tau_\nu$, hence
\begin{equation}
\det g =
\frac{\det \bar{h}}{2\Phi} = -\frac{1}{ \frac{1}{(d-1)!} \eta_{\mu_1 \dots \mu_d} \eta_{\nu_1 \dots \nu_d} v^{\mu_1} v^{\nu_1} h^{\mu_2 \nu_2} \dots h^{\mu_d \nu_d} }\,.
\end{equation}}
This provides a measure factor for the Newton-Cartan geometry.
It is straightforward to check that inserting the above non-Riemannian generalised metric \eqref{NCGM} in a doubled sigma model and integrating out the dual coordinates reproduces the string action of \cite{Harmark:2018cdl} (one can use for instance the general result of \cite{Morand:2017fnv}).
\section{Riemannian backgrounds and exotic supergravities in $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT}
We will now focus on the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT \cite{Berman:2011cg, Blair:2013gqa, Musaev:2015ces}, a good testing ground as it is simple enough to allow one to realise various constructions very explicitly, and simultaneously complex enough to be interesting.
Already at the level of Riemannian parametrisations, the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT describes not only the conventional 10- and 11-dimensional supergravities, but exotic variants \cite{Blair:2013gqa}, with all information about the nature of the spacetime theory encoded in the generalised metric via the choice of parametrisation.
We should however note that though these exotic variants appear to give valid parametrisations of the ExFT variables, their role in the full quantum string and M-theory is less clear as they involve spacetimes of non-Minkowskian signatures, and they are not expected to exist as the low energy limits of fully fledged variants of string and M-theory, though they may still appear as complex saddle points in the path integral.
\subsubsection*{Spacetime decompositions}
In general, in order to match exceptional field theory with standard supergravity, it is convenient to start with an intelligent decomposition of the fields of the latter.
For instance, the 11- or 10-dimensional Einstein frame metric $\hat g_{\hat{\mu}\hnu}$ can be decomposed in the following manner (corresponding to a partial fixing of Lorentz symmetry): splitting the 11- or 10-dimensional index $\hat{\mu} = (\mu, i)$, where $\mu$ is an $n$-dimensional index, let
\begin{equation}
\hat g_{\hat{\mu} \hnu} =
\begin{pmatrix} |\phi|^{\omega} g_{\mu \nu} + A_\mu{}^ k A_\nu{}^ l \phi_{ k l} & A_\mu{}^ k \phi_{ k j} \\
A_\nu{}^ k \phi_{ k i} & \phi_{ i j}
\end{pmatrix} \,,
\label{eq:GKK}
\end{equation}
where $\omega$ is the intrinsic weight appearing in the generalised Lie derivative (listed in Table \ref{GHR}).
For $\mathrm{SL}(5)$, $\omega=-1/5$.
The ExFT formalism will work regardless of the signatures of the blocks $g_{\mu\nu}$ and $\phi_{ij}$.
We will denote the signature of metrics by $(t,s)$.
Let $\phi_{i j }$ be a $d$-dimensional metric with signature $(t,s)$, so that $\phi \equiv \det \phi = (-1)^t | \phi |$.
Define $\epsilon_{i_1\dots i_d} = |\phi|^{1/2} \eta_{i_1\dots i_d}$, $\epsilon^{i_1\dots i_d} = |\phi|^{-1/2} \eta^{i_1\dots i_d}$ with both $\eta^{1\dots d} = \eta_{1 \dots d} = +1$. Then we have $\epsilon^{i_1\dots i_d} = (-1)^t \phi^{i_1 i_1^\prime} \dots \phi^{ i_d i_d^\prime} \epsilon_{i_1^\prime \dots i_d^\prime}$ and there are no extra signs in the contractions between $\epsilon$ with indices up and those with indices down.
As well as the metric, it can be convenient to redefine the components of the gauge fields which carry the external $\mu,\nu$ indices, making use of the field $A_\mu{}^i$.
The details are not important in the present paper. The reader can consult the appendices of \cite{Blair:2018lbh} for details adapted to the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ case.
\subsection{The $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT}
For $\mathrm{SL}(5)$, the representation $R_1$ is the antisymmetric 10-dimensional representation; we will write an $R_1$ index $M$ as an antisymmetic pair of five-dimensional indices $a,b$, so that $V^M \equiv V^{ab} = - V^{ba}$. We will contract indices with a factor of $1/2$, $V^M W_M \equiv \frac{1}{2} V^{ab} W_{ab}$, meaning that $\delta^M{}_N =2 \delta^{[ab]}_{cd} = \delta^a_c \delta^b_d - \delta^b_c \delta^a_d$.
The generalised Lie derivative is defined by giving the Y-tensor, which is $Y^{MN}{}_{KL} = \eta^{aa^\prime bb^\prime e} \eta_{cc^\prime dd^\prime e}$, and the section condition is $\eta^{abcde} \partial_{bc} \partial_{de} = 0 $.
The generalised metric, $\mathcal{M}_{MN}$, carries a pair of symmetric $R_1$ indices.
We can also define a ``little'' generalised metric in the fundamental five-dimensional representation, such that
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}_{ab,cd} = \pm ( m_{ac} m_{bd} - m_{ad} m_{bc} ) \, ,
\label{bigMlittlem}
\end{equation}
where the overall sign is needed to describe exceptional field theory in the case where the $Y^M$ coordinates include timelike directions. The little metric is constrained to have unit determinant, $\det m_{ab} = 1$.
Note that it is immediate from this decomposition that $\epsilon^{abcde} \mathcal{M}_{ab,cd} = 0$ and hence $Y^{MN}{}_{PQ} \mathcal{M}_{MN} = 0$, so that referring to the projector trace $P_{MN}{}^{MN}$ in \eqref{traceP} we find that $\mathcal{M}_{ab,cd}$ has 14 components, corresponding to the coset $\mathrm{SL}(5)/\mathrm{SO}(5)$ (or $\mathrm{SL}(5)/\mathrm{SO}(2,3)$).
The situation with the sign choice in \eqref{bigMlittlem}, meanwhile, is a little subtle. We choose to fix the sign differently in different parametrisations, such that the ``generalised line element''
\begin{equation}
g_{\mu\nu} dX^\mu dX^\nu + \mathcal{M}_{MN} ( dY^M + \mathcal{A}_\mu dX^\mu)( dY^N + \mathcal{A}_\nu dX^\nu )
\label{gle}
\end{equation}
when written out in terms of the spacetime metric, $\hat g_{\hat{\mu}\hnu}$ (as in \eqref{eq:GKK}), and spacetime coordinates, $\hat X^{\hat{\mu}} = (X^\mu, Y^i)$,
always equals
\begin{equation}
|\phi|^{-\omega} \hat g_{\hat{\mu} \hnu} dX^{\hat{\mu}} dX^{\hnu} + \dots
\end{equation}
where the ellipsis denotes terms involving dual coordinates. Pullbacks of the expression \eqref{gle} are used to construct particle and string actions with target space the extended geometry of ExFT, and the relative sign between the two terms is fixed by the appropriate notion of gauge covariance under the ExFT gauge symmetries \cite{Blair:2017gwn, Arvanitakis:2018hfn}.
As it is $\mathcal{M}_{MN}$ that appears in \eqref{gle}, we stress that it is the parametrisation of this version of the generalised metric which must be considered fundamental, though we will almost always write down explicit expressions using the more compact notation of the little metric $m_{ab}$. (Note we can also express $m_{ab}$ via $m_{ab} = \frac{1}{6} \eta_{aMN} \eta_{bPQ} \mathcal{M}^{MP} \mathcal{M}^{NQ}$.)
The gauge fields of the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT appearing in the action are a one-form $\mathcal{A}_\mu{}^M$, two-form, $\mathcal{B}_{\mu\nu a}$ with field strength $\mathcal{H}_{\mu\nu\rho a}$, and three-form, $\mathcal{C}_{\mu\nu\rho}{}^a$, whose field strength $\mathcal{J}_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma}{}^a$ appears in the Chern-Simons term but does not have a kinetic term. The equation of motion for $\mathcal{C}_{\mu\nu\rho}{}^a$ accordingly amounts to a duality relation relating it to the degrees of freedom in the other gauge fields.
The action is defined by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
S = \int \textrm{d}^{7}X \textrm{d}^{10} Y \sqrt{|g|} &\,\Bigg(
\hat R[g]
+ \frac{1}{12 } g^{\mu \nu} D_\mu \mathcal{M}_{MN} D_\nu \mathcal{M}^{MN} - V( \mathcal{M},g ) + \frac{1}{\sqrt{|g|}} \mathcal{L}_{CS}
\\ & \qquad\qquad
- \frac{1}{4} e g^{\mu\rho} g^{\nu \sigma} \mathcal{M}_{MN} \mathcal{F}_{\mu\nu}{}^M \mathcal{F}_{\rho\sigma}{}^N
- \frac{1}{2} m^{ab} \mathcal{H}_{\mu\nu\rho a} \mathcal{H}^{\mu\nu\rho}{}_{b}
\Bigg)
\end{split}
\label{actionSL5}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
- V(\mathcal{M}, g) & =
\frac{1}{12} \mathcal{M}^{MN} \partial_M \mathcal{M}^{KL} \partial_N \mathcal{M}_{KL} - \frac{1}{2} \mathcal{M}^{MN} \partial_M \mathcal{M}^{KL} \partial_K \mathcal{M}_{LN}
+ \frac{1}{2} \partial_M \mathcal{M}^{MN} \partial_N \ln |g|
\\ & \qquad+ \frac{1}{4} \mathcal{M}^{MN} \left( \partial_M g_{\mu\nu} \partial_N g^{\mu\nu} + \partial_M \ln |g| \partial_N \ln |g| \right)
\\
& = \pm\Bigg(
\frac{1}{8}m^{a c} m^{b d} \partial_{a b} m_{ e f} \partial_{c d}m^{e f}+\frac{1}{2}m^{a c} m^{b d} \partial_{a b}m^{e f} \partial_{e c} m_{ d f}+\frac{1}{2}\partial_{a b}m^{a c} \partial_{c d}m^{b d}
\\ & \qquad\qquad + \frac{1}{2} m^{ac}\partial_{ab} m^{b d} \partial_{cd} \ln |g| + \frac{1}{8}m^{a c} m^{b d} ( \partial_{a b} g^{\mu \nu} \partial_{c d} g_{\mu \nu} + \partial_{a b} \ln |g| \partial_{c d} \ln |g| )
\Bigg)
\end{split}
\end{equation}
and the Chern-Simons term is described in \cite{Musaev:2015ces}.
\subsection{M-theory parametrisations}
\label{5params}
The M-theory solution of the section condition is based on splitting $a=(i,5)$, where $i$ is a four-dimensional index, and choosing the physical coordinates to be $Y^i \equiv Y^{i5}$ and the dual coordinates to be $Y^{ij}$, with the section condition solution then provided by $\partial_{i} \neq 0$, $\partial_{ij} = 0$.
Generalised diffeomorphisms are generated by $\Lambda^{ab} = ( \Lambda^{i5} , \Lambda^{ij} )$. The vector $\Lambda^i$ is then found to generate four-dimensional diffeomorphisms, while $\Lambda^{ij} = \frac{1}{2} \eta^{ijkl} \lambda_{kl}$ produces gauge transformations of the three-form.
This allows us to parametrise the generalised metric in terms of the internal spacetime metric, $\phi_{ij}$, and the internal components of the three-form, $C_{ijk}$.
It is convenient to turn $C_{ijk}$ into a vector by defining $v^ i \equiv \frac{1}{3!} \epsilon^{ i j k l} C_{ j k l}$.
Then we have:
\begin{equation}
m_{ab} =
\begin{pmatrix}
\lambda |\phi|^{-2/5} \phi_{ i j} & -\lambda |\phi|^{1/10} v_ i \\
-\lambda |\phi|^{1/10} v_ j & |\phi|^{3/5} ( (-1)^t + \lambda v^ k v_ k )
\end{pmatrix}
\,.
\label{mparam}
\end{equation}
\begin{comment}
\begin{equation}
m^{ab} =
\begin{pmatrix}
\lambda |\phi|^{2/5} \phi^{ i j} + (-1)^t |\phi|^{-1/10} v^ i v^ j &
- (-1)^t|\phi|^{-1/10} v^ i
\\
- (-1)^t |\phi|^{-1/10}v^ j & (-1)^t |\phi|^{-3/5}
\end{pmatrix} \,.
\end{equation}
\end{comment}
This parametrisation incorporates two sign factors.
The first of these is $(-1)^t$, which depends on the number of timelike directions $t$ in $\phi_{ij}$.
This appears in order that the generalised metric parametrise the correct coset $\mathrm{SL}(5) / \mathrm{SO}(2,3)$ rather than $\mathrm{SL}(5) / \mathrm{SO}(5)$, and ensures that the determinant is $+1$. Such timelike variants of the classic $G/H$ cosets were analysed in \cite{Hull:1998br}.
The second sign factor is denoted by $\lambda$, and controls the sign of the kinetic term of the three-form, providing an ExFT parametrisation for exotic variants of 11-dimensional supergravity related to timelike dualities \cite{Hull:1998vg,Hull:1998ym}. See also \cite{Blair:2013gqa} for an earlier discussion of such parametrisations in the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT.
The parametrisation of the big generalised metric that we use corresponds to
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}_{ab,cd} = \lambda (-1)^t ( m_{ac} m_{bd} - m_{ad} m_{bc} ) .
\end{equation}
Studying the gauge transformations of the ExFT gauge fields in this solution of the section condition, we find that the obvious components of the 11-dimensional three-form can be identified with certain components of the ExFT gauge fields, schematically $\mathcal{A}_{\mu}{}^{ij} = \frac{1}{2} \eta^{ijkl} C_{\mu kl}$, $\mathcal{B}_{\mu \nu i} = C_{\mu\nu i}$, $\mathcal{C}_{\mu\nu\rho} = C_{\mu\nu\rho}$ (see the appendices of \cite{Blair:2018lbh} for more precise relationships). Apart from the obvious identification $\mathcal{A}_\mu{}^i = A_\mu{}^i$, the other components of the gauge fields are related to the dual 11-dimensional six-form, and can be eliminated from the ExFT action using duality relations.
As a result, one finds by explicit calculation that the ExFT action is equivalent to that of 11-dimensional supergravity:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
S & = \int d^{11}X \sqrt{|\hat g|} \left( R(\hat g) - \lambda \frac{1}{48} F^{\hat{\mu} \hnu \hat{\rho}\hat{\sigma}} F_{\hat{\mu} \hnu \hat{\rho}\hat{\sigma}} + \frac{1}{\sqrt{|\hat g|}} \mathcal{L}_{\text{CS}} \right) \,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
In general we see that $\lambda = +1$ corresponds to the usual relative sign between the Ricci scalar and $F^2$ term, while $\lambda = -1$ flips the sign of the $F^2$ term.
The latter variant of supergravity can be thought of as the low energy effective action of an exotic M-theory, called M${}^-$ theory, of signature $(2,9)$ and containing M2 branes whose worldvolume has Euclidean signature \cite{Hull:1998vg,Hull:1998ym, Dijkgraaf:2016lym}.
We can summarise some of the sign choices appearing in the little generalised metric \eqref{mparam}, with reference to figure \ref{exoticdiagram}:
\begin{itemize}
\item The signature of $\phi_{ij}$ is $(0,4)$ and $\lambda = +1$ so that the signature of $m_{ab}$ is $(0,5)$, and if the external metric has signature $(1,6)$ this describes the usual 11-dimensional SUGRA.
\item The signature of $\phi_{ij}$ is $(1,3)$ and $\lambda = +1$ so that the signature of $m_{ab}$ is $(2,3)$, and if the external metric has signature $(0,7)$ this describes the usual 11-dimensional SUGRA.
\item The signature of $\phi_{ij}$ is $(2,2)$, and $\lambda = -1$ so that the signature of $m_{ab}$ is $(2,3)$, and if the external metric has signature $(0,7)$ this describes the unusual 11-dimensional SUGRA with signature $(2,9)$ and wrong sign kinetic term, the low energy limit of the $M^*$ theory (see diagram \ref{exoticdiagram}).
\item Other choices can correspond to ExFT descriptions of other exotic variants of M-theory.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.9,black]
\tikzstyle{theory}=[align=center,draw=black!0,text width=2cm, font=\scriptsize]
\draw [blue!40, rounded corners = 0.5cm, thick, fill=blue!0] (-8.2,0.6) rectangle (-0.8,6.4);
\draw [color =black] (-5.5,0) node [align=left] { \scriptsize DFT$^+$ \scriptsize \cite{Hohm:2011dv} };
\draw [ green!40, rounded corners = 0.5cm, thick, fill=green!0] (0.8,0.6) rectangle (8.2,6.4);
\draw [color=black] (6.75,0) node [align=left] {\scriptsize DFT$^-$ \scriptsize \cite{Blair:2016xnn}};
\begin{scope}[xshift=-1cm]
\draw (-3.5,5.5) node[theory] {\scriptsize IIA$^{++}$ \scriptsize (IIA) \\ \scriptsize (1,9) };
\draw (-5.5,3.5) node[theory] {\scriptsize IIB$^{++}$ \scriptsize (IIB) \\\scriptsize (1,9) };
\draw (-1.5,3.5) node[theory] {\scriptsize IIB$^{+-}$ \scriptsize (IIB$^*$) \\\scriptsize (1,9) };
\draw (-3.5,1.5) node[theory] {\scriptsize IIA$^{+-}$ \scriptsize (IIA$^*$) \\\scriptsize (1,9) };
\draw[<->] (-4.75,5.5) -- (-5.5,4);
\draw[<->] (-4.75,1.5) -- (-5.5,3);
\draw[<->] (-2.25,5.5) -- (-1.5,4);
\draw[<->] (-2.25,1.5) -- (-1.5,3);
\draw (-5.25,4.85) node {\scriptsize $x$};
\draw (-1.65,2.25) node {\scriptsize $x$};
\draw (-5.4,2.25) node {\scriptsize $t$};
\draw (-1.75,4.85) node {\scriptsize $t$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift=1cm]
\draw (1.5,3.5) node[theory] {\scriptsize IIB$^{-+}$ \scriptsize (IIB$^\prime$) \\ \scriptsize (1,9) };
\draw (3.5,5.5) node[theory] {\scriptsize IIA$^{-+}$ \scriptsize (IIA$_E$) \\ \scriptsize (0,10)};
\draw (3.5,1.5) node[theory] {\scriptsize IIA$^{--}$ \\ \scriptsize (2,8) };
\draw (5.5,3.5) node[theory] {\scriptsize IIB$^{--}$ \\ \scriptsize (3,7) };
\draw (4.75,4.55) node {$\dots$};
\draw[<->] (4.75,1.5) -- (5.5,3);
\draw[<->] (2.25,5.5) -- (1.5,4);
\draw[<->] (2.25,1.5) -- (1.5,3);
\draw (2,5.4 ) node {\scriptsize $x$};
\draw (1.5 ,4.3 ) node {\scriptsize $t$};
\draw ( 1.5,2.7 ) node {\scriptsize $x$};
\draw (5.6,2.7) node {\scriptsize $t$};
\draw ( 2,1.6 ) node {\scriptsize $t$};
\draw (5,1.6) node {\scriptsize $x$};
\end{scope}
\draw (0,7) node[align=center] {\small M$^+$ \footnotesize (M) \\ \scriptsize (1,10) };
\draw (0,0) node[align=center] {\small M$^-$ \footnotesize (M$^*$) \\ \scriptsize (2,9) };
\draw[red,thick,->] (-0.9,7) --(-3.4,6.1);
\draw[red,thick,->] (0.9,7) --(3.4,6.1);
\draw[red,thick,->] (-0.9,0) --(-3.4,.9);
\draw[red,thick,->] (0.9,0) --(3.4,.9);
\draw[red] ( -2,0.15 ) node {\scriptsize $t$};
\draw[red] (2,0.15) node {\scriptsize $x$};
\draw[red] ( -2,6.8 ) node {\scriptsize $x$};
\draw[red] (2,6.8) node {\scriptsize $t$};
\draw [<->,densely dashed] (1.2,3.5) -- (-1.2,3.5);
\draw (0,3.8) node {\scriptsize S};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The exotic duality web. Red arrows denote timelike or spacelike reductions from 11 to 10 dimensions. Black arrows denote T-dualities. The dashed arrow in the centre denotes S-duality. All these theories are described by choosing different parametrisations of exceptional field theory.
The superscript IIA/B${}^{\pm \pm}$ denotes whether, firstly, fundamental strings and, secondly, D-branes have Lorentzian or Euclidean worldvolumes, and hence determines which gauge fields have wrong sign kinetic terms. Similarly M${}^\pm$ denotes whether M2 branes have Lorentzian or Euclidean worldvolumes. There are additional versions of these theories with more exotic signatures. The alternate names in brackets are those used originally by Hull \cite{Hull:1998vg,Hull:1998ym}, while the plus minus notation and form of the diagram is taken from \cite{Dijkgraaf:2016lym}.
}
\label{exoticdiagram}
\end{figure}
\subsection{IIB parametrisations}
For the IIB solution of the section condition we split $a=(i,\alpha)$ where $i$ a three-dimensional index, and $\alpha$ is a two-dimensional index associated to the unbroken $\mathrm{SL}(2)$ S-duality symmetry of IIB.
The physical coordinates are then the three coordinates $Y^{ij}$.
It can be convenient to view the $i$ index as being naturally down, i.e.\ $Y^M = (Y_{ij}, Y_i{}^\alpha, Y^{\alpha \beta})$, such that the physical coordinates can be defined to have the usual index position via $Y^i = \eta^{ijk} Y_{jk}$.
The generalised diffeomorphism parameter $\Lambda^{ab} = ( \eta_{ijk} \Lambda^k, \Lambda_i{}^\alpha, \Lambda^{\alpha \beta})$ now produces three-dimensional diffeomorphisms generated by $\Lambda^i$, gauge transformations $\Lambda_i{}^\alpha$ of the two-form doublet, and gauge transformations $\Lambda^{\alpha \beta} \equiv \varepsilon^{\alpha \beta} \frac{1}{3!} \eta^{ijk} \lambda_{ijk}$ of the four-form singlet.
The generalised metric can be parametrised in terms of the internal metric, $\phi_{ij}$, the two two-forms $(C_{ij}, B_{ij}) = C_{ij}{}^\alpha$ (which we again write as vectors, $v^{i \alpha} \equiv \frac{1}{2} \epsilon^{ijk} C_{jk}{}^\alpha$), and a two-by-two matrix, $\mathcal{H}_{\alpha \beta}$, containing the dilaton $\Phi$ and RR zero-form $C_0$.
We write
\begin{align}
m_{ab} & =
\begin{pmatrix}
|\phi|^{3/5} ( (-1)^t \sigma_F \sigma_D \phi^{ij} + \mathcal{H}_{\gamma \delta} v^{i \gamma} v^{j \delta} ) & |\phi|^{1/10} \mathcal{H}_{\alpha \gamma} v^{i \gamma} \\
|\phi|^{1/10} \mathcal{H}_{\beta \gamma} v^{j \gamma} & |\phi|^{-2/5} \mathcal{H}_{\alpha \beta}
\end{pmatrix} \,,\\
\mathcal{H}_{\alpha \beta} & =
\sigma_F e^\Phi \begin{pmatrix}
1 & C_0 \\ C_0 & \sigma_F \sigma_D e^{-2\Phi} + C_0^2
\end{pmatrix} \,.
\label{mIIBparam}
\end{align}
Again, we allow for a general distribution of sign factors when the coset is $\mathrm{SL}(5) / \mathrm{SO}(2,3)$.
Here the signs $\sigma_i = \pm$ dictate whether the parametrisation corresponds to a set of variants of type IIB, denoted IIB${}^{\sigma_F \sigma_D}$, where IIB${}^{++}$ is the standard IIB, IIB${}^{+-}$ is obtained by a timelike T-dualisation of type IIA, IIB${}^{-+}$ is the S-dual of IIB${}^{+-}$ and is a theory where the fundamental strings have Euclidean worldsheet, and IIB${}^{--}$ is obtained by further T-dualities \cite{Hull:1998vg,Hull:1998ym, Dijkgraaf:2016lym}.
The subscript on $\sigma_F$ means that the sign corresponds to the F1 having Lorentzian/Euclidean worldvolume, while that on $\sigma_D$ means that the sign corresponds to D-branes having Lorentzian/Euclidean worldsheets.
In this case, the parametrisation of the big generalised metric that we use corresponds to
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{M}_{ab,cd} = (-1)^t ( m_{ac} m_{bd} - m_{ad} m_{bc} ) .
\end{equation}
We also identify the gauge fields such that (schematically) $\mathcal{A}_{\mu ij} = \eta_{ijk} A_\mu{}^k$, $\mathcal{A}_{\mu i}{}^\alpha = (C_{\mu i} , B_{\mu i} )$, $\mathcal{A}_{\mu}{}^{\alpha \beta} = \varepsilon^{\alpha \beta} \frac{1}{3!} \eta^{ijk} C_{\mu ijk}$ and similarly for the higher rank fields.
Then the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT dynamics are equivalent to those following from the type pseudo-IIB action\footnote{The self-duality of the five-form field strength is imposed in the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT by the duality relations corresponding to the equation of motion of the gauge field $\mathcal{C}_{\mu\nu\rho}{}^a$.} of the form
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
S = \int d^{10}X \,\sqrt{|\hat g|} &\Big(
R(\hat g) + \frac{1}{4} \hat g^{\hat{\mu} \hnu} \partial_{\hat{\mu}} \mathcal{H}_{\alpha \beta} \partial_{\hnu} \mathcal{H}^{\alpha \beta} - \frac{1}{12} \sigma_D \sigma_F \mathcal{H}_{\alpha \beta} {F}_{\hat{\mu} \hnu \hat{\rho}}{}^\alpha F^{\hat{\mu} \hnu \hat{\rho} \beta}
\\ & \qquad - \frac{1}{4\cdot 5!} \sigma_D \sigma_F F_{\hat{\mu}_1 \dots \hat{\mu}_5} F^{\hat{\mu}_1 \dots \hat{\mu}_5}
+ \frac{1}{\sqrt{|\hat g|}} \mathcal{L}_{\text{CS}}
\Big),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
which matches the Einstein frame action exactly for the type IIB${}^{\sigma_F \sigma_D}$ supergravities \cite{Dijkgraaf:2016lym}.
We see that the choice of signs $\sigma_F, \sigma_D$ will determines which kinetic terms come with the wrong sign. When $\sigma_F = -1$, the NSNS $B$-field does, while when $\sigma_D=-1$ the RR two-form does.
We can summarise some of the sign choices appearing in the little generalised metric \eqref{mIIBparam}, with reference to figure \ref{exoticdiagram}:
\begin{itemize}
\item The signature of $\phi_{ij}$ is $(0,3)$, then we can describe either usual IIB${}^{++}$, in the $\mathrm{SL}(5)/\mathrm{SO}(5)$ description, with the external metric of signature $(1,6)$, or also IIB${}^{--}$, in the $\mathrm{SL}(5)/\mathrm{SO}(2,3)$ description.
\item The signature of $\phi_{ij}$ is $(1,2)$, then we can describe IIB${}^{++}$ (with Euclidean external metric) as the $(-1)^t$ factor flips the signature of the upper three-by-three block: this way we describe the usual Lorentzian supergravity (in \cite{Blair:2013gqa} this was viewed as working with a mostly minus signature in the spacetime picture). We can also describe IIB${}^{+-}$ or IIB${}^{-+}$.
\item Other choices can correspond to ExFT descriptions of other exotic variants of IIB supergravity.
\end{itemize}
\section{Non-Riemannian backgrounds in $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT}
\label{5NonRie}
We will now generate and describe non-Riemannian parametrisations of the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ theory. We will first play with the same simple examples as worked in the DFT case: namely, a Gomis-Ooguri scaling limit, and a U-duality of the worldvolume directions of an M2 brane solution.
We will then demonstrate how to think more systematically about such parametrisations in this ExFT.
\subsection{Examples: Gomis-Ooguri and timelike U-duality}
\subsubsection*{Gomis-Ooguri}
Consider the flat background
\begin{equation}
ds^2 = G^{2/3} \eta_{\alpha \beta} dz^\alpha dz^\beta + G^{-1/3} d\vec{x}_8{}^2
\,,\quad
C_{t12} = G - \mu \,,
\end{equation}
where $\eta_{\alpha \beta} = \mathrm{diag}\,(-1,1,1)$ and $G$ and $\mu$ are tunable constants: we will take the $G \rightarrow \infty$ limit keeping $\mu$ fixed.
The relative scaling between the worldvolume coordinates $z^\alpha = (t,z^1,z^2)$ and the transverse coordinates $\vec{x}_8$ is the same as in the M2 example considered in \cite{Gomis:2000bd}, however we need to rescale the overall metric by a factor of $G^{2/3}$ in order to obtain a finite generalised metric in the limit.
We pick ExFT physical coordinates $Y^{i5} = (z^\alpha,w)$ where $w$ denotes any one of the $\vec{x}_8$ directions. We take $\eta^{t12w} = +1$.
The only non-vanishing ExFT fields are the external metric and generalised metric (using the parametrisation \eqref{mparam} with, here, $\lambda = t = + 1$):
\begin{equation}
g_{\mu\nu} = \delta_{\mu\nu}\,,\quad
m_{ab} = \begin{pmatrix}
\eta_{\alpha \beta} & 0 & 0 \\
0 & G^{-1} & 1-\mu G^{-1} \\
0 & 1 - \mu G^{-1} & -2\mu + \mu^2 G^{-1}
\end{pmatrix} \,.
\end{equation}
The $G \rightarrow \infty$ limit is well-defined and non-singular at the level of the generalised metric, leading to
\begin{equation}
m_{ab} = \begin{pmatrix}
\eta_{\alpha \beta} & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & 1 & -2\mu
\end{pmatrix} \,.
\label{exGOm}
\end{equation}
However, this does not admit a Riemannian parametrisation: the upper left 4 by 4 block, which should be proportional to the spacetime metric, is degenerate.
We have therefore very easily generated an example of a non-Riemannian parametrisation in exceptional field theory.
\subsubsection*{Non-Riemannian geometry from U and S duality}
Our next trick will involve dualising supergravity solutions.
We will apply the following U-duality transformation:
\begin{equation}
U^a{}_b = \begin{pmatrix}
\delta^i{}_j - n^i \bar n_j & n^i \\
- \bar n_j & 0
\end{pmatrix}
\label{UBuscher}
\end{equation}
where $n^i \bar n_i = 1$. If the physical directions are indexed by $i=1,2,3,4$ and we want to do a U-duality acting on the $1,2,3$ directions, then we let $n^4 = 1 = \bar n_4$. This U-duality then reduces (after reduction on the $3$ direction, say) to a pair of Buscher T-dualities acting in the $1,2$ directions plus an interchange of the $x^1$ and $-x^2$ directions.
The generalised metric transforms to $\tilde m = U^{-T} m U^{-1}$.
\subsubsection*{U-duality between M2 and non-Riemannian background}
The M2 solution, which in fact inspired the form of the Gomis-Ooguri background considered above, is
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
ds^2 = H^{-2/3} \eta_{\alpha \beta} dz^\alpha dz^\beta + H^{1/3} d \vec{x}_8{}^2 \,,\quad
C_{t12} = H^{-1} + c \,,\quad
H = 1 + \frac{h}{|\vec{x}_8|^6}\,.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
One would normally have $c=-1$, such that the three-form vanishes at infinity, however we leave this constant general (corresponding to a large gauge transformation at infinity).
We again pick ExFT physical coordinates $Y^{i5} = (z^\alpha,w)$ with $z^\alpha = (t,z^1,z^2)$ and $w$ denoting one of the $\vec{x}_8$ directions.
The ExFT embedding of this solution (again, with $\lambda = t = +1$) is
\begin{equation}
g_{\mu\nu} = \delta_{\mu\nu} \,,\quad
m_{ab} = \begin{pmatrix}
\eta_{\alpha \beta} & 0 & 0 \\
0 & H & 1 + H c \\
0 & 1 + H c & 2c + Hc^2
\end{pmatrix} \,.
\label{M2inm}
\end{equation}
We dualise on the (isometric) $(t,z^1,z^2)$ directions. The $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ transformation \eqref{UBuscher} and transformed generalised metric are:
\begin{equation}
U^a{}_b = \begin{pmatrix}
\delta^\alpha_\beta & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1 \\
0 & -1 & 0
\end{pmatrix} \,,
\quad \tilde m_{ab} = \begin{pmatrix}
\eta_{\alpha \beta} & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 2c + Hc^2 & -(1+Hc)\\
0 & -(1+Hc) & H
\end{pmatrix} \,.
\label{mafterU}
\end{equation}
The spacetime parametrisation that one should use for $\tilde m_{ab}$ depends on the value of $\tilde H \equiv - 2c - Hc^2$.
\begin{itemize}
\item If $\tilde H < 0$, then the signature of the upper left 4 by 4 block is still $(1,3)$ so this admits the conventional geometric parametrisation.
We find
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
ds^2 = (|\tilde H|)^{-2/3} ( - dt^2 + (dz^1)^2 + (dz^2)^2 ) + (|\tilde H|)^{1/3} d \vec{x}_8{}^2 \,,\quad
C_{t12} = - \tilde H^{-1} - c^{-1} \,.
\end{split}
\label{negM2in}
\end{equation}
\item If $\tilde H > 0$, then the signature of the upper left 4 by 4 block is now $(2,2)$. It seems we have a choice of whether to use the parametrisation with $\lambda=1$ or $\lambda = -1$. The latter preserves the $S\mathrm{O}(8)$ invariance of the transverse directions, giving
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
ds^2 = (\tilde H)^{-2/3} ( dt^2 - (dz^1)^2 - (dz^2)^2 ) + (\tilde H)^{1/3} d \vec{x}_8{}^2 \,,\quad
C_{t12} = - \tilde H^{-1} - c^{-1} \,.
\end{split}
\label{negM2out}
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
For $c=-1$ we have $\tilde H = 2 - H = 1 - h/r^6$. Then the solution \eqref{negM2in} and \eqref{negM2out} describes a negative M2 in the exotic M${}^-_{2,9}$ theory with two timelike directions. In the region outside the brane where $\tilde H > 0$ and the spacetime is described by \eqref{negM2out}. Passing through the singularity at $\tilde H = 0$, the interior ($\tilde H < 0$) configuration \eqref{negM2in} then has as usual flipped signature in the worldvolume directions (so in fact is described by M-theory with conventional signature).\footnote{In \cite{Malek:2013sp} it is argued that the change of signature of spacetime should instead be viewed as a breakdown in the gauge fixing of the generalised vielbein, implying that it is impossible to everywhere describe the background in terms of a metric and a three-form. Instead, owing to the singularity at $\tilde H = 0$, we could introduce a parametrisation involving a dual metric and a trivector which will be globally defined on the dual geometry. Here we instead adopt the perspective that though the generalised metric is well-defined everywhere, the choice of parametrisation that one makes is discontinuous at $\tilde H = 0$. At the singularity $\tilde H = 0$, the geometry becomes non-Riemannian but on either side we have different Riemannian parametrisations in which spacetime has different signatures. Similar comments should apply to the DFT example considered previously, also.}
The generalised metric is non-Riemannian at $\tilde H =0$ when $c \neq 0$, and everywhere when $c=0$, with
\begin{equation}
\tilde m_{ab}(\tilde H = 0) = \begin{pmatrix}
\eta_{\alpha \beta} & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1\\
0 & 1 & -2/c
\end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
\tilde m_{ab}(c=0) = \begin{pmatrix}
\eta_{\alpha \beta} & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & -1\\
0 & -1 & H
\end{pmatrix}
\,.
\label{exUm}
\end{equation}
These are evidently non-Riemannian in the same manner as the Gomis-Ooguri example we considered previously.
\subsubsection*{S-duality between D$(-1)$ and non-Riemannian background}
We can also consider the generalised metric \eqref{M2inm} of the embedding of the M2 in the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT and this time interpret it in a type IIB solution of the section condition.
The appropriate parametrisation corresponds to the type IIB${}^{+-}$ theory (related by T-duality on the timelike direction to type IIA).
We find
\begin{equation}
e^\Phi = H \,,\quad
C_0 = H^{-1} + c\,,
\end{equation}
while the 10-d Einstein metric is flat.
This can be interpreted as the solution for a D$(-1)$ (normally this is obtained as a solution of the Euclideanised type IIB, a subtlety we will ignore. It seems natural to view the D$(-1)$ here as having been obtained by timelike T-duality of a D0). We can relate this IIB parametrisation back to the M-theory one: the relationship is evidently given by T-dualising the D$(-1)$ on all three physical coordinates to get a D2 which lifts to the M2 we started off by thinking about.
The U-duality transformation in \eqref{mafterU} now in fact corresponds to the S-duality that inverts the string coupling constant.
The resulting configuration \eqref{mafterU} can be simply described as:
\begin{equation}
e^\Phi = - \sigma_F \tilde H
\,,\quad
C_0 = - ( \tilde H^{-1} + c^{-1} )
\,,\quad
\sigma_F = - \mathrm{sgn} \,(\tilde H )
\end{equation}
where $\sigma_F$ is determined by requiring $e^\Phi$ be positive.
Let's consider the two cases of most interest:
\begin{itemize}
\item When $c=-1$, we have $\tilde H = 2 -H$ as before, and the solution can be written everywhere as
\begin{equation}
e^\Phi = | \tilde H |\,,\quad
C_0 = 1 - \tilde H^{-1}\,.
\end{equation}
For $\tilde H > 0$ we have $\sigma_F = -1$, $\sigma_D= +1$, so that the theory corresponds to IIB${}^{-+}$, while for $\tilde H < 0$, we have $\sigma_F = +1$, $\sigma_D=-1$, so this is IIB${}^{+-}$. This therefore is a negative D$(-1)$ in the IIB${}^{-+}$ theory. Note there is no signature flip (as we are dealing with a worldpoint).
\item When $c=0$, there is no parametrisation in terms of $e^\Phi$ and $C_0$, although the spacetime metric is well-defined. The ``non-Riemannian'' nature of the generalised metric is thus that the parametrisation of the part of the generalised metric, $\mathcal{H}_{\alpha \beta}$, describing the axio-dilaton of type IIB, is non-standard.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Non-Riemannian little metrics}
We can begin to understand the presence of non-Riemannian parametrisations in this ExFT by looking anew at the generalised metric.
We continue to use the little metric, and will work in an M-theory solution of the section condition.
Then, a general parametrisation of the little metric is:
\begin{equation}
m_{ab} = \begin{pmatrix} k_{ij} & \chi_i \\ \chi_j & \tilde \varphi \end{pmatrix} \,,
\label{mgeneral}
\end{equation}
assuming that it is symmetric and subject to the sole constraint that $\det m = 1$, such that
\begin{equation}
\tilde \varphi \det k - \frac{1}{6} \chi_{i_1} \chi_{j_1} \eta^{i_1 i_2 i_3 i_4} \eta^{j_1 j_2 j_3 j_4} k_{i_2j_2} k_{i_3j_3} k_{i_4j_4} = 1\,.
\label{mdetconstraint}
\end{equation}
We will now attempt to solve this constraint to find allowed parametrisations of $m_{ab}$.
\subsubsection*{Riemannian solutions}
First, we suppose that $\det k \neq 0$, and let $k^{ij}$ denote the inverse of $k_{ij}$. It follows from \eqref{mdetconstraint} that
\begin{equation}
\tilde \varphi = \frac{1}{\det k} \left( 1 + \det k \, k^{ij} \chi_i \chi_j \right) \,.
\end{equation}
Setting $k_{ij} = \lambda |\phi|^{-2/5} \phi_{ij}$ and $\chi_i = \lambda |\phi|^{1/10} \phi_{ij} v^j$ recovers the usual parametrisation \eqref{mparam}, after noting $\operatorname{det} k = {(-1)}^t {|\phi|}^{-3/5}$, consistent with the transformation properties implied by generalised diffeomorphisms. Note that we can have $\tilde \varphi = 0$ when $\phi_{ij} v^i v^j = - \lambda (-1)^t$.
\subsubsection*{Non-Riemannian solutions}
Now, we suppose $\det k = 0$. This takes us into the realm of non-Riemannian parametrisations, as evidently we will not be able to identify $k_{ij}$ as being proportional to the four-dimensional spacetime metric anymore.
Define a vector
\begin{equation}
u^i \equiv - \frac{1}{6} \chi_{j_1} \eta^{i\, i_2 i_3 i_4} \eta^{j_1 j_2 j_3 j_4} k_{i_2j_2} k_{i_3j_3} k_{i_4j_4}\,.
\end{equation}
Then the constraint \eqref{mdetconstraint} is equivalent to $u^i \chi_i = 1$, and we have $k_{ij} u^j = 0$. Note that then $k_{ij}$ has rank 3, and we cannot satisfy \eqref{mdetconstraint} if it has lower rank.
We introduce the almost inverse $\tilde h^{ij}$ such that
\begin{equation}
\tilde h^{ik} k_{kj} + u^i \chi_j = \delta^i_j \,,\quad \tilde h^{ij} \chi_j = 0 \,,\quad k_{ij} u^j = 0 \,.
\label{originalrelations}
\end{equation}
Then, the inverse metric is
\begin{equation}
m^{ab} = \begin{pmatrix} \tilde h^{ij} - \tilde \varphi u^iu^j & u^i \\ u^j & 0 \end{pmatrix} \,.
\label{minvgeneral}
\end{equation}
Explicitly, $\tilde h^{ij} =- \frac{1}{2} \eta^{iklm} \eta^{jpqr} \chi_m \chi_r k_{kp} k_{lq}$.
The parametrisations \eqref{mgeneral} and \eqref{minvgeneral} together with the relations \eqref{originalrelations} completely encode the non-Riemannian parametrisation.
To understand the quantities appearing, let us examine the transformation of the generalised metric under generalised diffeomorphisms \cite{Berman:2011cg}
\begin{equation}
\delta_\Lambda m_{ab} = \frac{1}{2} \Lambda^{cd} \partial_{cd} m_{ab} - \frac{2}{5} m_{ab} \partial_{cd} \Lambda^{cd} + 2 m_{c(a} \partial_{b)d} \Lambda^{cd} \,.
\end{equation}
In the M-theory solution to the section condition, we let $\Lambda^{ab} = ( \Lambda^{i5} , \Lambda^{ij} )$ such that
\begin{equation}
\delta_\Lambda k_{ij} = L_\Lambda k_{ij}
\,,\quad
\delta_\Lambda \chi_i = L_\Lambda \chi_i
+ k_{ij} \partial_k \Lambda^{kj} \,,\quad
\delta_\Lambda \tilde\varphi = L_\Lambda \tilde\varphi
- 2 \chi_i \partial_k \Lambda^{ik} \,,\quad
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\delta_\Lambda \tilde h^{ij} = L_\Lambda \tilde h^{ij}
- 2 \chi_{k} \partial_l \Lambda^{kl} u^i u^j + 2 u^{(i} \partial_k \Lambda^{j) k} \,,\quad
\delta_\Lambda u^i = L_\Lambda u^
\,,\quad
\label{localsymms5nonrie}
\end{equation}
where $L_\Lambda$ denotes the usual Lie derivative with respect to the parameter $\Lambda^{i5}$, with $k_{ij}$, $\chi_i$, $\tilde \varphi$, $u^i$ and $\tilde h^{ij}$ of weight $-4/5$, $1/5$, $6/5$, $-1/5$ and $+4/5$ respectively. Normally one views the transformations $\Lambda^{ij}$ as giving gauge transformations of the 11-dimensional three-form, with $\Lambda^{ij} = \frac{1}{2} \eta^{ijkl} \lambda_{kl}$.
We observe that though $k_{ij}$ and its zero vector $u^i$ are invariant under such transformations, the other quantities are not.
(However the defining properties \eqref{originalrelations} are preserved such the transformed variables still give a valid non-Riemannian parametrisation.)
To see how we could introduce a three-form into the non-Riemannian parametrisation transforming under the gauge transformations, suppose that we start with the degenerate $k_{ij}$ and its zero vector $u^i$.
If all we require of $\chi_i$ is that it obeys $u^i \chi_i = 1$, there is an ambiguity $\chi \sim \chi_i + k_{ij} b^j$ for arbitrary vector $b^j$.
We can provide a partial fixing of this ambiguity by defining a particular covector $X_i$ such that $u^i X_i = 1$.
Taking this as a reference, we can write
\begin{equation}
\chi_i = X_i - k_{ij} V^j \,,
\end{equation}
and require that $X_i$ be wholly ``geometric'' in the sense that it is unchanged by the gauge transformations $\Lambda^{ij}$.
Then, we find that
\begin{equation}
\delta_\Lambda V^i = L_\Lambda V^i + \partial_{k} \Lambda^{ik} \,,
\end{equation}
(with weight $1$). Simultaneously, we can redefine the other fields transforming under the gauge transformations according to
\begin{equation}
\tilde h^{ij} = h^{ij} + 2 u^{(i} V^{j)} + (- 2 V^k X_k + V^k k_{kl} V^l ) u^i u^j \,,\quad
\tilde \varphi = \varphi - 2 V^k X_k + V^k k_{kl} V^l,
\end{equation}
in terms of which $\varphi$, $h^{ij}$ are gauge invariant and we have an alternative version of the parametrisation, with
\begin{equation}
m_{ab}
=
\begin{pmatrix}
k_{ij} & X_i - k_{ik} V^k\\
X_j - k_{jk} V^k & \varphi - 2 V^k X_k + V^k k_{kl} V^l
\end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
\label{ansatz}
m^{ab} =
\begin{pmatrix}
h^{ij} - \varphi u^i u^j + 2 u^{(i}V^{j)} & u^i \\
u^j & 0
\end{pmatrix} \,.
\end{equation}
This can be factorised as $m_{ab} = ( U_V^T \bar m U_V)_{ab}$
where
\begin{equation}
(U_V)^a{}_b = \begin{pmatrix}
\delta^i_j & -V^i \\
0 & 1
\end{pmatrix} \,,\quad \mathrm{det}\, U_V = 1 \,,
\quad
\bar m_{ab} =
\begin{pmatrix}
k_{ij} & X_i \\
X_j & \varphi
\end{pmatrix}\,.
\end{equation}
The relations in \eqref{originalrelations} are now:
\begin{equation}
k_{ij} u^j = 0 \,,\quad h^{ij} X_j = 0 \,,\quad u^i X_i = 1\,,\quad
h^{ik} k_{kj} + u^i X_j = \delta^i_j \,.
\label{defining}
\end{equation}
In this version of the parametrisation, as $V^i$ transforms under three-form gauge transformations as $\delta_\lambda V^i = 3 \eta^{ijkl} \partial_j \lambda_{kl}$, we can think of relating this to three-form as $V^i = \frac{1}{3!} \eta^{ijkl} C_{jkl}$.
This form of the generalised metric \eqref{ansatz} appears to contain the degrees of freedom we might expect for $\mathrm{SL}(5)/\mathrm{SO}(2,3)$: in place of a Riemannian metric we instead have the degenerate $k_{ij}$ and $X_i$, along with a three-form (encoded in $V^i$) and the extra scalar $\varphi$, subject to the constraint $u^i X_i =1$. However, given the ambiguity in introducing $V^i$, the situation is quite subtle.
If we insist on using the parametrisation \eqref{ansatz}, then we must note that it is invariant under the shift symmetry:
\begin{equation}
X_i \rightarrow X_i + k_{ij} b^j \, , \qquad V^i \rightarrow V^i + b^i \, , \qquad \varphi \rightarrow \varphi + 2 b^k X_k + b^k k_{kl} b^l \,, \label{shiftsym}
\end{equation}
mirroring the shift symmetry \eqref{dftshift} appearing in the $\mathrm{O}(D,D)$ non-Riemannian parametrisations of \cite{Morand:2017fnv}. Note that for $b^i$ proportional to $u^i$, $X_i$ is invariant while $V^i$ and $\varphi$ transform. One can eliminate $\varphi$ using the latter transformation, with $b^i = - \frac{1}{2} u^i \varphi$, or eliminate $V^i$ using $b^i = -V^i$.
Furthermore, one can insert \eqref{ansatz} into the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT action \eqref{actionSL5} evaluated on the M-theory solution of the section condition to investigate see how $\varphi$ and $V^i$ appear. We focus on the terms involving derivatives of generalised metric. In the ``potential'' $V$, we have:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{8}m^{a c} m^{b d} & \partial_{a b} m_{ e f} \partial_{c d}m^{e f}+\frac{1}{2}m^{a c} m^{b d} \partial_{a b}m^{e f} \partial_{e c} m_{ d f}+\frac{1}{2}\partial_{a b}m^{a c} \partial_{c d}m^{b d} \\&
= -\frac{1}{4} u^i u^j \partial_i k_{kl} \partial_j h^{kl} + \frac{1}{2} u^i u^k \partial_i h^{jl} \partial_j k_{kl}
- \frac{1}{2} \partial_i u^i \partial_j u^j - \frac{1}{2} \partial_i u^j \partial_j u^i
\\ & \qquad
+ \frac{1}{2} u^i u^j \partial_i u^k \partial_k X_j
+ \frac{1}{2} h^{ij} u^k \partial_i u^l ( \partial_j k_{kl} - \partial_k k_{jl} )
\end{split}
\end{equation}
while the ``kinetic term'' involves:\footnote{Here $D_\mu = \partial_\mu - \mathcal{L}_{\mathcal{A}_\mu}$ with the generalised Lie derivative acting as explained in the text above.}
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{4}
D_\mu m^{ab} D^\mu m_{ab} = \frac{1}{4} D_\mu k_{ij} D^{\mu} h^{ij} + \frac{1}{2} D_\mu u^i D^\mu X_i
- k_{ij} D_\mu V^i D^\mu u^j + \frac{1}{2} \varphi k_{ij} D_\mu u^i D^\mu u^j \,.
\end{equation}
Before discussing the interpretation of this, note that for these non-Riemannian backgrounds the time-like direction is in what is normally called the ``internal space'' and the external space is Euclidean (this must be the case as in the examples we looked at, we obtained the non-Riemannian background by U-dualising from a generalised metric in $\mathrm{SL}(5)/\mathrm{SO}(2,3)$, i.e. including the timelike direction in the extended space). Thus the names ``potential'' and ``kinetic term'' are misnomers inherited from the more usual situation where time is in the external space. The fact that $V^i$ and $\varphi$ drop out of the action involving internal derivatives implies that there are no time derivatives for these fields and so their canonical momentum will vanish. This leads to (in the language of canonical quantisation) a first class constraint which we normally associate with a gauge symmetry. The local symmetry is the shift symmetry we have identified and thus leads to the conclusion that there are fewer physical degrees of freedom than expected relative to the usual case. This should not be a surprise since having non-Riemannian directions will mean that forms will also have fewer degrees of freedom.
We have seen previously that, in the maximally non-Riemannian case, all the propagating degrees of freedom were projected out and that one should think of the coset as $G/G$. Now that we have some subset of non-Riemannian directions one will naturally have fewer degrees of freedom, as indicated by the presence of the shift symmetry and the first class constraint on $V^i$. Constructing the coset description for each case with a different non-Riemannian structure is an invidious task that we leave for future work. The general story is that $H$ enhances as more dimensions become non-Riemannian. One should also note that from the ``kinetic terms'' ie. the action containing derivatives of the external space on $m_{ab}$ there are additional constraints from the equations of motion, these will be second class. A full detailed analysis of the constraint structure is beyond this paper. What we wish to emphasise is that there is a reduction in the form degrees of freedom due to the non-Riemannian nature of the space which may be seen from the absence of time derivative terms for $V^i$. The other (second class) constraints maybe viewed as providing a restriction on how a non-Riemannian space may be fibred over some other space. As such this is model provides a fascinating playground for studying different aspects of how non-Riemannian spaces are embedded in ExFT.
In spite of the above discussion, we can continue to make use of a $\mathrm{SL}(5) / \mathrm{SO}(2,3)$ description for the generalised vielbein. This is perfectly fine so long as we keep in mind the additional shift symmetry (\ref{shiftsym}) that will ultimately lower the degrees of freedom in the coset by enhancing $H$.
Then, to construct the generalised vielbein, let $\bar a, \bar b$ be flat five-dimensional indices, and $\bar \imath, \bar \jmath$ be three-dimensional flat indices.
The flat generalised metric can be taken to be
\begin{equation}
\eta_{ \bar a \bar b} = \begin{pmatrix} \eta_{\bar \imath \bar \jmath} & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & \sigma & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & - \sigma \end{pmatrix} \,,
\end{equation}
where $\sigma = \pm 1$ and $\eta_{\bar \imath \bar \jmath}$ is the three-dimensional Minkowskian metric. A family of generalised vielbein $E^{\bar a}{}_a$, satisfying $m_{ab} = E^{\bar a}{}_a E^{\bar b}{}_b \eta_{\bar a \bar b}$, is provided by
\begin{equation}
E^{\bar a}{}_a = \begin{pmatrix} k^{\bar \imath}{}_i & -k^{\bar \imath}{}_j V^j \\ \alpha X_i & \frac{1}{2} \left( \alpha \varphi + \frac{\sigma}{\alpha} \right) - \alpha X^k V_k \\ \alpha X_i & \frac{1}{2} \left( \alpha \varphi - \frac{\sigma}{\alpha} \right) - \alpha X^k V_k \end{pmatrix} \,.
\end{equation}
Here, $\alpha$ is an arbitrary non-zero constant and $k^{\bar\imath}{}_i k^{\bar \jmath}{}_j \eta_{\bar \imath \bar \jmath} = k_{ij}$ with $k^{\bar \imath}{}_i u^i = 0$.
We can also write down the big generalised metric, which will have the parametrisation
\begin{equation}
M_{ab,cd}
= \pm (U_V)^T
\begin{pmatrix}
\varphi k_{ik} - X_i X_k & k_{ki} X_l - k_{li} X_k\\
k_{ik} X_j - k_{jk} X_i & k_{ik} k_{jl} - k_{il} k_{jk}
\end{pmatrix}
U_V
\,,\quad U_V^{ab}{}_{cd} = \begin{pmatrix}
\delta^i_k & 0 \\
-\delta^{[i}_k V^{j]} & \delta^{[ij]}_{kl}
\end{pmatrix} \, ,
\end{equation}
where the sign factor will depend on the signature of $k_{ij}$ and on $\sigma$.
Now, consider the example non-Riemannian generalised metric \eqref{exGOm} we generated above by taking the Gomis-Ooguri limit (or equivalently those appearing after U-dualising the M2 supergravity solution, \eqref{exUm}).
This embeds into the general form of the little metric \eqref{mgeneral} as a non-Riemannian parametrisation with:
\begin{equation}
k_{ij} = \begin{pmatrix} \eta_{\alpha \beta} & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
\chi_i = \begin{pmatrix} 0 &0 &0 & 1 \end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
\tilde\varphi = -2\mu \,.
\label{mex}
\end{equation}
Alternatively, one could fix $X_i = \chi_i$, $\tilde \varphi = 0$ and write it in the form \eqref{ansatz} in terms of the following dualised three-form
\begin{equation}
V^i = \begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 & \mu \end{pmatrix} \,,
\end{equation}
which implies that we have $C_{t12} = -\mu$, i.e. this three-form is only defined with legs in the three-dimensional space orthogonal to the zero vector of $k_{ij}$.
This form of the solution is closest to the DFT non-Riemannian parametrisation \eqref{GOH} with a non-vanishing $B$-field.
\subsubsection*{A quick glance at IIB parametrisations}
We could approach the issue similarly in a IIB solution of the section condition, writing
\begin{equation}
m_{ab} = \begin{pmatrix}
k_{ij} & \chi_{i\beta} \\
\chi_{j\alpha} & H_{\alpha \beta}
\end{pmatrix} \,,
\end{equation}
with $i,j=1,2,3$ the spacetime indices and $\alpha,\beta=1,2$ the $\mathrm{SL}(2)$ indices.
We have the unit determinant constraint
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{det}\,k \,\mathrm{det}\,H + \varepsilon^{\alpha \beta} \varepsilon^{\gamma \delta} \eta^{ijk} \eta^{lmn} \left( - \frac{1}{2} H_{\alpha \gamma} \chi_{i \beta} \chi_{l \delta} k_{jm} k_{kn}
+ \frac{1}{4} k_{il} \chi_{j \gamma} \chi_{k \delta} \chi_{m \alpha} \chi_{n \beta} \right) = 1 \,.
\end{equation}
We shall not study this in detail here. It is clear that one can take $k_{ij}$ to be non-invertible, meaning there is no standard spacetime metric. Examples could be found by taking Gomis-Ooguri-type limits of the F1 and D1 SUGRA solutions.
However, there are also ``non-Riemannian'' possibilities that do not involve assuming lack of invertibility of $k_{ij}$ and $H_{\alpha \beta}$.
Indeed, the example \eqref{mex} (actually, one could in effect interpret this as a Gomis-Ooguri limit for the D$(-1)$ SUGRA solution) corresponds here to
\begin{equation}
k_{ij} = \begin{pmatrix}
- 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1
\end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
\chi_{i\alpha} = 0 \,,\quad
H_{\alpha \beta} = \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 \\
1 & -2\mu
\end{pmatrix}\,,
\end{equation}
in which the three-by-three and two-by-two blocks are invertible, but, as we explained before, the factor $H_{\alpha \beta}$ does not admit the standard parametrisation in terms of the dilaton and RR zero form as in \eqref{mIIBparam}. Thus not only the geometry, as encoded in the relationship between $k_{ij}$ and the spacetime metric, but the information about the string coupling can be modified in a generic parametrisation of the generalised metric.
\subsection{Reduction to $\mathrm{O}(3,3)$}
\label{redtoO33}
We now reduce the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ non-Riemannian parametrisation \eqref{ansatz} to $\mathrm{O}(3,3)$ to show that it becomes a $(1,1)$ non-Riemannian parametrisation in DFT.
The reduction from the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT to the $\mathrm{O}(3,3)$ DFT follows \cite{Berman:2011cg,Thompson:2011uw} (see also the appendix of \cite{Blair:2018lbh}).
The $\mathbf{10}$ of $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ reduces to the $\mathbf{6} \oplus \mathbf{4}$ of $\mathrm{O}(3,3)$, while the $\mathbf{5}$ of $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ becomes that $\mathbf{4} \oplus \mathbf{1}$.
The $\mathbf{4}$ is a Majorana-Weyl spinor representation.
The generalised metric $\mathcal{M}_{ab,cd}$ then leads to the $\mathrm{O}(3,3)$ generalised metric, $\mathcal{H}_{MN}$, a Majorana-Weyl spinor of RR fields, $C_I$, where $I$ is a four-dimensional spinor index, and the generalised dilaton, $\mathbf{d}$.
It is convenient to phrase the reduction in terms of the little metric: this gives rise to the $\mathrm{O}(3,3)$ generalised metric in the form of a $4\times 4$ symmetric matrix $h_{IJ}$ carrying spinorial indices. Explicitly, we have
\begin{equation}
m_{ab} =
\begin{pmatrix}
e^{-2\mathbf{d}/5} h_{IJ} + \eta e^{8\mathbf{d}/5} C_I C_J & \eta e^{8\mathbf{d}/5} C_I \\
\eta e^{8\mathbf{d}/5} C_J & \eta e^{8\mathbf{d}/5}
\end{pmatrix}
\label{mtoh}
\end{equation}
We include $\eta = \pm 1$ to allow the description of ``timelike'' reductions (see appendix \ref{appred} for the details of how this features in reductions of the usual Riemannian parametrisations). It is convenient to think of the five dimensional index $a$ as being split $a=(I,4)$.
Recall that the parametrisation of the large generalised metric is given by $\mathcal{M}_{ab,cd} = \pm ( m_{ac} m_{bd} - m_{ad} m_{bc} )$, where the sign is chosen such that the generalised line element $\mathcal{M}_{MN} dY^M dY^N \sim + \phi_{ i j} dY^i dY^j + \dots$ on choosing a section condition solution $\partial_i \neq 0$.
In order to pick out the components of $\mathcal{M}_{MN}$ corresponding to the $S\mathrm{O}(3,3)$ generalised metric, it is convenient to work with this generalised line element, for which we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{M}_{MN} dY^M dY^N & = \pm \bigg( \left( \frac{1}{2} e^{-4d/5} h_{IK} h_{JL} + \eta e^{6d/5} C_I C_K h_{JL} \right) dY^{IJ} dY^{KL}
\\ & \qquad\qquad+ 2 \eta e^{6d/5} h_{IK} C_J dY^{IJ} dY^{K4} + \eta e^{6d/5} h_{IJ} dY^{I4} dY^{J4}
\bigg)\,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where the 10 $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ coordinates $Y^M$ split into four spinorial coordinates $Y^{I4}$ and six coordinates $Y^{IJ}$ carrying an antisymmetric pair of spinor indices. These are related to the usual doubled coordinates by $Y^M = \frac{1}{2\sqrt{2}} \gamma^M{}_{IJ} Y^{IJ}$, where $\gamma^M$ and $\gamma_M$ denote the off-diagonal blocks of the full $\mathrm{O}(3,3)$ gamma matrices \cite{Berman:2011cg}. Writing $I=(i, \sharp)$ (where really $\sharp$ can be identified with $a=5$ index of the original $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT) means that $Y^M = ( Y^i, \tilde Y_i ) = ( Y^{i\sharp} , \frac{1}{2} \eta_{ijk} Y^{jk} )$, such that the components of the usual DFT generalised metric are given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{H}_{ ij } = \pm (h_{ij} h_{\sharp \sharp} - h_{ i\sharp} h_{ j \sharp } ) \,,\quad
\mathcal{H}_{i}{}^j = \pm \eta^{jkl} h_{ik} h_{l\sharp} \,,\quad
\mathcal{H}^{ij} = \pm \frac{1}{2} \eta^{ikl} \eta^{jmn} h_{km} h_{ln} \,.
\end{split}
\label{Hfromh}
\end{equation}
Let us carry this process out for the non-Riemannian parametrisation in the original form \eqref{mgeneral}, that is, let us write
\begin{equation}
m_{ab} = \begin{pmatrix}
k_{\hat \imath \hat \jmath} & \chi_{\hat \imath} \\
\chi_{\hat \jmath} & \tilde\varphi
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
where now $a=(\hat \imath, 5)$ in order to rewrite the four-dimensional indices as $\hat \imath = (i,4)$.
We assume that $k_{44} \neq 0$ and, for simplicity, that $k_{44} > 0$ so the reduction is (in some sense) spacelike. We can then write a Kaluza-Klein style decomposition for the degenerate matrix $k_{\hat \imath \hat \jmath}$,
\begin{equation}
k_{ \hat \imath \hat \jmath} = \begin{pmatrix}
\tilde k_{ij} + \frac{1}{k_{44}} k_{i4} k_{j4} & k_{i 4} \\
k_{j 4} & k_{44}
\end{pmatrix} \,.\end{equation}
Then $\det k = k_{44} \det \tilde k$ and so $\det \tilde k = 0$. The unit determinant condition \eqref{mdetconstraint} on the generalised metric implies
\begin{equation}
-\frac{1}{2} \eta^{ijk} \eta^{lmn} \tilde \chi_i \tilde \chi_l k_{44} \tilde k_{jm} \tilde k_{kn} = 1\,,
\end{equation}
where $\tilde \chi_i = \chi_i - k_{i 4} \chi_4 / k_{44}$. The null vector becomes
\begin{equation}
u^i = - \frac{1}{2} \eta^{imn} \eta^{jkl} \tilde \chi_j k_{44} \tilde k_{km} \tilde k_{lm} \,,
\quad
u^4 = - k_{i 4} u^i / k_{4 4}\,,
\end{equation}
with $\tilde k_{ij} u^i = 0$, $\tilde \chi_i u^i = 1$. Using \eqref{mtoh} we find explicit expressions for the generalised dilaton, the RR fields, and the spin generalised metric:
\begin{equation}
e^{8d/5} = k_{44}\,,\quad
C_I = \begin{pmatrix}k_{44}^{-1} k_{i4} \\ k_{44}^{-1} \chi_4 \end{pmatrix}
\,,\quad
h_{IJ} = ( k_{44} )^{1/4} \begin{pmatrix}
\tilde k_{ij} & \tilde \chi_i \\
\tilde \chi_j & \tilde\gamma
\end{pmatrix} \,,
\end{equation}
where $\tilde \gamma \equiv \tilde\varphi - k_{44}^{-1} ( \chi_4 )^2$.
This leads, via \eqref{Hfromh}, to the components of the vector generalised metric:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\mathcal{H}_{ij} = \pm ( k_{44} )^{1/2} \left( \tilde\gamma \tilde k_{ij} - \tilde \chi_i \tilde \chi_j \right)\,,\quad
\mathcal{H}_i{}^j =\pm ( k_{44} )^{1/2} \eta^{jkl} \tilde k_{ik} \tilde \chi_l \,,\quad
\mathcal{H}^{ij} = \pm ( k_{44} )^{1/2} \frac{1}{2} \eta^{ikl} \eta^{jpq} \tilde k_{kp} \tilde k_{lq} \,,
\end{split}
\label{tosolve}
\end{equation}
where $\pm$ corresponds to the choice of sign in relating the parametrisation of $\mathcal{M}_{ab,cd}$ to that of the little metric.
We note that
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{H}^{ij} \tilde k_{jk} Y^k = 0
\end{equation}
for arbitrary vector $Y^k$. Now, $\tilde k_{ij}$ has only one zero vector $u^i$, so its kernel has dimension one, and thus its image has dimension two.
This implies that $\mathcal{H}^{ij}$ has a two-dimensional kernel.
We therefore identify it directly with the degenerate matrix $H^{ij}$ of the DFT parametrisation.
We also see that $\mathcal{H}_i{}^i = 0$, so the trace vanishes, $\mathcal{H}_M{}^M =0$.
Thus the generalised metric obtained in the reduction is necessarily of type $(1,1)$ and not $(2,0)$ or $(0,2)$.
The identification of the other elements of the DFT parametrisation is ambiguous owing to the presence of shift symmetries in the non-Riemannian parametrisation.
One possible choice would be identify $K_{ij}$ with the term in $\mathcal{H}_{ij}$ proportional to $\tilde\chi_i \tilde\chi_j$.
After some work, detailed in appendix \ref{reddetails}, it can be shown that this corresponds to:
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
H^{ij} = \pm \frac{1}{2} (k_{44})^{1/2} \eta^{ikl} \eta^{jmn} \tilde k_{km} \tilde k_{ln} \,, \quad
K_{ij} = \mp ( k_{44} )^{1/2} \tilde X_i \tilde X_j \,,\\
\end{split}
\label{mtoDFTres1}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
B_{ij} = \pm \frac{1}{2} (k_{44})^{1/2} \tilde\gamma \eta_{ijk} H^{kl} \tilde X_l \,,\quad
Z_i{}^j = \pm ( k_{44} )^{1/2} \eta^{jkl} \tilde k_{ik} \tilde X_l \,.
\end{split}
\label{mtoDFTres2}
\end{equation}
In this case, the zero vectors of $K_{ij}$ are those $Y^i$ such that $\tilde X_i Y^i = 0$, while those of $H^{ij}$ are those $X_i$ such that $X_i = k_{ij} Y^j$. This parametrisation amounts to a special choice of $B$-field such that $B_{ij} H^{jk} = 0$.
Regardless of the ambiguity in directly identifying the blocks as in \eqref{mtoDFTres1} and \eqref{mtoDFTres2}, the expressions \eqref{tosolve} allow us obtain the full DFT generalised metric without ambiguities.
Let us check how this works out for the non-Riemannian little metrics \eqref{mex} which corresponded to the Gomis-Ooguri limit or the timelike U-duality of the M2 solution.
Reducing as above we find
\begin{equation}
h_{IJ} = \begin{pmatrix} -1 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 & \pm 1 \\ 0 & 0& \pm 1 & -f \end{pmatrix} \,,\quad e^{-2d} = 1\,,
\end{equation}
with vanishing $C_I$. This then leads to (the generalised metric is still Lorentzian so we choose the minus sign in $\pm$ of \eqref{mtoDFTres1})
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{H}_{ij}
= \begin{pmatrix} f & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & - f & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
\mathcal{H}^{ij}
\begin{pmatrix} 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 1 \end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
\mathcal{H}_i{}^j
= \begin{pmatrix} 0 & \mp 1 & 0 \\ \mp 1 & 0 & 0 \\ 0 & 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix} \,.
\end{equation}
For the Gomis-Ooguri case, when $f=-2\mu$ and the off-diagonal entries are $+1$, we get exactly the generalised metric obtained in the original Gomis-Ooguri limit, \eqref{GOH}.
For the background resulting from U-duality of the M2, with $f=H$ and $-1$ in the off-diagonal entries, we find that this generalised metric is $-P_\epsilon \tilde{\mathcal{H}}
P_\epsilon$, where $\tilde{\mathcal{H}}_{MN} $ is the generalised metric we obtained in the DFT case by T-dualising on the worldsheet directions of the F1 string, given in \eqref{Hnrex}.
The geometric $O(3,3)$ transformation
\begin{equation}
P_\epsilon =
\begin{pmatrix}
A & 0 \\ 0 & A^{-T}
\end{pmatrix}\,,\quad
A\equiv \begin{pmatrix}
0 & 1 & 0\\
-1 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & 1\\
\end{pmatrix} \,,
\quad P_\epsilon^T = P_\epsilon^{-1} = - P_{\epsilon}\,,
\end{equation}
corresponds to an interchange of $t$ and $z^1$. Its appearance is to be expected if we consider the U-duality transformation we used on the M2 solution.
For $\alpha=(t,1,2)$ this acted on the coordinates as
\begin{equation}
Y^{\prime\alpha 5} = - Y^{\alpha w} \,,\quad
Y^{\prime\alpha j} = Y^{\alpha \beta} \,,\quad
Y^{\prime\alpha w} = Y^{\alpha 5} \,,\quad
Y^{\prime w5} = Y^{w5} \,
\end{equation}
so that if we reduce from $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ to $\mathrm{SO}(3,3)$ on the $i=2$ direction, we find this acts on the doubled coordinates as $Y^M = (Y^t,Y^1, \tilde Y_t , \tilde Y_1)$ as $Y^{\prime M} = (P_\epsilon \mathcal{T})^M{}_N$ where $\mathcal{T}^M{}_N$ is the Buscher transformation on the $t,z^1$ directions. Note that $P_\epsilon \mathcal{T} = \mathcal{T} P_\epsilon$.
This result is therefore to be expected. Diagrammatically, we have:
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzcd}
\text{ExFT:} & m_{ab} \arrow[r, "U"] \arrow[d, "\text{reduce}"]
& \tilde m_{ab} \arrow[d, "\text{reduce}"] \\
\text{DFT:} & \mathcal{H}_{MN} \arrow[r,, "P_\epsilon \mathcal{T}"]
& \tilde{\mathcal{H}}_{MN} \,.
\end{tikzcd}
\end{center}
\subsection{Embedding Newton-Cartan}
\label{embeddingNC}
We will now offer three variations on a theme of Newton-Cartan.
Recall from section \ref{DFTNewtonCartan} that the Newton-Cartan geometry is described by degenerate matrices $h_{\mu\nu}$, $h^{\mu\nu}$ and their zero vectors $v^\mu$ and $\tau_\mu$.
Here the index $\mu$ is $d$ dimensional and $h_{\mu\nu}$ and $h^{\mu\nu}$ have rank $d-1$.
We will describe below methods to embed a Newton-Cartan geometry in an $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ description for $d=4,3$ and $2$. We will only discuss the generalised metric, i.e the ``internal'' sector of the ExFT. Including the external metric and other degrees of freedom would extend this to putative $11$, $10$ and $9$-dimensional non-relativistic geometries.
The latter case corresponds to the embedding of the Newton-Cartan geometry discussed in the context of string theory in section \ref{DFTNewtonCartan}, so that our description here might be thought of as an M-theory uplift of this. The 10-dimensional case would be obtained in M-theory by U-dualising an 11-dimensional metric along a null isometry direction.
The 11-dimensional case would perhaps be best thought of as needing ExFT for a higher dimensional interpretation, in place of a 12-dimensional Lorentzian geometry.
We leave detailed inquiry into these possibilities, and their role in an potential non-relativistic duality web, for future work.
\subsubsection*{$d=4$ Newton-Cartan: direct non-Riemannian and Riemannian embeddings}
The structure of our non-Riemannian parametrisation, in terms of degenerate metric-like quantities with zero vectors is clearly very similar to that of the Newton-Cartan geometry.
Indeed, given the Newton-Cartan structure $h_{\mu\nu}, h^{\mu\nu}$, $v^\mu$ and $\tau_\mu$ (we will consider the gauge field $m_\mu$ subsequently), with $\mu,\nu=1,\dots,4$, let us define first
\begin{equation}
g \equiv - \frac{1}{6} \tau_{\mu_1} \tau_{\nu_2} \eta^{\mu_1 \dots \mu_4} \eta^{\nu_1 \dots \nu_4} h_{\mu_2 \nu_2} h_{\mu_3 \nu_3} h_{\mu_4 \nu_4} \,,
\end{equation}
such that $|g|^{1/2}$ may serve as a density factor. (If we were to embed the Newton-Cartan geometry in a Lorentzian metric with a null isometry as in section \ref{DFTNewtonCartan}, then $g$ is indeed the determinant of this metric.) Then the following non-Riemannian $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ parametrisation describes this geometry:
\begin{equation}
m_{ab} = \frac{g}{|g|} \begin{pmatrix}
|g|^{-2/5} h_{\mu\nu} & |g|^{1/10} \tau_\mu \\
|g|^{1/10} \tau_\nu & 0
\end{pmatrix} \,,\quad
m^{ab} = \frac{g}{|g|}\begin{pmatrix}
|g|^{2/5} h^{\mu\nu} & - |g|^{-1/10} v^\mu \\
- |g|^{-1/10} v^\nu & 0
\end{pmatrix}
\end{equation}
where we have to include a sign factor $\frac{g}{|g|}$, in order that $\det m_{ab} = 1$.
(Note the form $m_{ab}$ itself resembles that of a five-dimensional metric with a null isometry.)
Curiously, we can include the Newton-Cartan gauge field $m_\mu$ in the form of conjugation by the following $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ element (which seems natural from the point of view of the index structure of $m_\mu$):
\begin{equation}
U_W^a{}_b = \begin{pmatrix} \delta^\mu{}_\nu & 0 \\ W_\nu & 1 \end{pmatrix}\,,
\quad
W_\mu \equiv - |g|^{-1/2} m_\mu \,,
\end{equation}
such that
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\tilde m_{ab} & = (U_W)^c{}_a m_{cd} (U_W)^d{}_b = \frac{g}{|g|}\begin{pmatrix}
|g|^{-2/5}\bar h_{\mu\nu} & |g|^{1/10} \tau_\mu \\
|g|^{1/10} \tau_\nu & 0
\end{pmatrix} \,,\\
\tilde m^{ab}& = (U^{-1}_W)^a{}_c (U^{-1}_W)^b{}_d m^{cd} = \frac{g}{|g|}\begin{pmatrix}
|g|^{2/5} h^{\mu\nu} & - |g|^{-1/10} \hat v^\mu \\
- |g|^{-1/5} \hat v^\nu & 2 |g|^{3/5} \tilde \Phi
\end{pmatrix}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Ordinarily, the factorisation involving $U_W$ would be associated with a trivector $\Omega^{\mu\nu\rho}$ defined by $W_\mu \equiv \frac{1}{3!} \eta_{\mu\nu\rho\sigma} \Omega^{\nu\rho\sigma}$.
The presence of the trivector, analogous to the bivector which appears in $\mathrm{O}(d,d)$, is usually associated to non-geometry (for instance, it provides a potential for non-geometric fluxes \cite{Blair:2014zba}).
This may signal here that we should really interpret this generalised metric in terms of a ``dual'' solution of the section condition. Furthermore, $\tilde m_{ab}$ now actually represents a Riemannian parametrisation as $\det \bar h = - 2 \Phi e^2 \neq 0$.
We leave a detailed understanding of this geometry, and its local symmetries, for future work.
\subsubsection*{$d=3$ Newton-Cartan: U-dualising the Lorentzian metric}
The second approach mimics what we did in section \ref{DFTNewtonCartan}. We start with the form of the Lorentzian metric \eqref{metric1} with null isometry, embed this into the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT and then U-dualise. That means we are thinking of \eqref{metric1} as describing an 11-dimensional metric, which may provide a route to a 10-dimensional Newton-Cartan geometry.
We focus on a four-dimensional part of the metric:
\begin{equation}
\phi_{ij} = \begin{pmatrix} \bar h_{\mu\nu} & \tau_\mu \\ \tau_\nu & 0 \end{pmatrix} \,,
\end{equation}
where now $\mu$ is a three-dimensional index, and $\bar h_{\mu\nu} =h_{\mu\nu} - 2 \tau_{(\mu} m_{\nu)}$ as before.
We insert this into the Lorentzian parametrisation of the little metric \eqref{mparam} with $\lambda = 1$ and $(-1)^t = - 1$.
Then we U-dualise via \eqref{UBuscher} with $n_i = ( n_\mu, 0 )$. This corresponds to a U-dualisation on the null isometry direction $u$ and two of the three-directions indexed by $\mu$. (Strictly speaking, we should impose that two of these directions are also isometries.)
The resulting generalised metric is
\begin{equation}
m_{ab} = |\phi|^{-2/5}
\begin{pmatrix}
\bar{h}_{\mu\nu} + n_\mu n_\nu ( n^\rho n^\sigma \bar{h}_{\rho\sigma} - |\phi| ) - 2 n^\rho \bar{h}_{\rho ( \mu } n_{\nu ) } & \tau_\mu - \tau^\rho n_\rho n_\mu & \bar{h}_{\mu\rho}n^\rho - n_\mu n^\rho n^\sigma \bar{h}_{\rho \sigma} \\
\tau_\mu - \tau^\rho n_\rho n_\mu & 0 & n^\rho \tau_\rho \\
\bar{h}_{\nu\rho}n^\rho - n_\nu n^\rho n^\sigma \bar{h}_{\rho \sigma} & n^\rho \tau_\rho & \bar{h}_{\mu\nu} n^\mu n^\nu
\end{pmatrix} \,.
\label{NClittlem1}
\end{equation}
This becomes non-Riemannian for $n_\mu = \tau_\mu$ and $n^\mu = -v^\mu$ or $n^\mu = - \hat{v}^{\mu}$.
For instance, in the latter case we have
\begin{equation}
k_{ij} = |\phi|^{-2/5} \begin{pmatrix} \bar{h}_{\mu\nu} + ( 2 \tilde \Phi - |\phi| ) \tau_\mu \tau_\nu & 0 \\ 0 & 0 \end{pmatrix}
\,,
\quad
\chi_i = |\phi|^{-2/5} \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix}
\,,\quad
\tilde\varphi = - |\phi|^{-2/5} 2 \tilde \Phi \,.
\end{equation}
\subsubsection*{$d=2$ Newton-Cartan: uplift from $\mathrm{O}(3,3)$ DFT}
The final approach we take is to start with the $\mathrm{O}(3,3)$ description of the Newton-Cartan geometry, which has a concrete origin in string theory via the dualisation procedure, and uplift this. So, we start again with the Newton-Cartan variables $h_{\mu\nu}$, $h^{\mu\nu}$, $\tau_\mu$, and $v^\mu$, where now $\mu$ is a two-dimensional index.
The Newton-Cartan geometry is especially simple as $h_{\mu\nu}$ and $h^{\mu\nu}$ have rank 1, and can be written in general as
\begin{equation}
h_{\mu\nu} = e^2 h_\mu h_\nu\,,\quad h^{\mu\nu} = \frac{1}{e^2} h^\mu h^\nu\,,
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
h_\mu \equiv \varepsilon_{\mu\nu} v^\nu \,,\quad
h^\mu \equiv \varepsilon^{\mu\nu} \tau_\nu \,,
\end{equation}
such that $h_\mu v^\mu = 0 = h^\mu \tau_\mu$, $h^\mu h_\mu = -1$ and the completeness relation holds, $h^{\mu \rho} h_{\rho \nu} - v^\mu \tau_\nu = \delta^\mu_\nu$. Here our conventions are that $\varepsilon_{12} = 1$, $\varepsilon^{12} = 1$ and so $\varepsilon_{\mu \rho} \varepsilon^{\nu \rho} = + \delta_\mu^\nu$
($\varepsilon^{\mu\nu}$ rather than $\eta^{\mu\nu}$ to denote the alternating symbol as the latter may be confused for a metric).
We have chosen to parametrise $h_{\mu\nu}$ in terms of a positive function $e^2 > 0$, as required by going back to the Lorentzian metric from which the Newton-Cartan geometry can be obtained by null duality, which has $\det g = - e^2$, using the formula \eqref{detgNC}.
We can then reverse engineer the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ generalised metric which reduces to the $\mathrm{O}(3,3)$ Newton-Cartan generalised metric \eqref{NCGM}.
Using \eqref{tosolve}, we find that the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT uplift of the Newton-Cartan geometry is described by the following non-Riemannian parametrisation of the little metric:
\begin{equation}
m_{ab} = \begin{pmatrix}
- e^{-4/5} \tau_\mu \tau_\nu & 0 & 0 & e^{6/5} \varepsilon_{\mu\rho} \hat v^\rho \\
0 & e^{-4/5} & 0 & 0 \\
0 & 0 & e^{-4/5} & 0 \\
e^{6/5} \varepsilon_{\nu\rho} \hat v^\rho & 0 & 0 & - e^{6/5} 2 \tilde \Phi
\end{pmatrix} \,.
\label{NClittlem}
\end{equation}
Note that $\tau_\mu \tau_\nu = e^2\varepsilon_{\mu\rho} \varepsilon_{\nu \sigma} h^{\rho \sigma}$.
It is possible to find U-duality transformations that take it to a Riemannian background - we describe a couple of possibilities in appendix \ref{app:NCU}.
\section{Discussion}
Exceptional Field Theory was constructed to reproduce ordinary supergravity but with the additional feature that it could manifestly include the different perspectives of U-duality related geometries in M-theory. Since its inception, some surprises have emerged, and the full spectrum of theories and backgrounds which can be accommodated in the ExFT (and DFT) framework is still being uncovered.
ExFT (and DFT) can describe many variants of supergravity theories.
By focusing on non-Riemannian parametrisations, we extend the range of DFT/ExFT further, finding that it can accommodate non-relativistic theories and theories seemingly without a standard dynamical gravity at all in the form of the maximally non-Riemannian solutions which gave either chiral string theory (in DFT) in a beta-gamma sense \cite{Nekrasov:2005wg} or a topological three-dimensional theory (in $E_{8(8)}$ ExFT).
In this paper we have extended the results of \cite{Lee:2013hma,Ko:2015rha,Morand:2017fnv,Cho:2018alk} and initiated the study of non-Riemannian backgrounds appearing in exceptional field theory. We have shown how the $E_{8(8)}$ ExFT contains a maximally non-Riemannian solution with no moduli. In this background the ExFT becomes the topological theory previously described by Hohm and Samtleben \cite{Hohm:2018ybo} as a truncation of ExFT. For the $\mathrm{SL}(5)$ ExFT, we have shown how to parametrise the generalised metric in order to obtain theories of non-relativistic type, related to the Gomis-Ooguri scaling limit and to Newton-Cartan type geometries.
The next stage is to understand these maximally non-Riemannian backgrounds and more of their properties. One can perhaps think of there being a full ``package'' associated to DFT/ExFT which is by now well understood and incorporates for instance geometric notions (such as connections and curvatures), supersymmetry, Scherk-Schwarz compactifications, and aspects of the descriptions of strings and branes \cite{Berman:2014jsa,Berman:2014hna}. This package should be brought to bear on understanding theories of non-Riemannian geometry and their role in string and M-theory.
A natural step is to examine sigma models in these backgrounds and determine their quantum consistency.
An immediate observation is that the doubled sigma model in such a background contains chiral theories \cite{Morand:2017fnv}, and thus the quantum consistency of the partition function is highly constrained \cite{Nekrasov:2005wg}.
The situation is similar for the exceptional sigma model of \cite{Arvanitakis:2017hwb,Arvanitakis:2018hfn}, which provides a way to describe strings and D1 branes in ExFT non-Riemannian backgrounds (likely reproducing and generalising the results of the very recent paper \cite{Kluson:2019ifd}). Furthermore one could study the general brane actions of \cite{Sakatani:2017vbd} in such backgrounds.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
David Berman is supported by STFC grant ST/L000415/1, ``String Theory, Gauge Theory and Duality''.
CB is supported by an FWO-Vlaanderen Postdoctoral Fellowship, and this work was furthermore supported in part by the Belgian Federal Science Policy Office through the Interuniversity Attraction Pole P7/37, in part by the FWO-Vlaanderen through the projects G020714N and G006119N, and in part by Vrije Universiteit Brussel through the Strategic Research Program ``High-Energy Physics''.
We would like to thank the Corfu meeting, ``Dualities and Generalized Geometries'' part of the COST Action MP1405, for providing the initial stimulus for this project.
We would also like to thank Chris Hull, Gianluca Inverso, Emanuel Malek, Diego Marqu{\'e}s, Niels Obers, Jeong-Hyuck Park and Henning Samtleben for useful discussions on different aspects of this work.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:7.1}
The existence of moments is key to statistical inference in financial time series.
While researchers generally assume that returns are strictly stationary, there is a large dispute to which extend their corresponding moments are finite. In particular many econometricians question the existence of fourth-order moments of returns, whereas some even challenge the existence of second-order moments. In the absence of moments many statistical tools become unreliable such as the ordinary least squares (OLS) estimator, whose asymptotic distribution requires the existence of fourth-order moments.
Frequently, returns are modeled as a product of a conditional volatility process and an sequence of innovations. In such case the existence of moments reduces to an inferential problem depending on the parameters of the conditional volatility model and on characteristics of the innovation process.
\cite{ling1999probabilistic} and \cite{ling2002necessary} provide the necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of even-order moments in the well-known GARCH model. Similar results for other GARCH-type models are obtained by \cite{he1999properties}, \cite{ling2002stationarity} and \citeauthor{francq2011garch} (\citeyear{francq2011garch}, Chapter 10). Recently, \cite{francq2018testing} study the existence of moments for GARCH($1$,$1$) processes and derive the asymptotic distribution of the Wald statistic. Observing that the finite sample behavior is not always in par with the asymptotic results, they propose a bootstrap procedure, whose validity they prove for testing second-order stationarity. Unfortunately, neither for higher-order moments nor for higher-order GARCH models results are available. In particular the latter is a non-standard testing problem as the test-statistic is typically based on the spectral radius. In contrast, bootstrap methods are well-studied in conjunction with GARCH-type models \citep{hall2003inference,hidalgo2007goodness,corradi2008bootstrap,shimizu2009bootstrapping,cavaliere2018fixed,beutner2018residual,heinemann2018expected} and are also proven to be suitable in non-standard testing problems \citep{cavaliere2018bootstrap}.
Therefore this paper studies the joint inference on conditional volatility parameters and the innovation moments by means of bootstrap. In particular, we prove the validity of the fixed design-residual bootstrap for a general class of volatility models and propose a bootstrap-based test for the existence of moments in the GARCH($p,q$) model. The testing procedure is simple to implement, provides asymptotically correctly-sized tests (without losing the consistency property) and can easily be extended to other GARCH-type settings.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. Section \ref{sec:7.2} describes the model. The joint asymptotic distribution of the quasi-maximum likelihood (QML) estimators of the volatility parameters and the empirical moments of the residuals is derived in Section \ref{sec:7.3}. In Section \ref{sec:7.4} we propose a fixed-design residual bootstrap method and prove its validity under mild assumptions. A bootstrap-based test for the existence of moments in the GARCH($p$,$q$) model is developed in Section \ref{sec:7.5} and extended to other GARCH-type models. A simulation study is conducted in Section \ref{sec:7.6} and an empirical application illustrates the bootstrap-based testing approach. Section \ref{sec:7.7} concludes. Proofs and auxiliary results are collected in the Appendix.
\section{Model}
\label{sec:7.2}
We consider conditional volatility models of the form
\begin{align}
\label{eq:7.2.1}
\epsilon_t = \sigma_t\eta_t
\end{align}
with $t\in \mathbb{Z}$, where $\epsilon_t$ denotes the log-return, $\{\sigma_t\}$ is a volatility process and $\{\eta_t\}$ is a sequence of independent and identically distributed (\text{i.i.d.}) variables. The volatility is assumed to be a measurable function of past observations
\begin{align}
\label{eq:7.2.2}
\sigma_{t}=\sigma_{t}(\theta_0)=\sigma(\epsilon_{t-1}, \epsilon_{t-2},\dots;\theta_0),
\end{align}
with $\sigma:\mathbb{R}^\infty\times \Theta\to(0,\infty)$ and $\theta_0$ denotes the true parameter vector belonging to the parameter space $\Theta \subset \mathbb{R}^r$, $r \in \mathbb{N}$. Various commonly used volatility models satisfy \eqref{eq:7.2.1}--\eqref{eq:7.2.2} such as GARCH($p$,$q$); for further examples see \citeauthor{francq2015risk} (\citeyear{francq2015risk}, Table 1). Frequently we are not only interested in the parameter vector $\theta_0$, but also in characteristics of the innovation distribution.
The following example illustrates.
\begin{example}
\label{ex:7.1}
Suppose $\{\epsilon_t\}$ follows a GARCH$(1,1)$ process given by \eqref{eq:7.2.1} and $\sigma_{t}^2 = \omega_0 + \alpha_0 \epsilon_{t-1}^2+ \beta_0 \sigma_{t-1}^2$, where $\theta_0 = (\omega_0,\alpha_0,\beta_0)'\in (0,\infty)\times[0,\infty)\times[0,1)$. Writing $\mu_{k}= \mathbb{E}[\eta_t^{k}]$ for $k \in \mathbb{N}$, the necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of the fourth moment $\mathbb{E}[\epsilon_t^4]$ is
\begin{align}
\label{eq:767698534}
\beta_0^2+2\alpha_0\beta_0\mu_2 +\alpha_0^2\mu_4<1.
\end{align}
\cite{francq2018testing} propose a Wald statistic based on QML to test for \eqref{eq:767698534}.
\end{example}
We collect the moment characteristics of the innovation distribution in a vector $\mu = \mathbb{E}[h(\eta_t)]$, where
we confine ourselves here
to the even moments, i.e.\
\begin{align}
\label{eq:2187476}
h(x)=(x^2,\dots,x^{2m})'
\end{align}
for some $m \in \mathbb{N}$.
Generally, $\mu$ is unknown
and needs to estimated just like $\theta_0$.
\section{Estimation}
\label{sec:7.3}
For the estimation of the parameters $\theta_0$ and $\mu$ we use a two-step procedure, which is also employed by \citeauthor{francq2015risk} (2018). First, the vector of the conditional volatility parameters $\theta_0$ is estimated by QML. Since the conditional volatility $\sigma_{t}(\theta) = \sigma(\epsilon_{t-1},\dots,\epsilon_{1}, \epsilon_{0},\epsilon_{-1},\dots;\theta)$ can generally not be determined completely given a sample $\epsilon_1 ,\dots, \epsilon_n$, we replace the unknown presample observations by arbitrary values, say $\tilde{\epsilon}_t$, $t\leq 0$, yielding $\tilde{\sigma}_{t}(\theta) = \sigma(\epsilon_{t-1},\dots,\epsilon_{1}, \tilde{\epsilon}_{0},\tilde{\epsilon}_{-1},\dots;\theta)$. Then the QML estimator of $\theta_0$ is defined as a measurable solution $\hat{\theta}_n$ of
\begin{align}
\label{eq:7.3.3}
\hat{\theta}_n=\arg\max_{\theta \in \Theta} \frac{1}{n}\sum_{t=1}^n \tilde{\ell}_t(\theta) \qquad \text{with} \qquad \tilde{\ell}_t(\theta)=-\frac{1}{2}\bigg(\frac{\epsilon_t}{\tilde{\sigma}_t(\theta)}\bigg)^2-\log \tilde{\sigma}_t(\theta).
\end{align}
In the second step, the first-step residuals are obtained, i.e. $\hat{\eta}_t=\epsilon_t/\tilde{\sigma}_t(\hat{\theta}_n)$, and the moments estimated:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:787979875}
\hat{\mu}_{n} = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{t=1}^n h(\hat{\eta}_t).
\end{align}
We first list several assumptions essential to the following analysis. Whereas in this paper we mainly focus on GARCH($p$,$q$) processes, the assumptions below are stated in a form that can readily applied to other GARCH-type processes (see Remark \ref{rem:7.3}).
\begin{assumption}{(Compactness)}
\label{as:7.1}
$\Theta$ is a compact subset of $\mathbb{R}^r$.
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}{(Stationarity \& Ergodicity)}
\label{as:7.2}
$\{\epsilon_t\}$ is a strictly stationary and ergodic solution of \eqref{eq:7.2.1} with \eqref{eq:7.2.2}.
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}{(Volatility process)}
\label{as:7.3}
For any real sequence $\{x_i\}$, the function $\theta\to\sigma(x_1,x_2,\dots;\theta)$ is continuous. Almost surely, $\sigma_t(\theta)>\underline{\omega}$ for any $\theta \in \Theta$ and some $\underline{\omega}>0$ and $\mathbb{E}[\sigma_t^s(\theta_0)]<\infty$ for some $s>0$. Moreover, for any $\theta \in \Theta$, we assume $\sigma_t(\theta_0)/\sigma_t(\theta)=1$ almost surely (a.s.) if and only if $\theta=\theta_0$.
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}{(Initial conditions)}
\label{as:7.4}
There exists a constant $\rho \in (0,1)$ and a random variable $C_1$ measurable with respect to $\mathcal{F}_0$ and $\mathbb{E}[C_1^s]<\infty$ for some $s>0$ such that
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item \label{as:7.4.1} $\sup_{\theta \in \Theta}|\sigma_t(\theta)-\tilde{\sigma}_t(\theta)|\leq C_1 \rho^t$;
\item \label{as:7.4.2} $\theta\to \sigma(x_1, x_2, \dots;\theta)$ has continuous second-order derivatives satisfying
\begin{align*}
\sup_{\theta \in \Theta}\bigg|\bigg|\frac{\partial \sigma_t(\theta)}{\partial \theta}-\frac{\partial \tilde{\sigma}_t(\theta)}{\partial \theta}\bigg|\bigg|\leq C_1 \rho^t, \qquad \quad \sup_{\theta \in \Theta}\bigg|\bigg|\frac{\partial^2 \sigma_t(\theta)}{\partial \theta \partial \theta'}-\frac{\partial^2 \tilde{\sigma}_t(\theta)}{\partial \theta\partial \theta'}\bigg|\bigg|\leq C_1 \rho^t,
\end{align*}
where $||\cdot||$ denotes the Euclidean norm.
\end{enumerate}
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}{(Innovation process)}
\label{as:7.5}
The innovations $\{\eta_t\}$ satisfy
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item \label{as:7.5.1} $\eta_t\overset{iid}{\sim}F$ with $F$ being continuous, $\mu_2=1$, $\mu_4<\infty$ and $\eta_t$ is independent of $\{\epsilon_u:u<t\}$;
\item \label{as:7.5.3} $\mathbb{E}\big[||h(\eta_t)||^2\big]<\infty$
\end{enumerate}
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}{(Interior)}
\label{as:7.6}
$\theta_0$ belongs to the interior of $\Theta$ denoted by $\mathring{\Theta}$.
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}{(Non-degeneracy)}
\label{as:7.7}
There does not exist a non-zero $\lambda\in \mathbb{R}^r$ such that $\lambda'\frac{\partial \sigma_t(\theta_0)}{\partial \theta}=0$ almost surely.
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}{(Moments)}
\label{as:7.9}
There exists a neighborhood $\mathscr{V}(\theta_0)$ of $\theta_0$ such that the following variables have finite expectation:
\begin{align*}
\text{(i)}\sup_{\theta \in \mathscr{V}(\theta_0)}\bigg|\frac{ \sigma_t(\theta_0)}{\sigma_t(\theta)}\bigg|^a, \qquad \;\;\: \text{(ii)} \sup_{\theta \in \mathscr{V}(\theta_0)}\bigg|\bigg|\frac{1}{\sigma_t(\theta)}\frac{\partial \sigma_t(\theta)}{\partial \theta}\bigg|\bigg|^{b}, \qquad \;\;\: \text{(iii)} \sup_{\theta \in \mathscr{V}(\theta_0)}\bigg|\bigg|\frac{1}{\sigma_t(\theta)}\frac{\partial^2 \sigma_t(\theta)}{\partial \theta \partial \theta'}\bigg|\bigg|^c
\end{align*}
for some $a$, $b$, $c$ (to be specified).
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}{(Scaling Stability)}
\label{as:7.10}
There exists a function $g$ such that for any $\theta \in \Theta$, for any $\lambda>0$, and any real sequence $\{x_i\}$
\begin{align*}
\lambda \sigma(x_1,x_2,\dots;\theta)=\sigma(x_1,x_2,\dots;\theta_\lambda),
\end{align*}
where $\theta_\lambda=g(\theta,\lambda)$ and $g$ is differentiable in $\lambda$.
\end{assumption}
The assumptions are fairly standard in the literature; for a discussion we refer to \cite{francq2015risk} and \cite{beutner2018residual}.
To lighten notation, we henceforth write $D_t(\theta) =\frac{1}{\sigma_t(\theta)}\frac{\partial\sigma_t(\theta)}{\partial \theta}$ and drop the argument when evaluated at the true parameter, i.e.\ $D_t=D_t(\theta_0)$. In addition, we define $d=deg(h)$, the highest polynomial degree of the function $h$,
which reduces to $2m$ using \eqref{eq:2187476}. The next result provides the joint asymptotic distribution of $\hat{\theta}_n$ and $\hat{\mu}_{n}$. A similar result for a GARCH($p$,$q$) model can be found in \cite{francq2018testing}.
\begin{theorem}\textit{(Asymptotic distribution)}
\label{thm:7.2} Suppose Assumptions \ref{as:7.1}--\ref{as:7.10} hold with $a=\max\{4,2d\}$, $b=4$ and $c=2$. Then, we have
\begin{align}
\label{eq:7.3.6}
\begin{pmatrix}
\sqrt{n}(\hat{\theta}_n-\theta_0)\\
\sqrt{n}(\hat{\mu}_{n} - \mu)
\end{pmatrix}
\overset{d}{\to}N\big(0, \Sigma \big) \qquad \mbox{with}\qquad
\Sigma=
\begin{pmatrix}
\frac{\mu_4-1}{4}J^{-1} & -J^{-1}\Omega \nu'\\
-\nu \Omega'J^{-1} & \Xi
\end{pmatrix},
\end{align}
where $\Omega = \mathbb{E}[D_t]$, $J=\mathbb{E}[D_tD_t']$, $\nu = \mathbb{E}\big[\eta_t\frac{\partial h(\eta_t)}{\partial x}\big]$, $ \Xi = \frac{\mu_4-1}{4}\nu \nu' +\frac{1}{2}(\xi \nu'+\nu \xi')+\Upsilon$, $\Upsilon = \mathbb{V}\mbox{ar}[h(\eta_t)]$ and $\xi = \mathbb{C}\mbox{ov}[h(\eta_t),\eta_t^2]$.
\end{theorem}
The asymptotic distribution in Theorem \ref{thm:7.2} can be used to perform inference on parameters after having obtained a consistent estimator for $\Sigma$. A powerful alternative to perform statistical inference provide bootstrap methods.
\section{Bootstrap}
\label{sec:7.4}
We employ a fixed-design residual bootstrap scheme as in \cite{cavaliere2018fixed} and \cite{beutner2018residual} to approximate the distribution of the estimators in \eqref{eq:7.3.3}--\eqref{eq:787979875}. We indicate the bootstrap quantities by a superscript $^*$ and use the usual bootstrap notation: “$\overset{p^*}{\to}$", “$\overset{d^*}{\to}$", “$O_{p^*}(1)$", “$o_{p^*}(1)$", $\mathbb{P}^*$ and $\mathbb{E}^*$ (cf.\ \citeauthor{chang2003sieve}, \citeyear{chang2003sieve}).
\begin{algorithm}\textit{(Fixed-design residual bootstrap)}
\label{alg:5.1}
\begin{enumerate}
\item For $t=1,\dots, n$, generate $\eta_t^* \overset{iid}{\sim} \hat{\mathbbm{F}}_n$ and the bootstrap observation $\epsilon_t^* = \tilde{\sigma}_t(\hat{\theta}_n) \eta_t^*$.
\item Calculate the bootstrap estimator
\begin{align}
\label{eq:7.4.1}
\hat{\theta}_n^* = \arg \max_{\theta \in \Theta}\frac{1}{n}\sum_{t=1}^n \ell_t^*(\theta) \quad \text{with} \quad \ell_t^*(\theta)=-\frac{1}{2}\bigg(\frac{\epsilon_t^{*}}{\tilde{\sigma}_t(\theta)}\bigg)^2-\log \tilde{\sigma}_t(\theta).
\end{align}
\item For $t=1,\dots,n$ compute the bootstrap residual $\hat{\eta}_t^* = \epsilon_t^*/\tilde{\sigma}_t(\hat{\theta}_n^*)$
and obtain
\begin{align}
\label{eq:7.4.2}
\hat{\mu}_{n}^*: = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{t=1}^n h\big(\hat{\eta}_t^*\big).
\end{align}
\end{enumerate}
\end{algorithm}
\noindent
The asymptotic validity of the bootstrap procedure is stated in the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}\textit{(Boostrap consistency)}
\label{thm:7.3}
If Assumptions \ref{as:7.1}--\ref{as:7.10} hold with $a=- 12, \max\{2d,12\}$, $b=12$ and $c=6$, then
\begin{align}
\label{eq:76784132}
\begin{pmatrix}
\sqrt{n}(\hat{\theta}_n^*-\hat{\theta}_n)\\
\sqrt{n}(\hat{\mu}_{n}^* - \hat{\mu}_{n})
\end{pmatrix}
\overset{d^*}{\to} N(0, \Sigma),
\end{align}
in probability.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:7.1}
The estimator $\hat{\theta}_n$ in the first step of Algorithm \ref{alg:5.1} can be replaced by any consistent estimator of $\theta_0$, say $\check{\theta}_n$. A close inspection of the proof of Theorem \ref{thm:7.3} reveals that the bootstrap's consistency follows after an appropriate standardization, i.e.\ replace $\hat{\theta}_n$ by $\check{\theta}_n$ in \eqref{eq:76784132}.
\end{remark}
In the subsequent section we employ Theorem \ref{thm:7.3} and Remark \ref{rem:7.1} to derive a bootstrap-based test for the existence of moments in the GARCH model.
\section{Bootstrap Test for the Existence of Moments}
\label{sec:7.5}
We consider a GARCH($p$,$q$) model, in which the recursive form of \eqref{eq:7.2.2} is given by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:897750}
\sigma_{t}^2 = \omega_0+ \sum_{i=1}^q\alpha_{0i} \epsilon_{t-i}^2+ \sum_{j=1}^p\beta_{0j} \sigma_{t-j}^2,
\end{align}
where $\theta_0 = (\omega_0,\alpha_{01},\dots,\alpha_{0q},\beta_{01},\dots, \beta_{0p})'\in \mathbb{R}_{>0} \times \mathbb{R}_{\geq 0}^{p+q}$.
We are interested in testing whether for this GARCH process the moment $\mathbb{E}[\epsilon_t^{2m}]$ exists.
\cite{ling1999probabilistic} and \cite{ling2002necessary} provide the necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of even moments of model \eqref{eq:7.2.1} and \eqref{eq:897750}. For any matrix $A$ we write $||A||_S$ to denote its spectral norm, i.e.\
$||A||_S=\sqrt{\lambda_{\max} (A'A)}$,
and set $A^{\otimes m} = A \otimes A \otimes \dots \otimes A$ ($m$ factors), where $\otimes$ is the Kronecker product. Then the moment $\mathbb{E}[\epsilon_t^{2m}]$ of the GARCH process is finite if and only if $T=\big|\big|\mathbb{E}[A_t^{\otimes m}]\big|\big|_S<1$,
where $A_t =A(\theta_0,\eta_t)$ and
\begin{align}
\label{eq:689954}
A(\theta,\eta) = \left(\begin{array}{@{}ccc|ccc@{}}
\alpha_1 \eta^2 & \dots & \alpha_q \eta^2 & \beta_1 \eta^2 & \dots & \beta_p \eta^2 \\
& I_{(q-1)\times(q-1)} & O_{(q-1)\times 1} & & O_{(q-1)\times p} & \\\hline
\alpha_1 & \dots & \alpha_q & \beta_1 & \dots & \beta_p \\
& O_{(p-1)\times q} & & & I_{(p-1)\times(p-1)} & O_{(p-1)\times 1}
\end{array}\right).
\end{align}
We are interested in testing the null hypothesis $H_0$: $T < 1$ against the alternative hypothesis $H_1$: $T\geq 1$. As usual in hypothesis testing where the null hypothesis is characterized by an open set, the test is in fact constructed for the closure of $H_0$, i.e.\
\begin{align}
\label{eq:998431298}
\bar{H}_0: T \leq 1 \qquad \quad \text{against} \qquad \quad \bar{H}_1: T > 1.
\end{align}
Before proceeding with the test statistic, note that $T$ can be expressed in terms of $\theta_0$ and $\mu$. To illustrate this fact, we review the GARCH($1$,$1$) model from Example \ref{ex:7.1}.
\begin{Example}\textbf{1.} (\textit{continued})
We observe that the left-hand side of \eqref{eq:767698534} corresponds to $T$ for $m=2$. Further, for $p=q=1$ we find that $A_t$ reduces to $A_t = (\eta_t^2, 1)'(\alpha_{01}, \beta_{01})$, such that for general $m$ we have $\mathbb{E}[A_t^{\otimes m}]=\mathbb{E}\big[(\eta_t^2, 1)^{\prime \otimes m}\big](\alpha_{01}, \beta_{01})^{\otimes m}$. The latter possesses a single non-zero eigenvalue (c.f.\ \citeauthor{francq2011garch}, \citeyear{francq2011garch}, p.\ 45) given by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:767447}
\big|\big|\mathbb{E}[A_t^{\otimes m}]\big|\big|_S=\sum_{k=0}^m \binom{m}{k} \alpha_{01}^k \beta_{01}^{m-k} \mu_{2k}.
\end{align}
\end{Example}
To appreciate why $T$ is a function of $\theta_0$ and $\mu$
also in higher order GARCH models, we state the following proposition.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:7.1}
For all $m \in \mathbb{N}$, we have $A(\theta,\eta)^{\otimes m}= \sum_{k=0}^m B_{k,m}(\theta) \eta^{2k}$ with $A(\theta,\eta)$ given in \eqref{eq:689954} and
$\big\{B_{k,m}(\theta): k=0,1,\dots,m\big\}$ is a sequence of matrices, where each matrix has dimension $(p+q)^m\times(p+q)^m$ and depends on $\theta$.
\end{proposition}
Employing Proposition \ref{prop:7.1}, one finds $\mathbb{E}\big[A_t^{\otimes m}\big]= \sum_{k=0}^m B_{k,m}(\theta_0) \mu_{2k}$ with $\mu_{0}=1$ and hence there exists a function $\tau:\Theta \times \mathbb{R}^{dim(\mu)} \to \mathbb{R}_+$ such that
\begin{align}
\label{eq:8787521}
T=\tau(\theta_0, \mu )= \big|\big|\mathbb{E}[A(\theta_0,\eta_t)^{\otimes m}]\big|\big|_S.
\end{align}
With regard to Section \ref{sec:7.3}, a natural test statistic is given by
\begin{align}
\label{eq:983298321}
\hat{T}_n = \tau(\hat{\theta}_n,\hat{\mu}_n) = \bigg|\bigg|\frac{1}{n}\sum_{t=1}^n A(\hat{\theta}_n,\hat{\eta}_t)^{\otimes m}\bigg|\bigg|_S.
\end{align}
For $p=q=1$ one can rely on asymptotic theory to find critical values that control the size of the test.
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:7.1}
Suppose a GARCH(1,1) process $\{\epsilon_t\}$ with parameter $\theta_0$ and \text{i.i.d.}~sequence $\{\eta_t\}$, which satisfies the assumptions of Theorem \ref{thm:7.2}. Then
\begin{align}
\sqrt{n}(\hat{T}_n-T) \overset{d}{\to}N(0,\varsigma^2),
\end{align}
where $\varsigma^2 = \frac{\partial \tau(\theta_0,\mu)}{\partial (\theta',\bar{\mu}')}\Sigma \frac{\partial \tau(\theta_0,\mu)}{\partial (\theta',\bar{\mu}')'}$.
\end{corollary}
The previous corollary is a direct consequence of Theorem \ref{thm:7.2} and the delta-method. Hence, testing $\bar{H}_0$: $T\leq 1$ in the GARCH($1$,$1$) at the asymptotic level $\alpha \in (0,1)$ could be defined by the rejection region $\big\{\sqrt{n}(\hat{T}_n-1) >\hat{\varsigma}_n\Phi^{-1}(1-\alpha)\big\}$, where $\hat{\varsigma}_n$ is a consistent estimate for $\varsigma$ and $\Phi$ denotes the standard normal cumulative distribution function.
However, as shown in \cite{francq2018testing}, the finite sample distribution of $\hat{T}_n$ is not always in par with the asymptotic results. Moreover, for higher order GARCH models, this asymptotic approach is practically infeasible due to the complicated form of function $\tau$ (recall that $\tau$ is a composite function involving the spectral norm). Instead we propose to mimic the finite sample distribution of the test statistic by means of a bootstrap procedure similar to Section \ref{sec:7.4}. To construct such bootstrap scheme we re-estimate the parameter $\theta$ to impose the null hypothesis $\bar{H}_0$ for the ``bootstrap world''. We denote the constrained estimator by $\hat{\theta}_n^c$, which satisfies
\begin{align}
\label{eq:238748761}
\hat{\theta}_n^c=\arg\max_{\theta \in \Theta_n^c} \frac{1}{n}\sum_{t=1}^n \tilde{\ell}_t(\theta) \qquad \text{with} \qquad \Theta_n^c = \big\{\theta \in \Theta : \tau(\theta,\hat{\mu}_n)\leq 1\big\}.
\end{align}
This estimator is strongly consistent for $\theta_0$ when $\tau(\theta_0,\mu)\leq 1$; for details we refer to Lemma \ref{lem:7.1} in the Appendix. Note that, by construction, the corresponding constrained test statistic
\begin{align}
\hat{T}_n^c = \tau(\hat{\theta}_n^c,\hat{\mu}_n) = \bigg|\bigg|\frac{1}{n}\sum_{t=1}^n A(\hat{\theta}_n^c,\hat{\eta}_t)^{\otimes m}\bigg|\bigg|_S
\end{align}
satisfies $\hat{T}_n^c\leq 1$. Based on the constrained estimator $\hat{\theta}_n^c$ we propose a fixed-design residual bootstrap algorithm to mimic the distribution of the test statistic $\hat{T}_n$.
\begin{algorithm}\textit{(Fixed-design residual bootstrap)}
\label{alg:5.2}
\begin{enumerate}
\item For $t=1,\dots, n$, generate $\eta_t^\star \overset{iid}{\sim} \hat{\mathbbm{F}}_n$ and the bootstrap observation $\epsilon_t^\star = \tilde{\sigma}_t(\hat{\theta}_n^c) \eta_t^\star$.
\item Calculate the bootstrap estimator
\begin{align}
\label{eq:7.5.9}
\hat{\theta}_n^\star = \arg \max_{\theta \in \Theta}\frac{1}{n}\sum_{t=1}^n \ell_t^\star(\theta) \quad \text{with} \quad \ell_t^\star(\theta)=-\frac{1}{2}\bigg(\frac{\epsilon_t^{\star}}{\tilde{\sigma}_t(\theta)}\bigg)^2-\log \tilde{\sigma}_t(\theta).
\end{align}
\item For $t=1,\dots,n$ compute the bootstrap residual $\hat{\eta}_t^\star = \epsilon_t^\star/\tilde{\sigma}_t(\hat{\theta}_n^\star)$
and obtain the bootstrap test statistic
\begin{align}
\label{eq:7.5.10}
\hat{T}_n^\star = \tau(\hat{\theta}_n^\star,\hat{\mu}_n^\star) = \bigg|\bigg|\frac{1}{n}\sum_{t=1}^n \big(A(\hat{\theta}_n^\star,\hat{\eta}_t^\star)\big)^{\otimes m}\bigg|\bigg|_S
\end{align}
with $\hat{\mu}_{n}^\star = \frac{1}{n}\sum_{t=1}^n h\big(\hat{\eta}_t^\star\big)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{algorithm}
Since the bootstrap quantities are generated under the constrained estimator, a superscript $^\star$ is employed to distinguish them from the ones in Algorithm \ref{alg:5.1}. The corresponding bootstrap notation is given by: “$\overset{p^\star}{\to}$", “$\overset{d^\star}{\to}$", “$O_{p^\star}(1)$", “$o_{p^\star}(1)$", $\mathbb{P}^\star$ and $\mathbb{E}^\star$. The bootstrap procedure described in Algorithm \ref{alg:5.2} is valid in the following sense.
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:7.2}
Suppose the assumptions of Theorem \ref{thm:7.3} hold true. Under the null hypothesis $\bar{H}_0$: $T \leq 1$ we have
\begin{align}
\label{eq:5850320}
\sup_x\Big|\mathbb{P}^\star\big[\sqrt{n}(\hat{T}_n^\star-\hat{T}_n^c)\leq x\big]-\mathbb{P}\big[\sqrt{n}(\hat{T}_n-T)\leq x\big]\Big|\overset{p}{\to}0.
\end{align}
Under the alternative $\bar{H}_1$: $T > 1$ we have $\sqrt{n}(\hat{T}_n^\star-\hat{T}_n^c)=O_{p^\star}(1)$ in probability.
\end{corollary}
The previous corollary legitimatizes the following bootstrap test to assess whether $\mathbb{E}[\epsilon_t^{2m}]$ is finite in the GARCH($p$,$q$) model. We acquire a set of $B$ bootstrap replicates, i.e.\ $\hat{T}_n^{\star (b)}$ for $b=1,\dots, B$, by repeating Algorithm \ref{alg:5.2} and compute
\begin{align}
\label{eq:21872}
\hat{p}_{n,B}^\star = \frac{1}{B}\sum_{b=1}^B\mathbbm{1}{\big\{\hat{T}_n -1\leq \hat{T}_n^{\star (b)}-\hat{T}_n^c\big\}},
\end{align}
which proxies the p-value of the null hypothesis $\bar{H}_0: T\leq 1$.
Thus, one rejects the null hypothesis when \eqref{eq:21872} is below the nominal level of the test (e.g.\ $5\%$ or $10\%$). To appreciate why the bootstrap test is consistent, we note that under the alternative $\bar{H}_1$: $T > 1$ we have $\sqrt{n}(\hat{T}_n^\star-\hat{T}_n^c)=O_{p^\star}(1)$ whereas
\begin{align}
\sqrt{n}(\hat{T}_n-1) = \underbrace{\sqrt{n}(\hat{T}_n-T)}_{=O_p(1)}+ \underbrace{\sqrt{n}(T-1)}_{\to \infty}
\end{align}
diverges in probability.
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:7.2}
In case one is interested in the null hypothesis $\tilde{H}_0:T\geq 1$ against the alternative hypothesis $\tilde{H}_1:T< 1$, the outlined bootstrap testing procedure can be readily adapted: replace ``$\leq$" in equations \eqref{eq:238748761} and \eqref{eq:21872} by ``$\geq$".
\end{remark}
\afterpage{
\begin{landscape}
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\resizebox{21cm}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
& \textbf{Moment} & \textbf{Volatility Recursion} & $\bm{A(\theta,\eta)}$ & $\bm{h(x)}$ \\ \hline \hline
& & & & \\
ARCH & $\mathbb{E}[\epsilon_t^{2m}]$ & $\sigma_{t}^2 = \omega_0+ \sum\limits_{i=1}^q\alpha_{0i} \epsilon_{t-i}^2$
& \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\left(\begin{array}{@{}ccc@{}} \alpha_1 \eta^2 & \dots & \alpha_q \eta^2 \\ & I_{(q-1)\times(q-1)} & O_{(q-1)\times 1}\\ \end{array}\right)$\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\left(\begin{array}{@{}c@{}} x^2 \\ \vdots \\ x^{2m}\\ \end{array}\right)$\end{tabular} \\
& & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} \\
GARCH & $\mathbb{E}[\epsilon_t^{2 m}]$ & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\sigma_{t}^2 = \omega_0 + \sum\limits_{i=1}^q\alpha_{0i}\epsilon_{t-i}^2$ \\ $\textcolor{white}{aaaaaaa} + \sum\limits_{j=1}^p\beta_{0j} \sigma_{t-j}^2 $\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\left(\begin{array}{@{}ccc|ccc@{}} \alpha_1 \eta^2 & \dots & \alpha_q \eta^2 & \beta_1 \eta^2 & \dots & \beta_p \eta^2 \\ & I_{(q-1)\times(q-1)} & O_{(q-1)\times 1} & & O_{(q-1)\times p} & \\\hline \alpha_1 & \dots & \alpha_q & \beta_1 & \dots & \beta_p \\ & O_{(p-1)\times q} & & & I_{(p-1)\times(p-1)} & O_{(p-1)\times 1}\\ \end{array}\right)$\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\left(\begin{array}{@{}c@{}} x^2 \\ \vdots \\ x^{2m}\\ \end{array}\right)$\end{tabular} \\
& & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} \\
T-GARCH & $\mathbb{E}[\epsilon_t^{m}]$ & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\sigma_{t} = \omega_0 + \sum\limits_{i=1}^q\big(\alpha_{0i}^+ \epsilon_{t-i}^+ + \alpha_{0i}^- \epsilon_{t-i}^-\big) ${}\\ $+ \sum\limits_{j=1}^p\beta_{0j} \sigma_{t-j}\textcolor{white}{aii}$\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\left(\begin{array}{@{}ccccc|ccc@{}} \alpha_1^+ \eta^+ & \alpha_1^- \eta^+ & \dots & \alpha_q^+ \eta^+ & \alpha_q^- \eta^+ & \beta_1 \eta^+ & \dots & \beta_p \eta^+ \\ \alpha_1^+ \eta^- & \alpha_1^- \eta^- & \dots & \alpha_q^+ \eta^- & \alpha_q^- \eta^- & \beta_1 \eta^- & \dots & \beta_p \eta^- \\ & I_{(2q-2)\times(2q-2)} & & O_{(2q-2)\times 2} & & & O_{(2q-2)\times p} & \\\hline \alpha_1^+ & \alpha_1^- & \dots & \alpha_q^+ & \alpha_q^- & \beta_1 & \dots & \beta_p \\ & & O_{(p-1)\times 2q} & & & & I_{(p-1)\times(p-1)} & O_{(p-1)\times 1}\\ \end{array}\right)$\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\left(\begin{array}{@{}c@{}} x^+ \\ \vdots \\ (x^+)^m \\ x^- \\ \vdots \\ (x^-)^m\\ \end{array}\right)$\end{tabular} \\
& & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} \\
AP-GARCH & $\mathbb{E}[\epsilon_t^{\delta m}]$ & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\sigma_{t}^\delta = \omega_0 + \sum\limits_{i=1}^q\alpha_{0i}\big(|\epsilon_{t-i}| - \gamma \epsilon_{t-i}\big)^\delta$ \\ $ + \sum\limits_{j=1}^p\beta_{0j} \sigma_{t-j}^\delta \textcolor{white}{aai}$\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\left(\begin{array}{@{}ccc|ccc@{}} \alpha_1 (|\eta|-\gamma \eta)^\delta & \dots & \alpha_q (|\eta|-\gamma \eta)^\delta & \beta_1 (|\eta|-\gamma \eta)^\delta & \dots & \beta_p (|\eta|-\gamma \eta)^\delta \\ & I_{(q-1)\times(q-1)} & O_{(q-1)\times 1} & & O_{(q-1)\times p} & \\\hline \alpha_1 & \dots & \alpha_q & \beta_1 & \dots & \beta_p \\ & O_{(p-1)\times q} & & & I_{(p-1)\times(p-1)} & O_{(p-1)\times 1}\\ \end{array}\right)$\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\left(\begin{array}{@{}c@{}} (x^+)^\delta \\ \vdots \\ (x^+)^{\delta m}\\ (x^-)^\delta \\ \vdots \\ (x^-)^{\delta m}\\ \end{array}\right)$\end{tabular} \\
& & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} \\
GJR-GARCH & $\mathbb{E}[\epsilon_t^{2m}]$ & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\sigma_{t}^2 = \omega_0 + \sum\limits_{i=1}^q\big(\alpha_{0i}^+ (\epsilon_{t-i}^+)^2 + \alpha_{0i}^- (\epsilon_{t-i}^-)^2\big)${}\\ $ + \sum\limits_{j=1}^p\beta_{0j} \sigma_{t-j}^2\textcolor{white}{aaaaaai}$\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\left(\begin{array}{@{}ccccc|ccc@{}} \alpha_1^+ (\eta^+)^2 & \alpha_1^- (\eta^+)^2 & \dots & \alpha_q^+ (\eta^+)^2 & \alpha_q^- (\eta^+)^2 & \beta_1 (\eta^+)^2 & \dots & \beta_p (\eta^+)^2 \\ \alpha_1^+ (\eta^-)^2 & \alpha_1^- (\eta^-)^2 & \dots & \alpha_q^+ (\eta^-)^2 & \alpha_q^- (\eta^-)^2 & \beta_1 (\eta^-)^2 & \dots & \beta_p (\eta^-)^2 \\ & I_{(2q-2)\times(2q-2)} & & O_{(2q-2)\times 2} & & & O_{(2q-2)\times p} & \\\hline \alpha_1^+ & \alpha_1^- & \dots & \alpha_q^+ & \alpha_q^- & \beta_1 & \dots & \beta_p \\ & & O_{(p-1)\times 2q} & & & & I_{(p-1)\times(p-1)} & O_{(p-1)\times 1}\\ \end{array}\right)$\end{tabular} & \begin{tabular}[c]{@{}c@{}}$\left(\begin{array}{@{}c@{}} (x^+)^2 \\ \vdots \\ (x^+)^{2m} \\ (x^-)^2 \\ \vdots \\ (x^-)^{2m}\\ \end{array}\right)$\end{tabular} \\
& & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{l}{} \\ \hline \hline
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Examples of GARCH-type models for which the proposed bootstrap-based test can be applied.}
\label{tab:7.1}
\end{table}
\end{landscape}
}
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:7.3}
The bootstrap-based test for the existence of moments can be readily adapted to other GARCH-type processes such as the threshold GARCH (T-GARCH) of \cite{zakoian1994threshold}, the asymmetric power GARCH (AP-GARCH) of \cite{ding1993long} or the GARCH extension of \cite{glosten1993relation} (GJR-GARCH). In fact, it only requires replacing the model-specific function $A(\theta,\eta)$ in \eqref{eq:689954}; see Table \ref{tab:7.1} for details on the functional forms of the aforementioned GARCH-type models. The theoretical results presented for the GARCH carry over after a small adjustment of the moment function $h(x)$: e.g.\ in the T-GARCH case the corresponding function is given by $h(x)=\big(x^+,\dots,(x^+)^m,x^-,\dots,(x^-)^m\big)'$, where $x^+=\max(x,0)$ and $x^-=\max(-x,0)$.\footnote{Although $h(x)$ is not differentiable at $x=0$ in the T-GARCH case, it is worth mentioning that $\nu$ in Theorem \ref{thm:7.2} is well defined as $h$ is differentiable almost everywhere.}
\end{remark}
\begin{comment}
\begin{example}
\label{ex:7.2}
Suppose $\{\epsilon_t\}$ follows a T-GARCH$(1,1)$ process given by \eqref{eq:7.2.1} and $\sigma_{t+1} = \omega_0 + \alpha_0^+ \epsilon_t^+ + \alpha_0^- \epsilon_t^- + \beta_0 \sigma_{t}$, where $\theta_0 = (\omega_0,\alpha_0^+,\alpha_0^-,\beta_0)'\in (0,\infty)\times[0,\infty)^2\times[0,1)$. The necessary and sufficient condition for the existence of $\mathbb{E}[|\epsilon_t|^d]$ is
\begin{align}
\label{eq:87879759975}
\sum_{i=0}^d \binom{d}{i} \Big(\big(\alpha_0^+\big)^i \mu_i^+ + \big(\alpha_0^-\big)^i \mu_i^-\Big) \beta_{0}^{m-i} \textcolor{red}{\mu_{2i}}<1
\end{align}
\end{example}
\end{comment}
\section{Numerical Illustration}
\label{sec:7.6}
\subsection{Monte Carlo Experiment}
\label{sec:7.6.1}
A simulation study is conducted to gain further insights into the practical implications of the bootstrap-based test of Section \ref{sec:7.5}. In particular we focus on the GARCH($1$,$2$) model, which is motivated by the subsequent empirical application (see Section \ref{sec:7.6.2}). The innovations are generated from a standard normal distribution, i.e.\ $\eta_t \overset{iid}{\sim}N(0,1)$, such that $(\mu_4,\mu_6,\mu_8,\mu_{10})=(3,15,105,945)$. Further, the GARCH parameters are set to $\omega_0 = 0.08$, $\alpha_{01} = 0.05$ and $\alpha_{02} = 0.10$ while $\beta_{01} \approx 0.80$ is chosen such that $T$ in \eqref{eq:8787521} is equal to unity when $m=3$. In other words, $m=3$ corresponds to the boundary case of the null hypothesis in which $\mathbb{E}[\epsilon_t^{2m}]$ is just evaluated infinite.
We consider three estimation sample sizes, $n \in \{1{,}000; 5{,}000; 10{,}000\}$, whereas the number of bootstrap replicates is fixed and equal to $B=1{,}999$. For each model version we simulate $S=2{,}000$ independent Monte Carlo trajectories and investigate the proposed bootstrap test at two nominal levels: $5\%$ and $10\%$.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\label{fig:1a}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{m1_n5000_trial2.jpg}
\caption{$m=1$ with $T=0.96$}
\end{subfigure}
\quad
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\label{fig:1b}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{m2_n5000_trial2.jpg}
\caption{$m=2$ with $T=0.95$}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\label{fig:1c}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{m3_n5000_trial2.jpg}
\caption{$m=3$ with $T=1.00$}
\end{subfigure}
\quad
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\label{fig:1d}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{m4_n5000_trial2.jpg}
\caption{$m=4$ with $T=1.11$}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\label{fig:1e}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{m5_n5000_trial2.jpg}
\caption{$m=5$ with $T=1.32$}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Density estimates for the distribution of $\sqrt{n}(\hat{T}_n-1)$ (solid blue line) based on $S=2{,}000$ simulations and the bootstrap distribution of $\sqrt{n}(\hat{T}_n^\star-\hat{T}_n^c)$ (dashed green line) based on $B=1{,}999$. The data generating process is a GARCH($1$,$2$) with Gaussian innovations and sample size $n=5{,}000$.}
\label{blubb}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{blubb} displays the density of the distribution of $\sqrt{n}(\hat{T}_n-1)$ and the bootstrap distribution of $\sqrt{n}(\hat{T}_n^\star-\hat{T}_n^c)$ for varying $m$ and sample size $n=5{,}000$. For $m=1$ and $m=2$ one observes that the two densities have a similar shape. The key difference is that the bootstrap distribution is centered around zero, whereas the distribution of $\sqrt{n}(\hat{T}_n-1)$ is shifted to the left (as expected) with center $\sqrt{n}(T-1)$, i.e.\ $-3.00$ for $m=1$ and $-3.22$ for $m=2$. For the case $m=3$, which corresponds to the boundary of the null hypothesis, Figure \ref{blubb}(iii) shows that the bootstrap distribution of $\sqrt{n}(\hat{T}_n^\star-\hat{T}_n^c)$ mimics well the finite sample distribution of $\sqrt{n}(\hat{T}_n-1)$. For $m=4$ and $m=5$, the null hypothesis is violated and the bootstrap and the non-bootstrap distribution exhibit distinct behavior as visualized in Figures \ref{blubb}(d) and \ref{blubb}(e). Whereas the bootstrap distribution remains centered around the origin, the distribution of $\sqrt{n}(\hat{T}_n-1)$ is more disperse and starts to diverge with center $\sqrt{n}(T-1)$, i.e.\ $7.83$ for $m=4$ and $22.40$ for $m=5$.
Table \ref{tab:7.2} reports the simulated rejection rates (in $\%$). For $m=1,2$ the null hypothesis of $\mathbb{E}[\epsilon_t^{2m}]<\infty$ is (almost) never rejected by the bootstrap test at the considered nominal values across sample sizes. For $m=3$, the relative rejection frequencies are below the corresponding nominal values, yet approach them with increasing sample size. This result suggests that the bootstrap test is rather conservative. For $m=4$ the the relative rejection frequency considerably increase (especially in larger samples) indicating that the null hypothesis is violated. For $m=5$ the results are more pronounced and the relative rejection rates are considerably higher reaching $100\%$ when the sample size is $n=10{,}000$.
\begin{table}[bh]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{rrccccc}
\hline \hline
\multicolumn{1}{c}{Sample} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{Nominal} & $m=1$ & $m=2$ & $m=3$ & $m=4$ & $m=5$ \\
\multicolumn{1}{c}{size} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{level} & $T=0.96$ & $T=0.95$ & $T=1.00$ & $T=1.11$ & $T=1.32$ \\ \hline
\multicolumn{1}{l}{} & \multicolumn{1}{c}{} & & & & & \\
$1{,}000$
& $5\%$ & $0.00$ & $0.00$ & $2.70$ & $18.75$ & $43.20$ \\
& $10\%$ & $0.00$ & $0.05$ & $6.40$ & $29.35$ & $58.05$ \\
$5{,}000$
& $5\%$ & $0.00$ & $0.00$ & $3.10$ & $66.80$ & $97.95$ \\
& $10\%$ & $0.00$ & $0.00$ & $6.50$ & $79.25$ & $99.00$ \\
$10{,}000$
& $5\%$ & $0.00$ & $0.00$ & $4.15$ & $91.15$ & $99.95$ \\
& $10\%$ & $0.00$ & $0.00$ & $8.70$ & $95.75$ & $100.00$ \\ \hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{The table reports the relative rejection frequency (in $\%$) of the null hypothesis $\mathbb{E}[\epsilon_t^{2m}]<\infty$ for different sample sizes ($n$) and for different nominal levels. The bootstrap test is based on $B=1{,}999$ bootstrap replications and the rejection frequencies are computed using $S=2{,}000$ simulations. The data generating process is a GARCH($1$,$2$) with Gaussian innovations.}
\label{tab:7.2}
\end{table}
\subsection{Empirical Application}
\label{sec:7.6.2}
Next, we study the German stock market index DAX for the period January 2, 1990 until January 20, 2009. The information on the index price is retrieved from Yahoo Finance and daily (log-) returns (expressed in $\%$) are determined yielding $n=4{,}807$ observations.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\label{fig:2a}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{DAX.jpg}
\caption{Returns of DAX}
\end{subfigure}
\quad
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.45\textwidth}
\label{fig:2b}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{DAX_residuals.jpg}
\caption{Histogram of the residuals $\hat{\eta}_t$'s}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{The returns of the German stock market index DAX are plotted in (i) for the period January 2, 1990 -- January 20, 2009. The histogram of the residuals is plotted in (ii) after fitting a GARCH($1,2$) model. A scaled normal density is superimposed.}
\label{fig:7.1}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:7.1}(i) displays the resulting series of returns. For this financial series \citeauthor{francq2011garch} (\citeyear{francq2011garch}, p.\ 206) strongly reject the null hypothesis of a GARCH($1$,$1$) in favor for a GARCH($1$,$2$) model. Estimating the latter, we present the corresponding point estimates in Table \ref{tab:7.3}, where the reported standard errors are obtained by means of bootstrap.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lccccccc}
\hline \hline
& $\hat{\omega}_n$ & $\hat{\alpha}_{n,1}$ & $\hat{\alpha}_{n,2}$ & $\hat{\beta}_{1,n}$ & $\hat{\mu}_{n,4}$ & $\hat{\mu}_{n,6}$ \\ \hline
point estimate & $0.0489$ & $0.0181$ & $0.0979$ & $0.8589$ & $7.9938$ & $629.9851$ \\
std. error & $0.0131$ & $0.0213$ & $0.0293$ & $0.0244$ & $3.0543$ & $421.4228$ \\ \hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{GARCH($1,2$) estimates and the estimates of the innovations' fourth and sixth moments. The standard errors are obtained by applying the fixed-design residual bootstrap with $B=9{,}999$ bootstrap replications.}
\label{tab:7.3}
\end{table}
Indeed we find a substantial point estimate for $\alpha_{0,2}$. Moreover, as documented in various studies we observe large volatility persistence in the data. The estimates of the fourth and sixth moments indicate that the innovation distribution is considerably more heavy-tailed than the standard normal distribution whose corresponding moments are $3$ and $15$, respectively.
Although this can be hardly seen from the histogram of the residuals in Figure \ref{fig:7.1}(ii), where a scaled normal distribution is superimposed,
we find that a (normalized) Student-t distribution with $9$ degrees of freedom provides an improved fit. Next, we test to what extend the financial time series at hand has finite moments. In particular we focus on the second, fourth and sixth moment corresponding to $m=1,2,3$, respectively. Table \ref{tab:7.4} presents the test-statistic and the corresponding p-value associated with the null hypothesis $\mathbb{E}[\epsilon_t^{2m}]<\infty$.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lccccccc}
\hline \hline
& $m=1$ & $m=2$ & $m=3$ & \\ \hline
$\hat{T}_n$ & $0.9773$ & $1.0309$ & $1.5788$ \\
$\hat{p}_{n,B}^\star$ & $0.9927$ & $0.1785$ & $0.0239$ \\ \hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Test-statistic and the corresponding p-value associated with the null hypothesis $\mathbb{E}[\epsilon_t^{2m}]<\infty$. The p-value is based on $B=9{,}999$ bootstrap replications.}
\label{tab:7.4}
\end{table}
For $m=1$, we find a test statistic smaller than unity and henceforth the corresponding p-value is large. For $m=2$, the test statistic is slightly larger than unity, however there is not enough evidence to reject the null hypothesis that the fourth moment exists. In contrast, for $m=3$, the test statistic is substantial larger and the corresponding p-value indicates that it is unlikely that the sixth moment is finite. Summing up: while the series seems to admit moments of second-order, there is strong evidence against the existence of sixth-order moments. With regard to the fourth-order moment, the test is inconclusive.
\section{Concluding Remarks}
\label{sec:7.7}
This paper studies the joint inference on conditional volatility parameters and the innovation moments by means of bootstrap to test for the existence of moments for GARCH processes. For a general class of volatility models we derive the joint asymptotic distribution of the QML estimators and the empirical moments of the residuals. Further, we propose a fixed-design residual bootstrap to mimic the estimators' finite sample distribution. The validity of the bootstrap method is proven under mild assumptions and a bootstrap-based test for the existence of moments in the GARCH($p$,$q$) model is proposed. This testing problem is non-standard as the test-statistic involves the spectral radius. Still the testing procedure is simple to implement and provides asymptotically correctly-sized tests without losing its consistency property. A simulation study demonstrates the test's size and power properties in finite samples. An empirical application illustrates the bootstrap-based testing approach, which can easily be extended to other GARCH-type settings.
|
\section{Introduction}
Localization based super-resolution ultrasound (SR-US) imaging can overcome the diffraction resolution limit~\cite{Couture2011,Viessmann2013,Desailly2013}. However, SR-US has two key restrictions on the maximum achievable resolution. Firstly, the SNR of the imaging system must be sufficiently high and the microbubble localization method must be able to identify individual microbubbles. The second limitation is any error introduced by motion during image acquisition~\cite{Harput2017a,Harput2018}. SR-US imaging and other imaging modalities based on multiple acquisitions are prone to motion artefacts that can usually be compensated by applying motion correction algorithms. For 2-D imaging, motion correction is impossible in the elevational direction in the presence of out-of-plane motion. For 3-D imaging with plane waves, the motion can be compensated in every direction thanks to the availability of full volumetric information at each time-point in the high-speed acquisition.
SR-US has been demonstrated by several researchers using different imaging methods and experimental setups. The most common way of achieving SR-US images is by using a 1-D ultrasound probe and super-localizing microbubbles in 2-D~\cite{Christensen-Jeffries2015,Ackermann2016,Foiret2017,Harput2017b,Harput2018,Couture2018,Song2018,Opacic2018,Ilovitsh2018,Zhang2018}. There are several studies that extended the use of SR-US to the third dimension by mechanically scanning a volume with a linear probe~\cite{Errico2015,Lin2017}. To achieve super-resolution in the elevational direction, researchers performed 3-D super-localization by using different methods~\cite{Reilly2013,Desailly2013,Christensen-Jeffries2017a}. So far, 3-D SR-US imaging has not been achieved in an \textit{in vitro}, pre-clinical or clinical setup involving large scale motion.
The aim of this study is to reduce the error introduced by motion in SR-US imaging by using a 3-D extension of the two-stage motion correction method~\cite{Harput2017a,Harput2018}. To acquire realistic motion, a 2-D handheld probe was used to image a wire phantom with a volumetric imaging rate of 333 Hz. Three set of simulations were performed without motion, with motion, and with motion correction. The extracted motion was implemented in 3-D simulations of microbubbles flowing inside a microvessel through tissue. 3-D SR-US imaging was achieved in simulations in the presence of handheld probe motion.
\section{Materials and Methods}
\subsection{3-D Motion Estimation \& Correction}
The motion estimation used here is based on an image registration approach which was previously proposed for \textit{in vivo} 2-D SR-US imaging~\cite{Harput2018}. MATLAB (The MathWorks, Natick, MA) codes are currently available to download~\cite{MC_url}. This method is capable of performing {rigid}, {affine}, {non-rigid}, and {two-stage} motion estimations. In this study, {affine} and {two-stage} methods achieved the same results due to the characteristics of handheld probe motion that was detected from the wire phantom acquisitions and simulated in the flow phantom.
Motion estimation was performed as the first step of the processing chain on the volumetric B-mode images. The transformation matrix was used to correct the 3-D microbubble localizations.
\subsection{Handheld Probe Measurements}
High volume-rate 3-D ultrasound imaging was performed with two ULA-OP256 systems~\cite{Boni2016,Boni2017}, which were used to transmit and receive synchronously from a 2-D sparse array. The 2-D sparse array was designed with 512 elements according to the method described in ~\cite{Ramalli2015a,Harput2018a}. The sparse array was used to image a 100~$\mu$m wire phantom using 3 cycle Gaussian pulses with a center frequency of 3.7~MHz. A total of 333 volumes were recorded using 9-angle plane wave compounding within a range of $\pm10$ degrees in the lateral and elevational directions with a pulse repetition frequency of 3000 Hz. During the 1 second acquisition, the probe was handheld as steadily as possible.
\subsection{3-D microvascular flow simulation}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[viewport = 30 55 450 650, width = 54mm, clip]{Simulation_microvessel.pdf}
\caption{Shape of the simulated microvascular structure is shown in the figure. It is a combination of Y and S shaped microvessels with sub-wavelength features.}
\label{fig:Simulation_microvessel}
\end{figure}
A 3-D microvascular flow simulation environment was created by combining tissue echoes generated in Field II~\cite{Jensen1992,Jensen1996} and microbubble signals generated with the Marmottant model~\cite{Marmottant2005}. Simulated microbubbles with a diameter of 3~$\mu$m were placed at different locations inside a Y and S shaped microvessel phantom as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Simulation_microvessel}. To test the feasibility of motion correction for 3-D SR-US imaging, the microvessels were simulated with sub-wavelength structures, where the wavelength is 416~$\mu$m at the imaging frequency in average human tissue. Fig.~\ref{fig:Simulation_microvessel} only shows the simulated Y and S shaped microvessels for clear visualization. The rest of the simulated volume had scatterers to generate a fully developed speckle pattern. By changing the location of microbubbles in both tubes a constant stream was created within a velocity of 3 and 10~mm/s for the S and Y shaped vessels respectively. A total of 333 volumetric ultrasound frames were simulated. Motion extracted from the handheld probe measurements were used to move the location of scatterers and microbubbles spatially in every simulated volume. Singular value decomposition was used on the simulated data to separate the tissue and microbubble signals. Motion estimation was performed on the 3-D B-mode data and microbubble locations were corrected accordingly. Localization of isolated microbubbles was performed using the \textit{onset} method on every acquired volume to generate the 3-D SR-US images~\cite{Christensen-Jeffries2017}.
\section{Results \& Discussion}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[viewport = 20 4 630 342, width = 88mm, clip]{Handheld_probe_motion.pdf}
\caption{Handheld probe motion is estimated in three dimensions over a 1 second acquisition with 333 volumes.}
\label{fig:Handheld_probe_motion}
\end{figure}
Handheld probe motion was estimated using the two-stage motion estimation method. The absolute motion in the axial, lateral, and elevational directions over 1 second is plotted as a function of time in Fig.~\ref{fig:Handheld_probe_motion}. The absolute motion was 384~$\mu$m, which is smaller than the imaging wavelength but much larger than typical localization precisions achieved in SR-US imaging.
Fig.~\ref{fig:SR_comparison_MC} shows the 3-D SR-US images achieved by super-localizing microbubbles flowing through the Y and S shaped microvessels in three different simulations without motion, with motion, and with motion correction, respectively. Without motion, the microvascular structures can be imaged clearly by using 3-D SR-US as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:SR_comparison_MC} (left). In Fig.~\ref{fig:SR_comparison_MC} (middle), the S shaped vessel cannot be resolved due to motion artefacts and the main branch of the Y shaped vessel appears as two different vessels. The reason for this duplicated vessel is the two different microbubbles flowing through the main branch of the Y shape vessel at different times and therefore with different positions between the simulated phantom and probe. After correcting the positions of localized microbubbles, both Y and S shaped vessels were visualized without major motion artefacts in Fig.~\ref{fig:SR_comparison_MC} (right).
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[viewport = 80 50 1130 550, width = 175mm, clip]{SR_comparison_MC.pdf}
\caption{Figure shows the 3-D SR-US images achieved by super-localizing microbubbles flowing through the Y and S shaped microvessels (Left) without motion, (Middle) with motion, and (Right) with motion correction.}
\label{fig:SR_comparison_MC}
\end{figure*}
Although, the main structure of both vessels was recovered after motion correction, residual motion artefacts can be seen when zoomed in to the S shaped vessel with sub-wavelength features in Fig.~\ref{fig:SR_comparison_MC_S_vessel}. The error values for the localizations of microbubbles travelling through the S shaped microvessel are presented as a box chart in Fig.~\ref{fig:MC_error_Boxplot} for three sets of simulations. Average absolute error between the simulated microbubble locations and 3-D super-localizations was 7.5, 136, and 18~$\mu$m for simulations without motion, with motion, and with motion correction. Motion correction significantly improved the erroneous localizations, where 75\% of the microbubble locations were detected with an error smaller than 25~$\mu$m. This value was 169~$\mu$m for the simulations with motion and 11~$\mu$m for the simulations without motion. Motion correction also reduced the maximum error below 78~$\mu$m, which is smaller than $\lambda /5$. A significant reduction in motion artefacts in the motion compensated 3-D SR-US clearly presents the benefit of motion correction.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[viewport = 60 25 380 690, width = 56mm, clip]{SR_comparison_MC_S_vessel.pdf}
\caption{Figure plots a detailed view of the S shaped vessel to highlight the motion artefacts before and after motion correction.}
\label{fig:SR_comparison_MC_S_vessel}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
Handheld probe motion over a 1 second duration may not be large enough to make a visible difference in the B-mode images; however, it is large enough to generate motion artefacts in 3-D SR-US as shown in simulations. In a clinical setup, the motion artefacts might be more severe since tissue will generate more complicated motion patterns than a handheld probe alone. Motion is a problem for both 2-D and 3-D SR-US and reduces image quality and resolution, therefore there is a need for motion correction in SR-US imaging.
Unlike 2-D imaging, motion can be compensated in every direction thanks to the availability of full 3-D volumetric information. In this study, a 3-D extension of the two-stage motion correction algorithm was used to compensate for the probe motion. The capability of the motion correction algorithm was demonstrated via 3-D simulations of sub-wavelength structures.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[viewport = 1 30 420 490, width = 60mm, clip]{MC_error_Boxplot.pdf}
\caption{Localization error of microbubbles inside the S shaped vessel without motion, with motion, and after applying motion correction.}
\label{fig:MC_error_Boxplot}
\end{figure}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work was supported mainly by the EPSRC under Grant EP/N015487/1 and EP/N014855/1, in part by the King's College London (KCL) and Imperial College London EPSRC Centre for Doctoral Training in Medical Imaging (EP/L015226/1), in part by the Wellcome EPSRC Centre for Medical Engineering at KCL (WT 203148/Z/16/Z), in part by the Department of Health through the National Institute for Health Research comprehensive Biomedical Research Center Award to Guy's and St Thomas' NHS Foundation Trust in partnership with KCL and King's College Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, in part by the Graham-Dixon Foundation and in part by NVIDIA GPU grant.
|
\section{Introduction}
One of the first studies on the consequences of the presence of a boundary in field theory was done by Casimir in \cite{Casimir:1948dh}, where the pressure between two parallel conducting plates was computed, as an example of modification of the vacuum state of the electromagnetic field. Later, in \cite{Symanzik:1981wd}, Symanzik faced the general problem of introducing and studying the effect of a boundary in a Quantum Field Theory (QFT), starting from the definition itself of boundary. Symanzik's basic idea was that a boundary separates the space into two regions. The field theoretical translation of this defining property concerns the propagators of the theory, which are constrained to vanish between points lying on different sides of the boundary (separability constraint). This approach has also the advantage of solving the ambiguity related to the boundary conditions which must be satisfied by the fields of the theory. According Symanzik's procedure, indeed, the boundary conditions are fixed by the separability constraint on the propagators which, in turn, are derived from the Ward identities of the theory. Hence, the boundary conditions are ultimately determined by the symmetries of the theory. Symanzik's approach has been successfully applied in situations where the boundary plays a role in QFT, and its effects can be measured \cite{Blasi:1992mm}. Particularly interesting is the case of Topological QFTs (TQFTs), which do not possess any local observable, the only cohomologically nontrivial objects being globally defined, like for instance Wilson loops, or surfaces, or geometrical knots \cite{Witten:1988ze}. Local physical observables of TQFTs are confined on the boundary, if present. For instance, introducing a boundary in 3D Chern-Simons (CS) theory serves to classify all rational conformal field theories \cite{Moore:1989yh}, and chiral conserved currents are derived on its edge, which form a Ka\c{c}-Moody (KM) algebra with central charge related to the CS coupling constant \cite{Blasi:1990pf,Emery:1991tf,Maggiore:2017vjf}. This nontrivial boundary structure has a physical interpretation in the Fractional Quantum Hall Effect \cite{Wen:1990se,Blasi:2008gt}. Similarly, on the boundary of topological BF theory \cite{Birmingham:1991ty}, which can be defined in any spacetime dimensions, KM algebras satisfied by conserved chiral currents are found \cite{Amoretti:2012kb,Amoretti:2013nv}, thus justifying the claim according to which topological BF theories are the effective field theories of topological insulators \cite{Hasan:2010xy,Cho:2010rk}. It makes difference if the boundary is double or single-sided. Of this latter type, for instance, are the theories involved in the AdS/CFT correspondence \cite{Maldacena:1997re}: a gravity theory in the $(D+1)$-dimensional bulk holographically reduces to a gauge theory on its (single-sided) $D$-dimensional boundary. This mechanism is also known as ``gauge-gravity duality'', and it has important applications also beyond its original string theory framework \cite{Hartnoll:2009sz,McGreevy:2009xe,Amoretti:2017xto}. By extension, this correspondence can also be referred to flat bulk theories, not involving gravity \cite{2013ass,Amoretti:2014kba}, with a single-sided boundary \cite{Amoretti:2014iza}. In these cases, Symanzik's method can be superseded by the introduction of a theta step function in the action, without need of imposing the separability constraint on the propagators, which might be a difficult task. The results may be different, as is the case, for instance, of topologically massive Maxwell-CS (MCS) theory \cite{Deser:1981wh}: while the physics on the boundary turns out to be independent from the Maxwell term in the case of double-sided boundary studied {\it \`a la} Symanzik \cite{Blasi:2010gw}, for single-sided boundary the central charge of the KM algebra and the chiral velocities of the conserved chiral edge currents depend on the Maxwell coupling constant \cite{Maggiore:2018bxr}. While the CS case can be recovered from MCS theory as the zero limit of the Maxwell coupling constant, the zero limit of the CS coupling constant diverges, and the 3D Maxwell theory with single-sided boundary must be treated separately, and this is the subject of this paper, which is organized as follows. In Section 2 the 3D Maxwell action with planar single-sided boundary is written, together with the gauge fixing term corresponding to the axial gauge, the external term where external sources are coupled to the fields of the theory, and the most general boundary term . In Section 3 the boundary conditions on the gauge fields are derived from their equations of motion, and the Ward identities are written. We find that two Ward identities hold, which is peculiar to the Maxwell theory alone, since only one Ward identity exists when the Maxwell action is coupled to a CS term \cite{Maggiore:2018bxr}. From the two Ward identities, the existence of two conserved currents is deduced, which satisfy a KM algebra with central extension equal to the inverse of the Maxwell coupling constant, in surprising analogy with the 3D topological BF theory with boundary \cite{Maggiore:1992ki,Blasi:2011pf}. In Section 4 we show that the degrees of freedom of the 2D boundary are two scalar fields, which are constrained by the boundary conditions on the bulk gauge fields found previously. We study two particular solutions with physical relevance, and we find that the constraints can be solved by chiral scalar fields with opposite chiralities, which renders the analogy with the 3D topological BF theory complete. Moreover, since this latter model is proposed as the effective field theory for 3D topological insulators \cite{Cho:2010rk}, this result suggests the unforeseen and interesting possibility of an alternative field theoretical description of 3D topological insulators, by means of the Maxwell field theory. In Section 5 we summarize and further comment our results.
\section{The action with boundary}
The Maxwell action defined on a closed, flat euclidean half-space is given by
\begin{equation}
S_{M}(A) = -\frac{\kappa}{4} \int d^3x\ \theta(x_2) \ F_{\mu\nu} F_{\mu\nu} \ ,
\label{2.1}\end{equation}
where $F_{\mu\nu}(x)$ is the electromagnetic field strength ($F_{\mu\nu}=\partial_\mu A_\nu-\partial_\nu A_\mu$), $\theta(x_2)$ is the step function which introduces in the theory the single-sided planar boundary
\begin{equation}
x_2=0,
\label{2.2}\end{equation}
and $\kappa$ is a real positive constant which could be normalized to one by a redefinition of the gauge field $A_\mu(x)$, which nevertheless we prefer to keep generically positive, in order to be able to identify at any time the role of the Maxwell term in what follows. In 3D, the canonical mass dimension of the gauge field is $[A]=1/2$. Our notations are as follows: Greek letters run over the 3D euclidean spacetime ($\mu=0,1,2$), while Latin letters cover the 2D boundary $x_2=0$ ($i=0,1$). Moreover, the 3D coordinates are denoted by $x=(x_0,x_1,x_2)$, while the plane $x_2=0$ is spanned by $X=(x_0,x_1)$. Accordingly, the Maxwell action \eqref{2.1} reads
\begin{eqnarray}
S_M(A) &=&
-\frac{\kappa}{4} \int d^3x\ \theta(x_2)\ (F_{ij} F_{ij} + 2F_{2i} F_{2i})
\nonumber\\
&=&
-\frac{\kappa}{2} \int d^3x\theta(x_2)
\left[
(\partial_0A_1)^2
+ (\partial_1A_0)^2
+ (\partial_0A_2)^2
+ (\partial_2A_0)^2
+ (\partial_2A_1)^2
\right.\nonumber\\
&&\left.
-2 \partial_0A_1\partial_1A_0
-2 \partial_0A_2\partial_2A_0
- 2 \partial_1A_2\partial_2A_1
+ (\partial_1A_2)^2
\right].
\label{2.3}
\end{eqnarray}
A convenient choice for the gauge fixing is the axial one
\begin{equation}
A_2=0,
\label{2.4}\end{equation}
which is implemented by the gauge fixing term
\begin{equation}
S_{gf}=\int d^3x\ \theta(x_2)bA_2 \ ,
\label{2.5}\end{equation}
where $b(x)$ is a Lagrangian multiplier, a.k.a. Nakanishi-Lautrup multiplier \cite{Nakanishi:1966zz,Lautrup:1967zz}. As usual, external fields are coupled to the gauge fields:
\begin{equation}
S_{\gamma}=\int d^3x\ \left[\theta(x_2)\gamma_i A_i +\delta(x_2)\gamma_{2i}(\partial_2A_i)\right]\ .
\label{2.6}\end{equation}
Notice that in $S_\gamma$ the external sources $\gamma_i(x)$ are coupled only to the gauge fields $A_i(x)$, and not to $A_2(x)$, which is gauged away by the axial gauge choice \eqref{2.4}. In addition, sources $\gamma_{2i}(x)$ must be coupled also to $\left.\partial_2A_i(x)\right|_{x_2=0}$ since, on the boundary $x_2=0$, the fields $\left.A_i(x)\right|_{x_2=0}$ and their $\partial_2$-derivatives $\left.\partial_2A_i(x)\right|_{x_2=0}$ are independent one from each other.
We stress that the fields $A_i(x)$ and their $\partial_2$-derivatives, are not independent dynamical variables {\it in the half 3D space (described by $x=(x_0,x_1,x_2)$}, but the physics {\it on the 2D plane $X=(x_0,x_1,x_2=0)$} depends on the type of boundary conditions the fields $A_i(x)$ undergo (a physical example is the role which the boundary conditions play in the field-theoretic description of the Casimir effect \cite{Asorey:2006pr}), and is described by the 2D generating functional ${\cal Z}[J(X)]$, where, in order to be able to treat independently Dirichlet and Neumann boundary conditions for the bulk fields,
external sources must be coupled to both $\left.A_i(x)\right|_{x_2=0}$ and $\left.(\partial_2A_i(x))\right|_{x_2=0}$, so that the boundary conditions are effectively treated as dynamical fields \cite{Karabali:2015epa}.
To highlight this remark, from now on we adopt the following shorthand notation
\begin{equation}
\partial_2A_i(x) \equiv A_{i,2}(x)\ .
\label{2.7}\end{equation}
Correspondingly, the fields and their $\partial_2$-derivatives may undergo independent boundary conditions on $x_2=0$: of the Dirichlet, Neumann or Robin type. Finally, on $x_2=0$ a boundary action should be defined, whose most general form is
\begin{eqnarray}
S_{bd}&=&\int d^3x\ \delta(x_2)\left(
a_1A_0^2
+a_2A_0A_1
+a_3A_1^2
+a_4\partial_0A_0A_1
+a_5\partial_1A_0A_1 \right.
\nonumber \\
&&\left. +a_6A_{0,2}A_0
+a_7A_{0,2}A_1
+a_8A_{1,2}A_0
+a_9A_{1,2}A_1
\right)\ ,
\label{2.8}\end{eqnarray}
where $a_i,\ i=(1,\ldots,9)$ are constant parameters and the power counting prescription has been taken into account, together with the observation that, as already remarked, on the boundary $x_2=0$ $A_i(x)$ and $A_{2i}(x)$ must be considered as independent fields, and therefore $\partial_2$-integration by parts is not allowed.
The 3D Maxwell theory is peculiar, because of power counting. In fact, the canonical mass dimensions of the 3D Maxwell gauge field $A_i(x)$ is one half, while for Chern-Simons theory, where only one spacetime derivatives appears, the dimension of the gauge field is one. As a consequence of the power counting constraint, in Chern-Simons theory the boundary term $S_{bd}$ cannot depend on $\partial_2 A_i$. This is not the case for 3D Maxwell theory, where, on its 2D boundary, $\partial_2 A_i$ may couple with $A_i$ forming a composite operator with mass dimension two. This seemengly technical remark has a deep physical consequence, as we will show in what follows.
Notice that the boundary term $S_{bd}$ in its general form \eqref{2.8} breaks $O(2)$ invariance on the boundary. The 2D invariance under rotations can be recovered for the particular choice of the parameters $a_i$
\begin{equation}
a_1=a_3\ ;\ a_6=a_9\ ;\ a_7+a_8=0\ ;\ a_2=a_4=a_5=0.
\label{3.3}\end{equation}
The parameters $a_i$ appearing in $S_{bd}$ \eqref{2.8} will be determined to describe physically relevant situations on the 2D boundary of 3D Maxwell theory. We therefore prefer to maintain a general ground without imposing a symmetry which might turn out to be too restrictive. Indeed, it can easily be seen that asking that the boundary term is invariant under 2D rotations, by fixing the parameters $a_i$ to the choice \eqref{3.3}, would prevent from constructing relevant 2D dynamics. This is in close analogy to what happens in massive gravity \cite{Hinterbichler:2011tt}, where a Lorentz covariant mass term is not the most general choice \cite{Rubakov:2004eb,Libanov:2005vu}, so that alternative to the Fierz-Pauli mass terms \cite{Fierz:1939ix} are possible \cite{Blasi:2015lrg,Blasi:2017pkk}.
Summarizing, the total classical action for Maxwell theory built on a closed flat half-space is given by
\begin{equation}
S_{tot}=S_M(A)+S_{gf}+S_\gamma+S_{bd}.
\label{2.9}\end{equation}
\section{Boundary conditions, Ward identities, conserved currents and Ka\c{c}-Moody algebra}
From the action $S_{tot}$ \eqref{2.9}, the field equations of motion are derived
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\delta S_{tot}}{\delta A_0} &=&
\theta(x_2)(\kappa \partial_1 F_{10}+\kappa\partial_2F_{20}+\gamma_0)
+\delta(x_2)(\kappa F_{20}+2a_1A_0+a_2A_1
\nonumber \\
&&
+a_6A_{0,2}
-a_4\partial_0A_1-a_5\partial_1A_1
+a_8A_{1,2}) \label{3.1}\\
\frac{\delta S_{tot}}{\delta A_1} &=&
\theta(x_2)(\kappa \partial_0 F_{01}+\kappa\partial_2F_{21}+\gamma_1)
+\delta(x_2)(\kappa F_{21}+a_2A_0+2a_3A_1
\nonumber \\
&&
+a_9A_{1,2}
+a_4\partial_0A_0+a_5\partial_1A_0
+a_7A_{0,2}). \label{3.2}
\end{eqnarray}
The boundary conditions on $x_2=0$ are obtained from the field equations \eqref{3.1} and \eqref{3.2} by integrating $\int_0^\epsilon dx_2$, letting $\epsilon\rightarrow 0$ and then going on-shell, $i.e.$ at vanishing external sources:
\begin{eqnarray}
2a_1A_0+a_2A_1+(a_6+\kappa)A_{0,2}
-a_4\partial_0A_1-a_5\partial_1A_1
+a_8A_{1,2} &=& 0\label{3.4}\\
a_2A_0+2a_3A_1+(a_9+\kappa)A_{1,2}
+a_4\partial_0A_0+a_5\partial_1A_0 + a_7A_{0,2} &=&0\label{3.5}.
\end{eqnarray}
From the equations of motion \eqref{3.1} and \eqref{3.2} the following integrated Ward identity is also derived
\begin{equation}
\int_0^\infty dx_2 \partial_i\gamma_i = \left. \kappa\partial_iA_{i,2}\right|_{x_2=0}.
\label{3.6}\end{equation}
Having in mind the previous remarks, we compute the equations of motion of the fields $A_{i,2}(x)$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\delta S_{tot}}{\delta A_{0,2}} &=&
\theta(x_2)(\kappa\partial_0A_2-\kappa A_{0,2})
+\delta(x_2)(\gamma_{20}+a_6A_0+a_7A_1) \label{3.7}\\
\frac{\delta S_{tot}}{\delta A_{1,2}} &=&
\theta(x_2)(\kappa\partial_1A_2-\kappa A_{1,2})
+\delta(x_2)(\gamma_{21}+a_8A_0+a_9A_1)\label{3.8},
\end{eqnarray}
from which the additional on-shell boundary conditions follow
\begin{eqnarray}
a_6A_0+a_7A_1 &=& 0\label{3.9}\\
a_8A_0+a_9A_1 &=& 0\label{3.10},
\end{eqnarray}
and the local Ward identity on the boundary $x_2=0$
\begin{equation}
\left.\partial_i\gamma_{2i}\right|_{x_2=0} = -\left. \kappa\partial_iA_i\right|_{x_2=0}.
\label{3.11}\end{equation}
The additional local Ward identity \eqref{3.11} will play a crucial role, and it is important to stress that its existence is peculiar to the Maxwell theory: it does not hold, indeed, when a Maxwell term is coupled, for instance, to CS theory \cite{Blasi:2010gw,Maggiore:2018bxr}.
It is interesting to remark the presence, on the boundary $x_2=0$, of a local Ward identity. It is known, in fact, that the axial gauge does not completely fix the gauge symmetry, and that the residual gauge symmetry is described by a local Ward identity \cite{Bassetto:1991ue}. Moreover, local Ward identities in 2D ($i.e.$ on the boundary of a 3D theory) determine the form of the commutators of fields and currents, which translate into the 2D conformal algebra \cite{Fradkin:1997df}. Here something similar happens, as explained below.
The Ward identities \eqref{3.6} and \eqref{3.11}, taken on-shell, $i.e.$ at vanishing external sources $\gamma_i(x)=\gamma_{2i}(x)=0$, give rise to two conserved currents, which live on the planar boundary $x_2=0$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left.\partial_iA_{i,2}(x)\right|_{x_2=0} &=& 0 \label{3.12} \\
\left.\partial_iA_i(x)\right|_{x_2=0} &=& 0. \label{3.13}
\end{eqnarray}
The Ward identities \eqref{3.6} and \eqref{3.11} lead also to a 2D algebra of the conserved currents identified by \eqref{3.12} and \eqref{3.13}. In fact, deriving the Ward identity \eqref{3.6} with respect to $\gamma_k(x')$,
going at vanishing external sources and defining the ``time'' ordered product with respect to the coordinate $x_0$, we get
\begin{eqnarray}
\partial_k\delta^{(2)}(X-X') &=&
\kappa \partial_i\left\langle A_{i,2}(X))A_k(X')\right\rangle\nonumber\\
&=&\kappa\delta(x_0-x_0')\left[A_{0,2}(X),A_k(X')\right]\nonumber\\
&&
+\kappa\left\langle\partial_iA_{i,2}(X)A_k(X')\right\rangle \ .
\label{3.14}\end{eqnarray}
The last term on the right hand side of \eqref{3.14} is a contact term (c.t.) which vanishes using the conservation relation \eqref{3.12}, so that we get the 2D commutation relation
\begin{equation}
\left[A_{0,2}(X),A_1(X')\right]\delta(x_0-x_0') = \frac{1}{\kappa}\partial_1\delta^{(2)}(X-X').
\label{3.15}\end{equation}
Similarly, deriving the Ward identity \eqref{3.6} with respect to $\gamma_{2k}(x')$ we get
\begin{eqnarray}
0&=&
\kappa\partial_i\left\langle A_{i,2}(X)A_{k,2}(X')\right\rangle\nonumber\\
&=&\kappa\delta(x_0-x_0')\left[A_{0,2}(X),A_{k,2}(X')\right]+\mbox{c.t.}
\label{3.16}\end{eqnarray}
Deriving then the Ward identity \eqref{3.11} with respect to $\gamma_k(x')$ and $\gamma_{2k}(x')$ we get, respectively
\begin{eqnarray}
0&=&
-\kappa \partial_i\left\langle A_i(X)A_k(X')\right\rangle\nonumber\\
&=&-\kappa\delta(x_0-x_0')\left[A_0(X),A_k(X')\right]+\mbox{c.t.}
\label{3.17}\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\partial_k\delta^{(2)}(X-X') &=&
-\kappa \partial_i\left\langle A_i(X)A_{k,2}(X')\right\rangle\nonumber\\
&=&-\kappa\delta(x_0-x_0')\left[A_0(X),A_{k,2}(X')\right]+\mbox{c.t.}
\label{3.18}\end{eqnarray}
Summarizing, we find the following equal ``time'' $x_0=x'_0$ algebra formed by the conserved currents $A_{i,2}(X)$ \eqref{3.12} and $A_i(X)$ \eqref{3.13} on the boundary $x_2=0$ of the 3D Maxwell theory\footnote{The following properties of the delta function have been used: $\delta(-x)=\delta(x)$ and $\delta'(-x)=-\delta'(x)$.}
\begin{equation}
[A_1(X),A_{0,2}(X')] = \frac{1}{\kappa} \partial_1 (x_1-x'_1)
\label{3.19}\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
[A_{0,2}(X),A_{k,2}(X')] = 0
\label{3.20}\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
[A_0(X),A_k(X')] = 0
\label{3.21}\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
[A_0(X),A_{1,2}(X')] = -\frac{1}{\kappa} \partial_1 (x_1-x'_1),
\label{3.22}\end{equation}
which can be written in a more compact way as
\begin{equation}
[A_i(X),A_{j,2}(X')] = -\frac{1}{\kappa}\epsilon_{ij}\partial_1\delta(x_1-x'_1),
\label{3.23}\end{equation}
taken at equal ``time'' $x_0=x_0'$.
The algebra \eqref{3.23} is a semidirect sum of KM algebras satisfied by the 2D conserved currents $A_i(X)$ and $A_{i,2}(X)$, with central extension $c=\frac{1}{\kappa}$, where $\kappa$ is the Maxwell coupling constant, in the mixed commutators. We notice that this algebra coincides with the one which is found on the boundary of the 3D topological BF theory \cite{Maggiore:1992ki,Blasi:2011pf} , where the role of the second gauge field $B_\mu(x)$ is here played by $A_{\mu,2}(x)$. This is a crucial fact, which has important physical consequences for the boundary dynamics of the theory, the first of which is the interpretation of the conserved currents \eqref{3.13} and \eqref{3.12} as charge current and spin current, respectively. These physical identifications will be discussed in the next Section.
\section{Boundary dynamics}
The current conservation relations \eqref{3.12} and \eqref{3.13} define two scalar fields on the 2D boundary $x_2=0$ of the 3D bulk Maxwell theory:
\begin{eqnarray}
\left. \partial_iA_i(x)\right|_{x_2=0} = 0 &\Rightarrow& A_i(X)=\epsilon_{ij}\partial_j\Phi(X) \label{4.1}\\
\left. \partial_iA_{i,2}(x)\right|_{x_2=0} = 0 &\Rightarrow& A_{i,2}(X)=\epsilon_{ij}\partial_j\Psi(X) \label{4.2}
\end{eqnarray}
The scalar fields $\Phi(X)$ and $\Psi(X)$ are the 2D dynamical degrees of freedom which concern the physics on the boundary of the 3D Maxwell theory. The boundary conditions \eqref{3.4}, \eqref{3.5}, \eqref{3.9} and \eqref{3.10}, written in terms of the 2D scalar fields $\Phi(X)$ and $\Psi(X)$ are:
\begin{equation}
2a_1\partial_1\Phi-a_2\partial_0\Phi+(a_6+\kappa)\partial_1\Psi+\partial_0(a_4\partial_0\Phi+a_5\partial_1\Phi)-a_8\partial_0\Psi = 0
\label{4.3}\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
a_2\partial_1\Phi-2a_3\partial_0\Phi-(a_9+\kappa)\partial_0\Psi+\partial_1(a_4\partial_0\Phi+a_5\partial_1\Phi)+a_7\partial_1\Psi = 0
\label{4.4}\end{equation}
\begin{eqnarray}
a_6\partial_1\Phi-a_7\partial_0\Phi &=& 0 \label{4.5} \\
a_8\partial_1\Phi-a_9\partial_0\Phi &=& 0 \label{4.6}
\end{eqnarray}
Notice that the equations \eqref{4.5} and \eqref{4.6} describe a chiral scalar field $\Phi(X)$
\begin{equation}
\partial_0\Phi+v_\Phi\partial_1\Phi =0
\label{4.7}\end{equation}
which propagates in the $x_1$-direction with velocity $v_\Phi$. We give now two examples, tuned by the parameters $a_i$ appearing in $S_{bd}$ \eqref{2.8}, of the physics which occurs on the boundary of the 3D Maxwell theory.
An interesting boundary situation is obtained taking
\begin{equation}
a_4=a_5=a_8=a_9=0.
\label{4.8}\end{equation}
The boundary conditions reduce to
\begin{eqnarray}
2a_1\partial_1\Phi-a_2\partial_0\Phi+(a_6+\kappa)\partial_1\Psi &=& 0 \label{4.9} \\
a_2\partial_1\Phi-2a_3\partial_0\Phi-\kappa\partial_0\Psi+a_7\partial_1\Psi &=& 0 \label{4.10} \\
a_6\partial_1\Phi-a_7\partial_0\Phi &=& 0. \label{4.11}
\end{eqnarray}
The condition \eqref{4.11} describes a chiral scalar field $\Phi(X)$ propagating in the $x_1$-direction with velocity
\begin{equation}
v_\Phi = -\frac{a_6}{a_7}.
\label{4.12}\end{equation}
Using \eqref{4.11}, the conditions \eqref{4.9} and \eqref{4.10} become
\begin{eqnarray}
(2a_1+a_2v_\Phi)\partial_1\Phi+(a_6+\kappa)\partial_1\Psi &=& 0 \label{4.13} \\
(a_2+2a_3v_\Phi)\partial_1\Phi-\kappa\partial_0\Psi+a_7\partial_1\Psi &=& 0. \label{4.14}
\end{eqnarray}
If, for instance,
\begin{equation}
2a_1+a_2v_\phi=a_6+\kappa=a_2+2a_3v_\phi=0,
\label{4.15}\end{equation}
we are left with
\begin{equation}
\partial_0\Psi-\frac{a_7}{\kappa}\partial_1\Psi =0,
\label{4.16}\end{equation}
which tells us that also the scalar $\Psi(X)$ is a chiral boson with velocity
\begin{equation}
v_\psi=-\frac{a_7}{\kappa},
\label{4.17}\end{equation}
while, because of \eqref{4.11}, the velocity of the chiral boson $\Phi(X)$ is
\begin{equation}
v_\phi=\frac{\kappa}{a_7}.
\label{4.18}\end{equation}
This configuration describes two 2D chiral bosons $\Phi(X)$ and $\Psi(X)$ which propagate on the boundary $x_2=0$ of the 3D Maxwell theory with opposite and inverse velocities:
\begin{equation}
v_\Phi v_\Psi = \left(-\frac{a_6}{a_7}\right)\left(-\frac{a_7}{\kappa}\right)=-1,
\label{4.19}\end{equation}
where we used \eqref{4.15}. The physical situation we are encountering here\footnote{We point out that the same physical result can be obtained with other choices of the parameters $a_i$.} reminds that of topological insulators \cite{Hasan:2010xy}, characterized by two chiral excitations moving on the edge of a surface with opposite velocities \cite{Cho:2010rk,Blasi:2011pf}. This allows the interpretation of the 2D conserved chiral currents \eqref{4.1} and \eqref{4.2} as charge current and spin current, respectively. The new fact here is that this peculiar feature of topological insulators is found on the boundary of 3D Maxwell theory, while the known fact so far is that this kind of behavior is recovered on the edge of 3D topological BF theory. Two quite different bulk theories (the topological BF theory and the non-topological Maxwell theory) on the boundary display the same physics (of topological insulators).
However, the dynamics which can be found on the boundary of 3D Maxwell theory is much richer, since the boundary conditions of the bulk theory may have more general solutions. For instance, let us consider again the four boundary conditions written in terms of the scalar fields $\Phi(X)$ and $\Psi(X)$: \eqref{4.3}, \eqref{4.4}, \eqref{4.5} and \eqref{4.6}. Like before, we chose $a_4=a_5=a_8=a_9=0$ and \eqref{4.5} describes a chiral boson $\Phi(X)$ with velocity $v_\Phi=-a_6/a_7$ \eqref{4.12}. We are then left with \eqref{4.13} and \eqref{4.14} as in the previous example. As before, let us take $a_2+2a_3v_\Phi=0$ \eqref{4.15}, so that \eqref{4.14} describes the chiral boson $\Psi(X)$ with chiral velocity $v_\Psi$ \eqref{4.17}. Eq. \eqref{4.13} represents a Robin boundary condition for the gauge field $A_0$:
\begin{equation}
\left.(2a_1+a_2v_\Phi)A_0+(a_6+\kappa)A_{0,2}\right|_{x_2=0}=0,
\label{4.20}\end{equation}
where we reintroduced the bulk gauge field $A_0$ through \eqref{4.1} and \eqref{4.2}. In other words, the set of boundary conditions can be solved by two chiral bosons provided that a Robin boundary condition on the gauge field $A_0(x)$ is given. A remark concerning the nature of the boundary degrees of freedom might be worth. In \cite{Amoretti:2013xya} it has been shown that the boundary conditions which are derived for the fields of topological BF theories in various spacetime dimensions fall into the class of duality conditions studied in \cite{Aratyn:1984jz,Aratyn:1983bg} which lead to a fermionization of the bosonic degrees of freedom involved. This means that the edge bosons for which a duality constraint holds, describe indeed fermionic degrees of freedom, which fits with the observation that the edge excitations of topological insulators are fermionic, despite the fact that the fields of the bulk effective field theory (3D BF theory) are bosonic. A similar fermionization mechanism might occurs for 3D Maxwell theory, where the role of the duality/boundary constraint studied in \cite{Amoretti:2013xya,Aratyn:1984jz,Aratyn:1983bg} is played by the Robin boundary condition \eqref{4.20}.
With respect to the previous case describing chiral bosons with opposite velocities, this time we have more choices, since
\begin{equation}
v_\Phi v_\Psi= \left(-\frac{a_6}{a_7}\right)\left(-\frac{a_7}{\kappa}\right)=\frac{a_6}{\kappa}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
>0 & \mbox{if}\ a_6>0 \\
<0 & \mbox{if}\ a_6 < 0
\end{array}
\right.
\label{4.21}\end{equation}
This solution therefore describes chiral bosons which may have opposite or concordant velocities, depending on the sign of one of the parameters appearing in the boundary term $S_{bd}$ \eqref{2.8}. This situation generalizes the one described in the previous example for topological insulators, where the conserved chiral currents travels in opposite directions on the edge.
\section{Conclusions}
In this paper we studied the 3D Maxwell theory with a single-sided planar boundary. Following standard methods of QFT, we found the most general boundary conditions compatible with the equations of motion of the gauge field $A_\mu(x)$, which depend on the parameters appearing in the boundary term of the total action. On the 2D boundary, the theory displays two Ward identities, which define two 2D conserved currents, obeying a KM algebra with central extension depending on the Maxwell coupling constant. The current conservation relations yield two 2D scalar fields, which are the dynamical variables on the 2D boundary. The boundary conditions on the gauge fields translate into constraints on the scalar fields, which can be solved by chiral bosons moving on the boundary of the 3D Maxwell theory with velocities which depend on the Maxwell coupling constant and on the parameters appearing in the boundary action, which may be tuned in order to have the chiral velocities either with the same or with the opposite sign. These features (conserved edge currents with opposite chiralities which obey a KM algebra with central charge equal to the inverse of the bulk coupling constant) coincide with those characterizing the boundary of 3D topological BF theory \cite{Maggiore:1992ki,Blasi:2011pf}, which is known to describe the physics of the topological insulators \cite{Cho:2010rk}. Maxwell and topological BF theory share the property of being gauge field theories respecting Time Reversal, which indeed plays an important role in the physics of topological insulators. Under any other respect, they are quite different theories, and having the same behavior on the boundary is an interesting result on its own. In the 3D topological BF theory, the two conserved edge chiral are interpreted as the currents of ``spinons'' and ``holons'' \cite{Cho:2010rk}. Pushing the analogy further, the role of the additional gauge field $B_\mu(x)$ is played here by the $\partial_2$-derivative of the gauge field $A_\mu(x)$, which, indeed, on the $x_2=0$ boundary must be considered as an independent field with respect to $A_\mu(x)$, obeying also independent boundary conditions (Dirichlet for $A_\mu(x)$, Neumann for $\partial_2A_\mu(x)$ and Robin for the mixed case). The analogy is impressive, and this new result deserves further studies before claiming that Maxwell theory with single-edged boundary represents an alternative effective theory for 3D topological insulators.
{\bf Acknowledgements}
The support of INFN Scientific Initiative SFT: ``Statistical Field Theory, Low-Dimensional Systems, Integrable Models and Applications'' is acknowledged.
|
\section{Introduction}
Dershowitz and Tzameret extended the Friedman-K\v{r}\'{i}\v{z}-Gordeev's tree embedding theorem with gap conditions by relaxing the well orderedness condition for the labels of tree-nodes to a well quasi orderedness condition. The first purpose of our paper is to generalize Okada-Takeuti's quasi ordinal diagram systems (\cite{takeuti1987,OT1987}) using this Dershowitz-Tzameret's result. The second purpose is to analyze to which extent such a non-simplification ordering could be used as an extension of the typical termination proof method based on simplification orderings. We especially consider a ``second-order (pattern-matching-based) rewrite rule" version of Buchholz's hydra game.
A typical termination proof method for first-order term rewriting systems is to show the termination of a term rewriting system $R$ by verifying that for each rewrite rule $l (\vec{x}) \to r(\vec{x})$ of $R$, $f( l ( \vec{x}) >f( r ( \vec{x}) )$ holds, where $f$ is a strictly order-preserving mapping and $<$ is a well founded ordering with the substitution property and the monotonicity property. Here, the substitution property and the monotonicity property mean (i) for any substitution (for the list of variables) $\sigma$, if $\alpha < \beta$ holds then $\alpha \sigma < \beta \sigma$ holds, and (ii) for any context $u[\ast ]$, if $\alpha < \beta$ holds then $u[\alpha] < u[\beta]$ holds, respectively. The properties (i) and (ii) guarantee the termination of the whole $R$ because any application of (first-order) rewrite rule $l (\vec{x}) \to r(\vec{x})$ has a form $u[ l \sigma ] \to u [ r \sigma ]$ for some context $u [\ast]$ and some substitution $\sigma$.
In this note, we restrict our attention to the identity $f$ for our basic argument.
The method has been widely used for termination proofs as well as a tool for Knuth-Bendix completion. The method itself would be attractive not only for the traditional first-order rewriting but also for higher-order or graphic-pattern-matching-based rewriting. One could expect that strong and general ordering structures in proof theory would be useful for this termination proof method of higher-order pattern-matching-based rewrite systems.
However, the use of strong orderings such as $<_i$ on Takeuti's ordinal diagram systems, which is a non-simplification ordering, cannot satisfy the two basic properties (i) and (ii). Because of this difficulty, instead of the traditional termination proof method, various different techniques for the termination of higher-order rewriting systems have been utilized; for example, Jouannaud and Okada (\cite{JO1991}) introduced a generalized form of Tait-Girard's reducibility candidates method (cf. also \cite{BJO2002,BJO2018} with Blanqui).
Hence at a first look, it seems hard to adapt ordinal diagram systems to the traditional termination method. It is a natural question how we could adapt them to the termination proof method especially for higher-order rewriting systems. We aim to answer this question in the present paper.
This paper is structured as follows. We first define our generalized quasi ordinal diagram systems $\lt{I,A}$ (\S \ref{elements}), then prove the well quasi orderedness of these systems as a corollary of the Dershowitz-Tzameret's version of tree embedding theorem (\S \ref{DT}). Next, we propose a termination proof method induced by the monotonicity property and a restricted substitution property of $\lt{I,A}$ (\S \ref{app}). Finally, we take a version of Buchholz game as an example of pattern-matching-based second-order rewrite systems and show its termination by another termination proof method in terms of $\lt{I,A}$ (\S \ref{buch}). Note that the termination of the original version and its variants of Kirby-Paris's hydra game could be proved in the traditional termination method of simplification orderings (cf. \cite{isihara2007}).
\section{Well quasi ordered systems of generalized quasi ordinal diagrams}\label{sectwo}
In this section, we first generalize quasi ordinal diagram systems $(\mathsf{Q} (I,A), \leq_i )$ of Okada-Takeuti (\cite{OT1987,takeuti1987}) by using an arbitrary well partial ordering $I$ as the inner node labels (\S \ref{elements}).
Next, we prove the well quasi orderedness of these generalized systems as a direct corollary of the Dershowitz-Tzameret's version (\cite{DT2003}) of tree embedding theorem with gap condition (\S \ref{DT}).
\subsection{Formulation of generalized quasi ordinal diagram systems}\label{elements}
A \textit{quasi ordering} is a pair $(D ,\leq)$ of a set $D$ and a binary relation $\leq$ such that for any $a \in D$, $a \leq a$ holds (reflexivity) and for any $a,b,c \in D$, if $a \leq b$ and $b \leq c$ hold then $a \leq c$ holds (transitivity). A \textit{partial ordering} is a quasi ordering $(D,\leq)$ with the antisymmetry: For any $a,b \in D$, if $a \leq b$ and $b \leq a$ hold then $a = b$ holds. A \textit{linear ordering} is a partial ordering $(D,\leq)$ with the linearity: For any $a,b \in D$, $a \leq b$ or $b \leq a$ holds. A \textit{well quasi ordering} is a quasi ordering $(D, \leq )$ such that for any infinite sequence $a_0, a_1,\ldots$ from $D$, there are numbers $n$ and $m$ such that $n < m$ and $a_n \leq a_m$ holds. A \textit{well partial ordering} is a partial ordering that is a well quasi ordering. For a quasi ordering $(D,\leq )$, we use abbreviation ``$a < b$" for ``$a \leq b$ and $b \not\leq a$." Note that the well quasi orderedness has a weaker definition saying that for any infinite $\leq$-decreasing sequence $a_0 \geq a_1 \geq \ldots$ from $D$, there are numbers $n$ and $m$ such that $n < m$ and $a_n \leq a_m$ holds. A \textit{weak well quasi ordering} is a quasi ordering $(D, \leq)$ satisfying this condition. In this paper, we show the stronger version of well quasi orderedness of our quasi ordinal diagram systems.
Let $(I ,\leq_I )$ be a well partial ordering and $(A, \leq_A)$ be a well quasi ordering. We define the set $\mathcal{F}_0$ of constants and the set $\mathcal{F}_1$ of unary function symbols as follows: $\mathcal{F}_0 := A$, $\mathcal{F}_1 := \{ f_i \mid i \in I \}$. Let $\mathcal{F}$ be a signature defined as the union of $\mathcal{F}_0$, $\mathcal{F}_1$ and $\{ \# \}$ with a varyadic function symbol $\#$.
The \textit{pre-domain} $\qd{I,A}$ \textit{of generalized quasi ordinal diagrams} on $(I ,\leq_I )$ and $(A ,\leq_A )$ is the set $\mathcal{T} (\mathcal{F})$ of all terms constructed from symbols in $\mathcal{F}$. To follow the notation in \cite{OT1987,takeuti1987}, we denote terms of $\qd{I,A}$ by $\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma , \ldots$ and adopt the following abbreviations: $(i, \alpha ) := f_i ( \alpha )$, $\alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_n := \# (\alpha_1 ,\ldots , \alpha_n)$. We call a term that belongs to $\mathcal{F}_0$ or has the form of $(i, \alpha )$ a \textit{connected term} of $\qd{I,A}$, and a term that has the form $\alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_n$ an \textit{unconnected term} of $\qd{I,A}$. When an unconnected term $\alpha$ is indicated as $\alpha \equiv \alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_n$, we assume that all of $\alpha_1 ,\ldots , \alpha_n$ are connected. For a connected term $\alpha$, a term $\beta$ is a \textit{component} of $\alpha$ if and only if $\beta \equiv \alpha$ holds. For an unconnected term $\alpha \equiv \alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_n$, a term $\beta$ is a \textit{component} of $\alpha$ if and only if for some $k$ with $1 \leq k \leq n$, $\beta \equiv \alpha_k$ holds.
\begin{defn}[Labeled Finite Trees]
\textit{Labeled finite trees} are defined as follows.
\begin{enumerate}
\item A \textit{finite tree} is a partial ordering $(T, \leq_T)$ such that $T$ is a finite set with the $\leq_T$-least element called the \textit{root}, and for any $a \in T$, the set $\{b \in T \mid b \leq_T a \}$ is linearly ordered with respect to $\leq_T$.
\item Let $(I, \leq_I)$ be a quasi ordering. A $I$-\textit{labeled finite tree} is a pair of a finite tree $(T, \leq_T)$ and a mapping $l : T \to I$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
Let $(T,\leq_T)$ be a finite tree. For any $a \in T$, if the set $\{ b \in T \mid b <_T a \}$
is non-empty, then we call its greatest element
the \textit{immediate lower node}
of $a$. We call $\leq_T$-maximal elements of $T$ \textit{leaves} of $T$. The $\leq_T$-greatest lower bound of $\{a , b\}$ is denoted by $a \land b$.
\begin{exa}\label{exazero}
Let $I$ and $A$ be the following well partial ordering and well quasi ordering, respectively, where the arrow $i \rightarrow j$ means $i <_I j$ and $a \rightsquigarrow b$ means $a \leq_A b$.
\[
\begin{xy}
(-10,0) *{I :=} ="C",
(0, 0) *{\bullet}*+!R{0} ="A",
(10, 3) *{\bullet}*+!D{1} ="A1", (20, 3) *{\bullet}*+!D{2} ="A2", (30, 3) *+{\cdots} ="A3",
(10, -3) *{\bullet}*+!U{1'} ="B1", (20, -3) *{\bullet}*+!U{2'} ="B2", (30, -3) *+{\cdots} ="B3",
(40, 0) *{\bullet}*+!L{\omega '} ="B",
\ar "A";"A1" \ar "A1";"A2" \ar "A2";"A3" \ar "A3";"B"
\ar "A";"B1" \ar "B1";"B2" \ar "B2";"B3" \ar "B3";"B"
\end{xy}
\qquad\qquad
\begin{xy}
(-10,0) *{A :=} ="C",
(0, 0) *{\bullet}*+!R{0''} ="A",
(10, 3) *{\bullet}*+!D{1''} ="A1", (20, 3) *{\bullet}*+!DL{2''} ="A2",
(10, -3) *{\bullet}*+!U{1'''} ="B1", (20, -3) *{\bullet}*+!UL{2'''} ="B2",
\ar @{~>}"A";"A1" \ar @{~>}"A1";"A2"
\ar @{~>}"A";"B1" \ar @{~>}"B1";"B2"
\ar @<1mm>@{~>}"A2";"B2" \ar @<1mm>@{~>}"B2";"A2"
\end{xy}
\]
In addition, we stipulate that for any $i \in I$ and any $a \in A$, $a <_{I} i$ hold. Here we use the symbol $\omega '$ since $I$ is similar to the ordinal $\omega$. An example of forest representation are as follows.
\[
\begin{xy}
(20,-9) *{(0, 0'' \# 0'') \# (2' ,(2',1''') \# (1',1'')) \# (1, 0'' \# (1, 2'' \# 0''))} ="D",
(0,0) *=0{\bullet}*+!U{0} ="A1", (-5,5) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{0''} ="A2", (5,5) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{0''} ="A3",
(20,0) *=0{\bullet}*+!U{2'} ="B1", (15,5) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{2'} ="B2", (10,10) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{1'''} ="B3", (25,5) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{1'} ="B4", (30,10) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{1''} ="B5",
(40,0) *=0{\bullet}*+!U{1} ="C0", (45,5) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{1} ="C1", (40,10) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{2''} ="C2", (50,10) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{0''} ="C3", (35,5) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{0''} ="C4",
\ar @{-}"A1";"A2" \ar @{-}"A1";"A3"
\ar @{-}"B1";"B2" \ar @{-}"B2";"B3" \ar @{-}"B1";"B4" \ar @{-}"B4";"B5"
\ar @{-}"C0";"C1" \ar @{-}"C1";"C2" \ar @{-}"C1";"C3" \ar @{-}"C0";"C4"
\end{xy}
\]
\end{exa}
Note that $\#$ is represented by tree's sum and branching. By the definition of the identity below, $\#$ denotes the associative-commutative sum of connected terms, which is called ``natural sum." In term rewrite orderings such as the recursive path ordering, $\alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_n$ is often represented as $\langle \alpha_1 ,\ldots , \alpha_n \rangle$.
\begin{defn}[Identity on $\qd{I,A}$]
For any two terms $\alpha$ and $\beta$ of $\qd{I,A}$, the \textit{identity relation} $\alpha = \beta$ holds if and only if either (1) both of $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are elements of $A$, and $\alpha$ is identical with $\beta$ in the sense of $A$, or (2) $\alpha \equiv (i, \alpha ')$, $\beta \equiv (i, \beta ')$ and $\alpha ' = \beta '$ hold, or (3) $\alpha \equiv \alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_n$ and $\beta \equiv \beta_1 \# \cdots \# \beta_n$ hold with $n > 1$ and there is a permutation $p$ of $\{ 1, \ldots , n\}$ such that $\alpha_i = \beta_{p(i)}$ holds for any $i$.
\end{defn}
\begin{defn}[$i$-sections]\label{subset}
For any two terms $\alpha$ and $\beta$ of $\qd{I,A}$ and any element $i$ of $I$, the relation $\alpha \subset_i \beta$, which we call ``$\alpha$ is an $i$-\textit{section} of $\beta$", is defined as follows.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\beta$ is an element of $A$, then $\alpha \subset_i \beta$ never holds.
\item If $\beta \equiv (j, \beta ')$ holds, then
\begin{enumerate}
\item when $i = j$ holds, $\alpha \subset_i \beta$ if and only if $\alpha = \beta '$ or $\alpha \subset_i \beta '$,
\item when $i < j$ holds, $\alpha \subset_i \beta$ if and only if $\alpha \subset_i \beta '$,
\item when $i \not\leq j$ holds, $\alpha \subset_i \beta$ never holds.
\end{enumerate}
\item If $\beta \equiv \beta_1 \# \ldots \# \beta_m$ holds with $m > 1$, then $\alpha \subset_i \beta$ if and only if for some $\beta_l \; (1\leq l\leq m)$, $\alpha \subset_i \beta_l$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
\begin{exa}[An example of an $i$-section]\label{exaone}
Consider the domain $\qd{I ,A}$ defined in Example \ref{exazero}.
\begin{center}
\begin{xy}
(0,0) *=0{\bullet}*+!U{5} ="A", (3,3) *=0{\bullet}*+!L{\omega '} ="B", (0,6) *=0{\bullet}*+!R{3} ="C", (3,9) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{2} ="D",
(3,14) *{\alpha} ="F", (-23,6) *{\beta :=} ="G",
(-18,18) ="E1", (-6,18) ="E2", (18,18) ="E3", (12,18) ="E4",
(70, 11) *{\text{Here $3,\omega ' ,5$ appears as labels, in this order, below $(2, \alpha )$.}} ="E5",
(70, 6) *{\text{Since $3,\omega ' ,5$ are greater than or equal to $2$, $\alpha \subset_2 \beta$ holds by definition,}} ="E6",
(70, 1) *{\text{where }\beta \equiv (5, \cdots \# (\omega ' , \cdots \# (3, \cdots \# (2, \alpha ) \# \cdots ) \# \cdots ) \# \cdots ).}
\ar @{-}"A";"B" \ar @{-}"B";"C" \ar @{-}"C";"D"
\ar @{-}"A";"E1" \ar @{-}"D";"E2" \ar @{-}"A";"E3" \ar @{-}"D";"E4" \ar @{-}"E1";"E3"
\end{xy}
\end{center}
\end{exa}
An element $i$ of $I$ is an \textit{index} of $\alpha$ if and only if there is a $\beta$ such that $\beta$ is an $i$-section of $\alpha$.
Set $\tilde{I} := I \cup \{ \infty \}$. For any $i \in I$ and any finite set $\{ \alpha_0 ,\ldots , \alpha_n \}$ of terms, define $\sid{i}{\alpha_0 ,\ldots , \alpha_n} := \{ j \mid i < j,\;j \text{ is an index of } \alpha_0 \text{ or } \ldots \text{ or } \alpha_n\}$. We denote the cardinality of $\sid{i}{\alpha_0 ,\ldots , \alpha_n}$ by $\# \sid{i}{\alpha_0 ,\ldots , \alpha_n}$. For any finite set $\{ \alpha_0 ,\ldots , \alpha_n \}$ of terms, the total number of all occurrences of $( , )$ and $\#$ in $\alpha_0 ,\ldots , \alpha_n$ is denoted by $l(\alpha_0 ,\ldots , \alpha_n)$.
\begin{defn}[Ordering $\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i$ on $\qd{I,A}$]\label{less}
For any element $i$ of $\tilde{I}$, the relation $\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i$ on $\qd{I,A}$ is defined by double induction on (1) $l(\alpha , \beta )$ and (2) $\# \sid{i}{\alpha , \beta}$, in this order.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If both of $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are elements of $A$, then for any element $i$ of $\tilde{I}$, $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ if and only if $\alpha \leq_A \beta$.
\item If $\alpha$ is an element of $A$ and $\beta$ is not, then for any element $i$ of $\tilde{I}$, both $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ and $\beta \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha$ hold.
\item If $\alpha \equiv \alpha_1 \# \ldots \# \alpha_n$ and $\beta \equiv \beta_1 \# \ldots \# \beta_m$ hold with $n+m > 2$, then for any element $i$ of $\tilde{I}$, $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ if and only if one of the following conditions holds:
\begin{enumerate}
\item there is a $\beta_l \; (1\leq l \leq m)$ such that for any $k\;(1\leq k \leq n)$, $\alpha_k \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta_l$ and $\beta_l \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha_k$ hold,
\item there is a $\beta_l \; (1\leq l \leq m)$ such that $\alpha_1 \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta_l$, and if $n \geq 2$ then the following holds.
\begin{center}
$\alpha_2 \# \ldots \# \alpha_{n} \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta_1 \# \ldots \# \beta_{l-1} \# \beta_{l+1} \# \ldots \# \beta_{m}$
\end{center}
\end{enumerate}
\item If $\alpha \equiv (j ,\alpha_0 )$, $\beta \equiv (j', \beta_0 )$ and $i = \infty$ hold, then $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} \beta$ if and only if either $j < j'$ holds or both $j = j'$ and $\alpha_0 \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_j \beta_0$ hold.
\item If $\alpha \equiv (j ,\alpha_0 )$ and $\beta \equiv (j', \beta_0 )$ hold and $i$ is an element of $I$, then $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ if and only if either
\begin{enumerate}
\item[($\exists$)] there is a $\beta ' \subset_i \beta$ such that $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta '$, or
\item[($\forall$)] for any $\alpha ' \subset_i \alpha$, both of $\alpha ' \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ and $\beta \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha '$ hold, and if $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta} \neq \emptyset$ holds then $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{j} \beta$ holds for any minimal element $j$ of $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta}$, otherwise $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} \beta$ holds.
\end{enumerate}
We say $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ \textit{holds by} $\exists$-\textit{condition}, when the condition ($\exists$) above holds. Similarly, we say $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ \textit{holds by} $\forall$-\textit{condition}, when the condition ($\forall$) above holds. Note that if $I$ is a \textit{finite} set, $j$ in the condition ($\forall$) can be taken as a $\leq_I$-maximal element of $\{ h \mid h >_I i \}$, and the resulting ordering $\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i$ becomes the same as the one defined above.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
\begin{rem}
Consider $\qd{I ,A}$ defined in Example \ref{exazero}. For the readers familiar to the recursive path ordering $\geq_{rpo}$ (cf. \cite{dershowitz1987}), the table below suggests some similarity of $\geq_{i}^{\mathsf{q}}$ to $\geq_{rpo}$ and the richness of $\geq_{i}^{\mathsf{q}}$ in the sense that $\geq_{i}^{\mathsf{q}}$ for some $i \in I$ depends on $\geq_{j}^{\mathsf{q}}$ for another $j \in I$. When we stipulate that $i > \#$ holds for any $i \in I$, we have the following table:
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{ | l | l | }
\hline
Recursive path ordering $\geq_{rpo}$ & The ordering $\geq_{\omega '}^{\mathsf{q}}$ \\
\hline
$\alpha \equiv (i, \alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_m ) \geq_{rpo} (j, \beta_1 \# \cdots \# \beta_n ) \equiv \beta $ & $\alpha \equiv (i, \alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_m ) \geq_{\omega '}^{\mathsf{q}} (j, \beta_1 \# \cdots \# \beta_n ) \equiv \beta$ \\
if $\alpha_k \geq_{rpo} \beta$ for some $k$ with $1 \leq k \leq m$, & if $\gamma \geq_{\omega '}^{\mathsf{q}} \beta$ for some $\gamma \subset_{\omega '} \alpha$, \\
or $i > j$ and $\alpha >_{rpo} \beta_l$ for any $k$ with $1 \leq l \leq n$, & or $i > j$ and $\alpha \geq_{\omega '}^{\mathsf{q}} \delta ,\; \delta \ngeq_{\omega '}^{\mathsf{q}} \alpha$ for any $\delta \subset_{\omega '} \beta$, \\
or $i = j$ and $\alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_m \geq_{rpo} \beta_1 \# \cdots \# \beta_n$. & or $i=j$ and $\alpha \geq_{\omega '}^{\mathsf{q}} \delta ,\; \delta \ngeq_{\omega '}^{\mathsf{q}} \alpha$ for any $\delta \subset_{\omega '} \beta$ and \\
& $\quad \alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_m \geq_{i}^{\mathsf{q}} \beta_1 \# \cdots \# \beta_n$. \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{rem}
\if0
\begin{exa}\label{exatwo}
Consider $I^*$ and $A^*$ in Example \ref{exaone}. In $\qd{I^* ,A^*}$, $(3, (5,0) \# (5',0)) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{3} (\omega ',0)$ holds. Let us explain this fact by tree-representation as follows.
\[
\begin{xy}
(0,0) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{3} ="A", (-7,7) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{5} ="B", (7,7) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{5'} ="C", (-7,14) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{0} ="D", (7,14) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{0} ="E",
\ar @{-}"A";"B" \ar @{-}"A";"C" \ar @{-}"B";"D" \ar @{-}"C";"E"
\end{xy}
\qquad \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_3 \qquad
\begin{xy}
(0,0) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{\omega '} ="A", (0,7) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{0} ="B",
\ar @{-}"A";"B"
\end{xy}
\]
This ordering relation holds by $\forall$-condition. First, the $3$-section $(5,0) \# (5',0)$ of $(3, (5,0) \# (5',0))$, which corresponds to the sum of the two immediate subtrees of the left tree above, is smaller than $(\omega ' ,0)$ in the sense of $\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_3$, because both $(5,0) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_3 (\omega ',0)$ and $(5',0) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_3 (\omega ',0)$ holds. Next, we have $(3, (5,0) \# (5',0)) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} (\omega ',0)$ because of the fact that $3 \leq_{I^*} \omega '$ holds: The label $3$ of the left tree's root is smaller than the label $\omega '$ of the right tree's root.
\end{exa}
\fi
\begin{lem}\label{qo}
For any well partial ordering $I$, any well quasi ordering $A$ and any element $i$ of $\tilde{I}$,
\noindent$(\qd{I,A} ,\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i )$ is a quasi ordering.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Prove the following sublemmas (1) and (2) by double induction on $\langle l (\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma), \# \sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma} \rangle$ and double induction on $\langle l(\alpha ) , \#\sid{i}{\alpha } \rangle$, respectively. (1) (Transitivity) For every $\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma \in \qd{I,A}$ and every $i \in \tilde{I}$, if $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ and $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \gamma$ hold then $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \gamma$ holds. (2) (Reflexivity) For every $\alpha \in \qd{I,A}$ and every $i \in \tilde{I}$, the following two hold: $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i} \alpha$ holds, and if $i \in I$ holds then for any $\beta \in \qd{I,A}$ with $\alpha \subset_i \beta$, $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i} \beta$ and $\beta \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i} \alpha$ hold.
\if0
\paragraph{Proof of 1.}
Induction on $\omega \cdot l(\alpha , \beta , \gamma ) + \#\sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta ,\gamma}$. We consider only the following case: $\alpha \equiv (j, \alpha ')$, $\beta \equiv (k, \beta ')$, $\gamma \equiv (h, \gamma ')$. We assume that both $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i} \beta$ and $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i} \gamma$ hold.
Suppose that $i = \infty$ holds. It suffices to show that either
\begin{itemize}
\item $j < h$ or
\item $j = h, \alpha ' \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_j \gamma '$
\end{itemize}
holds. If $j < k$ or $k < h$ holds by the assumption, then we have $j < h$. If $j = k = h$ holds by the assumption, then we have $\alpha ' \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_j \gamma '$ by IH.
Next, suppose that $i \in I$ holds. When there is a $\delta \subset_i \gamma$ with $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \delta$, then $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \delta$ holds. Therefore, $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \delta$ holds by IH, so we have $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \gamma$.
Suppose that for any $\eta \subset_i \beta$, $\eta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \gamma$ and $\gamma \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \eta$, and
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(i)] $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i'} \gamma$ for any minimal element $i'$ of $\sid{i}{\beta ,\gamma}$, if $\sid{i}{\beta ,\gamma} \neq \emptyset$,
\item[(ii)] otherwise, $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} \gamma$.
\end{enumerate}
When there is a $\delta \subset_i \beta$ with $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \delta$, then we have $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \delta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \gamma$. Therefore, $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \gamma$ holds by IH.
Suppose that for any $\delta \subset_i \alpha$, $\delta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ and $\beta \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \delta$, and
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(iii)] $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{j'} \beta$ for any minimal element $j'$ of $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta}$, if $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta} \neq \emptyset$,
\item[(iv)] otherwise, $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} \beta$.
\end{enumerate}
Then, for any $\delta \subset_i \alpha$, we have $\delta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \gamma$ by IH. It also holds that $\gamma \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \delta$, because if $\gamma \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \delta$ holds then we have $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \delta$ by IH, contradiction. To show that $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \gamma$ holds in this case, it suffices to verify
\begin{itemize}
\item $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{k'} \gamma$ for any minimal element $k'$ of $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\gamma}$, if $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\gamma} \neq \emptyset$,
\item otherwise, $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} \gamma$.
\end{itemize}
We distinguish the following cases.
\\[10pt]
(\textbf{Case 1})
Suppose that $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\gamma} = \emptyset$ holds.
\\[10pt]
(\textbf{Case 1.1})
$\sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta} = \emptyset$: Then, $\sid{i}{\beta ,\gamma} = \emptyset$ also holds. Therefore, we have $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} \gamma$ by (ii), (iv) and IH.
\\[10pt]
(\textbf{Case 1.2})
$\sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta} \neq \emptyset$: $\sid{i}{\beta ,\gamma} \neq \emptyset$ also holds. By (i), $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i'} \gamma$ for every minimal element $i'$ of $\sid{i}{\beta ,\gamma}$. Then, $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i'} \gamma$ holds by $\forall$-condition for every such a minimal element $i'$. Otherwise, $\gamma$ would have an index $i'$ with $i < i'$, contradiction. By repeating this argument, we can show that $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} \gamma$, so $k < h$ or $k=h$.
By (iii), $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{j'} \beta$ for every minimal element $j'$ of $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta}$. If $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{j'} \beta$ holds by $\exists$-condition for some such a minimal element $j'$, $\beta$ has the index $k$ such that $k \geq j' > i$. Then, $\gamma$ has the index $h$ with $h > i$, contradiction. Therefore, $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{j'} \beta$ holds by $\forall$-condition for every minimal element $j'$ of $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta}$. By repeating this argument, we have $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} \beta$, so $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} \gamma$ by IH.
\\[10pt]
(\textbf{Case 2})
Suppose that $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\gamma} \neq \emptyset$ holds. For a given minimal element $k'$ of $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\gamma}$, we show that $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{k'} \gamma$ holds.
\\[10pt]
(\textbf{Case 2.1})
$k'$ is a minimal element of both $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta}$ and $\sid{i}{\beta ,\gamma}$: By (i) and (iii), we have $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{k'} \beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{k'} \gamma$, so $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{k'} \gamma$ by IH.
\\[10pt]
(\textbf{Case 2.2})
Neither $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta}$ nor $\sid{i}{\beta ,\gamma}$ includes $k'$ as a minimal element: In this case, both $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta}$ and $\sid{i}{\beta ,\gamma}$ are always non-empty. Without loss of generality, we may assume that $k'$ is an index of $\alpha$. Since $k'$ is not a minimal element of $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta}$, there is an index $h'$ of $\beta$ such that $h'>i$, $h' \in \sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta}$ and $k' > h'$ hold. Consider a minimal one $h'$ among such indices. Then, $h'$ is also a minimal element of $\sid{i}{\beta ,\gamma}$, so $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{h'} \beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{h'} \gamma$ by (i) and (iii). Therefore, we have $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{h'} \gamma$ by IH.
Since neither $\alpha$ nor $\gamma$ has $h'$ as an index, $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{h'} \gamma$ holds by $\forall$-condition, that is, $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{h^*} \gamma$ holds for every minimal element $h^*$ of $\sid{h'}{\alpha ,\gamma}$. Then, $k'$ must be one of these minimal elements, otherwise $k'$ is not minimal in $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\gamma}$.
\\[10pt]
(\textbf{Case 2.3})
$k'$ is a minimal element of $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta}$, but $k'$ is not a minimal element of $\sid{i}{\beta ,\gamma}$: In this case, we always have $\sid{i}{\beta ,\gamma} = \emptyset$. By (iii), $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{k'} \beta$ holds. On the other hand, $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{k'} \gamma$ by (ii), so $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{k'} \gamma$ by IH.
\\[10pt]
(\textbf{Case 2.4})
$k'$ is a minimal element of $\sid{i}{\beta ,\gamma}$, but $k'$ is not a minimal element of $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta}$: By a similar argument to the one in (\textbf{Case 2.3}), one can verify that $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{k'} \gamma$ holds.
\paragraph{Proof of 2.}
By induction on $\omega \cdot l(\alpha ) + \#\sid{i}{\alpha }$. When $\alpha \in A$ holds, the sublemma obviously holds.
\\[10pt]
(\textbf{Induction Step, Case 1})
$\alpha$ is of the form $(k, \alpha ')$: We have $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} \alpha$ because $\alpha ' \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{k} \alpha '$ by IH.
Suppose that $i \in I$ holds. For a given $\delta$ with $\delta \subset_{i} \alpha$, we have both $\delta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i} \alpha$ and $\alpha \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i} \delta$ by IH. Moreover, $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i'} \alpha$ holds for every minimal element $i'$ of $\sid{i}{\alpha}$ by IH again. Therefore, $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i} \alpha$ holds.
Next, we show by induction on $l(\beta)$ that if $\alpha \subset_i \beta$ holds then $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i} \beta$ and $\beta \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i} \alpha$.
\\[10pt]
(\textbf{Case 1.1})
Suppose that $\beta$ is of the form $(h,\beta ')$. Since both $\alpha \subset_i \beta$ and $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha$ hold, we have $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$. To verify that $\beta \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha$ holds, we assume that $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha$ holds and deduce a contradiction. When $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha$ holds by $\exists$-condition, then there is a gqod $\gamma$ such that $\gamma \subset_i \alpha$ and $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \gamma$ hold. By IH of main induction, $\gamma \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha$ and $\alpha \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \gamma$ hold. On the other hand, we have $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \gamma$ by the transitivity, contradiction. When $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha$ holds by $\forall$-condition, then $\alpha \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \gamma$ for every $\gamma$ with $\gamma \subset_i \beta$. Therefore, we have a contradiction if we take such a $\gamma$ as $\alpha$.
\\[10pt]
(\textbf{Case 1.2})
Suppose that $\beta$ is of the form $\beta_1 \# \cdots \# \beta_n$ with $n >1$. Since $\alpha \subset_i \beta$ holds, we have $\alpha \subset_i \beta_l$ for some $l$ with $1 \leq l \leq n$. By IH of sub-induction, $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta_l$ and $\beta_l \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha$ hold. One can see that $\beta_l \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ holds by definition, so $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ and $\beta \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha$ hold by the transitivity.
\\[10pt]
(\textbf{Induction Step, Case 2})
$\alpha$ is of the form $\alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_n$ with $n>1$: In this case, one easily see by IH that for every $i \in \tilde{I}$, $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha$ holds. We show by induction on $l(\beta)$ that if $\alpha \subset_i \beta$ holds then $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i} \beta$ and $\beta \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i} \alpha$.
\\[10pt]
(\textbf{Case 2.1})
Suppose that $\beta$ is of the form $(h,\beta ')$. We have $\alpha_l \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha$ for every $l\;(1 \leq l \leq n)$ by definition. Since $\alpha \subset_i \beta$ holds and each $\alpha_l$ is a connected gqod, $\alpha_l \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ holds for every $l\;(1 \leq l \leq n)$ by $\exists$-condition. Therefore, $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ holds.
Assume that $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha$ holds. We deduce a contradiction from this assumption. By definition, $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha_l$ holds for some $l\;(1 \leq l \leq n)$. When $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha_l$ holds by $\exists$-condition, then there is a gqod $\delta$ such that $\delta \subset_i \alpha_l$ and $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \delta$ hold. By IH of main induction, $\alpha_l \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \delta$ holds. On the other hand, we have $\alpha_l \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \delta$ by the transitivity, contradiction. When $\beta \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha_l$ holds by $\forall$-condition, then for every $\gamma$ with $\gamma \subset_i \beta$, $\gamma \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha_l$ and $\alpha_l \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \gamma$ hold. We have a contradiction if we take such a $\gamma$ as $\alpha$.
\\[10pt]
(\textbf{Case 2.2})
Suppose that $\beta$ is of the form $\beta_1 \# \cdots \# \beta_m$ with $m >1$. By a similar argument to the one of (\textbf{Case 1.2}), one can see that $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ and $\beta \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha$ hold.
\fi
\end{proof}
\begin{rem}
Let us comment on the definitions of $i$-sections (Definition \ref{subset}) and $\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i$ (Definition \ref{less}).
\begin{itemize}
\item If we replace ``$i \not\leq j$" in Definition \ref{subset}.2.(c) with ``$i > j$", then we obtain the definition of $i$-sections in \cite{OT1987,takeuti1987}.
\item We defined $\qd{I,A}$ by taking $I$ as not a well \textit{quasi} ordering but a well \textit{partial} ordering. The antisymmetry of $I$ is needed to verify the transitivity of $\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty}$. In addition, note that the proof for the lemma above neither depends on the well quasi orderedness of $I$ nor the one of $A$. If we take $I$ as a well ordering, then in Definition \ref{less}.5.($\forall$) there always exists the \textit{least} element of $\sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta}$ if it is non-empty. This is the only difference of our orderings $\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i$ from the ones in \cite{OT1987,takeuti1987}.
\end{itemize}
\end{rem}
The central quasi ordering $\lll$ in this paper is a generalization of the linear ordering appeared in \cite{okada1988}, which satisfies the monotonicity property. We will show in Section \ref{app} that our ordering $\lll$ satisfies the monotonicity property as well (cf. Lemma \ref{mono}).
\begin{defn}[Ordering $\alpha \lll \beta$]
For any two terms $\alpha , \beta$ of $\qd{I,A}$, $\alpha \lll \beta$ holds if and only if $\alpha <^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ holds for any element $i$ of $\tilde{I}$.
\end{defn}
Let $\lll^=$ be the reflexive closure of $\lll$. It is obvious that $(\qd{I,A} ,\lll^{=})$ is a quasi ordering and that for any $\alpha$ and $\beta$, $\alpha \lll \beta$ holds if and only if both $\alpha \lll^= \beta$ and $\beta \not\lll^= \alpha$ holds.
Next, we restrict the pre-domains $\qd{I,A}$ to the \textit{path comparable tree}-domain $\lt{I,A}$, since there is a counterexample for the well quasi orderedness of $(\qd{I,A} ,\lll^= )$. In fact, we have a counterexample for its \textit{weak} well quasi orderedness.
\begin{exa}
A counterexample for the \textit{weak} well quasi orderedness of $(\qd{I,A}, \lll^= )$ is as follows: Let $I$ be $\{ 0, a_1 , a_2 , b_1, b_2\}$ and $A$ be $\{ 0 \}$, where $0 <_I a_1 <_I b_1$, $0 <_I a_2 <_I b_2$ and for any $c \in \{ a_1 ,b_1\}$ and $d \in \{ a_2 ,b_2 \}$, neither $c \leq_I d$ nor $d \leq_I c$ holds.
Then, we have the following infinite sequence.
\begin{center}
$(a_1 ,(b_2 ,0 )) \ggg ( a_1 , ( a_2 , (b_1 ,0 ))) \ggg (a_1 , ( a_2 , ( a_1 , ( b_2 , 0 )))) \ggg ( a_1 , (a_2 , (a_1 , (a_2 ,(b_1 , 0 ))))) \ggg \ldots$
\end{center}
\end{exa}
This kind of counterexamples is blocked if we restrict the pre-domains $\qd{I,A}$ to the path comparable tree-domains $\lt{I,A}$.
In the rest of this subsection and the next subsection, we assume that pre-domains $\qd{I,A}$ satisfy the following conditions: $I \cap A = \emptyset$ and $a <_{I} i$ holds for any $i \in I$ and any $a \in A$.
In addition, we identify a connected term $\alpha$ of $\qd{I,A}$ with a labeled finite tree $((T, \leq_T), l_T)$ in the manner of Example \ref{exazero}. For any quasi ordering $(A ,\leq_A)$ and any two elements $a_1 ,a_2$ of $A$, we say $a_1$ is \textit{comparable with} $a_2$ if and only if $a_1 \leq_A a_2$ or $a_2 \leq_A a_1$ holds.
\begin{defn}[Path comparable tree-domains $\lt{I,A}$ of $\qd{I,A}$, cf. \cite{DT2003}]
The \textit{path comparable tree-domain} $\lt{I,A}$ of $\qd{I,A}$ is defined as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $a \in A$ holds, then $a$ is a connected term of $\lt{I,A}$.
\item Let $\alpha_1 ,\ldots ,\alpha_n$ be connected terms of $\lt{I,A}$ with $\alpha_1 = ((T_1 ,\leq_1),l_1),\ldots ,\alpha_n = ((T_n ,\leq_n),l_n)$. If $i$ is comparable with $l_k (a)$ for any $k$ $(1 \leq k \leq n)$ and any $a \in T_k$, then $(i ,\alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_n)$ is a connected term of $\lt{I,A}$.
\item If $\alpha_1 ,\ldots ,\alpha_n$ are connected terms of $\lt{I,A}$, then $\alpha_1 \# \ldots \# \alpha_n$ is an unconnected term of $\lt{I,A}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
A \textit{generalized quasi ordinal diagram system} is a pair $(\lt{I,A} , \lll^= )$ of a path comparable tree-domain $\lt{I,A}$ and the quasi ordering $\lll^=$ on this domain. We often abbreviate $(\lt{I,A} , \lll^= )$ as $\lt{I,A}$. Hereafter, we call a connected term (resp. an unconnected term) of $\lt{I,A}$ a \textit{connected gqod} (resp. an \textit{unconnected gqod}). For $\lt{I,A}$, we have the following lemma by induction on $l (\alpha )$.
\begin{lem}\label{cpr}
For any element $(i, \alpha)$ of $\lt{I,A}$, $\alpha <^{\mathsf{q}}_j (i, \alpha)$ holds for any element $j$ of $I$ with $j \leq i$.
\end{lem}
\if0
\begin{proof}
By induction on $l (\alpha )$. When $\alpha$ is an element of $A$, the lemma obviously holds.
\\[10pt]
(\textbf{Induction Step, Case 1})
Suppose that $\alpha$ is of the form $\alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_n$ with $n >1$. When $j=i$ holds, we have $\alpha <^{\mathsf{q}}_j (i,\alpha)$ by the fact (2) in the proof of Lemma \ref{qo}.
Consider an element $j$ of $I$ with $j<i$. It suffices to show that $\alpha_k <^{\mathsf{q}}_j (i, \alpha )$ holds for any $k$ with $1 \leq k \leq n$. We have $\alpha_k <^{\mathsf{q}}_j (i, \alpha_k)$ by IH, so we verify by subinduction on $\# \sid{j}{ (i ,\alpha_k ), (i, \alpha ) }$ that $(i , \alpha_k) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_j (i, \alpha)$ holds. Take a gqod $\beta$ with $\beta \subset_j (i, \alpha_k)$. Then, $\beta \subset_j (i, \alpha )$ also holds, so we have $\beta <^{\mathsf{q}}_j (i, \alpha )$ by the fact (2) in the proof of Lemma \ref{qo}.
Take an arbitrary minimal element $j'$ of $\sid{j}{ (i, \alpha_k ), (i, \alpha)}$. Note that $\sid{j}{ (i,\alpha_k), (i, \alpha) } \neq \emptyset$ holds because $i \in \sid{j}{ (i,\alpha_k), (i, \alpha) }$ holds. In addition, we have $j' \leq i$. Then, we also have $(i,\alpha_k ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{j'} (i ,\alpha)$ by IH of subinduction.
\\[10pt]
(\textbf{Induction Step, Case 2})
Suppose that $\alpha$ is of the form $(k, \gamma)$. Note that we have either $k = i$, $k < i$ or $i < k$ because $(i, \alpha ) \in \lt{I,A}$ holds. When $j = i$ holds, we have $\alpha <^{\mathsf{q}}_j (i, \alpha )$ by the fact (2) in the proof of Lemma \ref{qo}. Assume that $j < i$ holds. We use subinduction on $\# \sid{j}{ \alpha , (i, \alpha )}$. Take a gqod $\beta$ with $\beta \subset_j \alpha$, then we have $\beta <^{\mathsf{q}}_j (i,\alpha )$ because $\beta \subset_j (i, \alpha )$ holds.
Next, we verify that $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{j'} (i, \alpha )$ holds for any minimal element $j'$ of $\sid{j}{ \alpha ,(i,\alpha ) }$. If either $k = i$ or $k < i$ holds, we immediately have $j' \leq i$ because $j' \leq k$ or $j' \leq i$ holds. Then, $\alpha <^{\mathsf{q}}_{j'} (i, \alpha )$ holds by IH of subinduction. Suppose that $i < k$ holds. Because $(i, \alpha) \in \lt{I,A}$ holds, either $j' = i$, $j' < i$ or $i < j'$ holds, but we cannot have $i < j'$ otherwise $j'$ would be a non-minimal element of $\sid{j}{ \alpha ,(i,\alpha ) }$. Therefore, we have $j' \leq i$ and $\alpha <^{\mathsf{q}}_{j'} (i, \alpha )$ by IH of subinduction.
Finally, we show that $(i, \alpha ) \nless^{\mathsf{q}}_j \alpha$ holds. Assume that we have $(i, \alpha ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_j \alpha$ by $\forall$-condition. Then, $(i,\alpha ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{j'} \alpha$ holds for any minimal element $j'$ of $\sid{j}{\alpha , (i, \alpha )}$. This contradicts IH of subinduction. Assume that we have $(i, \alpha ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_j \alpha$ by $\exists$-condition. Then, we have a gqod $\beta$ such that $(i, \alpha) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_j \beta \subset_j \alpha$ holds, but we also have $\beta <^{\mathsf{q}}_j (i, \alpha)$ because $\beta \subset_j (i, \alpha )$ holds. Contradiction.
\end{proof}
\fi
\subsection{Well quasi ordering proof for $(\lt{I,A}, \lll^= )$ via Dershowitz and Tzameret's tree embedding theorem}\label{DT}
We first recall Dershowitz-Tzameret's tree embedding with gap condition (cf. \cite[Definition 3.3]{DT2003}).
\begin{defn}[Tree Embedding $\hookrightarrow$]
For any two connected gqod's $\alpha = ((T_1,\leq_1),l_1)$ and
\noindent $\beta = ((T_2,\leq_2),l_2)$, $\alpha \hookrightarrow \beta$ holds if and only if there is an injection $\iota :T_1 \to T_2$ such that
\begin{enumerate}
\item (Node condition 1) for any $a \in T_1$, $l_1 (a) \leq_{I} l_2 (\iota (a) )$ holds,
\item (Node condition 2) for any $a_1,a_2 \in T_1$, $\iota (a_1 \wedge a_2 ) = \iota (a_1) \wedge \iota (a_2)$ holds,
\item (Edge condition) if $a_1$ is an element of $T_1$ with its immediate lower node $a_2$ in $T_1$, then for any $b \in T_2$ with $\iota (a_2) <_2 b <_2 \iota (a_1)$, $l_1 (a_1) \leq_I l_2 (b)$ holds, and
\item (Root condition) if $a$ is the root of $T_1$, then for any $b \in T_2$ with $b <_2 \iota (a)$, $l_1 (a) \leq_I l_2 (b)$ holds.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
\begin{exa}
The following is an example of Dershowitz-Tzameret's tree embedding (cf. \cite[p.87]{DT2003}).
\[
\begin{xy}
(0,5) *=0{\bullet}*+!U{3} ="A1", (5,13) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{1} ="A2", (-5,10) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{7} ="A3", (0,15) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{11} ="A4", (-5,20) *=0{\bullet}*+!RD{2} ="A5",
(40,0) *=0{\bullet}*+!U{5} ="B1", (35,5) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{4} ="B2", (45,5) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{0} ="B3", (30,10) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{9} ="B4", (40,10) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{2} ="B5", (50,10) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{0} ="B6", (37,13) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{0} ="B51", (43,15) *=0{\bullet}*+!L{1} ="B52", (46,13) *=0{\bullet}*+!L{0} ="B53", (40,19) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{3} ="B54", (53,13) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{0} ="B61", (59,13) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{0} ="B62", (26,14) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{7} ="B41", (22,23) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{6} ="B42", (30,21) *=0{\bullet}*+!L{11} ="B43", (27,24) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{0} ="B44",
\ar @{-}"A1";"A2" \ar @{-}"A1";"A3" \ar @{-}"A3";"A4" \ar @{-}"A3";"A5"
\ar @{-}"B1";"B2" \ar @{-}"B1";"B3" \ar @{-}"B2";"B4" \ar @{-}"B2";"B5" \ar @{-}"B3";"B6" \ar @{-}"B5";"B51" \ar @{-}"B5";"B52" \ar @{-}"B5";"B53" \ar @{-}"B52";"B54" \ar @{-}"B6";"B61" \ar @{-}"B6";"B62" \ar @{-}"B4";"B41" \ar @{-}"B41";"B42" \ar @{-}"B41";"B43" \ar @{-}"B43";"B44"
\ar @{.>}"A1";"B2" \ar @{.>}"A2";"B54" \ar @{.>}"A3";"B41" \ar @{.>}"A4";"B43" \ar @{.>}"A5";"B42"
\end{xy}
\]
\end{exa}
\if0
\begin{exa}
Consider $\lt{I^* ,A^*}$, where $I^*$ and $A^*$ were defined in Example \ref{exaone}. The first injection below, which satisfies the node conditions 1 and 2, does \textit{not} show that the left gqod is embedded into the right gqod in Dershowitz-Tzameret's sense, because neither the edge condition nor the root condition is satisfied. By modifying the first example as the second, we obtain an embedding of the left tree into the right tree.
\[
\begin{xy}
(0,0) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{\omega '} ="A1", (-7,7) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{2} ="A2", (7,7) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{3'} ="A3", (-7,14) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{0} ="A4", (7,14) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{0} ="A5",
(35,-7) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{0} ="B0", (35,0) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{\omega '} ="B1", (28,7) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{1} ="B2", (42,7) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{3'} ="B3", (28,14) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{4} ="B4", (42,14) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{0} ="B5", (28,21) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{0} ="B6",
\ar @{-}"A1";"A2" \ar @{-}"A1";"A3" \ar @{-}"A2";"A4" \ar @{-}"A3";"A5"
\ar @{-}"B1";"B2" \ar @{-}"B1";"B3" \ar @{-}"B2";"B4" \ar @{-}"B3";"B5" \ar @{-}"B0";"B1" \ar @{-}"B4";"B6"
\ar @/^/@{.>}"A1";"B1" \ar @/^/@{.>}"A2";"B4" \ar @/^/@{.>}"A3";"B3" \ar @/^/@{.>}"A4";"B6" \ar @/^/@{.>}"A5";"B5"
\end{xy}
\qquad\qquad
\begin{xy}
(0,0) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{\omega '} ="A1", (-7,7) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{2} ="A2", (7,7) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{3'} ="A3", (-7,14) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{0} ="A4", (7,14) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{0} ="A5",
(35,-7) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{\omega '} ="B0", (35,0) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{\omega '} ="B1", (28,7) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{3} ="B2", (42,7) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{3'} ="B3", (28,14) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{4} ="B4", (42,14) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{0} ="B5", (28,21) *+[Fo:<2.5mm>]{0} ="B6",
\ar @{-}"A1";"A2" \ar @{-}"A1";"A3" \ar @{-}"A2";"A4" \ar @{-}"A3";"A5"
\ar @{-}"B1";"B2" \ar @{-}"B1";"B3" \ar @{-}"B2";"B4" \ar @{-}"B3";"B5" \ar @{-}"B0";"B1" \ar @{-}"B4";"B6"
\ar @/^/@{.>}"A1";"B1" \ar @/^/@{.>}"A2";"B4" \ar @/^/@{.>}"A3";"B3" \ar @/^/@{.>}"A4";"B6" \ar @/^/@{.>}"A5";"B5"
\end{xy}
\]
\end{exa}
\fi
\begin{thm}[Theorem 3.1 in \cite{DT2003}]\label{dt}
Let $\mathsf{GQ}^{ctd}(I,A)$ be the set of all connected gqod's from $\lt{I,A}$. Then, $(\mathsf{GQ}^{ctd}(I,A), \hookrightarrow)$ is a well quasi ordering.
\end{thm}
Next, we extend this tree embedding to forests, namely, unconnected gqod's and show that $\alpha \lll^= \beta$ holds whenever $\alpha$ is embedded into $\beta$ in the sense of this forest embedding.
\begin{defn}[Forest Embedding $\hookrightarrow^{\#}$]
For any two terms $\alpha$ and $\beta$ of $\lt{I,A}$ with $\alpha \equiv \alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_n$ and $\beta \equiv \beta_1 \# \cdots \# \beta_m$ ($n ,m >0$), $\alpha \hookrightarrow^{\#} \beta$ holds if and only if $n \leq m$ and there is a permutation $p$ of $\{ 1,\ldots , n\}$ such that $\alpha_i \hookrightarrow \beta_{p(i)}$ for any $i$ with $1 \leq i \leq n$.
\end{defn}
\begin{prop}\label{embed}
For every $\alpha ,\beta \in \lt{I,A}$, if $\alpha \hookrightarrow^{\#} \beta$ holds, then $\alpha \lll^= \beta$ holds.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{cpr}, one can prove the following sublemma (1) and (2). For every $\alpha ,\beta \in \lt{I,A}$ and every $i,j \in I$ with $i \leq j$, (1) if $\beta$ is connected and $(i,\alpha ) \lll^= \beta$ holds, then $(i,\alpha ) \lll (j ,\beta)$ holds, and (2) if $\beta \equiv \beta_1 \# \cdots \# \beta_n \; (n>1)$ and for some $m \; (1 \leq m \leq n)$, $(i,\alpha ) \lll^= \beta_m$ hold, then $(i,\alpha ) \lll (j, \beta) $ holds.
\if0
\textbf{Proof of Sublemmas 1 and 2.}
Sublemma 1 implies Sublemma 2 because $(j,\beta_m ) \lll (j,\beta )$ holds, so we verify Sublemma 1 only. When $k = \infty$ holds or both $k \in I$ and $k \not\leq j$ hold, we easily have $(i,\alpha ) <^{\mathsf{q}}_{k} (j,\beta )$.
Suppose that $k \in I$ and $k \leq j$ hold. If $(i,\alpha ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{k} \beta$ holds by $\exists$-condition, then there is a gqod $\delta$ such that $\delta \subset_k \beta$ and $(i,\alpha ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_k \delta$ hold. Thus, $(i,\alpha ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_k (j,\beta )$ holds because $\delta$ is also a $k$-section of $(j,\beta )$. Next, suppose that $(i,\alpha ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{k} \beta$ holds by $\forall$-condition. For a given $\gamma \subset_k (i, \alpha )$, we have $\gamma <^{\mathsf{q}}_{k} (j,\beta )$ because $\beta <^{\mathsf{q}}_{k} (j,\beta )$ holds by Lemma \ref{cpr}. If $\sid{k}{(i,\alpha ) , (j,\beta )} = \emptyset$ holds, then we are done. Otherwise, consider a minimal element $h$ of $\sid{k}{(i,\alpha ) , (j,\beta )}$.
First, suppose that $h$ is an index of $(i,\alpha )$. In this case, $h$ is also a minimal element of $\sid{k}{(i,\alpha ) , \beta}$. Otherwise, there would be an index $h'$ of $\beta$ such that $h' < h$ and $k < h'$ hold. Then, we have $h' \leq i \leq j$, so $h'$ is also an index of $(j, \beta)$. This contradicts the minimality of $h$. Therefore, we have $(i, \alpha) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_h \beta <^{\mathsf{q}}_h (j ,\beta )$.
Next, suppose that $h$ is an index of $(j,\beta )$. If $h = j$ holds, then both $\beta \subset_h (j, \beta)$ and $(i,\alpha ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_h \beta$ hold, so we have $(i,\alpha ) <^{\mathsf{q}}_h (j,\beta )$ by definition. If $h < j$ holds, then $h$ is an index of $\beta$ and $h$ is a minimal element of $\sid{k}{(i,\alpha ) , \beta}$. We have $(i, \alpha ) <^{\mathsf{q}}_h (j ,\beta )$ by an argument similar to the case above.
\fi
We prove Proposition \ref{embed} by induction on $l (\alpha ) $. The base case is obvious. If $\alpha$ is unconnected, then the proposition immediately follows from IH. Suppose that $\alpha \equiv (i_1, \alpha ')$ holds. By the definition of $\hookrightarrow^{\#}$, it suffices to prove the proposition when $\beta$ is a connected gqod $(i_2 ,\beta ')$. In this case, the proposition follows from the following two claims: For any $i \in I$ and any $\delta \subset_i \alpha$, $\delta <^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ holds, and $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} \beta$ holds.
First, we show that for any $i \in I$ and any $\delta \subset_i \alpha$, $\delta <^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ holds. Consider a gqod $\delta$ with $\delta \subset_i \alpha$ and put $\delta \equiv \delta_1 \# \cdots \# \delta_n \; (n\geq 1)$. We show that $\delta_k <^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ for any $k$ with $1 \leq k \leq n$. If $\delta_k \in A$ holds then $\delta_k <^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ obviously holds, so we assume that $\delta_k$ is of the form $(i_k , \delta_k ')$. Let us denote this outermost occurrence of $i_k$ in $\delta_k$ by $i_k^*$. Suppose that the embedding $\alpha \hookrightarrow^{\#} \beta$ maps $i_k^*$ to the outermost occurrence of $j_k$ in a sub-gqod $(j_k , \beta_k)$ of $\beta$. We denote this outermost occurrence of $j_k$ in $(j_k , \beta_k)$ by $j_k^*$. Since $\delta_k \hookrightarrow^{\#} (j_k , \beta_k)$ holds, we have by IH $\delta_k \lll^= (j_k , \beta_k )$ for any $k$. On the other hand, $\alpha$ has a sub-gqod $(i, \delta )$ because $\delta \subset_i \alpha$ holds. Denote this occurrence of $i$ in $\alpha$ by $i^*$ and suppose that the embedding $\alpha \hookrightarrow^{\#} \beta$ maps $i^*$ to the outermost occurrence $j^*$ of $j$ in a sub-gqod $(j, \gamma_1 \# \cdots \# \gamma_m)$ of $\beta$ ($m \geq 1$), as the following figure.
\[
\begin{xy}
(-15, 0) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{i^*} ="A",
(-23, 5) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{i^*_1} ="A1", (-30, 12) ="A11", (-23, 9) *{\delta_1 '} ="A12", (-16, 12) ="A13",
(-15, 5) *{\cdots} ="A2",
(-7, 5) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{i^*_n} ="A3", (-14, 12) ="A31", (-7, 9) *{\delta_n '} ="A32", (0, 12) ="A33",
(30, 0) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{j^*} ="B", (0, 20) ="B1", (60, 20) ="B3",
(22, 13) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{j_1^*} ="C1", (15, 20) ="C11", (29, 20) ="C12", (22, 17) *{\beta_1} ="C13",
(25, 7) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{h} ="C2",
(30, 15) *{\cdots} ="CD",
(38, 13) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{j_n^*} ="D1", (31, 20) ="D11", (45, 20) ="D12", (38, 17) *{\beta_n} ="D13",
\ar@{-} "A";"A1" \ar@{-} "A";"A3"
\ar@{-} "A1";"A11" \ar@{-} "A1";"A13" \ar@{-} "A11";"A13"
\ar@{-} "A3";"A31" \ar@{-} "A3";"A33" \ar@{-} "A31";"A33"
\ar@{-} "B";"B1" \ar@{-} "B";"B3" \ar@{-} "B1";"B3"
\ar@{-} "C1";"C11" \ar@{-} "C1";"C12" \ar@{-} "C1";"C2"
\ar@{-} "D1";"D11" \ar@{-} "D1";"D12"
\ar@{.>} "A";"B" \ar@{.>} "A1";"C1" \ar@{.>} "A3";"D1"
\end{xy}
\]
Because of the gap condition of $\hookrightarrow^{\#}$, we have $\delta_k \lll \gamma_1 \# \cdots \# \gamma_m$ for any $k$ by using sublemmas (1) and (2) above repeatedly. For example, if $(j_1^* ,\beta_1)$ is subsumed by $(h, \eta_1 \# (j_1^* ,\beta_1) \# \eta_2 )$ and $h \neq j^*$, then $h \geq i_1$ holds by the gap condition. Therefore, we have $\delta_1 \lll (h, \eta_1 \# (j_1^* ,\beta_1) \# \eta_2 )$ by the sublemma (2). By repeating this argument, we have $\delta_k \lll \gamma_l$ for some $l$ with $1 \leq l \leq m$. Since $\gamma_1 \# \cdots \# \gamma_m <^{\mathsf{q}}_i (j,\gamma_1 \# \cdots \# \gamma_m)$ by Lemma \ref{cpr}, $\delta_k <^{\mathsf{q}}_i (j,\gamma_1 \# \cdots \# \gamma_m)$ holds for any $k$. Therefore, $\delta <^{\mathsf{q}}_i (j,\gamma_1 \# \cdots \# \gamma_m)$ holds. Note that $i \leq h$ holds for any $h$ occurring in the path from $j^*$ to the root of $\beta$ because of the gap condition and the fact that $\delta$ is an $i$-section of $\alpha$. Therefore, by Lemma \ref{cpr}, we have $\delta <^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$.
By an argument similar to the one above, one can verify that $\alpha \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} \beta$ holds.
\end{proof}
\begin{thm}\label{wqohra}
The system $(\lt{I,A}, \hookrightarrow^{\#})$ is a well quasi ordering.
\end{thm}
\begin{proof}
Let $\{ \alpha_i \}$ and $\{ \beta_i \}$ be infinite sequences of gqod's. We say $\{ \alpha_i \}$ is a \textit{component subsequence} of $\{ \beta_i \}$ if and only if there is a monotone function $f: \mathbb{N} \to \mathbb{N}$ such that for any $i \in \mathbb{N}$, $\alpha_i$ is a component of $\beta_{f(i)}$. In addition, an infinite sequence $\{ a_i \}$ from a quasi ordering $(A, \leq)$ is $\leq$-\textit{bad} if and only if there is no pair $i,j$ of natural numbers such that both $i < j$ and $a_i \leq a_j$ hold.
In a way similar to the proof of \cite[Lemma 17]{OT1987}, one can prove the following claim. Let $\{ \alpha_i \}$ be an infinite sequence from $\lt{I,A}$. If there is no $\hookrightarrow$-bad component subsequence $\{ \beta_i \}$ of $\{ \alpha_i \}$, then $\{ \alpha_i \}$ is $\hookrightarrow^{\#}$-good, that is, $\{ \alpha_i \}$ is not $\hookrightarrow^{\#}$-bad.
By this claim and Theorem \ref{dt}, we have the theorem.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor}
The system $(\lt{I,A} , \lll^{=} )$ is a well quasi ordering.
\end{cor}
\section{Discussion of generalized quasi ordinal diagram systems from the viewpoint of termination proof methods}\label{game}
In this section, we apply the well quasi orderedness of $(\lt{I,A}, \lll^=)$ to termination proof methods for second-order pattern-matching-based rewriting systems. First, we propose a termination proof method induced by the monotonicity property and a restricted substitution property of $(\lt{I,A}, \lll^=)$ (\S \ref{app}). Next, we consider Buchholz-style hydra game as an example (cf. \cite{buchholz1987,HO1998}), and show the termination of a rewriting system in this game by another termination proof method in terms of $(\lt{I,A}, \lll^=)$ (\S \ref{buch}).
\subsection{Application of $(\lt{I,A}, \lll^{=})$ to the termination proof method}\label{app}
Let $V$ be a finite set of variables. In this and next subsections, we consider an arbitrary system $\lt{I,A}$ satisfying the following conditions: (1) $A = V \cup \{ \rho \}$ holds, and neither $x \leq_A y$ nor $y \leq_A x$ holds for any $x,y \in V$, and $\rho$ is the $\leq_A$-minimum element of $A$, and (2) $\rho \in I$ and $I \cap V = \emptyset$ hold, and $\rho <_I x <_I i$ holds for any $x \in V$ and any $i \in I \setminus \{ \rho \}$.
We denote the set of all contexts from $\lt{I,A}$ by $\mathcal{C}$.
A \textit{numeral substitution} $\sigma$ for a gqod $\alpha$ is a substitution assigning a numeral term to each variable in $\alpha$, where a \textit{numeral term} is a connected gqod that consists of $\rho$'s only. Note that the numeral terms are generalization of the numerals represented by no $\#$-branching trees $\rho - \rho - \cdots - \rho$; the numeral terms correspond to the ordinals up to $\varepsilon_0$.
As we will see below, the system $(\lt{I,A}, \lll^{=})$ satisfies not only the monotonicity property (Lemma \ref{mono}) but also the following restricted substitution property (Lemma \ref{num}): For any \textit{connected} terms $\alpha$ and $\beta$ of $\lt{I,A}$ with $\alpha ,\beta \not\in A$, if $\alpha \lll \beta$ holds then $\alpha\sigma \lll \beta\sigma$ holds for any \textit{numeral} substitution $\sigma$. Therefore, if $l \ggg r$ holds for any rule $l \rhd r$ of a rewriting system $R$, then we immediately obtain the termination of the $R$-rewrite relation $\to$ defined as follows: $\alpha \to \beta$ holds if and only if $\alpha \equiv (i, u[ l ])\sigma$ and $\beta \equiv (i, u[ r ])\sigma$ for some context $u[\ast ]$ and some numeral substitution $\sigma$
\begin{lem}[The monotonicity property lemma]\label{mono}
Let $\alpha$ and $\beta$ be gqod's with $u[\alpha ] \in \lt{I,A}$ and $u[\beta ] \in \lt{I,A}$. If $\alpha \lll \beta$ holds, then $u[ \alpha ] \lll u[ \beta ]$ holds.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We easily obtain $\gamma_1 \# \cdots \# \gamma_k \# \alpha \# \gamma_{k+1} \# \cdots \# \gamma_n \lll \gamma_1 \# \cdots \# \gamma_k \# \beta \# \gamma_{k+1} \# \cdots \# \gamma_n$ if $\alpha \lll \beta$ holds. Therefore, it suffices to show that for any two gqod's $\alpha$ and $\beta$ with $(i,\alpha ) \in \lt{I,A}$ and $(i,\beta ) \in \lt{I,A}$, if $\alpha \lll \beta$ holds then $(i,\alpha ) \lll (i, \beta )$ holds.
Assume that $\alpha \lll \beta$ holds, then it is obvious that $(i,\alpha ) <^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} (i,\beta )$ holds.
We show that $(i,\alpha ) <^{\mathsf{q}}_j (i,\beta )$ holds for any $j$ with $j \not\leq i$. In this case, neither $(i,\alpha )$ nor $(i, \beta )$ has a $j'$-section for any $j'$ with $j' \geq j$, so $(i, \alpha ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_j (i,\beta )$ holds by $\forall$-condition, since we already have $(i,\alpha ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} (i,\beta )$. In the present case, it is easy to verify that $(i,\beta ) \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{j} (i,\alpha )$ holds.
Finally, we show that $(i,\alpha ) <^{\mathsf{q}}_j (i,\beta )$ holds for any $j$ with $j \leq i$ by induction on $\# \sid{j}{(i,\alpha ), (i,\beta )}$. Consider the base case, where $\# \sid{j}{(i,\alpha ), (i,\beta )} =0$ holds, that is, $j = i$ holds. In the base case, we have $(i,\alpha ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i (i,\beta )$ by $\forall$-condition, since $(i,\alpha ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} (i,\beta )$ holds and for any $\gamma \subset_i (i,\alpha )$, $\gamma \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha <^{\mathsf{q}}_{i} \beta <^{\mathsf{q}}_i (i, \beta )$ holds. Suppose that $(i,\beta ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i (i,\alpha )$ holds. If $(i,\beta ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i (i,\alpha )$ holds by $\exists$-condition, there is a gqod $\gamma \subset_i (i,\alpha )$ such that $(i,\beta ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \gamma \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha$ holds. Then, we have $\beta <^{\mathsf{q}}_i \alpha$, contradiction. We have a contradiction as well, if $(i,\beta ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_i (i,\alpha )$ holds by $\forall$-condition. Therefore, $(i,\beta ) \not\leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{i} (i,\alpha )$ holds.
Consider the induction step. In a way similar to the base case, we have $\gamma <^{\mathsf{q}}_j (i,\beta )$ for any $\gamma \subset_j (i, \alpha )$. Note that we have $\beta <^{\mathsf{q}}_j (i, \beta)$ by Lemma \ref{cpr} because $(i,\beta) \in \lt{I,A}$ holds. Let $j'$ be a minimal element of $\sid{j}{(i,\alpha ),(i,\beta )}$. Since $j'$ is an index of $(i,\alpha )$ or $(i,\beta )$, $j' \leq i$ holds. By IH, we have $(i,\alpha ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_{j'} (i,\beta )$. If $(i,\beta ) \leq^{\mathsf{q}}_j (i,\alpha )$ holds then we obtain a contradiction, so $(i,\alpha ) <^{\mathsf{q}}_j (i,\beta )$ holds.
\end{proof}
As stated above, we have the following restricted substitution property. Note that we cannot have the full substitution property of $(\lt{I,A}, \lll^=)$ because there is a counterexample. Take a substitution $\sigma$ assigning $(\rho ,\rho)$ to $x$. Then, we have both $x \# x \lll (\rho ,\rho ) \# x$ and $(x \# x)\sigma \not\lll ((\rho ,\rho ) \# x)\sigma$.
\begin{lem}[The numeral substitution property lemma]\label{num}
For any connected gqod's $\alpha$ and $\beta$ of $\lt{I,A}$ with $\alpha ,\beta \not\in A$, if $\alpha \lll \beta$ holds then $\alpha\sigma \lll \beta\sigma$ holds for any numeral substitution $\sigma$.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
Verify the following by double induction on $\langle l (\alpha ,\beta ) , \# \sid{i}{\alpha ,\beta}\rangle$: For any $i \in \tilde{I}$, any connected terms $\alpha$ and $\beta$ with $\alpha ,\beta \not\in A$, if $\alpha <^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta$ holds then $\alpha\sigma <^{\mathsf{q}}_i \beta\sigma$ holds for any numeral substitution $\sigma$.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}
Let $l \rhd r$ be an arbitrary rule of a rewriting system $R$. For any $i \in I$ and any context $u[\ast]$, if both of $(i, u[l])$ and $(i, u[r])$ are terms of $\lt{I,A}$ and $l \ggg r$ holds, then $(i, u[l])\sigma \ggg (i, u[r])\sigma$ holds for any numeral substitution $\sigma$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{mono} and Lemma \ref{num}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{A case study with the rewrite system of Buchholz-style hydra game}\label{buch}
Below we study the termination proof of a rewrite system version of Buchholz-style hydra game, by using our generalized quasi ordinal diagram systems.
Instead of the general method for termination proofs proposed in the last subsection, we use the method relative to a given rewriting system.
The set $\mathcal{C}_i$ of contexts for any $i \in I$ is defined as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\ast$ is a connected term of $\mathcal{C}_i$
\item if $u_i [ \ast ]$ is a connected term of $\mathcal{C}_i$ and $\alpha_1 ,\ldots ,\alpha_n ,\beta_1 ,\ldots ,\beta_m$ are connected gqod's in $\lt{I,A}$, then $u_i' [\ast] \equiv \alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_n \# u_i [\ast] \# \beta_1 \# \cdots \# \beta_m$ is an unconnected term of $\mathcal{C}_i$
\item if $u_i [\ast]$ is a term of $\mathcal{C}_i$ and $(j , u_i[\rho ]) \in \lt{I,A}$ holds with $j \geq i$, then $(j ,u_i [\ast] )$ is a connected term of $\mathcal{C}_i$
\end{enumerate}
Note that $u[ \alpha ]$ and $u_i [\alpha ]$ may not be path comparable trees even if $u[ \ast ]$, $u_i [\ast ]$ and $\alpha$ are.
An element $i$ of $I$ is a \textit{successor} if the set of all $I$-elements smaller than $i$ has a maximal element. An element $\lambda$ of $I$ is a \textit{limit element} if the set of all $I$-elements smaller than $\lambda$ is non-empty and does not have a maximal element.
To formulate Buchholz-style hydra game, we define the notion of \textit{segments}
\begin{defn}[Segments]
For any connected gqod $\alpha$ in $\lt{I,A}$ and any finite subset $J$ of $I$, the \textit{segment} $\alpha \upharpoonright J$ of $\alpha$ on $J$ is defined as follows: If $J$ is empty, $\alpha \upharpoonright J := \alpha$. Assume that $J$ is not empty.
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\alpha \in A$ holds, then $\alpha \upharpoonright J := \alpha$.
\item Suppose that $\alpha$ is of the form $(i, \alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_n )$ with $\alpha_1 , \cdots , \alpha_n$ connected. If there is an element of $J$ that is not comparable with $i$ then $\alpha \upharpoonright J := \rho$, otherwise $\alpha \upharpoonright J := (i, \alpha_1 \upharpoonright J \# \cdots \# \alpha_n \upharpoonright J )$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
For any $n \in \mathbb{N}$, let $\alpha \cdot (n+1)$ be $\underbrace{\alpha \# \cdots \# \alpha}_{\text{$n+1$ times}}$. We define $I \upharpoonright i := \{ j \in I \mid j < i \}$. A \textit{substitution} $\sigma$ is a mapping from $V$ to $\lt{I,A}$.
\begin{defn}[\textbf{Buchholz-style hydra game rules}]
Buchholz-style hydra game rules on $\lt{I,A}$ are the following rules (1), (1)', (2) and (3):
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(1)] $( i, \alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_n \# (\rho ,\rho) \# \beta_1 \# \cdots \# \beta_m ) \rhd ( (i, \alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_n \# \beta_1 \# \cdots \# \beta_m ) \cdot ( k+1 ) ) \# \rho \cdot 2 $, where $k$ is an arbitrarily chosen natural number and $n+m >0$ holds.
\item[(1)'] $( i, (\rho ,\rho) \bigr) \rhd \bigl( (i, \rho ) \cdot (k+1) ) \# \rho $, where $k$ is an arbitrarily chosen natural number.
\item[(2)] $( j , \alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_n \# u_i [ (i ,a) ] \# \beta_1 \# \cdots \# \beta_m ) \rhd \Biggl( j, \alpha_1 \# \cdots \# \alpha_n \# u_i \biggl[ \Bigl( i^- , u_i [ (\rho ,a) ] \Bigr) \upharpoonright J \biggr] \# \beta_1 \# \cdots \# \beta_m \Biggr) \# \rho$,
where $a \in A$ and $j < i$ hold, $i$ is a successor, $i^-$ is an arbitrarily chosen maximal element of $I \upharpoonright i$, $u_i [\ast ]$ is a connected term of $\mathcal{C}_i$ and $J := \emptyset$ if $u_i [\ast ] = \ast$, otherwise
\begin{center}
$ J := \{ j , i^- \} \cup \{ h \in I \mid \text{$h$ is a label occurring in the path between $\ast$ and the root of $u_i[\ast]$}\}$.
\end{center}
\item[(3)] $(\lambda ,a) \rhd (i ,a ) \# \rho $, where $\lambda$ is a limit element and $i$ is an arbitrarily chosen element of $I \upharpoonright \lambda$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{defn}
\begin{rem}\label{seg}
Let us comment on the definition above.
\begin{itemize}
\item Choices in each of the rules are, intuitively, made by hydras after Heracles's attacks.
\item By restricting the initial states of hydras to the form $(\rho , \alpha_1 ) \# \cdots \# (\rho , \alpha_n)$, one can guarantee that at least one rule applies to the initial hydras of the games. Moreover, if rewriting in these games terminates, then the final hydra is a forest of numeral terms that have at most the depth $2$.
\item The reason we attached one or two $\rho$'s to the right gqod's of the rules above is that we indicate by the number of the occurrences of $\rho$'s at leaves how many times at most we applied the rules.
\item We take the segment $\Bigl( i^- , u_i [ (\rho ,a) ] \Bigr) \upharpoonright J$ at RHS in the rule (2) to make sure that the right gqod in the rule (2) belongs to $\lt{I,A}$, since $u_i \Bigl[ \Bigl( i^- , u_i [ (\rho ,a) ] \Bigr) \Bigr]$ is not always a path comparable tree.
\item Our hydras have labels from the well partial ordering $I$, while Buchholz's original hydras (\cite{buchholz1987}) have labels from $\mathbb{N} \cup \{ \omega \}$. Moreover, our rule (3) is more liberal than Buchholz's corresponding rule. On the other hand, the duplication in the rule (2) of our hydra game is more restricted than the one in Buchholz's corresponding rule. Because of this restriction, we have Lemma \ref{sub} below.
\end{itemize}
\end{rem}
\begin{defn}[Rewrite relation for Buchholz-style hydra game]
For any two terms $\alpha$ and $\beta$ of $\lt{I,A}$, $\alpha \to \beta$ holds if and only if $\alpha \equiv u[l \sigma]$ and $\beta \equiv u[r \sigma]$ hold for some context $u[\ast]$, some substitution $\sigma$ and some $l ,r \in \lt{I,A}$ with $l \rhd r$.
\end{defn}
\begin{exa}
Consider $\lt{I ,V \cup \{ 0\}}$ with $I$ defined in Example \ref{exazero}. Then, a play runs as follows.
\[
\begin{xy}
(0, 0) *=0{\bullet}*+!U{0} ="A", (-4, 4) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{\omega '} ="A0",
(-8, 8) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{1} ="A00", (0, 8) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{1'} ="A01",
(-8, 12) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{x} ="A000", (0, 12) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{0} ="A010",
(15, 10) *{\to_{(2),\; i= 1'}},
\ar@{-} "A";"A0" \ar@{-} "A0";"A00" \ar@{-} "A0";"A01" \ar@{-} "A00";"A000" \ar@{-} "A01";"A010"
\end{xy}
\begin{xy}
(4, 0) *=0{\bullet}*+!U{0} ="B",
(0, 0) *=0{\bullet}*+!U{0} ="A", (-4, 4) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{\omega '} ="A0",
(-8, 8) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{1} ="A00", (-8, 12) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{x} ="A000",
(0, 8) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{0} ="A01", (4, 12) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{\omega '} ="A010",
(0, 16) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{1} ="A0100", (0, 20) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{x} ="A01000",
(8, 16) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{0} ="A0101", (8, 20) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{0} ="A01010",
(20, 10) *{\to_{(1),\; k = 2}},
\ar@{-} "A";"A0" \ar@{-} "A0";"A00" \ar@{-} "A0";"A01" \ar@{-} "A00";"A000"
\ar@{-} "A01";"A010" \ar@{-} "A010";"A0100" \ar@{-} "A0100";"A01000"
\ar@{-} "A010";"A0101" \ar@{-} "A0101";"A01010"
\end{xy}
\begin{xy}
(4, 0) *=0{\bullet}*+!U{0} ="B",
(0, 0) *=0{\bullet}*+!U{0} ="A", (-4, 4) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{\omega '} ="A0",
(-8, 8) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{1} ="A00", (-8, 12) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{x} ="A000",
(0, 8) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{0} ="A01",
(-8, 20) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{\omega '} ="A010", (-11, 25) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{1} ="A0100", (-11, 29) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{x} ="A01000",
(2, 20) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{\omega '} ="A011", (-1, 25) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{1} ="A0110", (-1, 29) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{x} ="A01100",
(12, 20) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{\omega '} ="A012", (9, 25) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{1} ="A0120", (9, 29) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{x} ="A01200",
(15, 10) *=0{\bullet}*+!L{0} ="A013", (12, 12) *=0{\bullet}*+!L{0} ="A014",
(25, 10) *{\to_{(3)}}
\ar@{-} "A";"A0" \ar@{-} "A0";"A00" \ar@{-} "A0";"A01" \ar@{-} "A00";"A000"
\ar@{-} "A01";"A010" \ar@{-} "A010";"A0100" \ar@{-} "A0100";"A01000"
\ar@{-} "A01";"A011" \ar@{-} "A011";"A0110" \ar@{-} "A0110";"A01100"
\ar@{-} "A01";"A012" \ar@{-} "A012";"A0120" \ar@{-} "A0120";"A01200"
\ar@{-} "A01";"A013" \ar@{-} "A01";"A014"
\end{xy}
\begin{xy}
(4, 0) *=0{\bullet}*+!U{0} ="B",
(0, 0) *=0{\bullet}*+!U{0} ="A", (-4, 4) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{5} ="A0", (6, 6) *=0{\bullet}*+!L{0} ="A1",
(-8, 8) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{1} ="A00", (-8, 12) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{x} ="A000",
(0, 8) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{0} ="A01",
(-8, 20) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{\omega '} ="A010", (-11, 25) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{1} ="A0100", (-11, 29) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{x} ="A01000",
(2, 20) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{\omega '} ="A011", (-1, 25) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{1} ="A0110", (-1, 29) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{x} ="A01100",
(12, 20) *=0{\bullet}*+!LU{\omega '} ="A012", (9, 25) *=0{\bullet}*+!RU{1} ="A0120", (9, 29) *=0{\bullet}*+!D{x} ="A01200",
(15, 10) *=0{\bullet}*+!L{0} ="A013", (12, 12) *=0{\bullet}*+!L{0} ="A014",
\ar@{-} "A";"A0" \ar@{-} "A";"A1" \ar@{-} "A0";"A00" \ar@{-} "A0";"A01" \ar@{-} "A00";"A000"
\ar@{-} "A01";"A010" \ar@{-} "A010";"A0100" \ar@{-} "A0100";"A01000"
\ar@{-} "A01";"A011" \ar@{-} "A011";"A0110" \ar@{-} "A0110";"A01100"
\ar@{-} "A01";"A012" \ar@{-} "A012";"A0120" \ar@{-} "A0120";"A01200"
\ar@{-} "A01";"A013" \ar@{-} "A01";"A014"
\end{xy}
\]
\end{exa}
The termination proof method in this subsection consists in the following substitution property.
\begin{lem}[The relative substitution property lemma]\label{sub}
For any substitution $\sigma$ and any two gqod's $l$ and $r$, if both of $l\sigma$ and $r\sigma$ belong to $\lt{I,A}$ and $l \rhd r$ holds, then $l\sigma \ggg r\sigma$ holds.
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We consider the rule (2) only, since the cases of the other rules are obvious. For any substitution $\sigma$ satisfying the conditions of the lemma, we show
\begin{center}
$( j , \vec{\alpha \sigma} \# u_i \sigma [ (i ,a\sigma) ] \# \vec{\beta \sigma} \rhd \Bigl( j, \vec{\alpha \sigma} \# u_i \sigma \Bigl[ \Bigl( \bigl( i^- , u_i [ (\rho ,a) ] \bigr) \upharpoonright J \Bigr) \sigma \Bigr] \# \vec{\beta \sigma} \Bigr) \# \rho $,
\end{center}
where we abbreviate $\alpha_1\sigma \# \cdots \# \alpha_n\sigma$ and $\beta_1\sigma \# \cdots \# \beta_m\sigma$ as $\vec{\alpha\sigma}$ and $\vec{\beta\sigma}$, respectively. We verify the claim above by proving the following two sublemmas. The lemma follows from these sublemmas by the monotonicity. Note that one easily obtains $(\alpha \upharpoonright J )\sigma \lll^= \alpha\sigma$ by induction on $l(\alpha)$.
\\[10pt]
\textbf{Sublemma 1.}
$u_i\sigma \Bigl[ \Bigl( \bigl( i^- , u_i [ (\rho ,a) ] \bigr) \upharpoonright J \Bigr) \sigma \Bigr] <^{\mathsf{q}}_h u_i \sigma [(i ,a\sigma )]$ holds for any $h$ with $h \not\leq i^-$ or $h = \infty$.
By induction on the built-up of $u_i\sigma [\ast ]$. If $u_i\sigma [\ast ]$ is $\ast$, then one can prove this sublemma by subinduction on $\#\sid{h}{ ( ( i^- , u_i [ (\rho ,a) ] ) \upharpoonright J ) \sigma , (i ,a\sigma )}$.
Suppose that $u_i\sigma [\ast ]$ is $(k, \gamma_1 \# \cdots \# \gamma_l \# u_i '[ \ast ] \# \delta_1 \# \cdots \# \delta_{l'})$ with $u_i '[\ast ]$ connected. We abbreviate $\gamma_1 \# \cdots \# \gamma_l$ and $\delta_1 \# \cdots \# \delta_{l'}$ as $\vec{\gamma}$ and $\vec{\delta}$, respectively. In addition, we set
\begin{center}
$\alpha :\equiv (k, \vec{\gamma} \# u_i ' \Bigl[ \Bigl( \bigl( i^- , u_i [ (\rho ,a) ] \bigr) \upharpoonright J \Bigr) \sigma \Bigr] \# \vec{\delta} ),\quad \beta :\equiv (k, \vec{\gamma} \# u_i ' [ (i, a\sigma )] \# \vec{\delta} )$.
\end{center}
By IH, we have $u_i ' \Bigl[ \Bigl( \bigl( i^- , u_i [ (\rho ,a) ] \bigr) \upharpoonright J \Bigr) \sigma \Bigr] <^{\mathsf{q}}_h u_i ' [(i ,a\sigma )]$ for any $h \not\leq i^-$. Therefore, we in particular have $u_i ' \Bigl[ \Bigl( \bigl( i^- , u_i [ (\rho ,a) ] \bigr) \upharpoonright J \Bigr) \sigma \Bigr] <^{\mathsf{q}}_k u_i ' [(i ,a\sigma )]$, so $\alpha <^{\mathsf{q}}_{\infty} \beta$ holds. Then, it follows that $\alpha <^{\mathsf{q}}_{h} \beta$ holds for any $h \not\leq i^-$ with $h \not\leq k$. Since $\alpha ' <^{\mathsf{q}}_k \beta$ holds for any $\alpha ' \subset_k \alpha$, we also have $\alpha <^{\mathsf{q}}_k \beta$ by $\forall$-condition. Finally, consider $h \in I$ with $h \not\leq i^-$ and $h < k$. Then, for any $\alpha ' \subset_h \alpha$, we have $\alpha ' <^{\mathsf{q}}_h \beta$ also in this case. Then, by subinduction on $\#\sid{h}{\alpha ,\beta}$, it follows that $\alpha <^{\mathsf{q}}_h \beta$ holds.
\\[10pt]
\textbf{Sublemma 2.}
$u_i\sigma \Bigl[ \Bigl( \bigl( i^- , u_i [ (\rho ,a) ] \bigr) \upharpoonright J \Bigr) \sigma \Bigr] <^{\mathsf{q}}_h u_i \sigma [(i ,a\sigma )]$ holds for any $h \leq i^-$.
Take a gqod $\gamma \subset_h u_i\sigma \Bigl[ \Bigl( \bigl( i^- , u_i [ (\rho ,a) ] \bigr) \upharpoonright J \Bigr) \sigma \Bigr]$ with $h \leq i^-$ and consider the key case, where $\gamma \subset_h \Bigl( \bigl( i^- , u_i [ (\rho ,a) ] \bigr) \upharpoonright J \Bigr) \sigma$ holds. Then, there is a gqod $\alpha '$ such that $\gamma \equiv (\alpha ' \upharpoonright J)\sigma$ holds. Since we have
\begin{center}
$(\alpha ' \upharpoonright J)\sigma \lll \alpha ' \sigma \leq_h (u_i [(\rho ,a )] ) \sigma = u_i \sigma [ (\rho ,a\sigma ) ] \lll u_i \sigma [(i ,a\sigma )]$,
\end{center}
$\gamma <^{\mathsf{q}}_h u_i \sigma [(i ,a\sigma )]$ holds. In the other cases, one easily see $\gamma <^{\mathsf{q}}_h u_i \sigma [(i ,a\sigma )]$. We obtain the present sublemma by induction on $\#\sid{h}{ u_i\sigma \Bigl[ \Bigl( \bigl( i^- , u_i [ (\rho ,a) ] \bigr) \upharpoonright J \Bigr) \sigma \Bigr] , u_i \sigma [(i ,a\sigma )] }$ and Sublemma 1.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}[Termination of $\to$]
For any substitution $\sigma$, any context $u[\ast ]$ and any two gqod's $l$ and $r$, if both of $u[ l\sigma ]$ and $u [ r\sigma ]$ belong to $\lt{I,A}$ and $l \rhd r$ holds, then $u[l\sigma ] \ggg u[r\sigma ]$ holds.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{sub} and Lemma \ref{mono}.
\end{proof}
\section{Concluding discussion and future work}
We have generalized Okada-Takeuti's quasi ordinal diagram systems and proved the well quasi orderedness of the generalized systems $(\lt{I,A} , \lll^=)$, using Dershowitz-Tzameret's tree embedding theorem with gap conditions. This gives one example of usefulness of Dershowitz-Tzameret's tree embedding theorem. We also have examined to which extent $(\lt{I,A} , \lll^=)$ can be used for termination proof methods for higher-order rewrite systems, by proposing two termination proof methods. First, it has been shown that $(\lt{I,A} , \lll^=)$ satisfies not only the monotonicity property but also the numeral substitution property, which holds for the substitutions of numeral trees.
Next, we have formulated the termination proof method relative to a given higher-order rewrite system, taking Buchholz-style hydra game as an example.
We conjecture that the order on $\lt{I,A}$ decreases even if Buchholz-style hydra game allows to move a subtree on \textit{several} leave nodes of another subtree at once. This might lead us to investigate an alternative substitution property, rather than the numeral substitution property reported in this paper.
These computational phenomena will be examined in our future work.
We also investigate further how to use our results of generalized quasi ordinal diagram systems for another pattern-matching-based rewrite programming. In addition, we are working on more graphic (non-tree) versions of quasi ordinal diagrams, based on the current results.
\nocite{*}
\bibliographystyle{eptcs}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Jet-production processes make up the most abundant final states
in hadron-hadron collisions, as carried out at the Large Hadron Collider
(LHC). They are of great importance for the determination of the
strong-coupling constant and provide a central ingredient to
precise determinations of parton density functions (PDFs). At the
same time pure-jet final states constitute promising search grounds for
physics beyond the Standard Model, when looking for resonance peaks
or an excess of events in the tails of transverse-momentum-type distributions.
Besides being of high phenomenological relevance, jet-production processes
serve as benchmark for various types of perturbative calculations including
fixed-order evaluations, all-orders resummations and parton-shower simulations.
Already the two-jet production channel features quarks and gluons in the
initial and final states and correspondingly various types of spin- and
color-correlations. Beyond the leading order there arise infrared singularities
both in the virtual and real corrections that need to be properly treated.
Further, sensitivity to the actual jet criterion used to define
the cross section emerges. Beyond perturbation theory, there are important corrections
from the fragmentation of final-state partons into hadrons and beam-remnant
interactions such as multi-parton scatterings.
For hadro-production the next-to-leading order (NLO) QCD corrections are
known to up to five-jet final states~\cite{Ellis:1992en,Giele:1993dj,Nagy:2003tz,Bern:2011ep,Badger:2013yda}.
The computation of the QCD next-to-next-to leading order (NNLO) corrections
to dijet production has recently been completed \cite{Currie:2017eqf}, resulting
in significantly reduced scale uncertainties in the predictions, paving the way
to precision analyses of LHC dijet data. Dedicated studies on the combination of
NLO QCD calculations with parton-shower simulations for dijet production have
been presented in \cite{Alioli:2010xa,Hoche:2012wh}.
To further improve the theoretical accuracy besides QCD also electroweak (EW) corrections
need to be considered. A first evaluation of the leading weak corrections to
dijet production has been presented in \cite{Dittmaier:2012kx}. These included the
tree-level contributions of ${\cal{O}}(\alpha_s\alpha)$ and ${\cal{O}}(\alpha^2)$ and
weak loop corrections of ${\cal{O}}(\alpha_s^2\alpha)$. Only recently the complete
set of NLO corrections, further including QED virtual and real contributions, was
completed \cite{Frederix:2016ost}. While these corrections are rather small for total
cross sections, they can reach $10-20\%$ for jet transverse momenta in the TeV range.
A first evaluation of the full set of NLO corrections, of QCD and EW origin, for the
three-jet inclusive cross section has been quoted in \cite{Frederix:2018nkq}. In this
paper we present results for the fully differential calculation of three-jet production
at the LHC to NLO, including all contributions proportional to $\alpha_s^n\alpha^m$
with $n+m=3$ and $n+m=4$. As a first application we consider the observable $\ensuremath{R_{32}}$,
the ratio of the three-jet and two-jet cross sections, differential in \ensuremath{H_\mathrm{T}^{(2)}}, i.e.
the scalar sum of the two leading-jets transverse momenta.
Our paper in organised as follows, in Sec.~\ref{sec:setup} we present our calculational
methods and specify our input parameters. In Sec.~\ref{sec:results} we present our
results for the full NLO calculation of the three-jet process and the $\ensuremath{R_{32}}$ observable
in particular. We give a summary of our findings in Sec.~\ref{sec:conclusions}.
\section{Setup}
\label{sec:setup}
To obtain the results presented in Sec.\ \ref{sec:results} we use
the \protect\textsc{Sherpa}\xspace Monte-Carlo event generator \cite{Gleisberg:2008ta}
and interface \cite{Biedermann:2017yoi} it to \protect\textsc{Recola}\xspace\footnote{
The public version 1.2 of \protect\textsc{Recola}\xspace is used.
} \cite{Actis:2012qn,Actis:2016mpe}.
Therein, the tree-level matrix elements,
infrared subtractions, process management and phase-space
integration are provided by \protect\textsc{Sherpa}\xspace for all contributions
to all processes using its tree-level matrix-element
generator \protect\textsc{Amegic}\xspace \cite{Krauss:2001iv}.
It also implements the infrared subtraction \cite{Gleisberg:2007md,Schonherr:2017qcj,
Kallweit:2014xda,Kallweit:2015dum,Biedermann:2017yoi,Kallweit:2017khh,
Chiesa:2017gqx,Greiner:2017mft,Gutschow:2018tuk,Schonherr:2018jva}
in the QCD+QED generalisation of the Catani-Seymour scheme
\cite{Catani:1996vz,Dittmaier:1999mb,Catani:2002hc,Dittmaier:2008md},
including the appropriate initial state mass factorisation counter
terms.
\protect\textsc{Recola}\xspace, on the other hand, using the \protect\textsc{Collier}\xspace library \cite{Denner:2016kdg}
for the evaluation of its scalar and tensor integrals, provides the
renormalised virtual corrections.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O30_1} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O21_1} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O12_1} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O03_3} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O30_3} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O21_2} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O12_2} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O03_2} \\
$\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\ensuremath{\alpha_s}^3)$ &
$\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\ensuremath{\alpha_s}^2\alpha)$ &
$\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\ensuremath{\alpha_s}\alpha^2)$ &
$\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\alpha^3)$
\end{tabular}\\
\caption{
Representative leading and subleading tree-level diagrams for
$\mathrm{pp}\to 3j$ production. The occurrence of QCD and
electroweak interferences, internal electroweak bosons and external
photons (wavy lines) in the initial and final state are exemplified.
While QCD vertices are marked by a black dot, EW interactions are
indicated in red.
\label{fig:diagrams-LO}
}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ccccc}
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O40_V_1} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O31_V_2} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O22_V_2} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O13_V_2} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O04_V_1} \\
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O40_V_2} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O31_V_1} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O22_V_1} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O13_V_5} &
\includegraphics[width=0.18\textwidth]{diagrams/3j_O04_V_2} \\
$\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\ensuremath{\alpha_s}^4)$ &
$\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\ensuremath{\alpha_s}^3\alpha)$ &
$\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\ensuremath{\alpha_s}^2\alpha^2)$ &
$\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\ensuremath{\alpha_s}\alpha^3)$ &
$\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\alpha^4)$
\end{tabular}
\caption{
Representative leading and subleading virtual correction diagrams for
$\mathrm{pp}\to 3j$ production. The occurrence of interferences,
QCD and EW loops, gauge boson (wavy line), Higgs boson (dashed line) and
top quark (double line) exchange as well as external photons are exemplified.
While QCD vertices are marked by a black dot, EW interactions are indicated in red.
\label{fig:diagrams-VIRT}
}
\end{figure*}
All calculations are performed in the framework of the Standard Model,
assuming a diagonal CKM matrix, and using the five-flavour scheme,
i.e.\ treating the bottom quark as massless.
The complex mass scheme \cite{Denner:2005fg,Denner:2014zga} is
used to consistently treat intermediate resonances in the
contributing amplitudes.
All electroweak Standard Model parameters are defined in the $\ensuremath{G_\mu}$-scheme,
and virtual amplitudes are renormalised correspondingly.
Consequently, the following set of input parameters is used throughout
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{rclrcl}
$\ensuremath{G_\mu}$ &\ensuremath{\!\!\!\!\!\!=\!\!\!\!\!\!}& $1.16639\times 10^{-5}\; \text{GeV}^{-2}$ &&& \\
$m_W$ &\ensuremath{\!\!\!\!\!\!=\!\!\!\!\!\!}& $80.385\; \text{GeV}$ & $\Gamma_W$ &\ensuremath{\!\!\!\!\!\!=\!\!\!\!\!\!}& $2.085\; \text{GeV}$ \\
$m_Z$ &\ensuremath{\!\!\!\!\!\!=\!\!\!\!\!\!}& $91.1876\; \text{GeV}$ & $\Gamma_Z$ &\ensuremath{\!\!\!\!\!\!=\!\!\!\!\!\!}& $2.4952\; \text{GeV}$ \\
$m_h$ &\ensuremath{\!\!\!\!\!\!=\!\!\!\!\!\!}& $125.0\; \text{GeV}$ & $\Gamma_h$ &\ensuremath{\!\!\!\!\!\!=\!\!\!\!\!\!}& $0.00407\; \text{GeV}$\\
$m_t$ &\ensuremath{\!\!\!\!\!\!=\!\!\!\!\!\!}& $173.21\; \text{GeV}$ & $\Gamma_t$ &\ensuremath{\!\!\!\!\!\!=\!\!\!\!\!\!}& $1.3394$\; \text{GeV}\,.
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
All other masses and widths are set to zero.
In the above,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:defalpha}
\begin{split}
\alpha
\,=&\;
\left|
\frac{\sqrt{2}\;\ensuremath{G_\mu}\;\mu^2_W\,\sin^2\theta_\text{w}}{\pi}
\right|\,,
\end{split}
\end{equation}
defines the electromagnetic coupling.
The complex mass of particle $i$ and the weak mixing angle
are defined according to
\begin{equation}
\mu_i^2=m_i^2-\mathrm{i}m_i\Gamma_i
\qquad\text{and}\qquad
\sin^2\theta_\text{w}=1-\frac{\mu_W^2}{\mu_Z^2}\;,
\end{equation}
respectively.
For the parton density functions we use the NNPDF3.1 NLO PDF set
\cite{Bertone:2017bme} with $\ensuremath{\alpha_s}(m_Z)=0.118$ and
including QED effects (at $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\alpha)$, $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\ensuremath{\alpha_s}\alpha)$ and
$\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\alpha^2)$) in the parton evolution employing the LUXqed scheme
\cite{Manohar:2016nzj,Manohar:2017eqh} \footnote{
To be precise the \texttt{NNPDF31\_nlo\_as\_0118\_luxqed} PDF set is used.
}.
They are interfaced through \protect\textsc{Lhapdf}\xspace \cite{Buckley:2014ana}.
The renormalisation and factorisation scales are defined as
\begin{equation}\label{eq:muRF}
\begin{split}
\mu_R\,=\,\mu_F\,=\,\ensuremath{\tfrac{1}{2}\,\ensuremath{\hat{H}_\mathrm{T}}}\;.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The variable $\ensuremath{\hat{H}_\mathrm{T}}$ is thereby given by the scalar sum of all final-state
particles' transverse momenta without applying any jet clustering.
To estimate the uncertainty on our computation
from uncalculated higher-order contributions, we vary the renormalisation and
factorisation scales independently by the customary factor two,
keeping $\tfrac{1}{2}\leq\mu_R/\mu_F\leq 2$.
All scale variations were calculated on-the-fly using the event-reweighting
algorithm detailed in \cite{Bothmann:2016nao}.
\section{Results}
\label{sec:results}
In this section numerical results for the production of a three-jet
final state at next-to-leading order accuracy in proton-proton collisions at
a centre-of-mass energy of 13\,TeV are presented.
We generate the respective matrix elements at all contributing orders
for all partonic processes with massless three (Born and virtual corrections)
and four body final states (real corrections). As final-state particles
we consider five quark flavours and gluons, as well as photons,
leptons and neutrinos. Jets are then defined through the anti-$k_t$ algorithm
\cite{Cacciari:2008gp} using \protect\textsc{FastJet}\xspace \cite{Cacciari:2011ma},
with $R=0.4$ as radial parameter.
All massless particles of our calculation, except for the neutrinos,
are considered as jet constituents.
Jets with a net lepton number\footnote{
A jet with a lepton and an anti-lepton, if they are of the same lepton
flavour, has net lepton number zero.
} and within $|\eta|<2.5$ are removed from the list of jets.
The final state then has to contain at least three surviving jets with
$|\eta(j)|<2.8$, of which the leading jet, ordered in transverse
momentum, must have $\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}(j_1)>80\,\ensuremath{\text{GeV}}$ and all subleading jets
$\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}(j_i)>60\,\ensuremath{\text{GeV}}$ ($i>1$).
This ensures that a jet definition with inherent lepton rejection,
which is both infrared-safe at NLO and close to
experimental analysis strategies, is used.
Nonetheless, it is worth pointing out that lepton final states may survive
this lepton-anti-tagged jet definition if either a collinear lepton pair
is contained in a single jet (possibly coming from a collinear
$\gamma\to\ell^+\ell^-$ splitting), or the jet containing the lepton is
outside the rapidity range in which the lepton can be identified.
To analyse our results we use the \protect\textsc{Rivet}\xspace\ package \cite{Buckley:2010ar}.
The full NLO $n$-jet production cross section can be decomposed into
contributions of varying power of the strong and electromagnetic coupling.
In what follows we employ the convention:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:xsec_contribs}
\begin{split}
\begin{array}{rclrcl}
\sigma_{nj}
& = & \sigma_{nj}^\ensuremath{\text{LO}} + \sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO}}, &&&
\\[2mm]
\sigma_{nj}^\ensuremath{\text{LO}}
& = & \sum\limits_{i=0}^{n} \sigma^{\ensuremath{\text{LO}}_{i}}_{nj},
&
\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}} \left( \sigma^{\ensuremath{\text{LO}}_{i}}_{nj} \right)
& = & \ensuremath{\alpha_s}^{n-i} \alpha^{i},
\\[2mm]
\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO}}
& = & \sum\limits_{i=0}^{n+1} \sigma^{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO}_{i}}_{nj},
&
\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}} \left( \sigma^{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO}_{i}}_{nj} \right)
& = & \ensuremath{\alpha_s}^{n+1-i} \alpha^{i},
\end{array}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
such that $\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO}_i$ accounts for the virtual and real
\emph{QCD} corrections while $\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO}_{i+1}$ accounts for the virtual and real
\emph{electroweak} corrections to $\ensuremath{\text{LO}}_i$. Representative diagrams
for the various tree-level and virtual contributions can be found
in Fig.~\ref{fig:diagrams-LO} and Fig.~\ref{fig:diagrams-VIRT}, respectively.
It is worth noting that our full NLO calculation in the five-flavour scheme
is indeed sensitive to the full Standard Model spectrum,
including the top-quark, the Higgs boson and all lepton and neutrino flavours.
Based on the above decomposition we can furthermore define the pure QCD LO and NLO
cross sections as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:phys_xsec_qcd}
\begin{split}
\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\text{LO}}\;\ensuremath{\text{QCD}}}&=\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\LO_{0}}},\\
\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}\;\ensuremath{\text{QCD}}}&=\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\LO_{0}}}+\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{0}}},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
respectively. The pure NLO EW corrections and their additive and
multiplicative combination with the QCD process are defined as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:phys_xsec_ew}
\begin{split}
\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}\;\ensuremath{\text{EW}}}
&=\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\LO_{0}}}+\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{1}}},
\vphantom{\frac{\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{0}}}}{\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\LO_{0}}}}}
\\
\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}\;\ensuremath{\text{QCD}+\text{EW}}}
&=\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\LO_{0}}}+\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{0}}}+\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{1}}},
\\
\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}\;\ensuremath{\text{QCD}\times\text{EW}}}
&=\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\LO_{0}}}
\left(1+\frac{\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{0}}}}{\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\LO_{0}}}}\right)
\left(1+\frac{\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{1}}}}{\sigma_{nj}^{\ensuremath{\LO_{0}}}}\right).
\end{split}
\hspace*{-10mm}
\end{equation}
The difference between the additive and multiplicative combination provides
an estimate of uncalculated mixed QCD-EW NNLO corrections of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\ensuremath{\alpha_s}\alpha)$, wrt.\ LO QCD.
\begin{table*}[t!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l||c||c|c|c|c||c|c|c|c|c}
\ensuremath{\vphantom{\int\limits_A^B}} & \ensuremath{\text{NLO}} & $\frac{\ensuremath{\LO_{0}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$ & $\frac{\ensuremath{\LO_{1}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$
& $\frac{\ensuremath{\LO_{2}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$ & $\frac{\ensuremath{\LO_{3}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$
& $\frac{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{0}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$ & $\frac{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{1}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$
& $\frac{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{2}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$ & $\frac{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{3}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$
& $\frac{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{4}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$ \\
& [nb]
& [\%]
& [\%]
& [\%]
& [\%]
& [\%]
& [\%]
& [\%]
& [\%]
& [\%]
\\\hline\hline
$\sigma_{2j}$\ensuremath{\vphantom{\int_A^B}} & $3385(3)$ & $67.34(6)$
& $0.0713(1)$
& $0.03915(4)$
& -- & $32.59(8)$
& $-0.118(7)$
& $0.0759(3)$
& $0.00022(1)$
& -- \\\hline
$\sigma_{3j}$\ensuremath{\vphantom{\int_A^B}} & $169(1)$ & $148(1)$
& $0.293(2)$
& $0.196(2)$
& $0.00217(2)$
& $-48.4(8)$
& $-0.74(1)$
& $0.344(7)$
& $-0.00433(6)$
& $0.0135(2)$
\end{tabular}
\caption{
Full NLO fiducial cross section for two- and three-jet production in the phase space detailed in the
text, i.e. $\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}(j_1)>80\; \ensuremath{\text{GeV}}$ and $\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}(j_i)>60\; \ensuremath{\text{GeV}}$ ($i>1$). Besides the total cross section the
relative contributions for the terms specified in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:xsec_contribs}) are given.
\label{tab:xs}
}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[t!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l||c||c|c|c|c||c|c|c|c|c}
\ensuremath{\vphantom{\int\limits_A^B}} & \ensuremath{\text{NLO}} & $\frac{\ensuremath{\LO_{0}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$ & $\frac{\ensuremath{\LO_{1}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$
& $\frac{\ensuremath{\LO_{2}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$ & $\frac{\ensuremath{\LO_{3}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$
& $\frac{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{0}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$ & $\frac{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{1}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$
& $\frac{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{2}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$ & $\frac{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{3}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$
& $\frac{\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{4}}}{\ensuremath{\text{NLO}}}$ \\
& [fb]
& [\%]
& [\%]
& [\%]
& [\%]
& [\%]
& [\%]
& [\%]
& [\%]
& [\%]
\\\hline\hline
$\sigma_{2j}$\ensuremath{\vphantom{\int_A^B}} & $51.9(6)$ & $60(1)$
& $7.07(8)$
& $1.82(2)$
& -- & $36.9(8)$
& $-4.5(1)$
& $-1.02(2)$
& $-0.552(7)$
& -- \\\hline
$\sigma_{3j}$\ensuremath{\vphantom{\int_A^B}} & $40.0(4)$ & $99(1)$
& $8.6(1)$
& $2.05(4)$
& $0.061(1)$
& $-0.9(9)$
& $-9.8(4)$
& $1.09(7)$
& $0.057(4)$
& $0.314(5)$
\end{tabular}
\caption{
As Table~\ref{tab:xs} but with the additional requirement of $\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}(j_1)>2\; \ensuremath{\text{TeV}}$.
\label{tab:xs_2tev}
}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[t!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l||c||c|c|c|c}
\ensuremath{\vphantom{\int\limits_A^B}} & \ensuremath{\text{NLO}} & \ensuremath{\text{LO}}\;\ensuremath{\text{QCD}} & \ensuremath{\text{NLO}}\;\ensuremath{\text{QCD}}
& \ensuremath{\text{NLO}}\;\ensuremath{\text{EW}}
& \ensuremath{\text{NLO}}\;\ensuremath{\text{QCD}+\text{EW}} \\
& [nb]
& [nb]
& [nb]
& [nb]
& [nb]
\\\hline\hline
$\sigma_{2j}$\ensuremath{\vphantom{\int_A^B}} & $3385(3)^{+334}_{-338}$
& $2279.4(6)^{+553.7}_{-404.4}$
& $3383(3)^{+335}_{-338}$
& $2275.4(6)^{+552.4}_{-403.5}$
& $3379(3)^{+333}_{-338}$
\\\hline
$\sigma_{3j}$\ensuremath{\vphantom{\int_A^B}} & $169(1)^{+16}_{-73}$
& $249.86(6)^{+102.28}_{-67.89}$
& $168(1)^{+16}_{-73}$
& $248.62(6)^{+101.62}_{-67.46}$
& $167(1)^{+17}_{-73}$
\end{tabular}
\caption{
Fiducial cross sections for two- and three-jet production and their corresponding scale uncertainties for a
leading-jet selection of $\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}(j_1)>80\; \ensuremath{\text{GeV}}$. The respective cross section definitions are given in
Eqs.~(\ref{eq:phys_xsec_qcd}) and~(\ref{eq:phys_xsec_ew}).
\label{tab:xs_phys}
}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[t!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l||c||c|c|c|c}
\ensuremath{\vphantom{\int\limits_A^B}} & \ensuremath{\text{NLO}} & \ensuremath{\text{LO}}\;\ensuremath{\text{QCD}} & \ensuremath{\text{NLO}}\;\ensuremath{\text{QCD}}
& \ensuremath{\text{NLO}}\;\ensuremath{\text{EW}}
& \ensuremath{\text{NLO}}\;\ensuremath{\text{QCD}+\text{EW}} \\
& [fb]
& [fb]
& [fb]
& [fb]
& [fb]
\\\hline\hline
$\sigma_{2j}$\ensuremath{\vphantom{\int_A^B}} & $51.9(6)^{+5.9}_{-6.7}$
& $31.2(5)^{+11.4}_{-7.9}$
& $50.4(6)^{+7.1}_{-7.3}$
& $28.9(5)^{+9.6}_{-6.7}$
& $48.1(6)^{+5.2}_{-6.1}$
\\\hline
$\sigma_{3j}$\ensuremath{\vphantom{\int_A^B}} & $40.0(4)^{+0.4}_{-6.9}$
& $39.4(2)^{+19.0}_{-12.1}$
& $39.0(4)^{+0.0}_{-5.0}$
& $35.5(2)^{+15.7}_{-10.2}$
& $35.1(4)^{+0.9}_{-8.2}$
\end{tabular}
\caption{
As Table~\ref{tab:xs_phys} but with the additional requirement of $\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}(j_1)>2\; \ensuremath{\text{TeV}}$.
\label{tab:xs_phys_2tev}
}
\end{table*}
We start our discussion of results by listing the inclusive two- and three-jet
cross sections for leading-jet selections of $\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}(j_1)>80\,\ensuremath{\text{GeV}}$ and $\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}(j_1)>2\,\ensuremath{\text{TeV}}$
in Tables \ref{tab:xs} and \ref{tab:xs_2tev}, respectively.
We quote results at full NLO accuracy in the Standard Model and list their decomposition into all contributing
orders. The numbers quoted in parantheses indicate the statistical error estimate on the last digit given.
For a leading jet requirement of $\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}(j_1)>80\,\ensuremath{\text{GeV}}$ corrections of EW origin are
generally rather small, reaching for the three-jet case at most a relative contribution to the
full NLO result of $-0.7\%$ for $\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{1}}$. The dominant corrections are of QCD nature and account for
$+33\%$ and $-48\%$ for two- and three-jet production, respectively.
Requiring $\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}(j_1)>2\,\ensuremath{\text{TeV}}$
changes the picture. While for the two-jet process the QCD NLO corrections are
still dominating, amounting to $+37\%$, QCD-EW mixed Born and EW one-loop
contributions clearly become sizeable, though they largely cancel. For
three-jet production in this selection and scale choice the NLO QCD
corrections are, accidentally, miniscule, below $-1\%$.
However, the Born contributions of EW origin reach a total of $+11\%$ but largely
get cancelled by the $\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{1}}$ terms that contribute $-10\%$ to the total
NLO result.
In Tables \ref{tab:xs_phys} and \ref{tab:xs_phys_2tev} we quote two- and
three-jet cross sections at full NLO, LO QCD, NLO QCD, NLO EW and \ensuremath{\text{NLO}}\;\ensuremath{\text{QCD}+\text{EW}}\
for the leading-jet selections of $\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}(j_1)>80\,\ensuremath{\text{GeV}}$ and $\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}(j_1)>2\,\ensuremath{\text{TeV}}$, respectively.
Besides the nominal cross sections we give their scale uncertainty estimates obtained from
7-point variations around the central scale choice $\mu_R\,=\,\mu_F\,=\,\ensuremath{\tfrac{1}{2}\,\ensuremath{\hat{H}_\mathrm{T}}}$.
A significant reduction in particular of the upward variations wrt. LO QCD is observed for
predictions including the $\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{0}}$ terms. Adding the $\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{1}}$ corrections, however, has
no sizeable effect on the scale uncertainties. Furthermore, no systematic reduction of the
scale uncertainties of the full NLO results in comparison to the \ensuremath{\text{NLO}}\;\ensuremath{\text{QCD}+\text{EW}}\ predictions
is observed.
In principle, the addition of a $\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}>2\,\text{TeV}$ requirement on the leading
jet, while leaving the subleading jets at $\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}>60\,\text{GeV}$ only, introduces a
large scale hierarchy to cross section results presented in Tables
\ref{tab:xs_2tev} and \ref{tab:xs_phys_2tev}. In principle, this mandates the inclusion
of a resummation of the corresponding potentially large logarithms. However, no perturbative
instabilities were encountered in this region and we, thus, consider the results reliable.
Similar considerations, of course, also apply to the tails of the distributions shown in
the following.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.45\linewidth]{./graphics/pT_1_3jincl_etarge_00_28_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.45\linewidth]{./graphics/pT_1_3jincl_etarge_00_28_pTcuts_80_60.pdf}
\caption{
Leading jet transverse momentum in three-jet production.
Left: Theoretical uncertainties at LO, NLO QCD, NLO QCD+EW and full NLO.
Right: Decomposition of the full NLO result in its contributions defined in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:xsec_contribs}).
\label{fig:pT1}
}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.45\linewidth]{./graphics/pT_2_3jincl_etarge_00_28_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.45\linewidth]{./graphics/pT_2_3jincl_etarge_00_28_pTcuts_80_60.pdf}
\caption{
Subleading jet transverse momentum in three-jet production.
Left: Theoretical uncertainties at LO, NLO QCD, NLO QCD+EW and full NLO.
Right: Decomposition of the full NLO result in its contributions defined in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:xsec_contribs}).
\label{fig:pT2}
}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.45\linewidth]{./graphics/pT_3_3jincl_etarge_00_28_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.45\linewidth]{./graphics/pT_3_3jincl_etarge_00_28_pTcuts_80_60.pdf}
\caption{
Third jet transverse momentum in three-jet production.
Left: Theoretical uncertainties at LO, NLO QCD, NLO QCD+EW and full NLO.
Right: Decomposition of the full NLO result in its contributions defined in Eqs.~(\ref{eq:xsec_contribs}).
\label{fig:pT3}
}
\end{figure*}
Figures \ref{fig:pT1}--\ref{fig:pT3} show the three-jet
cross section differential in the transverse momentum of the
leading, subleading and third hardest jet, respectively.
The left hand side panel details the scale uncertainties and
relative magnitudes of the LO QCD, the NLO \ensuremath{\text{QCD}+\text{EW}}, the
NLO \ensuremath{\text{QCD}\times\text{EW}}\ and the complete NLO (full NLO) result in
comparison to the NLO QCD prediction.
Similarly, the right hand side panel details the relative contributions
from the various LO and NLO contributions to the full NLO result
for the central scale choice. Note, while positive sub-contributions
are represented by a solid line, negative parts are indicated
by a dashed line and their corresponding absolute value is displayed
here.
In all three distributions we confirm the substantial shape correction
and improvement on the scale uncertainty through the NLO QCD corrections
observed in earlier calculations of these quantities \cite{Nagy:2003tz}.
The NLO EW corrections themselves lead to the well-known negative
corrections of EW Sudakov-type in the high-transverse momentum regime,
reaching $-10\%$ for the leading, $-15\%$ for the second and $-15\%$ for the
third hardest jet at $\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}=2\,\text{TeV}$. The very good agreement of the
additive and multiplicative combination of QCD and electroweak corrections
indicates a negligible size of the relative $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\ensuremath{\alpha_s}\alpha)$ corrections.
The remaining subleading LO and NLO contributions, however, cancel
the effect of the next-to-leading order electroweak corrections
almost completely.
In fact, at $\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}>2.5\,\text{TeV}$ they grow larger and increase
the full NLO result beyond the NLO QCD one.
The driving ingredients here are the $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\ensuremath{\alpha_s}^3\alpha)$ $\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{1}}$
terms, the tree-level interference $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\ensuremath{\alpha_s}^2\alpha)$ (\ensuremath{\LO_{1}}) contributions,
followed by the interference at $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\ensuremath{\alpha_s}\alpha^2)$ (\ensuremath{\LO_{2}}) and their
respective EW and QCD corrections at $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\ensuremath{\alpha_s}^2\alpha^2)$
(\ensuremath{\Delta\NLO_{2}}).
All other contributions to the full NLO result remain marginal.
It has to be stressed that this cancellation is accidental and
highly observable dependent and cannot be inferred to hold for any
other observable, or indeed for the same observable in a different
fiducial phase space. Lastly we note, that by the inclusion of NLO EW
corrections the uncertainty estimates obtained by QCD scale variations
increases wrt. the NLO QCD result, however, still being significantly
smaller than for the LO QCD prediction.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.45\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_2jincl_etarge_00_28_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.45\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_3jincl_etarge_00_28_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult.pdf}
\caption{
The \ensuremath{H_\mathrm{T}^{(2)}} distribution in two- and three-jet production at the LHC shown in the left and right panel,
respectively. Besides the full NLO prediction the central results and scale uncertainty bands for LO
and NLO QCD, NLO \ensuremath{\text{QCD}+\text{EW}}\ and NLO \ensuremath{\text{QCD}+\text{EW}}\ are shown.
\label{fig:HT2}
}
\end{figure*}
Figure \ref{fig:HT2} now displays the results for the scalar sum of the
leading and subleading jet transverse momenta, \ensuremath{H_\mathrm{T}^{(2)}}, in two- and three-jet
events. While the latter represents a novel result from our full NLO
three-jet calculation, the first is obtained from a dijet computation
with identical parameter settings, scale choices and PDFs. Qualitatively,
the \ensuremath{H_\mathrm{T}^{(2)}}\ distributions exhibit the same features as
the leading and subleading jet transverse momentum distributions presented
before.
While the scale uncertainties are shrunk going from LO to NLO QCD,
the electroweak corrections show the expected Sudakov behaviour.
The relative electroweak corrections are of nearly the same magnitude
for both the two- and the three-jet case.
This can be understood from the fact that with \ensuremath{H_\mathrm{T}^{(2)}}\ in the TeV
region, where the electroweak corrections become sizeable, the
additional third jet in the three-jet case is predominantly soft and
near the jet threshold. In this limit, higher order QCD and EW corrections
should factorise. Further, we note that for both distributions the
additive and multiplicative combination of NLO QCD and EW corrections
give compatible results. As has been observed before in the jet transverse
momenta, including electroweak contributions somewhat increases the uncertainty
wrt.\ NLO QCD.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\begin{minipage}{0.03\textwidth}
\rotatebox{90}{dijet production}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}{0.95\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=.33\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_2jincl_etarge_00_28_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.33\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_2jincl_etarge_00_05_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.33\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_2jincl_etarge_05_10_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=.33\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_2jincl_etarge_10_15_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.33\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_2jincl_etarge_15_20_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.33\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_2jincl_etarge_20_25_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\vspace{.15cm}
\\\hrule
\vspace{.3cm}
\begin{minipage}{0.03\textwidth}
\rotatebox{90}{three jet production}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}{0.95\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=.33\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_3jincl_etarge_00_28_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.33\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_3jincl_etarge_00_05_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.33\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_3jincl_etarge_05_10_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=.33\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_3jincl_etarge_10_15_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.33\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_3jincl_etarge_15_20_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.33\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_3jincl_etarge_20_25_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{
Scalar sum of leading and subleading jet transverse momentum, \ensuremath{H_\mathrm{T}^{(2)}}, in two
(top panel) and three (bottom panel)
jet production, decomposed into contributions from several ranges
of $\eta=|\eta_1-\eta_2|/2$.
Shown are the NLO QCD, NLO \ensuremath{\text{QCD}+\text{EW}}\ and full NLO result as well as the
subleading Born contributions \ensuremath{\LO_{1}}\ and \ensuremath{\LO_{2}}.
\label{fig:HT2_doublediff}
}
\end{figure*}
Upon inclusion of the additional subleading LO and NLO contributions
NLO EW effects get cancelled and the full NLO result gets
very close to the NLO QCD prediction. Interestingly, this is true both
for the two- and three-jet case. However, this cancellation is accidental
and highly dependent on the observable and the phase space considered.
To illustrate this observation, Figure \ref{fig:HT2_doublediff}
shows the same observable, \ensuremath{H_\mathrm{T}^{(2)}}, in different regions of absolute
pseudorapidity of the leading two-jet system, i.e. $\eta=|\eta_1-\eta_2|/2$.
In the central region, which dominates the inclusive result,
the subleading contributions, dominated by \ensuremath{\LO_{1}}\ in
both the two- and three-jet case, have a large positive effect on the
cross section.
The more forward \ensuremath{H_\mathrm{T}^{(2)}}\ is considered, however, the smaller especially
the \ensuremath{\LO_{1}}\ terms become and the closer the full NLO result is to the
NLO \ensuremath{\text{QCD}+\text{EW}}\ one.
This was already observed in \cite{Dittmaier:2012kx}.
In this region, also qualitative differences between the two- and three-jet case are apparent.
While the further subleading contributions are negative wrt.\ the
NLO \ensuremath{\text{QCD}+\text{EW}}\ result in the dijet case, they are positive wrt.\ the
NLO \ensuremath{\text{QCD}+\text{EW}}\ result in the three-jet case.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_3jincl_over_2jincl_etarge_00_28_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult.pdf}
\caption{
The \ensuremath{R_{32}}\ observable differential in \ensuremath{H_\mathrm{T}^{(2)}}. Upper panel: Predictions
at LO and NLO QCD, NLO \ensuremath{\text{QCD}+\text{EW}}, NLO \ensuremath{\text{QCD}\times\text{EW}}\ and full NLO in the Standard
Model. Lower panel: Related relative corrections wrt.\ the central NLO QCD result.
\label{fig:R32HT2}
}
\end{figure}
With full NLO calculations for two- and three-jet production at hand we
turn to the central observable of this letter, the three-jet-over-two-jet ratio, \ensuremath{R_{32}}.
This particular observable has attracted interest, as large parts
of the experimental and theoretical uncertainties in the inclusive three- and two-jet
cross sections cancel in the ratio, allowing for a competitive measurement of
the strong coupling $\ensuremath{\alpha_s}$~\cite{Aad:2011tqa,Chatrchyan:2013txa}.
Here we consider \ensuremath{R_{32}}\ differential in \ensuremath{H_\mathrm{T}^{(2)}}, the scalar sum of the leading-
and subleading-jet transverse momenta presented above, i.e.\
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\ensuremath{R_{32}}(\ensuremath{H_\mathrm{T}^{(2)}})
\,=\,\frac{\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\sigma_{3j}/\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\ensuremath{H_\mathrm{T}^{(2)}}}
{\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\sigma_{2j}/\ensuremath{\mathrm{d}}\ensuremath{H_\mathrm{T}^{(2)}}}\;.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The scale uncertainties are computed by synchronous variations of
numerator and denominator. Our results are presented in Figure~\ref{fig:R32HT2}.
We find that as the individual input distributions receive only minute EW
corrections, resulting in the NLO QCD predictions to agree with the full NLO,
also their ratio is very stable. However, as emphasised before, accidental
cancellations of individually much larger terms is in action for this observable.
Therefore, we present in Figure \ref{fig:R32HT2_doublediff} results differential
in various pseudorapidity regions, with $\eta =|\eta_1-\eta_2|/2$.
As before, the inclusive result is dominated by the most central
pseudorapidity slices, and they exhibit the same characteristics.
In the slightly more forward regions, between $0.5\leq\eta\leq 2$, the input
distributions of Figure \ref{fig:HT2_doublediff} do not exhibit this
almost complete cancellation of corrections any longer.
For the cross-section ratio \ensuremath{R_{32}}\ the net effect is nonetheless the same and the
residual corrections of electroweak and subleading origin are very small.
Their contributions largely factorise in the numerator and denominator
and, thus, cancel in the ratio.
Hence, the full NLO result is in very good agreement with the NLO QCD prediction
for this observable.
This very much confirms the particular usefulness of \ensuremath{R_{32}}\ for the determination
of the strong coupling.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.32\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_3jincl_over_2jincl_etarge_00_28_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.32\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_3jincl_over_2jincl_etarge_00_05_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.32\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_3jincl_over_2jincl_etarge_05_10_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.32\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_3jincl_over_2jincl_etarge_10_15_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.32\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_3jincl_over_2jincl_etarge_15_20_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=.32\linewidth]{./graphics/HT_2j_3jincl_over_2jincl_etarge_20_25_pTcuts_80_60-add-vs-mult-treelevel-crop.pdf}
\caption{
The \ensuremath{R_{32}}\ observable at NLO \ensuremath{\text{QCD}+\text{EW}}\ and full NLO differential in \ensuremath{H_\mathrm{T}^{(2)}} for different pseudo-rapidity selections
and in comparison to the corresponding NLO QCD result.
\label{fig:R32HT2_doublediff}
}
\end{figure*}
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusions}
In this letter we have presented the evaluation of the full set of Standard Model NLO corrections
to three-jet production at the LHC. Besides the dominating QCD corrections of $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\ensuremath{\alpha_s}^4)$
this comprises all (mixed) electroweak tree-level contributions up to $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\alpha^3)$ as well as
all (mixed) one-loop and real-corrections up to $\ensuremath{\mathcal{O}}(\alpha^4)$. As jet constituents we consider
besides quarks and gluons also photons and charged leptons. However, for the considered event
selections contributions from final states containing leptons are practically irrelevant. All calculations
have been performed in an automated manner within the \protect\textsc{Sherpa}\xspace\ event generation framework, with \protect\textsc{Recola}\xspace\
providing the renormalised virtual corrections.
For the jet transverse momentum distributions and the related $\ensuremath{H_\mathrm{T}^{(2)}}$ variable we observe a
compensation of the electroweak Sudakov-type suppression of high-$\ensuremath{p_\mathrm{T}}$ events when including
subleading electroweak tree-level and one-loop contributions. In fact, for leading jet
transverse momenta above $2.5\,\ensuremath{\text{TeV}}$ a resulting positive correction of $10-15\%$ wrt. the NLO
QCD prediction is observed. However, the mentioned compensation is specific for the fiducial
phase-space region considered. In particular for jet production away from central rapidity
we observe sizeable effects upon inclusion of the full set of (mixed) electroweak corrections.
This nicely illustrates the importance of considering the complete set of NLO Standard Model
corrections in predictions for the three-jet production process at the LHC.
As a first application of our calculation we have considered the ratio of three- over two-jet
production differential in $\ensuremath{H_\mathrm{T}^{(2)}}$. This variable proves to be very stable against electroweak
corrections, confirming its particular usefulness in the determination of the strong coupling
constant $\ensuremath{\alpha_s}$.
\begin{acknowledgements}
This work has received funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme as part of the Marie Sk\l{}odowska-Curie Innovative Training Network MCnetITN3 (grant agreement no. 722104). SS acknowledges support through the Fulbright-Cottrell Award and from BMBF (contracts 05H15MGCAA and 05H18MGCA1).
MS acknowledges the support of the Royal Society through the award
of a University Research Fellowship.
MR is supported by the Research Training Group GRK 2044 of the German Research Foundation (DFG).
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{spphys}
|
\section*{Supplementary information}
The supplementary information contains the explicit expressions for the Green's kernels of the Stokes equations, the calculation of the cortex flow in terms of the concentration fields, the description of the numerical procedure, the technique of shape reconstruction in the quasi-spherical limit and the physical values used to estimate non-dimensional parameters.
\section{Green's kernels}
The following kernels are to be used in eq. (2) of the main text:
\begin{align}
\label{kernels}
G_{ij}(\boldsymbol x,\boldsymbol x')&=\frac{1}{8\pi}\left[\frac{\delta_{ij}}{|\boldsymbol x-\boldsymbol x')|}+\frac{(\boldsymbol x-\boldsymbol x')_i(\boldsymbol x-\boldsymbol x')_j}{|\boldsymbol x-\boldsymbol x'|^3}\right],\notag\\
K_{ijk}(\boldsymbol x,\boldsymbol x')&=\frac{3}{4\pi}\frac{(\boldsymbol x-\boldsymbol x')_i(\boldsymbol x-\boldsymbol x')_j(\boldsymbol x-\boldsymbol x')_k}{|\boldsymbol x-\boldsymbol x'|^5}.
\end{align}
\section{Full solution}
The results in this section are presented in the most general form, without any assumptions about the relative values of $\eta_{in}$, $\eta_{out}$, $\eta_s$, and $\eta_b$.
\subsection{Spherical Harmonics}
All fields on the cell surface are expanded in spherical harmonics of the vector pointing from the center of the cell to a given point of its surface.
The spherical harmonics are defined as
\begin{equation}
\label{Y}
Y_{l,m}(\boldsymbol x)=\sqrt{\frac{2l+1}{4\pi}\frac{(l-m)!}{(l+m)!}}P_l^m\left(\frac{x_3}{x}\right)\left(\frac{x_1+ix_2}{|x_1+ix_2|}\right)^m,
\end{equation}
where $P_l^m$ are associated Legendre polynomials.
The following expansions are used
\begin{equation}
\label{sphericalca}
\begin{aligned}
&c^a(\boldsymbol x)=\sum\limits_{l=0}^\infty c^a_l(\boldsymbol x)\\
&c^a_l(\boldsymbol x)=\sum\limits_{m=-l}^lc^a_{l,m}Y_{l,m}(\boldsymbol x)\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{sphericalcm}
\begin{aligned}
&c^\mu(\boldsymbol x)=\sum\limits_{l=0}^\infty c^\mu_l(\boldsymbol x)\\
&c^\mu_l(\boldsymbol x)=\sum\limits_{m=-l}^lc^\mu_{l,m}Y_{l,m}(\boldsymbol x)\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{sphericalfn}
\begin{aligned}
&f^n(\boldsymbol x)=\sum\limits_{l=2}^\infty f^n_l(\boldsymbol x)\\
&f^n_l(\boldsymbol x)=\sum\limits_{m=-l}^lf^n_{l,m}Y_{l,m}(\boldsymbol x)\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{sphericalU}
\begin{aligned}
&U(\boldsymbol x)=\sum\limits_{l=1}^\infty U_l(\boldsymbol x)\\
&U_l(\boldsymbol x)=\sum\limits_{m=-l}^lU_{l,m}Y_{l,m}(\boldsymbol x)\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Note that $f^n_1=0$ is zero, as required by the condition of the total force acting on the cell being equal to zero, $f^n_0$ is irrelevant because it just shifts the osmotic pressure drop across the membrane, and $U_0$ is irrelevant because only gradients of $U$ enter equations.
We define the vector spherical harmonics as
\begin{equation}
\label{Y1}
\boldsymbol Y_{1,l,m} (\boldsymbol x) = [\boldsymbol \nabla^s -(l+1)\boldsymbol x] Y_{l,m}(\boldsymbol x)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{Y2}
\boldsymbol Y_{2,l,m} (\boldsymbol x) = [\boldsymbol \nabla^s +l\boldsymbol x] Y_{l,m}(\boldsymbol x)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{Y3}
\boldsymbol Y_{3,l,m} (\boldsymbol x) = \boldsymbol x \times \boldsymbol\nabla^s Y_{l,m}(\boldsymbol x)
\end{equation}
The following expansions are used
\begin{equation}
\label{vY}
\boldsymbol u^c=\sum\limits_{j=1}^3\sum\limits_{l=0}^\infty\sum\limits_{m=-l}^lu^c_{j,l,m}\boldsymbol Y_{j,l,m}(\boldsymbol x)
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{fY}
\boldsymbol f=\sum\limits_{j=1}^3\sum\limits_{l=0}^\infty\sum\limits_{m=-l}^lf_{j,l,m}\boldsymbol Y_{j,l,m}(\boldsymbol x)
\end{equation}
\subsection{Force calculation}
The force $\boldsymbol f$ can be represented as a sum of two contributions $f_{j,l,m}=f^v_{j,l,m}+f^e_{j,l,m},$ where
\begin{equation}
\label{f}
\begin{aligned}
&f^v_{1,l,m}=-\frac{(l+2)[2\eta_s(l^2+l+1)+\eta_b(l+1)(l+2)]}{2l+1}\frac{u^c_{1,l,m}}{R^2}-\frac{l(l-1)(l+2)(2\eta_s+\eta_b)}{2l+1}\frac{u^c_{2,l,m}}{R^2},\\
&f^v_{2,l,m}=-\frac{(l+1)(l+2)(l-1)(2\eta_s+\eta_b)}{2l+1}\frac{u^c_{1,l,m}}{R^2}-\frac{(l-1)[2\eta_s(l^2+l+1)+\eta_b(l-1)l]}{2l+1}\frac{u^c_{2,l,m}}{R^2},\\
&f^v_{3,l,m}=-\eta_s(l+2)(l-1)\frac{u^c_{3,l,m}}{R^2},\\
&f^e_{1,l,m}=\frac{l+2}{2l+1}\frac{\left[\chi c^\mu-\alpha c^a\right]_{l,m}}{R}+\frac{f^n_{l,m}}{2l+1},\\
&f^e_{2,l,m}=\frac{l-1}{2l+1}\frac{\left[\chi c^\mu-\alpha c^a\right]_{l,m}}{R}-\frac{f^n_{l,m}}{2l+1},\\
&f^e_{3,l,m}=0.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The amplitudes $f^v_{j,l,m}$ contain the contribution of the surface viscosity terms in eq. (1) of the main text, while the amplitudes $f^e_{j,l,m}$ contain contributions of myosin contractility, cortex compressibility, and Lagrange multiplier $f^n\boldsymbol n$.
\subsection{Fluid dynamics}
The integrals in eq. (2) of the main text can be calculated analytically for a spherical cell.
The results are
\begin{equation}
\label{BIEsphere}
\frac{\eta_{in}+\eta_{out}}{2}u^c_{j,l,m}=Rg_{j,l}f_{j,l,m}+(\eta_{out}-\eta_{in})k_{j,l}u^c_{j,l,m},
\end{equation}
where the coefficients $g_{j,l}$ and $k_{j,l}$ are listed in table \ref{greentable}.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{c|ccc}
$j$ & 1 & 2 & 3 \\
\hline
$g_{j,l}$ & $\frac{l}{(2l+1)(2l+3)}$ & $\frac{l+1}{(2l-1)(2l+1)}$ & $\frac{1}{2l+1}$ \\
$k_{j,l}$ & $\frac{3}{2(2l+1)(2l+3)}$ & $-\frac{3}{2(2l-1)(2l+1)}$ & $-\frac{3}{2(2l+1)}$ \\
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{greentable}Integrals of Green's kernels for a spherical cell.}
\end{table}
\subsection{Explicit solution}
We note that the Green's kernels (\ref{kernels}) are diagonal in the basis of vector spherical harmonics for spherical shape.
Furthermore, we see that the amplitudes of the surface viscosity force $f^v_{3,l,m}$ depend only on $u^c_{3,l,m}.$
This implies that the vector spherical harmonics with first index 3 are completely decoupled from the two other types.
Since $f^e_{3,l,m}=0$ for all $l$ and $m$, we conclude that $u^c_{3,l,m}=0$ for all $l$ and $m$ as well.
Adding the fixed shape condition $(\boldsymbol u^c-\boldsymbol v_s)\boldsymbol\cdot\boldsymbol n=0$ yields that $\boldsymbol u^c-\boldsymbol v_s$ can be written as a surface gradient of some surface potential $U$, as used in the main text.
Or, in spherical harmonics,
\begin{equation}
\label{grads}
u^c_{1,l,m}=\frac{U_{l,m}}{R}\frac{l}{2l+1},\,\,\, u^c_{2,l,m}=\frac{U_{l,m}}{R}\frac{l+1}{2l+1},\,\,\, u^c_{3,l,m}=0 \textrm{ for }l>1.
\end{equation}
Solving the equations (\ref{f}), (\ref{BIEsphere}), and (\ref{grads}) for $U$ and $f^n$ yields
\begin{equation}
\label{lambda}
U_{l,m}=\frac{R(\chi c^\mu-\alpha c^a)_{l,m}}{\lambda_l}.
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{lambdal}
\lambda_l=\begin{cases}
&3\eta_{in}R+2\eta_{out}R+2\eta_s+2\eta_b\textrm{, for }l=1,\\
&(2l+1)(\eta_{in}+\eta_{out})R+l(l+1)\eta_b+2(l^2+l-1)\eta_s\textrm{, for }l>1.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{vs}
v_s=-\frac{2}{3}\nabla U_1.
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\label{fnres}
f^n_{l,m}=-\left[(l+2)\eta_{out}R+(l-1)\eta_{in}R+2(l+2)(l-1)\eta_s\right]\frac{U_{l,m}}{R^2}\textrm{ for }l>1.
\end{equation}
Using the expressions (\ref{lambda}) and (\ref{vs}), the retrograde flow and the swimming velocity can be expressed as a function of the concentration fields.
The time evolution equations of the concentration fields are obtained by substituting $U$ into eqs. (3) and (4) of the main text.
The following equation can be used to reduce all calculations to scalar spherical harmonics
\begin{equation}
\label{Uc}
\boldsymbol\nabla^s\boldsymbol\cdot\left[c(\boldsymbol u^c-\boldsymbol v_s)\right]=\boldsymbol\nabla^s\boldsymbol\cdot(c\boldsymbol\nabla^s U)=\frac{\Delta^s(cU)+c\Delta^sU-U\Delta^sc}{2}.
\end{equation}
\section{Numerical procedure}
The numerical procedure consists in representing $c^a$, $c^\mu$ and $U$ by the amplitudes of the spherical harmonics for all values of $l<l_{max}$ and $|m|\le l$, where $l_{max}$ is the cut-off value.
We take $l_{max}=64$ for such calculations.
We observed that regardless of the initial conditions, the dynamics relaxed to an axisymmetric solution.
We therefore also performed simulations with the shape assumed axisymmetric from the beginning, which is achieved by setting all amplitudes for $m\ne 0$ to zero.
With this assumption, $l_{max}=1024$ was used, which proved to be necessary for strongly polarized cells.
The eqs. (3) and (4) of the main text were solved by an explicit Euler scheme by truncating the harmonic expansion of the advection terms to $l<l_{max}$.
The time step was chosen small enough to avoid the instability due to the stiffness of the diffusion equation (typically $10^{-4}$ in non-dimensional units).
In some cases, a small diffusion of actin (diffusion coefficient $10^{-3}$ in non-dimensional units) was added to enhance the stability of the actin advection equation.
The steady-state branches in Figs. 2 and 3 of the main text were obtained by solving eqs. (3) and (4) of the main text with $\dot c^a=\dot c^\mu=0$ using Newton's method.
\section{Model for the cell shape}
The calculation of the shape follows the method used in Ref. [28] of the main text.
Spherical shape of a cell in suspension can be physically achieved by a combination of high osmotic pressure $\Delta P$ inside the cell and the inextensibility of the membrane.
Further in this section, we allow the shape of the cell to deviate from a sphere, albeit weakly, taking the leading terms in the small-deformation expansion.
We parametrize the cell shape by a shape function $\rho$
\begin{equation}
\label{sphericalx}
|\boldsymbol x|=R_0\left[1+\rho(\boldsymbol x)\right],
\end{equation}
where $|\boldsymbol x|$ is the distance from the center of the cell to a given point on its boundary.
$\rho_0=0$ to the leading order in deformation because of the conservation of the membrane area.
$\rho_1=0$ because this term corresponds to a translation of the cell to the leading order.
We show below that $\rho$ scales as $\Delta P^{-1},$ which justifies an expansion in powers of $\rho$.
We consider the quasi-spherical limit, taking the leading terms in such expansions.
The function $\rho(\boldsymbol x)$ is expanded in spherical harmonics of $\boldsymbol x$ to be used below
\begin{equation}
\label{rho}
\begin{aligned}
&\rho(\boldsymbol x)=\sum\limits_{l=2}^\infty\rho_l(\boldsymbol x)\\
&\rho_l(\boldsymbol x)=\sum\limits_{m=-l}^l\rho_{l,m}Y_{l,m}(\boldsymbol x).
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Assuming the tension of the membrane $\zeta_0$ to be homogeneous (unaffected by the cortex flow) we can write for the tension force $\boldsymbol f^m$
\begin{equation}
\label{fm}
\boldsymbol f^m=-H\zeta_0\boldsymbol n=-\zeta_0H_0\boldsymbol n-(H-H_0)\boldsymbol n\zeta_0,
\end{equation}
where $H$ is the mean curvature of the membrane (sum of the principal curvatures) and $H_0=2/R$ is the value of $H$ for a perfectly spherical cell.
The term $-\zeta_0H_0\boldsymbol n$ in eq. (\ref{fm}) corresponds to an isotropic compression of the fluid inside the cell, which is balanced by the osmotic pressure.
This relates the tension of the membrane $\zeta_0$ to the pressure difference by the Laplace law:
\begin{equation}
\label{Laplace}
\zeta_0= \frac{R \Delta P}{2}.
\end{equation}
The term $(H-H_0)\boldsymbol n\zeta_0$ in eq. (\ref{fm}) corresponds to a position-dependent normal force, which we identify with the Lagrange multiplier $f^n\boldsymbol n$ used to maintain the shape of the cell.
This justifies that $H-H_0$ scales as $\zeta_0^{-1}$ or, equivalently, as $\Delta P^{-1}$ for fixed $f^n$.
Since $f^n$ is governed by the actomyosin dynamics, as follows from eq. (\ref{fnres}), we obtain that the shape of the cell can be indeed made as close to a sphere as necessary by choosing $\Delta P$ large enough.
This shows that all calculations made for perfectly spherical cells remain valid to the leading order in the limit of large $\Delta P$ even if the spherical-shape condition is relaxed.
The mean curvature can be related to the shape function by
\begin{equation}
\label{sphericalH}
H(\boldsymbol x)=\frac{2}{R}+\frac{1}{R}\sum\limits_{l=2}^\infty (l-1)(l+2)\rho_l(\boldsymbol x).
\end{equation}
This yields the final relation between the shape harmonics $\rho_{l,m}$ and the Lagrange multiplier $f^n$:
\begin{equation}
\label{rhores}
\rho_{l,m}=-\frac{2f^n_{l,m}}{(l-1)(l+2)\Delta P}.
\end{equation}
\section{Physical parameters}
We list in table.~\ref{t:valpar} the physical data we have considered to obtain rough estimates of the three non-dimensional parameters entering in the model.
\begin{table}
\scriptsize
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\hline\hline
name & symbol & typical value \\
\hline
cortical thickness & $h$ & $10^{-7}$ m \cite{clark2013monitoring,turlier2014furrow}\\
cortical viscosity & $\eta_s$ & $h\times (10^3-10^6)$ Pa m s \cite{turlier2014furrow,bergert2015force}\\
myosin contractility & $ \chi c_0^{\mu}$ &$h\times (10^2-10^3)$ Pa m \cite{bergert2015force,turlier2014furrow} \\
F-actin compressibility & $ \alpha c_0^{a}$ &$h\times 10^3$ Pa.m \cite{hawkins2011spontaneous}\\
myosin diffusion coefficient & $D^{\mu}$ &$10^{-13}-10^{-12}$ $\text{m}^{2}\text{s}^{-1}$ \cite{uehara2010determinants, hawkins2011spontaneous}\\
cell size & $R$ &$10^{-5}$ m \\
F-actin turnover & $\beta$ &$ 10^{-2}-10^{-1}$ ~$\text{s}^{-1}$ \cite{hawkins2011spontaneous, fritzsche2013analysis,turlier2014furrow} \\
\hline
characteristic length & $l_0=R$ &$10^{-5}$ m \\
characteristic time & $t_0=R^2/D^{\mu}$ & $10^2-10^3$ s \\
characteristic surface stress & $\sigma_0=D^{\mu}\eta_s/R^2$ & $1-10^4$ Pa m \\
\hline
contractility parameter & $\bar{\chi}=\chi c_0^{\mu}/\sigma_0$ & $10^{-2}-10^3$ \\
compressibility parameter & $\bar{\alpha}=\alpha c_0^{a}/\sigma_0$ & $10^{-1}-10^3$ \\
turnover parameter & $\bar{\beta}=\beta t_0$ & $1-10^2$\\
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{\small Estimates of material coefficients and non dimensional parameters definitions.\label{t:valpar}}
\end{table}
|
\section{Introduction and main results}
The Ginibre ensemble is the canonical example of a non--normal random matrix. It consists of a $N\times N$ matrix filled with independent complex Gaussian random variables of variance $1/N$, \cite{Ginibre65}.
It is well--known that the eigenvalues $(\lambda_1, \dots , \lambda_N)$ of a Ginibre matrix are asymptotically uniformly distributed inside the unit disk $\mathbb{D} = \{ z\in \mathbb{C} : |z| \le 1\}$ in the complex plane -- this is known as the circular law \cite{BC14}.
Moreover, these eigenvalues form a determinantal point process on $\mathds{C}$ with a correlation kernel
\begin{equation} \label{Gkernel}
K_N(x,z) = {\textstyle\sum_{j=0}^{N-1}} \frac{x^j \overline{z}^j}{j!} N^{j+1} e^{-N |x|^2/2 - N|z|^2/2}.
\end{equation}
This means that the law, denoted by $\P_N$, of the Ginibre eigenvalues is given by
\begin{equation} \label{Ginibre}
\P_N[\d x_1, \cdots , \d x_N ] = \frac{1}{N!} \det\big[K_N(x_i,x_j) \big]_{i,j =1}^N \tfrac{\d^2x_1}{\pi} \cdots \tfrac{\d^2x_N}{\pi} ,
\end{equation}
where $\d^2x$ denotes the Lebesgue measure on $\mathds{C}$.
We refer the readers to \cite[Chapter 4]{HKPV09} for an introduction to determinantal processes and to \cite[Theorem~4.3.10]{HKPV09} for a derivation of the Ginibre correlation kernel.
The Ginibre eigenvalues also have the same law as the particles in a one component two--dimensional Coulomb gas confined by the potential $Q(x) = |x|^2/2$, see \cite{Serfaty}.
Indeed, it is easy to verify that for any $N\in\mathbb{N}$, the probability measure \eqref{Ginibre} satisfies
$\d \P_N \propto e^{- \mathrm{H}_N(x)} {\textstyle\prod_{j=1}^N} \d^2 x_j$
where the energy of a configuration $x\in\mathds{C}^N$ is given by
\begin{equation} \label{Hamiltonian}
\mathrm{H}_N(x) = \sum_{\substack{ j, k =1 , \dots , N \\ j\neq k}} \log |x_j-x_k|^{-1} + 2 N \sum_{j=1, \dots ,N} Q(x_j) .
\end{equation}
In this article we are interested in the asymptotics of the modulus of the characteristic polynomial $z \in \mathds{C} \mapsto \prod_{j=1}^N|z-\lambda_j|$ of the Ginibre ensemble and in particular on the maximum size of its fluctuations. Before stating our main result, we need to review some basic asymptotic properties of the Ginibre eigenvalues process.
\medskip
First, it follows from a classical result in potential theory that the \emph{equilibrium measure} which describes the limit of the empirical measure $\frac{1}{N} \sum_{j=1}^N \delta_{\lambda_j}$ is indeed the circular law, $\sigma(\d x) = \frac{1}{\pi} \mathds{1}_{\mathds{D}} \d^2 x$, see \cite[Section 3.2]{Serfaty}.
This can be deduced from the fact that the logarithmic potential of the circular law
\begin{equation} \label{varphi}
\varphi(z) = \int \log|z-x| \sigma(\d x)
= \log_+|z| - \frac{(1- |z|^2)_+}{2} ,
\end{equation}
satisfies the condition
\begin{equation} \label{EL}
\varphi(z) = Q(z) - 1/2 \qquad\text{for all $z\in\mathds{D}$}.
\end{equation}
\medskip
Then, Rider--Vir\`ag \cite{RV07} showed that the fluctuations of the empirical measure of the Ginibre eigenvalues around the circular law are described by a Gaussian noise. This result was generalized to other ensembles of random matrices in \cite{AHM11, AHM15}, as well as to two--dimensional Coulomb gases at an arbitrary positive temperature in \cite{BBNY,LS18}.
Let us define
\begin{equation} \label{X}
\mathrm{X}(\d x)= {\textstyle \sum_{j=1}^N \delta_{\lambda_j}} - N \sigma(\d x) .
\end{equation}
This measure describes the fluctuations of the Ginibre eigenvalues and, by \cite[Theorem~1.1]{RV07}, for any function $f\in \mathscr{C}^2(\mathds{C})$ with at most exponential growth, we have as $N\to+\infty$,
\begin{equation} \label{clt}
\mathrm{X}(f) = {\textstyle \sum_{j=1}^N f(\lambda_j)} - N \int f(x)\sigma(\d x)
\ \overset{\rm law}{\longrightarrow}\ \mathscr{N}\left(0, \Sigma^2(f) \right) .
\end{equation}
Moreover, if $f$ has compact support inside the support of the equilibrium measure, then the asymptotic variance is given by
\begin{equation} \label{Sigma}
\Sigma^2(f)= \int \overline{\partial} f (x) \partial f(x) \sigma(\d x) .
\end{equation}
\medskip
The main object that we study in this article is the \emph{centered} logarithm of the Ginibre characteristic polynomial:
\begin{equation} \label{logcharpoly}
\Psi_N(z) = \log\left({\textstyle\prod_{j=1}^N } |z-\lambda_j| \right) - N \varphi(z) .
\end{equation}
See Figure~\ref{fig:logcharpoly} below for a sample of the random function $\Psi_N(z)$.
Note that it follows from the convergence of the empirical measure to the circular law that for any $z\in\mathds{C}$, we have in probability as $N\to+\infty$,
\[
\frac 1N \log\left({\textstyle\prod_{j=1}^N } |z-\lambda_j| \right) \to \varphi(z) = \int_\mathds{D}
\log |z-x| \frac{\d^2 x}{\pi} ,
\]
so that the second term on the RHS of \eqref{logcharpoly} is necessary to have the field $\Psi_N$ asymptotically centered.
In fact, it follows from the result of Webb--Wong \cite{WW} that $\mathds{E}_N[\Psi_N(z)] \to 1/4$ for all $z\in\mathds{D}$ as $N\to+\infty$.
Moreover, if we interpret $\Psi_N$ as a random generalized function, then the central limit theorem \eqref{clt} implies that $\Psi_N$ converges in distribution to the Gaussian free field (GFF)\footnote{We briefly review the definition of the GFF in Section~\ref{sect:gmc}} on~$\mathds{D}$ with free boundary conditions, see \cite[Corollary 1.2]{RV07} and also \cite{AHM15, Webb} for further details.
Even though the GFF is a random distribution, it can be though of as a \emph{random surface} which corresponds to the two--dimensional analogue of Brownian motion, see \cite{Sheffield07}.
The convergence result of Rider--Vir\`ag indicates that we can think of the field $\Psi_N$ as an approximation of the GFF in $\mathds{D}$.
The main property of the GFF is that it is a log--correlated Gaussian process on $\mathds{C}$.
This log--correlated structure is already visible for the absolute value of the characteristic polynomial of the Ginibre ensemble as it is possible to show that for any $z, x\in\mathds{D}$,
\begin{equation} \label{Psicov}
\mathds{E}_N\left[ \Psi_N(z) \Psi_N(x) \right] = \frac{1}{2} \log\left(\sqrt{N} \wedge |x-z|^{-1}\right) + \O(1) ,
\end{equation}
as $N\to+\infty$.
By analogy with the GFF and other log--correlated fields, we can make the following prediction for the asymptotics of the maximum of the field $\Psi_N$.
We have as $N\to+\infty$,
\begin{equation} \label{max}
\max_{z\in\mathds{D}} \Psi_N(z) = \frac{\log N }{\sqrt{2}} - \frac{3 \log \log N}{4\sqrt{2}} +\O(1) ,
\end{equation}
where the error term is given by a random variable.
Analogous predictions have been made for other log--correlated fields coming from random matrices.
For instance, Fyodorov--Keating \cite{FK14} first conjectured the asymptotics of the maximum of the logarithm of the absolute value of the characteristic polynomial of the circular unitary ensemble\footnote{A random $N\times N$ unitary matrice sampled from the Haar measure on the unitary group.} (CUE), including the distribution of the error term and Fyodorov--Simm \cite{FS16} made analogous prediction for the Gaussian Unitary Ensemble\footnote{A random $N\times N$ Hermitian matrice with independent Gaussian entries suitably normalized.} (GUE) .
\medskip
The main goal of this article is to verify the leading order in the asymptotic expansion \eqref{max}. More precisely, we prove the following result:
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:Ginibre}
For any $0<r<1$ and any $\epsilon>0$, we have
\[
\lim_{N\to+\infty} \P_N\left[ \frac{1-\epsilon}{\sqrt{2}} \log N \le \max_{|z| \le r} \Psi_N(z) \le \frac{1+\epsilon}{\sqrt{2}} \log N \right] =1 .
\]
\end{theorem}
It is worth pointing out that like other asymptotic properties of the eigenvalues of random matrices, we expect the results of Theorem~\ref{thm:Ginibre}, as well as the prediction \eqref{max}, and Theorem~\ref{thm:TP} below to be \emph{universal}. This means that these results should hold for other random normal matrix ensembles with a different confining potential $Q$ as well as for other non--Hermitian Wigner ensembles under reasonable assumptions on the entries of the random matrix.
In the remainder of this section, we review the context and most relevant results related to Theorem~\ref{thm:Ginibre}, and we provide several motivations to study the characteristic polynomial of the Ginibre ensemble.
\subsection{Comments on Theorem~\ref{thm:Ginibre} and further results}
The study of the characteristic polynomials for different ensembles of random matrices has an interesting history because of several connections to problems in various areas of mathematics.
In particular, there are the analogy between the logarithm of the absolute value of the characteristic polynomial of the CUE and the Riemann $\zeta$--function \cite{KS00}, as well as the connections with Toeplitz or Hankel determinant with Fisher--Hartwig symbols, \cite{Krasovsky07, DIK14}.
Of essential importance is also the connection between characteristic polynomial of random matrices, log--correlated fields and the theory of Gaussian multiplicative chaos \cite{HKO01, FK14}.
This connection has been used in several recent works to compute the asymptotics of the maximum of the logarithm of the characteristic polynomial for various ensembles of random matrices.
For the characteristic polynomial of the CUE, a result analogous to Theorem~\ref{thm:Ginibre} was first obtained by Arguin--Belius--Bourgade \cite{ABB17}. Then, the correction term was computed by Paquette--Zeitouni \cite{PZ18} and the counterpart of the conjecture \eqref{max} was established for the circular $\beta$--ensembles for general $\beta>0$ by Chhaibi--Madaule--Najnudel \cite{CMN18}.
For the characteristic polynomial of the GUE, as well as other Hermitian unitary invariant ensembles, the law of large numbers for the maximum of the absolute value of the characteristic polynomial was obtained in \cite{LP18}.
Cook and Zeitouni \cite{CZ} also obtained a law of large numbers for the maximum of the characteristic polynomial for a random permutation matrix, in which case their result does not match with the prediction from Gaussian log-correlated field because of arithmetic effects.
Finally, in the article \cite{CFLW} in preparation with Claeys, Fahs and Webb, we obtain the counterpart of Theorem~\ref{thm:Ginibre} for the imaginary part of the characteristic polynomial of a large class of Hermitian unitary invariant ensembles.
In \cite{CFLW}, we also show that our result implies \emph{optimal rigidity estimates} for the eigenvalues of random Hermitian.
Likewise, by adapting the proof of the upper--bound in Theorem~\ref{thm:Ginibre}, we can obtain \emph{precise rigidity estimates} for linear statistics of the Ginibre ensemble in the spirit of \cite[Theorem 1.2]{BBNY17} and \cite[Theorem 2]{LS18}.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:concentration}
For any $0<r<1$ and $ \kappa >0$, define
\begin{equation} \label{classF}
\mathscr{F}_{r,\kappa} = \left\{ f\in \mathscr{C}^2(\mathds{C}) : \Delta f(z) =0\ \text{ for all } z\in \mathds{C} \setminus \mathds{D}_r \text{ and }\max_\mathds{C} |\Delta f| \le N^\kappa \right\} .
\end{equation}
For any $\epsilon>0$, there exists a constant $C_{r,\kappa, \epsilon}>0$ such that
\[
\P_N\bigg[ \sup\left\{ |\mathrm{X}(f)| : f\in \mathscr{F}_{r,\kappa} \text{ and } \int_\mathds{D} |\Delta f(z)| \frac{\d^2z}{\pi} \le 1 \right\} \ge
(\log N)^{1+\epsilon} \bigg]
\le C_{r,\kappa, \epsilon} e^{- \frac 12 (\log N)^{1+\epsilon} } .
\]
\end{theorem}
We believe that Theorem~\ref{thm:concentration} is of independent interest since for instance it covers any smooth mesoscopic linear statistic at arbitrary small scales in a uniform way.
The proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:concentration} is given in Section~\ref{sect:concentration} and it relies on the basic observation that in the sense of distribution, the Laplacian of the field $\Psi_N$ is related to the empirical measure of the Ginibre ensemble suitably recentered:
$\Delta \Psi_N = 2\pi N \left( \frac 1N \sum_{j=1}^N \delta_{\lambda_j} - \frac 1\pi \mathds{1}_\mathds{D} \right)$.
\medskip
The proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:Ginibre} consists of an upper--bound which is based on the subharmonicity of the logarithm of the absolute value of the Ginibre characteristic polynomial and the moments estimates from Webb--Wong \cite{WW}\footnote{See Theorem~\ref{thm:WW} below.} and of a lower--bound which exploits the log--correlated structure of the field $\Psi_N$.
More precisely, by relying on the approach of \cite{LOS18}, we obtain the lower--bound in Theorem~\ref{thm:Ginibre} by constructing a family of subcritical Gaussian multiplicative chaos measures associated with certain mesoscopic regularization of the field $\Psi_N$ -- see Theorem~\ref{thm:gmc} below for further details.
Gaussian multiplicative chaos (GMC) is a theory which goes back to Kahane \cite{Kahane85} and it aims at encoding geometric features of a log--correlated field by means of a family of random measures.
These GMC measures are defined by taking the exponential of a log--correlated field through a renormalization procedure.
We refer the readers to Section~\ref{sect:gmc} for a brief overview of the theory and to the review of Rhodes--Vargas \cite{RV14} or the elegant and short article of Berestycki \cite{Berestycki17} for more comprehensive presentations.
It is well--known that in the subcritical phase, these GMC measures \emph{live} on the sets of so--called \emph{thick points}\footnote{
The concept of thick points is crucial to describe the geometric properties of log--correlated fields. Informally, these points corresponds to the extremal values of the field.} of the underlying field, \cite[Section 4]{RV14}.
By exploiting this connection, we obtain from our analysis the leading order of the size of the sets of thick points of the Ginibre characteristic polynomial for large $N$.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:TP}
Let us define the set of $\beta$--thick points of the Ginibre characteristic polynomial:
\begin{equation} \label{TP}
\mathscr{T}_N^\beta : = \big\{ x\in \overline{\mathds{D}_r} : \Psi_N(x) \ge \beta \log N \big\}
\end{equation}
and let $|\mathscr{T}_N^\beta|$ be its Lebesgue measure.
For any $0<r<1$, any $0 \le \beta < 1/\sqrt{2}$ and any small $\epsilon>0$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{TP0}
\lim_{N\to+\infty} \P_N\left[ N^{-2\beta^2-\delta} \le |\mathscr{T}_N^\beta| \le N^{-2\beta^2+\delta}\right] =1.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
The proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:TP} will be given in Section~\ref{sect:TP} and the result has the following interpretation.
By \eqref{logcharpoly}, the field $-\Psi_N$ corresponds to the (electrostatic) potential energy generated by the random charges $(\lambda_1, \dots , \lambda_N)$ and the negative uniform background $\sigma$.
One may view $-\Psi_N$ as a complex energy landscape and the asymptotics \eqref{TP0} describe the multi--fractal spectrum of the level sets near the extreme local minima of this landscape.
Moreover, as a consequence of Theorems~\ref{thm:Ginibre} and~\ref{thm:TP}, we can deduce the leading order of the corresponding \emph{free energy}, i.e. the logarithm of the partition function of the Gibbs measure $e^{\beta \Psi_N}$ for $\beta>0$. Namely, by adapting the proof of \cite[Corollary~1.4]{ABB17}, we obtain for any $0<r<1$,
\vspace{-.3cm}
\begin{equation}\label{freezing}
\lim_{N\to+\infty} \frac{1}{\beta \log N} \log\left( \int_{\mathds{D}_r} e^{\beta \Psi_N(z)} \frac{\d^2z}{\pi} \right) = \max_{\gamma \in [0, 1/\sqrt{2}]}\Big\{ \frac 1\beta+ \gamma -\frac2\beta \gamma^2 \Big\}
= \begin{cases}
\displaystyle\frac1\beta+ \frac\beta8 , & \beta \in [0, \sqrt{8}] \\
\displaystyle 1/\sqrt{2} , &\beta > \sqrt{8}
\end{cases}.
\end{equation}
The fact that the free energy is constant and equals to ${\displaystyle\lim_{N\to+\infty}}\frac{\max_{\mathds{D}_r} \Psi_N}{\log N}$ in the \emph{supercritical regime} $\beta>\sqrt{8}$ is called \emph{freezing}.
This property is typical for Gaussian log--correlated fields and our results rigorously establish that the Ginibre characteristic polynomial behave according to the Gaussian predictions which is a well--known heuristic in random matrix theory.
Moreover, this \emph{freezing scenario} is instrumental to predict the full asymptotic behavior \eqref{max} of the maximum of the field $\Psi_N$, including the law of the error term, see e.g. \cite{FB08}.
For an illustration of level sets of the random function and in particular of the geometry of thick points, see Figure~\ref{fig:levelsets}.
\medskip
Let us return to the connections between our results and the theory of Gaussian multiplicative chaos.
The family of GMC measures associated to the GFF are called \emph{Liouville measures} and they play a fundamental role in recent probabilistic constructions in the context of quantum gravity, imaginary geometries, as well as conformal field theory. We refer to the reviews \cite{Aru, RV17} for further references on these aspects of the theory.
Thus, motivated by the result of Rider--Vir\`ag, it is expected that a random measure whose density is given by a power of the characteristic polynomial (see Figure~\ref{fig:charpoly} below) of the Ginibre ensemble suitably normalized:
\begin{equation} \label{charpoly}
\frac{\prod_{j=1}^N|z-\lambda_j|^\gamma}{\mathds{E}_N\left[\prod_{j=1}^N|z-\lambda_j|^\gamma \right] } \frac{\d^2z}{\pi} = \frac{e^{\gamma \Psi_N(z)}}{\mathds{E}_N\left[ e^{\gamma \Psi_N(z)}\right]} \frac{\d^2z}{\pi}
\ \overset{\rm law}{\longrightarrow} \ \mu_\mathrm{G}^\gamma ,
\end{equation}
where $\mu_\mathrm{G}^\gamma$ is a Liouville measure with parameter\footnote{This corresponds to the subcritical phase -- the critical value being $\gamma_*=\sqrt{8}$ as in \eqref{freezing} or in Theorem~\ref{thm:gmc} below. } $0<\gamma< \sqrt{8}$.
Hence, this provides an interesting connection between the Ginibre ensemble of random matrices and random geometry.
As we observed in \cite[Section 3]{CFLW}, this convergence result in the subcritical phase implies the lower--bound in Theorem~\ref{thm:Ginibre}. An important observation that we make in this paper is that it suffices to establish the convergence of
$\frac{e^{\gamma \psi_N(z)}}{\mathds{E}_N\left[ e^{\gamma \psi_N(z)}\right]} \frac{\d^2z}{\pi}$ to a GMC measure for a suitable regularization $\psi_N$ of the field $\Psi_N$ in order to capture the correct leading order asymptotics of its maximum and thick points. The main issues are to work with a regularization at an \emph{optimal mesoscopic scale} $N^{-1/2+\alpha}$ for arbitrary small $\alpha>0$ and to be able to obtain the convergence in the whole subcritical phase.
In particular, our result on GMC, Theorem~\ref{thm:gmc}, below provides strong evidence that the prediction \eqref{charpoly} is correct.
\medskip
It is an important and challenging problem to obtain \eqref{charpoly} already in the subcritical phase. In particular, this requires to derive the asymptotics of joint moments of the characteristic polynomials. For a single $z\in\mathds{D}_r$, these asymptotics are obtained by Webb--Wong in \cite{WW}. Let us recall their main result which is also a key input in our method.
\begin{theorem}[\cite{WW}, Theorem 1.1] \label{thm:WW}
For any fixed $0<r<1$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{WW}
\mathds{E}_N[e^{\gamma \Psi_N(z)}] = (1+ o(1)) \frac{(2\pi)^{\gamma/4}}{G(1+\gamma/2)} N^{\gamma^2/8} ,
\end{equation}
where the error term is uniform for all $\{ \gamma \in \mathds{C} : \gamma>-2\}$ and $z\in \mathds{D}_r$.
\end{theorem}
The asymptotics of the joint exponential moments of $\Psi_N$ remain conjectural, see e.g.
\cite[Section~1.2]{WW}.
However, it is possible to give explicit formulae for the joint even moments of the characteristic polynomial of the Ginibre ensemble and we obtain the following result.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:jm}
Recall the definition \eqref{Gkernel} of the correlation kernel $K_N$ of the Ginibre ensemble.
For any $n\in\mathbb{N}$, we have for any $z_1, \dots , z_n \in\mathds{C}$ such that $z_1 \neq \cdots \neq z_n$,
\begin{equation} \label{mcharpoly}
\mathds{E}_N\left[ {\textstyle\prod_{i=1}^n \prod_{j=1}^N } |z_i-\lambda_j|^2\right]
= \frac{ \pi^n \prod_{k=N}^{N+n-1} k! }{N^{-Nn - \frac{n(n+1)}{2}} } \frac{\det_{n\times n}[K_{N+n}(z_i,z_j)]}{ \prod_{1\le i< j \le n}| z_i-z_j|^2} e^{N \sum_{i=1}^n |z_i|^2} .
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
A generalization of Theorem~\ref{thm:jm} which holds for other confining potential is proved in the Appendix~\ref{sect:A} and we also sketch how the results can be used to deduce asymptotics which are related to Fisher--Hartwig formula and match with the prediction from \cite[Section~1.2]{WW} -- see Remark~\ref{rk:Ginibremoment}. We also motivate why these asymptotics are universal -- see Remark~\ref{rk:universality}.
To our knowledge, Theorem~\ref{thm:jm} is new, although other (more general) exact formulae have already been obtained in \cite{FK07,FR09}. In contrast to these previous results, formula \eqref{mcharpoly} expresses the joint even moments of the characteristic polynomial in terms of the correlation kernel of the ensemble and it is therefore directly amenable to asymptotic analysis.
So, we believe that Theorem~\ref{thm:jm} is of independent interest and some consequences will be discussed in future work. The proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:jm} relies on a simple generalization of Heine formula which is inspired from the work of Brezin--Hikami \cite{BH00} on Hermitian matrices.
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace*{-1cm}
\caption{\small \label{fig:logcharpoly}Sample of the logarithm of the absolute value of the Ginibre characteristic polynomial $\Psi_N(z)$ for a random matrix of dimension $N=3000$.}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.7\textwidth]{Ginibre.png}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace*{-.7cm}
\caption{\small \label{fig:levelsets}Level sets of the logarithm of the absolute value of the Ginibre characteristic polynomial $\Psi_N(z)$ for a random matrix of dimension $N=5000$. }
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{levelsets.png}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[H]
\vspace*{-.7cm}
\caption{\small \label{fig:charpoly} Sample of the (normalized) Ginibre characteristic polynomial $\frac{\prod_{j=1}^N |z-\lambda_j| }{\mathds{E}_N[ \prod_{j=1}^N |z-\lambda_j| ] }$ for a random matrix of dimension $N=3000$. This is an approximation of the Liouville measure $\mu_G^\gamma$ with parameter $\gamma=1$.}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.8\textwidth]{GMC.png}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Outline of the article}
The remainder of this article is devoted to the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:Ginibre}.
The result follows directly by combining the upper--bound of
Proposition~\ref{prop:UB} and the lower--bound from Proposition~\ref{prop:LB}.
As we already emphasized the proof of the lower--bound follows form the connection with GMC theory and the details of the argument are reviewed in Section~\ref{sect:proofLB}. In particular, it is important to obtain \emph{mod--Gaussian asymptotics} for the exponential moments of a mesoscopic regularization of the field $\Psi_N$, see Proposition~\ref{thm:exp}. These asymptotics are obtained by using the method developed by Ameur--Hedenmalm--Makarov \cite{AHM15} which relies on the so--called \emph{Ward identities} and the determinantal structure of the Ginibre ensemble. Compared with the proof of the central limit theorem in \cite{AHM15}, we face two significant extra technical challenges: we must consider a mesoscopic linear statistic coming from a test function which develops logarithmic singularities as $N\to+\infty$.
This implies that we need a more precise approximation for the correlation kernel of the \emph{biased determinantal process}.
For these reasons, we give a detailed proof of Proposition~\ref{thm:exp} in Section~\ref{sect:clt} and Section~\ref{sect:approx}.
Our proof for the upper--bound is given in Section~\ref{sect:UB} and it relies on the subharmonicity of the logarithm of the absolute value of the Ginibre characteristic polynomial and the moments estimates from Theorem~\ref{thm:WW}.
In Section~\ref{sect:concentration}, we discuss an application to linear statistics of the Ginibre eigenvalues and give the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:concentration}.
Finally, in the appendix~\ref{sect:A}, we provide the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:jm}.
\subsection{Acknowledgment}
G.L. is supported by the University of Zurich Forschungskredit grant FK-17-112 and by the grant SNSF Ambizione S-71114-05-01.
G.L. wishes to thank P. Bourgade for interesting discussions about the problem studied in this article.
\section{Proof of the lower--bound} \label{sect:proofLB}
Recall that $\Psi_N$ denotes the centered logarithm of the absolute value of the Ginibre characteristic polynomial, \eqref{logcharpoly}. The goal of this section is to obtained the following result:
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:LB}
For any $r>0$ and any $\delta>0$, we have
\[
\lim_{N\to+\infty} \P_N\left[ \max_{|x| \le r} \Psi_N(x) \ge\frac{1-\delta}{\sqrt{2}} \log N \right] =1 .
\]
\end{proposition}
Our strategy to prove Proposition~\ref{prop:LB} is to obtain an analogous lower--bound for a mesoscopic regularization of $\Psi_N$ which is also compactly supported inside $\mathds{D}$.
To construct such a regularization, let us fix $0< \epsilon_0 \le 1/4$ and a mollifier\footnote{This means that $\phi(x)$ is a smooth probability density function which only depends on $|x|$ with compact support in the disk $\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0} = \{x\in \mathds{C} : |x|\le \epsilon_0 \}$.} $\phi \in \mathscr{C}^\infty_c(\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0})$ which is radial.
For any $0<\epsilon<1$, we denote $\phi_\epsilon(\cdot) = \phi(\cdot/\epsilon) \epsilon^{-2}$ and to approximate the logarithm of the characteristic polynomial, we consider the test function
\begin{equation} \label{psi}
\psi_\epsilon(z) = \int \log |z-x| \phi_\epsilon(x) \d^2x .
\end{equation}
We also denote $\psi=\psi_1$.
For technical reason, it is simpler to work with test function compactly supported inside $\mathds{D}$ -- which is not the case for $\psi_\epsilon$.
However, this can be fixed by making the following modification: for any $z \in \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}$, we define
\begin{equation} \label{gN}
g_N^z(x) = \psi_{\epsilon}(x-z) - \psi(x-z) , \qquad x\in \mathds{C}.
\end{equation}
It is easy\footnote{This follows from the fact that since the mollifier $\phi$ is radial and compactly supported, $\psi_\epsilon(z) = \log |z|$ for all $|z| \ge \epsilon$ and for any $\epsilon>0$.}
to see that the function $g_N^z$ is smooth and compactly supported inside $\mathds{D}(z, \epsilon_0)$.
Since we are interested in the regime where $\epsilon(N)\to 0$ as $N\to+\infty$, we emphasize that $g_N^z$ depends on the dimension $N\in\mathbb{N}$ of the matrix. Then, the random field $z\mapsto \mathrm{X}(g_N^z)$ is related to the logarithm of the Ginibre characteristic polynomial as follows:
\begin{equation} \label{X4}
\mathrm{X}(g_N^z)
= \int \Psi_N(x) \phi_\epsilon(z+x) \d^2x - \int \Psi_N(x) \phi(z+x) \d^2x .
\end{equation}
In particular, $z\mapsto \mathrm{X}(g_N^z)$ is still an approximation of a log--correlated field. Indeed, according to \eqref{clt}, \eqref{Sigma} and formula \eqref{cov1} below, we expect that as $N\to+\infty$
\[
\mathds{E}_N\left[ \mathrm{X}(g_N^z) \mathrm{X}(g_N^x) \right] = \frac{1}{2} \log\left( \epsilon(N)^{-1}\wedge |x-z|^{-1}\right) + \O(1) .
\]
This should be compared with formula \eqref{Psicov}.
\subsection{Gaussian multiplicative chaos} \label{sect:gmc}
Let $\mathrm{G}$ be the Gaussian free field (GFF) on $\mathds{D}$ with free boundary conditions. That is, $\mathrm{G}$ is a Gaussian process taking values in the space of Schwartz distributions with covariance kernel:
\begin{equation} \label{cov3}
\mathds{E}\left[\mathrm{G}(x) \mathrm{G}(z)\right] = \frac{1}{2} \log|z-x|^{-1} .
\end{equation}
Up to a factor of $1/\pi$, the RHS of \eqref{cov3} is the Green's function\footnote{We chose this unusual normalization in order to match with formula \eqref{Psicov}.} for the Laplace operator $-\Delta$ on $\mathds{C}$.
Because of the singularity of the kernel \eqref{cov3} on the diagonal, $\mathrm{G}$ is called a \emph{log--correlated field} and it cannot be defined pointwise.
In general, $\mathrm{G}$ is interpreted as a random distribution valued in a Sobolev space $H^{-\alpha}(\mathds{D})$ for any $\alpha>0$, \cite{Aru}. In particular, with a mollifier $\phi$ as above, for any $\epsilon>0$, we can view
\begin{equation} \label{reg}
\mathrm{G}_\epsilon(z) := \int \mathrm{G}(x) \phi_\epsilon(z+x) \d^2x
\end{equation}
as a regularization of $\mathrm{G}$.
\medskip
The theory of Gaussian multiplicative chaos aims at defining the exponential of a log--correlated field. Since such a field is merely a random distribution, this is a non trivial problem. However, in the so-called \emph{subcritical phase}, this can be done by a quite simple renormalization procedure. Namely, for $\gamma>0$, we define
$\mu^\gamma_\mathrm{G} = : \hspace{-.1cm}e^{\gamma \mathrm{G}} \hspace{-.15cm}:$ as
\begin{equation} \label{muG}
\mu^\gamma_\mathrm{G}(\d x) = \lim_{\epsilon\to0} \frac{e^{\gamma\mathrm{G}_\epsilon(x)}}{\mathds{E}[e^{\gamma\mathrm{G}_\epsilon(x)}]} \sigma(\d x) .
\end{equation}
It turns out that this limit exists as a random measure on $\mathds{D}$ and it does not depend on the mollifier $\phi$ within a reasonable class.
Moreover, in the case of the GFF \eqref{cov3}, it is a non trivial measure if and only if the parameter $0<\gamma < \sqrt{8}$ -- this is called the \emph{subcritical phase},
\cite{RV10, Berestycki17, Aru}.
For general log-correlated field the theory of GMC goes back to the work of Kahane \cite{Kahane85} and in the case of the GFF, the construction $\mu^\gamma_\mathrm{G}$ was re-discovered by Duplantier--Sheffield \cite{DS11} from a different perspective.
In a certain sense, the random measure $\mu^\gamma_\mathrm{G}$ encodes the \emph{geometry} of the GFF. For instance, the support of $\mu^\gamma_\mathrm{G}$ is a fractal set which is closely related to the concept of \emph{thick points}, \cite{HMP10}. We will not discuss these issues in this paper and we refer to \cite{Aru, CFLW} for further details. Let us just point out that the relation between Theorem~\ref{thm:gmc} and Corollary~\ref{cor:LB} below is based on such arguments.
\medskip
For log-correlated fields which are only asymptotically Gaussian, especially those coming from RMT such as the logarithm of the modulus of the Ginibre characteristic polynomial $\Psi_N$, the theory of Gaussian multiplicative chaos has been developed in \cite{Webb15, LOS18}.
The construction in \cite{LOS18} is inspired from a method of Berestycki \cite{Berestycki17} and it has been recently applied to unitary random matrices in \cite{NSW}, as well as to Hermitian unitary invariant random matrices in
\cite{BWW18} as well as in our work \cite{CFLW} in preparation.
In this paper, we apply directly the main result of \cite{LOS18} to construct subcritical GMC measures coming from the regularization $ \mathrm{X}(g_N^z)$, \eqref{X4}, of the logarithm of the Ginibre characteristic polynomial at a scale $\epsilon = N^{-1/2+\alpha}$ for a small $\alpha>0$.
This mesoscopic regularization makes it possible to compute the leading asymptotics of the exponential moments
of the field $ \mathrm{X}(g_N^z)$ -- see Proposition~\ref{thm:exp} below.
Then, using the results from \cite{LOS18}, these asymptotics allow us to prove that the limit of the renormalized exponential $\mu^\gamma_N = : \hspace{-.1cm}e^{\gamma \mathrm{X}(g_N^z)} \hspace{-.15cm}:$ exists for all $\gamma>0$ in the subcritical phase and that it is absolutely continuous with respect to the GMC measure $\mu^\gamma_\mathrm{G}$.
\begin{theorem} \label{thm:gmc}
Recall that $0< \epsilon_0 \le 1/4$ is fixed.
Let $\gamma >0$ and let $g_N^{z}$ be as in \eqref{gN} with $\epsilon=\epsilon(N) = N^{-1/2+\alpha}$ for a fixed $0<\alpha<1/2$. Let us define the random measure $\mu^\gamma_N$ on $ \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}$ by
\[
\mu^\gamma_N(\d z) = \frac{\exp\left(\gamma \mathrm{X}(g_N^{z}) \right)}{\mathds{E}_N[\exp\left(\gamma \mathrm{X}(g_N^{z}) \right)]} \sigma(\d z) .
\]
For any $0<\gamma < \gamma_* = \sqrt{8}$, the measure $\mu^\gamma_N$ converges in law as $N\to+\infty$ with respect to the weak topology toward a random measure
$\mu^\gamma_\infty$ which has the same law, up to a deterministic constant as $e^{\gamma\mathrm{G}_1(x)}\mu^\gamma_\mathrm{G}(\d x)$, where $\mathrm{G}_1$ is a smooth Gaussian process given by \eqref{reg} and $\mu^{\gamma}_\mathrm{G}$ is the GMC measure \eqref{muG}. In particular, our convergence covers the whole subcritical phase.
\end{theorem}
The proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:gmc} follows from applying \cite[Theorem 2.6]{LOS18}. Let us check that the correct assumptions hold. First, we can deduce \cite[Assumption 2.1, Assumption 2.2]{LOS18} from the CLT of Rider--Vir\`ag \eqref{clt}. Indeed, since for any fixed $\epsilon>0$, $\psi_\epsilon$ is a smooth function, we have that the process $(z, \epsilon)\mapsto \mathrm{X}\big(\psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z)\big)$ converges in the sense of finite dimensional distributions to a mean--zero Gaussian process whose covariance is given by \eqref{Sigma}. Namely, we have for any $\epsilon_1, \epsilon_2>0$ and $z_1, z_2 \in \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}$,
\begin{align}
\lim_{N\to+\infty} \mathds{E}_N\left[ \mathrm{X}\left( \psi_{\epsilon_1}(\cdot - z_1 ) \right) \mathrm{X}\left(\psi_{\epsilon_2}(\cdot - z_2) \right)\right]
&\notag
=\Sigma\left( \psi_{\epsilon_1}(\cdot - z_1 ) ; \psi_{\epsilon_2}(\cdot - z_2) \right)\\
&\notag
= - \frac{1}{2} \iint \log |x_1-x_2| \phi_{\epsilon_1}(x_1 - z_1) \phi_{\epsilon_2}(x_2-z_2) \d^2 x_1 \d^2 x_2 \\
&\label{cov2}
= \mathds{E}\left[ \mathrm{G}_{\epsilon_1}(z_1) \mathrm{G}_{\epsilon_2}(z_2) \right] \\
&\notag
= - \frac{1}{2} \iint \log |z_1-z_2 + \epsilon_1 u_1- \epsilon_2u_2| \phi(u_1) \phi(u_2) \d^2 u_1 \d^2 u_2 \\
&\label{cov1}
= \frac{1}{2} \log\left( |z_1-z_2 |^{-1} \wedge \epsilon_1^{-1} \wedge \epsilon_2^{-1} \right) + \underset{\epsilon_1, \epsilon_2 \to0}{\O(1)} ,
\end{align}
where the error term is uniform in $z_1, z_2 \in\mathds{D}$.
In particular, \eqref{cov2} shows that the process $(z, \epsilon)\mapsto \mathrm{X}\big(\psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z)\big)$ converges in the sense of finite dimensional distributions to $(z, \epsilon)\mapsto \mathrm{G}_\epsilon(z)$, \eqref{reg}, which is coming directly from mollifying a GFF.
Then, in this case, the \cite[Assumption 2.3]{LOS18} follows e.g. from \cite[Theorem 1.1]{Berestycki17}.
So, the only important input to deduce Theorem~\ref{thm:gmc} is to verify \cite[Assumption 2.4]{LOS18} which consists in obtaining \emph{ mod--Gaussian asymptotics} for the joint exponential moments of the field $\mathrm{X}(g_N^z)$.
Namely, we need the following asymptotics:
\begin{proposition} \label{thm:exp}
Fix $0<\alpha<1/2$, $R>0$ and let $\epsilon=\epsilon(N) = N^{-1/2+\alpha}$.
For any $n\in\mathbb{N}$, $\gamma_1 , \dots \gamma_n \in \mathds{R}$, $z_1, \dots, z_n \in \mathds{C}$, we denote
\begin{equation} \label{g}
g_N^{\vec{\gamma}, \vec{z}} (x) = {\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^n} \gamma_k \left( \psi_{\epsilon_k}(x-z_k) - \psi(x-z_k) \right) , \qquad x\in \mathds{C},
\end{equation}
with parameters $ \epsilon(N)\le \epsilon_1(N) \le \cdots \le \epsilon_n(N) <1$.
We have
\begin{equation} \label{exp}
\mathds{E}_N\left[\exp\left( \mathrm{X}(g_N^{\vec{\gamma}, \vec{z}} ) \right)\right] = \exp\Big( \frac 12 \Sigma^2(g_N^{\vec{\gamma}, \vec{z}} ) + \underset{N\to+\infty}{o(1)}\Big) ,
\end{equation}
where $\Sigma$ is given by \eqref{Sigma} and the error term is uniform for all $\vec{z} \in \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}^{\times n}$ and $\vec{\gamma} \in [-R,R]^n$.
\end{proposition}
The proof of Proposition~\ref{thm:exp} is the most technical part of this paper and it is postponed to Section~\ref{sect:clt}.
It relies on adapting in a non-trivial way the arguments of Ameur--Hedenmalm--Makarov from \cite{AHM15}.
In particular, our proofs relies heavily on the determinantal structure of the Ginibre eigenvalues.
We also need local asymptotics of the correlation kernel of the ensemble obtained after making a small perturbation of the Ginibre potential -- see Section~\ref{sect:notation}.
It turns out that these asymptotics are \emph{universal} and can be derived by using a method from the works of Berman \cite{Berman09, Berman12} which has also been applied to study the fluctuations of the eigenvalues of normal random matrices in \cite{AHM10, AHM11, AHM15}.
\medskip
As an important consequence of Theorem~\ref{thm:gmc}, we obtain the following corollary:
\begin{corollary} \label{cor:LB}
Fix $0<\alpha<1/2$, let $\epsilon=\epsilon(N) = N^{-1/2+\alpha}$ and let $\psi_\epsilon$ be as in \eqref{psi}. If $\gamma_*=\sqrt{8}$, then for any $\delta>0$ and any $0< \epsilon_0 \le 1/4$, we have
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{N\to+\infty} \P_N\left[ \max_{|z| \le \epsilon_0} \mathrm{X}\left(\psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z)\right) \ge (1-\delta)\frac{\gamma^*}{2} \log \epsilon^{-1} \right] =1 .
\end{equation*}
\end{corollary}
The proof of Corollary~\ref{cor:LB} follows form \cite[Theorem 3.4]{CFLW} with a few non trivial modifications, the details are given in Section~\ref{sect:LB}.
\subsection{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:LB}.}
We are now ready to complete the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:LB}.
Observe that by \eqref{logcharpoly} and \eqref{psi}, we have for $z\in\mathds{C}$ and $0<\epsilon \le 1$,
\[
\mathrm{X}\left(\psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z)\right) = \int \Psi_N(z+x) \phi_\epsilon(x) \d^2x .
\]
In particular since $\operatorname{supp}(\phi_\epsilon) \subseteq \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}$ for any $0<\epsilon \le 1$, this implies that we have a deterministic bound for any $z\in \mathds{C}$,
\begin{equation*}
\mathrm{X}\left(\psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z)\right) \le \max_{x\in \mathds{D}(z,\epsilon_0)} \Psi_N(x) .
\end{equation*}
Then
\[
\max_{|z| \le \epsilon_0} \mathrm{X}\left(\psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z)\right) \le \max_{|x|\le 2\epsilon_0} \Psi_N(x)
\]
and by Corollary~\ref{cor:LB} with $\alpha=\delta$, we obtain
\[
\lim_{N\to+\infty} \P_N\left[ \max_{|x| \le 2\epsilon_0} \Psi_N(x) \ge\frac{1-3\delta}{\sqrt{2}} \log N \right] =1 .
\]
Since $0< \epsilon_0 \le 1/4$ and $0<\delta<1/2$ are arbitrary, this yields the claim.
\subsection{Proof of Corollary~\ref{cor:LB}} \label{sect:LB}
This corollary follows from the results on the behavior of extreme values of general log--correlated which are asymptotically Gaussian developed in \cite[Section 3]{CFLW}.
Let us fix $0<\epsilon_0 \le 1/4$.
First of all, we verify that it follows from Proposition~\ref{thm:exp} and formula \eqref{cov1} that for any $\gamma\in\mathds{R}$, as $N\to+\infty$
\[
\mathds{E}_N\left[\exp\left(\gamma \mathrm{X}(g_N^{z}) \right)\right] = \exp\Big( \frac{\gamma^2}{4} \log \epsilon(N)^{-1} + \O(1)\Big) ,
\]
uniformly for all $z\in\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}$.
These asymptotics show that the field $z\mapsto \mathrm{X}(g_N^{z})$ satisfies \cite[Assumptions 3.1]{CFLW} on the disk $\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}$.
Moreover, by Theorem~\ref{thm:gmc}, $\mu^\gamma_N(\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}) \to \mu^\gamma_\infty(\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}) $ in distribution as $N\to+\infty$ where $0<\mu^\gamma_\infty(\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}) <+\infty $ almost surely.
This follows from the fact that the random measure $\mu^\gamma_\infty(\d x) \propto e^{\gamma\mathrm{G}_1(x)}\mu^\gamma_\mathrm{G}(\d x)$, $\mathrm{G}_1$ is a smooth Gaussian process on $\mathds{D}$, $\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}$ is a continuity set for the GMC measure $ \mu^\gamma_\mathrm{G}$ and $0<\mu^\gamma_\mathrm{G}(\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}) <+\infty $ almost surely.
Thus, \cite[Assumptions 3.3]{CFLW} holds and we can apply\footnote{Note that our normalization does not match with the standard convention for log--correlated fields used in \cite[Section 3]{CFLW}. Actually, we apply \cite[Theorem 3.4]{CFLW} to the field $\mathrm{X}(z)= \sqrt{2} \mathrm{X}(g_N^z)$ -- this explains why the critical value is $\gamma^*= \sqrt{8}$ and the factor $\frac{\gamma^*}{2}$ in \eqref{max1}. } \cite[Theorem 3.4]{CFLW} to obtain a lower--bound for the maximum of the field $z\mapsto \mathrm{X}(g_N^{z})$.
This shows that for any $0< \epsilon_0 \le 1/4$ and any $\delta>0$,
\begin{equation} \label{max1}
\lim_{N\to+\infty} \P_N\left[ \max_{|z| \le \epsilon_0} \mathrm{X}(g_N^{ z}) \ge \left(1-\frac{\delta}{2} \right) \frac{\gamma_*}{2} \log \epsilon(N)^{-1} \right] =1 .
\end{equation}
Let us point out that heuristically, the lower--bound \eqref{max1} follows from the facts that the random measure $\mu^\gamma_N$
from Theorem~\ref{thm:gmc} has most of its mass in the set $\left\{ z\in \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0} : \mathrm{X}(g_N^{z}) \ge \gamma(1-\delta)\Sigma^2(g_N^{z}) \right\}$ for large $N$ and that $\mu^\gamma_N$ has a non-trivial if and only if $\gamma< \gamma_*$.
Moreover, by \cite[Proposition 3.8]{CFLW}, we also obtain a lower--bound for the size of the sets where the field $z\mapsto \mathrm{X}(g_N^{ z})$ takes extreme values. Namely, under the assumptions of Proposition~\ref{thm:gmc}, we have for any $0 \le \gamma < \frac{\gamma_*}{\sqrt{2}}$ and any small $\delta>0$,
\begin{equation} \label{TP1}
\lim_{N\to+\infty} \P_N\left[ \bigg| \Big\{ z\in\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0} : \mathrm{X}(g_N^{ z}) \ge \frac{\gamma}{\sqrt{2}} \log \epsilon(N)^{-1} \Big\}\bigg| \ge \epsilon(N)^{(\gamma^2-\delta)/2 } \right] =1 .
\end{equation}
In Section~\ref{sect:TP}, we use these asymptotics to compute the leading order of the size of the sets of thick points of the characteristic polynomial of the Ginibre ensemble, hence proving Theorem~\ref{thm:TP}.
\medskip
Let us return to the proof of Corollary~\ref{cor:LB} and recall that $g_N^{z} = \psi_{\epsilon}(\cdot-z) - \psi(\cdot-z)$ with $\epsilon=\epsilon(N)$. So, in order to obtain the lower--bound, we must show that the random variable
$\max_{z\in \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}} \left| \mathrm{X}\left( \psi(\cdot-z) \right)\right|$
remains small compared to $\log \epsilon(N)^{-1}$ for large $N\in\mathbb{N}$.
To prove this claim, we need the following general estimate.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:maX}
Let $ \mathscr{F}_{r,0}$ be as in \eqref{classF}. For any $0<r<1$, there exists a constant $C_r>0$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{X2}
\mathds{E}_N\Big[ \big( \max_{f \in \mathscr{F}_{r,0}} \left| \mathrm{X}(f) \right| \big)^2 \Big] \le C_r \left(4+\log \sqrt{N} \right) .
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It follows from the estimate \eqref{ww} below that we have uniformly for all $\gamma \in [-1,1]$ and all $z\in\mathds{D}_r$,
\begin{equation} \label{LG}
\mathds{E}_N\left[e^{\gamma |\Psi_N(z)|}\right] \le \tfrac{2C_r}{\pi} N^{\gamma^2/8} .
\end{equation}
In particular, by Markov's inequality, this implies that for any $\lambda>0$,
\begin{equation} \label{TB}
\P_N\left[|\Psi_N(z)| \ge \lambda\right] \le \tfrac{2C_r}{\pi} N^{1/8} e^{- \lambda} .
\end{equation}
Observe that according to \eqref{X}, we have for any test function $f\in \mathscr{C}^2(\mathds{C})$,
\begin{equation} \label{X3}
\mathrm{X}(f) = \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_\mathds{C} \Delta f(x) \Psi_N(x) \d^2x .
\end{equation}
In particular, this implies that for all $f\in \mathscr{F}_{r,0}$,
\begin{equation*}
| \mathrm{X}(f) | \le \frac{1}{2\pi} \int_{|x| \le r} |\Psi_N(x)| \d^2x .
\end{equation*}
Then, by Jensen's inequality,
\begin{equation*}
| \mathrm{X}(f) |^2 \le \frac{1}{4\pi} \int_{|x| \le r} |\Psi_N(x)|^2 \d^2x .
\end{equation*}
Therefore, it holds that
\[
\mathds{E}_N\Big[ \big( \max_{f \in \mathscr{F}_{r,0}} \left| \mathrm{X}(f) \right| \big)^2 \Big] \le \frac{1}{4\pi} \int_{|x| \le r} \mathds{E}_N\left[ |\Psi_N(x)|^2 \right] \d^2x
\]
Hence, to obtain the bound \eqref{X2}, it suffices to show that for all $x\in \mathds{D}_r$,
\begin{equation} \label{M2}
\mathds{E}_N\left[|\Psi_N(x)|^2 \right] \le C_r( \log \sqrt{N}+ 4) .
\end{equation}
\medskip
Let us fix $z\in \mathds{D}_r$ and $\ell_N = \frac 12 \log \sqrt{N}$. Using the estimate \eqref{LG} with $\gamma= \lambda/\ell_N $, we obtain for any $0<\lambda< \ell_N$,
\[
\P_N[|\Psi_N(z)| \ge \lambda] \le C_re^{ \gamma^2 \ell_N/2 - \gamma \lambda}
= C_r e^{- \lambda^2/2\ell_N} .
\]
Then, by integrating this estimate, we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{TB1}
\int_0^{\ell_N} \lambda \P_N\left[|\Psi_N(z)| \ge \lambda\right] \d\lambda \le C_r \ell_N .
\end{equation}
Moreover, using the estimate \eqref{TB}, we also have
\begin{equation} \label{TB2} \begin{aligned}
\int_{\ell_N}^{+\infty} \lambda \P_N\left[|\Psi_N(z)| \ge \lambda\right] d\lambda
&\le C_r N^{1/8}\int_{\ell_N}^{+\infty} \lambda e^{-\lambda} d\lambda = C_r N^{1/8} (\ell_N +1) e^{-\ell_N} \\
& \le 2 C_r,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
since $N^{1/8} e^{-\ell_N} = N^{-1/8}$.
By combining the estimates \eqref{TB1} and \eqref{TB2}, we obtain for any $N\in \mathbb{N}$,
\[\begin{aligned}
\mathds{E}_N\left[|\Psi_N(z)|^2 \right] &= 2\int_0^{+\infty} \lambda \P_N\left[|\Psi_N(z)| \ge \lambda\right] d\lambda = 2C_r( \ell_N +2) .
\end{aligned}\]
This proves the inequality \eqref{M2} and it completes the proof.
\end{proof}
We are now ready to complete the proof of Corollary~\ref{cor:LB}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary~\ref{cor:LB}]
Let us recall that we let $\epsilon=\epsilon(N) = N^{-1/2+\alpha}$ for $0<\alpha<1/2$.
Moreover, by \eqref{psi}, we have $\Delta \psi = \phi \in \mathscr{C}^\infty_c(\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0})$ for some $0<\epsilon_0 \le 1/4$.
In particular, for any $z\in\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}$, the function
$x\mapsto \psi(x-z) / \| \phi\|_\infty$ belongs to $\mathscr{F}_{1/2,0}$.
By Lemma~\ref{lem:maX} and Chebyshev's inequality, this implies that for any $\delta>0$,
\begin{equation} \label{max2}
\P_N\left[ \max_{z\in \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}} \left| \mathrm{X}\left( \psi(\cdot-z) \right)\right| \ge \frac{\delta}{2} \log \epsilon^{-1} \right]
\le \frac{2C_{1/2} \| \phi\|_\infty^2}{ \delta^2} \frac{8+\log N }{(\log \epsilon^{-1})^2} .
\end{equation}
In particular, the RHS of \eqref{max2} converges to 0 as $N\to+\infty$.
Moreover, since $\mathrm{X}(\psi_{\epsilon}(\cdot-z)) = \mathrm{X}(g_N^{z}) + \mathrm{X}(\psi(\cdot-z))$ and $\gamma^*\ge 1$, we have
\[\begin{aligned}
\P_N\left[ \max_{|z| \le \epsilon_0} \mathrm{X}\left(\psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z)\right) \ge (1-\delta)\frac{\gamma^*}{2} \log \epsilon^{-1} \right]
& \ge \P_N\left[ \max_{|z| \le \epsilon_0} \mathrm{X}(g_N^{ z}) \ge \left(1-\frac{\delta}{2} \right) \frac{\gamma_*}{2} \log \epsilon(N)^{-1} \right] \\
&\qquad -\P_N\left[ \max_{z\in \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}} \left| \mathrm{X}\left( \psi(\cdot-z) \right)\right| \ge \frac{\delta}{2} \log \epsilon^{-1} \right]
\end{aligned}\]
By \eqref{max1} and \eqref{max2}, this implies that
\[
\lim_{N\to+\infty} \P_N\left[ \max_{|z| \le \epsilon_0} \mathrm{X}\left(\psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z)\right) \ge (1-\delta)\frac{\gamma^*}{2} \log \epsilon^{-1} \right] =1,
\]
which completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of the upper--bound} \label{sect:UB}
The goal of this section is to establish the upper--bound in Theorem~\ref{thm:Ginibre}.
Then, in Section~\ref{sect:concentration}, we adapt the proof in order to prove Theorem~\ref{thm:concentration}.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:UB}
For any fixed $0<r<1$ and $\varepsilon>0$, we have
\[
\lim_{N\to+\infty} \P_N \left[ \max_{\overline{\mathds{D}_r}} \Psi_N \le \frac{1+\varepsilon}{\sqrt{2}} \log N \right] =1 .
\]
\end{proposition}
In order to prove Proposition~\ref{prop:UB}, we need the following consequence of Theorem~\ref{thm:WW}: for any $0<r<1$, there exists a constant $C_r>0$ such that $\gamma\in[-1,4]$,
\begin{equation} \label{ww}
\mathds{E}_N[e^{\gamma \Psi_N(z)}] \le \tfrac{C_r}{\pi} N^{\gamma^2/8} .
\end{equation}
In fact, we do not need the precise asymptotics \eqref{WW} and the upper--bound \eqref{ww} for the Laplace transform of the field $\Psi_N$ suffices for our applications.
For instance, it is straightforward to deduce the following estimates.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:TP}
Fix $0<r<1$ and recall the definition \eqref{TP} of the set $\mathscr{T}_N^\beta$ of $\beta$--thick points.
We have for any $\beta \in [0,1]$,
\[
\mathds{E}_N\big[|\mathscr{T}_N^\beta|\big] \le C_r N^{-2\beta^2} .
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Markov's inequality, we have for any $\beta \ge 0$,
\[ \begin{aligned}
\mathds{E}_N\big[|\mathscr{T}_N^\beta|\big] & = \int_{\mathds{D}_r} \P[\Psi_N(x) \ge \beta \log N] \d^2x \\
&\le N^{-\gamma\beta} \int_{\mathds{D}_r} \mathds{E}\left[ e^{\gamma\Psi_N(x)}\right] \d^2x .
\end{aligned}\]
Taking $\gamma=4\beta$ and using the estimate \eqref{ww}, this implies the claim.
\end{proof}
For the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:UB}, we also need the following simple Lemma.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:radi}
Recall that $(\lambda_1, \dots , \lambda_N)$ denotes the eigenvalues of a Ginibre random matrix. For any $\delta\in [0,1]$ $($possibly depending on $N)$, we have for all $N\ge 3$,
\[
\P_N\left[ \max_{j\in[N]} |\lambda_j| \ge 1+\delta\right] \le \delta^{-1} \sqrt{N} e^{-N \delta^2/4} .
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let us recall that Kostlan's Theorem \cite{Kostlan92} states that the random variables $\left\{N |\lambda_1|^2 , \dots, N |\lambda_N|^2\right\} $ have the same law as $\left\{ \boldsymbol{\gamma}_1, \dots, \boldsymbol{\gamma}_N\right\} $
where $\boldsymbol{\gamma}_k$ are independent random variables with distribution
$\P[\boldsymbol{\gamma}_k \ge t] = \frac{1}{\Gamma(k)} \int_t^{+\infty} s^{k-1} e^{-s} ds$
for $k=1, \dots, N$.
By a union bound and a change of variable, this implies that
\[ \begin{aligned}
\P_N[ \max_{j\in[N]} |\lambda_j| \ge t ] &\le N \P[ {\boldsymbol{\gamma}_N} \ge N t] \\
&\le \frac{N^{N+1}}{\Gamma(N)} \int_{t}^{+\infty} s^{N} e^{-Ns} \frac{ds}{s} \\
&\le \frac{N^{N+1}e^{-N}}{\Gamma(N)t} \int_{t}^{+\infty} e^{-N\phi(s)}ds
\end{aligned}\]
where $\phi(s) = s- \log s -1$. Since $\phi$ is strictly convex on $[0,+\infty)$ with $\phi'(t)=1-1/t$, this implies that
\[ \begin{aligned}
\P_N[ \max_{j\in[N]} |\lambda_j| \ge t ]
& \le\frac{N^{N+1}e^{-N- N\phi(t)}}{\Gamma(N)t} \int_0^{+\infty} e^{-N(1-\frac 1t) s} ds \\
&\le \frac{ \sqrt{N} (1-1/N)^{-N}}{\sqrt{2\pi}e (t-1)} e^{-N \phi(t)} .
\end{aligned}\]
Using that $\phi(t) \ge t^2/4$ for all $t\in[0,2]$ and taking $t=1+\delta$, this completes the proof.
\end{proof}
We are now ready to give the Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:UB}.
\subsection{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:UB}}
Fix $0<r<1$ and a small $\varepsilon>0$ such that $r' = r+\sqrt{\varepsilon} <1$. The function $\Psi_N$ is subharmonic in $\mathds{C}\setminus\mathds{D}$, so by the maximum principle:
\[
\max_\mathds{C} \Psi_N = \max_{\overline{\mathds{D}}} \Psi_N .
\]
For $z\in\mathds{C}$, we let $P_N(z) = {\textstyle\prod_{j=1}^N } |z-\lambda_j|$ and
recall that the logarithmic potential of the circular law is given by~$\varphi$, \eqref{varphi}.
Conditionally on the event $\left\{\max_{j\in[N]} |\lambda_j| \le \frac{3}{2} \right\}$, we have the a--priori bound: $\max_{z\in\overline{\mathds{D}}}|P_N(z)| \le (\frac{5}{2})^N$.
Since $\Psi_N = \log P_N - N\varphi $ and $-\varphi \le 1/2$, by Lemma~\ref{lem:radi}, this shows that
\begin{equation} \label{sub8}
\P_N\left[ \max_{\overline{\mathds{D}}} \Psi_N \ge 3N \right] \le \P_N \left[\max_{j\in[N]} |\lambda_j| \ge \frac{3}{2} \right] \le 2 \sqrt{N} e^{-N/16} .
\end{equation}
The function $\Psi_N$ is upper--semicontinuous on $\mathds{C}$, so that it attains it maximum on $\overline{\mathds{D}_r}$. Let $x_* \in \overline{\mathds{D}_r}$ such that
\[
\Psi_N(x_*) = {\textstyle \max_{\overline{\mathds{D}_r}}}\ \Psi_N .
\]
Since the function $z\mapsto \log P_N(z)$ is subharmonic on $\mathds{C}$, we have
for any $\delta>0$,
\begin{equation} \label{sub1}
\Psi_N(x_*) \le \frac{1}{\pi \delta^2} \int_{\mathds{D}(x_*,\delta)} \hspace{-.3cm} \log P_N(z)\ \d^2z - N \varphi(x_*) .
\end{equation}
Observe that by Taylor' theorem, if $\mathds{D}(x_*,\delta) \subset \mathds{D}$, then
\[\begin{aligned}
\frac{1}{\pi \delta^2} \int_{\mathds{D}(x_*,\delta)} \hspace{-.3cm}\varphi(x) \d^2 x
& = \varphi(x_*) + \frac{1}{\pi \delta^2} \int_{\mathds{D}_\delta} \hspace{-.3cm} u\cdot \nabla \varphi(x_*)\ \d^2 u + \frac{1}{2\pi \delta^2} \int_{\mathds{D}_\delta} \hspace{-.3cm} u \cdot \nabla^2 \varphi(x_*) u\ \d^2 u \\
& = \varphi(x_*) + \frac{\Delta \varphi(x_*)}{4\pi \delta^2} \int_{\mathds{D}_\delta} \hspace{-.3cm} |u|^2 \d^2 u \\
&= \varphi(x_*) + \frac{\delta^2}{4} ,
\end{aligned}\]
where we used that $\varphi(z) = \frac{|z|^2-1}{2} $ for $z\in\mathds{D}$, \eqref{varphi}.
By \eqref{sub1}, this implies that
\begin{equation} \label{sub2}
\Psi_N(x_*) \le \frac{1}{\pi \delta^2} \int_{\mathds{D}(x_*,\delta)} \hspace{-.3cm} \Psi_N(z) \d^2z + \frac{N \delta^2}{4} .
\end{equation}
Choosing $\delta=\sqrt{ \varepsilon \frac{\log N}{N}}$ in \eqref{sub2}, we obtain
\[
\Psi_N(x_*) \le \frac{1}{\pi \delta^2} \int_{\mathds{D}(x_*,\delta)} \hspace{-.3cm}\Psi_N(z) \d^2z + \frac{\varepsilon}{4} \log N .
\]
On the event $\Big\{{\textstyle \max_{\overline{\mathds{D}_r}}}\ \Psi_N\ge \frac{1+\varepsilon}{\sqrt{2}} \log N \Big\}$, this implies that
\begin{equation} \label{sub6}
\frac{1}{\pi \delta^2} \int_{\mathds{D}(x_*,\delta)} \hspace{-.3cm}\Psi_N(z) \d^2z \ge \Big(
\tfrac{1}{\sqrt{2}}+ \frac{\varepsilon}{3} \Big) \log N .
\end{equation}
On the other--hand with $\beta= 1/\sqrt{2}$,
\begin{equation} \label{sub7}
\frac{1}{\pi \delta^2} \int_{\mathds{D}(x_*,\delta)} \hspace{-.3cm}\Psi_N(z) \d^2z \le
\tfrac{\log N}{\sqrt{2}} + \frac{1}{\pi \delta^2} \int_{\mathscr{T}_\beta}\Psi_N(z) \d^2z .
\end{equation}
Combining \eqref{sub6} and \eqref{sub7}, this implies
\[
\int_{\mathscr{T}_\beta}\Psi_N(z) \d^2z \ge \varepsilon \delta^2 \log N = \frac{(\varepsilon\log N)^2}{N}
\]
so that conditionally on the event $\Big\{ \frac{1+\varepsilon}{\sqrt{2}} \log N \le \max_{\overline{\mathds{D}_r}} \Psi_N \le \max_{\overline{\mathds{D}_{r'}}} \Psi_N \le \frac{\varepsilon^2}{2} (\log N)^2 \Big\}$, we obtain
\[
|\mathscr{T}_\beta| \ge \frac{( \varepsilon \log N)^2}{2N} .
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:TP} applied with $0<r'<1$ and $\beta= 1/\sqrt{2}$, this implies that
\begin{align} \notag
\P_N\left[ \tfrac{1+\varepsilon}{\sqrt{2}} \log N \le \max_{\overline{\mathds{D}_r}} \Psi_N \le \max_{\overline{\mathds{D}_{r'}}} \Psi_N \le \tfrac{\varepsilon^2}{2} (\log N)^2 \right]
&\le \P_N\left[ |\mathscr{T}_\beta| \ge \frac{( \varepsilon \log N)^2}{2N} \right] \\
& \label{sub3}
\le\frac{2N }{( \varepsilon \log N)^2} \mathds{E}_N\left[ |\mathscr{T}_\beta| \right] \le \frac{2 C_{r'}}{( \varepsilon \log N)^2} .
\end{align}
By a similar argument, taking $\delta= \varepsilon\frac{\log N}{\sqrt{N}}$ in \eqref{sub2}, we obtain conditionally on the event $ \{\max_{\overline{\mathds{D}_{r'}}} \Psi_N \ge \tfrac{\varepsilon^2}{2} (\log N)^2 \}$,
\[
\frac{(\varepsilon\log N)^2}{2} \le \Psi_N(x_*) \le \frac{1}{\pi \delta^2} \int_{\mathds{D}(x_*,\delta)} \hspace{-.3cm}\Psi_N(z) \d^2z + \frac{(\varepsilon\log N)^2 }{4} .
\]
Let $\mathscr{A} = \left\{ z\in \overline{\mathds{D}_{r'}} : \Psi_N(z) \ge \frac{(\varepsilon\log N)^2}{8} \right\} $.
Conditionally on the event
$ \left\{ \tfrac{\varepsilon^2}{2} (\log N)^2 \le \max_{\overline{\mathds{D}_{r'}}} \Psi_N \le
\max_{\overline{\mathds{D}}} \Psi_N \le 3N\right\}$, this gives
\[
\frac{3N|\mathscr{A}|}{\pi \delta^2} + \frac{(\varepsilon\log N)^2}{8} \ge \frac{1}{\pi \delta^2} \int_{\mathds{D}(x_*,\delta)} \hspace{-.3cm}\Psi_N(z) \d^2z \ge \frac{(\varepsilon\log N)^2 }{4} ,
\]
so that we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{sub4}
|\mathscr{A}| \ge \frac{(\varepsilon\log N)^4 }{8 N^2} .
\end{equation}
A variation of the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:TP} using the estimate \eqref{ww} with $0<r'<1$ and $\gamma=2$ shows that
$ \mathds{E}_N\left[ |\mathscr{A}| \right] \le C_{r'} \sqrt{N} e^{-(\varepsilon\log N)^2/4}$.
By \eqref{sub4}, this implies that if $N$ is sufficiently large,
\begin{align} \notag
\P_N \left[ \tfrac{\varepsilon^2}{2} (\log N)^2 \le \max_{\overline{\mathds{D}_{r'}}} \Psi_N \le \max_{\overline{\mathds{D}}} \Psi_N \le 3N\right]
& \le \P_N\left[ |\mathscr{A}| \ge \frac{(\varepsilon\log N)^4 }{8 N^2} \right] \\
&\notag\le N^2 \mathds{E}_N\left[ |\mathscr{A}| \right] \\
&\label{sub5}
\le C_{r'} N^{5/2} e^{-(\varepsilon\log N)^2/4} .
\end{align}
In order to complete the proof, it remains to observe that by combining the estimates \eqref{sub3}, \eqref{sub5} and \eqref{sub8}, we obtain
\[
\P_N\left[ \tfrac{1+\varepsilon}{\sqrt{2}} \log N \le \max_{\overline{\mathds{D}_r}} \Psi_N \right] \le \frac{2 C_{r'}}{( \varepsilon \log N)^2} + C_{r'} N^{5/2} e^{-(\varepsilon\log N)^2/4}+ 2 \sqrt{N} e^{-N/16} .
\]
The RHS converges to 0 as $N\to+\infty$.
\subsection{Concentration estimates for linear statistics: Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:concentration}} \label{sect:concentration}
In order to prove Theorem~\ref{thm:concentration}, we need the following estimates as well as Lemma~~\ref{lem:radi}.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:concest}
Fix $\varepsilon>0$ and $0<r<1$. There exists a universal constant $A>0$ such that conditionally on the event $\mathscr{B} = \{ \max_{j=1,\dots, N} |\lambda_j| \le 2\} $, we have for any function $f\in \mathscr{C}^2(\mathds{C})$ $($possibly depending on $N\in\mathbb{N})$ which is harmonic in $\mathds{C} \setminus \overline{\mathds{D}_r}$,
\begin{equation} \label{Xest1}
| \mathrm{X}(f) | \le
(\log N)^{1+\varepsilon} \int_\mathds{D} |\Delta f(z)| \frac{\d^2z}{2\pi}
+ C N \sqrt{ |\mathscr{G}|} \max_\mathds{C} |\Delta f| ,
\end{equation}
where $\mathscr{G} = \left\{ z\in \mathds{D}_r : |\Phi_N(z)| > (\log N)^{1+\varepsilon} \right\}$. Moreover, there exists a constant $C_r>0$ such that for any $\kappa >0$,
\begin{equation} \label{Xest2}
\P\left[|\mathscr{G}| \ge N^{-\kappa} \right] \le C_r N^{\kappa+ 1/8} e^{-(\log N)^{1+\varepsilon} } .
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Observe that since we assume that $f\in \mathscr{C}^2(\mathds{C})$ is harmonic in $\mathds{C} \setminus \overline{\mathds{D}_r}$, by definition of $\mathscr{G}$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{linstatest}
\left| \int_\mathds{C}\Delta f(z) \Phi_N(z)\ \d^2z \right| \le
(\log N)^{1+\varepsilon}\int_{\mathds{D}_r} |\Delta f(z)| \d^2z + \max_{\mathds{D}_r} |\Delta f| \int_{\mathscr{G}} |\Phi_N(z)| \d^2z .
\end{equation}
Then, by the Cauchy--Schwartz inequality,
\[
\int_{\mathscr{G}} |\Phi_N(z)| \d^2z \le
\sqrt{|\mathscr{G}| \int_{\mathds{D}} |\Phi_N(z)|^2 \d^2z }
\]
and conditionally on the event $\mathscr{B}$,
\[ \begin{aligned}
\int_{\mathds{D}} |\Phi_N(z)|^2 \d^2z &\le
2\int_{\mathds{D}} \left(\textstyle{\sum_{j=1}^N \log|z-\lambda_j|} \right)^2 \d^2z + \frac{N^2}{2} \int_\mathds{D} (1-|z|^2)^2 \d^2z\\
&\le N\left( 2 \int_\mathds{D} \textstyle{\sum_{j=1}^N \left( \log|z-\lambda_j| \right)^2} \d^2z + \frac{8\pi}{15} N\right) \\
&\le N^2 A^2 ,
\end{aligned}\]
where
$\displaystyle C= \sqrt{ 2 \sup_{|x| \le 2} \int_\mathds{D} \left( \log|z-x| \right)^2 \d^2z + \frac{8\pi}{15}} $
is a numerical constant. This shows that
\[
\int_{\mathscr{G}}|\Phi_N(z)| \d^2z \le C N \sqrt{ |\mathscr{G}|} .
\]
Then, according to formula \eqref{X3} and \eqref{linstatest},
we obtain the estimate \eqref{Xest1}.
In order to obtain the estimate on the size of the set $\mathscr{G}$, let us observe that using the estimate \eqref{LG} with $\gamma=1$, by Markov's inequality, we have
\[ \begin{aligned}
\mathds{E}_N\left[ |\mathscr{G}| \right] & = \int_{|x| \le r} \P\left[ |\Phi_N(x)| \ge (\log N)^{1+\varepsilon}
\right] \d^2x \\
&\le e^{-(\log N)^{1+\varepsilon} } \int_{|x| \le r} \mathds{E}[e^{|\Phi_N(x)|}] \d^2x \\
&\le C_r N^{1/8} e^{-(\log N)^{1+\varepsilon} } .
\end{aligned}\]
By Markov's inequality, this implies the estimate \eqref{Xest2}.
\end{proof}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:concentration}]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:concest}, for any test function $f \in \mathscr{F}_{r,\kappa}$, it holds conditionally on the event $\mathscr{B} = \{ \max_{j=1,\dots, N} |\lambda_j| \le 2\} $ that
\[
| \mathrm{X}(f) | \le (\log N)^{1+\varepsilon} \int_\mathds{D} |\Delta f(z)| \frac{\d^2z}{2\pi}
+ C N^{1+\kappa} \sqrt{ |\mathscr{G}|} .
\]
Hence, this implies that if $N \in \mathbb{N}$ is sufficiently large,
\[
\P_N\bigg[ \sup\left\{ |\mathrm{X}(f)| : f\in \mathscr{F}_{r,\kappa} \text{ and } \int_\mathds{D} |\Delta f(z)| \frac{\d^2z}{\pi} \le 1 \right\} \ge
(\log N)^{1+\varepsilon} \bigg]
\le \P_N\left[ |\mathscr{G}| \ge N^{-2(1+\kappa)} \right] + \P_N\left[ \mathscr{B}^c \right] .
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:radi} with $\delta=1$, we have $\P_N[\mathscr{B}^c] \le \sqrt{N} e^{-N}$ and using the estimate \eqref{Xest2},
$ \P_N\left[ |\mathscr{G}| \ge N^{-2(1+\kappa)} \right] \le C_r N^{2(1+\kappa)+ 1/8} e^{-(\log N)^{1+\varepsilon} }.$
By combining these estimates, this completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Thick points: Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:TP}} \label{sect:TP}
Like the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:Ginibre}, the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:TP} consists of a separate upper--bound \eqref{TPUB}
and lower--bound (Proposition~\ref{prop:TPLB} below) and it relies on similar techniques.
In particular, the upper--bound follows directly from Lemma~\ref{lem:TP}. Namely, by Markov's inequality, we have for any $\beta\in[0,1]$ and $\delta>0$,
\begin{equation} \label{TPUB}
\P_N\left[ |\mathscr{T}_N^\beta| \le N^{-2\beta^2+\delta}\right] \ge 1- \frac{ C_r}{N^\delta} .
\end{equation}
Then, to obtain the lower--bound, we rely the fact that the field $\Psi_N$ can be well approximated by
$\mathrm{X}\left(\psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z)\right) $ for $\epsilon = N^{-1/2+\alpha}$ and a small $\alpha>0$ and use the estimate \eqref{TP1}.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:TPLB}
For any $0<r<1$, any $0\le \beta <1/\sqrt{2}$ and any $\delta>0$, we have
\[
\lim_{N\to+\infty} \P_N\left[ | \mathscr{T}_N^\beta | \ge N^{-2\beta^2-\delta} \right] =1 .
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We fix parameters $r\in (0,1)$, $\beta \in [0,1/\sqrt{2})$, a small $\delta\in (0, 1/2]$ and $\epsilon_0 \in (0,1/4]$ with $\epsilon_0 < r/3$.
Recall that $\phi \in \mathscr{C}^\infty_c(\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0})$ is a mollifier and that for any $z\in\mathds{C}$,
\begin{equation} \label{X5}
\mathrm{X}\left(\psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z)\right) = \int \Psi_N(x) \phi_\epsilon(z-x) \d^2x ,
\end{equation}
where $\epsilon=\epsilon(N) = N^{-1/2+\alpha}$ as in Proposition~\ref{thm:gmc} -- the parameter $0<\alpha<1/2$ will be chosen later in the proof depending on $\beta$ and $\delta$.
Throughout the proof, we assume that $N$ is sufficiently large so that $\epsilon \ll \epsilon_0$, we let $\mathrm{c} = 2 \sup_{x\in\mathds{C}} \phi(x)$ and set
\[
\Upsilon_N^\beta : = \Big\{ z\in\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0} : \mathrm{X}\big(\psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z)\big) \ge (\beta+ \tfrac\delta8) \log N \Big\} .
\]
We also define the event
\[
\mathscr{A} = \Big\{ \max_{|x| \le r} \psi_N (x) \le 2 \gamma_* \log N\Big\} .
\]
Recall that $\gamma_* = \sqrt{8}$ is the critical value and by Proposition~\ref{prop:UB}, $\P_N[\mathscr{A}] \to 1$ as $N\to+\infty$.
Since $g_N^{z}= \psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z) -\psi(\cdot-z)$ by \eqref{gN}, we have for any $\gamma>0$,
\[\begin{aligned}
\P_N\left[ \bigg| \Big\{ z\in\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0} : \mathrm{X}(g_N^{ z}) \ge \frac{\gamma + \delta}{\sqrt{2}} \log \epsilon^{-1} \Big\}\bigg| \ge \epsilon^{\gamma^2/2- 3\delta/4} \right]
\le \P_N\left[ \max_{z\in \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}} \left| \mathrm{X}\left( \psi(\cdot-z) \right)\right| \ge \frac{\delta}{2} \log \epsilon^{-1} \right] \ \ \\
+
\P_N\left[ \bigg| \Big\{ z\in\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0} : \mathrm{X}\big(\psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z)\big) \ge \frac{\gamma+\delta/2}{\sqrt{2}} \log \epsilon^{-1} \Big\}\bigg| \ge \epsilon^{\gamma^2/2-3\delta/4} \right] .
\end{aligned}\]
Then, using the estimates \eqref{TP1} and \eqref{max2}, we obtain that for any $0 \le \gamma < \frac{\gamma_*}{\sqrt{2}}$ (with $\delta$ sufficiently small),
\begin{equation} \label{TP2}
\lim_{N\to+\infty} \P_N\left[ \bigg| \Big\{ z\in\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0} : \mathrm{X}\big(\psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z)\big) \ge \frac{\gamma+\delta/2}{\sqrt{2}} \log \epsilon^{-1} \Big\}\bigg| \ge \epsilon^{\gamma^2/2-3\delta/4} \right] =1 .
\end{equation}
Now, let us choose $\epsilon=\epsilon(N) = N^{-1/2+\alpha}$ with $\alpha = \frac{\delta}{8\sqrt{2}(\gamma+\delta/2)}$ with $\gamma = \sqrt{8}\beta$. Then the estimate \eqref{TP2} implies that for $0\le \beta <1/\sqrt{2}$,
\begin{equation} \label{TP3}
\lim_{N\to+\infty} \P_N\left[ | \Upsilon_N^\beta | \ge N^{-2\beta^2-\delta} \right] =1 .
\end{equation}
\medskip
Observe that by formula \eqref{X5}, by definition of the set of $\beta$--thick points, we have conditionally on $\mathscr{A}$, for any $z\in \mathds{D}_{2\epsilon_0}$,
\begin{equation} \label{TP4}
\begin{aligned}
\mathrm{X}\left(\psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z)\right) &= \int_{\mathds{D}_r\setminus\mathscr{T}_N^\beta} \Psi_N(x) \phi_\epsilon(x-z) \d^2x + \int_{\mathscr{T}_N^\beta} \Psi_N(x) \phi_\epsilon(x-z) \d^2x \\
&\le \beta \log N + \mathrm{c} \gamma_* \big| \mathscr{T}_N^\beta \cap \mathds{D}(z, \epsilon/4) \big| \epsilon^{-2} \log N ,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where we used that $ \phi_\epsilon(x-z) \le \frac{\mathrm{c}}{2\epsilon^2} \mathds{1}_{|x-z| \le \epsilon/4}$ at the last step.
Now, we tile the disk $\mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}$ with squares of area~$\epsilon^{-2}$. To be specific, let $M = \lceil \epsilon^{-1} \rceil$ and
$\square_{i,j} = [i\epsilon, (i+1)\epsilon] \times [j\epsilon, (j+1)\epsilon]$ for all integers $i,j \in [-M,M]$.
Note that since $z\mapsto \mathrm{X}\left(\psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z)\right) $ is a continuous process, for any $i,j \in \mathbb{Z} \cap [-M,M]$, we can choose
\[
z_{i,j} = \arg\max \big\{ \mathrm{X}\left(\psi_\epsilon(\cdot-z)\right) : z\in \square_{i,j} \big\} .
\]
The point of this construction is that we have the deterministic bound
\begin{equation} \label{TP5}
|\Upsilon_N^\beta| \le\ \epsilon^2 \hspace{-.5cm} \sum_{i,j \in \mathbb{Z} \cap [-M,M] } \hspace{-.3cm} \mathds{1}_{z_{i,j} \in \Upsilon_N^\beta} .
\end{equation}
Moreover, if $z_{i,j} \in \Upsilon_N^\beta$, using the estimate \eqref{TP4}, we obtain conditionally on $\mathscr{A}$,
\[
\big| \mathscr{T}_N^\beta \cap \mathds{D}(z_{i,j}, \frac\epsilon4) \big| \ge \frac{\delta \epsilon^2}{8\mathrm{c} \gamma_*} .
\]
By \eqref{TP5}, this implies that
\[
|\Upsilon_N^\beta| \le \frac{ 8 \mathrm{c} \gamma_* }{\delta} \hspace{-.1cm} \sum_{i,j \in \mathbb{Z} \cap [-M,M] } \hspace{-.3cm} \mathds{1}_{z_{i,j} \in \Upsilon_N^\beta} \big| \mathscr{T}_N^\beta \cap \mathds{D}(z_{i,j}, \frac\epsilon4) \big| .
\]
Since the squares $\square_{i,j}$ are disjoint (except for their sides) and $z_{i,j} \in \square_{i,j}$, we have the deterministic bound
\[
\sum_{i,j \in \mathbb{Z} \cap [-M,M] } \hspace{-.3cm} \big| \mathscr{T}_N^\beta \cap \mathds{D}(z_{i,j}, \frac\epsilon4) \big| \le 4 |\mathscr{T}_N^\beta| .
\]
Hence, we have shown that conditionally on $\mathscr{A}$, for $0\le \beta <1/\sqrt{2}$ and $\delta>0$ sufficiently small (but independent of $N$),
\[
|\mathscr{T}_N^\beta| \ge \frac{\delta}{32\mathrm{c} \gamma_* } |\Upsilon_N^\beta| .
\]
Combining this estimate with \eqref{TP3}, since we also have $\P_N[\mathscr{A}] \to 1$ as $N\to+\infty$ by Proposition~\ref{prop:UB}, this completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Gaussian approximation} \label{sect:clt}
In this section, we turn to the proof of our main asymptotic result: Proposition~\ref{thm:exp}.
Our proof relies on the so called \emph{Ward's identity} or \emph{loop equation} which have already been used in \cite{AHM15} and \cite{BBNY17, BBNY} to study the fluctuations of linear statistics of eigenvalues of random normal matrices and two--dimensional Coulomb gases respectively.
For completeness, we provide a detailed proof of the Ward's identity that we use in Section~\ref{sect:Ward}.
Then, to show that the error terms in Ward's identity are small, we relie on the determinantal structure of the Ginibre ensemble after we make a small perturbation of the potential $Q$ and on a local approximation of the correlation kernel (see Proposition~\ref{prop:approx} below) that we obtain in Section~\ref{sect:approx} by using the method from \cite{AHM15}.
Using this approximation, we show that the error terms are indeed negligible as $N\to+\infty$ in Sections \ref{sect:est}--\ref{sect:error3}.
Finally, we give the proof of Proposition~\ref{thm:exp} in Section~\ref{sect:proof} by using an classical argument introduced by Johansson \cite{Johansson98} to prove a CLT for $\beta$--ensembles on $\mathds{R}$.
Before starting, we need to introduce further notations.
\subsection{Notation} \label{sect:notation}
For any $N\in\mathbb{N}$, we define
\begin{equation} \label{polynom}
\mathscr{P}_N = \{\text{analytic polynomials of degree}<N \} .
\end{equation}
Let us recall that by Cauchy's formula, if $f$ is smooth and compactly supported inside $\mathds{D}$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{cauchy}
f(z) = \int \frac{\overline{\partial} f(x) }{z-x}\sigma(\d x) .
\end{equation}
Throughout Section~\ref{sect:clt}, we fix $n\in\mathbb{N}$, $\vec{\gamma} \in [-R,R]^n$, $\vec{z} \in \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}^{\times n}$ and we let $g_N = g_N^{\vec{\gamma}, \vec{z}}$ be as in formula \eqref{g}.
We recall thats as $\vec{z} \in \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}^{\times n}$ varies, the functions $x\mapsto g_N^{\vec{\gamma}, \vec{z}}(x)$ remain smooth and compactly supported inside $\mathds{D}_{2\epsilon_0}$ for all $N\in\mathbb{N}$.
Let us define for $t>0$,
\begin{equation} \label{Pbias}
\d \P_N^* =\frac{e^{t\mathrm{X}(g_N)}}{\mathds{E}_N [e^{t\mathrm{X}(g_N)}]} \d \P_N .
\end{equation}
The biased measure $\P_N^*$ corresponds to an ensemble of the type \eqref{Hamiltonian} with a \emph{perturbed potential} $Q^* := Q- \frac{t}{2N}g_N$. Therefore, under $\P_N^*$, $\lambda=(\lambda_1, \dots \lambda_N)$ also forms a determinantal point process on $\mathds{C}$ with a correlation kernel:
\[
k^*_N(x,z)= {\textstyle \sum_{k=0}^{N-1}} p_k^*(x) \overline{p_k^*(z)} ,
\]
where $(p_0^*, \dots , p_{N-1}^*)$ is an orthonormal basis of $\mathscr{P}_N$ with respect to the inner product inherited from $L^2(e^{-2N Q^*})$ such that $\operatorname{deg}(p_k^*) = k$ for $k=0,\dots, N-1$.
We denote
\begin{equation} \label{kernel2}
K_N^*(x,z) = k_N^*(x,z) e^{-N Q^*(x) - N Q^*(z)}
\end{equation}
and we define the \emph{perturbed one--point function}: $u_N^*(x) = K_N^*(x,x) \ge 0 $.
By definitions, we record that for any $N\in\mathbb{N}$ and all $x\in \mathds{C}$,
\begin{equation} \label{mass}
\int_{\mathds{C}} k^*_N(x,z) \d^2z = u_N^*(x)
\qquad\text{and}\qquad
\int_{\mathds{C}} u_N^*(z) \d^2z =N.
\end{equation}
Finally, we set $\widetilde{u}_N^* = u_N^* - \sigma$ where $\sigma(\d x) = \frac{1}{\pi} \mathds{1}_{\mathds{D}} \d^2 x$ denotes the circular law, so that for any smooth function $f:\mathds{C}\to\mathds{C}$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{1pt}
\mathds{E}_N^*[\mathrm{X}(f)] = \int f(x) \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) \d^2x .
\end{equation}
As in proposition~\ref{thm:exp}, we fix $0<\alpha<1/2$ and let $\epsilon=\epsilon(N) = N^{-1/2+\alpha}$.
In the following, we also fix $\beta>1$ and let
$\delta_N = \sqrt{(\log N)^\beta /N}$ -- see Proposition~\ref{prop:approx}.
Finally, we set $\eta= \eta(N) = \delta/\epsilon = (\log N)^{\beta/2} N^{-\alpha}$.
Throughout Section~\ref{sect:clt}, we assume that the dimension $N\in\mathbb{N}$ is sufficiently large so that $\eta \le 1/4$ and $\eta^\ell \le N^{-1}$ for a fixed $\ell\in\mathbb{N}$ -- e.g. we can pick $\ell = \lfloor 2/\alpha \rfloor$.
Moreover, we will use the following convention: $C, N_0 >0$ are positive constant which may vary from line to line and depends only on the mollifier $\phi$, the parameters $R,\alpha,\beta, \epsilon_0>0$ and $n, \ell\in\mathbb{N}$. Then, we also write $A_N=\O(B_N)$ if there exists such a constant $C>0$ such that $0\le A_N \le B_N$.
\subsection{Ward's identity} \label{sect:Ward}
Formula \eqref{ward} below is usually called \emph{Ward's equation} or \emph{loop equation}.
This equation is one of the key input of a method pioneered by Johansson \cite{Johansson98} to establish that linear statistics of $\beta$--ensembles are asymptotically Gaussian. In the following, we follow the approach of Ameur--Hedenmalm--Makarov \cite{AHM15} who applied Johansson's method to study the fluctuations of the eigenvalues of random normal matrices, including the Ginibre ensemble.
In particular, the terms $\mathfrak{T}^k_N$ for $k=1,2,3$ should be treated as corrections because of the factor $1/N$ in front of them.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:ward}
If $g\in \mathscr{C}^2_c(\mathds{D})$, we have for any $N\in\mathbb{N}$ and $t\in(0,1]$,
\begin{equation} \label{ward}
\mathds{E}_N^*\left[ \mathrm{X}(g) \right] =
\Sigma(g;g_N) +\frac{1}{N} \left(\mathfrak{T}^1_N(g) + \mathfrak{T}^2_N(g) - \mathfrak{T}^3_N(g)\right) ,
\end{equation}
where
\[ \begin{aligned}
\mathfrak{T}^1_N(g) := \int \Big( t \overline{\partial} g (x) \partial g_N(x) +\frac 14 \Delta g(x) \Big) \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) \d x , \qquad
\mathfrak{T}^2_N(g) := \iint \frac{\overline{\partial} g(x) }{x-z} \widetilde{u}_N^*(z) \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) \d^2 x\d^2z
\end{aligned}\]
and
\[
\mathfrak{T}^3_N(g) := \iint \frac{\overline{\partial} g(x) }{x-z} | K_N^*(x,z) |^2 \d^2 x\d^2z .
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
An integration by parts gives for any $h\in \mathscr{C}^1(\mathds{C})$ with compact support:
\begin{equation} \label{ward1}
\mathds{E}_N^*\left[ \sum_{j\neq k} \frac{h(x_j)}{x_j-x_k} + \sum_{j} \partial h(x_j) - \sum_{j} h(x_j) \left( 2N \partial Q - t\partial g_N\right)(x_j) \right] =0 .
\end{equation}
Observe that if we choose $h = \overline{\partial} g$, by \eqref{1pt} and \eqref{cauchy}, we
obtain
\begin{equation} \label{X1}
\mathds{E}_N^*\left[ \mathrm{X}(g) \right] = \int g(z)\ \widetilde{u}_N^*(z) \d^2 z = \iint \frac{h(x) }{z-x}\sigma(\d x)\ \widetilde{u}_N^*(z) \d^2z .
\end{equation}
On the one--hand, using the determinantal property of the ensemble $\P_N^*$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{ward2}
\mathds{E}_N^*\left[ \sum_{j\neq k} \frac{h(x_j)}{x_j-x_k} \right]
= \iint \frac{h(x) }{x-z} u_N^*(x) u_N^*(z) \d^2z\d^2x - \frac{1}{2} \iint \frac{h(x) - h(z)}{x-z} \left| K_N^*(x,z) \right|^2 \d^2z\d^2x,
\end{equation}
where the second term is given by $\mathfrak{T}^3_N(g)$ and the first term on the RHS satisfies
\begin{equation} \label{ward3}
\begin{aligned}
\frac 1N \iint \frac{h(x) }{x-z} u_N^*(x) u_N^*(z) \d^2z\d^2x
& = N \iint \frac{h(x) }{x-z} \sigma(\d z)\sigma(\d x) + \iint \frac{h(x) }{x-z} \sigma(\d z) \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) \d^2x \\
&\qquad+ \iint \frac{h(x) }{x-z} \sigma(\d x) \widetilde{u}_N^*(z) \d^2z
+ \frac 1N \mathfrak{T}^2_N(g) .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
On the other--hand, by \eqref{EL}, since $\partial Q (x) = \partial \varphi(x) = \frac 12 \int \frac{1}{x-z} \sigma(\d z) $ for all $x\in\mathds{D}$ and $\operatorname{supp}(h) \subset \mathds{D}$, we also have
\begin{align} \notag
\mathds{E}_N^*\left[ \sum_{j} h(x_j) \partial Q (x_j) \right] & = N \int h(x) \partial Q (x) \sigma(\d x) + \int h(x) \partial Q (x)\ \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) \d x \\
& \label{ward4}
= \frac{N}{2} \iint \frac{h(x) }{x-z} \sigma(\d z)\sigma(\d x)
+\frac 12 \iint \frac{h(x) }{x-z} \sigma(\d z)\ \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) \d x .
\end{align}
Combining formulae \eqref{ward2}, \eqref{ward3} and \eqref{ward4}, we obtain
\[ \begin{aligned}
\mathds{E}_N^*\left[ \frac 1N \sum_{j\neq k} \frac{h(x_j)}{x_j-x_k} - 2 \sum_{j} h(x_j) \partial Q (x_j) \right] = \iint \frac{h(x) }{x-z} \sigma(\d x) \widetilde{u}_N^*(z) \d^2z
+ \frac 1N \left( \mathfrak{T}^2_N(g) - \mathfrak{T}^3_N(g) \right) .
\end{aligned} \]
By formula \eqref{X1}, this implies that
\begin{equation} \label{ward5}
\mathds{E}_N^*\left[ \frac 1N \sum_{j\neq k} \frac{h(x_j)}{x_j-x_k} - 2 \sum_{j} h(x_j) \partial Q (x_j) \right]
= - \mathds{E}_N^*\left[ \mathrm{X}(g) \right] + \frac 1N \left( \mathfrak{T}^2_N(g) - \mathfrak{T}^3_N(g) \right).
\end{equation}
Finally, combining formulae \eqref{ward1} and \eqref{ward5} with $h = \overline{\partial} f$, we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{ward6}
\mathds{E}_N^*\left[ \mathrm{X}(g) \right] = \frac 1N \mathds{E}_N^*\left[ \sum_j \Big(t \overline{\partial} g(x_j) \partial g_N(x_j) +\frac 14 \Delta g(x_j) \Big) \right]
+ \frac 1N \left( \mathfrak{T}^2_N(g) - \mathfrak{T}^3_N(g) \right) ,
\end{equation}
where we used that $\partial \overline{\partial} g = \frac 14 \Delta g$. Finally using that
$\displaystyle \int \Delta g(x) \sigma(\d x) =0 $ since $\operatorname{supp}(g) \subseteq \mathds{D}$ and \eqref{Sigma}, we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{ward7}
\frac 1N \mathds{E}_N^*\left[ \sum_j \Big(\overline{\partial} g(x_j) \partial g_N(x_j) +\frac 14 \Delta g(x_j) \Big)\right]
= t\Sigma(g;g_N) + \frac 1N \int \Big(t\overline{\partial} g(x) \partial g_N(x) +\frac 14 \Delta g(x) \Big) \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) \d x .
\end{equation}
Combining formulae \eqref{ward6} and \eqref{ward7}, this completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{kernel approximation} \label{sect:kernel}
Let us recall that the probability measure $\P_N^*$ induces a determinantal process on $\mathds{C}^N$ with correlation kernel $K_N^*$, \eqref{kernel2}.
In order to estimate the RHS of \eqref{ward}, we need the asymptotics of the this kernel as the dimension $N\to+\infty$.
In general, this is a challenging problem, however we expect that the kernel decays quickly off diagonal and that its asymptotics near the diagonal are universal in the sense that they are similar to that of the Ginibre correlation kernel $K_N$. In Section~\ref{sect:approx}, using the method of Berman \cite{Berman09}, see also \cite{Berman12, AHM10,AHM15}, we compute the asymptotics of $K_N^*$ near the diagonal.
To state our result, let us define the \emph{approximate Bergman kernel}:
\begin{equation} \label{kapprox}
k^\#_N(x,w) = \frac{N}{\pi} e^{N x \overline{w}} e^{-t \Upsilon_N^w(x-w) } ,
\qquad x,w\in\mathds{C}.
\end{equation}
where $\Upsilon_N^w(u) = g_N(w) + \sum_{i=1}^\ell \frac{u^i}{i} \partial^i g_N(w)$.
We also let
\begin{equation} \label{K0}
K^\#_N(x,w) = k^\#_N(x,w) e^{-NQ^*(z) - N Q^*(w)} ,
\qquad x,w\in\mathds{C}.
\end{equation}
Let us state our main asymptotic result that we prove in Section~\ref{sect:BA}.
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:approx}
Let $\vartheta_N : = \sum_{k=1}^n \epsilon_k^{-2} \mathds{1}_{\mathds{D}(z_k, \epsilon_k)}$ and $\delta_N := \sqrt{(\log N)^\beta /N}$ for $\beta>1$. There exists constants $L, N_0>0$ such that for all $N\ge N_0$, we have for any $z\in \mathds{D}_{1-2\delta_N}$ and all $w\in\mathds{D}(z,\delta_N)$,
\[
\left|K^*_N(w,z) - K^\#_N(w,z) \right| \le L \left( \vartheta_N(z) + 1 \right) .
\]
\end{proposition}
\begin{remark} \label{rk:uniformity}
We should emphasize that the constants $L, N_0>0$ do not depend on $\vec{\gamma}\in[-R,R]^n$, $\vec{z} \in \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}^{\times n}$, nor $t\in[0,1]$. Consequently, our estimates in the remainder of Section~\ref{sect:clt} are also uniform for all $t\in(0,1]$, $\vec{\gamma} \in [-R,R]^{n}$ and $\vec{z} \in \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}^{\times n}$ even though this will not be emphasized to lighten the presentation.
In fact, since the parameter $t\in(0,1]$ is not relevant for our analysis, we will also assume that $t=1$ to simplify notation\footnote{Indeed, this is equivalent to change the parameters $\vec{\gamma}$ to $t\vec{\gamma}$.}.
\end{remark}
In the remainder of this section and in Section~\ref{sect:est}, we discuss some consequences of the approximation of Proposition~\ref{prop:approx}.
Then, in Sections~\ref{sect:error1}--\ref{sect:error3}, we obtain the necessary estimates on the term $\mathfrak{T}^k_N(g_N)$ for $k=1,2,3$ in order to complete the proof of Proposition~\ref{thm:exp} in Section~\ref{sect:proof}.
\medskip
By definition, with $t=1$, we have for any $z\in\mathds{C}$,
\[
K^\#_N(z,z) = \frac{N}{\pi} e^{N|z|^2 - g_N(z) - 2N Q^*(z)} = \frac{N}{\pi} .
\]
Then, observe that by taking $w=z$ in the estimate of Proposition~\ref{prop:approx}, we obtain for any $z\in \mathds{D}_{1-2\delta_N}$,
\begin{equation} \label{1ptest}
| \widetilde{u}_N^*(z) | \le L(\vartheta_N(z) +1) ,
\end{equation}
where we used $\sigma(z) = 1/\pi$ if $z\in\mathds{D}$.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:04}
We have as $N\to+\infty$,
\begin{equation*}
\int_\mathds{C} | \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) | \d^2 x = \O(N \delta_N) .
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First, let us observe that since $\operatorname{supp}(\sigma) = \overline{\mathds{D}}$, we have
\begin{equation} \label{1pt1}
\int_{\mathds{C}\setminus\mathds{D}} | \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) | \d^2 x = \int_{\mathds{C}\setminus\mathds{D}} u_N^*(x) \d^2 x = N - \int_\mathds{D} u_N^*(x) \d^2 x ,
\end{equation}
by \eqref{mass}. Moreover, since
\begin{equation} \label{vartheta}
\int_\mathds{D} (\vartheta_N(x) +1) \d^2x = (n+1)\pi ,
\end{equation}
using the estimate \eqref{1ptest}, we also have
\begin{equation} \label{1pt2}
\int_{|x| \le 1-2\delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm} | \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) | \d^2 x =\O(1) .
\end{equation}
In particular, this implies that
\[
\left| \int_{|x| \le 1-2\delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm} u_N^*(x) \d^2 x - N \int_{|x| \le 1-2\delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}\sigma(\d x) \right| \le \int_{|x| \le 1-2\delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm} | \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) | \d^2 x =\O(1) .
\]
Hence, since $\displaystyle \int_{|x| \le 1-2\delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}\sigma(\d x) = (1-2\delta_N)^2 $ we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{1pt3}
\int_\mathds{D} u_N^*(x) \d^2 x \ge \int_{|x| \le 1-2\delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm} u_N^*(x) \d^2 x \ge N - \O(N\delta_N) .
\end{equation}
Combining the estimate \eqref{1pt3} with formula \eqref{1pt1}, this shows that as $N\to+\infty$,
\begin{equation} \label{1pt4}
\int_{\mathds{C}\setminus\mathds{D}} | \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) | \d^2 x = \O(N\delta_N) .
\end{equation}
Using the uniform from Lemma~\ref{lem:02}, there exists $C>0$ such that $ | \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) | \le C N$ for all $x\in \mathds{C} $ and this implies that
\begin{equation} \label{1pt5}
\int_{ 1-2\delta_N \le |x| \le 1} \hspace{-.3cm} | \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) | \d^2 x =\O(N \delta_N) .
\end{equation}
Combining the estimates \eqref{1pt2}, \eqref{1pt4} and \eqref{1pt5}, this completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Technical estimates} \label{sect:est}
We denote the Gaussian density with variance $2/N$ by
\[
\Phi_N(u) : = \tfrac{N}{\pi} e^{-N|u|^2} .
\]
Since for any $x,z\in\mathds{C}$,
\begin{equation} \label{Q}
NQ^*(z) + NQ^*(x) - N\Re\{z\overline{x}\} + g_N(x) = \frac 12 \left( |z-x|^2 + g_N(x) - g_N(z) \right)
\end{equation}
by formula \eqref{K0}, we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{K3}
\begin{aligned}
| K^\#_N(z,x) |^2 & = \tfrac{N}{\pi} \Phi_N(x-z) e^{g_N(z)-g_N(x) -2 \sum_{i=1}^\ell \frac{(x-x)^i}{i} \partial^i g_N(x) } .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
We should view the last factor or \eqref{K3} as a correction, indeed on small scales, i.e.~if $|x-z| \le \delta_N$, then $ e^{g_N(z)-g_N(x) -2 \sum_{i=1}^\ell \frac{(x-x)^i}{i} \partial^i g_N(x)} = 1+\O(\eta)$.
In particular, this implies that if $N$ is sufficiently large, for all $x,z\in\mathds{C}$ such that $|x-z| \le \delta_N$,
\begin{equation} \label{K9}
|K_N^{\#}(x,z)|\le N .
\end{equation}
Actually, formula \eqref{K3} shows that on short scales $| K^\#_N(z,x) |^2$ is well approximated by the Gaussian kernel $\Phi_N(x-z)$.
We use this fact to prove the following Lemma.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:05}
Recall that we fixed $\ell \in\mathbb{N}$ in such a way that $\eta^\ell \le N^{-1}$. There exists coefficients $c_1, \dots , c_\ell \ge 0$ independent of $N\in\mathbb{N}$ such that for any $x\in\mathds{D}$,
\[
\int_{|x-z| \le \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm} | K_N^\#(z,x) |^2 \d^2z = N\left( \sigma(x)+ {\textstyle \sum_{j=1}^{\ell} } \frac{c_j}{N^j} \Delta^jg_N(x) \right) + \O(\delta_N^2) ,
\]
as $N\to+\infty$, with a uniform error.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Throughout this proof, let us fix $x\in\mathds{C}$.
Since $g_N$ is a smooth function, by Taylor Theorem, there exists a matrix $\mathrm{M} \in \mathds{R}^{\ell \times \ell}$ such that for all $z\in\mathds{D}(x,\delta_N)$,
\[ \begin{aligned}
&g_N(x) - g_N(z) - \sum_{i=1}^\ell \frac{(x-x)^i}{i} \partial^i g_N(x)
=- 2\i\Im\left\{\partial g_N(z)(x-z) \right\} \\
&\qquad
+ \underbrace{\sum_{j=1}^\ell \Delta^jg_N(x) \frac{ |x-z|^{2j}}{4j!j!}}_{\displaystyle : = \mathrm{Y}^1_x(x-z)}
+ \underbrace{\sum_{\substack{ 2 \le i+j \le 2\ell \\ i \neq j}} \mathrm{M}_{i,j} (\overline{x-z})^j(x-z)^{i} \partial^i \overline{\partial}^{j}\hspace{-.1cm} g_N(x)}_{\displaystyle : = \mathrm{A}^1_x(x-z)} + \O\left(\delta_N^{2\ell+1} \| \nabla^{2\ell+1}g_N \|_\infty\right) .
\end{aligned}\]
Observe that, since $\| \nabla^j g \|_{\infty} = \O(\epsilon^{-j})$ for any $j\in\mathbb{N}$,
the error term in the previous formula is of order $\eta^{2\ell+1} \le N^{-2}$.
Moreover, even though it is not emphasized, both $ \mathrm{Y}^1_x , \mathrm{A}^1_x$ depend on $N\in\mathbb{N}$ and we have for all $|u| \le \delta_N$,
\begin{equation} \label{Aest}
| \mathrm{Y}^1_x(u)| , | \mathrm{A}^1_x(u) | = \O(\eta^2) .
\end{equation}
Then, by formula \eqref{K3}, we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{K2}
| K_N^\#(z,x) |^2 = \frac{N}{\pi} \Phi_N(x-z)\exp\left( \mathrm{Y}^1_x(x-z) + \mathrm{A}^1_x(x-z) \right) + \O(1)
\end{equation}
where the error term is uniform for all $x\in\mathds{C}$ and $z\in \mathds{D}(x,\delta_N)$.
\medskip
Importantly, note that since both $\Phi_N$ and $\mathrm{Y}^1_x$ are radial functions, we have for any $ k \in\mathbb{N}$,
\[
\int_{|u| \le \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm} \left( \mathrm{A}^1_x(u) \right)^k \exp\left( \mathrm{Y}^1_x(u) \right) \Phi_N(\d u) = 0 .
\]
Using \eqref{Aest} and \eqref{K2}, this implies that
\[\begin{aligned}
\int_{|x-z| \le \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm} | K_N^\#(z,x) |^2 \d^2z
&= \frac{N}{\pi} \int_{|u| \le \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm} \exp\left( \mathrm{Y}^1_x(x-z) + \mathrm{A}^1_x(x-z) \right) \Phi_N(\d u) + \O(\delta_N^2) \\
&= \frac{N}{\pi} \int_{|u| \le \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}\exp\left( \mathrm{Y}^1_x(u) \right) \Phi_N(\d u) + \O(\delta_N^2) \\
&= \frac{N}{\pi} \int_{|u| \le \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm} \left(1+ {\textstyle \sum_{j=1}^{\ell} } \tfrac{c_j}{j!}\Delta^jg_N(x) |u|^{2j} \right) \Phi_N(\d u) + \O(\delta_N^2) ,
\end{aligned}\]
since $\exp\left( \mathrm{Y}^1_x(u) \right) = 1+ \sum_{j=1}^{\ell} \tfrac{c_j}{j!}\Delta^jg_N(x) |u|^{2j} + \O(N^{-2})$ for some coefficients $c_j\ge 0$ which do not depend on $N\in\mathbb{N}$ -- the error term follows from the fact that $\eta^{\ell} \le N^{-1}$ and it is uniform in $x\in\mathds{C}$ and $|u| \le \delta_N$.
Since for any integer $j\ge 0$,
\begin{equation} \label{Gmoment}
\int_{|u| \le \delta_N } |u|^{2j} \Phi_N(\d u) = N^{-j} \left( j! + \O(e^{- N\delta_N^2}) \right) ,
\end{equation}
this implies that
\begin{equation} \label{K1}
\int_{|x-z| \le \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm} | K_N^\#(z,x) |^2 \d^2z = \frac{N}{\pi} \left( 1+ {\textstyle \sum_{j=1}^{\ell} } \frac{c_j}{N^j} \Delta^jg_N(x) \right) +\O(\delta_N^2)
\end{equation}
with a uniform error. Since $\sigma(x)= 1/\pi$ for $x\in \mathds{D}$, this completes the proof.
\end{proof}
We can use Lemma~\ref{lem:05} to estimate a similar integral for the correlation kernel $ K_N^*$.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:06}
We have for any $x\in \mathds{D}_{1-2\delta_N}$, as $N\to+\infty$
\[
\int_{|x-w| > \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}|K^*_N(z,x) |^2 \d^2z
= \O\left(N \delta_N^2 \left( 1+ \vartheta_N(x) \right) \right) .
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First of all, let us observe that
\[ \begin{aligned}
\left| \int_{|x-w| \le \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}|K^*_N(z,x) |^2 \d^2z
- \int_{|x-w| \le \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}|K^\#_N(z,x) |^2 \d^2z \right|
&\le 2 \int_{|x-z| \le \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}|K^\#_N(z,x) | \left| K^*_N(z,x) - K^\#_N(z,x) \right|\d^2z \\
&\quad + \int_{|x-z| \le \delta_N} \hspace{-.1cm} \left| K^*_N(z,x) - K^\#_N(z,x) \right|^2\d^2z .
\end{aligned}\]
According to Proposition~\ref{prop:approx}, since $\vartheta_N \le n \epsilon^{-2}$, we have for any $x\in\mathds{D}_{1/2}$,
\begin{equation} \label{K4}
\int_{|x-z| \le \delta_N} \hspace{-.1cm} \left| K^*_N(z,x) - K^\#_N(z,x) \right|^2\d^2z = \O\left(\eta^2 (\vartheta_N(x) +1) \right) .
\end{equation}
Moreover, using the estimate \eqref{K9}, we also have for any $x\in\mathds{D}_{1/2}$,
\begin{equation} \label{K5}
\int_{|x-z| \le \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}|K^\#_N(z,x) | \left| K^*_N(z,x) - K^\#_N(z,x) \right|\d^2z \le \pi L N \delta_N^2 (\vartheta_N(x) +1) .
\end{equation}
This shows that for any $x\in \mathds{D}_{1-2\delta_N}$,
\[
\int_{|x-w| \le \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}|K^*_N(z,x) |^2 \d^2z
= \int_{|x-w| \le \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}|K^\#_N(z,x) |^2 \d^2z +\O\left(N \delta_N^2 (\vartheta_N(x) +1)\right)
\]
Using the reproducing property \eqref{mass} and Lemma~\ref{lem:05}, this implies that for any $x\in \mathds{D}_{1-2\delta_N}$,
\[ \begin{aligned}
\int_{|x-w| > \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}|K^*_N(z,x) |^2 \d^2z
& = u^*_N(x) - \int_{|x-w| \le \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}|K^\#_N(z,x) |^2 \d^2z +\O\left(N \delta_N^2 (\vartheta_N(x) +1)\right) \\
& = \widetilde{u}^*_N(x) - N{\textstyle \sum_{j=1}^{\ell} } \frac{c_j}{N^j} \Delta^jg_N(x) +\O\left(N \delta_N^2 (\vartheta_N(x) +1)\right) .
\end{aligned}\]
Using the estimate $| \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) | \le L(\vartheta_N(x) +1)$, see \eqref{1ptest}, and the bound $ | \Delta^{j+1} g_N(x)| \le C \epsilon^{-2j} \vartheta_N(x)$ for $j=0,\dots \ell-1$, this yields the claim.
\end{proof}
Finally, we need a last Lemma which relies on the \emph{anisotropy} of the \emph{approximate Bergman kernel} $K_N^{\#}$ that we can see from formula \eqref{K3}.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:07}
We have as $N\to+\infty$,
\[ \iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |z-x| \le \delta_N}} \hspace{-.1cm} \frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x)- \overline{\partial} g_N(z)}{x-z} |K_N^{\#}(x,z)|^2 \d^2z \d^2x = \O(1) .
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof if analogous to that of Lemma~\ref{lem:05}.
Since $g$ is a smooth function, by Taylor Theorem up to order $\ell\in\mathbb{N}$, we have for any $x \neq z$,
\[
\frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x)- \overline{\partial} g_N(z)}{x-z}
= \underbrace{\sum_{j=0}^{\ell-1} \Delta^{j+1} g_N(x) \frac{|x-z|^{2j}}{j!(j+1)!}}_{\displaystyle : = \mathrm{Y}^2_x(x-z)}
+ \underbrace{\sum_{\substack{ 1 \le i+j \le 2\ell \\ i \neq j+1}} \frac{(\overline{x-z})^j(x-z)^{i-1} }{i! j!} \partial^i \overline{\partial}^{j+1} \hspace{-.16cm}g_N(x)}_{\displaystyle : = \mathrm{A}^2_x(x-z)}
+ \O\left(\delta_N^{2\ell}\| \nabla^{2(\ell+1)} g_N\|_\infty\right) ,
\]
where the error term is uniform.
Since $\| \nabla^{k} g\|_\infty = O(\epsilon^{-k})$ for any $k\in\mathbb{N}$ and we choose $\ell\in\mathbb{N}$ in such a way $\eta^\ell \le N^{-1}$, we obtain
\[
\frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x)- \overline{\partial} g_N(z)}{x-z} = \mathrm{Y}^2_x(x-z) + \mathrm{A}^2_x(x-z)
+ \O(N^{-1}) .
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lem:05},
we immediately see that $\displaystyle \iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |z-x| \le \delta_N}} \hspace{-.1cm}|K_N^{\#}(x,z)|^2 \d^2z \d^2x = \O(N)$ and we obtain
\[
\mathfrak{Z}_N : = \iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |z-x| \le \delta_N}} \hspace{-.1cm}\frac{\overline{\partial} g(x)- \overline{\partial} g(z)}{x-z} |K_N^{\#}(x,z)|^2 \d^2z \d^2x
=\iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |z-x| \le \delta_N}} \hspace{-.1cm}\left( \mathrm{Y}^2_x(x-z) + \mathrm{A}^2_x(x-z) \right) |K_N^{\#}(x,z)|^2 \d^2z \d^2x
+\O(1) .
\]
Using formula \eqref{K2}, by a change of variable, this implies that
\[
\mathfrak{Z}_N = \iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |u| \le \delta_N}}
\left( \mathrm{Y}^2_x(u) + \mathrm{A}^2_x(u) \right) \left(\frac{N}{\pi} \exp\left( \mathrm{Y}^1_x(u) + \mathrm{A}^1_x(u) \right)
\Phi_N(u)+\O(1) \right) \d^2u \d^2x .
\]
Using the estimates $|\mathrm{Y}^1_x(u)| , |\mathrm{A}^1_x(u)| = \O(\epsilon^{-2})$ which are uniform for $x,u\in\mathds{C}$, we get
\[
\mathfrak{Z}_N = \frac{N}{\pi} \iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |u| \le \delta_N}}
\left( \mathrm{Y}^2_x(u) + \mathrm{A}^2_x(u) \right) \exp\left( \mathrm{Y}^1_x(u) + \mathrm{A}^1_x(u)\right) \Phi_N(\d u) \d^2x
+\O(\eta^2)
\]
If we proceed exactly as in the proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:05}, this implies that
\[ \begin{aligned}
\mathfrak{Z}_N
&= \frac{N}{\pi} \iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |u| \le \delta_N}}
\mathrm{Y}^2_x(u) \exp\left( \mathrm{Y}^1_x(u)\right) \Phi_N(\d u) \d^2x
+\O(\eta^2)\\
&= \frac{N}{\pi} \iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |u| \le \delta_N}}
\left({\textstyle \sum_{j=0}^{\ell-1} } \tfrac{c'_j}{j!}\Delta^{j+1}g_N(x) |u|^{2j} \right) \Phi_N(\d u) \d^2x + \O(1) ,
\end{aligned}\]
since we can express $ \mathrm{Y}^2_x(u) \exp\left( \mathrm{Y}^1_x(u)\right) = \sum_{j=0}^{\ell-1}\tfrac{c'_j}{j!} \Delta^{j+1} g_N(x) |u|^{2j} + \O(N^{-1})$ for some coefficients $c'_j\ge 0$ by our choice of $\ell\in\mathbb{N}$.
Hence, using the estimate \eqref{Gmoment}, our asymptotics imply that
\[
\left| \iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |z-x| \le \delta_N}} \hspace{-.1cm}
\frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x)- \overline{\partial} g_N(z)}{x-z} |K_N^{\#}(x,z)|^2 \d^2z \d^2x \right|
= \frac{N}{\pi} \sum_{j=0}^{\ell-1} \frac{ c'_j}{N^j} \int_{|x| \le 1/2} \hspace{-.1cm}\Delta^{j+1}g_N(x) \d^2x + \O(1) .
\]
Since all the integrals on the RHS vanish because $\operatorname{supp}(g_N) \subset \mathds{D}_{1/2}$, this completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Error of type $\mathfrak{T}^1_N$} \label{sect:error1}
In Sections~\ref{sect:error1}--\ref{sect:error3}, we use the estimates that we obtained in Sections~\ref{sect:kernel} and~\ref{sect:est} in order to bound the error terms when we apply Proposition~\ref{prop:ward} to the function $g_N = g_N^{\vec{\gamma}, \vec{z}}$ given by \eqref{g}. Let us denote
\begin{equation} \label{Sigmag}
\Sigma = \Sigma(g_N) = \sqrt{ \int \overline{\partial} g_N(x) \partial g_N(x) \sigma(\d x)} .
\end{equation}
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:error1}
We have
$\left| \mathfrak{T}^1_N(g_N) \right| = \O\left( \Sigma^2 \epsilon^{-2} \right)$,
uniformly for all $t\in(0,1]$,
as $N\to+\infty$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
A trivial consequence of the estimate \eqref{1ptest} is that
$|\widetilde{u}_N^*(x)| \le C \epsilon^{-2}$ for all $|x| \le 1/2$.
Since $\operatorname{supp}(g_N) \subseteq \mathds{D}_{1/2}$, this implies that
\[
\left| \int \Delta g_N(x)\ \widetilde{u}_N^*(x)\d^2x \right| \le C \epsilon^{-2} \int |\Delta g_N(x)| \d^2x = \O( \epsilon^{-2}) ,
\]
where we used that $\Delta g_N(x) = {\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^n} \gamma_k \left( \phi_{\epsilon_k}(x-z_k) - \phi(x-z_k) \right)$ so that
$\displaystyle \int |\Delta g_N(x)| \d^2x \le 2 {\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^n} |\gamma_k|$ since $\phi$ is a probability density function on $\mathds{C}$. Similarly, we have
\[
\left|\int \overline{\partial} g_N(x) \partial g_N(x) \ \widetilde{u}_N^*(x)\d^2x\right| \le C \epsilon^{-2} \int \overline{\partial} g_N(x) \partial g_N(x) \d^2x = \O\left( \Sigma^2 \epsilon^{-2} \right) ,
\]
since $\overline{\partial g_N} = \overline{\partial} g_N$ so that $\overline{\partial} g_N(x) \partial g_N(x) \ge 0$ for all $x\in\mathds{C}$ and the previous integrals equals to $\pi \Sigma^2 (g_N)$.
By definition of $ \mathfrak{T}^1_N$ -- see Proposition~\ref{prop:ward} -- this proves the claim.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Error of type $\mathfrak{T}^2_N$} \label{sect:error2}
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:error2}
Recall that $\eta = \delta_N/\epsilon$.
We have
$\left| \mathfrak{T}^2_N(g_N) \right| = \O\left( \Sigma N \eta \right)$
as $N\to+\infty$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Fix a small parameter $0< \kappa \le 1/4$ independent of $N\in\mathbb{N}$ and let us split
\begin{equation} \label{error2}
\mathfrak{T}^2_N(g_N)= \iint \frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x) }{x-z} \widetilde{u}_N^*(z) \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) \d^2 x\d^2z
= \mathfrak{Z}_N + \iint_{|z-x| \ge \kappa} \frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x) }{x-z} \widetilde{u}_N^*(z) \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) \d^2 x\d^2z .
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation} \label{error1}
\mathfrak{Z}_N
: = \iint_{|z-x| \le \kappa} \frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x) }{x-z} \widetilde{u}_N^*(z) \widetilde{u}_N^*(x)\d^2 x\d^2z .
\end{equation}
Since $\operatorname{supp}(g_N) \subseteq \mathds{D}_{1/2}$, by Lemma~\ref{lem:04},
the second term on the RHS of \eqref{error2} satisfies
\begin{equation} \label{error5}
\left| \iint_{|z-x| \ge \kappa} \frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x) }{x-z} \widetilde{u}_N^*(z) \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) \d^2 x\d^2z \right| = \O\left( N \delta_N \int_{|x|\le 1/2} |\overline{\partial} g_N(x) \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) | \d^2x \right) .
\end{equation}
Moreover, using the estimate \eqref{1ptest}, by Cauchy--Schwartz inequality, we obtain
\[
\int_{|x|\le 1/2} |\overline{\partial} g_N(x) \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) | \d^2x \le L \sqrt{ \int |\overline{\partial} g_N(x) |^2\d^2x \int_{|x|\le 1/2} \left(\vartheta_N(x) +1\right)^2 \d^2x }
\]
Since we verify ${ \displaystyle \int_{|x|\le 1/2} \hspace{-.3cm} } \vartheta_N(x)^2 \d^2x \le \pi \sum_{j,k=1}^n \epsilon_k^{-2} \epsilon_j^{-2}(\epsilon_k^2+\epsilon_j^{2}) \le 2\pi n^2 \epsilon^{-2}$, by \eqref{Sigmag}, this implies that
\begin{equation} \label{error6}
\int_{|x|\le 1/2} |\overline{\partial} g_N(x) \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) | \d^2x = \O(\Sigma \epsilon^{-1}).
\end{equation}
Recall that $\eta = \delta_N/\epsilon$. The estimates \eqref{error5} and \eqref{error6} show that
\begin{equation} \label{error4}
\left| \iint_{|z-x| \ge \kappa} \frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x) }{x-z} \widetilde{u}_N^*(z) \widetilde{u}_N^*(x) \d^2 x\d^2z \right| = \O(N \Sigma \eta) .
\end{equation}
\medskip
Recall $\mathscr{S}_N = \operatorname{supp}(\vartheta_N) = \bigcup_{k=1}^n \mathds{D}(z_k,\epsilon_k)$.
To estimate the integral $\mathfrak{Z}_N$, \eqref{error1}, we split it into $n+1$ parts and use the estimate \eqref{1ptest} which is valid for all $x\in\operatorname{supp}(g_N)$, then we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{error7}
\begin{aligned}
\left| \mathfrak{Z}_N \right|
& \le L \left( \sum_{k=1}^n \epsilon_k^{-2} \int_{|x-z_k| \le \epsilon_k}
+ \int_{x \notin \mathscr{S}_N} \right)
\left( \int_{|w| \le \kappa} |\widetilde{u}_N^*(x+w)| \frac{\d^2 w}{|w|} \right) |\overline{\partial} g_N(x)| \d^2x .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
On the one hand, observe that by \eqref{1ptest}, we have for any $x\in\mathds{D}(z_k,\epsilon_k)$,
\[ \begin{aligned}
\int_{|w| \le \kappa} |\widetilde{u}_N^*(x+w)| \frac{\d^2 w}{|w|} \
& \le L \sum_{j=1}^n \epsilon_j^{-2} \int_{w\in \mathds{D}(z_j-x, \epsilon_j)} \frac{\d^2 w}{|w|} + L \int_{\substack{ |w| \le \kappa \\ (x+w) \notin \mathscr{S}_N}} \frac{\d^2 w}{|w|} \\
&\le
L \sum_{j=1}^n \epsilon_j^{-2} \int_{w\in \mathds{D}(z_j-z_k, \epsilon_j + \epsilon_k)} \frac{\d^2 w}{|w|} + 2\pi \kappa L \\
&\le L \pi \left( 1+ {\textstyle \sum_{j=1}^n} \epsilon_j^{-2} (\epsilon_j + \epsilon_k) \right) .
\end{aligned}\]
On the other hand, by \eqref{1ptest}, $|\widetilde{u}_N^*(z)| \le nL \epsilon^{-2}$ for all $|z| \le 3/4$, so that we have for all $x\in \mathds{D}_{1/2}$,
\[
\int_{|w| \le \kappa} |\widetilde{u}_N^*(x+w)| \frac{\d^2 w}{|w|} =\O(\epsilon^{-2}) .
\]
Combining these estimates with \eqref{error7}, it shows that
\[ \begin{aligned}
\left| \mathfrak{Z}_N \right|
\le
\pi L^2 \sum_{k, j =1}^n \epsilon_k^{-2} \epsilon_j^{-2} (\epsilon_j + \epsilon_k)
\int_{|x-z_k| \le \epsilon_k} \hspace{-.3cm} |\overline{\partial} g(x)| \d^2x
+\O\left(\epsilon^{-2} \int |\overline{\partial} g(x)| \d^2x\right)
\end{aligned}\]
By the Cauchy--Schwartz inequality and \eqref{Sigmag}, this implies that
\[
\left| \mathfrak{Z}_N \right|
\le (\pi L)^2 \Sigma \sum_{k, j =1}^n \epsilon_k^{-1} \epsilon_j^{-2} (\epsilon_j + \epsilon_k) + \O(\epsilon^{-2} \Sigma) .
\]
Since our parameters $\epsilon_1, \dots , \epsilon_n \ge \epsilon$, we have $ \sum_{k, j =1}^n \epsilon_k^{-1} \epsilon_j^{-2} (\epsilon_j + \epsilon_k) \le 2n^2 \epsilon^{-2}$. Hence, we have proved that
\begin{equation} \label{error3}
\left| \mathfrak{Z}_N \right| = \O(\epsilon^{-2} \Sigma) .
\end{equation}
Since $\epsilon \ge \delta_N \ge N^{-1/2}$, by combining the estimates \eqref{error2}, \eqref{error4} and \eqref{error3}, this completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Error of type $\mathfrak{T}^3_N$} \label{sect:error3}
\begin{proposition} \label{prop:error3}
We have
$\left| \mathfrak{T}^3_N(g_N) \right| = \O(N\eta)$
as $N\to+\infty$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
First, let us observe that by Lemma~\ref{lem:06},
\[ \begin{aligned}
\left| \iint_{|z-x| \ge \delta_N} \frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x) }{x-z} | K_N^*(x,z) |^2 \d^2 x\d^2z
\right| &\le \delta_N^{-1} \int |\overline{\partial} g_N(x)| \left( \int_{|z-x| \ge \delta_N} | K_N^*(x,z) |^2\d^2z \right) \d^2 x \\
&\le C N \delta_N \int |\overline{\partial} g_N(x)| \left( 1+\vartheta_N(x) \right)\d^2 x .
\end{aligned}\]
Since $\| \nabla g_N\|_\infty = \O(\epsilon^{-1})$ and
$\displaystyle \int_{|x|\le 1/2} \hspace{-.3cm} \left( 1+\vartheta_N(x) \right)\d^2 x \le (n+1)\pi$, this shows that
\begin{equation} \label{K7}
\left| \iint_{|z-x| \ge \delta_N} \frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x) }{x-z} | K_N^*(x,z) |^2 \d^2 x\d^2z
\right| = \O(N\eta) .
\end{equation}
\smallskip
Second, since $\displaystyle \left| \frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x)- \overline{\partial} g_N(z)}{x-z} \right| \le \| \nabla^2 g_N\|_\infty = \O(\epsilon^{-2})$ for all $x,z\in\mathds{C}$, we have
\[ \begin{aligned}
&\left| \iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |z-x| \le \delta_N}} \hspace{-.1cm} \frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x)- \overline{\partial} g_N(z)}{x-z} |K_N^{*}(x,z)|^2 \d^2z \d^2x -\iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |z-x| \le \delta_N}} \hspace{-.1cm} \frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x)- \overline{\partial} g_N(z)}{x-z} |K_N^{\#}(x,z)|^2 \d^2z \d^2x \right| \\
&\qquad\le 2 \epsilon^{-2} \left( \iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |z-x| \le \delta_N}} \hspace{-.1cm} |K^\#_N(z,x) | \left| K^*_N(z,x) - K^\#_N(z,x) \right|\d^2z \d^2x
+ \iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |z-x| \le \delta_N}} \hspace{-.1cm} \left| K^*_N(z,x) - K^\#_N(z,x) \right|^2\d^2z \d^2x \right) .
\end{aligned}\]
If we integrate the estimate \eqref{K4}, respectively \eqref{K5}, over the set $|x| \le 1/2$, we obtain
\[
\iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |z-x| \le \delta_N}} \hspace{-.1cm} \left| K^*_N(z,x) - K^\#_N(z,x) \right|^2\d^2z \d^2x = \O(\eta^2) ,
\]
and
\[
\iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |z-x| \le \delta_N}} \hspace{-.1cm} |K^\#_N(z,x) | \left| K^*_N(z,x) - K^\#_N(z,x) \right|\d^2z = \O(N \delta_N^2).
\]
Here we used again that $\displaystyle \int_{|x|\le 1/2} \hspace{-.3cm} (\vartheta_N(x) +1) \d^2x \le (n+1) \pi$.
These bounds imply that
\begin{equation} \label{K6}
\left| \iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |z-x| \le \delta_N}} \hspace{-.1cm} \frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x)- \overline{\partial} g_N(z)}{x-z} |K_N^{*}(x,z)|^2 \d^2z \d^2x -\iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |z-x| \le \delta_N}} \hspace{-.1cm} \frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x)- \overline{\partial} g_N(z)}{x-z} |K_N^{\#}(x,z)|^2 \d^2z \d^2x \right| = \O(N \eta^2) .
\end{equation}
By symmetry, since $\operatorname{supp}(g_N) \subseteq \mathds{D}_{1/2}$,
\[
\left| \iint_{|z-x| \le \delta_N} \frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x) }{x-z} | K_N^*(x,z) |^2 \d^2 x\d^2z
\right| \le \left| \iint_{\substack{ |x| \le 1/2 \\ |z-x| \le \delta_N}} \hspace{-.1cm} \frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x)- \overline{\partial} g_N(z)}{x-z} |K_N^{*}(x,z)|^2 \d^2z \d^2x \right| .
\]
Then, using the estimate \eqref{K6} and Lemma~\ref{lem:07}, we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{K8}
\left| \iint_{|z-x| \le \delta_N} \frac{\overline{\partial} g_N(x) }{x-z} | K_N^*(x,z) |^2 \d^2 x\d^2z \right|
= \O(N \eta^2) .
\end{equation}
Finally, it remains to combine the estimates \eqref{K7} and \eqref{K8} to complete the proof.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Proposition~\ref{thm:exp}} \label{sect:proof}
We are now ready to give the proof of Proposition~\ref{thm:exp}. Recall that we use the notation of Section~\ref{sect:notation}. Let us observe that when we combine the estimates of Proposition~\ref{prop:error1}, \ref{prop:error2} and \ref{prop:error3}, we obtain as $N\to+\infty$,
\[
\left|\mathfrak{T}^1_N(g_N) + \mathfrak{T}^2_N(g_N) - \mathfrak{T}^3_N(g_N)\right|
= \O\left(\Sigma(g_N) N\eta\right) ,
\]
where, by Remark~\ref{rk:uniformity}, the error term is uniform for all $\vec{z} \in \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}^{\times n}$ , all $t\in(0,1]$ and all $\vec{\gamma} \in [-R,R]^{n}$ for a fixed $R>0$.
Since $\Sigma^2(g_N) = \O(\log N)$ according to the asymptotics \eqref{cov1} and $\eta = \delta/\epsilon = (\log N)^{\beta/2} N^{-\alpha}$. This implies that as $N\to+\infty$
\begin{equation} \label{error8}
\frac{1}{N}\left|\mathfrak{T}^1_N(g_N) + \mathfrak{T}^2_N(g_N) - \mathfrak{T}^3_N(g_N)\right|
= \O\left( (\log N)^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}} N^{-\alpha}\right).
\end{equation}
\medskip
The main idea of the proof, which originates from \cite{Johansson98} is to observe that for any $t>0$,
\[
\frac{d}{dt}\log \mathds{E}_N\left[\exp\left( t \mathrm{X}(g_N) \right)\right]
= \mathds{E}_N^*\left[ \mathrm{X}(g_N) \right] .
\]
Hence, by Proposition~\ref{prop:ward} applied to the function $g_N = g_N^{\vec{\gamma}, \vec{z}}$, using the estimate \eqref{error8}, we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{error9}
\frac{d}{dt} \log\mathds{E}_N\left[\exp\left( t\mathrm{X}(g_N^{\vec{\gamma}, \vec{z}}) \right)\right]
= t \Sigma^2(g_N^{\vec{\gamma}, \vec{z}})+ \O\left( (\log N)^{\frac{\beta+1}{2}} N^{-\alpha}\right) ,
\end{equation}
where the error term is uniform for all $t\in[0,1]$, all $\vec{\gamma}$ in compact subsets of $\mathds{R}^n$ and all $\vec{z} \in \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}^{\times n}$. Then, if we integrate the asymptotics \eqref{error9} for $t\in [0,1]$, we
obtain \eqref{exp}.
\section{Kernel asymptotics} \label{sect:approx}
In this section, we obtain the asymptotics for the correlation kernel induced by the biased measure \eqref{Pbias} that we need in Section~\ref{sect:clt} in order to control the error term in Ward's equation.
Let us denote
\[
\| f\|_Q^2 = \int_\mathds{C} |f(x)|^2 e^{-2N Q(x)} \d^2x ,
\]
and similarly for the norm $\|\cdot\|_{Q^*}$.
Recall that $Q(x) = |x|^2/2$ is the Ginibre potential and $Q^* = Q- \frac{g_N}{2N}$ is a potential perturbed by the function $g_N = g_N^{\vec{\gamma}, \vec{z}} \in \mathscr{C}_c^\infty(\mathds{D}_{1/2})$ given by \eqref{g} with $\vec{z} \in \mathds{D}_{\epsilon_0}^{\times n}$ and $\gamma\in[-R,R]^n$ for some fixed $n\in \mathbb{N}$ and $R>0$.
Let us also recall that, like in Section~\ref{sect:notation}, we have the parameters:
\[
\epsilon=\epsilon(N) = N^{-1/2+\alpha}, \qquad
\delta_N = \sqrt{(\log N)^\beta /N}
\qquad\text{and}\qquad
\eta= \eta(N) = \delta/\epsilon = (\log N)^{\beta/2} N^{-\alpha} ,
\]
where $0<\alpha<1/2$ and $\beta>1$. Moreover, we have chosen $\ell\in\mathbb{N}$ in such a way that $\eta^\ell \le N^{-1}$.
We also let $N_0 \in \mathbb{N}$ be sufficiently large\footnote{The integer $N_0$ depends only on the mollifier $\phi$, the parameters $R,\alpha,\beta>0$ and $n\in\mathbb{N}$.} so that we have for all $N\ge N_0$, $\eta\le 1/4$ and $\| \Delta g_N\|_\infty \le N$.
\subsection{Uniform estimates for the 1--point function}
In this section, we collect some simple estimates on the 1--point function $u_N^*$ which we need. We skip the details since the argument is the same as in \cite[Section~3]{AHM10} only adapted to our situation.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:01}
There exists a universal constant $C>0$ such that if $N\ge N_0$, for any function $f$ which is analytic in $\mathds{D}(z; 2/\sqrt{N})$ for some $z\in\mathds{C}$,
\[
|f(z)|^2 e^{-2N Q^*(z)} \le CN \|f\|^2_{Q^*} .
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If $N\ge N_0$, we have $\Delta Q^* \le3$ and by \cite[Lemma~3.1]{AHM10}, we obtain
\[
|f(z)|^2 e^{-2N Q^*(z)} \le N \int_{|z-x| \le N^{-1/2}} |f(x)|^2 e^{-2 N Q^*(x)} e^{3N|x-z|^2} \sigma(\d x) .
\]
This immediately yields the claim.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:02}
With the same $C>0$ as in Lemma~$\ref{lem:01}$, we have for all $N\ge N_0$ and all $z\in\mathds{C}$,
\[
u_N^*(z) \le C N .
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Fix $z\in\mathds{C}$ and let us apply Lemma~\ref{lem:01} to the polynomial $k^*_N(\cdot,z)$, we obtain
\[
|k^*_N(w,z)|^2 e^{-2 N Q^*(w)} \le C N k^*_N(z,z) ,
\]
since $\| k^*_N(\cdot,z)\|_{Q^*}^2 = k^*_N(z,z)$ because of the reproducing property of the kernel $k^*_N$. Taking $w=z$ in the above estimate, since
$u_N^*(z) =k^*_N(z,z) e^{-2N Q^*(z)}$, we obtain the claim.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Preliminary Lemmas}
Recall that we let $\Upsilon_N^w(u) = g(w) + \sum_{i=1}^\ell \frac{u^i}{i} \partial^i g(w) $ and that we defined the \emph{approximate Bergman kernel} $k^\#$ by
\begin{equation*}
k^\#_N(x,w) = \frac{N}{\pi} e^{N x \overline{w}} e^{- \Upsilon_N^w(x-w) } ,
\qquad x,w\in\mathds{C}.
\end{equation*}
We note that this kernel is not Hermitian but it is analytic in $x\in\mathds{C}$ and we define the corresponding operator:
\begin{equation} \label{Kapprox}
K^\#_N[f] (w) = \int_\mathds{C} \overline{k^\#_N(x,w)} f(x) e^{-2N Q^*(x)} \d^2x , \qquad w\in \mathds{C},
\end{equation}
for any $f\in L^2(e^{-2N Q^*})$.
\begin{assumption} \label{ass:chi}
Let $\chi \in \mathscr{C}^\infty_c\big(\mathds{D}_{2\delta_N}\big)$ be a radial function such that $0\le \chi\le 1$, $\chi =1$ on $\mathds{D}_{\delta_N}$, and $\| \nabla \chi\|_\infty \le C$ for a $C>0$ independent of $N\in\mathbb{N}$.
In the following for any $z\in\mathds{C}$, we let $\chi_z = \chi(\cdot-z)$.
\end{assumption}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:1}
There exists a constant $L>0$ (which depends only on $R>0$, the mollifier $\phi$ and $n, \ell\in\mathbb{N}$) such that for any $z\in\mathds{C}$ and any function $f \in L^2(e^{-2N Q^*})$ which is analytic in $\mathds{D}(z, 2 \delta_N)$, we have
\[
\left| f(z) -K^\#_N[\chi_z f] (z) \right| \le \frac{L}{\sqrt{N}}\left( \vartheta_N(z) + 1 \right) e^{NQ^*(z)} \|f\|_{Q^*} .
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By definitions, we have
\[ \begin{aligned}
K^\#_N[\chi_z f] (z) & = \frac{N}{\pi} \int e^{ g_N(x)- \overline{\Upsilon_N^z(x-z)} }
\chi_z(x) f(x) e^{N(z-x) \overline{x} } \d^2x \\
& = \int e^{ g_N(x)- \overline{\Upsilon_N^z(x-z)} }
\chi_z(x) f(x) \overline{\partial} \left( e^{N(z-x) \overline{x} } \right) \frac{1}{z-x} \frac{\d^2x}{\pi} .
\end{aligned}\]
By formula \eqref{cauchy}, since $\chi_z(z) =1$ and $\Upsilon_N^z(0) =g_N(z)$, we obtain
\[
K^\#_N[\chi_z f] (z)
= f(z) - \int \overline{\partial} \left( e^{ g_N(x)- \overline{\Upsilon_N^z(x-z)} }\chi_z(x) f(x) \right) e^{N(z-x) \overline{x} } \frac{1}{z-x} \frac{\d^2x}{\pi} .
\]
Since $f$ is analytic in $\mathds{D}(z,2 \delta_N) = \operatorname{supp}(\chi_z)$, this implies that
\begin{equation} \label{est8}
\begin{aligned}
f(z) - K^\#_N[\chi_z f] (z)
= \mathfrak{Z}_N
+ \int e^{ g_N(x)- \overline{\Upsilon_N^z(x-z)}} f(x) \overline{\partial}\chi_z(x) \frac{ e^{N(z-x) \overline{x} }}{z-x} \frac{\d^2x}{\pi} ,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where we let
\begin{equation} \label{est10}
\begin{aligned}
\mathfrak{Z}_N &: = \int \overline{\partial} \left( e^{ g_N(x)-\overline{\Upsilon_N^z(x-z)}} \right) \chi_z(x) f(x) \frac{e^{N(z-x) \overline{x} } }{z-x} \frac{\d^2x}{\pi} \\
&= \int_{ |x-z| \le 2\delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm} \frac{\overline{ \partial g_N(x) - \partial \Upsilon_N^z(x-z)}}{x-z} e^{ g_N(x)- \overline{\Upsilon_N^z(x-z)}} \chi_z(x) f(x) e^{Nz\overline{x} } e^{-2NQ(x)} \frac{\d^2x}{\pi} .
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Using the Assumptions~\ref{ass:chi}, the second term on the RHS of \eqref{est8} satisfies
\begin{equation} \label{est7}
\left|\int e^{ g_N(x)- \overline{\Upsilon_N^z(x-z)} } f(x) \overline{\partial}\chi_z(x) \frac{ e^{N(z-x) \overline{x} }}{z-x} \frac{\d^2x}{\pi} \right| \le \delta_N^{-1}
\int_{\delta_N \le |x-z| \le 2\delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm} |f(x)| \ |e^{ g_N(x)-\Upsilon_N^z(x-z) }|\ e^{N \Re\{(z-x) \overline{x} \} } \frac{\d^2x}{\pi} .
\end{equation}
Recall that we let $\eta= \delta_N/\epsilon \le1/4$. By Taylor's formula, if $|x-z| \le 2\delta_N$,
\[
\Upsilon_N^z(x-z)= g_N(z) + \partial g_N(z) (x-z) + \O(\eta^2)
\]
so that
\begin{equation} \label{est11}
e^{ g_N(x)-\Upsilon_N^z(x-z)} = e^{ g_N(x)/2 - g_N(z)/2} e^{- \i\Im\{ \partial g_N(z) (x-z) \} + \O(\eta^2) } .
\end{equation}
Then, we have on the RHS of \eqref{est7},
$|e^{ g_N(x)-\Upsilon_N^z(x-z) }| \le C e^{ g_N(x)/2 - g_N(z)/2} $.
Moreover, since we have
\begin{equation} \label{est15}
Q(z) + Q(x) - \Re\{z\overline{x}\} = \frac 12 |z-x|^2,
\end{equation}
and $Q^* = Q - \frac{g}{2N}$, we obtain
\[
\left|\int e^{ g_N(x)-\overline{\Upsilon_N^z(x-z)}} f(x) \overline{\partial}\chi_z(x) \frac{ e^{N(z-x) \overline{x} }}{z-x} \frac{\d^2x}{\pi} \right| \le C \delta_N^{-1} e^{NQ^*(z)}
\int_{|x-z| \ge \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm} |f(x)| e^{-N |x-z|^2/2} e^{-NQ^*(x)} \frac{\d^2x}{\pi} .
\]
Now, by Cauchy--Schwartz inequality, we see that the second term on the RHS of \eqref{est8} is bounded by
\begin{equation} \label{est9}
\left|\int e^{ g_N(x)- \overline{\Upsilon_N^z(x-z)} } f(x) \overline{\partial}\chi_z(x) \frac{ e^{N(z-x) \overline{x} }}{z-x} \frac{\d^2x}{\pi} \right| \le C e^{NQ^*(z)}
\| f\|_{Q^*} e^{- N \delta_N^2/2} .
\end{equation}
Here we used that $\delta_N^{-1} \le \sqrt{N}$ and
\begin{equation} \label{est16}
\int_{ |x-z| \ge \delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}
e^{-N |x-z|^2 } \frac{\d^2x}{\pi} = N^{-1} e^{-N\delta_N^2}
\end{equation}
\smallskip
It remains to estimate $\mathfrak{Z}_N$, see \eqref{est10}. Let us recall that we have fixed $\ell \in\mathbb{N}$ in such a way that the parameter $\eta^\ell \le N^{-1}$.
Since the function $g_N$ is smooth, by Taylor's Theorem up to order $\ell$, we have for $x\in \mathds{D}(z,2\delta_N)$,
\[ \begin{aligned}
\partial g_N(x) - \partial \Upsilon_N^z(x-z)
&= \partial g_N(x) - {\textstyle \sum_{i=0}^{\ell-1} }(x-z)^i \partial^{i+1} g_N(z) \\
&= \frac 14 {\textstyle \sum_{i=1}^{\ell-1} } \partial^{i-1} \Delta g_N(\zeta_i) \overline{(x-z)} (x-z)^{i-1}
+ \O\left(\| \nabla^{\ell+1} g_N\|_\infty \delta_N^\ell \right) ,
\end{aligned}\]
where $\zeta_1(x), \dots \zeta_{\ell-2}(x) \in \mathds{D}(z,2\delta_N)$.
We have the uniform bound $\| \nabla^{\ell+1} g_N\|_\infty = \O(\epsilon^{-\ell-1})$
and the estimates
\[ | \partial^{i-1} \Delta g_N(\zeta_i) | \le C \left( {\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^n} \epsilon_k^{-i-1} \mathds{1}_{\zeta_i \in \mathds{D}(z_k, \epsilon_k/4)} + 1 \right) ,
\qquad i=1, \dots , \ell ,
\]
which follows from the fact that
$\Delta g_N(x) = {\textstyle \sum_{k=1}^n} \gamma_k \left( \phi_{\epsilon_k}(x-z_k) - \phi(x-z_k) \right)$ and $\operatorname{supp}(\phi) \subseteq \mathds{D}_{1/4}$. In particular, if we set $\vartheta_N = \sum_{k=1}^n \epsilon_k^{-2} \mathds{1}_{\mathds{D}(z_k, \epsilon_k)}$, since $\delta_N \le \epsilon/4$ and $\epsilon_1,
\dots , \epsilon_n \ge \epsilon$, we obtain
\[
| \partial^{i-1} \Delta g_N(\zeta_i) | \le C \left( \vartheta_N(z)\epsilon^{1-i} +1 \right),
\qquad i=1, \dots , \ell .
\]
Hence, this shows that for any $x\in \mathds{D}(z,2\delta_N)$,
\begin{equation} \label{est13}
\left| \frac{\overline{ \partial g_N(x) - \partial \Upsilon_N^z(x-z)}}{x-z} \right| \le
\frac{C\ell}{4}\left( \vartheta_N(z) + 1 \right)
+ \O\left( \epsilon^{-1} \eta^\ell\right) .
\end{equation}
Our choice of $\ell\in\mathbb{N}$ implies that the error term is at most of order $N^{-1/2}$ and it is uniform for all $z\in\mathds{C}$.
Since $\chi_z \le C \mathds{1}_{\mathds{D}(z,2\delta_N)}$, the estimate \eqref{est13} implies that $\mathfrak{Z}_N$, \eqref{est10}, is bounded by
\[
\left| \mathfrak{Z}_N \right| \le
C \left( \vartheta_N(z) + 1 \right) \int_{ |x-z| \le 2\delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}
|f(x)| \ |e^{ g_N(x)-\Upsilon_N^z(x-z) }|\ e^{Nz\overline{x} } e^{-2NQ(x)} \d^2x .
\]
Using the estimate \eqref{est11},
$|e^{ g_N(x)-\Upsilon_N^z(x-z) }| \le C e^{ g_N(x)/2 - g_N(z)/2} $ in the previous integral and we obtain
\[
\left| \mathfrak{Z}_N \right| \le
C \left( \vartheta_N(z) + 1 \right) e^{NQ^*(z)} \int_{ |x-z| \le 2\delta_N}
\hspace{-.3cm} |f(x)| \ e^{- NQ(x)-NQ(z)}\ e^{Nz\overline{x} } e^{-NQ^*(x)}\d^2x .
\]
By \eqref{est15} and the Cauchy--Schwartz inequality, we obtain
\begin{align} \notag
\left| \mathfrak{Z}_N \right|
&\le C \left( \vartheta_N(z) + 1 \right) e^{NQ^*(z)} \int_{ |x-z| \le 2\delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}
|f(x)| e^{-NQ^*(x)}\ e^{-N |x-z|^2/2 } \d^2x \\
&\label{est12}
\le \frac{C}{\sqrt{N}}\left( \vartheta_N(z) + 1 \right) e^{NQ^*(z)} \|f\|_{Q^*} .
\end{align}
Here we used that $\displaystyle \int_{ |x-z| \le 2\delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}
e^{-N |x-z|^2 } \d^2x \le N^{-1} $.
Finally, by combining the estimates \eqref{est9} and \eqref{est12} with formula \eqref{est8}, this completes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:2}
For any integer $\kappa\ge0$, there exists $N_\kappa\in\mathbb{N}$ (which depends only on $R>0$, the mollifier $\phi$ and $n, \ell\in\mathbb{N}$) such that if $N \ge N_\kappa$, we have for all $z\in \mathds{D}_{1-2\delta_N}$ and all $w\in\mathds{D}(z,\delta_N)$,
\[
\left| k^\#_N(w,z) - K^*_N[\chi_z k^\#_N(\cdot,z)] (w)\right| \le N^{-\kappa} e^{NQ^*(z) + N Q^*(w)} .
\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
In this proof, we fix $N\in\mathbb{N}$ and $z\in \mathds{D}_{1-2\delta_N}$. We let $f := \chi_z k^\#_N(\cdot,z)$ where $\chi_z$ is as in Assumptions~\ref{ass:chi} and we also define $W(x) = N \big(\varphi(x) +1/2\big) + \log\sqrt{1+|x|^2}$ where $\varphi$ is as in equations \eqref{varphi}--\eqref{EL}.
Note that by construction $\operatorname{supp}(f) \subset \overline{\mathds{D}}$ and $f$ is analytic in $\mathds{D}(z,\delta_N)$.
Let $V$ be the minimal solution in $L^2(e^{-2W})$ of the problem $\overline{\partial} V= \overline{\partial} f$. H\"ormander's inequality, e.g. \cite[formula (4.5)]{AHM10}, for the $\overline{\partial}$--equation gives
\[
\|V\|_{L^2(e^{-2W})}^2 \le 2 \int_\mathds{D} \left| \overline{\partial} f(x)\right|^2 \frac{e^{-2W(x)}}{\Delta W(x)} \d^2x .
\]
Here we used that $W$ is strictly subharmonic\footnote{Note that we have $\Delta \left( \log\sqrt{1+|x|^2} \right) = \frac{4}{(1+|x|^2)^2} >0$ for $x\in\mathds{C}$.}. By \eqref{EL}, since $W(x) \ge N Q(x) $ and $\Delta W(x) \ge N \Delta Q(x) = 2N$ for all $x\in\mathds{D}$, this implies that
\[
\|V\|_{L^2(e^{-2W})}^2 \le N^{-1} \|\overline{\partial} f\|_{Q}^2 .
\]
Moreover, by \eqref{varphi}, there exists a universal constant $c>0$ such that $W(x) \le N Q(x) + c $ and we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{est3}
\|V\|_{Q}^2 \le e^{2c} N^{-1} \|\overline{\partial} f\|_{Q}^2 .
\end{equation}
Recall that $Q^*= Q -\frac{g_N}{2N}$ where the perturbation $g_N$ which is given by \eqref{g} satisfies $\| g_N\|_\infty \le C \log \epsilon^{-1}$.
This implies that $L^2(e^{-2NQ^*}) \cong L^2(e^{-2NQ})$ with for any function $h\in L^2(e^{-2NQ})$:
\[
\epsilon^{C/2}\|h\|_{Q^*} \le \| h\|_{Q} \le \epsilon^{-C/2} \|h\|_{Q^*} .
\]
By \eqref{est3}, this equivalence of norms shows that if $N\in\mathbb{N}$ is sufficiently large,
\begin{equation} \label{est14}
\|V\|_{Q^*}^2 \le N^{C/2-1} \|\overline{\partial} f\|_{Q}^2 .
\end{equation}
Observe that by \eqref{varphi}, since $W(x) = 2(N+1) \log|x| +o(1)$ as $|x| \to +\infty$, the Bergman space $A^2(e^{-2W})$ coincide with $\mathscr{P}_N$, \eqref{polynom}, so that we must have $V- f \in \mathscr{P}_N$.
\medskip
We let $U$ to be the minimal solution in $L^2(e^{-2NQ^*})$ of the problem $U-f \in \mathscr{P}_N$.
Since $U$ has minimal norm, the estimate \eqref{est14} implies that
\begin{equation} \label{est4}
\|U\|_{Q^*}^2 \le N^{C/2-1} \|\overline{\partial} f\|_{Q}^2 .
\end{equation}
Since $k^\#_N(\cdot,z)$ is analytic by construction, \eqref{kapprox}, we have
$\overline{\partial} f = k^\#_N(\cdot,z) \overline{\partial} \chi_z$ and we obtain
\[
\|\overline{\partial} f\|_{Q}^2 \le C \int_{\delta_N \le |x-z| \le 2\delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm}| k^\#_N(x,z) |^2 e^{-2NQ(x)} \d^2x .
\]
Recall that $\eta = \delta/\epsilon \le 1/4$ and $\| \nabla^i g_N\| =\O(\epsilon^{-i}) $ for all $i=1,\dots, \ell$.
Then by \eqref{kapprox}, we have for all $z \in \mathds{C}$ and $|x-z| \le 2\delta_N$,
$\Upsilon_N^z(x-z) = g_N(z) + \O(\eta)$ so that
\[
| k^\#_N(x,z) |^2 \le C e^{g_N(z)+ 2N \Re\{ x \overline{z} \}} .
\]
By \eqref{est15}, this shows that
\[
| k^\#_N(x,w) |^2 e^{-2NQ(x)} \le C e^{2N Q^*(z) - N |x-z|^2} .
\]
Then, by \eqref{est16}, we obtain
\[ \begin{aligned}
\|\overline{\partial} f\|_{Q}^2 & \le Ce^{2NQ^*(z)}\int_{\delta_N \le |x-z| \le 2\delta_N} \hspace{-.3cm} e^{- N |x-z|^2} \frac{\d^2x}{\pi} \\
& \le C N^{-1}e^{2NQ^*(z)} e^{-N \delta_N^2} .
\end{aligned}\]
Combining the previous estimate with \eqref{est4}, we obtain
\begin{equation} \label{est5}
\|U\|_{Q^*}^2 \le C N^{C/2-2} e^{2NQ^*(z)} e^{-N \delta_N^2}.
\end{equation}
We may turn this into a pointwise estimate using Lemma~\ref{lem:01}.
Note that both $f$ and $U$ are analytic\footnote{Here we used that $\chi_z=1$ on $\mathds{D}(z;\delta_N)$ and $\overline{\partial} f = \overline{\partial} U$ since $U-f \in\mathscr{P}_N$ by definition of $U$. } in $\mathds{D}(z;\delta_N)$, by Lemma~\ref{lem:01} and \eqref{est5}, this implies that for any $w\in \mathds{D}(z;\delta_N)$
\begin{equation} \label{est6}
|U(w)|^2 e^{-2N Q^*(w)} \le C N^{C/2-1} e^{2NQ^*(z)} e^{-N \delta_N^2}.
\end{equation}
It is well known that minimal solution $U$ is given by
\begin{equation*}
U = f - K^*_N[f] .
\end{equation*}
Since $f = \chi_z k^\#_N(\cdot,z)$ and $\chi_z(w) =1$, by \eqref{est6}, we conclude that for any $w\in \mathds{D}(z;\delta_N)$,
\[
\left| k^\#_N(w,z) - K^*_N[\chi_z k^\#_N(\cdot,z)] (w) \right| \le C N^{C/2-2} e^{NQ^*(z) + NQ^*(w)} e^{- N \delta_N^2} .
\]
Since $e^{N \delta_N^2}$ grows faster than any power of $N\in\mathbb{N}$, this completes the proof.
\end{proof}
We are now ready to give the proof of our main approximation for the correlation kernel $k^*_N$, \eqref{kernel2}.
\subsection{Proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:approx}} \label{sect:BA}
We apply Lemma~\ref{lem:1} to the function $f(x) = k^*_N(x,w)$ which is analytic for $x\in\mathds{C}$ with norm
\[
\| f \|_{Q^*}^2 = k^*_N(w,w) = u^*_N(w) e^{2N Q^*(w)}
\]
by the reproducing property. Hence, we obtain for any $z, w\in\mathds{C}$, \begin{equation*}
\left| k^*_N(z,w) -K^\#_N[\chi_z k^*_N(\cdot,w)] (z) \right| \le L \left( \vartheta_N(z) + 1 \right) \sqrt{\frac{u^*_N(w)}{N}} e^{NQ^*(z) + N Q^*(w)} .
\end{equation*}
By Lemma~\ref{lem:02}, this shows that
\begin{equation} \label{est1}
\left| k^*_N(w,z) -K^*_N[\chi k^\#_N(\cdot,z)] (w) \right|
\le CL \left( \vartheta_N(z) + 1 \right) e^{NQ^*(z) + N Q^*(w)} .
\end{equation}
Recall that by \eqref{Kapprox}, we have
\[
K^\#_N[\chi_z k^*_N(\cdot,w)] (z) = \int \overline{k^\#_N(x,z)} \chi_z(x) k^*_N(x,w) e^{-2N Q^*(x)} \d^2x ,
\]
and since the kernel $k^*_N$ is Hermitian,
\[
\overline{K^\#_N[\chi_z k^*_N(\cdot,w)] (z)} = \int k^\#_N(x,z) \chi_z(x) \overline{k^*_N(x,w)} e^{-2N Q^*(x)} \d^2x
= K^*_N[\chi_z k^\#_N(\cdot,z)] (w) .
\]
Then, it follows from the bound \eqref{est1} that for any $z, w\in\mathds{C}$
\begin{equation} \label{est2}
\left| k^*_N(w,z) -K^*_N[\chi_z k^\#_N(\cdot,z)] (w) \right|
\le CL \left( \vartheta_N(z) + 1 \right) e^{NQ^*(z) + N Q^*(w)} .
\end{equation}
Finally, by Lemma~\ref{lem:2}, this implies that for any $z\in \mathds{D}_{1-2\delta_N}$ and all $w\in\mathds{D}(z,\delta_N)$, we have
\[
\left|k^*_N(w,z) - k^\#_N(w,z) \right| \le CL \left( \vartheta_N(z) + 1 \right) e^{NQ^*(z) + N Q^*(w)} .
\]
This completes the proof.
|
\section{Introduction}
Soon after its launch, the {\it Fermi} satellite has been detecting\footnote{\url{http://fermi.gsfc.nasa.gov/ssc/observations/types/grbs/lat_grbs/table.php}.} $\text{about}$ 14 gamma-ray bursts (GRBs) per year on average with its Large Area Telescope (LAT) in the high-energy (HE) range between a few MeV to 100 GeV \citep{Ackermann2013}. The
{\it Fermi}/LAT GRBs confirm the detections by the Astro Rivelatore Gamma ad Immagini Leggero (Agile/GRID -- \citet{Giuliani2008,Giuliani2010,Delmonte2011}) and the earlier results of the {\it Compton Gamma Ray Observatory}/EGRET \citep{Sommer1994,Hurley1994,Gonzalez2003}.
Until very recently, observations of GRBs emission at very high energies (VHE) by Imaging Atmospheric Cherenkov Telescopes (IACT) resulted only in upper limits (\citet{Aliu2014}, \citet{Carosi2015,Hoischen2017}). GRB 190114C is the first burst detected at $>300$ GeV by the Major Atmospheric Gamma Imaging Cherenkov Telescopes (MAGIC) \citep{Mirzoyan2019GCN}.
Gammy-ray burst emission in the 100 MeV -- 100 GeV energy range as detected by LAT typically starts with a short delay with respect to the trigger time of the keV--MeV component \citep{Omodei2009,Ghisellini2010,Ghirlanda2010} and extends until after the prompt emission. This behavior has also been observed in short GRBs \citep{Ghirlanda2010,Akermann2010}. While the early HE emission (simultaneous with the keV--MeV component) shows some variability, its long-lasting tail decays smoothly. A possible transition from an early steep decay ($\propto t^{-1.5}$) to a shallower regime ($\propto t^{-1}$) has been reported \citep{Ghisellini2010,Ackermann2013} and a faster temporal decay in brighter bursts has been claimed \citep{Panaitescu2017}.
During the prompt emission phase (as detected, e.g., by~the Gamma Ray Burst Monitor, GBM, on board the \textit{Fermi} satellite), the LAT spectrum can either be the extension above 100 MeV of the typical sub-MeV GRB spectrum (which is usually fitted with the Band function; \citet{Band1993}), or it requires an additional spectral component in the form of a power law (PL), as in GRB 080916C, 110713A \citep{Ackermann2013}, 090926A \citep{Yassine2017}, and 130427A \citep{Ackermann2014}. In a few bursts, this additional PL component has been found to extend to the X-ray range ($<20$ keV; e.g., 090510, \citet{Akermann2010}, and 090902B, \citet{Abdo2009}).
When the prompt emission has ceased, the LAT spectrum is
often fit by a PL with photon index $\Gamma_{\rm PL}\sim -2$.
The interpretation of the HE emission of GRBs is still debated (see \citet{Nava2018} for a review). It has been proposed that the LAT emission that extends after the end of the prompt emission is the afterglow that is produced in the external shock
that is driven by the jet into the circum-burst medium \citep{Kumar2009, Ghisellini2010, Kumar2010}. The mechanism that causes this might be synchrotron emission. The correlation of the LAT luminosity with the prompt emission energy \citep{Nava2014} and the direct modeling of the broadband spectral energy distribution (initially in a few bursts, \citet{Kumar2009,Kumar2010} and then in a larger sample \citet{Beniamini2015}) support the hypothesis of a synchrotron origin.
A possible problem with the synchrotron interpretation are VHE photons (tens of GeV), which exceed the theoretical limit of synchrotron emission from shock-accelerated electrons. This limit is $\sim$70 MeV in the comoving frame (\citet{Guilbert1983}, see also \citet{deJaeger1996} and \citet{Lyutikov2010} for a lower value of about 30 MeV), but downstream magnetic field stratification \citep{Kumar2012} or acceleration in magnetic reconnection layers \citep{Uzdensky2011,Cerutti2013} can alleviate this apparent discrepancy.
The deceleration of the jet by the interstellar medium is expected to produce a peak
in the afterglow light curve at a time $t_{\rm p}$
that corresponds to the transition from the coasting to the deceleration phase \citep{Sari1999}.
$t_{\rm p}$ depends on the blast wave kinetic energy $E_{\rm k}$, on the density of the
circum-burst medium (and its radial profile),
and on the initial bulk Lorentz factor $\Gamma_{0}$
(representing the maximum velocity that the jet attained, i.e.,~that of the coasting phase).
Therefore, by deducing $E_{\rm K}$ from the prompt emission and making an assumption on the circum-burst medium density, it is possible to estimate $\Gamma_{0}$ \citep{Molinari2007,Ghirlanda2012,Ghirlanda2018} for large samples of GRBs.
If the GeV component is afterglow produced by the external shock, the time
$t_{\rm p}$ provides an estimate of $\Gamma_{0}$ (see also \citet{Nava2017}), as shown for the first time in the case of the LAT-detected GRB 090510 \citep{Ghirlanda2010}.
The shorter $t_{\rm p}$, the larger $\Gamma_0$: LAT bursts have the shortest times $t_{\rm p}$ \citep{Ghirlanda2018} and therefore provide the highest values of $\Gamma_0$ up to $\sim$1200 (GRB 090510 -- \citet{Ghirlanda2018}). As discussed in \cite{Ghisellini2010}, this might indicate that a large $\Gamma_0$ helps to accelerate very high energy electrons, which emit at high photon energies.
Furthermore, even a small fraction of photons of the prompt phase can be scattered by the circum-burst medium and act as targets for the $\gamma$--$\gamma \to$ $e^\pm$ process: this enhances the lepton abundance of the medium, thus making shock acceleration of the leptons more efficient \citep{Beloborodov2005, Ghisellini2010}.
While the LAT emission, which in some cases is detected up to hours after the end of the prompt, seems to be of external origin, a possible challenge is the interpretation of the early LAT emission that is detected during the prompt phase.
It has been argued \citep{zhang2011,He2011} that the very early LAT emission has
an internal origin \citep{Bosnjak2009} because it can be due to inverse Compton-scattered synchrotron photons of the prompt (SSC).
The delay of the GeV emission as measured by LAT could be explained by inverse Compton emission that occurred in the Klein--Nishina regime at early times \citep{Daigne2012,Bosnjak2009}. While recent findings seem to support a synchrotron origin of keV--MeV photons \citep{Oganesyan2017,Oganesyam2018, Ravasio2018}, the presence of a soft excess ($<$50 keV) that is clearly detected so far in GRB 090902B \citep{Abdo2009}, GRB 090510 \citep{Ackermann2010}, and GRB 090926A \citep{Yassine2017}, represents a challenge for the SSC interpretation (but see \citet{Toma2011}) and would be more easily interpreted as the the low-energy extension of the GeV afterglow component.
This paper is based on the study of the emission of GRB 190114C (\S2) as detected by the
GBM in the 10 keV -- 40 MeV energy range, up to 61 s after the trigger. We also consider data from the Burst Alert Telescope (BAT) and the X-Ray Telescope (XRT) on board the {\it Neil Gehrels Swift Observatory} in three time intervals.
While the properties of GRB 190114C are similar to other bursts detected by LAT, emission that might extend up to the TeV energy range as detected by MAGIC \citep{Mirzoyan2019GCN} makes this event unique so far.
Data extraction and analysis are presented in \S3 and in \S4, where we show the appearance and temporal evolution of a nonthermal power-law spectral component
starting from 4 s after the trigger.
In \S 5 we discuss our results and their implications.
\section{GRB 190114C}
On 14 January 2019 at 20:57:03 UT, both the \textit{Fermi}/GBM and the \textit{Swift}/BAT were triggered by GRB 190114C \citep{Hamburg2019GCN,Gropp2019GCN}.
The burst was also detected in hard X-rays by the SPI-ACS instrument on board \textit{INTEGRAL}, with evidence for long-lasting emission \citep{Minaev2019GCN},
by the Mini-CALorimeter (MCAL) instrument on board the {\it AGILE} satellite \citep{Ursi2019GCN}, by the Hard X-ray Modulation Telescope
(HXMT) instrument on board the \textit{Insight} satellite \citep{Xiao2019GCN}, and by
Konus-Wind \citep{Frederiks2019GCN}.
Remarkably, this burst was the first to be detected at very high energies by a Cherenkov telescope: MAGIC was able to point the source 50 s after the {\it Swift} trigger, revealing the burst with a significance $>20\sigma$ at energies $>$300 GeV \citep{Mirzoyan2019GCN}. The burst was also detected by LAT. It
remained in its field of view until 150 s after the GBM trigger \citep{Kocevski2019GCN}.
The redshift was first measured by the Nordic Optical Telescope (NOT) \citep{Selsing2019GCN} (soon confirmed by the Gran Telescopio Canarias GTC, \citet{Castro-Tirado2019GCN}), with the value $z = 0.4245 \pm 0.0005$.
The fluence (integrated in the 10--1000 keV energy range) measured by the GBM is $3.99\times 10^{-4}\pm 8\times 10^{-7}$ erg cm$^{-2}$ and the peak photon flux (with 1 s binning in the same energy range) is $246.86 \pm 0.86$ cm$^{-2}$ s$^{-1}$ \citep{Hamburg2019GCN}. As reported in \citet{Hamburg2019GCN}, the corresponding isotropic equivalent energy and luminosity are $E_\mathrm{iso}\sim 3\times 10^{53}\,\mathrm{erg}$ and $L_\mathrm{iso}\sim 1\times 10^{53}\,\mathrm{erg}\,s^{-1}$, respectively.
These values make this burst consistent with the $E_{\rm peak}$--$E_{\rm iso}$
\citep{Amati2002}
and $E_{\rm peak}$--$L_{\rm iso}$ \citep{Yonetoku2004} correlations
\citep{Frederiks2019GCN}.
The prompt emission of GRB 190114C is characterized by a first (multi-peaked)
pulse that lasted $\sim$ 5.5 s, followed by a second weaker and softer pulse from
15 to 22 s after trigger (as shown in the top panel of Fig. \ref{lc}), and then a weaker and long tail that lasted up to some hundreds of seconds \citep{Hamburg2019GCN,Minaev2019GCN}.
\section{Data analysis}
\subsection{Fermi/GBM}
The GBM is composed of 12 sodium iodide (NaI, 8 keV--1 MeV) and 2 bismuth germanate
(BGO, 200 keV--40 MeV) scintillation detectors \citep{Meegan2009}.
We analyzed the data of the three brightest NaI detectors with a viewing angle smaller than $60^{\circ}$ (n3, n4, and n7) and both the BGO detectors (b0 and b1).
In particular, we selected the energy channels in the range 8--900\,keV for NaI detectors, excluding the channels in the range 25--40 keV because of the iodine K--edge at 33.17 keV\footnote{\url{https://fermi.gsfc.nasa.gov/ssc/data/analysis/GBM\_caveats.html}} and 0.3--40\,MeV for BGO detectors.
Spectral data files and the corresponding response matrix files (\texttt{.rsp2}) were obtained from the online
archive\footnote{\url{https://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/W3Browse/fermi/fermigbrst.html}} , and the spectral analysis was performed with the public software {\sc rmfit}-~(v.~4.3.2).
To model the background, we selected background spectra in time intervals well before and after the burst (approximately -130 : -10 s and 210 : 370 s from the trigger time) and modeled them with a polynomial function up to the third order.
We used time-tagged event (TTE) data, and rebinned them with a time resolution of 0.3 s during the first emission episode of the burst. After the first emission episode, we rebinned the data in progressively longer time bins up to the second minor peak of the light curve (from $\sim 15$ s to $\sim 23$ s), which was analyzed as a single bin. Finally, we analyzed the 23--61 s time interval as two consecutive time bins
(23--47 s and 47--61 s).
\subsection{Swift: BAT and XRT data}
We also considered BAT data extracted for three time bins, 6--6.3 s, 47--61 s, and 87--232 s, both as a check of the consistency with the parameters of the fit obtained in the same time intervals from GBM data and as a way to extend our analysis to later times. We downloaded BAT event files from the {\it Swift}\ data archive\footnote{\url{http://heasarc.gsfc.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/W3Browse/swift.pl}}.
To extract BAT spectra, we used the latest version of the {\sc heasoft} package (v6.25). We generated BAT spectral files with the {\tt batbinevt} task, applying the correction for systematic errors with the {\tt batupdatephakw} and {\tt batphasyserr} tasks. We generated response files with the {\tt batdrmgen} tool. We adopted the latest calibration files (CALDB release 2017--10--16).
In addition, we retrieved XRT event files from the {\it Swift}/XRT archive\footnote{\url{http://www.swift.ac.uk/archive/}}. The source and background files were extracted with the {\tt xselect} tool. We removed the central region of the XRT image to avoid pile-up effects, following the procedure described in \cite{Romano_06}.
We generated an ancillary response file with the {\tt xrtmkarf} task. We excluded all the channels below 1.5 \,keV because an apparent low-energy excess has been reported in \cite{xrtreport}. We then rebinned the energy channels using the the {\it grppha} tool, requiring at least 40 counts per bin.
We used the multiplicative XSPEC models {\tt tbabs} and {\tt ztbabs} to account for Galactic and intrinsic absorption of the X-ray spectrum by neutral hydrogen \citep{wilms00}. The value of Galactic neutral hydrogen column density in the direction of GRB 190114C was found from \cite{Kalberia_05}. The intrinsic column density $\rm 7.7\times 10^{22} cm^{-2}$ was estimated by fitting the late-time X-ray spectrum ($5.6 \times 10^4 - 5.7 \times 10^{5}$ s).
\subsection{Fitting models}
A preliminary analysis of the GBM spectrum was reported in \cite{Hamburg2019GCN}: the time-integrated spectrum from 0 to $38.59$ s (which includes the two pulses of the burst but also the inter-pulse interval) was fit with a Band function, finding $E_{\rm peak} = 998.6 \pm 11.9$ keV, $\alpha = -1.058 \pm 0.003$, and $\beta = -3.18 \pm 0.07$.
In addition, the authors also reported a strong statistical preference for an extra power-law component.
In our time-resolved analysis, we fit the spectra with a smoothly broken power-law (SBPL, see \citet{Ravasio2018} for a description of the functional form). The SBPL is one of the empirical functions that is generally used to model GRB spectra \citep{Kaneko2006,Gruber2014}.
The SBPL is made of two power laws, with spectral indices $\alpha$ and $\beta$, which are smoothly connected at the break energy (usually corresponding to the $\nu F_\nu$ peak of the spectrum, $E_{\rm peak}$). As in \citet{Ravasio2018}, the curvature parameter was kept fixed at n = 2.
Because an additional power-law component was reported in \cite{Hamburg2019GCN}, we also added an additional power-law component in the fitting procedure, with two free parameters, the normalization $N$ and the spectral index $\Gamma_{\rm PL}$.
\section{Results}
Fig.~\ref{lc} shows the results of the time-resolved spectral analysis of GBM data. We find that all spectra belonging to the first emission episode (from 0 s to 4.8 s) are reasonably well fit by an SBPL model and no additional power-law component is required. The low- and high-energy spectral indices of the SBPL model are shown in panel (C) of Fig.~\ref{lc} (red and black symbols, respectively).
Their values are consistent with the typical distributions obtained from the analysis of large samples of GBM bursts (\citet{Goldstein12,Gruber2014, Nava2011,Kaneko2006}).
The peak energy (panel D in Fig.~\ref{lc}) evolves and tracks the flux of the light curve, with an average value of $E_{\rm peak} = 510 \pm 170$\,keV.
The additional power-law component starts in the 4.8--5.4 s and 5.4--6.0 s time bins, where the superposition of an SBPL and a PL component is preferred over the SBPL component alone (an F-test yields a 6 and 7.5 $\sigma$ preference for the SBPL+PL model in the first and second bin, respectively).
The power-law component reaches its peak in the time bin 6--6.3 s, with a flux of $1.7\, \pm 0.2 \times 10^{-5}\, \mathrm{erg\, cm^{-2}\, s^{-1}}$, integrated in the energy range 10 keV--40 MeV.
From 6.3 s onward, the spectrum is well fit (p-value $>0.3$ in all bins) by a single power-law PL component, with no increase in the goodness of fit when the SBPL component is added. Moreover, when we tried to fit with the SBPL function, the peak energy $E_{\rm peak}$ was completely unconstrained, and the values found for the two spectral indices $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are consistent with each other within the errors.
The single power-law spectral slope is shown by the blue symbols in panel (C) of Fig.~\ref{lc}. Its 10 keV -- 40 MeV flux is shown by the blue symbols in panel (B).
The average spectral slope of the PL component in the time interval 4.8--15.3 s is $\Gamma_{\rm PL} = -1.81 \pm 0.08$, similar to the spectral slope found in the LAT data (at >100 MeV, \citet{Kocevski2019GCN}) in the same time interval \citep{Wang2019}. After $\sim$10 s, the slope of the power law becomes constant and settles at the --2 value, again similar to the LAT index.
The second emission episode was fit by an SBPL,
with $\alpha = -1.51 \pm 0.06$, $\beta = -2.33 \pm 0.06,$ and $E_{\rm peak} = 63 \pm 3$ keV.
The parameters of the additional power law were not constrained, and the fit did not improve when it was included.
After 22.8 s, the spectrum was again well fit by a power law alone, with index
$\Gamma_{\rm PL}\sim -2$.
The flux of the PL component (panel B of Fig.~\ref{lc}) decayed steeply from the peak up to 15 s (a reference green line $\propto t^{-2.8}$ is shown).
From 15--50 seconds, the temporal decay of the flux was consistent with $t^{-1.0}$.
We also added BAT data for the time intervals 6.0--6.3 s and 11--14 s. In both time bins, BAT+GBM data were fit together with a single PL, from which we obtained best-fit parameters that were consistent with the analysis of GBM data alone. We also verified that BAT data alone for the first time bin result in power-law parameters that were fully consistent with those derived from the fit of the GBM spectrum alone.
Fig. \ref{fig:sed} shows the spectral energy distribution of the three time intervals (as labeled). Spectral data used in the fits are BAT+GBM for interval 6--6.3 s and 11--14 s. XRT+BAT+GBM spectra are shown for the last time bin (66--92 s). \citet{Wang2019} analyzed the LAT spectrum of GRB 190114C by fitting the high-energy data with a power-law model. Fig. \ref{fig:sed} also shows the LAT flux and spectral index with butterflies (including the corresponding uncertainties) for the same time intervals, to be compared with our results.
The GBM and BAT data appear to be connect to the LAT emission, as analyzed by \citet{Wang2019}. In the two time intervals 6--6.3 s and 11--14 s, the photon indices of the LAT spectrum are $\Gamma_{\rm PL} = -2.06 \pm 0.30$ and $\Gamma_{\rm PL} = -2.10 \pm 0.31,$ respectively, which are consistent with the values we obtained from our analysis. The LAT emission is slightly higher than the GBM extrapolation (by less than 60\%: less than 2$\sigma$).
Moreover, we analyzed XRT+BAT+GBM data from 66 s to 92 s to check again for consistency with the LAT flux given in \citet{Wang2019} and also to track the power-law evolution at later times. As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:sed}, the LAT flux is still consistent with extrapolation of the joint XRT+BAT+GBM data fit.
From our analysis, the fit of XRT+BAT+GBM data from 66 s to 92 s with a PL function results in a spectral slope $\Gamma_{\rm PL} = -2.01 \pm 0.05$, which is only marginally consistent with the values obtained by \citet{Wang2019} for the LAT data ($\Gamma_{\rm PL} = -1.67 \pm 0.27$).
We note, however, that the spectral slopes reported in \citet{Wang2019} have large uncertainties and show a rapid variability.
In summary, Fig. \ref{fig:sed} shows that the keV-MeV and GeV emissions have a similar time decay and similar slopes, suggesting that they belong to the same component. However, because of the uncertainties on the LAT spectral parameters reported in \citet{Wang2019}, the possibility that the GeV and keV-MeV data belong to two different components cannot be excluded.
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\centering
\hskip -1.5 cm
\centering\includegraphics[scale=0.65]{FLUX_ext.pdf}
\vskip -1 cm
\caption{Spectral evolution of GRB190114C. Two spectral components are shown:
Smoothly broken power law (SBPL, red symbols) and power law (PL, blue circles).
$1\sigma$ errors are shown. Panel A: Count rate light curve (black solid line for GBM NaI detector 3 and purple solid line for GBM BGO detector 0).
Panel B: Flux (integrated in the 10 keV -- 40 MeV energy range) of the two spectral components. The green line is a power law with slope --2.8 up to 15 s, with slope --1 when the decay of the flux is shallower.
Panel C shows the temporal evolution of the spectral photon index of the SBPL (red and black symbols) and of the PL (blue symbols).
Panel D shows the evolution of the peak energy ($E_{peak}$) of the SBPL model.}
\label{lc}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[h]
\vskip -7.5 cm
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{sed8.pdf}
\vskip -6 cm
\caption{ X--ray to GeV SED of GRB 190114C at three specific times:
at 6-6.3 s, when the power-law component peaks in the GBM data (see panel (B) of Fig.\ref{lc}, blue symbols), at 11--14 s, and at 66--92 s (as labeled). We show the GBM, BAT, and XRT data (the latter deabsorbed, as described in the text). Errors and upper limits on the data points represent 1$\sigma$. The LAT butterflies represent the range of fluxes and indices of the power law reported in the analysis of \citet{Wang2019}.}
\label{fig:sed}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Estimate of $\Gamma_{0}$}
Several slightly different formulae can be used to derive the bulk Lorentz factor $\Gamma_0$
of the coasting phase from the observational data.
The required parameters are
i) the peak time of the light curve $t_{\rm p}$;
ii) the isotropic equivalent kinetic energy of the jet $E_{\rm K}$ after the emission of the prompt radiation;
iii) the circum-burst density $n$, which is responsible for the deceleration of the jet, and
iv) its radial profile.
Usually, it is assumed that the observed isotropic equivalent energy radiated in the prompt phase $E_{\rm iso}$ is a fraction $\eta$ of the kinetic energy, implying $E_{\rm K} = E_{\rm iso}/\eta$, typically with $\eta=0.1$ or 0.2.
The density is assumed to have a radial profile $n\propto R^{-s}$ ($R$ is the distance from the central engine originating the GRB).
We considered the case of a uniform density ($s=0$),
or a steady stellar wind density profile ($s=2$). In the latter case, the density depends on the mass rate $\dot M_{\rm w}$ of the wind and its velocity $v_{\rm w}$ \citep{Chevalier2000}, $n(R) = \dot M_{\rm w}/(4\pi v_{\rm w} R^2 m_\mathrm{p})$.
The different formulae used to calculate $\Gamma_0$ have been thoroughly discussed in \cite{Ghirlanda2018}.
As in that paper, we used the formula derived in \cite{Nava2013}
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_{0}
= \left[\frac{(17-4s)(9-2s)3^{2-s}}{2^{10-2s}\pi(4-s)}
\left(\frac{E_\mathrm{K}}{n_0 m_{\rm p}c^{5-s}}\right)\right]^{\frac{1}{8-2s}}
t_{\rm p, z}^{-\frac{3-s}{8-2s}}
\label{n13}
,\end{equation}
which for the two different cases of homogeneous medium (s=0) and wind density profile (s=2), becomes
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_{0} \propto \left(\frac{E_\mathrm{iso}}{\eta n_0 m_{\rm p}c^{5}}\right)^{\frac{1}{8}}
t_{\rm p, z}^{-\frac{3}{8}} \qquad (s=0)\\
\label{n14}
\end{equation}
\begin{equation}
\Gamma_{0} \propto \left(\frac{E_\mathrm{iso}}{\eta n_0 m_{\rm p}c^{3}}\right)^{\frac{1}{4}}
t_{\rm p, z}^{-\frac{1}{4}} \qquad (s=2)
\label{n15}
.\end{equation}
Here $t_{\rm p}$ is measured in the source cosmological rest frame, that is, $t_{p,z} = t_{\rm p}/(1+z)$, $m_{\rm p}$ is the mass of the proton, and $n_0$ is the normalization of the circum-burst density profile, that is,~$n(R)=n_0\,R^{-s}$.
Assuming $E_{\rm iso} = 2.6\times 10^{53}$ erg calculated from 0 to 6 s,
$\eta=0.2$, $t_{\rm p}=6$ s,
through Eq. \ref{n13} we estimate
$\Gamma_{0}\sim 700 \pm 26$ (520 $\pm$ 20) in the case of a homogeneous medium with density $n=1$\, cm$^{-3}$ ($n=10$ cm$^{-3}$ ).
For a wind medium with $\dot M_{\rm w} =10^{-5} M_\odot/{\rm yr}$ and $v_{\rm w}=10^3$ km/s ($v_{\rm w}=10^2$ km/s), following the relation $n_0 = \dot M_{\rm w} / 4\pi v_{\rm w} m_p $, the initial bulk Lorentz factor is $\Gamma_{0}\sim 230 \pm 6$ (130 $\pm$ 3).
The errors are only statistical and were calculated using the uncertainties on the observables $E_{\rm iso}$ and $t_{\rm p}$; the errors do not include the unknown uncertainties on parameters $\eta$ and $n_0$ .
Table 2 in \cite{Ghirlanda2018} lists the coefficients that are required to calculate $\Gamma_0$
for all the other proposed formulae for the homogeneous and for the wind case.
The resulting $\Gamma_0$ values
differ
at most by a factor of 2.
The computed values are similar to those found for other GBRs detected by LAT, which show a peak in the light curve in the LAT energy band \citep{Ghirlanda2018}.
\section{Discussion}
Our results indicate that a power-law component appears at $\sim 4$ s after trigger in the GBM data, that it peaks at 6 s, and then declines.
This temporal behavior matches that of the flux above 100 MeV, as seen by the LAT.
Fig.~\ref{fig:sed} shows that the emission in the two detectors (GBM and LAT) joins smoothly, with a consistent slope (within the errors).
It is therefore compelling to interpret the two power laws seen in LAT and GBM as belonging to a single emission component.
We propose that this nonthermal emission is produced by the external shock that is driven by the jet into the circum-burst medium. Its peak marks the jet deceleration time, that is,~onset time of the afterglow.
The reasons leading to this interpretation are
i) they appear after the trigger of the prompt event, and peak when most of the
prompt emission energy has already been radiated;
ii) they last much longer than the prompt emission;
iii) they are characterized by a spectral index ($\Gamma_{\rm PL}\sim -2$) typical
of the known afterglows;
iv) with the exception of the early variable phases, their light curve smoothly decays with a temporal slope typical of the known afterglows.
We remark that this is not the first time that a power law is detected in the hard X-rays in addition to the spectral components that are usually seen during the prompt emission phase.
A component like this was well visible in GRB 090202B, another burst that was very strong in the LAT band (\citet{Rao2013} and references above). The observation of the onset of the afterglow in the hard X-ray band is new, however, as is that it was found to be simultaneous within the uncertainties with the peak of the LAT light curve.
This is especially important in this burst because of the MAGIC detection.
Our results imply that emission in the energy range between 10 keV and 30 GeV is produced by a single mechanism.
If this mechanism is synchrotron or inverse Compton emission, this in turn implies that the energy of the underlying electron distribution must extend over more than three orders of magnitude.
We also know that the MAGIC telescope revealed photons above 300 GeV \citep{Mirzoyan2019GCN} despite the strong absorption due to the extragalactic optical-infrared background \cite[e.g.,][]{Franceschini2008} that is expected for $z=0.425$.
If the maximum synchrotron energy is
$h\nu_{\rm max}= m_{\rm e} c^2 /\alpha_{\rm F}\sim$ 70 MeV in the comoving frame, as theoretically predicted in the case of shock acceleration \citep{Guilbert1983, deJaeger1996}, then the radiation above 300 GeV might be interpreted as due to another process, most likely inverse Compton or synchrotron self-Compton emission.
On the other hand, the observed maximum photon energy detected by LAT, 22.9 GeV 15 s after trigger, does not violate the comoving 70 MeV limit if the bulk Lorentz factor $\Gamma$ at this time is higher than 450.
For this value to be consistent with $\Gamma_0$, that is,~the bulk Lorentz of the jet before it starts to be decelerated by the circum-burst medium, (assuming a prompt efficiency $\eta=0.2$) the circum-burst medium must not be too dense, with a number density $n\lesssim 30\,\mathrm{cm^{-3}}$ in the homogeneous case, or the progenitor stellar wind to be slightly faster and/or less massive than usually assumed, to satisfy $\dot M_\mathrm{w,-5}\, v_\mathrm{w,8} \lesssim 0.02$ (where $\dot M_\mathrm{w,-5} = \dot M_\mathrm{w}/(10^{-5}\,\mathrm{M_\odot\,yr^{-1}})$ and $v_\mathrm{w,8}=v_\mathrm{w}/(10^{8}\,\mathrm{cm\,s^{-1}}$)).
Alternatively, the entire spectral energy distribution from the keV to the TeV energy range
could be inverse Compton emission, possibly by Compton scattering
off IR--optical radiation.
In this case, the MAGIC emission should connect smoothly
with the LAT spectrum (i.e., it should not be harder).
Therefore the MAGIC flux and spectrum will give crucial information about the
origin of the entire high-energy spectrum of GRBs.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We would like to thank Lara Nava for fruitful discussions.
M. E. R. is grateful to the Observatory of Brera for the kind hospitality.
This research has made use of data obtained through the High Energy Astrophysics Science Archive Research Center Online Service, provided by the NASA/Goddard Space Flight Center, and specifically, this work made use of public {\it Fermi}-GBM data. We acknowledge INAF-Prin 2017 (1.05.01.88.06) for support and the Italian Ministry for University and Research grant "FIGARO" 1.05.06.13. We also would like to thank for the support of the implementing agreement ASI-INAF n.2017-14-H.0.
\bibliographystyle{aa}
|
\section{Introduction}
Holographic dualities between quantum field and gravity theories continue to provide
us with interesting new information and approaches to understanding quantum gravity.
The AdS/CFT correspondence \cite{thelarge}, which is arguably the most reputed and explored, conjectures a duality between a $d$-dimensional conformal field theory (CFT) formulated on a spacetime that can be considered to be the boundary of an asymptotically $(d+1)$-dimensional anti-de Sitter (AdS) spacetime. A number of years ago a proposed holographic connection between the entanglement entropy of a quantum (conformal) field theory and the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of an AdS black hole arose \cite{holodev}.
More recently
proposals have been put forward relating information theoretic quantities in CFT
to geometric quantities in the corresponding bulk spacetime \cite{entangenough}.
One example \cite{gravitydual} was the proposal that a quantum information metric is dual to a codimension-1 time slice of an AdS black hole. Shortly afterward a quantum information quantity known as the computational complexity of the CFT was conjectured to be proportional to either a codimension-2 volume or to the action evaluated on a Wheeler-DeWitt (WDW) patch of the conformal diagram of an AdS black hole \cite{compucomp,complexityaction}, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{CIeq}
C=I_{\mbox{\tiny WDW}}/\pi.
\end{equation}
Computational complexity can be thought of as the degree of difficulty to carry out a computational task. In more precise and quantifiable terms, it has been defined as
the minimum number of gates necessary to synthesize a unitary operator taking one
state (called the reference) to another (called the target) \cite{ageometric}. The minimum number of gates needed to approximate this unitary is geometrically interpreted as the minimum length (in the manifold of unitaries) between the identity operator and that unitary.
Proceeding from these conjectures, time-dependent expressions of complexity were derived from investigations in the gravity side. These studies resulted in the observation that the rate of variation of the complexity at late time is proportional to twice the mass of the AdS black hole \cite{complexityaction,gravitational,complexity, onthetime}. A proposed extension making use of a lattice for computing the complexity of free scalar field theory was then given \cite{circuitcomp}, from which a time-dependent expression of the CFT complexity was formulated \cite{complexentang}. The complexity growth was found to be linear in a short interval of time of the order of the scrambling time of the system (for a system consisting of fast scramblers). Many attempts on the computation of the time dependence of the complexity were subsequently undertaken \cite{liouville,comparisonof,divergences1,evolution1,evolution2,timevol} and led to similar conclusions.
A recent approach for computing complexity in continuous quantum many-body systems that exploited Gaussian states \cite{towards} was subsequently generalized to
make use of a different choice of gates \cite{topological} to derive the time-dependent complexity in the CFT for a free scalar field theory, and this likewise led to similar results.
However in this latter study it was shown that the time interval could be much larger when considering a reference state (a thermofield double (TFD) state in this case) with a larger thermal circle.
Here we extend this previous study \cite{topological} to charged AdS black holes and their dual CFTs, for which the conjectured complexity growth at late time is proportional to the difference of the mass and charge of the black hole and does not exceed the Lloyd bound \cite{complexityaction,gravitational}. We shall investigate a simple theory that consists of a free complex scalar field theory coupled to an electric potential. We find that the complexity grows linearly for a larger interval of time since the scrambling time of the system is larger, and that for scalar fields with small charge the linear growth of complexity has the conjectured relationship to the growth of the gravitational action evaluated on a WDW patch at late time.
We organize our paper as follows: In section 2, we review the notion of computational complexity in a CFT and emphasize its geometrical formulation and interpretation.
Section 3 is devoted to the exploration of free complex scalar field theory in $d$-dimensions, with an emphasis on the construction of the Hamiltonian of the theory as this plays a very central role in the computation of the complexity. Section 4 consists of the derivation of a time-dependent expression of the complexity following the Nielsen approach with a Hamiltonian gate and a manifold of unitaries endowed with a Fubini-Study metric.
In section 5, we provide a short discussion on our model based on an analogy with a system of N qubits, interacting in parallel in intervals of time \cite{bhmirrors}. We recapitulate our main results and suggest further directions for future projects in section 6.
\section{Manifold and metric generation}
The main idea here is to introduce the notion of complexity using the geometrical approach employed by Nielsen \cite{ageometric}. Let us consider a unitary operator $U$ which maps a state referred to as the reference state to another state that we define as the target state. This unitary operator $U$ is thought of as an element of a manifold of unitaries, which is endowed with a local metric. The shortest distance between the identity operator $I$ and the unitary operator $U$ on the manifold of unitaries can be regarded as the minimum number of gates necessary to synthesize the unitary $U$ mapping the reference to the target state.
\vskip 5pt In the context of the present work we consider that the manifold of unitaries is considered to be the direct product of the noncompact group $SU(1,1)$ with the simplest unitary group $U_Q(1)$, i.e. $SU(1,1)\times U_Q(1)$. The presence of the $U_Q(1)$ symmetry group is due to the fact that the CFT
is supposed to carry an electric charge and is coupled to an electric potential as it is dual to a charged AdS black hole. The above case is merely an extension of what has been studied in \cite{towards, topological} for a CFT dual to a Schwarzschild-AdS black hole whose manifold of unitaries is $SU(1,1)$.
Let us start with a unitary operator that belongs to the manifold $SU(1,1)\times U_Q(1)$, whose path parameter is $\sigma$, and which reads as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{unitary2}
U(\sigma)=e^{\int d^{d-1}k~g(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma)}
\end{eqnarray}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
g(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma)&=&\alpha_+(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma)K_+(\overrightarrow{k})+\alpha_-(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma)K_-(\overrightarrow{k})\nonumber\\
&+&\omega(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma)K_0(\overrightarrow{k})+\bar{\omega}(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma)\bar{K}_0(\overrightarrow{k}).
\end{eqnarray}
The functions $\alpha_\pm(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma), ~\omega(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma)$, and $\bar{\omega}(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma)$ are arbitrary functions of the CFT momentum $\overrightarrow{k}$ and the path parameter $\sigma$. $K_\pm, K_0$, and $\bar{K}_0$ are the generators of $SU(1,1)\times U_Q(1)$.
The directions that only give an overall phase to the state are modded out:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{su11}
&&K_+=\frac{1}{2}c^\dagger_1c^\dagger_2\nonumber\\
&&K_-=\frac{1}{2}c_1c_2\nonumber\\
&&K_0=\frac{1}{4}(c^\dagger_1c_1
+c_2c^\dagger_2)\nonumber\\
&&\bar{K}_0=\frac{1}{4}(c^\dagger_1c_1
-c_2c^\dagger_2)
\end{eqnarray}
where $c_1=c_{\overrightarrow{k}},~c_2=\tilde{c}_{-\overrightarrow{k}}$ satisfy the commutation relations
\begin{eqnarray}
{[c_{\small\overrightarrow{k}},c^\dagger_{\small \overrightarrow{k}^\prime}]}&=& {\delta^{d-1}({\small\overrightarrow{k}}-{\small\overrightarrow{k}^\prime})}\nonumber\\
~ {[\tilde{c}_{\small -\overrightarrow{k}},\tilde{c}^\dagger_{\small -\overrightarrow{k}^\prime}]}&=& {\delta^{d-1}({\small\overrightarrow{k}}-{\small\overrightarrow{k}^\prime})}
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
&&[K_+,K_-]=-K_0 ~~~~~~~[K_0,K_\pm]=\pm\frac{1}{2}K_\pm\nonumber\\
&&[\bar{K}_0,K_0]=0 ~~~~~~~[\bar{K}_0,K_\pm]=0 .
\end{eqnarray}
Since $\bar{K}_0$ commutes with the other generators it is straightforward to show that the unitary operator (\ref{unitary2}) can be expressed as \cite{agroup}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{unitary3}
U(\sigma)&=&e^{\int d^{d-1}k~\gamma_+(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma)K_+(\overrightarrow{k})}\nonumber\\
&\times &
e^{\int d^{d-1}k~\log(\gamma_0(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma))K_0(\overrightarrow{k})}\nonumber\\
&\times &e^{\int d^{d-1}k~\gamma_-(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma)K_-(\overrightarrow{k})}\nonumber\\
&\times &e^{\int d^{d-1}k~\tilde{\omega}(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma)\bar{K}_0(\overrightarrow{k})}
\end{eqnarray}
where the functions $\gamma_+(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma), \gamma_-(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma)$, and $\gamma_0(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma)$ read as
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\gamma_{\pm}=\frac{2\alpha_{\pm}\sinh\Xi}{2\Xi\cosh\Xi-\omega\sinh\Xi}\nonumber\\
&&\gamma_0=(\cosh\Xi-\frac{\omega}{2\Xi}\sinh\Xi)^{-2}\nonumber\\
&&\Xi^2=\frac{\omega^2}{4}-\alpha_+\alpha_-.
\end{eqnarray}
To obtain the simplest possible form of (\ref{unitary3}) we impose the conditions \cite{towards}
\begin{eqnarray}
&&K_-|R\rangle =0
\qquad K_0|R\rangle =\frac{1}{4} \delta^{d-1} (0)|R\rangle\nonumber\\
&&\bar{K}_0|R\rangle =-\frac{1}{4} \delta^{d-1} (0)|R\rangle
\end{eqnarray}
on the reference state and that~ $\bar{\omega}^\ast(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma)=-\bar{\omega}(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma)$.
This last condition on the function $\bar{\omega}({\small\overrightarrow{k}},\sigma)$, in combination with the fact that the $U_Q(1)$ generator $\bar{K}_0$ commutes with the other generators, implies that the component along $\bar{K}_0$ will contribute just an overall phase. We shall see that the choice of these conditions shall ease the computation by providing a suitable control function $\gamma_+$ when using particular Hamiltonian gates (which will be the case in the next sections).
These conditions lead to a target state of the form
\begin{eqnarray}
|\Psi (\sigma)\rangle &=&N~e^{\int d^{d-1}k~ \gamma_+(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma)K_+(\overrightarrow{k})}|R\rangle\nonumber\\
\mbox{with}~~N&=& e^{\frac{1}{4}\delta^{d-1}(0)\int d^{d-1}k\log(\gamma_0(\overrightarrow{k},\sigma))}
\end{eqnarray}
in which only the factor involving $\gamma_+$ needs to be taken into account, with an overall phase modded out.
From the normalization of that state it follows that $|\gamma_0|=1-|\gamma_+|^2$.
The reference state is chosen such that it is annihilated by the $c_{\overrightarrow{k}}$ and $\tilde{c}_{-\overrightarrow{k}}$
\begin{equation}
|R\rangle=|0,0\rangle
\end{equation}
and when omitting the variables and the integrals we find that
\begin{equation}
\label{zeromode}
|\Psi\rangle=Ne^{\gamma_+K_+}|0,0\rangle.
\end{equation}
The target state (\ref{zeromode}) becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{zeromode1}
|\Psi\rangle=\sqrt{1-|\gamma_+|^2}\sum_{n}(\gamma_+)^n|n,n\rangle
\end{equation}
upon expanding into the basis of number (energy) state $|n\rangle ~(|E_n\rangle)$.
Inserting (\ref{zeromode1}) in the Fubini-Study metric,
\begin{equation}
\label{complexity}
ds^2_{FS}=\langle\delta\Psi|\delta\Psi\rangle-\langle\delta\Psi|\Psi\rangle\langle\Psi|\delta\Psi\rangle
\end{equation}
we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{metric2}
ds_{FS}=\frac{|\delta\gamma_+|}{1-|\gamma_+|^2}.
\end{equation}
It appears that the above metric corresponds to the line element of the Poincaré disk whose associated manifold is the coset $SU(1,1)/U(1)$ of the manifold $SU(1,1)$.
\vskip 5pt The computational complexity is therefore defined as the shortest distance between two unitary transformations on the manifold of unitaries. Khaneja et al \cite{khaneja} have shown that finding the minimal length geodesic on the coset space $SU(2^n)/K$ (with $n\geq 1$ and $K$ a subgroup of $SU(2^n)$) of $SU(2^n)$ is equivalent to synthesize the unitary $U\in SU(2^n)$ in the minimum possible time.
In the case where the manifold of unitaries is $SU(1,1)$ with a coset $SU(1,1)/U(1)$ the complexity can be expressed as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{complexity1}
C^{(n)}&=&\min_{\gamma_+}\int^{s_f}_{s_i}d\sigma\sqrt[n]{\frac{V_{d-1}}{2}\int d^{d-1}k~|ds_{FS}(\sigma)/d\sigma|^n}\nonumber\\
&&
\end{eqnarray}
with ~$\gamma_+^\prime=\partial\gamma_+/\partial\sigma$ and $V_{d-1}$ the $(d-1)$-dimensional volume of a time slice. $C^{(n)}$ is clearly an $L^{(n)}$ norm and for the sake of simplicity we will only focus on $(n=1)$ case whose complexity has the form
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{complexity2}
C^{(1)}&=&\min_{\gamma_+}\int^{s_f}_{s_i}d\sigma ~\frac{V_{d-1}}{2}\int d^{d-1}k\frac{|\gamma_+^\prime|}{1-|\gamma_+|^2}. \nonumber\\
&&
\end{eqnarray}
The $C^{(1)}$ norm is obtained when gates for different momenta ($k$'s) are not allowed to act in parallel.
\section{Complex scalar field}
The purpose of the current section is to provide enough technical background on the complex scalar field theory which will be very useful for what will follow in the next section. The complex scalar field will be defined in terms of the particle (antiparticle) creation and annihilation operators and so will the Hamiltonian and charge operators. Thus, the quantum gates built from the Hamiltonian and charge operators will also depend on these creation and annihilation operators. We shall also introduce the notion of pure Gaussian states for this particular theory. The ground state of the theory will be one of the Gaussian states as well as some other vacuum (for some momentum sector) obtained after Bogoliubov transformations of the creation and annihilation operators.
To this end, let us consider a complex scalar field theory in $d$ dimensions whose Hamiltonian is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{hamiltonian0}
H_m=\frac{1}{2}\int d^{d-1}x~[\pi^\dagger\pi+\nabla\Phi^\dagger.\nabla\Phi+m^2\Phi^\dagger\Phi]
\end{equation}
where $m$ is the mass of the field $\Phi (x)$, $\pi (x)$ is its conjugate momentum, and
$\pi=\partial_0\Phi^\dagger,~\nabla\Phi\equiv\partial_i\Phi~~~(i=1,...,d-1)$. These functions obey the commutation rules
\begin{equation}
\label{commutation}
[\Phi (\overrightarrow{x}),\pi (\overrightarrow {x}^\prime)]=i\delta^{d-1}(\overrightarrow{x}-\overrightarrow{x}^\prime).
\end{equation}
In terms of the annihilation $a_k, ~b_k$ and creation operators $a^\dagger_k, ~b^\dagger_k$ of the particle and anti-particle respectively, the field and its associated momentum are explicitly given by
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{scalar1}
\Phi (x)&=&\int d^{d-1}k\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega_k}}(a_k~e^{-ikx}+b^\dagger_k~e^{ikx})\nonumber\\
\pi (x)&=&-\int d^{d-1}k\frac{\sqrt{\omega_k}}{\sqrt{2}i}(a^\dagger_k~e^{ikx}-b_k~e^{-ikx})
\end{eqnarray}
with ~ $\omega_k=\sqrt{k^2+m^2}$.
Substituting (\ref{scalar1}) into (\ref{commutation}) we find
\begin{eqnarray}
&&[a_{\overrightarrow{k}},a^\dagger_{\overrightarrow{k}^\prime}]=\delta^{d-1}(\overrightarrow{k}-\overrightarrow{k}^\prime)\nonumber\\
&&[b_{\overrightarrow{k}},b^\dagger_{\overrightarrow{k}^\prime}]=\delta^{d-1}(\overrightarrow{k}-\overrightarrow{k}^\prime)
\end{eqnarray}
with all other commutators being zero.
The Hamiltonian can be rewritten in a more useful form as a function of the particle (antiparticle) annihilation operators $a_k,~b_k$ and the particle (antiparticle) creation operators $a^\dagger_k,~b^\dagger_k$
\begin{equation}
\label{hamiltonian1}
H_m=\frac{1}{2}\int d^{d-1}k~\omega_k~ \big[a^\dagger_{\overrightarrow{k}}a_{\overrightarrow{k}}+
b^\dagger_{\overrightarrow{k}}b_{\overrightarrow{k}}+1\big].
\end{equation}
The charge operator associated with the field reads as
\begin{equation}
Q=\frac{iq}{2}\int d^{d-1}x[\Phi^\dagger\dot{\Phi}-\Phi\dot{\Phi}^\dagger].
\end{equation}
As a function of the particle (antiparticle) annihilation and creation operators it becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{charge1a}
Q=\frac{q}{2}\int d^{d-1}k ~\big[a^\dagger_{\overrightarrow{k}}a_{\overrightarrow{k}}-
b^\dagger_{\overrightarrow{k}}b_{\overrightarrow{k}}\big].
\end{equation}
The complex scalar field $\Phi$ and its Hermitian conjugate associated momentum become
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{scalarfield}
&&\Phi(\overrightarrow{k})=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\omega_k}}(a_{\overrightarrow{k}}+b^\dagger_{-\overrightarrow{k}})\nonumber\\
&&\pi^\dagger(\overrightarrow{k})={\frac{\sqrt{\omega_k}}{\sqrt{2}i}}(a_{\overrightarrow{k}}-b^\dagger_{-\overrightarrow{k}})
\end{eqnarray}
in the momentum space.
In order to obtain a CFT we consider that the complex scalar field is massless $(m=0)$.
A pure Gaussian state $|S\rangle$ is a state defined as \cite{towards}
\begin{equation}\label{GS}
\big[\sqrt{\frac{\alpha_k}{2}}\Phi(\overrightarrow{k})+\frac{i}{\sqrt{2\alpha_k}}\pi^\dagger(\overrightarrow{k})\big]|S\rangle =0
\end{equation}
where ~$\alpha_k=\omega_k$ corresponds to the ground state $|m\rangle$ ~of the theory.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1]
\draw(2,0)--(2,2)
node[midway, right, inner sep=1mm] {$\mbox{{\tiny CFT}}_2$};
\draw(0,2)--(0,0)
node[midway, left, inner sep=1mm] {$\mbox{{\tiny CFT}}_1$};
\draw[blue,thick](0,0)--(2,2);
\draw[blue](0,0)--(0.5,0.5)
node[midway, right, outer sep=1mm]
{$r_+$};
\draw[blue] (2,0)--(1.5,0.5)
node[midway, left, inner sep=1mm]
{$r_+$};
\draw[blue,thick] (2,0)--(0,2);
\draw[dashed] (0,2)--(0,4);
\draw[dashed] (2,2)--(2,4);
\draw[dashed] (0,0)--(0,-2);
\draw[dashed] (2,0)--(2,-2);
\draw[red,thick] (0,2)--(2,4);
\draw[red,thick] (2,2)--(0,4);
\draw[red,thick] (0,0)--(2,-2);
\draw[red,thick] (2,0)--(0,-2);
\draw[red] (0,-2)--(0.5,-1.5)
node[midway, right, outer sep=1mm]
{$r_-$};
\draw[red] (2,-2)--(1.5,-1.5)
node[midway, left, inner sep=1mm]
{$r_-$};
\draw[red] (0,2)--(0.5,2.5)
node[midway, right, outer sep=1mm]
{$r_-$};
\draw[red] (2,2)--(1.5,2.5)
node[midway, left, inner sep=1mm]
{$r_-$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{The current diagram is the conformal diagram of a charged AdS black hole. The dashed and solid lines represent the singularity $r=0$ and boundaries $r=\infty$, respectively. The CFTs are defined on the boundaries (one CFT in each boundary). $r_+$ and $r_-$ are the outer and inner horizons, respectively. The blue and red lines are the horizons' radii. }\label{fig:M1}
\end{figure}
\section{Complexity in Conformal Field Theory}
In this section we investigate the time evolution of the computational complexity in conformal field theories in $d$ dimensions defined on the boundary of a charged AdS black hole. To start, we consider that the field theory consists of a free CFT coupled to an electric potential. In the case of an eternal black hole there exist two CFTs, one in each boundary of the conformal diagram of the black hole. We assume that one CFT consists in states of positive charge and is coupled to a positive electric potential $\mu$ and the other of negative charge states and coupled to a negative electric potential $-\mu$.
The states in the CFTs dual to charged AdS black holes (see figure \ref{fig:M1}) are in the thermofield double (TFD) description with period $\beta$ and have the form \cite{complexityaction}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{tfd1}
|\mbox{TFD}_\mu(t)\rangle &\equiv & e^{-i(H_1+\mu Q_1)t_1} e^{-i(H_2-\mu Q_2)t_2}|\mbox{TFD}_\mu(0)\rangle \nonumber \\
&=& e^{-i[H_1+H_2+\mu(Q_1-Q_2)]t}|\mbox{TFD}_\mu (0)\rangle
\end{eqnarray}
with $t_1=t_2\equiv t$ ~and~ $H_{1,2}$ the free Hamiltonians of fields 1 and 2 , respectively, and
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{tfd0}
|\mbox{TFD}_\mu(0) \rangle &\equiv & N \sum_{n}e^{-\beta (E_n+\mu Q_n)/2}|E_n, Q_n\rangle_1|E_n,-Q_n\rangle_2\nonumber\\
&&
\end{eqnarray}
with $N=\sqrt{1-e^{-\beta(\omega+\mu q)}}$. $|E_n, Q_n\rangle_1$, $|E_n, -Q_n\rangle_2$ are the eigenstates of the free Hamiltonians defined on the $\mbox{CFT}_{1,2}$ respectively. Considering that the system is made of harmonic oscillators, $E_n=n \omega$ and $Q_n= n q$~ are regarded as their corresponding energies and charges.
In the context of a system of harmonic oscillators the state $|\mbox{TFD}_\mu(0)\rangle$ is expressed in the form \cite{eternalblack}
\begin{equation}
|\mbox{TFD}_\mu(0) \rangle= N e^{\int d^{d-1}k~ e^{-\beta(\omega_k+\mu q)/2}a^\dagger_{\overrightarrow{k}}
b^\dagger_{-\overrightarrow{k}}}|0\rangle
\end{equation}
which is annihilated by operators $c_{\overrightarrow{k}}$ and $\tilde{c}_{-\overrightarrow{k}}$ defined via Bogoliubov transformations as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{bogo}
c_{\overrightarrow{k}}&=&\cosh\theta_k a_{\overrightarrow{k}}-\sinh\theta_k b^\dagger_{-\overrightarrow{k}}\nonumber\\
\tilde{c}_{-\overrightarrow{k}}&=&\cosh\theta_k b_{-\overrightarrow{k}}-\sinh\theta_k a^\dagger_{\overrightarrow{k}}
\end{eqnarray}
with~ $\tanh\theta_k=e^{-\beta(\omega_k+\mu q)/2}$. We see that despite the fact
that the $U_Q(1)$ generator $\bar{K}_0$ commutes with the other generators, the parameter $\theta_k$ retains information about the charge.
We consider that the CFT states in the boundaries are two-mode states whose one mode is on one side of the diagram (figure \ref{fig:M1}) and corresponds to states of a conformal complex scalar field theory with positive momentum $\overrightarrow{k}$ and the other mode on the other side of the diagram to a complex scalar field theory with negative momentum states $-\overrightarrow{k}$. The total Hamiltonian of the system according to (\ref{hamiltonian1}) and (\ref{charge1a}) reads
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{totalham}
H&=&H_1+H_2+\mu (Q_1-Q_2)\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{1}{2}\int d^{d-1}k~\big[\omega_k[a^\dagger_1a_1+b^\dagger_2b_2+1
+a^\dagger_2a_2+b^\dagger_1b_1+1]\nonumber\\
&+& {\mu q [a^\dagger_1a_1+b^\dagger_2b_2-a^\dagger_2a_2-b^\dagger_1b_1]\big]}
\end{eqnarray}
where ~$\omega_k=k$, ~$a_1=a_{\overrightarrow{k}},~ ~b_1=b_{\overrightarrow{k}}, ~~a_2=a_{-\overrightarrow{k}}\mbox{and}~~b_2=b_{-\overrightarrow{k}}$.
The total Hamiltonian (\ref{totalham}) can be put into the following form
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{totalham2}
H&=&{\frac{1}{2}\int d^{d-1}k~\big[(\omega_k+\mu q)(a^\dagger_1 a_1+b^\dagger_2 b_2+1)}\nonumber\\
&+& {(\omega_k-\mu q) (b^\dagger_1 b_1+a^\dagger_2 a_2+1)\big].}
\end{eqnarray}
Since the state $|\mbox{TFD}_\mu(0) \rangle$ is generated only by the operators $a_1$ and $b_2$, the second term in \eqref{totalham2} (which only has
operators involving $b_1$ and $a_2$) acts trivially on the reference state and contributes only as an overall phase to the target state. We are therefore left with the operators involving $a_1$ and $b_2$, which will be the only ones taken into account in the unitary operator acting on the reference state.
The total Hamiltonian (\ref{totalham2}) in the basis (\ref{su11}), using \eqref{bogo}, has operators of the form
\begin{eqnarray}
a^\dagger_1a_1+b^\dagger_2b_2+1 &=& 2\cosh(2\theta_k)K_0+\sinh(2\theta_k)(K_++K_-)\nonumber\\
a^\dagger_1a_1-b^\dagger_2b_2-1 &=&4\bar{K}_0 ,
\end{eqnarray}
where we have included $\bar{K}_0$ even though it does not appear in \eqref{totalham2}; this generator contributes an overall phase factor to the target state, but in this particular case makes no phase contribution.
It follows that the resulting operator has components in the directions that correspond to the generators of $SU(1,1)\times U_Q(1)$.
Therefore (\ref{tfd1}) becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{tfd2}
|\mbox{TFD}_\mu(t)\rangle\equiv e^{\alpha_+ K_++\alpha_-K_-+\omega K_0}~|\mbox{TFD}_\mu(0)\rangle
\end{equation}
with
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\alpha_{\pm}=-i~{(\omega_k+\mu q)}~t\sinh(2\theta_k)\nonumber\\
&&\omega=-2i~{(\omega_k+\mu q)}~t\cosh(2\theta_k).
\end{eqnarray}
Equation (\ref{tfd2}) read as
\begin{equation}
\label{tfd4}
|\mbox{TFD}_\mu (t)\rangle\equiv e^{\gamma_+K_+}e^{\log(\gamma_0)K_0} e^{\gamma_-K_-}~|\mbox{TFD}_\mu(0)\rangle
\end{equation}
when using the transformation of the unitary operator (\ref{unitary3}).
\vskip 5pt The above state \eqref{tfd4} is reduced to (\ref{zeromode}) and (\ref{zeromode1}) when following the same steps,
with the control functions
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\gamma_{\pm}=\frac{-i\sinh(2\theta_k)\sin\Xi}{\cos\Xi+i\cosh(2\theta_k)\sin\Xi}\nonumber\\
&&\Xi={(\omega_k+\mu q)}~t~~~~\mbox{and}~~~~\omega_k=k.
\end{eqnarray}
In terms of the path parameter $\sigma$ the control function $\gamma_+$ is written as
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\gamma_\pm(k,\sigma)=\frac{-i\sinh(2\theta_k)\sin\Xi}{\cos\Xi+i\cosh(2\theta_k)\sin\Xi}\nonumber\\
&&\Xi={(k+\mu q)}t~\sigma.
\end{eqnarray}
The control function $\gamma_+=\gamma_+(k,\sigma)$, as a function of $\sigma$, verifies the conditions
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma_+(k,s_i)&=&0~~~~\mbox{and}\nonumber\\
\gamma_+(k,s_f)&=&\frac{-i\sinh(2\theta_k)\sin ({(k+\mu q)}t)}{\cos ({(k+\mu q)}t)+i\cosh(2\theta_k)\sin ({(k+\mu q)}t)}\nonumber\\
&&
\end{eqnarray}
which correspond to the reference and target state respectively. The time-dependent control function $\gamma_+$ will obviously imply a time-dependent complexity.
\vskip 5pt Inserting the control function $\gamma_+$ into the complexity (\ref{complexity2}) we get a time-dependent expression of the form
\begin{eqnarray}
C^{(1)}(t)&=&\min_{\gamma_+}\int^{s_f}_{s_i}d\sigma ~\frac{V_{d-1}}{2}\int d^{d-1}k~\frac{|\gamma_+^\prime|}{1-|\gamma_+|^2}\nonumber\\
&=&{V_{d-1}\Omega_{\kappa,d-2} \bigg[2^{d-1}\beta^{-d}\Gamma (d)} \nonumber \\
&&{\times\left( \textrm{Li}_d(e^{-\mu q/2}) - \textrm{Li}_d(- e^{-\mu q/2})\right)}\nonumber\\
&+& {\mu q~2^{d-2}\beta^{-(d-1)}\Gamma (d-1)} \nonumber \\
&&{\times\left( \textrm{Li}_{d-1}(e^{-\mu q/2}) - \textrm{Li}_{d-1}(- e^{-\mu q/2})\right)\bigg]~t}\nonumber\\
&&
\label{complexC1}
\end{eqnarray}
as detailed in eq. \eqref{appendix1} in the appendix, where $ \textrm{Li}_d (z)$ is the polylog function. We see from this expression that the complexity evolves linearly in time.
For $q$ very small eq. \eqref{complexC1} reads as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{complexC2}
C^{(1)}(t)&=&{V_{d-1}\Omega_{\kappa, d-2} \big[(2^d-1)\beta^{-d}\Gamma (d)\zeta(d)}\nonumber\\
&-&{(d-2)(2^{d-1}-1)\beta^{-(d-1)}\Gamma (d-1)\zeta (d-1)\mu q\big]~t}.\nonumber\\
&&
\end{eqnarray}
In order to understand the contribution of the second term in \eqref{complexC2}, we define the total energy of the neutral scalar field (q=0) as (see \eqref{scalarenergy} and \eqref{charge1} in the appendix)
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{energy1}
E&=&V_{d-1}\int d^{d-1}k~ \omega_k \frac{e^{-\beta \omega_k}}{1-e^{-\beta \omega_k}}\nonumber\\
&=&V_{d-1}\Omega_{\kappa, d-2}\beta^{-d}\Gamma (d)\zeta (d)
\end{eqnarray}
and its total charge (when $q$ is very small)
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{charge0}
Q&=&V_{d-1}\int d^{d-1}k~ q~ \frac{e^{-\beta (\omega_k +\mu q)}}{1-e^{-\beta (\omega_k +\mu q)}}\nonumber\\
&=& q ~V_{d-1}\Omega_{\kappa, d-2}\beta^{-(d-1)}\Gamma (d-1)\zeta (d-1).
\end{eqnarray}
Hence the complexity \eqref{complexC1} has the form
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{adscomplex}
C^{(1)}(t)&=&{[(2^d-1)E-(d-2)(2^{d-1}-1)\mu Q]~ t}\nonumber\\
&=&{[n_d~E- (d-2)n_{d-1}~\mu Q]~t}
\end{eqnarray}
with $n_d=(2^d-1)$ a dimensionless constant.
\vskip 5pt The rate of change of the complexity for very large $t$ is
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{rated2}
{\frac{dC(t)}{dt}}={n_d E - (d-2)n_{d-1}\mu Q.}
\end{eqnarray}
Equation (\ref{rated2}) implies that the variation of the complexity with respect to time at late time is proportional to the total energy $E$ of the neutral scalar field and the total charge $Q$ ($q$ very small) of the complex scalar field theory. When the energy of the neutral scalar field is identified with the mass of the AdS black hole and the charge of the complex scalar field with the charge of the black hole we find that the complexity is proportional to the action evaluated on the WDW patch (see figure \ref{fig:M2}).
We pause to comment on the correspondence between a CFT that consists of a charged scalar field theory coupled to an electric potential, and a charged AdS black hole.
Charged AdS black holes are solutions of Einstein-Maxwell (EM) truncation of gauged supergravities. Einstein-Maxwell-AdS (EM-AdS) truncations are associated with rotating branes (particularly the $\mbox{EM-AdS}_4$ and $\mbox{EM-AdS}_5$), and dual field theories are thought to arise on the world volume of these branes \cite{chargedadsbh}.
Although the $\mbox{EM-AdS}_7$ is not related to a rotating-brane truncation of the $\mbox{AdS}_7\times \mbox{S}^4$ gauge supergravity (therefore its dual field theory cannot be declared to live on a rotating $\mbox{M}5$-brane world-volume), AdS holography can still be thought of as a phenomenon that exists independently of string and M-theory contexts and dual field theories are expected beyond $d=4,5$ \cite{adsspace0,gravinstanton} .
According to \cite{chargedrot} a $\mbox{CFT}_d$ dual to a charged $\mbox{AdS}_{d+1}$ black hole corresponds to a theory in an Einstein universe with a chemical potential. This statement can be explained by the fact that an $\mbox{AdS}_{n+1} \times M^m$ spacetime is dual to a $\mbox{CFT}_n$ defined in a space with the topology of the $\mbox{AdS}_{n+1}$ and that the isometries of the manifold $M^m$ imply global symmetries of the boundary CFT \cite{chargedadsbh}. This can also be extended to gauge symmetries ($\mbox{SU(N)}$ is our case, with $\mbox{U(1)}$ a subgroup thereof).
Since the thermal properties of EM-AdS black holes are consistent with field theory interpretations \cite{chargedadsbh} , we infer that the $\mbox{U(1)}$ charge can be regarded as a thermodynamic quantity for both the charged AdS and its dual CFT. However, it is still necessary to clarify what the CFT consists of.
As an illustration, let us consider a
$D=4,~ {\cal{N}}=4$ super Yang-Mills theory dual to spinning branes ($10d$ IIB gauged supergravity on $\mbox{AdS}_5\times \mbox{S}^5$) whose $\mbox{EM-AdS}_5$ arise from the truncation. This theory contains six real scalar fields $X^i~(i=1, ..., 6)$. For the sake of simplicity in the complexity computation the free scalar field Hamiltonian can be truncated from the total Hamiltonian of the system and treated as a theory in its right (though it would be more consistent to deal with the whole CFT) . Thus we advocate that there may exist a $d$- dimensional theory of scalar fields that is part of a larger CFT in $d$ dimensions dual to a charged $(d+1)-$dimensional AdS black hole.
The variation of the action at late time is bounded by the Lloyd bound \cite{complexityaction,gravitational,complexity}, i.e,
\begin{equation}
\frac{dI_{\mbox{\tiny WDW}}}{dt}\bigg|_{t\rightarrow\infty}
\leq 2(M-\mu Q)
\end{equation}
though we note a recent claim that for anisotropic black branes this bound can be violated
\cite{HosseiniMansoori:2018gdu}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1.2]
\draw(2,0)--(2,2);
\draw(0,2)--(0,0);
\draw[thick,tropicalrainforest](1,2)--(0,1.1);
\draw[thick,tropicalrainforest](1,2)--(2,1.1);
\draw[thick,tropicalrainforest](0,0.9)--(1,0);
\draw[thick,tropicalrainforest](1,0)--(2,0.9);
\node [red] at (1,2) {\textbullet};
\node [red] at (0,1.1) {\textbullet};
\node [red] at (1,2) {\textbullet};
\node [red] at (2,1.1) {\textbullet};
\node [red] at (0,0.9) {\textbullet};
\node [red] at (1,0) {\textbullet};
\node [red] at (1,0) {\textbullet};
\node [red] at (2,0.9) {\textbullet};
\draw[fill=babyblueeyes!30](1,2)--(0,1.1)--(0,0.9)--(1,0)--(1,0)--(2,0.9)--(2,1.1)--(1,2)--cycle;
\draw[dashed] (0,0)--(0,-1);
\draw[dashed] (2,0)--(2,-1);
\draw[dashed] (0,2)--(0,3);
\draw[dashed] (2,2)--(2,3);
\draw[blue,thick] (0,0)--(2,2);
\draw[blue,thick] (0,2)--(2,0);
\draw[red,thick] (2,2)--(1,3);
\draw[red,thick] (0,2)--(1,3);
\draw[red,thick] (0,0)--(1,-1);
\draw[red,thick] (2,0)--(1,-1);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{In this diagram we depict the WDW patch, on which is evaluated the action. The light blue area is the bulk, the green lines are the null geodesics and the red dots are the joints (intersections of null-null or null-timelike geodesics). The different contributions to the action come from the bulk, the surface terms and the joint terms. The late time variation of the action evaluated on the WDW is proportional to the mass and the charge of the charged AdS black hole and is less or equal to a quantity known as the Lloyd bound. }\label{fig:M2}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion}
This section covers a short discussion on an deductive study based on the system of $N$ qubits investigated in \cite{bhmirrors} by Hayden and Preskill as it yields a way to assess the scrambling time of our system.
They studied a system which is thought of as a parallel processing model, i.e. a system where multiple disjoint pairs of qubits are allowed to interact simultaneously, considering $N$ qubits where every qubit interacts once in each time step ($\beta$ is the time between the steps). From these considerations it follows that the total number of $U(4)$ operators required to scramble the system is $N\log N$ and the minimum scrambling time is $t_\ast=\beta\log N$.
Although the system described above is not a conventional Hamiltonian system (since it consists of repeated discrete random unitary operations in parallel), we can still regard it as a discrete model, whose discrete step time is identified with a time interval of the order of the inverse of the energy per degree of freedom \cite{fastscamb}. Indeed, this time interval is the one during which each degree of freedom interacts once. According to \eqref{energy1} this interval of time scales as $\Delta t\sim\beta$ for our Hamiltonian system.
For systems referred to as fast scramblers $\beta$ is very small. In the case where $\beta$ is large (which corresponds to a large scrambling time) the time variation of the complexity \eqref{rated2} is
\begin{equation}
\frac{dC}{dt}\bigg|_{t\rightarrow\beta} \propto n_d \zeta (d) \beta^{-d}
- n_{d-1}\zeta (d-1)\mu q \beta^{-(d-1)}
\end{equation}
using \eqref{energy1} and \eqref{charge0}.
These correspond to charged AdS black holes with small mass and charge.
Moreover, it has been posited that thermal properties of AdS black holes can be reinterpreted as those of their corresponding CFTs at the same temperature \cite{adsspace} . From these properties we infer that the mass of a Schwarzschild-AdS black hole is proportional to the inverse of the dth power of $\beta$ (see eq. \eqref{adsmass1}).
In the limit $\beta\rightarrow\infty$, the reference state $|\mbox{TFD}_\mu(0)\rangle$ becomes the ground state $|0\rangle$ of the theory. The energy E and the charge Q vanish, and so does the rate of variation of the complexity.
\section{Conclusion}
We derived a time-dependent expression of the computational complexity for a $d$-dimensional CFT, which consists of a complex scalar field theory coupled to a constant electric potential, defined in the boundary of a charged asymptotically AdS black hole in $d+1$ dimensions. We observed that the complexity grows linearly for a large interval of time
since the scrambling time of the system is large. This can be explained by considering a reference state, i.e., the TFD at initial time, with a large thermal circle ($\beta$ large). While $\beta$ is very small our results conform with those of the cMERA circuit \cite{entanglementrenorm,holographicgeom1,holographicgeom2}, in which the complexity grows as $V_{d-1}\beta^{-(d-1)}$ in a short interval of time proportional to $\beta$.
For complex scalar fields with very small charge ($q\rightarrow 0$) the linear growth of the complexity ($\beta$ large) can be compared (up to some constant $n_d$) to the growth of the gravitational action evaluated on a WDW patch at late time. The latter is bound by a limit referred to as the Lloyd bound.
For future directions it would be of interest to investigate in the time dependence of the complexity of a theory in which a complex scalar field is coupled to a variable electric potential ($\mu=\mu(x)$ or a local gauge). Furthermore, theories involving fermionic and gauge fields shall constitute good candidates to dig into for the study of time-dependent complexities of CFTs dual to charged AdS black holes.
\section*{Appendix}
\subsection{Complexity evaluation}
\renewcommand{\theequation}{A-\arabic{equation}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
In this subsection we perform explicit calculations to derive the final form of the computational complexity $C^{(1)}(t)$. The complexity as defined in the previous sections becomes (for $q$ very small)
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{appendix1}
C^{(1)}(t)&=&\min_{\gamma_+}\int^{s_f}_{s_i}d\sigma~\frac{V_{d-1}}{2}\int d^{d-1}k~\frac{|\gamma_+^\prime|}{1-|\gamma_+|^2}\nonumber\\
&=&\int^{s_f}_{s_i}d\sigma~\frac{V_{d-1}}{2}\int d^{d-1}k~|{(\omega_k+\mu q)} t\sinh(2\theta_k)|\nonumber\\
&=&V_{d-1}~t~\Omega_{\kappa, d-2}\int {(k^{d-1}+\mu q~ k^{d-2})}\nonumber\\
&&\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad
\times{\frac{e^{-\beta (k+\mu q)/2}}{1-e^{-\beta (k+\mu q)}}dk}\nonumber\\
&=&{V_{d-1}\Omega_{\kappa,d-2}\bigg[\beta^{-d}\Gamma (d)\sum_{n=0}\frac{e^{-(n+1/2)\beta\mu q}}{(n+1/2)^d}} \nonumber\\
&+&{\mu q\beta^{-(d-1)}\Gamma (d-1)\sum_{n=0}\frac{e^{-(n+1/2)\beta\mu q}}{(n+1/2)^{d-1}}\bigg]~t} \nonumber\\
&=& {V_{d-1}\Omega_{\kappa,d-2} \bigg[2^{d-1}\beta^{-d}\Gamma (d)} \nonumber \\
&&{\times\left( \textrm{Li}_d(e^{-\mu q/2}) - \textrm{Li}_d(- e^{-\mu q/2})\right)}\nonumber\\
&+& {\mu q~2^{d-2}\beta^{-(d-1)}\Gamma (d-1)} \nonumber \\
&&{\times\left( \textrm{Li}_{d-1}(e^{-\mu q/2}) - \textrm{Li}_{d-1}(- e^{-\mu q/2})\right)\bigg]~t}\nonumber\\
&=&{V_{d-1}\Omega_{\kappa, d-2} \big[(2^d-1)\beta^{-d}\Gamma (d)\zeta(d)}\nonumber\\
&-&{(d-2)(2^{d-1}-1)\beta^{-(d-1)}\Gamma (d-1)\zeta (d-1)\mu q\big]~t}\nonumber\\
&&
\end{eqnarray}
up to the leading order in $q$, with the control function
\begin{equation}
\label{appendix2}
\gamma_+=\frac{-i\sinh(2\theta_k)\sin ({(k+\mu q)}t\sigma)}{\cos ({(k+\mu q)}t\sigma)+i\cosh(2\theta_k)\sin ({(k+\mu q)}t\sigma)}
\end{equation}
yielding the final expression
\begin{equation}
\label{appendix3}
\frac{|\gamma_+^\prime|}{1-|\gamma_+|^2}={(\omega_k+\mu q)} t\sinh(2\theta_k)
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\sinh(2\theta_k)
=\frac{2e^{-\beta(\omega_k+\mu q)/2}}{1-e^{-\beta(\omega_k+\mu q)}}.
\end{equation}
\subsection{Total energy of the scalar field}
\renewcommand{\theequation}{B-\arabic{equation}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
The current subsection is devoted to the computation of the total energy of the (neutral) complex scalar field and the total charge of the complex scalar field (for $q$ very small) knowing the probability densities of the Hamiltonian eigenstates $|E_n,Q_n\rangle_1|E_n,-Q_n\rangle_2$ (we will rather use the simplified notation $|n,n\rangle$ ).
\vskip 5pt Considering the $|\mbox{TFD}_\mu(0)\rangle$ state in \eqref{tfd0} the density matrix is obtained from the expression
\begin{eqnarray}
\rho&=&\mbox{Tr}(|\mbox{TFD}_\mu(0)\rangle\langle \mbox{TFD}_\mu(0)|)\nonumber\\
&=&(1-e^{-\beta (\omega_k +\mu q)})\sum_{n_k} e^{-\beta n_k (\omega_k +\mu q)}|n_k\rangle\langle n_k|\nonumber\\
&&
\end{eqnarray}
after tracing over the states $|n_k\rangle_2$.
We find that the probability densities of the eigenstates are
\begin{equation}
(1-e^{-\beta(\omega_k +\mu q)})e^{-\beta n_k(\omega_k +\mu q)}.
\end{equation}
From these densities we obtain that the total energy of the neutral scalar field ($q=0$) reads as
\begin{eqnarray}
E&=&\sum_{n_k}n_k\omega_k e^{-\beta n_k\omega_k}(1-e^{-\beta\omega_k})\nonumber\\
&=&\omega_k\frac{e^{-\beta\omega_k}}{1-e^{-\beta\omega_k}}.
\end{eqnarray}
Restoring the integrals we get
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{scalarenergy}
E&=&V_{d-1}\int d^{d-1}k~ \omega_k~ \frac{e^{-\beta\omega_k}}{1-e^{-\beta\omega_k}}\nonumber\\
&=&V_{d-1}\int d^{d-1}k~ k~ \frac{e^{-\beta k}}{1-e^{-\beta k}}\nonumber\\
&=&V_{d-1}\Omega_{\kappa,d-2}\beta^{-d}\Gamma(d)\zeta (d).
\end{eqnarray}
The total charge of the complex scaler field (for $q$ very small) is
\begin{eqnarray}
Q&=&q\sum_{n_k}n_k e^{-\beta n_k(\omega_k+\mu q)}(1-e^{-\beta(\omega_k+\mu q)})\nonumber\\
&=&q~\frac{e^{-\beta (\omega_k+\mu q)}}{1-e^{-\beta(\omega_k+\mu q)}}
\end{eqnarray}
and after restoring the integrals the above expression reads
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{charge1}
Q&=&q~V_{d-1}\int d^{d-1}k~\frac{e^{-\beta(\omega_k+\mu q)}}{1-e^{-\beta(\omega_k+\mu q)}}\nonumber\\
&=&q~V_{d-1}\Omega_{\kappa, d-2}\beta^{-(d-1)}\Gamma(d-1)\zeta(d-1).
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{Mass of the Schwarzschild-AdS black hole}
\renewcommand{\theequation}{C-\arabic{equation}}
\setcounter{equation}{0}
The present subsection is intended to derive the mass of a Schwarzschild-AdS black hole as well as to show its dependence on the period $\beta$ of the thermal circle of the TFD state. For the sake of simplicity we will only restrict our interest to the planar case ($\kappa=0$).
In the coordinate $z=l/r$ a planar Schwarzschild-AdS black hole in $d+1$ dimensions admits the metric
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{Scharzschild-AdS}
ds^2&=&\frac{l^2}{z^2}[-h~dt^2+dz^2/h+d\Sigma^2_{\kappa,d-1}]\nonumber\\
h&=&1-(z/z_0)^d
\end{eqnarray}
where ~$z_0^d=l^{d-2}/\omega^{d-2}$~ and ~$\omega^{d-2}=r_+^d/l^2$. ~$r_+$ is the horizon radius in radial coordinates and ~$l$~ is the AdS radius. The mass of this black hole reads as
\begin{equation}
\label{massterm}
M=\frac{d-1}{16\pi G_N}~\Omega_{0,d-1}~\omega^{d-2}
\end{equation}
and its temperature
\begin{equation}
\label{adstemperature}
T=\frac{d}{4\pi z_0 l}.
\end{equation}
Since the thermal properties of the AdS black hole can be regarded as those of the dual CFT \cite{adsspace} whose temperature is the inverse of the period $\beta$ it follows, when substituting $z_0\sim \beta$ from \eqref{adstemperature} and \eqref{Scharzschild-AdS} in \eqref{massterm}, that
\begin{equation}
\label{adsmass1}
M\sim\beta^{-d}.
\end{equation}
\section*{Acknowledgments}
This work was supported in part by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
|
\section{Motivation}
It is impossible to overlook similarity of the wakes produced on deep water by objects as distinct in sizes, shapes and speeds as a waterfowl, a high-speed boat, or a tanker. This property has its origin in hydrodynamic similarity of the flow pattern due to a point traveling pressure source as discovered by Kelvin \cite{Kelvin}. The conclusion is a consequence of linearity of the theory and the dispersion law of gravity waves on deep water, which in the inviscid incompressible fluid limit, and neglecting the effects of capillarity, has the form \cite{Lamb}
\begin{equation}
\label{spectrum}
\omega^{2}(\textbf{k})=gk
\end{equation}
where $\omega$ is the frequency of the wave of the wave vector $\textbf{k}$, $g$ is the free fall acceleration and $k=|\textbf{k}|$. Indeed dimensional considerations imply that the flow pattern is characterized by a single length scale
\begin{equation}
\label{scale}
l=\frac{v^{2}}{g},
\end{equation}
hereafter called the Kelvin length, composed of $g$ and the speed of the source $v$. If the length is measured in Kelvin units (\ref{scale}), the problem of determining the wake pattern is parameter-free, i.e. all the wakes produced by point sources are geometrically similar (the proof of the statement is Eq.(\ref{Kelvin_integral}) below). The hallmark of the Kelvin wake shown in Figure \ref{wakes}a is its "feathered" appearance due to the so-called transverse and diverging wavefronts confined within $39^{\circ}$ sector \cite{Kelvin,Lamb,Newman,Faber}.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.0\columnwidth, keepaspectratio]{wakes.png}
\caption{(Color online) Evolution of the wavecrests produced by pressure source at the origin traveling to the right, Eqs.(\ref{parametric}), (\ref{wavecrests}) and (\ref{range}), in co-moving reference frame as a function of the cutoff parameter $Q$: from Kelvin wake (a) to Kelvin-Froude wakes, (b) and (c). Kelvin units of length (\ref{scale}) are adopted hereafter. Transverse (t) and diverging (d) wavefronts are shown in orange and red, respectively. Regions where both transverse and diverging wavefronts are found are shaded light blue; regions with only transverse wavefronts present are shaded grey (b) or light purple (c). In cases (a) and (b) the entire wake is bounded by Kelvin's $39^{\circ}$ angle. Opening angle of the inner sector with only transverse wavefronts present, cases (b) and (c), is given by Eq.(\ref{inner_angle}).}
\label{wakes}
\end{figure*}
The Kelvin wake is a dispersive counterpart of the Cherenkov and Mach wakes \cite{wake_review} produced by light and sound, respectively. However no threshold in the form of a requirement on the speed of the source is needed for its formation. Indeed, the wake is formed if there is a wave mode whose phase velocity $\omega/k$ matches the projection of the velocity of the source onto the direction of radiation. This statement known in hydrodynamics as the condition of stationarity \cite{Newman,Faber} or more generally as the Mach-Cherenkov-Landau (MCL) constraint \cite{wake_review} applied to the dispersion law (\ref{spectrum}) acquires the form
\begin{equation}
\label{Cherenkov}
\cos\varphi=\frac{\omega}{kv}=\sqrt{\frac{g}{v^{2}k}}\equiv\frac{1}{\sqrt{kl}}
\end{equation}
where $\varphi$ is the angle between the direction of radiation of the gravity wave and the direction of motion of the source. Since $\cos\varphi \leqslant 1$, the wake is present if the inequality $kl\geqslant1$ holds. Clearly there always are modes satisfying this inequality and thus participating in producing the wake.
Ship wakes seen in practice are not strictly similar. Indeed, the wakes of tankers are dominated by transverse wavefronts while the wakes of high-speed boats are largely made of diverging waves. This is due to finite size of pressure sources that Kelvin's solution neglects \cite{Lighthill}. For fixed shape these effects are captured by the Froude number $F$ defined in terms of the ratio of the Kelvin length (\ref{scale}) to characteristic length scale $a$ of the source (e.g. the hull length for a slender ship)
\begin{equation}
\label{Froude}
F=\sqrt{\frac{l}{a}}=\frac{v}{\sqrt{ga}},
\end{equation}
that also plays a central role in understanding the wave resistance \cite{Lamb,Newman,Faber}.
In marine practice, applicability of the linear water wave theory \cite{Lamb} is limited by the effects of wave breaking, which set an upper bound to the Froude number at $F\simeq 3$ that can be achieved by high-speed boats. Since the Kelvin $a=0$ limit corresponds to infinite Froude number, $F=\infty$, deviations from the ideal Kelvin wake seen in practice are not surprising.
The apparent wake angle is the direct signature of the wake pattern, and ship wakes narrower than Kelvin's have long been observed both in practice \cite{observations} and numerical studies \cite{numerical,numerical2}. The interest in appearance of ship wakes has recently been reignited following a study of Rabaud and Moisy \cite{RM}, who deduced the dependence of the wake angle on the Froude number $F$ from a series of airborne images of ship wakes in the Google Earth database. The angle was found to be approximately constant and close to Kelvin's $39^{\circ}$ for $0.1\lesssim F\lesssim 0.6$. For larger Froude numbers, the angle was decreasing with $F$ reaching values as small as $14^{\circ}$ at $F\simeq 1.7$, seemingly calling Kelvin's theory into question. Original explanation of these results \cite{RM} hinged on an assumption that an object cannot generate waves of wavelength larger than its size.
Recognizing that the angle measured by Rabaud and Moisy corresponds to the locus of the peaks of highest waves, Darmon, Benzaquen, and Rapha\"el \cite{DBR} and Ellingsen \cite{Ellingsen} provided an assumption-free analysis of the observations \cite{RM} based on the classical linear water wave theory \cite{Lamb,theory,RD} applied to the case of traveling isotropic Gaussian pressure source. The treatment also indicated that the entire wake was delimited by Kelvin's $39^{\circ}$ angle. Benzaquen, Darmon and Rapha\"el \cite{BDR} further extended the analysis to understanding wake patterns and wave resistance due to anisotropic pressure disturbances. Similar investigation has been carried out by Moisy and Rabaud \cite{MR}. Yet their interpretation involved a conjecture that amplitude of the waves excited by a disturbance of size $a$ is small unless their wavelength is in a narrow band around $a$.
A different explanation of narrow wake angles due to Noblesse \textit{et al.} \cite{interference} implemented a classic idea of marine hydrodynamics that the wake pattern of a ship can be understood as an interference of two opposite effect Kelvin wakes originating at the bow and stern of the ship \cite{Newman,Faber,resistance}. Assumptions underlying the three competing explanations of narrow wakes \cite{RM, DBR,BDR,MR,interference} have been critically assessed by He \textit{et al.} \cite{He}.
These studies stimulated a series of fundamental questions regarding the gravity wake behind a ship that will be addressed in this work in a unified manner free of unnecessary assumptions:
(i) What is the physics behind the wakes more narrow than Kelvin's? The conjectures regarding the relationship between the excited wavelength and the size of the source \cite{RM,MR} are considered to be controversial \cite{He}. At the same time, the contention that the effect has largely a two-point interference origin \cite{interference} has not been proven.
(ii) Since there is more to the wake than apparent wake angle, how does the Froude number $F$ control the appearance of the wake, i.e. what are possible wake patterns? While there exist qualitative arguments putatively explaining the effect of the Froude number \cite{Lighthill}, quantitative understanding is lacking.
(iii) How is it possible for the wake to be bounded by Kelvin's $39^{\circ}$ angle for small $F$? It is a puzzle because in this case the pattern has to be least similar to the ideal, $F=\infty$, Kelvin wake.
\section{Kelvin wake pattern}
We begin with an expression for the vertical displacement of the water surface due to a pressure source traveling with constant velocity $\textbf{v}$ over deep water in the co-moving reference frame, derived within the framework of the linear water wave theory \cite{Lamb,theory,RD}.
\begin{equation}
\label{general_wake_integral}
\zeta(\textbf{r})=\frac{1}{\rho}\int\frac{d^{2}k}{(2\pi)^{2}}\frac{kp(\textbf{k})e^{i\textbf{k}\cdot\textbf{r}}}{(\textbf{k}\cdot\textbf{v}+i0)^{2}-gk},
\end{equation}
Here, $\textbf{r}$ is a two-dimensional position vector, $\rho$ is the density of water, and $p(\textbf{k})$ is a Fourier transform of the excess pressure $\delta p(\textbf{r})$ due to traveling disturbance,
\begin{equation}
\label{Fourier_transform_definition}
p(\textbf{k})=\int \delta p(\textbf{r})e^{-i\textbf{k}\cdot \textbf{r}}d^{2}r.
\end{equation}
The $+i0$ shift in the denominator of the integrand in (\ref{general_wake_integral}) is required by causality \cite{wake_review}.
Let us choose the positive $x$ direction along the velocity vector $\textbf{v}$ and measure the length in Kelvin units (\ref{scale}), the wave vectors in units of $l^{-1}$, and the excess pressure $\delta p(\textbf{r})$ in units of $\rho g l$. Further specifying to the point source limit $p=const=1$ brings the wake integral (\ref{general_wake_integral}) to a parameter-free form
\begin{equation}
\label{Kelvin_integral}
\zeta(\textbf{r})=\int\frac{d^{2}k}{(2\pi)^{2}}\frac{ke^{i\textbf{k}\cdot\textbf{r}}}{(k_{x}+i0)^{2}-k}
\end{equation}
thus demonstrating geometric similarity of Kelvin wakes. Since the Kelvin limit continues to play central role for general $p(\textbf{k})$ in (\ref{general_wake_integral}), we review this case first.
While the Fourier integral (\ref{Kelvin_integral}) cannot be computed in closed form, the geometry of the wake pattern can be understood by employing Kelvin's stationary phase argument \cite{Kelvin,Lamb,Newman,Faber,wake_review}.
First, the integral (\ref{Kelvin_integral}) is dominated by the wave vectors corresponding to the pole of the integrand
\begin{equation}
\label{pole}
k_{x}^{2}=k
\end{equation}
which is the MCL condition (\ref{Cherenkov}) in disguise.
Second, far away from the source, at $r\gg1$, the phase factor $f=\textbf{k}\cdot\textbf{r}$ in the integrand in (\ref{Kelvin_integral}) is large and the exponential is a highly oscillatory function of $\textbf{k}$. Here, contributions from various elements $d^{2}k$ typically cancel each other; this is the case of destructive interference with almost zero net result. This cancellation, however, will not occur for wave vectors which both satisfy the MCL condition (\ref{pole}) and have a phase $f$ which is stationary with respect to $\textbf{k}$; this is the case of constructive interference.
The trace of the source divides the plane into two regions related to one another by reflection; without the loss of generality we can focus on the $y>0$ half-space. Here the wake is a superposition of the waves whose wave vectors have positive components, $k_{x,y}>0$. Then the phase is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{phase_general}
f=\textbf{k}\cdot\textbf{r}=\sqrt{k}\cdot x+\sqrt{k^{2}-k}\cdot y
\end{equation}
where the components $k_{x,y}$ were expressed in terms of $k$ according to Eq.(\ref{pole}). The condition of stationary phase $df/dk=0$,
\begin{equation}
\label{stationary_phase_general}
-\frac{y}{x}=\frac{\sqrt{k-1}}{2k-1}
\end{equation}
can only be satisfied for $x<0$, which is where the wake is. This relationship appeared previously \cite{RM}. The right-hand side of (\ref{stationary_phase_general}) vanishes at $k=1$, $k\rightarrow \infty$, and for $k=3/2$ it reaches a maximum value of $1/2\sqrt{2}$. Thus Eq.(\ref{stationary_phase_general}) has two solutions for $0\leqslant-y/x<1/2\sqrt{2}$ corresponding to the transverse and diverging wavefronts. These solutions merge at $-y/x=1/2\sqrt{2}$, and none are found for $-y/x>1/2\sqrt{2}$. Therefore the wake is confined (for $y>0$) by an $\arctan(1/2\sqrt{2})\approx19.47^{\circ}$ angle which is Kelvin's classic result.
Since the phase $f$ is constant along the wavefront, Eqs.(\ref{phase_general}) and (\ref{stationary_phase_general}) can be
solved relative to $x$ and $y$ to give the equation for the wavefront in parametric form:
\begin{equation}
\label{parametric}
x(k)=fk^{-3/2}(2k-1),~~y(k)=-fk^{-3/2}\sqrt{k-1}.
\end{equation}
Wavecrests of the pattern (\ref{parametric}) correspond to the choice of the phase in the form
\begin{equation}
\label{wavecrests}
f_{n}=-\pi\left (2n+\frac{5}{4}\right )
\end{equation}
with $n$ integer \cite{Havelock}. They are shown in Figure \ref{wakes}a; the $y<0$ part of the wake is obtained by reflection. The wake consists of the transverse (t) wavefronts formed by elementary waves with the wave vectors in the $1\leqslant k\leqslant3/2$ range connecting the edges of the pattern across the central line $y=0$, and the diverging (d) wavefronts formed by the waves with the wave vectors in the $k>3/2$ range connecting the source to the edges of the pattern \cite{Kelvin,Lamb,Newman,Faber}. Combined with the form of the integrand in (\ref{Kelvin_integral}), these facts imply that the transverse waves are significantly weaker than the diverging ones unless one is close to the cenral line $y=0$. The wavelength of the pattern along the latter is $2\pi$ while at the wake boundaries $y/x=\pm1/2\sqrt{2}$ it is $4\pi/3$.
Alternatively, the equation of the wavefront can be written out by substituting solutions of the equation of the stationary phase (\ref{stationary_phase_general}) into the expression for the phase (\ref{phase_general}):
\begin{equation}
\label{phase(x,y)}
f(x,y)=-\frac{x^{2}\left (1+4y^{2}/x^{2}\pm\sqrt{1-8y^{2}/x^{2}}\right )^{3/2}}{4\sqrt{2}y(1\pm\sqrt{1-8y^{2}/x^{2}})}.
\end{equation}
Here the upper and lower signs correspond to the diverging and transverse wavefronts, respectively. Equating Eqs.(\ref{wavecrests}) and (\ref{phase(x,y)}) then gives two implicit equations for the wavecrests of the transverse and diverging kind.
The phase function corresponding to the diverging wavefronts (plus sign in Eq.(\ref{phase(x,y)})) increases in magnitude without bound as one approaches the central line $y=0$. This translates into oscillatory behavior of the water height with ever decreasing wavelength, seen as a bunching of the diverging wavefronts in Figure 1a as $y\rightarrow 0$. In practice such a behavior may be halted by a combination of effects that the present theory omits: capillarity neglected in the dispersion law (\ref{spectrum}) and non-linearity coming into play for sufficiently steep waves. Possible manifestations are discussed by Barnell and Noblesse \cite{numerical2} and Noblesse \textit{et al.} \cite{interference}: in practice the effects are limited to a very narrow angular range near the central line $y=0$.
\section{Effects of finite size and shape: smooth boundaries}
The effect of finite size and shape of pressure source on the wake pattern crucially depends on whether water surface piercing is absent or not.
\subsection{Modified stationary phase argument}
The former situation studied first may describe a hovercraft, low-flying airplane, or missile, and a boat in the planing regime \cite{Newman,Faber}.
This class of sources can be represented by smooth spatially localized excess pressure functions $\delta p(\textbf{r})$ whose Fourier transforms $p(\textbf{k})$ are localized in the $\textbf{k}$-space. It has an effect of imposing an ultraviolet cutoff in the integral (\ref{general_wake_integral}). A simple approximate way to account for this effect is to take a sharp cutoff limit consisting in strict elimination of sufficiently large wave vectors from the integration domain in Eq.(\ref{Kelvin_integral}).
Let $Q$ be the magnitude of the wave vector both obeying the MCL constraint (\ref{pole}) and belonging to the boundary of the now compact integration domain in (\ref{Kelvin_integral}): only the waves whose wave vectors satisfy the condition
\begin{equation}
\label{range}
k\in [1,Q]
\end{equation}
participate in producing the wake pattern. We now recall that the equations for the Kelvin wavefronts (\ref{parametric}) are given in terms of parametric dependences on the magnitude of the wave vector $k$. These equations subject to the constraint (\ref{range}) also describe the wavefronts due to sharply localized pressure functions $p(\textbf{k})$. The information about the shape of the integration region in Eq.(\ref{Kelvin_integral}) is hidden in the phenomenological parameter $Q$.
Evolution of the wavefronts given by Eqs.(\ref{parametric}), (\ref{wavecrests}), and (\ref{range}) for different values of the cutoff parameter $Q$ is shown in Figure \ref{wakes}. The Kelvin, $Q=\infty$ limit, Figure \ref{wakes}a, differs from the case of finite $Q>3/2$, Figure \ref{wakes}b, in that the diverging wavefronts no longer reach the source at the origin. Their end points belong to a ray
\begin{equation}
\label{Froude_ray}
-\frac{y}{x}=\frac{\sqrt{Q-1}}{2Q-1}
\end{equation}
hereafter called the Froude ray. The latter and its $y<0$ reflection define an inner wake of the opening angle
\begin{equation}
\label{inner_angle}
2\theta=2\arctan\frac{\sqrt{Q-1}}{2Q-1}
\end{equation}
that only contains the transverse wavefronts. Both the diverging and transverse wavefronts are found outside the inner wake and are bounded by Kelvin's $39^{\circ}$ angle. As $Q$ approaches $3/2$, the inner wake widens and the segments of the diverging wavefronts shorten. At $Q=3/2$ the inner wake angle (\ref{inner_angle}) matches Kelvin's $39^{\circ}$, and the diverging wavefronts disappear. The wakes having the geometry of Figure \ref{wakes}b have been observed both in nature \cite{Newman} and numerical studies \cite{DBR,Ellingsen,BDR}.
For $1<Q<3/2$, Figure \ref{wakes}c, the wake consists entirely of the transverse wavefronts confined within the wedge of the angle (\ref{inner_angle}) smaller than Kelvin's. As the cutoff parameter $Q$ approaches unity, the wake narrows and disappears for $Q<1$. The absence of the wake for $Q<1$ does not imply strict lack of the waves but indicates that the stationary phase approximation no longer applies, and that the waves are weak.
The wakes generated by finite-size pressure sources, like those in Figures \ref{wakes}b and \ref{wakes}c, are hereafter called Kelvin-Froude wakes.
\subsection{General numerical procedure}
All the wake integrals considered in this paper were evaluated numerically via a fast Fourier transform algorithm \cite{FFT}; a sample code is available online \cite{Jonathan_code}. The integration region was chosen to be a $2k_{max}\times 2k_{max}$ square centered at the origin with sides parallel to the $k_{x,y}$ axes. In all of the wake images presented below, the computation parameters $k_{max}$ and the integration step $\Delta k$ were chosen to maximize the resulting image resolution for the desired real space range $x_{max}$. It can be shown for a fast Fourier transform on an array of size $N\times N$ that the resolutions in real and the wave vector space, $\Delta x$ and $\Delta k$, respectively, obey the uncertainty relation $\Delta x \Delta k \simeq 1/N$. Here $N=k_{max}/\Delta k = x_{max}/\Delta x$, and in practice the parameter $N$ was limited by available computer memory. So at fixed $N$, one finds that $\Delta x k_{max} \simeq \Delta k x_{max} \simeq 1$. For each image, $\Delta k$ was chosen to be the smallest value compatible with the desired $x_{max}$, so that $k_{max}$ and consequentially the real space image resolution could be maximized.
For viewing purposes, the water height values, $\zeta(\textbf{r})$, were adjusted to be centered around zero. In order to prevent very large response at the origin from dominating the color scale and obscuring other wake features, a bound was applied such that all the values satisfying $|\zeta(\textbf{r})|>\zeta_{max}$ were changed to $\pm\zeta_{max}$. The exact value of $\zeta_{max}$ was determined individually for each wake image, with the goal being to have it small enough to show all of the wake features without it being so small that slight variations in the background became visible. Finally, the values were rescaled to fit on the range $[-1, 1]$.
\subsection{Sharp wave vector cutoff}
To illustrate the modified stationary phase argument at work, let us consider an example where the integration domain in Eq.(\ref{Kelvin_integral}) is a $2k_{max}\times 2k_{max}$ square centered at the origin whose sides are parallel to the $k_{x,y}$ axes. Intersections of the boundary of this square with the MCL curve (\ref{pole}) then determine the cutoff parameter $Q$ to be given by
\begin{equation}
\label{squareQ}
Q = \left \{
\begin{aligned}
&k_{max}^{2}, && \text{if}\ k_{max}^{2}<2 \\
&\frac{1+\sqrt{1+4k_{max}^{2}}}{2}, && \text{if}\ k_{max}^{2}\geqslant2
\end{aligned} \right.
\end{equation}
One then expects no wake for $k_{max}<1$; for $1\leqslant k_{max}\leqslant(3/2)^{1/2}$ the wake pattern will have the geometry of Figure \ref{wakes}c while for $k_{max}>(3/2)^{1/2}$ the geometry will be that of Figure \ref{wakes}b. Moreover, the wavecrests are predicted to be given by Eqs.(\ref{parametric}), (\ref{wavecrests}), (\ref{range}) and (\ref{squareQ}).
For a series of different values of $k_{max}$ the integral (\ref{Kelvin_integral}) was computed numerically. The results for the water displacement $\zeta(\textbf{r})$, shown in Figure \ref{sharp} as a series of color-coded topographical height maps, fully support phenomenological reasoning based on the modified stationary phase argument.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.0\columnwidth, keepaspectratio]{sharp.png}
\caption{(Color online) Evolution of the wake pattern generated by Eq.(\ref{Kelvin_integral}) for the square integration domain $|k_{x,y}|\leqslant k_{max}$ for a series of different values of $k_{max}$ shown as color-coded topographical map of the water displacement $\zeta(\textbf{r})$ rescaled to fit on the $[-1, 1]$ range as indicated by the color bars at the far right of each row of images. In the top row, cases (a)-(e), black-dotted curves represent the wavecrests given by Eqs.(\ref{parametric}), (\ref{wavecrests}), (\ref{range}) and (\ref{squareQ}). In the bottom row, cases (f)-(j), the black- and blue-dotted straight lines represent the Froude (\ref{Froude_ray}) and Kelvin, $-y/x=1/2\sqrt{2}$, rays, respectively.}
\label{sharp}
\end{figure*}
The wavecrests in the top row images, (a)-(e), were overlaid (for $y>0$) with the curves given by Eqs.(\ref{parametric}), (\ref{wavecrests}), (\ref{range}) and (\ref{squareQ}). As expected, the diverging wavefronts are absent in cases (a) and (b), and the wakes are narrow and weak. As one goes through the sequence (c) to (e), the diverging wavefronts grow in presence and magnitude.
The bottom row images, (f)-(j), have (for $y>0$) only the Kelvin $-y/x=1/2\sqrt{2}$ and Froude (\ref{Froude_ray}) rays overlaid, and they clearly demonstrate well-developed diverging wavefronts and narrowing of the inner wake according to Eqs.(\ref{inner_angle}) and (\ref{squareQ}) with increase of $k_{max}$. The last three images, (h)-(j), also show that a sliver of a nearly zero water displacement is formed between the Froude ray (\ref{Froude_ray}) and the part of the wake containing both the diverging and transverse wavefronts. As $k_{max}$ increases, this sliver widens due to narrowing of the inner wake. The appearance of this peculiar region is an artifact reflecting our inability to properly display rapidly oscillating diverging wavefronts, the property discussed following Eq.(\ref{phase(x,y)}). We then conclude that as $k_{max}\rightarrow \infty$, the wake pattern approaches Kelvin's ideal limit sketched in Figure \ref{wakes}a.
Since $k_{max}$ has a meaning of an inverse spatial scale of the pressure source, these conclusions can be recast in terms of the Froude number $F\equiv \sqrt{k_{max}}$ as follows: there exist two critical Froude numbers, $F_{1}=1$ and $F_{2}=(3/2)^{1/4}$, such as no wake is found for $F< F_{1}$, for $F_{1}\leqslant F\leqslant F_{2}$ the wake has the geometry of Figure \ref{wakes}c while for $F>F_{2}$ the wake has the geometry of Figure \ref{wakes}b.
A different implementation of the sharp ultraviolet cutoff in the integral (\ref{Kelvin_integral}) only changes the critical values $F_{1,2}$ without affecting the gross picture that there are two possibilities for the wake patterns controlled by the Froude number and encapsulated in Figures \ref{wakes}b or \ref{wakes}c. The underlying physics is a suppression of the short-wavelength modes by finite size effects which (coming from large to small Froude numbers) progressively decrease the presence of the diverging wavefronts until they disappear at $F=F_{2}$ followed by gradual exclusion of the transverse wavefronts until the wake is gone at $F=F_{1}$.
\subsection{Generalization to smooth pressure sources $p(\textbf{k})$}
While the wakes of sources sharply localized in the wave vector space can be understood by generalization of the argument that explains the ideal Kelvin wake pattern, they mimic realistic disturbances poorly: their direct space counterparts $\delta p(\textbf{r})$ feature non-physical slowly decaying oscillatory behavior as one moves away from the pressure center. Yet, we contend that the reasoning developed to understand these cases largely carries over to smooth localized pressure disturbances $p(\textbf{k})$ whose real space counterparts $\delta p(\textbf{r})$ are free of artifacts.
Indeed, the origin of the critical Froude numbers $F_{1,2}$ can be traced back to the existence of the two critical values of the cutoff parameter (\ref{range}), $Q_{1}=1$ (appearance of the wake in the form of the transverse wavefronts), and $Q_{2}=3/2$ (onset of the diverging wavefront generation). However, for smooth $p(\textbf{k})$ the cutoff parameter $Q$ is no longer sharply defined because contribution of large wave vector modes into the wake pattern is only suppressed rather than excluded. The well-localized nature of the pressure function $p(\textbf{k})$ still allows us to define a characteristic cutoff parameter $Q$. The instants when the latter takes on the threshold values of $Q_{1}=1$ and $Q_{2}=3/2$ define the characteristic Froude numbers $F_{1}$ and $F_{2}$, respectively. Thus the transitions at $F=F_{1,2}$ become smeared. Moreover, observation of the narrow wake pattern like in Figure \ref{wakes}c may become problematic as the tail of the function $p(\textbf{k})$ admits high wave vector modes, causing the wake to appear wider.
In order to test these predictions, we focus on smooth pressure distributions characterized by a single length scale $a\equiv 1/F^{2}$ (see Eq.(\ref{Froude})). This limitation is not crucial and is only made for the sake of simplicity. Then the response to the moving pressure source is given by a generalization of Eq.(\ref{Kelvin_integral}):
\begin{equation}
\label{beyond_Kelvin_integral}
\zeta(\textbf{r})=\int\frac{d^{2}k}{(2\pi)^{2}}\frac{kp(\textbf{k}/F^{2})e^{i\textbf{k}\cdot\textbf{r}}}{(k_{x}+i0)^{2}-k}
\end{equation}
For isotropic disturbance $p(\textbf{k}/F^{2})\equiv p(k/F^{2})$ the cutoff parameter $Q$ (\ref{range}) then can be estimated as
\begin{equation}
\label{isotropic_cutoff}
Q\simeq F^{2}
\end{equation}
As a result the opening angle of the inner wake (\ref{inner_angle}) for $F\gg1$ behaves as
\begin{equation}
\label{limit_iso_angle}
2\theta \simeq \frac{1}{F}
\end{equation}
Curiously, the $1/F$ asymptotic behavior was predicted for the angle of largest waves due to isotropic Gaussian pressure source \cite{RM,DBR}.
For strongly anisotropic disturbance $p(\textbf{k}/F^{2})\equiv p(k_{x}/F^{2})$ the ${x}$-components of the wave vectors are effectively suppressed at $k_{x}\simeq F^{2}$; the MCL condition (\ref{Cherenkov}) then implies that
\begin{equation}
\label{anisotropic_cutoff}
Q\simeq F^{4}
\end{equation}
In this case the opening angle of the inner wake (\ref{inner_angle}) for $F\gg1$ behaves as
\begin{equation}
\label{limit_aniso_angle}
2\theta \simeq \frac{1}{F^{2}}
\end{equation}
Curiously, the $1/F^{2}$ asymptotic dependence was predicted for the angle of largest waves by Noblesse \textit{et al.} \cite{interference} and by Moisy and Rabaud \cite{MR} for two different model anisotropic pressure disturbances.
The integral (\ref{beyond_Kelvin_integral}) is evaluated numerically for two particular choices of isotropic and strongly anisotropic pressure disturbances to which the predictions (\ref{isotropic_cutoff})-(\ref{limit_aniso_angle}) apply. To probe the effects of the pressure disturbance rather than that of the cutoff we made sure that $F^{2}\ll k_{max}$ for isotropic case, $p(\textbf{k}/F^{2})\equiv p(k/F^{2})$, and $F^{4}\ll k_{max}$ for strongly anisotropic one, $p(\textbf{k}/F^{2})\equiv p(k_{x}/F^{2})$.
\subsubsection{Isotropic Gaussian pressure source}
As an example of an isotropic pressure source we look at the Gaussian disturbance
\begin{equation}
\label{iGaussian_disturbance}
p\left (\frac{\textbf{k}}{F^{2}}\right )=\exp\left (-\frac{k^{2}}{F^{4}}\right ).
\end{equation}
While this case has been studied previously \cite{DBR,Ellingsen}, our focus is different as we test quantitative reasoning regarding evolution of the wake pattern with the Froude number. In the regime of small Froude numbers we also find a disagreement with Refs.\cite{DBR}. Our convention (\ref{iGaussian_disturbance}) gives a Froude number which is $\sqrt{2\pi}$ times larger than that employed in Refs.\cite{DBR,Ellingsen}.
For the isotropic Gaussian pressure source (\ref{iGaussian_disturbance}) and a series of different values of $F$ the integral (\ref{beyond_Kelvin_integral}) was computed numerically.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.0\columnwidth, keepaspectratio]{isogaussian.png}
\caption{Evolution of the wake pattern generated by isotropic Gaussian pressure source, Eqs.(\ref{beyond_Kelvin_integral}) and (\ref{iGaussian_disturbance}), for a series of different values of the Froude number $F$. The legend is the same as that of Figure \ref{sharp}. The bounding rays for the top row were drawn via a procedure based on the topographical map of $\partial \zeta/\partial y$, the second from the top row, and explained in the main text. The source point was set as the intersection of these bounding rays with the $y=0$ line, and was found to be at some $x=X_{int}>0$ for $F<F_{2}$. The cutoff parameter employed in the third from the top row for the wavecrests (\ref{parametric}) and in the fourth from the top row for the Froude ray (\ref{Froude_ray}) is $Q=1.4F^{2}$. }
\label{isogaussian}
\end{figure*}
The results displayed in Figure \ref{isogaussian} largely support the reasoning regarding the existence of two characteristic Froude numbers $F_{1,2}$ and two types of the wake patterns having the geometries of Figures \ref{wakes}b and \ref{wakes}c. Specifically, the results are reasonably well-described in terms of the cutoff parameter $Q\approx 1.4 F^{2}$ (in agreement with the scaling prediction (\ref{isotropic_cutoff})) and characteristic Froude numbers $F_{1} \approx 0.84$ and $F_{2} \approx 1.04$.
The wakes in the first row images, (a)-(e), only feature transverse wavefronts which are bounded within a wedge marked by two black-dotted rays. Their bounding angle $2\theta$ is smaller than Kelvin's; the Kelvin ray $-y/x=1/2\sqrt{2}$ is also shown for comparison. The bounding wedge was drawn by fitting lines through the points of maximal $|\partial \zeta/\partial y|$ as demonstrated in the second from the top row of images, (a')-(e'), that display topographical map of $\partial \zeta/\partial y$. As the Froude number increases tending to $F=F_{2}$, the wake widens approaching the Kelvin $39^{\circ}$ limit. This would be an illustration of the geometry of Figure \ref{wakes}c if not for the fact that the apex of the wake at $x=X_{int}$ is found to be \textit{ahead} of the source, i.e. $X_{int}>0$, a feature commonly observed in marine practice \cite{Newman}. As the Froude number increases toward $F=F_{2}$, the apex of the wake $X_{int}$ approaches the disturbance center $x=0$. Numerically determined values of the wake angle $2\theta$ and the apex position $X_{int}$ along with corresponding Froude numbers $F$ are quoted in images (a')-(e'). It is in this range of low Froude numbers that we find ourselves in disagreement with conclusions of Refs.\cite{DBR,Ellingsen} who found that the wake is always delimited by Kelvin's $39^{\circ}$ angle.
The wavecrests of the third row images, (f)-(j), were overlaid with the curves given by Eqs. (\ref{parametric}), (\ref{wavecrests}), and (\ref{range}) with $Q=1.4 F^{2}$. As the Froude number increases from $1.2$ to $1.6$, the diverging wavefronts develop and grow in presence.
The bottom row images, (k)-(o), only have the Kelvin $-y/x = 1/2\sqrt{2}$ and Froude (\ref{Froude_ray}) rays overlaid, and they clearly demonstrate well-developed diverging wavefronts and narrowing of the inner wake with increase of $F$ in accordance with Eq.(\ref{inner_angle}).
The wakes in the $F=1.25-2.5$ range of the Froude numbers can be visually compared with those reported in Refs.\cite{DBR,Ellingsen}, and we find ourselves in agreement on their appearance and evolution with the Froude number.
\subsubsection{Strongly anisotropic Gaussian pressure source}
As an example of a strongly anisotropic pressure source we look at the Gaussian disturbance
\begin{equation}
\label{aGaussian_disturbance}
p\left (\frac{\textbf{k}}{F^{2}}\right )=\exp\left (-\frac{k_{x}^{2}}{F^{4}}\right ).
\end{equation}
The results of numerical evaluation of the integral (\ref{beyond_Kelvin_integral}) shown in Figure \ref{anisogaussian} for a series of Froude numbers largely support the reasoning regarding the existence of two characteristic Froude numbers $F_{1,2}$ and two types of the wake patterns encapsulated in Figures \ref{wakes}b and \ref{wakes}c.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.0\columnwidth]{anisogaussian.png}
\caption{Evolution of the wake pattern generated by strongly anisotropic Gaussian pressure source, Eqs.(\ref{beyond_Kelvin_integral}) and (\ref{aGaussian_disturbance}), for a series of different values of the Froude number $F$. The legend is the same as that of Figures \ref{sharp} and \ref{isogaussian}. The cutoff parameter employed in the first and second rows for the wavecrests, Eqs.(\ref{parametric}) and (\ref{wavecrests}), and in the third row for the Froude ray (\ref{Froude_ray}) is $Q=3.1F^{4}$.}
\label{anisogaussian}
\end{figure*}
Specifically, numerical results are reasonably well-described in terms of the cutoff parameter $Q\approx 3.1F^{4}$ (in agreement with the scaling prediction (\ref{anisotropic_cutoff})) and characteristic Froude numbers $F_{1} \approx 0.75$ and $F_{2} \approx 0.83$.
The wakes in the first row images, (a)-(e), only feature transverse wavefronts bounded by the Kelvin ray $-y/x=1/2\sqrt{2}$. This would be an illustration of the geometry of Figure \ref{wakes}c if not for the fact that the wake is wider (a possibility already anticipated); the wake angle appears to be exactly Kelvin's $39^{\circ}$. In contrast to the low-$F$ regime of isotropic case, Figure \ref{isogaussian} (a-e), the apex of the wake coincides with the center of the source. It is curious that low-$F$ wakes of isotropic pressure source, Figure \ref{isogaussian}, are more \textit{narrow} than low-$F$ wakes of strongly anisotropic one, Figure \ref{anisogaussian}.
The wavecrests of the first and second row images, (a)-(j), were overlaid with the curves given by Eqs. (\ref{parametric}), (\ref{wavecrests}), and (\ref{range}) with $Q=3.1F^{4}$. As the Froude number increases from $0.9$ to $0.98$, the diverging wavefronts develop and grow in presence.
The bottom row images, (k)-(o), only have the Kelvin $-y/x = 1/2\sqrt{2}$ and Froude (\ref{Froude_ray}) rays overlaid, and they clearly demonstrate well-developed diverging wavefronts and narrowing of the inner wake with increase of $F$ in accordance with Eq.(\ref{Froude_ray}).
\section{Effects of finite size and shape: sharp boundaries}
Due to water piercing, pressure disturbances describing actual ships correspond to functions $\delta p(\textbf{r})$ that are finite within a compact spatial domain and zero otherwise. Their Fourier transforms $p(\textbf{k})$ entering Eq.(\ref{general_wake_integral}) are slowly decaying oscillating functions; they do not suppress large wave vector modes, thus implying that the wake is always present. Oscillatory behavior exhibited by $p(\textbf{k})$, a source to a host of additional interference effects, has to be treated on the same footing as that of the oscillating exponentials in the integral (\ref{general_wake_integral}).
\subsection{Finite length segment constant pressure source: two-point interference argument}
Below we do not attempt to discuss all the possibilities but focus on the case of a boundary with two sharp corners. Specifically, we will be employing the function
\begin{equation}
\label{segment}
p\left (\frac{\textbf{k}}{F^{2}}\right )=\frac{2F^{2}}{k_{x}}\sin\left (\frac{k_{x}}{2F^{2}}\right )\equiv\frac{2}{k_{x}a}\sin\left (\frac{k_{x}a}{2}\right )
\end{equation}
which corresponds to a constant pressure line segment of length $a\equiv 1/F^{2}$ parallel to the $x$-axis and centered at the origin. The function (\ref{segment}) mimics the geometry of a slender ship. Substituting (\ref{segment}) into Eq.(\ref{beyond_Kelvin_integral}) we find
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{segment_integral}
\zeta(\textbf{r})&=&\int\frac{2F^{2}kd^{2}k}{(2\pi)^{2}k_{x}}\frac{\sin(k_{x}/2F^{2})e^{i\textbf{k}\cdot\textbf{r}}}{(k_{x}+i0)^{2}-k}\nonumber\\
&=&\int\frac{kd^{2}k}{(2\pi)^{2}ik_{x}a}\frac{e^{i[k_{x}(x+a/2)+k_{y}y]}-e^{i[k_{x}(x-a/2)+k_{y}y]}}{(k_{x}+i0)^{2}-k}\nonumber\\
\end{eqnarray}
The second representation lends support to interpretation of the outcome as a superposition of the two opposing effect wakes originating at the segment's end $x=-a/2$ and front $x=a/2$. This is largely in agreement with the classic idea of marine hydrodynamics that the wake pattern of a ship can be understood as an interference of two opposite effect bow and stern Kelvin wakes \cite{resistance,Newman}. The difference is that the two wakes implicit in Eq.(\ref{segment_integral}) are not exactly Kelvin's and the function (\ref{segment}) is not a pressure dipole in real space. This distinction is important because the function $p(\textbf{k}/F^{2})$ in Eq.(\ref{beyond_Kelvin_integral}) is the property of the pressure source at rest. Thus if a vessel is symmetric about its center, so is the pressure function; a pressure dipole is incompatible with central symmetry.
In the stationary phase approximation, the wakes originating at the segment's edges, $x=\mp a/2$ are described by the phase functions $f(x\pm a/2,y)$, respectively, of the form (\ref{phase(x,y)}) found in the Kelvin case. For $x<-a/2$ and $|y/(x+a/2)|<1/2\sqrt{2}$ the two wakes interfere. This wedge-shaped region of the two-point interference is our main interest. The rest of the pattern appears due to the front of the segment $x=a/2$ generating its own Kelvin-like wake pattern.
The locus of the points of largest waves is given by the condition of constructive interference
\begin{equation}
\label{constructive}
f\left (x+\frac{a}{2}\right )-f\left (x-\frac{a}{2}\right )=\pi (2n+1), ~~~n=0, 1, 2,...
\end{equation}
Likewise, the locus of the points of smallest waves is given by similar expression with $2n+1$ replaced by $2n$. The relationship (\ref{constructive}) encompasses two different equations corresponding to the two sign choices in the phase function (\ref{phase(x,y)}): with upper signs we have the case of the diverging (dd) wavefronts interfering while with lower signs chosen, it is the transverse (tt) wavefronts that interfere. The two-letter abbreviations, dd or tt, are hereafter refer to the two-point interference nature of the effects.
Far away from the source, $|x|\gg a$, Eq.(\ref{constructive}) simplifies to
\begin{equation}
\label{same_constructive}
\frac{\partial f}{\partial x}=\frac{\pi(2n+1)}{a}\equiv\pi(2n+1)F^{2}.
\end{equation}
Curiously, evaluation of the derivative $\partial f/\partial x$ with two different phase functions (\ref{phase(x,y)}) leads to the same result
\begin{equation}
\label{discrete_stationary_phase}
-\frac{y}{x}=\frac{\sqrt{k_{n}-1}}{2k_{n}-1},~~~k_{n}=\pi^{2}(2n+1)^{2}F^{4}
\end{equation}
with the provision that the tt interference takes place if $1\leqslant k_{n}\leqslant3/2$ while the dd interference corresponds to the $k_{n}> 3/2$ case. Eq.(\ref{discrete_stationary_phase}) is a discrete counterpart of the equation of stationary phase (\ref{stationary_phase_general}); the role of the magnitude of the wave vector $k$ is now played by the discrete set of $k_{n}$ hereafter called the wave numbers.
The relationship (\ref{discrete_stationary_phase}) was already given \cite{interference} where it was obtained by assuming that the wake pattern is a result of interference of the two opposing Kelvin wakes originating at the bow and stern of a ship mimicked by a pressure dipole. In our analysis the physical picture of the two out of phase interfering wakes arises naturally in the course of treatment of integral (\ref{segment_integral}); the latter also contains the information about magnitude of the effects. However as far as the geometry of the wake is concerned, the idea of Ref.\cite{interference} is vindicated. Hereafter our analysis complements that of Ref.\cite{interference}; numerical demonstration of the effects is where our results largely lie.
If the wave numbers $k_{n}$ (\ref{discrete_stationary_phase}) are subject to the MCL condition (\ref{pole}), one finds a set of the $x$-components of the wave vectors, $k_{x,n}=\pi(2n+1)F^{2}=\pi(2n+1)/a\geqslant \pi/a$. This largely justifies the conjectures \cite{RM,MR} as consequences of the established theory \cite{theory,RD} applied to the pressure source (\ref{segment}).
According to Eq.(\ref{discrete_stationary_phase}), the constructive tt interference takes place along the central line $y=0$ provided $k_{n}=1$ which is satisfied for a discrete set of the Froude numbers
\begin{equation}
\label{y=0_constructive_interference}
F_{n}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{\pi(2n+1)}}\approx 0.564, 0.326, 0.252, 0.213,...
\end{equation}
Likewise, the condition of the destructive tt interference is
\begin{equation}
\label{y=0_destructive_interference}
F_{n}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi n}}\approx 0.399,0.282,0.230,0.199,...
\end{equation}
These two sets are familiar from analysis of a one-dimensional toy model that only allows for the transverse wavefronts \cite{Newman}. This model is recovered along the central line where $f(x,0)=x$, Eq.(\ref{phase(x,y)}). The "unfavorable" set (\ref{y=0_constructive_interference}) leading to large waves is known to correspond to the maxima of the wave resistance versus Froude number dependence \cite{Newman}. On the contrary, for the "favorable" set (\ref{y=0_destructive_interference}) the waves are small, and the wave resistance exhibits minima \cite{Newman}.
Evolution of the wake pattern can be understood by following the "flow" of the set of the wave numbers $k_{n}$ (\ref{discrete_stationary_phase}) along the curve of the stationary phase (\ref{stationary_phase_general}) with \textit{decrease} of the Froude number as shown in Figure \ref{flow}.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.0\columnwidth, keepaspectratio]{flow.png}
\caption{(Color online) Flow of the wave numbers $k_{n}$ (\ref{discrete_stationary_phase}) shown as solid red (dd interference) or orange (tt interference) circles visible within the $1\leqslant k \leqslant 128$ range along the curve of the stationary phase (\ref{stationary_phase_general}) (opaque grayscale) presented in the semi-logarithmic scale with decrease of the Froude number $F$. Numbers next to the circles are subscripts $n$ in $k_{n}$ labeling constructive interference fringes.}
\label{flow}
\end{figure*}
If $\pi^{2}F^{4}>3/2$ or $F>0.624$ all the wave numbers belong to the descending, $k>3/2$, part of the curve and represent the dd interference effects. An example is shown in Figure \ref{flow}a. Opaque grayscale is used for the curve of the stationary phase (\ref{stationary_phase_general}), and the wave numbers $k_{n}$ visible within the $1\leqslant k \leqslant 128$ range are shown as solid red circles. The numbers next to the circles are the subscripts in $k_{n}$ labeling the fringes. The entire interference pattern is confined within a wedge of an angle given by Eq.(\ref{inner_angle}) with
\begin{equation}
\label{zero_Q}
Q=k_{0}=\pi^{2}F^{4}
\end{equation}
This is the main interference fringe.
As the Froude number decreases, the wave numbers (\ref{discrete_stationary_phase}) flow leftward along the curve of the stationary phase (\ref{stationary_phase_general}). As a result, the confining angle of the wake given by Eqs.(\ref{inner_angle}) and (\ref{zero_Q}) increases approaching its maximal $39^{\circ}$ value as $F\rightarrow (3/2\pi^{2})^{1/4}=0.624$ from above. At a slightly smaller $F$ the wave number $k_{0}$ finds itself on the ascending, $k<3/2$, part of the curve (\ref{stationary_phase_general}). It is now shown as solid orange circle and it corresponds to the tt interference effect. At the same time the remaining wave numbers, $k_{n}$, $n\geqslant 1$, still belong to the $k>3/2$ part of the curve (\ref{stationary_phase_general}). The confining angle of the pattern now decreases with decrease of $F$ as evident from Figure \ref{flow}b.
As the Froude number further decreases, $k_{0}$ moves down while the remaining $k_{n}$'s move up the curve (\ref{stationary_phase_general}). The confining angle of the interference pattern decreases and continues to be given by Eqs.(\ref{inner_angle}) and (\ref{zero_Q}) until $k_{0}$ and $k_{1}$ reach the same height. At this point, $F=0.568$ (Figure \ref{flow}c), the interference pattern is confined within fairly narrow wedge because $F=0.568$ is very close to the $F_{0}=0.564$, Eq.(\ref{y=0_constructive_interference}), threshold.
Upon further decrease of the Froude number, the entire interference pattern is confined within a wedge of an angle given by Eq.(\ref{inner_angle}) with
\begin{equation}
\label{one_Q}
Q=k_{1}=9\pi^{2}F^{4}
\end{equation}
It contains the single $k_{0}$ tt interference fringe and an infinite set of the $n\geqslant1$, dd interference fringes. As the Froude number further decreases toward $F=F_{0}=0.564$, the $k_{0}$ tt fringe approaches the central line $y=0$, the wedge, confining the pattern according to Eqs.(\ref{inner_angle}) and (\ref{one_Q}) widens, and at $F=0.564$, depicted in Figure \ref{flow}d, the tt fringe is about to become extinct.
At a Froude number slightly smaller than $0.564$, the situation shown in Figure \ref{flow}e occurs. Here only the $n\geqslant1$ dd interference fringes are present. Apart from the substitution $n\rightarrow n+1$, this looks like a counterpart to the case depicted in Figure \ref{flow}a indicative of a cyclic change in the interference pattern. However this is only a half-cycle as there also are "destructive" ($2n+1\rightarrow 2n$) wave numbers sandwiched between two existing neighboring "constructive" $k_{n}$'s (\ref{discrete_stationary_phase}). To complete the cycle the Froude number has to further decrease until the tt fringe corresponding to the wave number $k_{1}$ is extinct.
\subsection{Numerical visibility requirements}
Numerical evaluation of the integral (\ref{segment_integral}) was carried over a $2k_{max}\times2k_{max}$ domain with $k_{max}=128\gg1$. In order to properly understand numerical results we observe that the two wakes generated by the segment's front and end have the geometry of Figure \ref{wakes}b. They feature inner wakes of the opening angle (\ref{inner_angle})
\begin{equation}
\label{inner_angle_segment}
2\theta\approx\frac{1}{\sqrt{Q}}\approx\frac{1}{\sqrt{k_{max}}}=\frac{1}{8\sqrt{2}}
\end{equation}
This is a manifestation of strict elimination of the diverging $k>k_{max}$ wave modes from contributing into the wake pattern. The same reasoning applies to the set of the wave numbers $k_{n}$ (\ref{discrete_stationary_phase}) participating in the constrictive interference. Specifically, the presence of finite $k_{max}$ limits numerical visibility of the effects to those satisfying the condition $k_{n}<k_{max}$ thus setting an upper limit to the number of interference fringes. Equating $k_{n}$ and $k_{max}$ one arrives at the set of characteristic "constructive" Froude numbers
\begin{equation}
\label{constructive_F}
F_{c}^{(n)}=\frac{k_{max}^{1/4}}{\sqrt{\pi (2n+1)}}=1.898, 1.096, 0.849, 0.717,...
\end{equation}
Similarly, in the "destructive" ($2n+1\rightarrow 2n$) case one finds
\begin{equation}
\label{destructive_F}
F_{d}^{(n)}=\frac{k_{max}^{1/4}}{\sqrt{2\pi n}}=1.342, 0.949, 0.775, 0.671...
\end{equation}
The meaning of these characteristic values is that for given Froude number $F$ only the interference fringes whose order $n$ (and type) satisfies the inequalities $F<F_{c,d}^{(n)}$ are visible. Specifically, for $k_{max}=128$ the two-point interference effects are only visible if $F<F_{c}^{(0)}=1.898$. Explicit examples of what fringes are visible for given $F$ are also shown in Figures \ref{flow} (a)-(e), where the horizontal range was deliberately chosen to cover the $1\leqslant k\leqslant128$ interval. We note that there also are destructive fringes (not shown in Figure \ref{flow}) sandwiched between two neighboring constructive ones.
\subsection{Numerical confirmation}
For a series of Froude numbers the integral (\ref{segment_integral}) was computed choosing the square $2k_{max}\times 2k_{max}$ integration domain with $k_{max}=128$. A series of wake patterns corresponding to Froude numbers $F=1.00-0.399$ is shown in Figure \ref{1stcycle}.
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.0\columnwidth, keepaspectratio]{1stcycle.png}
\caption{(Color online) Evolution of the two-point interference effects in the wake pattern generated by the uniform pressure segment source of length $a=1/F^{2}$, Eq.(\ref{segment_integral}), for a series of moderately large Froude numbers $F$. The first and third rows display topographical map of $\zeta(\textbf{r})$ while its magnitude $|\zeta(\textbf{r})|$ (grayscale) is presented in the second and fourth rows followed by grayscale bars. The source is shown as a bold segment centered at the origin, and each of the wakes is overlaid with the Kelvin ray $-y/(x+a/2) =1/2\sqrt{2}$ (blue dotted line). The loci of the points of constructive interference given by Eqs.(\ref{constructive}) and (\ref{phase(x,y)}) for all visible $n$ are indicated by red dotted lines if they represent the dd interference effects, $k_{n}>3/2$, or orange dotted lines if the effect has the tt nature, $1\leqslant k_{n}\leqslant3/2$.}
\label{1stcycle}
\end{figure*}
The wake source, the pressure segment, is shown as a bold interval of length $a=1/F^{2}$ centered at the origin, the wakes are overlaid with the Kelvin ray $-y/(x+a/2) =1/2\sqrt{2}$ (blue dotted line) originating at the segment's end $x=-a/2$. The loci of the points of constructive interference given by Eqs.(\ref{constructive}) and (\ref{phase(x,y)}) for all visible $n$, are indicated by red dotted lines if they represent the dd interference effects, $k_{n}>3/2$, or orange dotted lines if the effect has the tt nature, $1\leqslant k_{n}\leqslant 3/2$. While for larger $F$ these are nearly identical to the straight line rays (\ref{discrete_stationary_phase}), use of the more accurate expressions (\ref{constructive}) and (\ref{phase(x,y)}) makes a difference as $F$ gets smaller.
First we observe that the dd interference effects are invisible in the maps of $\zeta(\textbf{r})$. The reason is that $k_{max}=128$ is sufficiently large so that our inability to properly display rapidly oscillating functions comes into play before the wave vector cutoff effect. That is why the inner wakes appear to be significantly wider than the prediction $2\theta=1/8\sqrt{2}$. We have already faced this artifact in the problem of point source visible in Figures \ref{sharp} (i, j) as a sliver of nearly zero water displacement sandwiched between the Froude ray (\ref{Froude_ray}) and the part of the wake containing both the diverging and transverse wavefronts. It is apparent from Figure \ref{1stcycle} that the loci of the points of constructive interference may be masked by this artifact.
The dd interference effects are revealed in topographical maps of the magnitude of the wake $|\zeta(\textbf{r})|$. This happens because rapid oscillations in $|\zeta|$ now average to a positive constant. This creates a smooth background for the interference effects to be clearly visible. The maps of $|\zeta|$ are shown in grayscale in the second and fourth rows of Figure \ref{1stcycle} right below corresponding maps of $\zeta$. They all feature a very narrow innermost wake, the finite $k_{max}$ effect, whose opening angle is indeed given by $2\theta=1/2\sqrt{8}$. Evolution of the $|\zeta|$ pattern with the Froude number is in full correspondence with the analysis given; constructive interference fringes are dark while the destructive ones are light. As a visual aid to the fringe count, the Froude numbers for images d'-g' in Figure \ref{1stcycle} were chosen to coincide with those in Figure \ref{flow} (a, b, d, and e).
As $F$ decreases, existing dark dd fringes move in the direction of larger angles toward Kelvin's and get progressively wider. The new narrow fringes become visible at the threshold Froude numbers satisfying the condition $k_{n}=k_{max}$, and their overall number increases. The maps of $|\zeta|$ also reveal "echoes" which represent magnified patterns of $|\zeta|$ in the vicinity of the inner wake boundaries. These artifacts of finite $k_{max}$ make it easier to discern the fringes, especially when their number is large, the case of $F$ small.
At $F=0.580$ the $n=0$ fringe ends up on the transverse part of the curve of the stationary phase, Figure \ref{flow}b, and we do not see tt interference effects in $|\zeta|$. At the same time, the evolution of the original wake patterns $\zeta(\textbf{r})$ with decrease of $F$ reveals that the height of the transverse waves steadily increases in magnitude in the $F=1.000-0.564$ range. The right boundary of this interval corresponds to the first unfavorable Froude number $F_{0}$ (\ref{y=0_constructive_interference}); the $n=0$ tt fringe which is now along the central line $y=0$ is about to disappear. We checked that the transverse waves are indeed largest at $F=F_{0}$ but this maximum is flat and the effect is weak. This is already visible from the $F=0.580$ (e), $F=0.564$ (f), and $F=0.500$ (g) images of Figure \ref{1stcycle} which all feature transverse waves of comparable magnitude. On the other hand, the $F=0.399$ (h) image of Figure \ref{1stcycle}, corresponding to the first favorable Froude number $F_{1}$ (\ref{y=0_destructive_interference}), illustrates a strong destructive interference effect where transverse wavefronts are practically invisible.
Despite confirmation of the two-point interference picture of the wake patterns, the images of Figure \ref{1stcycle} do not yet make it obvious to the eye that we are dealing with two interfering wakes. In order to see that this is the case, we need to look at even smaller Froude numbers where the pressure source is sufficiently long and the effects of the interval ends are spatially well-separated. This is demonstrated in Figure \ref{_cycles} where we show topographical maps $\zeta(\textbf{r})$ of the wakes whose Froude numbers were chosen from the sets (\ref{y=0_constructive_interference}), images b, f, and j, and (\ref{y=0_destructive_interference}), images d, h, and l, of special Froude numbers. These are supplemented by generic Froude numbers, images a, e, i, c, g, and k, sandwiched between the special ones.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=2.0\columnwidth, keepaspectratio]{_cycles.png}
\caption{(Color online) Evolution of the wake pattern generated by the uniform pressure segment source of length $a=1/F^{2}$, Eq.(\ref{segment_integral}), for a series of small Froude numbers $F$. Each of the wakes is overlaid with the Kelvin ray $-y/(x+a/2) =1/2\sqrt{2}$ (blue dotted line).}
\label{_cycles}
\end{figure*}
Like in Figure \ref{1stcycle}, the dd interference effects can be "unmasked" by looking at the maps of $|\zeta(\textbf{r})|$. These are not shown as they do not contain anything new compared to what was already demonstrated in Figure \ref{1stcycle}. Therefore, the images in Figure \ref{_cycles} are only overlaid with the Kelvin ray $-y/(x+a/2) =1/2\sqrt{2}$ originating at segment's end to aid visual separation of the effects of the interval edges.
Moreover, the tt interference effects are more pronounced than those in Figure \ref{1stcycle}. Specifically, the waves are largest at unfavorable Froude numbers, $F=0.326, 0.252$ and $0.213$ (second column of images), Eq.(\ref{y=0_constructive_interference}), and smallest at favorable ones, $F=0.282, 0.230$ and $0.199$ (fourth column of images), Eq.(\ref{y=0_destructive_interference}). Cyclic changes in the appearance of the wake patterns occurring with decrease of $F$ are also obvious to the eye.
It is now certain that each wake pattern is a result of superposition of the two opposite effect wakes originating at the interval edges: the water at the front of the segment, $x=a/2$, is pulled up while at its end, $x=-a/2$, it is pushed down. The part of the wake outside the $|y/(x+a/2)| =1/2\sqrt{2}$ wedge is solely due to the Kelvin-like wake originating at the segment's front and resembling $k_{max}=64$ wake of Figure \ref{sharp}.
\section{Discussion}
We now discuss Figure 1a of Ref.\cite{RM}, an image of a wake due to a cargo ship characterized by the Froude number $F\simeq0.15$. It resembles the images shown in Figure \ref{_cycles} with two sources, at the bow and stern, determining overall wake pattern. The apparent wake angle that the authors associate with this Froude number corresponds to Kelvin-like wake originating at the bow of the ship. It is then no surprise that this angle is the same as Kelvin's despite the fact that the Froude number is very small. There also is little evidence of waves in the part of the wake where one would expect to see the two-point interference effects: Figure 1a of Ref. \cite{RM} is very similar to the last column of images in Figure \ref{_cycles}. This is also not surprising as $F\simeq0.15$ is very close to the favorable Froude number $F_{7}$ given by Eq.(\ref{y=0_destructive_interference}) when the destructive tt interference effects drastically diminish the waves along the central line $y=0$.
\section{Acknowledgements}
We are grateful to I. Klich, A. P. Levanyuk and I. Shlosman for their interest in our work.
|
\section{Introduction}
All the graphs considered in this note are simple and finite. Sets of vertices and edges of a graph $G$ will be denoted by $V(G)$ and $E(G)$, respectively. Degree of a vertex $u$ and the edge connecting the vertices $u,v\in V(G)$ will be denoted by $d_u$ and $uv$, respectively. Let $N(u)$ be the set of all those vertices of $G$ which are adjacent to $u$. By an $n$-vertex graph, we mean a graph with $n$ vertices. The graph theoretical terminology not defined here, can be found from some standard books of graph theory, like \cite{Harary-69,Bondy-08}.
For a graph $G$, the imbalance of the edge $uv\in E(G)$, denoted by $imb(uv)$, is defined as $|d_u-d_v|$. The idea of the imbalance of an edge was actually appeared implicitly in \cite{Albertson-91} within the study of Ramsey graphs. Using the concept of imbalance, Albertson \cite{2} defined the following graph invariant
$$
A(G)=\sum_{uv\in E(G)} imb(uv)\,
$$
and named it as the \textit{irregularity} of $G$; however, several researchers \cite{Gutman-05,Hansen-05,Reti-MATCH-18,Matejic-18,Ali-16,Furtula-13} referred it as the \textit{Albertson index} and we do the same in this paper. Detail about the mathematical properties of the Albertson index can be found in the recent papers \cite{Chen-18,Ashrafi-19,Nasiri-19,Nasiri-IJMC-18} and related references listed therein.
This note is devoted to establish some properties of the following modified version of the Albertson index
$$
A\!^*\!(G)=\sum_{uv\in E(G)} |(d_{u})^{2}- (d_{v})^{2}|\,.
$$
We propose to call the graph invariant $A\!^*$ as the \textit{modified Albertson index}.
\section{Main Results}
Firstly, we prove two results concerning the modified Albertson index of trees; one of these results is related to a sharp lower bound of $A\!^*$ in terms of maximum degree and the second one is an extremal result, in which we characterize the $n$-vertex trees having maximal and minimal $A\!^*$ values.
\begin{prop}\label{thm-new-2}
If $T$ is a tree with maximum degree $\Delta$ then $A\!^*\!(T)\ge \Delta(\Delta^2 - 1)$ with equality if and only if $T$ is isomorphic to either a path or a tree containing only one vertex of degree greater than 2.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The result is obvious for $\Delta\le2$ and hence we assume that $\Delta\ge3$. If $v\in V(T)$ has maximum degree then there are $d_v$ pendant vertices namely $w_1,w_2,\cdots,w_{d_v}\,$ in $T$ such that the paths $v-w_1,v-w_2,\cdots,v-w_{d_v}\,$ are pairwise internally disjoint. If the path $v-w_1$ has length greater than 1, suppose that $w_{1,1},w_{1,2},\cdots, w_{1,r}$ are the internal vertices of the path $v-w_1$. Then,
\begin{align*}
&\big|(d_v)^2-(d_{w_{1,1}})^2\big| + \big|(d_{w_{1,1}})^2-(d_{w_{1,2}})^2\big| +\cdots + \big|(d_{w_{1,r}})^2 - (d_{w_{1}})^2\big|\\
&\ge \big[(d_v)^2-(d_{w_{1,1}})^2\big] + \big[(d_{w_{1,1}})^2-(d_{w_{1,2}})^2\big] +\cdots + \big[(d_{w_{1,r}})^2 - (d_{w_{1}})^2\big]=\Delta^2 -1\,.
\end{align*}
We note that the equality
\[
\big|(d_v)^2-(d_{w_{1,1}})^2\big| + \big|(d_{w_{1,1}})^2-(d_{w_{1,2}})^2\big| +\cdots + \big|(d_{w_{1,r}})^2 - (d_{w_{1}})^2\big| = \Delta^2 -1
\]
holds if and only if the degrees of successive vertices along the path from $v$ to $w_1$ decrease monotonously (not
necessarily strictly). Similarly, for $i=2,\cdots,r$, the sum of contributions of edges to $A\!^*\!(T)$ along the path $v-w_i$ is at least $\Delta^2 -1$ with equality if and only if the degrees of successive vertices along the path from $v$ to $w_i$ decrease monotonously (not necessarily strictly), and hence the desired result follows.
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}\label{thm-new-3}
For $n\ge5$, if $T$ is an $n$-vertex tree different from the path $P_n$ and star $S_n$, then $A\!^*\! (P_n) < A\!^*\! (T) <A\!^*\! (S_n)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
The inequality $A\!^*\! (P_n) < A\!^*\! (T)$ follows from Proposition \ref{thm-new-2}. To prove the inequality $A\!^*\! (T) <A\!^*\! (S_n)$, we note that for any two vertices $u,v\in V(T)$, it holds that $|(d_u)^2 - (d_v)^2| \le |(n-1)^2 - 1|$ with equality if and only if one of the vertices $u,v$ has degree 1 and the other has degree $n-1$. But, $T$ does not contain any vertex of degree $n-1$ and hence
\[
A\!^*\! (T)=\sum_{uv\in E(T)}|(d_u)^2 - (d_v)^2| < (n-1)|(n-1)^2 - 1|= A\!^*\! (S_n).
\]
\end{proof}
Let $u$ be a fixed vertex of $G$. We partition the set $N(u)$ as follows: $L(u)=\{v\in N(u):~d_v<d_u\}$, $E(u)=\{v\in N(u):~d_v=d_u\}$ and $G(u)=\{v\in N(u):~d_v>d_u\}$. The number of elements in $L(u)$, $E(u)$ and $G(u)$ ar denoted by $l_u$, $e_u$ and $g_u\,$, respectively. Clearly, $d_u=l_u+e_u+g_u\,$.
Now, we will prove that the modified Albertson index $A\!^*$ is non-negative even integer for every graph; but, before proving this fact, we derive the following useful result first.
\begin{lem}\label{thm-new-1}
If $u$ and $v$ are non-adjacent vertices in a graph $G$ such that $d_u\ge d_v$ then
\[
A\!^*\!(G+uv) = A\!^*\!(G) + 3d_u(d_u+1) + d_v(d_v-1) -2[(2d_u+1)g_u + (2d_v+1)g_v]\,.
\]
\end{lem}
\begin{proof}
We consider the difference
\begin{align*}
A\!^*\!(G+uv) - A\!^*\!(G)
&=(d_u +1)^2 - (d_v +1)^2 \\
& \quad + \sum_{x\in N(u)} \bigg( \big|(d_u +1)^2 - (d_x)^2\big| - \big|(d_u)^2 - (d_x)^2\big|\bigg)\\
& \quad + \sum_{y\in N(v)} \bigg( \big|(d_v +1)^2 - (d_y)^2\big| - \big|(d_v)^2 - (d_y)^2\big|\bigg)\,.
\end{align*}
Now, using the facts $N(u)=L(u)\cup E(u)\cup G(u)$, $N(u)=L(v)\cup E(v)\cup G(v)$ and then after simplifying, we arrive at
\begin{align*}
A\!^*\!(G+uv) - A\!^*\!(G)
&=(d_u - d_v)(d_u +d_v +2)+ (2d_u+1)(e_u +l_u - g_u)\\
& \quad + (2d_v+1)(e_v +l_v - g_v)\,,
\end{align*}
which is equivalent to
\begin{align*}
A\!^*\!(G+uv) - A\!^*\!(G)
&=3d_u(d_u+1) + d_v(d_v-1) -2[(2d_u+1)g_u + (2d_v+1)g_v]\,.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
\begin{prop}\label{cor-new-1}
The modified Albertson index $A\!^*$ of every graph is a non-negative even integer.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
Let $G$ be any graph. By definition, $A\!^*(G)\ge0$ with equality if and only if every component of $G$ is regular. The result obviously holds if $G$ is the complete graph and hence we assume that $G$ is not isomorphic to a complete graph.
We prove the result by induction on the number of edges of $G$. If $G$ is the edgeless graph then $A\!^*\!(G)=0$ and hence the induction starts. Let $u$ and $v$ be non-adjacent vertices of $G$ such that $d_u\ge d_v$. Then, by Lemma \ref{thm-new-1}, it holds that
\begin{equation}\label{Eq-cor-new-1}
A\!^*\!(G+uv) = A\!^*\!(G) + 3d_u(d_u+1) + d_v(d_v-1) -2[(2d_u+1)g_u + (2d_v+1)g_v]\,.
\end{equation}
By induction hypothesis, $A\!^*\!(G)$ is even and hence from Equation \eqref{Eq-cor-new-1}, it follows that $A\!^*\!(G+uv)$ is even. This completes the induction and hence the proof.
\end{proof}
\noindent
{\bf Transformation 1.} Let $uv$ be an edge of a graph $G$ satisfying $d_u=d_v=3$. Let $G'$ be the graph obtained from $G$ by inserting a new
vertex $x\not\in V(G)$ of degree 2 on the edge $uv$.\\
Finally, we prove that there exist infinitely many connected graphs whose modified Albertson index is $2t$ for every integer $t\in\{0,3,4,5\}\cup\{8,9,10,\cdots\}$. For this, we need the following two lemmas whose proofs are straightforward.
\begin{lem} \label{lem-new2}
If $G$ and $G'$ are the two graphs specified in Transformation 1, then $A\!^*\!(G') = A\!^*\!(G)+10$.
\end{lem}
\begin{lem} \label{lem-new1}
Let $uv$ be an edge of a graph $G$ satisfying one of the following conditions
\begin{enumerate}
\item $d_u=1$ and $d_v\ge 2$;
\item at least one of the vertices $u,v$ has degree 2.
\end{enumerate}
If $G'$ is the graph obtained from $G$ by inserting a new
vertex $x\not\in V(G)$ of degree 2 on the edge $uv$, then $A\!^*\!(G') = A\!^*\!(G)$.
\end{lem}
\begin{prop}\label{thm-new-4}
For every integer $t\in\{0,3,4,5\}\cup\{8,9,10,\cdots\}$, there exist infinitely many connected graphs whose $A\!^*$ value is $2t$.
\end{prop}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\textwidth]{Fig1.pdf}
\caption{The graphs $H_{0,0}$, $H_{0,1}$, $H_{0,2}$, $H_{0,3}$ and $H_{0,4}$, used in the proof of Proposition \ref{thm-new-4}.}
\label{fig1}
\end{figure}
\begin{proof}
Let $H_{0,0}$ be the cubic graph shown in Figure \ref{fig1}. Obviously, $H_{0,0}$ has $3(t+2)$ edges and its $A\!^*$ value is 0.
Also, we consider the graphs $H_{0,1}$, $H_{0,2}$, $H_{0,3}$ and $H_{0,4}$ (which are obtained from $H_{0,0}$) depicted in Figure \ref{fig1}; their $A\!^*$ values are 32, 24, 16 and 8, respectively. For $j=0,1,2,3,4$ and $1\le i < 3(t+2)$, let $H_{i,j}$ be the graph obtained from $H_{i-1,j}$ by applying Transformation 1. Then,
\[
A\!^*\!(H_{i,j})= \begin{cases}
10i & \hbox{if $j=0$;} \\
2(5i-4j+20) & \hbox{otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\]
We yet need to find the graphs with $A\!^*$ values 22 and 6. The $A\!^*$ value of the 3-vertex path graph $P_3$ is 6. Let $H$ be the graph obtained from the 5-vertex complete graph $K_5$ by inserting a new vertex $x\not\in V(K_5)$ of degree 2 on an edge of $K_5$. If $H'$ is the graph obtained from $H$ by attaching a new vertex $y\not\in V(H)$ to the vertex $x\in V(H)$, then $A\!^*\!(H')=22$. Until now, we have found a single graph having modified Albertson index $2t$ for each $t\in\{0,3,4,5\}\cup\{8,9,10,\cdots\}$. Now, by using the transformation specified in Lemma \ref{lem-new1}, we get infinitely many graphs with the same $A\!^*$ value, corresponding to each of the graphs $H_{i,j}$, $P_3$, $H'$.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
Computer-driven music composition has been approached through various pathways (\cite{fernandez2013ai}): through knowledge-based systems, evolutionary algorithms, Markov Processes, and in the last 25 years, Artificial Neural Networks(ANNs). The presence of a strong mathematical framework behind music has explicitly and implicitly aided researchers in these approaches. ANNs' propensity to successfully learn complex patterns from raw data has made them especially suited to the problem of algorithmic music composition. Several research endeavours have been undertaken on the subject of training ANNs to compose original music that appeals to human sensibilities. These works have resulted in computer systems that can fashion musical sequences that are occasionally quite difficult to discern from human-composed music. \par
Despite these advances, the application of Artificial Intelligence in music composition is a nascent domain that has great potential for extensive scientific research. In this paper, our contributions to this evolving area are as follows: We have built a novel representation for polyphonic music that has a much lower sparsity when compared to other existing representations. Attempts at using reinforcement learning towards getting preferred compositions from already trained neural networks have been very few - we take an approach that is quite different from these attempts and present the results of our work where we observe significant improvements when using RL. We also present, to the best of our knowledge, the first instance of a method to intelligently explore the powerful {\em plan} space first introduced by \cite{todd1989connectionist}.
\par
\section{Conventions and Definitions}
We use the following set of conventions and definitions throughout this paper:
\begin{itemize}
\setlength\itemsep{-0.1em}
\item A {\em note} is equivalent to playing a pitch for a definite duration.
\item A {\em note-set} is a set of pitches that begin simultaneously, but last for independently defined durations.
\item Unless specified otherwise, the term \textbf{subsequence} means a contiguous subsequence.
\item Musical sequences are visually presented in the piano roll visualization\footnote{While this has its own limitations, it greatly aids in appreciating the general flow of the melody, harmony, rhythm, etc.}. The vertical axis represents note pitch while the horizontal axis represents the flow of time.
\end{itemize}
\section{Related Work}
\cite{todd1989connectionist} trains a neural network to first learn sequences drawn from existing music. Input configurations called {\em {\em plans}} are used to encode the identity of sequence that the neural network is presently learning. During the composition phase, interpolated {\em plans} are used to generate new melodies. \cite{mozer1991connectionist} use a Recurrent Neural Network along with a multidimensional pitch representation based on psychological studies from \cite{shepard1982geometrical}. Both these approaches are examples of using an ANN to generate a melody sequentially, note-by-note. \par
There has also been research (\cite{fernandez2013ai}) into harmonizing existing melodies with \cite{shibata1991harmony} and \cite{melo1998connectionist} being some instances. \cite{liang2016bachbot} and \cite{hadjeres2017deepbach} demonstrate a neural network harmonizing three out of the {\em soprano}, {\em alto}, {\em tenor} and {\em bass} parts of a Bach chorale when one of them is fixed. \par
Numerous attempts at sequential music composition with neural networks have used the Long Short-Term Memory units introduced in \cite{hochreiter1997long}, starting with\cite{eck2002first}. \cite{colombo2016algorithmic} in contrast, apply Gated Recurrent Units (GRU) for monophonic composition. \par
There are a few instances(\cite{franklin2001multi} and \cite{jaques122016tuning}) of reinforcement learning being used over trained neural networks to impose additional conditions on the composed music. Another previously used non-reinforcement strategy for imposing external conditions on a separately trained neural network is to use sampling grammars as seen in \cite{sun2016composing}.
\section{LSTM Neural Networks}
The temporal capacity of a reccurent neural network allows it to learn patterns that are spread over time, and this has permitted RNNs to be used in signal processing, natural language processing and music generation among other areas. However, simple recurrent neural networks suffer from the vanishing and exploding gradients problems demonstrated in \cite{bengio1994learning}. These problems cause the gradients corresponding to earlier inputs to either vanish or blow-up depending upon their value, and thus these networks have difficulty in learning long-range temporal dependencies. This is a particular deficiency for learning patterns in music as temporal dependencies in musical sequences may be several notes apart. \par
Long-Short Term Memory units (\cite{hochreiter1997long} and \cite{Gers99learningto}) step around this problem by using a constant error carousel that trap the error within a cell. Two gating neurons regulate the flow of information into a cell and out of it respectively, while one neuron learns whether to forget the value inside the cell. \par
Specific details about the input, output and internal state relations followed in LSTM units can be found in \cite{hochreiter1997long} and \cite{Gers99learningto}.
\section{Input Representation}
\subsection{Pitch and Duration Encodings}
We first transpose the musical sequences to the same key, in accordance with positive results observed in \cite{mozer1991connectionist}, \cite{franklin2004recurrent}, \cite{sun2016composing}, \cite{boulanger2012modeling} and \cite{liang2016bachbot}.\par
In contrast with the approaches in \cite{mozer1991connectionist} and \cite{franklin2004recurrent} where encodings based on musical information were used to represent pitches, chords and note durations, we chose to follow the empirically validated methodology adopted by later methods as seen in \cite{liang2016bachbot}, \cite{sun2016composing}, \cite{colombo2016algorithmic} and \cite{yang2017midinet} where the network was able to learn low-level harmonic correlations between notes without the need for building them into the representation.\par
We represent a single pitch value by a one-hot encoded vector of length equal to the number of pitches playable on most pianos(88, from A0 to C8).
Varying approaches are taken for representing note durations. Some eschew the need for one by sampling the input tracks at a fixed rate. \cite{eck2002first} sample by {\em quavers}(eighth notes), while \cite{liang2016bachbot} samples by {\em demisemiquavers}(thirty-second notes). Some earlier monophonic approaches such as \cite{mozer1991connectionist} and \cite{franklin2004recurrent} used compressed binary vectors to encode note duration. \cite{sun2016composing} use a 30-bit vector to explicitly encode note lengths from a {\em semiquaver}(sixteenth note) to a {\em breve}(two whole notes). \par
We chose to use explicit duration encoding instead of the sampling method, firstly since it simplifies the multi-stream representation that we use, and secondly since forcing the network to learn patterns in note duration distributions was expected to help later during the {\em plan} interpolation process. Further, any errors in the sequential counting task resulting from the sampling approach can collapse the rhythm of a polyphonic composition. \par
We encode the durations as a one-hot vector, with each bit corresponding to a note duration that is frequently observed in the musical corpus that we use.
\subsection{Existing Representations for Polyphonic Music}
A widely used representation for polyphonic music is the piano roll representation. Here, each bit in a binary vector represents the On/Off state of a pitch. The symbolic music is sampled at a fixed rate, and a {\em Sustain} pitch indicates whether or not the previous note is continued. \par
After this, the learning algorithm may either treat each note as a binary classification problem(\cite{boulanger2012modeling}), or sequentialize the notes(\cite{liang2016bachbot}) to produce $P$ $n_p$-class classification problems where $P$ is the instantaneous polyphony and $n_p$ is the number of possible pitches. \par
\cite{chu2016song} and \cite{yang2017midinet} divide pop music into a melody track and a chord track, and use separate one-hot encodings for these tracks. However, this representation is limited to the class of songs that have a separate chord track that uses a standard set of multi-note chords for harmony. \par
\cite{hadjeres2017deepbach} use a pitch representation that has some similarities to our proposed representation. The major differences lie in our use of an explicit duration representation, the resolution of resulting incompatibilities and the imposition of pitch ordering.
\subsection{The Multi-Stream Note Representation for Polyphonic Music}
In the multi-stream representation which is a novelty arising from this work, we represent polyphonic music as a small set of streams, all of which are monophonic. Each stream has a pitch and duration component tied to it. This representation can embody polyphonic music of all forms and is limited in this process only by the number of streams $n_s$ and the set of permissible durations $\textbf{d}$.
\begin{itemize}
\setlength\itemsep{-0.1em}
\item During transcription, each incoming note in a polyphonic track is allotted to the lowest possible stream.
\item Multiple notes in a note-set are sorted in descending order of pitch to encourage the localization of closely spaced pitches in the same stream over time.
\item We introduce a {\em Rest} pitch value(111 here) to represent time-steps when a stream is not sounding any note.
\item We also use a {\em Sustain}\footnote{The occurrence of the Sustain pitch is deterministic and hence does not unnecessarily complicate the learning task.} pitch value(110 here) to handle cases where at the start of a note-set, a particular stream is expected to continuously play a previously started note rather than strike it again.
\item Rest notes are filled into streams such that they do not have to be sustained in the next note-set.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{80mm}{!} {\includegraphics *{elise.png}}
\caption {\textbf{The first 16 note-sets from F\"ur Elise in the Multi-Stream Representation. Symbolic Pitches and Durations are depicted.}}
\label{fig:multistreamElise}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Fig \ref{fig:multistreamElise}} presents an example with the first few notes of Beethoven's F\"ur Elise in the multi-stream representation. This representation overcomes the following shortcomings of the piano roll representation and greatly reduces the sparsity of the input space:
\begin{itemize}
\setlength\itemsep{-0.1em}
\item The piano roll representation produces an extreme class imbalance for most pitches, since predicting each pitch is a binary classification problem, and since any given pitch is off during most samples. The lower streams in the multi-stream representation are spread very well across the various playable notes(classes), and any imbalance is by virtue of a particular note being played frequently.
\item The multi-stream representation produces a division of responsibilities among streams where the lowest stream generally learns to play the central melody, and higher notes learn the harmony or the ornamental notes.
\item Very few, if any single-instrument compositions will have more than 15-20 notes being played simultaneously. \cite{boulanger2012modeling} note that on a large collection of polyphonic music that included hundreds of musical pieces from different genres of music, the maximum polyphony was only $15$, with the average being $3.9$. The piano roll representation however, allows for the unnecessary freedom of playing upto $n_p(88)$ simultaneous notes at the cost of increasing the sparsity of the space and the probability of incompatible pitches\footnote{A crude workaround for this is to impose an upper limit on the number of simultaneously sounded notes during the composition process}.
\end{itemize}
In the ordinary piano roll representation, if $T$, $S$, and $n_p$ are composition length, sampling rate, and the number of pitches respectively, then the number of possible compositions $N_1$ is given by
\begin{align*}
N_1 = 2^{\frac{T}{S}n_p}
\end{align*}
In the multi-stream representation with $n_s$ streams and with $\textbf{d} = {d_0, d_1, ... d_{n_d}}$ as the available set of note durations, a composition of time $T$ can be made up of several different combinations of durations.
Through numerical simulations, we observed that on reasonable choices of $\textbf{d}$ such as the {\em semiquaver} to {\em breve} set used in \cite{sun2016composing}, and our frequent durations set, the total number of possible compositions of length $T$ is greatly dominated by those that fully use the shortest durations for all notes\footnote{This is since the minimum duration is much smaller than the next available duration}. \par
The approximate number of compositions $N_2$ is then
\begin{align*}
N_2 \approx (n_p)^{n_s\frac{T}{d_0}}
\end{align*}
The logarithmic ratio, $R = log\frac{N_1}{N_2}$ for the representative values of $S = d_0 = \frac{1}{16}$, $n_s = 5$ and $n_p = 88$ is $268.29T$. In other words, the sparsity of the composition space in the piano roll representation increases $10^{268.29}$ times faster than the multi-stream representation for every whole note. We noted experimentally that during the composition phase, the neural network classified notes with much higher confidence with the multi-stream representation than with the piano roll representation.
\par
\subsection{Plan and Plan Interpolation}
The practice of using an additional set of variables called a {\em plan} to differentiate subsequences taken from different songs has previously been used in \cite{todd1989connectionist}, and later in \cite{franklin2001multi}. Both these approaches use a one-hot encoded binary vector to provide information on which song the given subsequence is from. During the composition phase, \cite{todd1989connectionist} uses interpolated plans to force creativity, while \cite{franklin2001multi} turns on all the bits in the plan. \cite{todd1989connectionist} notes that compositions inherits attributes from the songs that have high weights in the plan and offer the following paraphrased analysis of the plan inputs: The activations from the plan inputs act as biases on the hidden units, causing them to compute different functions of the context inputs. The context inputs can be thought of as points in a higher-dimensional space, and the hidden units act as planes to cut this space up into regions for different outputs. \par
This implies that switching a single bit in the plan input will cause significant alterations in the network's behaviour, and this is indeed corroborated by our experiments. \par
We first re-validated the attribute inheritance through experiment when we observed that major parts of the composition’s pitch and note duration distributions are combinations of strongly(with very high/low relative frequency) observed
attributes in the songs corresponding to the On bits. \par
As opposed to \cite{todd1989connectionist}, we limited the search space from $R^n$ to $\{(p_1, p_2, ... p_n) : p_i \in \{0,1\}\}$. This is since it transforms the compositional attribute inheritance from a parametrized setting to that of a competitive, dominance-based process. Here, multiple songs from the plan will compete or collaborate to influence the composition, as per their own mismatching or matching attributes. \par
The qualities and advantages of the {\em plan} space have been largely unexplored until now, especially its properties when enlarged by using a large number of songs. We present the first instance of a method that can intelligently explore interesting points in this space without undertaking an exhaustive search. We also show later with a few examples that the attribute inheritance goes beyond simple properties like pitch and duration distribution.
\section{LSTM Neural Network Training and Results}
\subsection{Training Data, Inputs and Targets}
We used MIDI versions\footnote{from http://www.piano-midi.de} of a selected set of solo piano compositions from Beethoven, Mozart, Lizst, Bach and Alb\'eniz. Since these songs all have varying tempos, we quantized the tempo values to ensure that a small, common set of note durations would represent note lengths in all these tracks. We applied further temporal quantization to adjust misaligned notes caused by human performance. \par
The input during each prediction task is a sequence of $l_c$ note-sets in the multi-stream representation, where $l_c$ is the context length for predicting the next note-set. Given these, the neural network is expected to predict the pitch and duration values for all $n_s$ streams in the next note-set.
\subsection{Neural Network Structure and Training}
We observed that using shared LSTM layers for both the pitch and duration inputs resulted in faster training and better generalization than using separate layers for these inputs. Following the $n_l$ LSTM layers each with $n_u$ LSTM units, we added $2n_s$ fully connected layers, all using the softmax activation function to predict the pitch and duration values for each stream. The loss function $L$ was the sum of cross-entropies for each classification problem, i.e.
\begin{equation*}
L = - \frac{1}{n_s}\sum\limits_{i=1}^{n_s} \sum\limits_{j=1}^{n_p} y_{p,i} \log \hat{y_{p,i}} - \frac{1}{n_s}\sum\limits_{i=1}^{n_s} \sum\limits_{j=1}^{n_d} y_{d,i} \log \hat{y_{d,i}}
\end{equation*}
We used the Adam Optimizer introduced in \cite{kingma2014adam} for gradient descent, and a batch size of 64. We used the Keras software library to implement the LSTM neural network. We perform a grid search over $l_c \in \{10,15,20,25,30\}$, $n_l \in \{1,2,3\}$, and $n_u \in \{100,200,300,400\}$ while minimizing the loss function defined above. We obtained $l_c = 20$, $n_l = 2$ and $n_u = 300$ as the optimal values.
\subsection{Network Learning over Epochs}
\textbf{Fig \ref{fig:compositionVsEpoch}} shows the clear progress in the network's learning over training epochs. \par
At 4 epochs, the network has simply identified the pre-eminence of treble and bass parts in most of the training songs and emulates this. The composition is arrhythmic, with note starts and endings mismatched throughout the sample. \par
At 20 epochs, we observe significant improvements in the rhythm, and there are even symmetric movements between the treble and the bass components. There is also a rudimentary understanding of melodic intervals and tonality. However, there is little melodic or harmonic variation in the composition at this point. \par
At 50 epochs, the melodic and harmonic complexity greatly evidence themselves in the compositions. There are occasional contrapuntal sections(not seen here) where two separate melodies intertwine harmonically, and the rhythm is well-maintained. \par
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{80mm}{!} {\includegraphics *{epochs42050.png}}
\caption {\textbf{Compositions from the network at 4 Epochs(left), 20 Epochs(center) and 50 epochs(right). Y-Axes are not to equal scales.}}
\label{fig:compositionVsEpoch}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Composition}
We follow the sequential composition process used by \cite{todd1989connectionist}, \cite{eck2002first}, \cite{franklin2004recurrent} and \cite{sun2016composing} among others. We compose one note-set in every step, then append this note-set to the context for predicting the next note-sets. We seed the network with an initial sequence as is the practice in previous work. \par
For a given contextual sequence of past note-sets, the neural network outputs probability distribution vectors for the pitch and duration values for every stream in the next note-set: $\textbf{p}_{p,1}(x_{t+1}),\textbf{p}_{p,2}(x_{t+1}),... \textbf{p}_{p,n_s}(x_{t+1})$ and $\textbf{p}_{d,1}(x_{t+1}),\textbf{p}_{d,2}(x_{t+1}),... \textbf{p}_{d,n_s}(x_{t+1})$. \par
From these $2n_s$ distributions, we sample one value each, thus defining the entire note-set.
To exert control over the incidence of low-probability pitches and durations in the compositions, we modify the neural network's {\em softmax} output with the Boltzmann Distribution before sampling from it. A parameter called the {\em Temperature} is used to this end.
\begin{equation*}
p_{i, new} = \frac{e^{\frac{\log p_i}{T}}}{\sum\limits_{j=1}^{n_p} e^{\frac{\log p_i}{T}}}
\end{equation*}
The probability distribution varies between a deterministic point for $T=0$, $\{p_i\}$ itself for $T=1$ and the discrete uniform distribution for $T=\infty$. \par
At low {\em temperatures}, the network often makes predictions that are "safe" and have low variation. With an increase in {\em temperature}, the predictions become varied, at the risk of selecting notes that are not apt for the composition. \par
We use this {\em temperature} during the reinforcement learning phase as it allows us to tune melodic, harmonic and rhythmic variation with our need to reduce poorly placed notes.
\section{Applying Reinforcement Learning}
\subsection{Applicability of Reinforcement Learning}
A neural network trained to reproduce existing musical pieces when given completely unseen inputs will just output compositions that have high probabilities according to the distribution it previously learnt. While they do tend to be guided by the conditional probabilities observed in existing music, their original compositions may not possess positive attributes that we expect from them. The compositions may contain unwanted quirks that simply maximize the joint probability according to the network, for instance, a small cycle of somewhat pleasing notes that repeats indefinitely. \cite{sun2016composing} and \cite{jaques122016tuning} note that the music generated through a multi-step process from RNNs lack global structure and are overly repetitive. \par
These observations establish the strong need for having feedback and conditioning on the neural network's compositions. \cite{briot2017music} observe that "the reinforcement strategy allows to combine arbitrary user given control with a style learnt by the recurrent network". \par
\subsection{Rewards and Penalties}
We define the following rewards and penalties (denoted (\textbf{+}) and (\textbf{-}) respectively), basing upon rules used previously in \cite{franklin2001multi}, \cite{sun2016composing} and \cite{jaques122016tuning}, and tailoring it to our specific requirements:
\begin{enumerate}[itemsep=0.0mm]
\item (\textbf{+}) Occurrence of dyads, triads and seventh chords.
\item (\textbf{+}) High pitch entropy.
\item (\textbf{-}) Overuse of very short or long note durations.
\item (\textbf{-}) Multiple identical note-sets in sequence.
\item (\textbf{-}) Rests form too large a part of the played note-sets.
\item (\textbf{-}) Large peaks in the normalized cross-correlations\footnote{Cross-correlation is performed with the pitch values represented in one-hot encoding. Only note-sets with overlapping pitches must contribute to the cross-correlation.} between pitch values in subsequences from the composition and songs in the training set\footnote{This penalty was added to suppress compositions that plagiarize parts of the training data.}.
\end{enumerate}
The numerical parameters and thresholds for these rewards and penalties were chosen by maximizing the aggregate reward on a set of compositions that were manually determined to be pleasant.
\subsection{Problem Modelling}
In a novel exercise, instead of directly altering the weights of the previously trained polyphonic reproduction network or cascading note-level sampling networks that learn through RL, we take a different approach. We use the powerful, varied, high-level control offered by the {\em plan} input and the {\em temperature} parameters to surface combinations that result in compositions that conform to our expectations.\par
In this case, the problem of searching through the space of {\em plans} and {\em temperatures} can be restated as a Markov Decision Process(\cite{puterman2014markov}):
\begin{itemize}
\setlength\itemsep{-0.1em}
\item {\em Plan} and {\em temperature} inputs together form a state $s$.
\item At every state, the allowed actions\footnote{In a simplification, the state transitions upon taking actions are all deterministic.} A involve either switching a particular bit in the {\em plan}, or altering the {\em temperatures}.
\item The reward is obtained by composing a song with the selected {\em plan} and {\em temperatures} and evaluating it.
\end{itemize}
We use the mathematical framework and the iterative algorithm described in \cite{watkins1989learning} and \cite{watkins1992q} to learn the Q-Values.
We use a three-layer neural network as a function approximator(\cite{crites1996improving}) to store and predict the Q-Values. This methodology has sometimes been observed to improve learning by using previous experience towards predicting the utility of unseen states.
\subsection{Implementation}
We implemented the Q-Learning algorithm in Python and used the Keras software library to implement the function approximator neural network. We used Mean Squared Error(MSE) and Stochastic Gradient Descent(SGD) to train the neural network. We also performed a grid search to find the optimal hyperparameters among discount factor $\gamma \in \{0.2, 0.4, ... 1.0\}$, learning rate $\eta \in \{10^{-3}, 2.5\times10^{-3}, 5\times 10^{-3}, 7.5\times 10^{-2}, 10^{-2}\}$ and number of hidden neurons $n_h \in \{10,20,30,40\}$. We obtained $\gamma = 0.8$, $\eta = 0.075$ and $n_h = 20$ as the optimal values.
\subsection{Comparison of Average Compositional Quality with and without RL}
The plot in \textbf{Fig \ref{fig:goodCountVsTime}} illustrates the progress and utility of the learning process. It shows the count of good compositions\footnote{A good composition is taken as that which fetches a reward greater than $5.0$ out of a maximum of $7.0$.} in a moving window 200 iterations wide. From the strong upward movement of the average count line, we see clearly the advantage offered by reinforcement learning over a random {\em plan} selection approach. \par
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{80mm}{!} {\includegraphics *{goodCountVsTime.png}}
\caption {\textbf{Moving Windowed Count of Good Compositions against RL Iterations}}
\label{fig:goodCountVsTime}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\newcolumntype{R}[1]{>{\raggedright\let\newline\\\arraybackslash\hspace{0pt}}m{#1}}
\begin{table}[h]
\begin{tabular}{R{3cm} c c}
\toprule
\multicolumn{1}{c}{} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{\textbf{Average over 200 Compositions}}\\
\cmidrule{2-3}
\textbf{Attribute} & \textit{With RL} & \textit{Without RL} \\ \midrule
Dyads, Triads and Seventh Chords & \textbf{0.24} & 0.12 \\
Pitch Entropy & \textbf{0.82} & 0.71 \\
Very short/long duration incidence & 0.05 & 0.08 \\
Repeated Identical Note-sets & \textbf{0.06} & 0.20 \\
Aggregated Rest Duration & \textbf{0.08} & 0.14 \\
Rest Count & 0.07 & 0.11 \\
Cross-Correlation peak & \textbf{0.13} & 0.2 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{\textbf{Improvements in compositional attributes when using Reinforcement Learning}}
\label{table:rlImprovementsTable}
\end{table}
Detailed per-attribute improvements are shown in \textbf{Table \ref{table:rlImprovementsTable}}. The averages in the table are on absolute values for the entropy and the cross-correlation peak, and relative values for the other attributes.
\section{Qualitative Analysis of the Compositions}
Two interesting subsequences from \textbf{Amadeus}' compositions are shown in \textbf{Fig \ref{fig:exampleCompositions}}. The sequence on the top was composed with the {\em plan} bits corresponding to F\"ur Elise and Bach's BWV 850 set to 1.0. It shows a clear melodic sequence with an accompanying harmony, quite reminiscent of F\"ur Elise. The pitch distribution, however, is strongly influenced by BWV 850, with most notes drawn from the C Major scale. It is also interesting to note that both the melody and the harmony follow and maintain distinct note lengths that together maintain the rhythm. \par
The lower piece was composed with the {\em plan} bits corresponding to the $3^{rd}$ Movement of Appassionata and the Prelude from Alb\'eniz's Espa\~na set to 1.0. The composition inherits the contrapuntal qualities of both these songs. There are sections in the composition where the melody frequently uses intervals from Espa\~na. Once again, there is clear differentiation between the contrapuntal melodies, and the rhythm is maintained almost perfectly. \par
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center}
\resizebox{55mm}{!} {\includegraphics *{exampleCompositions.png}}
\caption {\textbf{Two example Compositions dominated by F\"ur Elise(top) and Espana Op. 165 Prelude(bottom)}}
\label{fig:exampleCompositions}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
However, higher-level musical qualities such as organized repetition with variations, surprise, tension/resolution, and well-designed climactic sequences are still out of reach at present. Identifying techniques to embody these will be the focus of our future research.
\section{Conclusion, Audio Tracks and Additional Material}
We presented a novel multi-stream representation that takes advantage of polyphonic music's structure to simplify the learning problem that we are solving here. We used this representation to train an LSTM Neural Network, then in a unique approach, applied Reinforcement Learning to select high-level network configurations(rather than directly modify the network weights or its outputs) that maximize a set of attributes that we expect from pleasant algorithmic music. We also demonstrated the significant utility of the previously introduced {\em plan} space towards producing controlled, but diverse compositions. \par
Our system demonstrates its ability to emulate some of the notable features of music composed by human composers such as harmony, melodic complexity, tonality, counterpoint, rhythm, and the proper use of treble and bass components. While some of these properties have been displayed by previous research work in this field, the compositions produced by \textbf{Amadeus} present all of these as a coherent whole, thus producing music that is one more step closer to human-level composition. \par
In the future, we hope to first add more localized rewards and introduce an attack velocity for the played notes. We also hope to undertake a comparative rating test of our compositions on human audience(e.g. \cite{liang2016bachbot}, \cite{yang2017midinet} and \cite{hadjeres2017deepbach}). \par
Audio tracks of compositions, and additional material such as structural diagrams, datasets, etc. can be found at \url{https://goo.gl/ogVMSq}
\bibliographystyle{named}
|
\section{Introduction}
The study of topological measures (initially called quasi-measures) began with papers by
J. F. Aarnes \cite{Aarnes:TheFirstPaper}, \cite{Aarnes:ConstructionPaper}, and \cite{Aarnes:Pure}.
There are now many papers devoted to topological measures and corresponding non-linear functionals;
their application to symplectic topology has been studied in numerous papers (beginning with \cite{EntovPolterovich})
and a monograph (\cite{PoltRosenBook}).
To date, however, almost all these works deal with topological measures on compact spaces.
In \cite{Aarnes:LC} J. F. Aarnes gives a definition of a topological measure on a locally compact space,
presents a procedure for obtaining topological measures from solid set functions
on a locally compact, connected, locally connected space,
and constructs some examples.
While \cite{Aarnes:LC} contains many interesting ideas, it is not entirely satisfactory.
It contains incomplete proofs and sometimes asks the reader to adapt
lengthy proofs from other papers to its subject matter.
In addition, the approach in \cite{Aarnes:LC} makes heavy use of sets that are connected
and co-connected (i.e. have connected complements).
We do not think this is the right approach for the non-compact setting.
For example, using these sets one may end up constructing trivial topological measures (see Example 6.2 in \cite{Aarnes:LC}).
Finally, the paper has never been published in a refereed mainstream journal.
The construction technique employed by Aarnes for a compact space $X$ in \cite{Aarnes:ConstructionPaper}
was later nicely simplified by
D. J. Grubb, who used semi-solid sets in a compact space.
Grubb presented his elegant construction in a series of lectures in 1998, but, unfortunately, never published it.
Influenced by ideas of Aarnes and Grubb, we have developed an approach for constructing topological measures
on locally compact spaces.
Instead of sets that are connected and have connected complements we use sets that are connected
and whose complement has finitely many bounded and unbounded components.
Our approach allows us
to extend a solid set function (see Definition \ref{DeSSFLC})
to a topological measure on $X$ when $X$ is a locally compact, connected,
and locally connected space;
the restriction of a topological measure to solid sets with compact closure is a solid set function that
uniquely determines the topological measure.
We obtain an easy way to construct topological measures on non-compact locally compact spaces
whose one-point compactification has genus 0.
(See \cite{Aarnes:ConstructionPaper}, and section \ref{examplesTmLC} for more information about genus.)
Thus, we are able to produce a variety of topological measures on $\R^n$, half-spaces, punctured balls, etc..
The paper is organized as follows. In section \ref{Prelim} we give necessary topological preliminaries.
In section \ref{SolidSemisoid} we study the structure of solid and semi-solid sets.
In section \ref{TM} we give a definition and basic properties of
topological measures on locally compact spaces, and in section \ref{SSF}
we do the same for solid-set functions. In section \ref{ExtBssKc}
on a locally compact, connected, and locally connected space
we extend a solid-set function from bounded solid sets to compact connected and bounded semi-solid sets.
In section \ref{BCOX} the extension is done to the
finite unions of disjoint compact connected sets, and in section \ref{ExttoTM}
the extension produces a topological measure that is uniquely defined by
a solid set function (see Theorem \ref{extThLC} and Theorem \ref{ExtUniq}).
In section \ref{examplesTmLC} we give examples and present
an easy way (Theorem \ref{tmXtoXha}) to generate topological measures on
locally compact, connected, and locally connected spaces whose one-point compactification has genus 0
from existing examples of topological measures on compact spaces.
In this paper by a component of a set we always mean a connected component.
We denote by $\overline E$ the closure of a set $E$
and by $\partial E$ the boundary of $E$.
We denote by $ \bigsqcup$ a union of disjoint sets.
\begin{definition} \label{debddset}
A set $A \subseteq X$ is called bounded if $\overline A$ is compact.
A set $A$ is solid if $A$ is connected, and $X \setminus A$ has only unbounded
components.
A set $A$ is semi-solid if $A$ is connected, and $X \setminus A $ has only finitely many components.
\end{definition}
Several collections of sets will be used often. They include:
$\calO(X)$, the collection of open subsets of $X $;
$\calC(X)$, the collection of closed subsets of $X $; and
$\calK(X)$, the collection of compact subsets of $X $.
$\calP(X)$ is the power set of $X$.
Often we will work with open, compact or closed sets with particular properties.
We use subscripts $c, s$ or $ ss$ to indicate (open, compact, closed) sets that are, respectively, connected, solid, or semi-solid.
For example,
$ \calO_{c}(X)$ is the collection of open connected subsets of $X$, and
$ \calK_{s}(X)$ is the collection of compact solid subsets of $X$.
Given any collection $\mathscr{E}\subseteq\calP(X)$,
we denote by $\mathscr{E}^*$ the subcollection of all bounded sets belonging to $\mathscr{E}$.
For example,
$\calA^{*}(X) = \kx \cup \calO^{*}(X)$ is the collection of compact and bounded open sets, and
$\calA_{ss}^{*}(X) = \calK_{ss}(X) \cup \calO_{ss}^{*}(X) $ is the collection of bounded open semi-solid and
compact semi-solid sets. By $\calK_{0}(X)$ we denote the collection of finite unions of disjoint compact connected sets.
\begin{definition}
A non-negative set function $ \mu$ on a family of sets that includes compact sets is called compact-finite if $ \mu(K) <\infty$ for
each compact $K$.
A non-negative set function is called simple if it only assumes values $0$ and $1$.
\end{definition}
We consider set functions that are not identically $\infty$.
\section{Preliminaries} \label{Prelim}
This section contains necessary topological preliminaries.
Some results in this section are known, but sometimes we give proofs for the reader's convenience.
\begin{remark} \label{netsSETS}
An easy application of compactness (see, for example, Corollary 3.1.5 in \cite{Engelking}) shows that
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)]
If $K_\alpha \searrow K, K \subseteq U,$ where $U \in \calO(X),\ K, K_\alpha \in \calC(X)$, and $K$ and at least one of $K_\alpha$ are compact,
then there exists $\alpha_0$ such that
$ K_\alpha \subseteq U$ for all $\alpha \ge \alpha_0$.
\item[(ii)]
If $U_\alpha \nearrow U, K \subseteq U,$ where $K \in \calK(X), \ U, \ U_\alpha \in \calO(X)$ then there exists $\alpha_0$ such that
$ K \subseteq U_\alpha$ for all $\alpha \ge \alpha_0$.
\end{itemize}
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} \label{OpenComp}
\begin{itemize}
\item[(a)]
Suppose$X$ is connected, $ U \in \calO_{c}(X)$ and $F \in \calC_{c}(X)$ are disjoint sets.
If $\overline U \cap F \ne \O$ then $U \sqcup F $ is connected.
\item[(b)]
If $X$ is locally compact and locally connected,
for each $x \in X$ and each open set $U$ containing $x$, there is
a connected open set $V$ such that $ x \in V \subseteq \overline V \subseteq U $ and $\overline V$ is compact.
\item[(c)]
If $V = \bigsqcup_{s \in S} V_s$
where $V$ and $V_s $ are open sets, then $\overline{ V_s} \cap V_t = \O$ for $ s \ne t$.
In particular, if $X$ is locally connected, and $V = \bigsqcup_{s \in S} V_s$
is a decomposition of an open set $V$ into connected components, then all components $V_s$ are open, and
$\overline{ V_s} \cap V_t = \O$ for $ s \ne t$.
\end{itemize}
\end{remark}
\begin{lemma} \label{prelLemma}
Let $U$ be an open connected subset of a locally compact
and locally connected
set $X$. Then for any $x, y \in U$ there is $ V_{xy} \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X)$ such that
$ x,y \in V_{xy} \subseteq \overline{ V_{xy}} \subseteq U$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Fix $x \in U$. Let
$$A = \{ y \in U : \exists V_{xy} \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X) \mbox{ such that }
x,y \in V_{xy} \subseteq \overline{ V_{xy}} \subseteq U \}. $$
Clearly, $A$ is open, since if $y \in A$ then $V_{xy} \subseteq A$.
The set $ U \setminus A$ is also open, since if $y \in U \setminus A$ then
by Remark \ref{OpenComp} there exists $V \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X)$
such that $y \in V \subseteq \overline V \subseteq U$.
In fact, $V \subseteq U \setminus A$. (Otherwise, if $ z \in V \cap A$ then
$ V_{xz} \cup V$ is a bounded open connected set with
$x,y \in V_{xz} \cup V \subseteq \overline{ V_{xz}} \cup \overline V \subseteq U$, i.e. $y \in A$.)
Thus, $ U \setminus A$ is also open. Since $x \in A$, we must have $A = U$.
\end{proof}
We would like to note the following fact. (See, for example, \cite{Dugundji}, Chapter XI, 6.2)
\begin{lemma} \label{easyLeLC}
Let $K \subseteq U, \ K \in \kx, \ U \in \calO(X)$ in a locally compact space $X$.
Then there exists a set $V \in \calO^{*}(X)$ such that
$$ K \subseteq V \subseteq \overline V \subseteq U. $$
\end{lemma}
\noindent
In the spirit of this result we can say more, given connectedness.
\begin{lemma} \label{LeConLC}
Let $X$ be a locally compact, locally connected space, $K \subseteq U, \ K \in \kx, \ U \in \calO(X)$.
If either $K$ or $U$ is connected there exist a set $V \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X)$ and a set $C \in \calK_{c}(X)$
such that
$$ K \subseteq V \subseteq C \subseteq U. $$
One may take $C = \overline V$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Case 1: $ K \in \calK_{c}(X)$. For each $ x \in K$
by Remark \ref{OpenComp} there is $ V_x \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X)$ such that
$ x \in V_x \subseteq \overline{ V_x} \subseteq U$. By compactness of $K$, we may write
$ K \subseteq V_{x_1} \cup \ldots \cup V_{x_n}$.
Since both $K$ and $V_{x_i} $ are connected and $ x_i \in K \cap V_{x_i}$,
$\, K \cup V_{x_i}$ is connected for each $ i =1, \ldots, n$.
Hence,
$$ V = \bigcup\limits_{i=1}^n V_{x_i} = \bigcup\limits_{i=1}^n (K \cup V_{x_i}) $$
is a bounded open connected set for which
$$ K \subseteq V \subseteq \overline V \subseteq \bigcup_{i=1}^n \overline{ V_{x_i}} \subseteq U. $$
Take $C = \overline V$. \\
Case 2: $ U \in \calO_{c}(X)$.
As in Case 1 we may find $V_1, \ldots, V_n \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X)$
such that
$$ K \subseteq V_1 \cup \ldots \cup V_n \subseteq \overline{ V_1} \ldots \cup \overline{V_n} \subseteq U .$$
Pick $ x_i \in V_i$ for $i=1, \ldots, n$. By Lemma \ref{prelLemma} choose
$W_i \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X)$ with $ x_1, \ x_i \in W_i \subseteq \overline{ W_i} \subseteq U$ for $ i=2, \ldots, n$.
Then the set $V_1 \cup W_i \cup V_i$ is connected for each $ i =2, \ldots, n$.
Then
$$ V = \bigcup_{i=1}^n V_i \cup \bigcup_{i=2}^n W_j = \bigcup_{i=2}^n (V_1 \cup W_i \cup V_i)$$
is open connected and
$$ K \subseteq \bigcup_{i=1}^n V_i \subseteq V \subseteq \overline V \subseteq \bigcup_{i=1}^n \overline{ V_i} \cup
\bigcup_{i=2}^n \overline{ W_i} \subseteq U.$$
Again, let $C = \overline V$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{LeCCoU}
Let $X$ be a locally compact, locally connected space. Suppose $K \subseteq U, \ K \in \kx, \ U \in \calO(X)$.
Then there exists $C \in \calK_{0}(X)$ such that $ K \subseteq C \subseteq U$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $U = \bigsqcup_{i \in I'} U_i$ be the decomposition into connected components. Since
$X$ is locally connected, each $U_i$ is open, and by compactness of $K$ there exists
a finite set $I \subseteq I'$ such that $K \subseteq \bigsqcup_{i \in I} U_i$.
Then $ K \cap U_i = K \setminus \bigsqcup\limits_{j \in I, \ j \ne i} U_j$
is a compact set. For each $i \in I$ by Lemma \ref{LeConLC}
choose $C_i \in \calK_{c}(X)$ such that $K \cap U_i \subseteq C_i \subseteq U_i$.
The set $C = \bigsqcup_{i \in I} C_i$ is the desired set.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{CmpCmplBdA}
Let $X$ be a connected, locally connected space.
Let $ A \in \calA_{c}(X)$ and
let $B$ be a component of $X \setminus A$. Then
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)]
If $A$ is open then $B$ is closed and $\overline{A} \cap B \neq \O$.
\item[(ii)]
If $A$ is closed then $B$ is open and $A \cap \overline{B} \neq \O.$
\item[(iii)]
$A \sqcup \bigsqcup\limits_{s \in S} B_s$ is connected for
any family $\{ B_s\}_{s \in S} $ of components of $ X \setminus A$.
\item[(iv)]
$B$ is connected and co-connected.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof of the first two parts is not difficult. For the third part, observe that by Remark \ref{OpenComp} $A \bigsqcup B$ is
connected for each component $B$ of $X \setminus A$. To prove the last part,
let $X \setminus A = \bigsqcup_{s \in S} B_s$ be a decomposition
into connected components. For each $ t \in S$ connected component $B_t$ is also
co-connected, because
$$ X \setminus B_t =A \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \ne t} B_s $$
is a connected set by the previous part.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{LeAaCompInU}
Let $X$ be a connected, locally connected space.
Let $K \in \kx, \ K \subseteq U \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X)$. Then at most a finite number of connected components of
$X \setminus$ K are not contained in $U.$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $ X \setminus K = \bigsqcup_{s \in S} W_s$ be the decomposition of $ X \setminus K$
into connected components.
Note that each component $ W_s$ intersects $U$ since otherwise we would have
$W_s \subseteq X \setminus U$, so $\overline{ W_s} \subseteq X \setminus U$, so $\overline{ W_s} \cap K =\O$, which contradicts
Lemma \ref{CmpCmplBdA}.
Assume that there are infinitely many components of $X \setminus K$ that are not contained in $U$.
Then we may choose components $W_i, \ i=1, 2, \ldots$, such that $W_i \cap U \neq\O$ and
$W_i \cap (X \setminus U) \neq \O$ for each $i$.
Connectivity of $W_i$ implies that $ W_i \cap \partial U \neq \O$ for each $i$.
Let $x_i \in W_i \cap \partial U$. By compactness of $\partial U$, let $x_0 \in \partial U$
be the limit point of $(x_i)$. Then $x_0 \in X \setminus U \subseteq X \setminus K = \bigsqcup_{s \in S} W_s$,
i.e. $x_0 \in W_t $ for some $t \in S$. But then all but finitely many $x_i$ must also
be in $W_t$, which is impossible, since $W_i \cap W_t =\O$ for $t \neq i$.
\end{proof}
\begin{corollary} \label{CoBddComp}
Let $X$ be a connected, locally connected space.
Let $K \in \kx$ and let $W$ be the union of bounded components of $X \setminus K$.
Then $W \in \calO^{*}(X)$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{LeConLC} pick $V \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X)$ such that
$ K \subseteq V$. From Lemma \ref{LeAaCompInU} it follows that $W$ is bounded. By Lemma
\ref{CmpCmplBdA} $W$ is open.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{ReUnbddComp}
If $A \subseteq B, \ B \in \calA^{*}(X)$ then $ X \setminus B \subseteq X \setminus A$ and each unbounded component
of $X \setminus B$ is contained in an unbounded component of $ X \setminus A$.
\end{remark}
\begin{lemma} \label{LeUnbddComp}
Let $X$ be a connected, locally connected space.
Assume $ A \subseteq B, \ B \in \calA^{*}(X)$. Then each unbounded component of $X \setminus B$
is contained in an unbounded component of $ X \setminus A$ and each unbounded component
of $ X \setminus A$ contains an unbounded component of $X \setminus B$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose first that $ A \subseteq K, \ K \in \kx$.
The first assertion is Remark \ref{ReUnbddComp}. Now let $E$ be an unbounded component of
$X \setminus A$ which contains no unbounded components of $X \setminus K$. Then $E$ is contained
in the union of $K$ and all bounded components of $X \setminus K$.
By Corollary \ref{CoBddComp} this union is a bounded set, and so is $E$, which leads to a contradiction. Therefore,
each unbounded component of $X \setminus A$ must contain an unbounded component of $X \setminus K$.
Now suppose $ A \subseteq B, \ B \in \calA^{*}(X)$. Choose $K \in \kx$ such that $ A \subseteq B \subseteq K$. Let $E$ be an unbounded component of
$X \setminus A$. By the previous part, $ E$ contains an unbounded component $Y$ of $ X \setminus K$. But $Y \subseteq G$ for some
unbounded component $G$ of $ X \setminus B$. Then $G \subseteq E$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{LeNoUnbdComp}
Let $X$ be locally compact, locally connected.
Let $A \in \calA^{*}(X)$. Then the number of unbounded components of $ X \setminus A$ is finite.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose first that $ A \in \kx$. By Lemma \ref{LeConLC}
let $U \subseteq \calO_{c}^{*}(X)$ be such that $ A \subseteq U $. Then the assertion follows from
Lemma \ref{LeAaCompInU}.
Now suppose that $ A \in \calO^{*}(X)$. Then $\overline A \in \kx$, so the number of unbounded components
of $ X \setminus \overline A$ is finite. From Lemma \ref{LeUnbddComp}
it follows that the number of unbounded components of $X \setminus A$ is also finite,
since it does not exceed the number of unbounded components of $ X \setminus \overline A$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{LeCleverSet}
Let $X$ be locally compact, connected, locally connected.
Suppose $D \subseteq U$ where $ D \in \kx, \ U \in \calO^{*}(X).$
Let $C$ be the intersection of the union of bounded components of $X \setminus D$
with the union of bounded components of $X \setminus U$. Then $C$ is compact
and $ U \sqcup C$ is open.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Write
$$ X \setminus D = V \sqcup W,$$
where $V$ is the union of bounded components of $ X \setminus D$,
and $W$ is the union of unbounded components of $ X \setminus D.$
Also write
$$ X \setminus U = B \sqcup F,$$
where $B$ is the union of bounded components of $ X \setminus U$, and
$F$ is the union of unbounded components of $X \setminus U.$
By Lemma \ref{LeNoUnbdComp} $F$ is a closed set.
Let
$$ C = V \cap B.$$
Clearly, $C$ and $U$ are disjoint. To see that $U \sqcup C$ is open,
note first that $U \sqcup B = X \setminus F$ is an open set. Hence,
$$ U \sqcup C = U \sqcup(V \cap B) = (U \cup V) \cap (U \sqcup B)$$
is also an open set. Now we shall show that $C$ is closed,
i.e. that $X \setminus C$ is open. Note that $ F \subseteq W$ by Remark \ref{ReUnbddComp}.
The set $W$ is open by Lemma \ref{CmpCmplBdA}. Now
\begin{eqnarray*}
X \setminus C &=& X \setminus (B \cap V) = (X \setminus B) \cup (X \setminus V) \\
&=& ( U \sqcup F) \cup (D \sqcup W) = (U \cup D) \cup (F \cup W) = U \cup W
\end{eqnarray*}
is an open set. By Corollary \ref{CoBddComp} the set $C$ is bounded.
\end{proof}
\section{Solid and Semi-solid sets} \label{SolidSemisoid}
\begin{remark} \label{ReFinNoComp}
Let $X$ be locally compact, locally connected.
From Lemma \ref{LeNoUnbdComp}
it follows that a bounded set $B$ is semi-solid if and only if the number of bounded
components of $X \setminus B$ is finite. For a bounded solid set $A$ we have:
$$ X \setminus A = \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n E_i $$
where $ n \in \N$ and $E_i$'s are unbounded connected components.
\end{remark}
\begin{lemma} \label{SolidCompoLC}
Let $X$ be locally compact, locally connected.
If $A \in \calA^{*}(X)$ then each bounded component of $X \setminus A$ is a solid bounded set.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let
$$ X \setminus A = \bigsqcup_{i \in I} B_i \sqcup \bigsqcup_{j \in J} D_j $$
be the decomposition of $X \setminus A$ into components, where $B_i, \ i \in I$ are bounded
components, and $D_j, \ j \in J$ are unbounded ones. Pick a bounded component $B_k$.
Then
$$ X \setminus B_k = A \sqcup \bigsqcup_{i \neq k} B_i \sqcup \bigsqcup_{j \in J} D_j $$
Note that the set on the right hand side is connected by
Lemma \ref{CmpCmplBdA} and unbounded.
Hence, $B_k$ is solid.
\end{proof}
A set $A \in \calA_{c}^{*}(X)$ may not be solid. But we may make it solid by filling in the "holes"
by adding to $A$ all bounded components of $X \setminus A$. More precisely, we have
the following result.
\begin{lemma} \label{leSolidHu}
Let $X$ be locally compact, locally connected.
For $A \in \calA_{c}^{*}(X)$ let
$\{A_i\}_{i=1}^n$be the unbounded components
of $X \setminus A$ and $\{B_s\}_{s \in S}$ be the bounded components of $X \setminus A$.
Then the set $\tilde{A} = A \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S} B_s =X \setminus \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n A_i $
is solid.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The set $\tilde A $ is connected by Lemma \ref{CmpCmplBdA}.
It is clear that $X \setminus \tilde A$ has only unbounded components.
\end{proof}
\begin{definition} \label{solid hull}
Let $X$ be locally compact, locally connected.
For $A \in \calA_{c}^{*}(X)$ let $\{A_i\}_{i=1}^n$be the unbounded components
of $X \setminus A$ and $\{B_s\}_{s \in S}$ be the bounded components of $X \setminus A$.
We say that $\tilde{A}= A \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S} B_s= X \setminus \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n A_i $
is a solid hull of $A$.
\end{definition}
The next lemma gives some properties of solid hulls of connected sets that are bounded open or compact.
\begin{lemma}\label{PrSolidHuLC}
Let $X$ be locally compact, connected, locally connected.
Let $A, B \in \calA_{c}^{*}(X)$.
\begin{enumerate}[label=(a\arabic*),ref=(a\arabic*)]
\item \label{part1}
If $ A \subseteq B$ then $\tilde{A} \subseteq \tilde{B}.$
\item \label{part2}
$\tilde{A}$ is a bounded solid set, $A \subseteq \tilde{A}$, and $A$ is solid iff $A = \tilde{A}.$
\item \label{part3}
$\tilde{\tilde{A}} = \tilde{A}.$
\item \label{part4}
If $A$ is open, then so is $ \tilde{A}$. If $A$ is compact, then so is $\tilde{A}.$
\item \label{part5}
If $A, B$ are disjoint bounded connected sets, then their solid hulls $\tilde{A}, \tilde{B}$ are
either disjoint or one is properly contained in the other.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Part \ref{part1} follows since each unbounded component of
$ X \setminus B$ is contained in an unbounded component of $ X \setminus A$.
If $A$ is compact, choose by
Lemma \ref{LeConLC} a set $U \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X)$ that contains $A$.
Since $\tilde A$ is a union of $A$ and bounded components of $X \setminus A$, applying
Lemma \ref{LeAaCompInU} we see that $\tilde A$ is bounded. The rest of
parts \ref{part2} and \ref{part3} is immediate.
For part \ref{part4},
note that if $A$ is open (closed) then
each of finitely many (by Lemma \ref{LeNoUnbdComp}) unbounded components of $X \setminus A$ is closed (open) by
Lemma \ref{CmpCmplBdA}.
To prove part \ref{part5}, let $A, B \in \calA_{c}^{*}(X)$ be disjoint.
If $A \subseteq \tilde B$ then $\tilde A \subseteq \tilde B$ by parts \ref{part1} and \ref{part3}.
To prove that the inclusion
is proper, assume to the contrary that $\tilde A = \tilde B$. If one of the sets $A, B$
is open and the other is closed, this equality means that $\tilde A$ is a proper
clopen subset of $X$,
which contradicts the connectivity of $X$. Suppose $A$ and $B$ are both closed (both open).
Then it is easy to see that $A = E$, where $E$ is a bounded component of $X \setminus B$,
an open (closed) set. Thus, $A$ is a proper clopen subset of $X$, which
contradicts the connectivity of $X$. Therefore, $\tilde A$ is properly contained in $\tilde B$.
Similarly, if $ B \subseteq \tilde A$ then $ \tilde B \subseteq \tilde A $, and the inclusion is proper.
Suppose neither of the above discussed cases $A \subseteq \tilde B$ or $B \subseteq \tilde A$ occurs.
Then by connectedness we must have:
$$ A \subseteq G , \ \ B \subseteq E$$
where $G$ is an unbounded component of $ X \setminus B$ and $E$ is an unbounded
component of $ X \setminus A$. Then $ B \subseteq \tilde B \subseteq X \setminus G \subseteq X \setminus A$,
i.e. $\tilde B$ is contained in a component of $ X \setminus A$.
Since $\tilde B$ is connected and $ B \subseteq E$ we must have $ \tilde B \subseteq E \subseteq X \setminus \tilde A$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{LeCsInside}
Let $X$ be locally compact, connected, locally connected.
If $K \subseteq U, \ K \in \kx, \ U \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$ then there exists $C \in \calK_{s}(X)$ such that
$$ K \subseteq C \subseteq U.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
One may take $C$ to be the solid hull of the set $\overline V$ from Lemma
\ref{LeConLC}. Then $C \subseteq U$ by Lemma \ref{PrSolidHuLC}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{opensolid}
Let $X$ be locally compact, connected, locally connected.
Let $K \subseteq V, \ K \in \calK_{s}(X), \ V \in \calO(X)$. Then there exists $ W \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$ such that
$$ K \subseteq W \subseteq \overline W\subseteq V.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{LeConLC} we may choose $ U \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X)$ such that
\begin{eqnarray} \label{V}
K \subseteq U \subseteq \overline U \subseteq V.
\end{eqnarray}
Since $ K \in \calK_{s}(X)$ let
$$ X \setminus K = \bigsqcup_{j=1}^n V_j$$
be the decomposition into connected components. Each $V_j $ is an unbounded
open connected set. Since $X\setminus U \subseteq X \setminus K$, for each $j=1, \ldots, n$ let
$E_j$ be the union of all bounded components of $X \setminus U$ contained in $V_j$, and
let $F_j$ be the union of (finitely many by Lemma \ref{LeNoUnbdComp})
unbounded components of $X \setminus U$ contained in $V_j$.
By Lemma \ref{CmpCmplBdA} each $F_j$ is closed.
By Lemma \ref{LeUnbddComp} each $F_j$ is non-empty.
Then by Lemma \ref{CmpCmplBdA} non-empty set $F_j \cap \overline U \subseteq V_j$ and
$F_j \cap \overline U \in \kx$.
Now, $E_j \subseteq \tilde U$, so $ E_j $ is bounded.
Note that $X = K \sqcup \bigsqcup_{j=1}^n V_j$, and a limit point $x$
of $E_j$ can not be in $V_i$ for $i \neq j$; and it can not be in $K$, since in this case a neighborhood $U$ of $x$ contains no points of
$E_j$. Thus, $\overline{ E_j} \subseteq V_j$. Then $(F_j \cap \overline U) \cup \overline{ E_j}$ is a compact set contained in $V_j$.
By Lemma \ref{LeConLC} there exists $ D_j \in \calK_{c}(X)$ such that
\begin{eqnarray} \label{3sh}
(F_j \cap \overline U) \cup \overline{ E_j} \subseteq D_j \subseteq V_j.
\end{eqnarray}
Let
$$ B_j = D_j \cup F_j.$$
Then $B_j$ is connected because from (\ref{3sh}) one sees that $D_j $
intersects every component comprising $F_j$.
Thus, each $B_j$ is an unbounded closed connected set, $B_j \cap K =\O$.
Set
$$B= \bigcup_{j=1}^n B_j.$$
Then
$B \cap K = \O$.
Now $ K \subseteq X \setminus B$, so let
$O$ be the connected component of $X \setminus B$ such that $ K \subseteq O \subseteq X \setminus B$.
Since $B= \bigcup_{j=1}^n B_j \subseteq X \setminus O$,
$B$ is contained in the union of unbounded components of $X \setminus O$.
Hence, each bounded component of $ X \setminus O$ is disjoint from $B$, and
so $\tilde O \subseteq X \setminus B$. Thus
$$ K \subseteq O \subseteq \tilde O \subseteq X \setminus B \subseteq U.$$
By (\ref{V}) we see that
$$ K \subseteq \tilde O \subseteq U \subseteq \overline U \subseteq V$$
and we may take $W =\tilde O$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The closure of a solid set need not be solid. For example,
in the infinite strip
$X = \R \times [0,1] $ the open set $ U = ((1,3) \times (0,1)) \cup ((5,7) \times(0,1)) \cup ((2,6) \times (0.25 , 0.75))$
is solid, while its closure is not.
\end{remark}
\begin{lemma} \label{ossreg}
Let $X$ be locally compact, connected, locally connected.
Suppose $K \subseteq W, \ K \in \calK_{c}(X), \ W \in \calO_{ss}(X)$. Then there exist $V \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X)$ and
$ D \in \calK_{ss}(X)$ such that
$$ K \subseteq V \subseteq D \subseteq W.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{LeConLC} choose $U \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X)$ and $ C \in \calK_{c}(X)$ such that
$$ K \subseteq U \subseteq C \subseteq W.$$
Let $X \setminus W = \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n E_i, \ X \setminus C = \bigsqcup_{t \in T} V_t, \ X \setminus U = \bigsqcup_{s \in S} D_s$
be decompositions into connected components of $X \setminus W, \ X \setminus C, \ X \setminus U$ respectively.
Then
$$ \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n E_i \subseteq \bigsqcup_{t \in T} V_t \subseteq \bigsqcup_{s \in S} D_s.$$
Let $T_0 = \{ t \in T: \ V_t \mbox{ is unbounded } \}$.
Let us index by $T'$ the family of
all bounded components of $X \setminus C$ each of which contains a component of $X \setminus W$.
So $ \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n E_i \subseteq \bigsqcup_{t \in T_0} V_t \sqcup \bigsqcup_{t \in T'} V_t$. Note that $T'$ is a finite index set.
Now let us index by $S'$ the family of
all bounded components of $X \setminus U$ each of which contains a component $V_t$ for some
$t \in T' $.
Note that $S'$ is a finite index set and
$$ \bigsqcup_{t \in T'} V_t \subseteq \bigsqcup_{s \in S'} D_s.$$
Consider
$$ V = \tilde U \setminus \bigsqcup_{s \in S'} D_s.$$
Then $V$ is bounded.
Also, $V$ is open. By Lemma \ref{CmpCmplBdA} $V$ is connected.
Since
$$ X \setminus V = (X \setminus \tilde U) \sqcup\bigsqcup_{s \in S'} D_s \subseteq \bigsqcup_{s \in S} D_s = X \setminus U$$
we see that $V \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X)$ (as the first equality indicates that $X \setminus V$ has finitely
many components), and that $U \subseteq V$.
Now consider
$$ D = \tilde C \setminus \bigsqcup_{t \in T' } V_t.$$
Then $D$ is compact. By Lemma \ref{CmpCmplBdA} $D$ is connected.
We have
$$ X \setminus D = (X \setminus \tilde C) \sqcup \bigsqcup_{t \in T'} V_t \subseteq (X \setminus \tilde U) \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S'} D_s = X \setminus V,$$
so $X \setminus D$ has finitely many components, and $V \subseteq D$. Thus, $D \in \calK_{ss}(X)$.
Also,
$$ X \setminus W = \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n E_i \subseteq
\bigsqcup_{t \in T_0} V_t \sqcup \bigsqcup_{t \in T'} V_t = (X \setminus \tilde C) \sqcup \bigsqcup_{t \in T'} V_t = X \setminus D.$$
Therefore, $ D \subseteq W$.
Then we have:
$$ K \subseteq U \subseteq V \subseteq D \subseteq W,$$
where $ V \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X)$ and $ D \in \calK_{ss}(X)$.
\end{proof}
Let $V$ be an open subset of $X$ endowed with the subspace topology. Let $D \subseteq V$.
By $\overline D^V$ we denote the closure of $D$ in $V$ with the subspace topology. As before,
$\overline D$ stands for the closure of $D$ in $X$.
\begin{lemma} \label{76a}
Let $V \in \calO(X), \ D \subseteq V$. Suppose $V$ is endowed with the subspace topology.
\begin{itemize}
\item[a)]
If $D$ is bounded in $V$ with the subspace topology then
$\overline D^V = \overline D$ and $\overline D \subseteq V$.
\item[b)]
If $D$ is bounded in $X$ and $\overline D \subseteq V$ then $D$ is bounded in $V$.
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\begin{itemize}
\item[a)]
If $D$ is bounded in $V$(with the subspace topology) then $\overline D^V$ is a compact subset of $V$,
and so is a compact in $X$, hence, closed in $X$. That is, $\overline{ \overline D^V} = \overline D^V$.
Since clearly $\overline D^V \subseteq \overline D$ and $ D \subseteq \overline D^V$, we have:
$$ \overline D \subseteq \overline{ \overline D^V} = \overline D^V \subseteq \overline D.$$
It follows that $ \overline D = \overline D^V \subseteq V$.
\item[b)]
Since $\overline D$ is compact in $X$ it is easy to see that $\overline D^V$ is compact in $V$.
\end{itemize}
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{bddInV}
Let $V \in O^*(X)$ be endowed with the subspace topology. From Lemma \ref{76a} we see that
$D$ is bounded in $V$ iff $\overline D \subseteq V$. Hence, $D$ is unbounded in $V$ iff
$\overline D \cap (X \setminus V) \neq \O$.
\end{remark}
The next two results give relations between being a solid set in a subspace of $X$ and
being a solid set in $X$.
\begin{lemma} \label{LeSolidInV}
Let $X$ be locally connected.
Let $C \subseteq V, \ C \in \calC_{s}(X), \ V \in \calO(X)$. Then $C \in \calC_{s}(V)$, i.e. connected components
of $V \setminus C$ are unbounded subsets of $V$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose $V \setminus C = \bigsqcup_{s \in S} V_s$ is the decomposition into connected components
in $V$.
Note that
$$ X \setminus C = (X \setminus V) \sqcup (V \setminus C) =(X \setminus V) \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S} V_s $$
Assume that there exists $r \in S$ such that $V_r$ is bounded in $V$.
By Lemma \ref{76a} $\overline{ V_r} \cap (X \setminus V) =\O$.
Also, by Remark \ref{OpenComp} $\overline{V_r} \cap V_s = \O$ for each $s \ne r$.
Thus, $ \overline{ V_r} \subseteq C \sqcup V_r$.
Since $V_r \subseteq X \setminus C$ and $V_r$ is connected in $X$, assume that $V_r$
is contained in a component $U$
of $X \setminus C$.
Then $ V_r \subseteq U \cap \overline{V_r} \subseteq U \cap (C \sqcup V_r) \subseteq V_r$, so $ U \cap \overline{V_r} \subseteq V_r$.
Thus, $U =(U \cap \overline{V_r}) \sqcup (U \setminus \overline V_r) = V_r \sqcup (U \setminus \overline V_r)$ is the disconnection of $U$, unless $U = V_r$.
This shows that $U=V_r$ is a component of $X \setminus C$. But this is impossible, since
$V_r$ is bounded and $C$ is solid.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
Let $A \subseteq V, \ V \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$. If $A \in \calA_{s}(V) $ then $A \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
If $ A \in \calA_{s}(V)$ then $A$ is connected in $X$ and bounded in $X$. Since $V \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$, we
may write $X \setminus V = \bigsqcup_{i \in I} F_i$ where $F_i$ are unbounded connected components.
Let $V \setminus A = \bigsqcup_{s \in S} E_s$ be the decomposition into connected components in $V$.
Each $E_s$ is unbounded in $V$, i.e., $\overline{ E_s} \cap (X \setminus V) \ne \O$, hence,
$\overline{ E_s} \cap F_i \ne \O$ for some $ i \in I$. Let $I' = \{ i \in I: \ F_i \cap \overline{ E_s} \ne \O
\mbox{ for some } E_s \}$, and for $i \in I'$ let $S_i = \{ s \in S : \ \overline{ E_s} \cap F_i \ne \O \}$.
For $i \in I'$ the set $ F_i \cup \bigsqcup_{s \in S_i} E_s$ is unbounded and connected.
Since
$$ X \setminus A = (X \setminus V) \sqcup (V \setminus A) =
\bigsqcup_{i \in I'} (F_i \cup \bigsqcup_{s \in S_i} E_s) \sqcup \bigsqcup_{i \in I \setminus I'} F_i $$
is a disjoint union of unbounded connected sets, the proof is complete.
\end{proof}
Now we shall take a closer look at the structure of an open solid or semi-solid set that contains a
closed solid or closed connected set.
\begin{lemma} \label{LeDecompV}
Let $X$ be locally compact, connected, locally connected.
Let $ C \subseteq V, \ C \in \calK_{s}(X)$.
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*),ref=(\roman*)]
\item
Suppose $V \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$. If $V \setminus C$ is connected then
$$V = C \sqcup W \mbox{ where } W \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X).$$
If $ V \setminus C$ is disconnected then
$$ V = C \sqcup \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n V_i \mbox{ where } V_i \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X), \ i=1, \ldots, n. $$
\item
Suppose $ V \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X)$. Then
$$ V = C \sqcup \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n V_i \mbox{ where } V_i \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X), \ i=1, \ldots, n. $$
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*),ref=(\roman*)]
\item
Suppose $V \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$ and let
$$X \setminus V = \bigsqcup_{s \in S} F_s$$
be the decomposition
into connected components, so $S$ is a finite index set and each $F_s$ is unbounded.
If $V \setminus C$ is connected then taking $W = V \setminus C$ we see that
$$X \setminus W = X \setminus (V \setminus C) = (X \setminus V) \sqcup C =C \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S} F_s $$
has finitely many components, i.e. $W \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X)$. \\
Now assume that $V \setminus C$ is not connected.
By Lemma \ref{LeSolidInV} and Remark \ref{bddInV} $C \in \calC_{s}(V)$ and is bounded in $V$.
The set $ V \setminus C$ is also disconnected in $V$, so using Remark \ref{ReFinNoComp} let
$$V \setminus C = \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n V_i, \ n \ge 2 $$
be the decomposition into connected (unbounded in $V$)
components in $V$. Each $V_i$ is connected in $X$.
To show that each $V_i \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$
we only need to check that the components of $X \setminus V_i$ are unbounded.
For simplicity, we shall show it for $V_1$. For $2 \le j \le n$
by Lemma \ref{LeSolidInV} and Remark \ref{bddInV}
$\overline{ V_j}$ intersects $X\setminus V$, hence, intersects some $F_s$.
Let $S_1 = \{ s\in S: F_s \cap \overline{ V_j} \neq \O \mbox{ for some } 2 \le j \le n \} $.
By Remark \ref{OpenComp} and Lemma \ref{CmpCmplBdA}
the set $(\bigsqcup_{s \in S_1} F_s \sqcup C \sqcup \bigsqcup_{j=2}^n V_j )$ is connected.
It is also unbounded.
Now
\begin{eqnarray*}
X \setminus V_1 &=& (X \setminus V) \sqcup (V \setminus V_1) \\
&=& \bigsqcup_{s \in S} F_s \sqcup C \sqcup \bigsqcup_{j=2}^n V_j \\
&=& (\bigsqcup_{s \in S_1} F_s \sqcup C \sqcup \bigsqcup_{j=2}^n V_j ) \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S \setminus S_1} F_s
\end{eqnarray*}
Since $X \setminus V_1$ is the disjoint union of connected unbounded sets, it follows that
$V_1$ is solid.
\item
Suppose $V \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X)$ and let $\bigsqcup_{j=1}^k F_j$ be the
components of $X \setminus V$.
By Lemma \ref{LeSolidInV} and Remark \ref{bddInV} $C \in \calC_{s}(V)$ and is bounded in $V$.
Let
$$V \setminus C = \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n V_i, \ n \ge 1 $$
be the decomposition into connected components in $V$ according to
Remark \ref{ReFinNoComp}.
Each $V_i$ is connected in $X$, and
to show that each $V_i \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X)$ we only need to check that $X \setminus V_i$ has finitely
many components. For simplicity, we shall show it for $V_1$. We have:
$$ X \setminus V_1 = (X \setminus V) \sqcup (V \setminus V_1) = \bigsqcup_{j=1}^k F_j \sqcup C \sqcup \bigsqcup_{i\ne 1} V_i .$$
Since $X \setminus V_1$ is a finite disjoint union of connected sets, the number of components
of $ X \setminus V_1$ is finite, so $V_1 \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{LeDecompU}
Let $X$ be locally compact, connected, locally connected.
Suppose $ C \subseteq U, \ \ C \in \calK_{c}(X), \ \ U \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$.
If $\ U \setminus \tilde C$ is disconnected then
$$ U = C \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S} V_s, \ \ \ V_s \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X).$$
If $ \ U \setminus \tilde C$ is connected then
$$ U = C \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S} V_s \sqcup W, \ \ \ V_s \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X), \ W \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X).$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Note first that $\tilde C \in \calK_{s}(X)$ and $\tilde C \subseteq U$ by Lemma \ref{PrSolidHuLC}.
Assume that $U \setminus \tilde C$ is disconnected. By Lemma \ref{LeDecompV} we may write
$ U = \tilde C \sqcup \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n U_i, \ \ U_i \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$. But
$\tilde C = C \sqcup \bigsqcup_{\alpha} V_{\alpha}$, where $V_{\alpha}$ are bounded components
of $ X \setminus C$, so by Lemma \ref{SolidCompoLC} each $V_{\alpha} \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$. After
reindexing, one may write $$ U = C \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S} V_s, \ \ \ V_s \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X).$$
The proof for the case when
$U \setminus \tilde C$ is connected follows similarly from Lemma \ref{LeDecompV}.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{finiteT}
Let $X$ be locally compact, connected, locally connected.
Suppose that
\[ V = \bigsqcup_{j=1}^m C_j \sqcup \bigsqcup_{t \in T} U_t \]
where $V \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X), \ C_j \in \calK_{s}(X), \ U_t \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X)$. Then $T$ is finite.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The proof is by induction on $m$. Let $m=1$. Using Lemma \ref{LeDecompV} we have
\[ V \setminus C_1 = \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n V_i = \bigsqcup_{t \in T} U_t.\]
Since sets $V_i$ and $U_t$ are connected, $T$ must be finite. Now let
$V = \bigsqcup_{j=1}^m C_j \sqcup \bigsqcup_{t \in T} U_t $ and assume that the result holds for any
bounded open semi-solid set which contains less than $m$ compact solid sets.
Using Lemma \ref{LeDecompV} we see that
\[ V = C_1 \sqcup \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n V_i =C_1 \sqcup \bigsqcup_{j=2}^m C_j \sqcup \bigsqcup_{t \in T} U_t,\]
where $V_i \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X)$.
All involved sets are connected, so each set $V_i$ is the disjoint union of sets from the
collection $\{ C_2, \ldots, C_m, U_t, t \in T \}$. By the induction hypothesis each $V_i$
contains finitely many sets, and it follows that $T$ is finite.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{finiteSP}
Let $X$ be locally compact, connected, locally connected.
If $A = \bigsqcup_{t \in T} A_t, \ \ A , A_t \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$ with at most finitely many
$A_t \in \calK_{s}(X)$ then $T$ is finite.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assume first that $A \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$. If the cardinality $|T| > 1$ then there must be a compact solid set
among $A_t$, and the result follows from Lemma \ref{finiteT}. Assume now that $A \in \calK_{s}(X)$
and write
\[ A = \bigsqcup_{j=1}^m C_j \sqcup \bigsqcup_{t \in T} U_t, \]
where $C_j \in \calK_{s}(X), \ U_t \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$. We need to show that $T$ is finite.
By Lemma \ref{opensolid} choose $ V \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$ such that $A \subseteq V$. Then
from Lemma \ref{LeDecompV} we may write $V \setminus A = \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n V_i$, where
$ V_i \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X)$. Then
\[ V =\bigsqcup_{j=1}^m C_j \sqcup \bigsqcup_{t \in T} U_t \sqcup \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n V_i ,\]
and by Lemma \ref{finiteT} $T$ is finite.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
Lemma \ref{LeNoUnbdComp}, Lemma \ref{PrSolidHuLC}, Lemma \ref{opensolid}, and Lemma \ref{LeSolidInV}
are close to Lemmas 3.5, 3.6, 3.8, 3.9, and 4.2 in \cite{Aarnes:LC}.
Lemma \ref{LeCleverSet} is related to a part in the proof of Lemma 5.9 in \cite{Aarnes:LC}.
The case " $V \setminus C$ is disconnected" in the first part of Lemma \ref{LeDecompV} is Lemma 4.3 in \cite{Aarnes:LC}, and
Lemma \ref{finiteSP} is an expanded (to compact sets as well) version of Lemma 4.4 in \cite{Aarnes:LC}.
In all instances our proofs are modified, expanded, or different, compared to the proofs in \cite{Aarnes:LC}.
\end{remark}
\section{Definition and basic properties of topological measures on locally compact spaces} \label{TM}
\begin{Definition}\label{DeTMLC}
A topological measure on $X$ is a set function
$\mu: \calC(X) \cup \calO(X) \to [0,\infty]$ satisfying the following conditions:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(TM\arabic*),ref=(TM\arabic*)]
\item \label{TM1}
if $A,B, A \sqcup B \in \calK(X) \cup \calO(X) $ then
$
\mu(A\sqcup B)=\mu(A)+\mu(B);
$
\item \label{TM2}
$
\mu(U)=\sup\{\mu(K):K \in \kx, \ K \subseteq U\}
$ for $U\in\calO(X)$;
\item \label{TM3}
$
\mu(F)=\inf\{\mu(U):U \in \calO(X), \ F \subseteq U\}
$ for $F \in \calC(X)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{Definition}
\begin{remark}
It is important that in Definition \ref{DeTMLC} condition \ref{TM1} holds for sets from
$\calK(X) \cup \calO(X)$. In fact, \ref{TM1} fails on $\calC(X) \cup \calO(X)$. See Example \ref{puncdisk} or
Example \ref{linetm} below.
\end{remark}
The following result gives some immediate properties of topological measures
on locally compact spaces.
\begin{lemma} \label{propTMLC}
The following is true for a topological measure:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(t\arabic*),ref=(t\arabic*)]
\item \label{l1}
$\mu$ is monotone, i.e. if $ A \subseteq B, \ A, B \in \calC(X) \cup \calO(X)$ then $\mu(A) \le \mu(B)$.
\item \label{smooth}
If an increasing net $U_s \nearrow U$, where $U_s, U \in \calO(X)$ then
$\mu(U_s) \nearrow \mu(U)$.
In particular, $\mu$ is additive on $\calO(X)$.
\item \label{l5}
$\mu( \O) = 0$.
\item \label{kl}
If $V \sqcup K \subseteq U$, where $U , V \in \calO(X), \ K \in \kx$ then $\mu(V) + \mu(K) \le \mu(U).$
\item \label{l2}
If $\mu$ is compact-finite then $\mu(A) < \infty$ for each $A \in \calA^{*}(X)$.
$\mu$ is finite (i.e. $\mu(X) < \infty$) iff $\mu$ is real-valued.
\item \label{CoRegulLC}
If $X$ is locally compact, locally connected then for any $U \in \calO(X)$
$$\mu(U)=\sup \{ \mu(C): \ C \in \calK_{0}(X), \ C\subseteq U\}.$$
\item \label{l8}
If $X$ is connected then
$$ \mu(X) = \sup\{ \mu(K) : \ K \in \calK_{c}(X) \} .$$
If $X$ is locally compact, connected, locally connected then also
$$ \mu(X) = \sup\{ \mu(K) : \ K \in \calK_{s}(X) \} .$$
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}[label=(t\arabic*),ref=(t\arabic*)]
\item
The monotonicity is immediate from Definition \ref{DeTMLC} if
sets $A$ and $B$ are both open or both closed. It is also easy to show the monotonicity
in the case when one of the sets is open and the other one is closed.
\item
Suppose $U_s \nearrow U, U_s, U \in \calO(X)$.
Let compact $K \subseteq U.$ By Remark \ref{netsSETS}, there is $t \in S$ such that $K \subseteq U_s$ for all $s \ge t$.
Then $\mu(K) \le \mu(U_s) \le \mu(U)$ for all $s \ge t$, and we see from the inner regularity
(whether $ \mu(U) < \infty$ or $ \mu(U) =\infty$) that $\mu(U_s) \nearrow \mu(U)$.
\item
Easy to see since $ \mu$ is not identically $ \infty$.
\item
Easy to see from part \ref{TM2} of Definition \ref{DeTMLC}.
\item
If $U$ is an open bounded set then $ \mu(U) \le \mu(\overline U) < \infty$. The second statement is obvious.
\item
By Lemma \ref{LeCCoU} for arbitrary $K \subseteq U, \ K \in \calC(X), \ U \in \calO(X)$ there is
$C \in \calC_{0}(X)$ with $ K \subseteq C \subseteq U$. By monotonicity $ \mu(K) \le \mu(C) \le \mu(U).$
Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mu(U) &=& \sup\{ \mu(K): \ K \in \calC(X), \ K \subseteq U\} \\
&\le& \sup\{ \mu(C): \ C \in \calC_{0}(X), \ K \subseteq C \subseteq U\} \le \mu(U)
\end{eqnarray*}
\item
Follows from Lemma \ref{LeConLC} and Lemma \ref{PrSolidHuLC}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition} \label{PrFinAddLC}
Let $X$ be locally compact.
A set function $\mu: \calO(X) \cup \calC(X) \rightarrow [0,\infty] $ satisfying \ref{TM2} and \ref{TM3} of
Definition \ref{DeTMLC} also satisfies \ref{TM1} if
the following conditions hold:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(c\arabic*),ref=(c\arabic*)]
\item \label{usl1}
$\mu(U \sqcup V ) = \mu(U) + \mu(V) $ for any disjoint open sets $U,V$
\item \label{usl2}
$\mu(U) = \mu(K) + \mu(U \setminus K) $ whenever $K \subseteq U, \ K \in \kx, \ U \in \calO(X).$
\end{enumerate}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Our proof is an expanded version of the proof of Proposition 2.2 in \cite{Alf:ReprTh} where the result first appeared for
compact-finite topological measures.
Suppose that $\mu$ is a set function satisfying \ref{TM2}, \ref{TM3} as well as
conditions \ref{usl1} and \ref{usl2}. We need to show that $\mu$ satisfies \ref{TM1}.
$X$ is completely regular, so it is evident from
\ref{usl1} and \ref{TM3} that $\mu$ is finitely additive on $\calO(X)$ and on $\kx$. Hence, we only
need to check \ref{TM1} in the situation when $ A \in \kx, \ B \in \calO(X)$, and $ A \sqcup B$ is either
compact or open. If $ A \sqcup B$ is open then using condition \ref{usl2} we get:
$$ \mu(A \sqcup B) = \mu((A \sqcup B) \setminus A) + \mu(A) = \mu(B) + \mu(A) .$$
Now suppose $A \sqcup B \in \kx$. Note that \ref{TM3} implies monotonicity of $\mu$ on $\kx$.
Let $ C \in \kx, \ C \subseteq B$. Then finite additivity and monotonicity of $\mu$ on $\kx$ gives:
$$ \mu(A) + \mu(C) = \mu(A \sqcup C) \le \mu(A \sqcup B).$$
By \ref{TM2}
$$ \mu(A) + \mu(B) \le \mu(A \sqcup B).$$
Now we will show the opposite inequality. It is obvious if $\mu(A) = \infty$, so let $\mu(A) < \infty$, and
for $ \epsilon >0$ pick $ U \in \calO(X)$ such that
$A \subseteq U$ and $\mu(U) < \mu(A) + \epsilon$. Then compact set $A \sqcup B$ is contained in
the open set $B \cup U$. Also, the compact set $ (A \sqcup B) \setminus U = B \setminus U$ is contained in
$ B \cup U$, and $ (B \cup U) \setminus (B \setminus U) = U$. Applying \ref{TM2} and then condition
\ref{usl2} we see that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mu(A \sqcup B) &\le& \mu(B \cup U) = \mu((B \cup U) \setminus (B\setminus U)) + \mu(B \setminus U) \\
&=& \mu(U) + \mu(B \setminus U) \le \mu(U) + \mu(B) \\
&\le& \mu(A) + \mu(B) + \epsilon
\end{eqnarray*}
Thus,
$$ \mu(A \sqcup B) \le \mu(A) + \mu(B) .$$
This finishes the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{dualwrong}
The condition \ref{usl2} of Proposition \ref{PrFinAddLC},
$ \mu(U) = \mu(K) + \mu(U \setminus K) $
for $U$ open and $K$ compact, is a very useful one.
Of course, any topological measure satisfies this condition. It is interesting to note that a
similar condition regarding a bounded open subset of a closed set fails for topological measures, i.e.
\[ \mu(F) = \mu(U) + \mu(F \setminus U) \]
where $F$ is closed and $U$ is open bounded,
in general is not true, as Example \ref{linetm} below shows.
\end{remark}
\section{Solid set functions} \label{SSF}
Our goal now is to extend a set function defined on a smaller collection of subsets of $X$ than
$\calO(X) \cup \calC(X)$ to a topological measure on $X$. One such convenient collection is the collection of solid
bounded open and solid compact sets, and the corresponding set function is a solid set function.
\begin{definition} \label{DeSSFLC}
A function $ \lambda: \calA_{s}^{*}(X) \rightarrow [0, \infty) $ is a solid set function on $X$ if
\begin{enumerate}[label=(s\arabic*),ref=(s\arabic*)]
\item \label{superadd}
whenever $\bigsqcup\limits_{i=1}^n C_i \subseteq C, \ \ C, C_i \in \calK_{s}(X)$, we have
$ \sum\limits_{i=1}^n \lambda(C_i) \le \lambda(C)$;
\item \label{regul}
$ \lambda(U) = \sup \{ \lambda(K): \ K \subseteq U , \ K \in \calK_{s}(X) \}$ for $U \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$;
\item \label{regulo}
$ \lambda(K) = \inf \{ \lambda(U) : \ K \subseteq U, \ U \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X) \}$ for $ K \in \calK_{s}(X)$;
\item \label{solidparti}
if $A = \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n A_i, \ \ A , A_i \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$ then
$ \lambda(A) = \sum\limits_{i=1}^n \lambda (A_i)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma} \label{PrPropSsfLC}
Let $X$ be locally compact, connected, locally connected.
Suppose $\lambda$ is a solid set function on $X$. Then
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)]
$\lambda(\O) = 0$
\item[(ii)]
if $ \bigsqcup_{s \in S} A_s \subseteq A, $ where $A_s, A \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$, then
$\sum_{s \in S } \lambda(A_s)\le \lambda(A)$
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
From Definition \ref{DeSSFLC} we see that $\lambda(\O) = 0$.
Now let $ \bigsqcup_{s \in S} A_s \subseteq A, $ where $A_s, A \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$. Since
$\sum_{s \in S } \lambda(A_s) =
\sup \{ \sum_{s \in S'} \lambda(A_s) : \ S' \subseteq S, \ S' \mbox{ is finite } \}$,
it is enough to assume that $S$ is finite. By regularity
in Definition \ref{DeSSFLC} we may take all sets $A_s$ to be disjoint compact solid.
If also $A \in \calK_{s}(X)$, the assertion is just part \ref{superadd} of Definition \ref{DeSSFLC}.
If $A \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$ then there exists $ C \in \calK_{s}(X)$ such that $\bigsqcup_{s \in S } A_s \subseteq C \subseteq A$ by
Lemma \ref{LeCsInside}.
Now the assertion follows
from parts \ref{superadd} and \ref{regul} of Definition \ref{DeSSFLC}.
\end{proof}
\section{Extension to $\calA_{ss}^{*}(X) \cup \calK_{c}(X)$} \label{ExtBssKc}
We start with a solid set function $ \lambda: \calA_{s}^{*}(X) \rightarrow [0, \infty)$
on a locally compact, connected, locally connected space $X$.
Our goal is to extend
$\lambda$ to a topological measure on $X$. We shall do this in steps, each time extending
the current set function to a new set function defined on a larger collection of sets.
\begin{definition} \label{la1LC}
Let $X$ be locally compact, connected, locally connected.
For $A \in\calA_{ss}^{*}(X) \cup \calK_{c}(X)$ define
$$ \lambda_1(A) = \lambda(\tilde{A}) - \sum_{i \in I} \lambda(B_i),$$
where $\{ B_i : \ i \in I\} $ is the family of bounded components of $X \setminus A$.
\end{definition}
By Lemma \ref{SolidCompoLC} each $B_i \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$.
If $A \in\calA_{ss}^{*}(X) \cup \calK_{c}(X)$
then $\bigsqcup_{i \in I} B_i \subseteq \tilde A$ and by
Lemma \ref{PrPropSsfLC}
$$\sum_{i \in I} \lambda(B_i) \le \lambda(\tilde A).$$
\begin{lemma} \label{Prla1LC}
The set function $\lambda_1: \calA_{ss}^{*}(X) \cup \calK_{c}(X) \rightarrow [0, \infty) $ defined in
Definition \ref{la1LC} satisfies the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*),ref=(\roman*)]
\item \label{pa1}
$\lambda_1$ is real-valued and $\lambda_1 = \lambda$ on $\calA_{s}^{*}(X).$
\item
Suppose $\bigsqcup_{i=1}^n A_i \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S} B_s \subseteq A$, where
$A, A_i \in \calA_{ss}^{*}(X) \cup \calK_{c}(X)$ and $B_s \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$. Then
$$ \sum_{i=1}^n \lambda_1(A_i) + \sum_{s \in S} \lambda_1(B_s) \le \lambda_1(A).$$
In particular, if $\bigsqcup_{i=1}^n C_i \subseteq C$ where $C_i, C \in \calK_{c}(X)$ then
$$ \sum_{i=1}^n \lambda_1(C_i) \le \lambda_1(C)$$
and if $A \subseteq B, \ A,B \in \calA_{ss}^{*}(X) \cup \calK_{c}(X) $ then
$$\lambda_1(A) \le \lambda_1(B).$$
\item
Suppose that $\bigsqcup_{i=1}^n A_i \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S} B_s = A$, where
$A, A_i \in \calA_{ss}^{*}(X) \cup \calK_{c}(X)$ and $B_s \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$ with at most finitely many of $B_s \in \calK_{s}(X)$.
Then
$$ \sum_{i=1}^n \lambda_1(A_i) + \sum_{s \in S} \lambda_1(B_s) = \lambda_1(A).$$
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}[label=(\roman*),ref=(\roman*)]
\item
Obvious from Lemma \ref{PrSolidHuLC}, Definition \ref{la1LC}, and Lemma \ref{PrPropSsfLC}.
\item
Suppose that $\bigsqcup_{i=1}^n A_i \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S} B_s \subseteq A$, where
$A, A_i \in \calA_{ss}^{*}(X) \cup \calK_{c}(X)$ and $B_s \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$.
We may assume that $A \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$, since the inequality
\begin{eqnarray} \label{number1}
\sum_{i=1}^n \lambda_1(A_i) + \sum_{s \in S} \lambda_1(B_s) \le \lambda_1(A)
\end{eqnarray}
is equivalent to
\begin{eqnarray} \label{number2}
\sum_{i=1}^n \lambda_1(A_i) + \sum_{s \in S} \lambda_1(B_s) +
\sum_{t \in T} \lambda_1 (D_t) \le \lambda_1(\tilde{A}),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\{D_t: \ t \in T \}$ is the disjoint family of bounded components of $X \setminus A$, and
by Lemma \ref{SolidCompoLC} each $D_t \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$.
The proof is by induction on $n$.
For $n=0$ the statement is Lemma \ref{PrPropSsfLC}.
Suppose now $n \ge 1$ and assume the result is true for any disjoint collection
(contained in a bounded solid set) of bounded semi-solid or compact connected sets among which
there are less than $n$ non-solid sets. Assume now that we have $n$ disjoint sets
$A_1, \ldots, A_n$ from the collection
$\calA_{ss}^{*}(X) \cup \calK_{c}(X)$.
Consider a partial order on
$\{ A_1, A_2, \ldots, A_n \}$ where $A_i \le A_j$ iff $\tilde{A_i} \subseteq \tilde{A_j}$.
(See Lemma \ref{PrSolidHuLC}.)
Let $ A_1, \ldots, A_p$ where $ p \le n$ be maximal elements in $\{ A_1, A_2, \ldots A_n \}$
with respect to this partial order.
For a maximal element $A_k, k \in \{ 1, \ldots, p\}$
define the following index sets:
$$ I_k = \{ i \in \{ p+1, \ldots, n\}: \, A_i \mbox{ is contained in a bounded component of }
X\setminus A_k \}, $$
$$ S_k = \{ s \in S : \ B_s \mbox{ is contained in a bounded component of }
X\setminus A_k \}. $$
Let $\{ E_{\alpha} \}_{\alpha \in H} $ be the disjoint family of bounded components
of $X \setminus A_k$. Then we may say that
$$ I_k = \bigsqcup_{\alpha \in H} I_{k,\alpha}, \
S_k = \bigsqcup_{\alpha \in H} S_{k,\alpha} $$
where
$$ I_{k, \alpha} = \{ i \in \{ p+1, \ldots, n\} : \ A_i \subseteq E_\alpha \}, $$
$$ S_{k, \alpha} = \{ s \in S : \ B_s \subseteq E_\alpha \}. $$
The set $I_k$ and each set $I_{k, \alpha}$ has cardinality $< n$.
The set $E_\alpha$ is a solid set according to Lemma \ref{SolidCompoLC}, and
\begin{eqnarray} \label{zv1}
\bigsqcup_{i \in I_{k, \alpha}} A_i \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S_{k, \alpha}} B_s \subseteq E_\alpha.
\end{eqnarray}
By induction hypothesis
$$ \sum_{i \in I_{k, \alpha}} \lambda_1(A_i) +
\sum_{s \in S_{k, \alpha}} \lambda_1(B_s) \le \lambda_1(E_\alpha). $$
It follows that
\begin{align*}
\sum_{i \in I_k} \lambda_1(A_i) + \sum_{s \in S_k} \lambda_1(B_s)
&= \sum_{\alpha \in H}\left( \sum_{i \in I_{k, \alpha}} \lambda_1(A_i) +
\sum_{s \in S_{k, \alpha}} \lambda_1(B_s) \right) \\
&\le \sum_{\alpha \in H} \lambda_1 (E_\alpha).
\end{align*}
Then using part \ref{pa1} and Definition \ref{la1LC} we have:
\begin{align} \label{Aktilde}
\lambda_1 (A_k) + \sum_{i \in I_k} \lambda_1(A_i) + \sum_{s \in S_k} \lambda_1(B_s)
\le \lambda_1 (A_k) +\sum_{\alpha \in H} \lambda_1 (E_\alpha) = \lambda_1(\tilde{A_k}).
\end{align}
Notice that $\tilde{A_1}, \ldots, \tilde{A_p}$,
being the maximal elements, are all disjoint by part \ref{part5} of Lemma \ref{PrSolidHuLC}.
This also implies that the sets $I_k, \ k=1, \ldots, p$ are disjoint
(otherwise, if $ i \in I_k$ and also $ i \in I_m, \ 1\le k, m \le p$
then $\tilde{A_k} \cap \tilde{A_m} \ne \O$).
Similarly, the sets $S_k, \ k=1, \ldots, p$ are also disjoint.
Consider the index set $$ S' = S \setminus \bigsqcup_{k=1}^p S_k.$$
Note that $ \{1, \ldots, n\} = \{1, \ldots, p\} \sqcup \bigsqcup_{k=1}^p I_k $.
Indeed, if $i \in \{1, \ldots, n\} \setminus \{ 1, \ldots, p\}$ we must have $ A_i \subseteq \tilde A_i \subseteq \tilde A_k$
for some maximal element $A_k$ (where $ k \in \{1, \ldots, p\}$), and since $A_i$ and $A_k$ are
disjoint, $A_i$ must be contained in a bounded component of $A_k$, i.e. $ i \in I_k$.
Now we have:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sum_{i=1}^n \lambda_1(A_i) &+& \sum_{s \in S} \lambda(B_s) \\
&=& \sum_{k=1}^p \left( \lambda_1(A_k) + \sum_{i \in I_k} \lambda_1(A_i) +
\sum_{s \in S_k} \lambda(B_s) \right) + \sum_{s \in S'} \lambda(B_s) \\
&\le& \sum_{k=1}^p \lambda(\tilde{A_k}) + \sum_{s \in S'} \lambda(B_s) \\
&\le& \lambda(\tilde{A})
\end{eqnarray*}
The first inequality is by formula (\ref{Aktilde}), and
for the last inequality we applied Lemma \ref{PrPropSsfLC}, since
$ \{\tilde{A_k}\}_{k=1}^p \bigsqcup \{B_s\}_{ s \in S'}$ is
a collection of disjoint solid sets contained in the solid set $A$.
\item
The proof is almost identical to the proof of the previous part, and we keep the same
notations. Again, we may assume that $A \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$,
since the inequalities (\ref{number1}) and (\ref{number2}) become equalities.
The proof is by induction on $n$, and the case $n=0$ is given by
Lemma \ref{finiteSP} and part \ref{solidparti} of
Definition \ref{DeSSFLC}. The inequalities in the induction step become equalities
once one observes that (\ref{zv1}) above becomes
$\bigsqcup_{i \in I_{k, \alpha}} A_i \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S_{k , \alpha}} B_s =E_{\alpha}$
(note that $\tilde A_k \subseteq A$, so $E_{\alpha} \subseteq A$).
Since $\bigsqcup_{k=1}^p \tilde{A_k} \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S'} B_s = A$,
the last inequality in the proof of the previous part becomes an equality
by Lemma \ref{finiteSP} and part \ref{solidparti} of
Definition \ref{DeSSFLC}.
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\section{Extension to $\calK_{0}(X)$} \label{BCOX}
Our goal now is to extend the set function $\lambda_1$ to a set function $\lambda_2$
defined on $\calK_{0}(X).$ Recall that $ K \in \calK_{0}(X)$ if $ K = \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n K_i$ where $ n \in \N$ and
$K_i \in \calK_{c}(X)$ for $ i=1, \ldots, n.$
\begin{definition} \label{la2LC}
For $K = \bigsqcup\limits_{i=1}^n K_i,$ where $ K_i \in \calK_{c}(X)$, let
$$ \lambda_2(K ) = \sum_{i=1}^n \lambda_1(K_i). $$
\end{definition}
\begin{lemma} \label{Lela2LC}
The set function $\lambda_2$ from Definition \ref{la2LC} satisfies the following properties:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)]
$\lambda_2$ is real-valued, $\lambda_2 = \lambda_1 $ on $\calK_{c}(X)$ and $\lambda_2 = \lambda$ on $ \calK_{s}(X)$.
\item[(ii)]
$\lambda_2$ is finitely additive on $\calK_{0}(X)$
\item[(iii)]
$\lambda_2$ is monotone on $\calK_{0}(X).$
\end{itemize}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The first part easily follows from the definition of $\lambda_2$ and
Lemma \ref{Prla1LC}. The second part is obvious. To prove the third one,
let $ C \subseteq K, $ where
$C, \ K \in \calK_{0}(X)$. Write $ C= \bigsqcup\limits_{i=1}^n C_i, \ K = \bigsqcup\limits_{j=1}^m K_j,$ where
the sets $C_i (i=1, \ldots, n)$ and $ K_j (j =1, \ldots, m)$ are compact connected.
By connectivity, each $C_i$ is contained in one of the sets $K_j.$ Consider index sets
$ I_j = \{ i : \ C_i \subseteq K_j \} $
for each $ j = 1, \ldots, m.$ By Lemma \ref{Prla1LC} we have
$\sum_{i \in I_j} \lambda_1(C_i) \le \lambda_1(K_j).$
Then
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lambda_2(C) & = & \sum_{i=1}^n \lambda_1(C_i) =
\sum_{j=1}^m \sum_{i \in I_j} \lambda_1(C_i)
\le \sum_{j=1}^m \lambda_1 (K_j) = \lambda_2 (K)
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{proof}
\section{Extension to $\calO(X) \cup \calC(X)$} \label{ExttoTM}
We are now ready to extend the set function $\lambda_2$ to a set function $\mu$
defined on $\calO(X) \cup \calC(X).$
\begin{definition} \label{muLC}
For an open set $U$ define
$$ \mu(U) = \sup\{ \lambda_2(K) : \ K \subseteq U , \ K \in \calK_{0}(X) \}, $$
and for a closed set $F$ let
$$ \mu(F) = \inf \{ \mu(U): \ F \subseteq U, \ U \in \calO(X) \}.$$
\end{definition}
Note that $ \mu$ may assume $ \infty$.
\begin{lemma} \label{PropMuLC}
The set function $\mu$ in Definition \ref{muLC} satisfies the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}[label=(p\arabic*),ref=(p\arabic*)]
\item \label{monotoneLC}
$\mu$ is monotone, i.e. if $A \subseteq B, \, A,B \in \calO(X) \cup \calC(X)$ then $ \mu(A) \le \mu(B)$.
\item \label{finiteness}
$\mu(A) < \infty$ for each $ A \in \calA^{*}(X)$, so $ \mu$ is compact-finite.
\item \label{ineqla2}
$\mu \ge \lambda_2$ on $\calK_{0}(X).$
\item \label{CoAppr}
Let $ K \subseteq V, K \in \kx, \ V \in \calO(X)$. Then for any positive $\epsilon$ there exists $ K_1 \in \calK_{0}(X)$
such that
$ K \subseteq K_1 \subseteq V$ and $ \mu(K_1) - \mu(K) < \epsilon.$
\item \label{extla2}
$\mu = \lambda$ on $ \calA_{s}^{*}(X).$
\item\label{OpenFinAddLC}
$ \mu$ is finitely additive on open sets.
\item\label{CloFinAddLC}
If $G = F \sqcup K$, where $G, F \in \calC(X), \ K \in \calK(X)$ then $\mu(G) = \mu(F) + \mu(K).$ In particular,
$\mu$ is finitely additive on compact sets.
\item \label{AddBox}
$\mu$ is additive on $\calO(X)$, i.e.
if $V = \bigsqcup\limits_{i \in I} V_i$, where $ V, \ V_i \in \calO(X)$ for all $ i \in I$, then
$\mu(V) = \sum\limits_{i \in I} \mu(V_i). $
\item \label{superaddF}
If $G \sqcup V = F$ where $ G, F \in \calC(X), \ V \in \calO(X)$ then $ \mu(G) + \mu(V) \le \mu(F).$
\item \label{superaddU}
If $G \sqcup V \subseteq U$ where $ G \in \calC(X), \ V,U \in \calO(X)$ then $ \mu(G) + \mu(V) \le \mu(U).$
\item \label{mula1}
$\mu = \lambda_1$ on $\calK_{c}(X)$ and $\mu = \lambda_2$ on $\calK_{0}(X)$.
\item \label{regularityLC}
$\mu(U) = \sup\{\mu(C): \ C \subseteq U , \ C \in \kx \} , \ \ \ U \in \calO(X).$
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\begin{enumerate}[label=(p\arabic*)]
\item
It is obvious that $\mu$ is monotone on open sets and on closed sets.
Let $ V \in \calO(X), F \in \calC(X)$. The monotonicity in the case $ F \subseteq V$ is obvious.
Suppose $ V \subseteq F$. For any open set $U $ with $ F \subseteq U$ we have $V \subseteq U$, so $ \mu(V) \le \mu(U)$,
Then taking infimum over sets $U$ we obtain $ \mu(V) \le \mu(F)$.
\item
Let $K \in \calK(X)$. By Lemma \ref{LeConLC} choose $V \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X)$ and $C \in \calK_{c}(X)$ such that
$ K \subseteq V \subseteq C \subseteq U$. For any $D \in \calK_{0}(X), D \subseteq V$ by Lemma \ref{Lela2LC} we have $\lambda_2(D) \le \lambda_2(C)$, and
$\lambda_2(C) < \infty$.
By Definition \ref{muLC} $\mu(V) \le \lambda_2(C)$, and then $ \mu(K) \le \mu(V) \le \lambda_2(C) < \infty$.
Thus, $ \mu$ is compact-finite.
If $U$ is an open bounded set then $ \mu(U) \le \mu(\overline{U}) < \infty$.
\item
Let $K \in \calK_{0}(X).$ For any open set $U$ containing $K$ we have
$\mu(U) \ge \lambda_2(K)$ by the definition of $\mu$. Then,
again from the definition of $\mu$, $\mu(K) \ge \lambda_2(K).$
\item
$\mu(K) < \infty$, so by Definition \ref{muLC} find $U \in \calO(X)$ such that $ U \subseteq V, \, \mu(U) - \mu(K) < \epsilon$.
Let $U_1, \ldots, U_n$ be
finitely many connected components of $U$ that cover $K$.
By Lemma \ref{LeConLC}
pick $V_i \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X)$ such that
$K \cap U_i \subseteq V_i \subseteq \overline{ V_i} \subseteq U_i$ for $ i =1, \ldots, n$. We may take
$K_1 = \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n \overline{ V_i}$, for $ K_1 \subseteq V$ and
$$ \mu(K_1) - \mu(K) < \mu(\bigsqcup_{i=1}^n U_i) - \mu(K) \le \mu(U) - \mu(K) < \epsilon .$$
\item
First we shall show that $\mu= \lambda$ on $\calO_{s}^{*}(X)$. Let $U \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$, so by part \ref{finiteness} $ \mu(U) < \infty$.
By Definition \ref{muLC}, given $\epsilon > 0$, choose $K \in \calK_{0}(X)$ such that
$K \subseteq U$ and $ \mu(U) -\epsilon < \lambda_2(K)$.
By Lemma \ref{LeCsInside} there exists $ C \in \calK_{s}(X)$ such that $ K \subseteq C \subseteq U$.
Now using Lemma \ref{Lela2LC} and Definition \ref{DeSSFLC} we have:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mu(U) - \epsilon &<& \lambda_2(K) \le \lambda_2(C) \\
&\le& \sup \{ \lambda_2(C) : \ \ C \subseteq U, \ C \in \calK_{s}(X)\} \\
&=& \sup \{ \lambda(C) : \ \ C \subseteq U, \ C \in \calK_{s}(X)\} = \lambda(U).
\end{eqnarray*}
Hence, $\mu(U) \le \lambda(U)$.
For the opposite inequality, observe that by Lemma \ref{Lela2LC} $\lambda = \lambda_2$ on $\calK_{s}(X)$, so
by Definition \ref{DeSSFLC}
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lambda(U) &=& \sup\{ \lambda(C): \ C \subseteq U, C \in \calK_{s}(X) \} \\
&=& \sup\{ \lambda_2 (C): \ C \subseteq U, C \in \calK_{s}(X) \} \\
&\le& \sup\{ \lambda_2 (C): \ C \subseteq U, C \in \calK_{0}(X) \} = \mu(U).
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, $\mu(U) = \lambda(U)$ for any $ U \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$.
Now we shall show that $\mu = \lambda$ on $\calK_{s}(X)$. From part \ref{ineqla2} above and Lemma \ref{Lela2LC}
we have $\mu \ge \lambda_2 = \lambda$ on $\calK_{s}(X)$.
Since $\mu = \lambda$ on $\calO_{s}^{*}(X)$, for $C \in \calK_{s}(X)$ we have by Definition \ref{DeSSFLC} and
Defintion \ref{muLC}:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\lambda(C) &=& \inf \{ \lambda(U): \ \ U \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X), \ C \subseteq U \} \\
&=& \inf \{ \mu(U): \ \ U \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X), \ C \subseteq U \} \\
&\ge& \inf \{ \mu(U): \ \ U \in \calO(X) , \ C \subseteq U \} = \mu(C)
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, $\mu = \lambda $ on $\calK_{s}(X)$.
\item
Let $U_1 , U_2 \in \calO(X)$ be disjoint. For any $C_i, C_2 \in \calK_{0}(X)$
with $ C_i \subseteq U_i, \ i=1,2$ we have by Lemma \ref{Lela2LC} and Definition \ref{muLC}
$$ \lambda_2(C_1) + \lambda_2(C_2) = \lambda_2(C_1 \sqcup C_2) \le \mu(U_1 \sqcup U_2).$$
Then by Definition \ref{muLC} we obtain
$$ \mu(U_1) + \mu(U_2) \le \mu(U_1 \sqcup U_2).$$
For the converse inequality, note that given $ C \subseteq U_1 \sqcup U_2, \ C \in \calK_{0}(X)$ we
have $C_i = C \cap U_i \in \calK_{0}(X), \ i =1,2$ (since each connected component of $C$ must be
contained either in $U_1$ or in $U_2$) and $C = C_1 \sqcup C_2$. Then
$$ \lambda_2(C) = \lambda_2(C_1) + \lambda_2(C_2) \le \mu(U_1) + \mu(U_2),$$
giving
$$ \mu(U_1 \sqcup U_2) \le \mu(U_1) + \mu(U_2).$$
\item
Let $C_1, C_2$ be a compact and a closed set that are disjoint.
Given $ U \in \calO(X), \ C_1 \sqcup C_2 \subseteq U$ we may find disjoint open sets $U_1, U_2$ such that
$$ U_1 \sqcup U_2 \subseteq U, \ \ \ C_i \subseteq U_i, \ \ i=1,2.$$
Then by parts \ref{OpenFinAddLC} and \ref{monotoneLC}
$$ \mu(C_1) + \mu(C_2) \le \mu(U_1) + \mu(U_2) = \mu(U_1 \sqcup U_2) \le \mu(U), $$
so using Definition \ref{muLC} we have
$$ \mu(C_1) + \mu(C_2) \le \mu(C_1 \sqcup C_2).$$
For the converse inequality, observe that for any $U_1, U_2 \in \calO(X)$ such that
$C_i \subseteq U_i, \ i=1,2$ one may find disjoint open sets $V_1, V_2$ with
$C_i \subseteq V_i \subseteq U_i, \ i=1,2$.
Then by parts \ref{OpenFinAddLC} and \ref{monotoneLC}
$$ \mu(C_1 \sqcup C_2) \le \mu(V_1 \sqcup V_2) = \mu(V_1) + \mu(V_2) \le \mu(U_1) + \mu(U_2),
$$
which gives by Definition \ref{muLC}
$$ \mu(C_1 \sqcup C_2) \le \mu(C_1) + \mu(C_2).$$
\item
Let $ V = \bigsqcup\limits_{i \in I} V_i$ with $V, V_i \in \calO(X)(X)$ for all $ i \in I$.
By parts \ref{OpenFinAddLC} and \ref{monotoneLC}
for any finite $I' \subseteq I$
$$ \sum_{i \in I'} \mu(V_i) = \mu(\bigsqcup_{i \in I'} V_i) \le \mu(V). $$
Then $\sum_{i \in I} \mu(V_i) \le \mu(V).$
To prove the opposite inequality, first assume that $ \mu(V) < \infty$.
For $\epsilon >0 $ find a compact $C \in \calK_{0}(X)$ contained in $V$
such that $ \mu(V) - \epsilon < \lambda_2(C).$ By compactness, $ C \subseteq \bigsqcup\limits_{i \in I'} V_i$
for some finite subset $I'$ of $I$.
Then $C = \bigsqcup\limits_{i \in I'} C_i$ where
$C_i = C \cap V_i \subseteq V_i$, and $C_i \in \calK_{0}(X)$ for each $i \in I'.$
By Lemma \ref{Lela2LC} and part \ref{ineqla2} we have:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mu(V)-\epsilon &<& \lambda_2(C) = \lambda_2(\bigsqcup_{i \in I'} C_i) = \sum_{i \in I'} \lambda_2(C_i) \le \sum_{i \in I'} \mu(C_i) \\
& \le & \sum_{i \in I'} \mu(V_i) \le \sum_{i \in I} \mu(V_i)
\end{eqnarray*}
Therefore, $\mu(V) \le \sum\limits_{i \in I} \mu(V_i)$.
This shows that $\mu(V) = \sum\limits_{i \in I} \mu(V_i)$ when $ \mu(V) < \infty$.
Now suppose $ \mu(V) = \infty$. For $ n \in \N$ find a compact $ K \subseteq V$ such that $ \mu(K) > n$.
Choose a finite index set $I_n \subseteq I$ such that $ K \subseteq \sqcup_{i \in I_n} V_i$. Then
$$ \sum_{i \in I} \mu(V_i) \ge \sum_{i \in I_n} \mu(V_i) = \mu (\bigsqcup_{i \in I_n} V_i) \ge \mu(K) > n.$$
It follows that $ \sum_{i \in I} \mu(V_i) = \infty = \mu(V)$.
\item
It is enough to show the statement for the case $ \mu(F) < \infty$.
If $K \subseteq V, \ K \in \calK_{0}(X)$ then $ G \sqcup K \subseteq F$. By parts \ref{ineqla2}, \ref{CloFinAddLC} and
\ref{monotoneLC} $\ \mu(G) + \lambda_2(K) \le \mu(G) + \mu(K) \le \mu(F)$.
Then $ \mu(G) + \mu(V) \le \mu(F)$.
\item
It is enough to show the statement for the case $ \mu(U) < \infty$.
If $K \subseteq V, \ K \in \calK_{0}(X)$ then $F= G \sqcup K \subseteq U$. By parts \ref{ineqla2}, \ref{CloFinAddLC},
and Definition \ref{muLC} $\mu(G) + \lambda_2(K) \le \mu(G) + \mu(K) = \mu(F) \le \mu(U)$.
Then $ \mu(G) + \mu(V) \le \mu(U)$.
\item
Let $C \in \calK_{c}(X)$. According to Lemma \ref{SolidCompoLC} and
Definition \ref{solid hull} write $\tilde C \in \calK_{s}(X)$ as
$ \tilde C = C \sqcup \bigsqcup_{i \in I} U_i$
where $U_i \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$ are the bounded components of $X \setminus C$.
Given $\epsilon>0$ choose by Definition \ref{DeSSFLC} $V \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$ such that
$\tilde C \subseteq V$ and $ \lambda(V) -\lambda(\tilde C) < \epsilon$.
By parts \ref{AddBox}, \ref{superaddF}, and \ref{monotoneLC}
$$ \mu(C) + \sum_{i\in I} \mu(U_i) = \mu(C) + \mu (\bigsqcup_{i\in I} (U_i)) \le \mu(\tilde C) \le \mu(V).$$
Then using part \ref{extla2} and Definition \ref{la1LC} we have:
\begin{align*}
\mu(C) &\le \mu(V) - \sum_{i \in I} \mu(U_i) = \lambda(V) - \sum_{i\in I} \lambda(U_i) \\
&\le \lambda(\tilde C) - \sum_{i\in I} \lambda(U_i) + \epsilon = \lambda_1(C) + \epsilon
\end{align*}
Thus, $\mu(C) \le \lambda_1(C)$. By part \ref{ineqla2} and Lemma \ref{Lela2LC}
$\mu(C) \ge \lambda_2(C) =\lambda_1(C)$. So $\mu =\lambda_1$ on $\calK_{c}(X)$. From part \ref{CloFinAddLC}
and Definition \ref{la2LC} we have $\mu = \lambda_2$ on $\calK_{0}(X)$.
\item
Using part \ref{ineqla2}
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mu(U) &=& \sup \{\lambda_2(C) : C \subseteq U , \ C \in \calK_{0}(X) \} \\
&\le& \sup \{\mu(C) : C \subseteq U , \ C \in \calK_{0}(X) \} \\
&\le& \sup \{\mu(C) : C \subseteq U , \ C \in \kx \}
\end{eqnarray*}
For the converse inequality, given $ C \subseteq U, \ U \in \calO(X), \ C \in \kx$ choose
by Lemma \ref{LeCCoU} $K \in \calK_{0}(X)$ with $ C \subseteq K \subseteq U$.
Then by parts \ref{monotoneLC} and \ref{mula1} $\mu(C) \le \mu(K) = \lambda_2(K)$, so
\begin{eqnarray*}
\sup \{\mu(C) : C \subseteq U , \ C \in \kx \} &\le& \sup \{\lambda_2(K) : K \subseteq U , \ K \in \calK_{0}(X) \} \\
&=& \mu(U).
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{enumerate}
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}\label{BigLemmaLC}
For the set function $\mu$ in Definition \ref{muLC}
$$ \mu(U) = \mu(K) + \mu(U \setminus K) $$
whenever $ K \subseteq U, \ K \in \kx, \ U \in \calO(X)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We shall prove the statement in steps.
Recall that $\mu = \lambda_1$ on $\calK_{c}(X)$ and $ \mu = \lambda_2$ on $\calK_{0}(X)$
by part \ref{mula1} of Lemma \ref{PropMuLC}. \\
STEP 1. We shall show that
$\mu(U) = \mu(C) + \mu(U \setminus C) $ whenever
$C \subseteq U, \ U \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X), \ C = C_1 \sqcup \ldots \sqcup C_n, \ C_j \in \calK_{s}(X).$ \\
Let $C = C_1 \sqcup C_2 \sqcup \ldots \sqcup C_n$, where each $C_j \in \calK_{s}(X)$.
The proof is by induction on $n$. Suppose $n=1$, i.e. $C \in \calK_{s}(X)$.
By Lemma \ref{LeDecompV}
\begin{eqnarray}
U = C \sqcup \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n U_i
\end{eqnarray}
where each $U_i \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X)$.
By Lemma \ref{Prla1LC}
$$ \mu(U) = \mu(C) + \sum_{i=1}^n \mu (U_i). $$
Then
$$ \mu(U) - \mu(C) = \sum_{i=1} ^n \mu (U_i) = \mu( U \setminus C), $$
where the last equality follows from additivity of $\mu$ on $\calO(X) $ in
Lemma \ref{PropMuLC}.
Suppose that result holds for all $ C \subseteq U, \ U \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X)$ where
$C$ is the disjoint union of less than $n$ sets $C_j \in \calK_{s}(X)$.
Now let $C = C_1 \sqcup C_2 \sqcup \ldots \sqcup C_n$, where each $C_j \in \calK_{s}(X)$.
By Lemma \ref{LeDecompV}
\begin{eqnarray} \label{UCS1}
U \setminus C_1 = \bigsqcup_{i=1}^m U_i
\end{eqnarray}
where each $U_i \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X)$.
By connectivity each $C_j, \ j=2, \ldots, n$ is contained in one of the sets $U_i$.
For $ i =1, \ldots, m$ let
$K_i$ be the disjoint union of those $C_j, \ j \in \{2, \ldots, n\} $
that are contained in $U_i$. Notice that each $K_i$ is the union of no more than
$n-1$ disjoint sets, and
$\bigsqcup_{i=1}^m K_i = \bigsqcup_{j=2}^n C_j. $
By induction hypothesis,
\begin{align} \label{inductS1}
\mu(U_i) = \mu(U_i \setminus K_i) + \mu(K_i).
\end{align}
By finite additivity of $\mu$ on compact sets
in Lemma \ref{PropMuLC}
\begin{align} \label{unionS1}
\mu(C) = \mu(\bigsqcup_{j=2}^n C_j) + \mu(C_1)
= \mu(\bigsqcup_{i=1}^m K_i) + \mu(C_1) = \sum_{i=1}^m \mu(K_i) + \mu(C_1).
\end{align}
Also we have
\begin{align} \label{UKS1}
U \setminus C = (U \setminus C_1) \setminus \bigsqcup_{j=2}^n C_j = (\bigsqcup_{i=1}^m U_i) \setminus (\bigsqcup_{i=1}^m K_i )
= \bigsqcup_{i=1}^m (U_i \setminus K_i ).
\end{align}
By the first part of the induction proof
$$ \mu(U) = \mu(U \setminus C_1) + \mu (C_1). $$
Using
(\ref{UCS1}), additivity of $\mu$ on $\calO^{*}(X)$ in
Lemma \ref{PropMuLC}, (\ref{inductS1}), (\ref{unionS1}), and (\ref{UKS1})
we obtain:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mu(U) &=& \mu(U \setminus C_1) + \mu(C_1) \\
&=& \mu(\bigsqcup_{i=1}^m U_i) + \mu(C_1) \\
&=& \sum_{i=1}^m \mu(U_i) + \mu(C_1) \\
&=& \sum_{i=1}^m \mu(U_i \setminus K_i) +\sum_{i=1}^m \mu(K_i) + \mu(C_1) \\
&=& \sum_{i=1}^m \mu(U_i \setminus K_i) + \mu(C) \\
&=& \mu(U\setminus C) + \mu(C)
\end{eqnarray*}
STEP 2. We shall show that
$\mu(U) = \mu(C) + \mu(U \setminus C) $ whenever
$C \subseteq U, \ C \in \calK_{0}(X), \ U \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X).$ \\
Let $C = C_1 \sqcup C_2 \sqcup \ldots \sqcup C_n$, where each $C_i \in \calK_{c}(X)$.
The proof is by induction on $n$. Suppose $n=1$, i.e. $C \in \calK_{c}(X)$.
By Lemma \ref{LeDecompU}
$$ U = C \sqcup W \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S} V_s $$
where $V_s \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X), \ W \in \calO_{ss}^{*}(X)$ ($W$ may be empty).
By Lemma \ref{Prla1LC}
$$ \mu(U) = \mu(C) + \sum_{s \in S} \mu (V_s) + \mu(W). $$
Then
\[ \mu(U) - \mu(C) = \sum_{s \in S} \mu (V_s) + \mu(W) = \mu( U \setminus C), \]
where the last equality follows from additivity of $\mu$ on $\calO(X)$ in
Lemma \ref{PropMuLC}.
Suppose that the result holds for all $ C \subseteq U, \ U \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X), \ C \in \calK_{0}(X)$ where
$C$ is the disjoint union of less than $n$ sets $C_i \in \calK_{c}(X)$.
Now assume that $C = C_1 \sqcup \ldots \sqcup C_n, \ C_i \in \calK_{c}(X)$.
As in the proof of Lemma \ref{Prla1LC}, consider partial order on
$\{ C_1, \ldots, C_n \}$ where $C_i \le C_j$ iff $ \tilde C_i \subseteq \tilde C_j$.
Some parts of the argument here are as in the proof
of Lemma \ref{Prla1LC}.
Let $C_1, \ldots, C_p, \ p \le n$ be maximal elements in $\{ C_1, \ldots, C_n \}$
with respect to this partial order. Then $\tilde C_1, \ldots, \tilde C_p$ are disjoint.
This implies that the family
\[ \{W_s: \ s \in S\} = \bigsqcup_{k=1}^p \{ \mbox{ bounded components of }
X \setminus C_k\} \]
is a disjoint family of sets. Each $ W_s \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$
by Lemma \ref{SolidCompoLC} and
$\bigsqcup_{s \in S} W_s \in \calO^{*}(X)$, because $\bigsqcup_{s \in S} W_s \subseteq U$.
Let $I = \{1, \ldots, n\} \setminus \{1, \ldots, p \}$.
For each $ i \in I$ $C_i$ is non-maximal element, and there exists $k \in \{ 1, \ldots, p\}$
such that $ C_i \subseteq \tilde C_k$. In other words,
each non-maximal set $C_i, \ i \in I$ is contained in a bounded component of
$X \setminus C_k$ for some maximal element $C_k$ (for some $ k \in \{1, \ldots, p\}$),
that is $C_i \subseteq W_s$ for some $s \in S$.
Let $S_1$ be a finite subset of $S$ such that for $s \in S_1$
the set $W_s$ contains some $C_i, \ i \in I$. Let $S' = S \setminus S_1$.
For each $s \in S_1$ let $C_s$ be the disjoint union of those sets $C_i, i \in I$
that are contained in $W_s$. Since $|I| \le n-1$, each $C_s$ is the union of no more
than $n-1$ disjoint sets, and by induction hypothesis for each $ s \in S_1$
\begin{align} \label{2sh}
\mu(W_s ) = \mu( W_s \setminus C_s) + \mu(C_s).
\end{align}
Note also that
\begin{align} \label{1sh}
\bigsqcup_{s \in S_1} C_s = \bigsqcup_{i \in I} C_i.
\end{align}
Then using Definition \ref{solid hull} and (\ref{1sh}) we see that:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\tilde C_1 \sqcup \ldots \sqcup \tilde C_p &=& C_1 \sqcup \ldots \sqcup C_p \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S} W_s \\
&=& C_1 \sqcup \ldots \sqcup C_p \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S_1} W_s \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S'} W_s \\
&=& C_1 \sqcup \ldots \sqcup C_p \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S_1} C_s \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S_1} (W_s \setminus C_s)
\sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S'} W_s \\
&=& C_1 \sqcup \ldots \sqcup C_p \sqcup \bigsqcup_{i \in I} C_i \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S_1} (W_s \setminus C_s)
\sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S'} W_s \\
&=& C_1 \sqcup \ldots \sqcup C_n \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S_1} (W_s \setminus C_s)
\sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S'} W_s
\end{eqnarray*}
We write
\begin{eqnarray} \label{CtildeUnion}
\tilde C_1 \sqcup \ldots \sqcup \tilde C_p = C_1 \sqcup \ldots \sqcup C_n \sqcup W = C \sqcup W
\end{eqnarray}
where
$$W = \bigsqcup_{s \in S_1} (W_s \setminus C_s) \sqcup \bigsqcup_{s \in S'} W_s$$
is an open bounded set (since $W \subseteq \bigsqcup_{s \in S} W_s \subseteq U$).
Using Definition \ref{solid hull} and Definition \ref{la1LC},
(\ref{2sh}), (\ref{1sh}), finite additivity of $\mu$ on $\kx$
and additivity of $\mu$ on $\calO(X)$ in Lemma \ref{PropMuLC} we have:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mu(\bigsqcup_{k=1}^p \tilde C_k) &=& \sum_{k=1}^p \mu(C_k) + \sum_{s \in S} \mu(W_s) \\
&=& \sum_{k=1}^p \mu(C_k) + \sum_{s \in S_1} \mu(W_s) + \sum_{s \in S'} \mu(W_s) \\
&=& \sum_{k=1}^p \mu(C_k) + \sum_{s \in S_1} \mu(C_s) +
\sum_{s \in S_1} \mu(W_s \setminus C_s) + \sum_{s \in S'} \mu(W_s) \\
&=& \sum_{k=1}^p \mu(C_k) + \sum_{i \in I} \mu(C_i) +
\sum_{s \in S_1} \mu(W_s \setminus C_s) + \sum_{s \in S'} \mu(W_s) \\
&=& \mu(C_1 \sqcup \ldots \sqcup C_n) + \mu(W) =\mu(C) + \mu(W).
\end{eqnarray*}
The sets $ U \setminus (C \sqcup W) = U \setminus (\tilde C_1 \sqcup \ldots \sqcup \tilde C_p)$ and $W$ are
disjoint open bounded sets whose union is $U \setminus C$.
Now using the result of Step 1, (\ref{CtildeUnion}), just obtained equality
$\mu(\bigsqcup_{k=1}^p \tilde C_k) = \mu(W) + \mu(C)$,
and additivity of $\mu$ on $\calO(X)$ in Lemma \ref{PropMuLC} we have:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mu(U) &=& \mu(U \setminus \bigsqcup_{k=1}^p \tilde C_k) + \mu(\bigsqcup_{k=1}^p \tilde C_k) \\
&=& \mu(U \setminus (C \sqcup W )) + \mu(W) + \mu(C) \\
&=& \mu(U \setminus C) + \mu(C)
\end{eqnarray*}
STEP 3. We shall show that
$\mu(U) = \mu(K) + \mu(U \setminus K) $ whenever $K \subseteq U, \ K \in \kx, \ U \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X).$ \\
Using part \ref{regularityLC} of Lemma \ref{PropMuLC} and Lemma \ref{LeConLC}
choose sets $ W \in \calO_{c}^{*}(X)$ and $ D \in \calK_{c}(X)$ such that
\begin{eqnarray} \label{WD}
K \subseteq W \subseteq D \subseteq U \mbox{ and } \mu(U) - \mu(W) < \epsilon.
\end{eqnarray}
Let $B$ be the union
of bounded components of $ X \setminus U$ and let the open set $V$
be the union of bounded components of $ X \setminus D$. Set
$$C = B \cap V.$$
By Lemma \ref{LeCleverSet}
$C$ is compact and $ U \sqcup C$ is open.
The solid hull $\tilde D= D \sqcup V$.
Then by part \ref{superaddF} of Lemma \ref{PropMuLC}
$\mu(D) + \mu(V) \le \mu(\tilde D)$.
Note that by Lemma \ref{PrSolidHuLC}
$V \subseteq \tilde D \subseteq \tilde U = U \sqcup B$.
Then
$$ V \subseteq U \sqcup (B \cap V) = U \sqcup C. $$
It follows that
$$ K \sqcup C \subseteq D \sqcup V = \tilde D \subseteq U \sqcup C .$$
Since $U \sqcup C$ is open, by Lemma \ref{opensolid} we may find $ W' \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$ such that
\begin{eqnarray} \label{sha}
K \sqcup C \subseteq \tilde D \subseteq W' \subseteq U \sqcup C.
\end{eqnarray}
Then
\begin{eqnarray} \label{W'}
W' \setminus(K \sqcup C) \subseteq U \setminus K.
\end{eqnarray}
According to part \ref{CoAppr} of Lemma \ref{PropMuLC}, pick $K_1 \in \calK_{0}(X)$ such that
\begin{eqnarray} \label{K1}
K \sqcup C \subseteq K_1 \subseteq W' \mbox{ and } \mu(K_1) \le \mu(K \sqcup C) + \epsilon.
\end{eqnarray}
By Step 2, $\mu(W') = \mu(W' \setminus K_1) + \mu(K_1)$.
Now using (\ref{WD}), Definition \ref{la1LC},
(\ref{sha}), (\ref{K1}), (\ref{W'}), additivity on $\calO(X)$ and finite additivity of
$\mu$ on $\kx$ in Lemma \ref{PropMuLC} we have:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mu(U) - \epsilon &<& \mu(W) \le \mu(D)= \mu(\tilde D) - \mu(V) \\
&\le& \mu(\tilde D) - \mu(C) \\
&\le& \mu(W') - \mu(C) \\
&=& \mu(W' \setminus K_1) + \mu(K_1) - \mu(C) \\
&\le& \mu(W' \setminus (K \sqcup C)) + \mu(K \sqcup C) + \epsilon - \mu(C) \\
&\le& \mu(U \setminus K) + \mu(K) + \mu(C) -\mu(C) + \epsilon\\
&=& \mu(U \setminus K) + \mu(K) + \epsilon
\end{eqnarray*}
It follows that $\mu(U) \le \mu(U \setminus K) + \mu(K)$.
The opposite inequality is part \ref{superaddU} of Lemma \ref{PropMuLC}. \\
STEP 4. We shall show that
$\mu(U) = \mu(K) + \mu(U \setminus K) $ whenever $K \subseteq U, \ K \in \kx, \ U \in \calO^{*}(X).$ \\
Let $ U = \bigsqcup_{i \in I} U_i$ be the decomposition of $U$ into connected components, and
let $I'$ be a finite subset of $I$ such that $ K \subseteq \bigsqcup_{i \in I'} U_i$. For each $i \in I'$ the set
$K_i = K \cap U_i = K \setminus \bigsqcup_{j \in I' \setminus {i}} U_j \in \kx$ and
\begin{eqnarray} \label{Bb}
K = \bigsqcup_{i \in I'} K_i.
\end{eqnarray}
By Step 3 we know that
\begin{eqnarray} \label{A}
\mu(K_i) + \mu(U_i \setminus K_i) = \mu(U_i) \ \ \ \ \ \mbox{for each} \ \ i \in I'.
\end{eqnarray}
Then using (\ref{Bb}), finite additivity of $\mu$ on $\kx$ and additivity of $\mu$ on
$\calO(X)$ in Lemma \ref{PropMuLC}, and (\ref{A}) we have:
\begin{eqnarray*}
\mu(K) &+& \mu(U \setminus K) = \mu(\bigsqcup_{i \in I'} K_i) + \mu (U \setminus \bigsqcup_{i \in I'} K_i) \\
&=& \sum_{i \in I'} \mu(K_i) + \sum_{i \in I'} \mu(U_i \setminus K_i) + \sum_{i \in I \setminus I'} \mu(U_i) \\
&=& \sum_{i \in I'} \mu(U_i) + \sum_{i \in I \setminus I'} \mu(U_i) = \sum_{i \in I} \mu(U_i) = \mu(U)
\end{eqnarray*}
STEP 5. We shall show that
$\mu(U) = \mu(K) + \mu(U \setminus K) $ whenever $K \subseteq U, \ K \in \kx, \ U \in \calO(X).$ \\
First assume that $ \mu(U) < \infty$.
Given $\epsilon >0$ by Definition \ref{muLC} find $C \in \kx $ such that $ K \subseteq C$ and $\mu(U) - \mu(C) < \epsilon $.
Using Lemma \ref{easyLeLC} find
$ V \in \calO^{*}(X)$ such that
$$ K \subseteq C \subseteq V \subseteq U.$$
By Step 4 $\ \ \mu(V) = \mu(V \setminus K) + \mu(K)$.
Then using monotonicity of $\mu$ in Lemma \ref{PropMuLC} we see that
\begin{align} \label{muCVK}
\mu(C) \le \mu(V) = \mu(V \setminus K) + \mu(K) \le \mu(U \setminus K) + \mu(K).
\end{align}
Then $ \mu(U) - \epsilon < \mu(C) \le \mu(U \setminus K) + \mu(K)$.
Therefore, $ \mu(U) \le \mu(U \setminus K) + \mu(K)$.
The opposite inequality is part \ref{superaddU} of Lemma \ref{PropMuLC}.
Therefore, if $ \mu(U) < \infty$ then
$$ \mu(U) = \mu(U \setminus K) + \mu(K).$$
Now assume $ \mu(U) = \infty$.
For $n \in \N$ choose $ C \in \calK(X)$ such that $ K \subseteq C$ and $ \mu(C) > n$.
By Lemma \ref{easyLeLC} find $ V \in \calO^{*}(X)$ such that
$$ K \subseteq C \subseteq V \subseteq U.$$
Using again (\ref{muCVK}) we have:
$$ n < \mu(C) \le \mu(V \setminus K) + \mu(K),$$
i.e. $n - \mu(K) \le \mu(V \setminus K) \le \mu(U \setminus K)$.
Since $ \mu(K) \in \R$ by part \ref{finiteness} of Lemma \ref{PropMuLC},
it follows that $ \mu (U \setminus K) = \infty$, and $ \mu(U \setminus K) + \mu(K) = \mu(U)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem} \label{extThLC}
Let $X$ be locally compact, connected, locally connected.
A solid set function on $X$ extends uniquely to a compact-finite topological measure on $X$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Definitions \ref{la1LC}, \ref{la2LC} and \ref{muLC} extend solid set function
$\lambda$ to a set function $\mu$. We would like to show that $\mu$ is a topological measure.
Definition \ref{muLC} and part \ref{regularityLC} of Lemma \ref{PropMuLC}
show that $\mu$ satisfies \ref{TM2} and \ref{TM3} of definition \ref{DeTMLC}.
Proposition \ref{PrFinAddLC}, part \ref{OpenFinAddLC} of Lemma \ref{PropMuLC}, and Lemma \ref{BigLemmaLC}
show that $\mu$ is a topological measure. By part \ref{finiteness} of Lemma \ref{PropMuLC} $\mu$ is compact-finite.
To show that the extension from a solid set function to a topological measure
is unique suppose $\nu$ is a topological measure on $X$ such that $ \mu = \nu = \lambda$ on $ \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$.
If $A \in \calK_{c}(X)$ then by Definition \ref{solid hull} $A = \tilde A \setminus (\bigsqcup_{s \in S} B_s)$, where $ \tilde A, B_s \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$,
so from Definition \ref{la1LC} it follows that $\mu = \nu$ on $ \calK_{c}(X)$, and, hence, on $\calK_{0}(X)$.
From part \ref{CoRegulLC} of Lemma \ref{propTMLC} it then follows that $\mu = \nu$ on $\calO(X)$, so $ \mu = \nu$.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{extsumme}
We will summarize the extension procedure for obtaining a topological measure $\mu$ from a
solid set function $\lambda$ on a locally compact, connected, locally connected space.
First, for a compact connected set $C$ we have:
$$ \mu(C) = \lambda(\tilde C) - \sum_{i=1}^n \lambda(B_i), $$
where $\tilde C$ is the solid hull of $C$ and $B_i$ (open solid sets) are bounded components of $X \setminus C$.
For $C \in \calK_{0}(X)$, i.e. for a compact set which is the
union of finitely many disjoint compact connected sets $C_1, \ldots, C_n$,
we have:
$$ \mu (C) = \sum_{i=1}^n \mu(C_i). $$
For an open set $U$ we have:
$$ \mu(U) = \sup\{ \mu(K) : \ K \subseteq U , \ K \in \calK_{0}(X) \}, $$
and for a closed set $F$ let
$$ \mu(F) = \inf \{ \mu(U): \ F \subseteq U, \ U \in \calO(X) \}.$$
\end{remark}
\begin{theorem} \label{Tpart2}
If a solid set function $\lambda$ is extended to a topological measure $\mu$
then the following holds: if $\lambda: \calA_{s}^{*}(X) \rightarrow \{0,1\}$ then $\mu$ also assumes only
values $0$ and $1$; if
$\sup \{ \lambda(K): \ K \in \calK_{s}(X)\} = M < \infty$ then $\mu$ is finite and $ \mu(X) = M.$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Follows from Remark \ref{extsumme}, part \ref{extla2} of Lemma \ref{PropMuLC}, and part \ref{l8} of Lemma \ref{propTMLC}.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem} \label{ExtUniq}
The restriction $\lambda$ of a compact-finite topological measure $\mu$ to $\calA_{s}^{*}(X)$ is a solid set function, and
$\mu$ is uniquely determined by $\lambda$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $\lambda$ be the restriction of $\mu$ to $ \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$.
Monotonicity of a topological measure (see Lemma \ref{propTMLC}) and \ref{TM1} of Definition \ref{DeTMLC}
show that $\lambda$ satisfies conditions \ref{superadd} and \ref{solidparti}
of Definition \ref{DeSSFLC}.
For $ U \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$ by \ref{TM2} let $ K \in \calK(X)$ be such that $\mu(U) - \mu(K) < \epsilon$ and by Lemma \ref{LeCsInside}
we may assume that $K \in \calK_{s}(X)$.
Part \ref{regul} of Definition \ref{DeSSFLC} follows.
Part \ref{regulo} of Definition \ref{DeSSFLC} follows from \ref{TM3} and Lemma \ref{opensolid}.
Since $\mu$ is compact-finite, $\lambda$ is real-valued. Therefore, $\lambda$ is a solid set function.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{additionalPropMu}
Lemma \ref{PrPropSsfLC}, Lemma \ref{Prla1LC}, and Lemma \ref{PropMuLC} give us
some additional properties of topological measures. For
example, by part \ref{CloFinAddLC} of Lemma \ref{PropMuLC}, if a closed set $F$ and a compact $K$ are disjoint,
then $\mu(F \sqcup K) = \mu(F) + \mu(K)$.
\end{remark}
\section{Examples} \label{examplesTmLC}
When $X$ is compact, a set is called solid if it and its complement are both connected.
For a compact space $X$ we define a certain topological characteristic, genus.
See \cite{Aarnes:ConstructionPaper} for more information about genus $g$ of the space.
We are particularly interested in spaces with genus 0. One way to
describe the ``$g=0$'' condition is the following: if the union of two open
solid sets in $X$ is the whole space, their intersection must be connected.
(See \cite{Grubb:IrrPart}.) Intuitively, $X$ does not have holes or loops.
In the case where $X$ is locally path connected, $g=0$ if the fundamental group $\pi_1(X)$ is finite (in particular, if $X$ is
simply connected). Knudsen \cite{Knudsen} was able to show that if
$H^1(X) = 0 $ then $g(X) = 0$, and in the case of CW-complexes the converse also holds.
The following two remarks for a compact space follow from results in \cite{Aarnes:ConstructionPaper}:
\begin{remark} \label{genconn}
$g(X) =0$ if and only if $X \setminus \bigsqcup\limits_{i=1}^n C_i$ is connected
for any finite disjoint family $\{C_i\}_{i=1}^n$ of closed solid sets.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark} \label{ReIrrPart}
If there is only one open (closed) solid set in a solid partition of $X$
(i.e. a partition of $X$ into a union of disjoint sets each of which is open solid or closed solid),
then there is only one closed (open) solid set in this partition.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
When $X$ is compact, a solid-set function on $X$ extends in a unique way to a topological measure on $X$.
For precise definitions and extension procedure see \cite{Aarnes:ConstructionPaper}.
\end{remark}
The majority of existing examples of topological measures on compact spaces are given for spaces with genus 0.
Here is one:
\begin{example} [Aarnes circle measure] \label{Aatm}
Let $X$ be the unit square and $B$ be the boundary of $X.$
Fix a point $p$ in $X \setminus B$.
Define $\mu $ on solid sets as follows:
$\mu (A) = 1$ if i) $B \subset A$ or
ii) $ p \in A $ and $A \cap B \ne \O$.
Otherwise, we let $ \mu(A) = 0 $.
Then
$ \mu $ is a solid set function and, hence,
extends to a topological measure on $X$.
Note that $\mu$ is not a point mass.
To demonstrate that $\mu $ is
not a measure we shall show that $\mu$ is not
subadditive.
Let $A_1$ be a closed solid set consisting of
two adjacent sides of $B$,
$A_2$ be a closed solid set that is the other two
adjacent sides of $B$, and $A_3 = X \setminus B$ be
an open solid subset of $X$. Then
$X = A_1 \cup A_2 \cup A_3, \ \mu(X) = 1 $, but
$ \ \mu (A_1) + \mu(A_2) + \mu(A_3) = 0$.
\end{example}
The reason that the majority of existing examples of topological measures on compact spaces are given for the
spaces with genus 0 is
the following. To obtain a topological measure it is enough to define a solid-set function.
When a space has genus 0, in the definition of a solid-set function
the hardest condition to verify, the irreducible partition condition, becomes easy to verify.
When $X$ is locally compact, the hardest condition in Definiton \ref{DeSSFLC}
to verify is the condition \ref{solidparti} that deals with solid partitions.
But, as we shall see in this section, it turns out that this condition holds trivially for spaces
whose one-point compactification has genus $0$.
In this section we denote by $\hat X$ the one-point compactification of $X$.
\begin{lemma} \label{hatXsoli}
Let $X$ be locally compact and $\hat X$ be its one-point compactification.
If $A \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$ then $A$ is solid in $\hat X$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Since $A $ is connected in $X$, it is also is connected in $\hat X$.
Let $X \setminus A = \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n B_i$ be the decomposition into connected components.
Each $B_i$ is an unbounded subset of $X$.
We can write $\hat X \setminus A = \bigcup_{i=1}^n E_i$ where each $E_i = B_i \cup \{ \infty\}$.
It is easy to see that each $E_i$ is connected in $\hat X$. Thus, $\hat X \setminus A$ is connected,
and so $A$ is solid in $\hat X$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} \label{nosopart}
Let $X$ be a locally compact space whose one-point compactification $\hat X$ has genus 0.
If $A \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$ then any solid partition of $A$ is the set $A$ itself.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Suppose first that $V \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$ and its solid partition is given by
\[ V = \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n C_i \sqcup \bigsqcup_{j=1}^m U_j \]
where each $C_i \in \calK_{s}(X)$ and each $U_j \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$. From Lemma \ref{hatXsoli}
it follows that $\hat X \setminus V$ and each $C_i$ are closed solid sets in $\hat X$.
Since $\hat X$ has genus $0$, by Remark \ref{genconn}
\[ \hat X \setminus ((\hat X \setminus V) \sqcup \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n C_i) = \bigsqcup_{j=1}^m U_j \]
must be connected in $\hat X$. It follows that $m=1$ and we may write
\[ V = \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n C_i \sqcup U_1. \]
Then $\{ U_1, \hat X \setminus V, C_1, \ldots, C_n\} $ is a solid partition of $\hat X$, and it has
only one open set. By Remark \ref{ReIrrPart} this solid partition also has only one
closed set in it, and it must be $\hat X \setminus V$. So each $C_i= \O$, and the solid partition of $V$ is
$V = U_1$, i.e. the set itself.
Now suppose that $C \in \calK_{s}(X)$ and its solid partition is given by
\[ C = \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n C_i \sqcup \bigsqcup_{j=1}^m U_j \]
where each $C_i \in \calK_{s}(X)$ and each $U_j \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$.
Then $\{ \hat X \setminus C, U_1, \ldots, U_m, C_1, \ldots, C_n\}$ is a solid partition of $\hat X$.
Again by Remark \ref{genconn}
\[ \hat X \setminus \bigsqcup_{i=1}^n C_i = (\hat X \setminus C) \sqcup U_1 \ldots \sqcup U_m \]
must be connected in $\hat X$. It follows that $U_j = \O$ for $j=1, \ldots, m$.
Then by connectivity of $C$ we see that the solid partition of $C$ must be the set itself.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark} \label{easyRn}
From Lemma \ref{nosopart}
it follows that for any locally compact space whose one-point compactification has genus 0
the last condition of Definition \ref{DeSSFLC} holds trivially. This is true, for example,
for $X = \R^n $, half-plane in $\R^n$ with $n \ge 2$, or for a punctured ball in $\R^n$ with the relative topology.
\end{remark}
\begin{example}
Lemma \ref{nosopart} may not be true for spaces whose one-point compactification
has genus greater than $0$. For example, let $X$ be an infinite strip $\R \times [0,1]$ without the ball
of radius $1/4$ centered at $(-1/2, 1/2)$,
so $\hat X$ has genus greater than $0$.
It is easy to give an example of a solid partition of a bounded solid set
(say, rectangle $[0,n] \times [0,1]$ or $(0,n) \times [0,1]$) which consists of $n$ solid sets
(rectangles of the type $(i, i+1) \times [0,1]$ or $[i, i+1] \times [0,1]$) for any given odd $n \in \N, \, n >1$.
\end{example}
We are ready to give examples of topological measures on locally compact spaces.
\begin{example} \label{ExDan2pt}
Let $X$ be a locally compact space whose one-point compactification has genus 0.
Let $\lambda$ be a real-valued topological measure on $X$
(or, more generally, a real-valued deficient topological measure on $X$;
for definition and properties of deficient topological measures on locally compact spaces see \cite{Butler:DTMLC}).
Let $P$ be a set of two distinct points.
For each $A \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$ let $ \nu(A) = 0$ if $\sharp A = 0$, $ \nu(A) = \lambda(A) $ if $\sharp A = 1$, and
$ \nu(A) = 2 \lambda(X)$ if $\sharp A = 2$,
where $ \sharp A$ is the number of points in $ A \cap P$.
We claim that $\nu$ is a solid set function.
By Remark \ref{easyRn} we only need to check the first three conditions of
Definition \ref{DeSSFLC}. The first one is easy to see.
Using Lemma \ref{LeCsInside} and Lemma \ref{opensolid} it is easy to verify conditions \ref{regul} and \ref{regulo}
of Definition \ref{DeSSFLC}.
The solid set function $\nu$ extends to a unique finite topological measure on $X$.
Suppose, for example, that $ \lambda$ is the Lebesgue measure on $X = \R^2$, the set $P$ consists of two points
$p_1 = (0,0)$ and $p_2 = (2,0)$. Let $K_i$ be the closed ball of radius $1$ centered at $p_i$ for $i=1,2$. Then
$K_1, K_2$ and $ C= K_1 \cup K_2$ are compact solid sets, $\nu(K_1) = \nu(K_2) = \pi, \, \nu(C) = 4 \pi$. Since
$\nu$ is not subadditive, $\nu$ is a topological measure that is not a measure.
\end{example}
The next two examples are adapted from Example 2.2 in \cite{Aarnes:LC} and are related to Example \ref{Aatm}.
\begin{example} \label{puncdisk}
Let $X$ be the unit disk on the plane with removed origin. $X$
is a locally compact Hausdorff space with respect to the relative topology.
Any subset of $X$ whose closure in $\R^2$ contains the origin is unbounded in $X$.
For $A \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$ (since $A$ is also solid subset of the unit disk by Lemma \ref{hatXsoli}) we define
$\mu' (A) = \mu(A)$ where $\mu$ is the solid set function on the unit disk
from Example \ref{Aatm}. From Remark \ref{easyRn}, Lemma \ref{LeCsInside}, Lemma \ref{opensolid}
and the fact that $\mu$ is a solid set function
on $\hat X$ we see that $\mu'$ is a solid-set function on $X$. By Theorem \ref{extThLC}
$\mu'$ extends uniquely to a topological measure on $X$, which we also call $\mu'$.
Note that $\mu'$ is simple. We claim that $\mu'$
is not a measure. Let $U_1 = \{ z \in X: \ Im \ z > 0\}, \ U_2 = \{ z \in X: \ Im \ z < 0\}$ and
$F = \{ z \in X: \ Im \ z = 0\}$. Then $U_1, U_2$
are open (unbounded) in $X$ and $F$ is a closed (unbounded) set in $X$ consisting of
two disjoint segments. Note that $X= F \cup U_1 \cup U_2$.
Using Remark \ref{extsumme} we calculate $\mu'(F) = \mu'(U_1) = \mu'(U_2) =0$.
The boundary of the disk, $C$, is a compact connected set, $X \setminus C$ is unbounded in $X$, so $C \in \calK_{s}(X)$.
Since $\mu'(C) = 1$, we have $\mu'(X) =1$. Thus, $\mu'$ is not subadditive, so it is not a measure.
This example also shows that on a locally compact space
finite additivity of topological measures holds on $\calK(X) \cup \calO(X)$ by
Definition \ref{DeTMLC}, but fails on $\calC(X) \cup \calO(X)$. This is in contrast to topological measures
on compact spaces, where finite additivity holds on $\calC(X) \cup \calO(X)$.
\end{example}
\begin{example} \label{linetm}
Let $X = \R^2, \ l$ be a straight line and $p$ a point of $X$ not on the line $l$.
For $A \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$ define $\mu(A) = 1$ if $A \cap l \neq \O$ and $p \in A$; otherwise,
let $\mu(A) =0$. Using Lemma \ref{LeCsInside} and Lemma \ref{opensolid}
it is easy to verify the first three conditions of Definition \ref{DeSSFLC}.
From Remark \ref{easyRn} it follows that $\mu$ is a solid set function on $X$.
By Theorem \ref{extThLC} $\mu$ extends uniquely to a topological measure on $X$,
which we also call $\mu$. Note that $\mu$ is simple. We claim that $\mu$ is not a measure.
Let $F$ be the closed half-plane determined by $l$ which does not contain $p$.
Then using Remark \ref{extsumme} we calculate $\mu(F) = \mu(X \setminus F) = 0$,
and $\mu(X) = 1$. Failure of subadditivity shows that $\mu$ is not a measure.
The sets $F$ and $X \setminus F$ are both unbounded. Now take a bounded open disk
$V$ around $p$ that does not intersect $l$. Then
\[ X = V \sqcup (X \setminus V), \]\
where $V \in \calO^{*}(X), \ \mu(V) = \mu(X \setminus V) = 0$, while $\mu(X) =1$.
This example also shows that on a locally compact space
finite additivity of topological measures holds on $\calK(X) \cup \calO(X)$ by
Definition \ref{DeTMLC}, but fails on $\calC(X) \cup \calO(X)$.
It fails even in the situation $X = V \sqcup F$, where $ V $ is a bounded open set, and $F$ is a closed set.
\end{example}
The last two examples suggest that having a topological measure on $\hat X$
helps us to get a topological measure on $X$. In fact, we have the following result.
\begin{theorem} \label{tmXtoXha}
Let $X$ be a locally compact, connected, locally connected space whose one-point compactification $\hat X$ has genus 0.
Suppose $\nu$ is a solid set function on $\hat X$. For $A \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$ define $\mu(A) = \nu(A)$.
Then $\mu$ is a solid set function on $X$ and, thus, extends uniquely to a topological
measure on $X$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Let $A \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$. By Lemma \ref{hatXsoli}, $A$ is a solid set in $\hat X$.
Using Lemma \ref{LeCsInside}, Lemma \ref{opensolid}, the fact that $\nu$ is a solid set function on $\hat X$, and that
a bounded solid set does not contain $\infty$ it is easy to verify the first three conditions of Definition \ref{DeSSFLC}.
By Remark \ref{easyRn} $\mu$ is a solid set function on $X$.
\end{proof}
Theorem \ref{tmXtoXha} allows us to obtain a large variety of topological measures on a locally compact space from
examples of topological measures on compact spaces.
\begin{example} \label{nvssf}
Let $X$ be a locally compact space whose one-point compactification has genus 0.
Let $n$ be a natural number. Let $P$ be the set of distinct $2n+1$ points.
For each $A \in \calA_{s}^{*}(X)$ let $ \nu(A) = i/n$ if $\sharp A = 2i$ or $2i+1$, where $ \sharp A$ is the number of points in $ A \cap P$.
When $X$ is compact, a set function defined in this way is a solid-set function
(see Example 2.1 in \cite{Aarnes:Pure}, Examples 4.14 and 4.15 in \cite{QfunctionsEtm}).
By Theorem \ref{tmXtoXha} $\nu$ is a solid-set function on $X$; it extends to a unique topological measure on $X$
that assumes values $0, 1/n, \ldots, 1$.
\end{example}
We conclude with an example of another infinite topological measure.
\begin{example} \label{mojexLC}
Let $X=\R^n$ for any $n \ge 2$, and $\lambda$ be the Lebesque measure on $X$.
For $U \in \calO_{s}^{*}(X)$ define $\mu(U) =0$ if $0 \le \lambda(U) \le 1$ and $\mu(U) = \lambda(U)$ if
$\lambda(U) >1$. For $C \in \calK_{s}(X)$ define $\mu(C) = 0$ if $0 \le \lambda(C) < 1$ and
$\mu(C) =\lambda(C)$ if $\lambda(C) \ge 1$. It is not hard to check the first three conditions
of Definition \ref{DeSSFLC}. From Remark \ref{easyRn} it follows that $\mu$ is
a solid set function on $X$.
By Theorem \ref{extThLC} $\mu$ extends uniquely to a topological measure on $X$,
which we also call $\mu$. Note that $\mu(X) = \infty$. $\mu$ is not subadditive, for
we may cover a compact ball with Lebesque measure greater than 1 by finitely many balls
of Lebesque measure less than 1. Hence, $\mu$ is not a measure.
\end{example}
{\bf{Acknowledgments}}:
This work was conducted at the Department of Mathematics at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and
the Department of Mathematics at the University of California Santa Barbara. The author would like to thank both departments
for their hospitality and supportive environments.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
Wikipedia has emerged as one of the most reputable sources on the internet for a wide range of tasks, from question answering~\cite{DBLP:conf/acl/ChenFWB17} or relation extraction~\cite{DBLP:conf/acl/MintzBSJ09}. One of the most notable uses of Wikipedia is on knowledge base construction.
Well known knowledge bases like DBpedia~\cite{DBLP:conf/semweb/AuerBKLCI07} or YAGO~\cite{DBLP:conf/www/SuchanekKW07} are almost exclusively built with information coming from Wikipedia's infoboxes. Infoboxes have several advantages as they adhere to pre-defined templates and contain factual information (e.g. \emph{bornIn} facts). However, they are sparse and the information they cover is very narrow. For most of the application use cases of Wikipedia, availability of factual information is a fundamental requirement.
Wikipedia tables on the other hand are in abundance. The current snapshot of Wikipedia contains more than 3.23M tables from more than 520k Wikipedia articles. Tables are rich with factual information for a wide range of topics. Thus far, their use has been limited, despite them covering a broad domain of factual information that can be used to answer complex queries. For instance, for complex queries like \emph{``Award winning movies of horror Genre?''} the answer can be found from facts contained in \emph{multiple tables} in Wikipedia. However, question answering systems~\cite{DBLP:conf/www/AbujabalRYW18} built upon knowledge base facts, in most cases they will not be able to provide an answer or will provide an \emph{incomplete} answer.
The sparsity or lack of factual information from infoboxes can easily be remedied by additionally considering facts that come from Wikipedia tables. A rough estimate reveals that we can generate more than hundreds of millions of additional facts that can be converted into knowledge base triples~\cite{DBLP:conf/wsdm/MunozHM14}. This amount in reality is much higher, if we allow for tables to be aligned. That is, currently, tables are seen in isolation, and \emph{semantically} related tables are not interlinked (i.e. \texttt{equivalent} table relations). Table alignments would allow to access tables fulfilling a specific criteria (e.g. \emph{``List of All Movies''} by different \texttt{Producers}). Additionally, relations that can semantically describe tables as \emph{supersets or subsets} (i.e. \texttt{subPartOf} relations) in terms of classic database \emph{projection} or \emph{selection} functions are missing (cf. Figure~\ref{fig:table_example}), which would enable queries to access semantically dependent tables (i.e., \emph{``List of Award-Winning Movies''} and \emph{``List of All Movies''} from a \texttt{Producer}). The presence of such fine-grained relations opens up for opportunities that can be used in question answering, knowledge base construction, and inferences of other facts from the facts that reside in \texttt{equivalent} or \texttt{subPartOf} aligned tables.
Determining the fine-grained table relations is not a trivial task. Table relations are dependent on the semantics of the columns (e.g. a column containing instance values of type \texttt{Country}), the context in which the column appears (e.g. \emph{``Name''} can be an ambiguous column and it can only be disambiguated through other columns in a table schema), cell values etc. Furthermore, not all columns are important for determining the relation between two tables~\cite{DBLP:conf/sigmod/SarmaFGHLWXY12}. Finally, to be able to establish relations amongst all relevant table pairs, requires for efficient approaches that avoid exhaustive computations between all table pairs that can be cumbersome given the extent of tables in Wikipedia.
In this aspect, related work has focused mainly on table retrieval scenarios. The Google Fusion project~\cite{DBLP:conf/sigmod/SarmaFGHLWXY12,DBLP:journals/pvldb/CafarellaHWWZ08} retrieves top--$k$ tables, where the query is a table and the notion of relatedness is in terms of table schemata (specifically subject columns). Recent work~\cite{DBLP:conf/www/ZhangB18} focuses on ad-hoc table retrieval from keyword search. There are two main issues that are not addressed by related work: (i) top--$k$ retrieval does not provide guarantees in terms of coverage, and (ii) the notion of relevance is in terms of \emph{keyword queries}, and there is no distinction between the different \emph{relation types}, specifically \texttt{equivalent} and \texttt{subPartOf} relations.
We propose \emph{TableNet}, an approach with the goal of aligning tables with \texttt{equivalent} and \texttt{subPartOf} fine-grained relations. Our goal is to ensure that for any table, with high coverage we can find candidate tables for alignment, and with high accuracy determine the relation type for a table pair. We distinguish between two main steps: (i) efficient and high coverage table candidate generation for alignment, and (ii) relation type prediction by leveraging table schemas and values therein.
We perform an extensive evaluation of \emph{TableNet} on the entire English Wikipedia with more than 3.2 million tables. Through our proposed approach we are able to retain table pairs that have a relation with a high coverage of 88\%, and correspondingly predict the type of the relation with an accuracy of 90\%.
We make the following contributions in constructing TableNet:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=*]
\setlength{\parskip}{0pt}
\setlength\itemsep{0em}
\item we formally define the problem of fine-grained table alignment;
\item we model tables with fine-grained information relying on column descriptions, instance values, and types and additionally take into account the context in which the columns appear for table alignment;
\item a large ground-truth for table alignment with coverage guarantees with more than 17k table pairs;
\item a large scale knowledge graph of aligned tables with more than 3.2 million tables.
\end{itemize}
\section{Related Work}\label{sec:relatedwork}
In this section, we review related work, which we differentiate between three main categories that we describe in the following.
\textbf{Wikipedia Tables.} Bhagavatula et al.~\cite{DBLP:conf/kdd/BhagavatulaND13} propose an approach for finding relevant columns from target tables for a given source table, based on which the table pair can be joined. Similarly, in our table candidate generation process we employ graph relatedness measures in order to generate relevant table pairs for alignments. Nonetheless, our objectives are on finding tables for alignment that are semantically similar. As such our criteria for alignment does not adhere to their \textit{join} definition where the objective is to construct a new table as a result of the joined tables. Additionally, for our task of fine-grained alignment, we argue that relying only in specific columns is not sufficient for alignment. The semantics of a table cannot always be defined from a single column, but rather the context in which the column occurs.
\textbf{Web Tables.} The work carried in the project \textit{Google Fusion Tables}~\cite{DBLP:journals/pvldb/CafarellaHWWZ08,DBLP:conf/sigmod/SarmaFGHLWXY12,DBLP:journals/pvldb/VenetisHMPSWMW11,DBLP:conf/sigmod/GonzalezHJLMSSG10} represents one of the most significant efforts in providing additional semantics over tables, and to the best of our knowledge, only some of the works carried in this project are most related to our work, against which we provide an optimal comparison~\cite{DBLP:conf/sigmod/SarmaFGHLWXY12}.
Carafella et al.~\cite{DBLP:journals/pvldb/CafarellaHWWZ08} propose an approach for table extraction from Web pages and additionally provide a ranking mechanism for table retrieval. An additional aspect they consider is the schema auto-completion for some input column, where they recommend other columns that would fit contextually to generate a ``complete'' schema. Our aim is different here, while we aim at providing more fine-grained representations of columns in a table schema, our goal is to use such information for the task of table alignment.
Das Sarma et al.~\cite{DBLP:conf/sigmod/SarmaFGHLWXY12} propose an approach for finding related tables, where as relatedness they consider two cases: (i) \emph{entity complement} and (ii) \emph{schema complement}. For (i), the task is to align tables that have the same table schemas, however, with complementary instances. This case can be seen as applying a \emph{selection} over some table that has the union of instances from both tables. In (ii), the columns of a target table can be used to complement the schema of a source table, with the precondition that the instances (from \emph{subject} columns) are the same in both tables. This case is seen as a \emph{projections} operation over some table with the same \emph{selection} criteria, thus, resulting in the same set of instances.
Our work is related to the case of \emph{entity complement}, where the authors compute the \emph{schema similarity} between two tables in order to decide if a table can be considered for complementing the instances in another table. The similarity of the schemas is considered as a max-weight bipartite matching approach, with weighted established between the column in the disparate schemas, and edge weight being the \emph{string similarity} between columns and jaccard similarity between the column types (established from the values in a column through the \texttt{WebIsA} database).
Despite the fact that this approach is unsupervised, we adapt it such that we find the best threshold of the max-weight matching score between two schemas, and consider tables to be either \emph{aligned} or \emph{not-aligned}. We show that our approach outperforms the most closely related work from Google Fusion.
The aforementioned works rely on a structured table representation based on work by Venetis et al.~\cite{DBLP:journals/pvldb/VenetisHMPSWMW11}. The columns in a table are labelled based on a \texttt{isA} database, which consists of instances and the associated labels mined from a large Web corpus (e.g. \emph{capital cities} for a column containing \emph{Paris, Berlin}, etc.). In our case, we deal with Wikipedia tables in which instances are linked to Wikipedia articles, thus, we opt for using the Wikipedia category taxonomy and the additional information coming from knowledge bases for inferring a structured representation of a table schema, respectively for the individual columns in a table. Wikipedia categories are much richer than the \texttt{isA} database used in \cite{DBLP:journals/pvldb/VenetisHMPSWMW11}, which is flat, contrary to the categories which represent a taxonomy, thus, allowing us to leverage from coarse to fine grained information about columns.
\textbf{Table Annotation.} Work on table annotation \cite{DBLP:journals/pvldb/LimayeSC10,DBLP:conf/semweb/BhagavatulaND15} focus specifically on linking cell values with entities, and columns with entity types that best describe the values in a column. We see these works as complementary, in which case we can employ them to further enrich tables where the cell values are not already linked to existing Wikipedia entities.
Another line of work is proposed by Mun\~oz et al.\cite{DBLP:conf/wsdm/MunozHM14}. In this work, Wikipedia tables, specifically table rows are used as an input for generating RDF triples, where the relations between two columns correspond to properties extracted from a target knowledge base like DBpedia. Slightly related to \cite{DBLP:conf/wsdm/MunozHM14} is the work by Ritze et al.~\cite{DBLP:conf/wims/RitzeLB15}, where the authors propose a system called \emph{T2K Match}. T2K matches Web tables into a target knowledge base, that is, the columns are described in terms of classes from the target KB. The works in \cite{DBLP:conf/wims/RitzeLB15,DBLP:conf/wsdm/MunozHM14} can be seen as complementary and they could be used as additional information for the table alignment task.
\textbf{Schema Matching.} In the database community, there has been extensive research in schema matching~\cite{rahm2001survey,DBLP:conf/dexa/NunesCCFLD13,DBLP:conf/edbt/KoutrakiPV16,DBLP:conf/esws/KoutrakiPV17}. However, works in schema matching tackle the problem of mapping individual columns from two database table schemas, whereas, in our case, the column alignments from two table schemas are only intermediary input into determining the actual fine-grained relation between two tables.
\section{Preliminaries and Overview}\label{sec:problem}
\begin{figure*}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.80\textwidth]{table_relations}
\caption{Table alignment example with \texttt{subPartOf} (dashed line), and \texttt{equivalent} relations (full line). \texttt{subPartOf} can be explained in terms of \emph{age restriction} or \emph{gender restriction}, whereas \texttt{equivalent} relation represents topically similar information.}
\label{fig:table_example}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Terminology}
We consider Wikipedia articles $A=\{a_1,\ldots,a_n\}$; each article $a$ is associated with a set of Wikipedia categories $\Psi_a=\{\psi_1,\ldots,\psi_n\}$. From all the categories we induce the category graph $\Psi$, which consists of \emph{parent} and \emph{child} relations between categories $\psi_i \text{\texttt{ childOf }} \psi^p$. The parent/child relations allow us to establish a hierarchical graph in $\Psi$. The level of a category is denoted by $\lambda_{\psi}$.
Next, we define the tables from an article $a$ as $T_a=\{t_1,\ldots,t_n\}$. A table $t$ consists of a \emph{table schema} (or \emph{column header}) that we define as $C(t)=\{c_1,\ldots c_n\}$. Each column consists of a \emph{textual description} and the set of all values $c_i=\langle desc, \{v_i^1,\ldots,v_i^n\}\rangle$ assigned to the corresponding column cells in the table rows $t_i(r)=\{r_i^1,\ldots,r_i^n\}$. More specifically, the cell value that is attributed to a specific \emph{row} and \emph{column} is indicated by $v_i^k$, where $k$ is the row $r^k$ and $i$ is the column $c_i$. Cell values can point to existing articles in Wikipedia, that is $v_i^k= \langle a_k\rangle$, which we will refer to as \emph{instance values}, or \emph{primitive values} in cases of text, numbers, dates etc.
From the extracted tables $T=\{t_1,\ldots,t_n\}$ from $A$, we define two fine-grained types of relations between a table pair $\langle t_i, t_j\rangle$: (i) $t_i \vDash t_j$ where $t_j$ is considered to be \emph{semantically} a \texttt{subPartOf} of $t_i$, and (ii) $t_i \equiv t_j$ where $t_i$ and $t_j$ are \emph{semantically} \texttt{equivalent}. We indicate the presence of relation with $r(t_i, t_j)\neq \emptyset$, and in the next section we precisely define the table relations.
\subsection{Table Alignment Task Definition}\label{subsec:prob_definition}
In this section, we define the task of table alignment, and provide the definition for the fine-grained table relations.
\paragraph{\textbf{Table Alignment}} From the generated table pairs in the previous step, the task is to determine the \emph{relation type} between any table pair $r(t_i,t_j)$ from the article pair $\langle a_i, a_j\rangle$. The relation types can be either \texttt{subPartOf}, \texttt{equivalent} or \texttt{none} (in case $r(t_i, t_j)=\emptyset$).
\begin{definition}[subPartOf] For a table pair $r(t_i, t_j)=\{\text{\texttt{subPartOf}}\}$ holds if the schema $C(t_i)$ can subsume either at the \textbf{data value} (i.e. \textbf{cell-value}) or \textbf{semantically} the columns from $C(t_j)$ (cf. Figure~\ref{fig:table_example}), that is, $C(t_i)\supseteq C(t_j)$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}[equivalent] For a pair $r(t_i, t_j)=\{\text{\texttt{equivalent}}\}$ holds if both table schemas have \textbf{semantically similar} column representation (cf. Figure~\ref{fig:table_example}), that is, $C(t_i)\approx C(t_j)$.
\end{definition}
With the notion of \emph{semantic similarity} we refer to cell \emph{instance} values, whose similarity can be assessed at the Wikipedia category level, e.g. the column $c=\langle\text{\emph{``Country''}, \{\text{\emph{Germany}}, \text{\emph{USA}}, \ldots \}}\rangle$ contains values of type \texttt{Location}, thus $c$ will be semantically similar to any column whose values are topically similar, despite the fact that at data level those values will not overlap. Similarly, is the case for the column descriptions, where \emph{``Nation''} and \emph{``Country''} usually refer to the same type of columns.
\subsection{TableNet Overview}\label{sec:approach}
TableNet operates in a manner such that for any given \emph{source} Wikipedia article $a_i\in A$, first, we generate article candidate pairs $\langle a_i, a_j\rangle$ ($a_j \in A$ and $a_i\neq a_j$) where the tables from the pair are likely to have an alignment relation (i.e. $r(t_i, t_j)\neq \emptyset$, where $t_i \in T(a_i)$ and $t_j \in T(a_j)$), which corresponds to the second step in TableNet. In the following, we describe the two main steps of TableNet:
\begin{enumerate}
\setlength{\parskip}{0.2em}
\setlength\itemsep{0.2em}
\item Article candidate pair generation
\item Table alignment
\end{enumerate}
\section{Article Candidate Pair Generation}\label{subsec:table_extraction}
In the article candidate generation step, we address the problem of determining article pairs, whose tables will result in a table relation. In this case, we require our article candidate generation process to fulfill two main properties. First, we need to minimize the amount of \emph{irrelevant article pairs}, whose tables do not result in a table relation. Second, the filtering out of article pairs (from the first property) should not affect the coverage in terms of retaining \emph{relevant article pairs}, whose tables result in a table relation.
Thus, we define a function as shown in Equation~\ref{eq:td_table_align_pairs} which provides optimal coverage of relevant article pairs, and at the same time minimizes the amount of irrelevant pairs.
\begin{equation}\label{eq:td_table_align_pairs}
A\times A \rightarrow r(t_i, t_j), \text{ where } t_i \in T(a_i) \wedge t_j \in T(a_j), \text{ and } a_i \neq a_j
\end{equation}
This step is necessary as \emph{naive} approaches which would enumerate over all article pairs to ensure maximal coverage result in a combinatorial explosion ($n!$ where n is the number of articles). Thus, in our candidate generation approach we circumvent this issue by defining features that fulfill the following desiderata:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=*]
\item For an article pair whose tables will result in a table alignment, we expect the articles to be \emph{semantically} or \emph{topically} similar, which can be captured through the article abstracts or their category associations.
\item For any two tables, whose parent articles fulfill the first criterion, we expect to find notions of similarity in terms of their schemas, such as column names
\end{itemize}
With these desiderata in mind, we define features that either operate at the article pair level or table level, and use them in two ways: (i) filter out irrelevant article pairs, and (ii) employ the features in a supervised manner to further filter out such pairs.
\begin{table}[ht!]
\centering
\scalebox{0.75}{
\begin{tabular}{l l p{5.5cm} p{1.5cm}}
\toprule
& \emph{feature} & \emph{description} & \emph{group}\\
\midrule
$f_1$ & \emph{tfidf} & \emph{tfidf} similarity between abstracts & \multirow{3}{*}{\emph{abstract}} \\
$f_2$ & \emph{d2v} & \emph{doc2vec} similarity between abstracts & \\
$f_3$ & \emph{w2v} & \emph{avg.} word2vec abstract vectors similarity & \\
\midrule
$f_4$ & $sim(\Psi_{a_i}, \Psi_{a_j})$ & similarity in embedding space between $\Psi_a$ and $\Psi^p_a$ categories for the article pair & \multirow{5}{2cm}{\emph{$\Psi$ \& KB}}\\
$f_5$ & $\bigcap\limits_{a \in \langle a_i, a_j\rangle}\Psi_a$ & direct and parent categories overlap & \\
$f_6$ & $sim(a_i, a_j)$ & embedding similarity of the article pair& \\
$f_7$ & \emph{type} & type overlap & \\
\midrule
$f_8$ & $sim(\psi_i, \psi_j)$ & column title similarity ($f_8^l$) and column distance ($f_8^d$) between the schemas in a table pair & \emph{tables}\\
$f_9$ & $\norm{\gamma(\psi_i)-\gamma(\psi_j)}$ & category representation similarity $\gamma$\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Article candidate pair features.}
\label{tbl:candidate_feature_list}
\end{table}
\subsection{Features} Table~\ref{tbl:candidate_feature_list} provides an overview of all the similarity features for the article candidate pair generation step.
\textbf{Article Abstract.} Wikipedia article abstracts contain a summary of the article, containing the most important information. For a \emph{relevant article pair}, we expect that the abstracts will overlap in terms of abstract, specifically on \emph{keywords}. For example, \texttt{Ariane Friedrich} and \texttt{Teddy Tamgho}, whose tables are in \texttt{equivalent} relation, both contain snippets indicating that the corresponding persons are \emph{\textbf{athletes}} and \emph{\textbf{jumpers}}. This \emph{topical similarity} is in line with the definitions of table relations in Section~\ref{sec:problem}.
The features in Table~\ref{tbl:candidate_feature_list} in the \emph{abstract} group capture exactly such \emph{topical} similarities. Feature $f_2$ computes a \emph{doc2vec}~\cite{DBLP:conf/icml/LeM14} embedding for each article and measures the cosine similarity between those embeddings. Doc2Vec embeddings have the advantage that they take into account a broader context when compared to standard word2vec~\cite{mikolov2013distributed}. Additionally in $f_3$, we compute an \emph{average embedding} from \emph{word2vec} embeddings from the tokens in the abstract. We use GloVe pre-trained embeddings Wikipedia~\cite{DBLP:conf/emnlp/PenningtonSM14}. Finally, since none of the embedding can account for the \emph{salience of tokens} in an abstract, we additionally compute the cosine similarity of the \emph{tf-idf} (feature $f_1$) vectors from the article abstracts.
\textbf{Categories \& Knowledge Bases.} Wikipedia categories are indicators that two articles are semantically similar in either \emph{temporal}, \emph{geographical}, or \emph{topical} dimension (categories are created to indicate either \emph{temporal} or \emph{geographical} grouping, or \emph{topical} similarity). Since articles are associated manually to categories, this association is prone to noise. As we show later in our evaluation, if we consider as pairs only articles assigned to the same categories, the resulting coverage will be low.
To circumvent this problem, we compute \emph{graph embeddings} for Wikipedia categories based on the category graph $\Psi$. We use different embedding approaches like RDF2Vec~\cite{DBLP:conf/semweb/RistoskiP16} and Node2Vec~\cite{DBLP:conf/kdd/GroverL16}. This allows us to elevate the category comparisons from the link based structure in $\Psi$ to the embedding space, and consider as candidates articles whose categories are close in the embedding space.
As features we consider the cosine similarity between the \emph{directly associated categories} for an article pair, and additionally their \emph{parent categories}. We also consider the similarity of articles in the same embedding space (Equation~\ref{eq:cosine_sim}), and the jaccard similarity in terms of types in DBpedia.
\begin{equation}\label{eq:cosine_sim}\small
sim(a_i, a_j) = \frac{emb(a_i)\cdot emb(a_j)}{\norm{emb(a_i)} \norm{emb(a_j)}}
\end{equation}
\textbf{Tables.} The article pair features capture a coarse grained similarity for the tables in the articles themselves. We compute a set of light-weight features between the tables schemas for tables $t_i\in a_i$ and $t_j\in a_j$ from an article pair. The similarity corresponds to the \emph{average word embedding} of the column description for two columns in the schemas $C(t_i)$ and $C(t_j)$. We consider only the highest matching column as measured in Equation~\ref{eq:table_column_features}. In addition to the similarity, we capture also the \emph{positional index} difference between the highest matching columns, and the maximal matching in terms of a \emph{column representation} which we explain below.
\begin{align}\label{eq:table_column_features}\small
\max_{c_l \in C(t_j)} sim(c_k, c_l),
\end{align}
where $sim(c_k, c_l)$ is computed similarly as in Equation~\ref{eq:cosine_sim}.
\textbf{Column-Representation. } In case a column $c_i$ consists of instance-values, we compute a representation for $c_i$ based on the attributes associated with the instances $\{v_i\}$ (where an instance points to a Wikipedia article), e.g. \emph{$v_i^1$=``George Lucas'} \textbf{\emph{bornIn}} \emph{``Modesto, California, U.S.''}. More specifically, since there may be multiple instances $|v_i|>1$, we find the \emph{lowest common ancestor} $\psi_{L}$ category from $\{v_i\}$ by following the article-category associations in $\Psi$. This provides an abstraction over the values and is seen as a \emph{type} of instances in $\{v_i\}$. By considering $\psi_{L}$ instead of the individual $\{v_i\}$, we can summarize the column representation in terms of the most discriminative attributes in overall for $\psi_L$. In this way, for a table pair, we compare the column representations, and in cases of a high match we assume the columns to be semantically similar.
The representation of $c_i$ is computed as in Equation~\ref{eq:category_attribute_weight}. We weigh the importance of \emph{attributes} based on how discriminative they are for $\psi_L$, e.g. an attribute associated with articles directly belonging to category $\psi_L$ are exclusive for $\psi_{L}$, and thus are weighted high. For an attribute $p$, the weight for $\psi_{L}$ is computed as following:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:category_attribute_weight}\small
\gamma(p,\psi_{L}) = \frac{\lambda_{\psi_L}}{\max\lambda_{\psi}} *
\left(-\log\frac{|\bigcup{o}|: \forall \langle a, p, o\rangle \wedge a\in \psi_L}{|o|: \forall \langle a, p, o\rangle \wedge a\in \psi_L}\right)
\end{equation}
where, the first part of the fraction weighs $p$ by taking into account the level of $\lambda_{\psi_L}$ and the deepest category where $p$ is present in a target KB $\max\lambda_{\psi}$. $|\bigcup{o}|$ represents the number of distinct values assigned to attribute $p$ from $a\in \psi_L$, whereas $|o|$ is the total number of assignments of $p$ in $\psi_L$.
Through $\gamma(\psi_L)$ we capture the most \emph{important} and \emph{descriptive} attributes for a column $c_i$. For two columns in two table schemas, a high similarity $\norm{\gamma(\psi_i)-\gamma(\psi_j)}$ is an indicator that the columns are semantically similar, which we use as a \emph{table feature}.
\subsection{Filtering \& Classification}
We use the features in Table~\ref{tbl:candidate_feature_list} in two ways: (i) filter out article pairs that are \emph{unlikely} to yield a table relation, and (ii) train a supervised model and classify article pairs as either \emph{relevant} or \emph{irrelevant}.
\paragraph{\textbf{Filtering.}}
We consider a \emph{conjunction} of filtering criteria based on empirically evaluated thresholds for the individual features. Our main goal is to retain a high coverage of \emph{relevant article pairs}, and at the same time filter out drastically \emph{irrelevant pairs}. For thresholds we consider the \emph{mean} value of a particular feature. This ensures that for a pair, if the score is below the mean value, that is an indicator that the pair is unlikely to yield any table relation. In Section~\ref{sec:evaluation} we show that we are able to drastically reduce the number of pairs by simply applying such thresholds.
\paragraph{\textbf{Classification.}} From the remaining pairs we train a classification model and classify pairs as being either \emph{relevant} or \emph{irrelevant}. We consider as positive instances all table pairs from the article pair $\langle a_i, a_j\rangle$ which have \emph{at least one} table relation, i.e, $r(t_i,t_j)\neq \text{\texttt{none}}$, where $\exists (t_i \in a_i \wedge t_j \in a_j)$.
For classification we use Random Forests (RF)~\cite{breiman2001random}. RFs allow to set \emph{minimal amount of samples} that are allowed for a node in the tree to be split. This has direct implications in the accuracy of a classifier, however, this allows us to retain high coverage. Setting this number high makes the leafs of the different trees to be impure containing relevant and irrelevant article pairs. Our classifier will classify such impure leafs as relevant, at the cost of accuracy, however, in this way we retain a high recall. Section~\ref{sec:evaluation} shows that we can maintain high coverage of relevant pairs and at the same drastically reduce the amount of irrelevant pairs.
\section{Table Alignment}\label{subsec:table_alignment}
TableNet is a bidirectional recurrent neural network (RNN), which for any table pair $r(t_i, t_j)$ learns to classify them into one of the relations \texttt{equivalent}, \texttt{subPartOf}, or \texttt{none}. For a model to accurately align table, the order of columns in their schemas needs to be taken into account. Additionally, the matching columns in the two schemas need to fulfill two main criteria: (i) \emph{the context} in which the columns occur needs to be semantically similar, and (ii) \emph{the positions} in which the columns appear needs to be comparably similar~\cite{DBLP:conf/sigmod/SarmaFGHLWXY12}.
Figure~\ref{fig:alignment_neural_model} shows an overview of the proposed alignment model. In the following we describe in details the means of representing tables, and the proposed architecture for the alignment task.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{table_alignment}
\caption{TableNet uses \emph{BiLSTM}s to encode the tables as a sequence of columns. Each column can be represented in terms of its \emph{description}, \emph{instance values}, and its \emph{column-type} (indicated by the different colors). The \emph{column-by-column} captures soft-alignments between columns in the corresponding table schemas. (better viewed in color)}
\label{fig:alignment_neural_model}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Table Representation} How we represent columns is key towards an accurate alignment model. A column in table schema consists of the following information $c_i = \langle desc, \{v^1_i, \ldots v^n_1\}\rangle$ (see Section~\ref{sec:problem}).
\textbf{Column Description.} For a column $c$ its description is a strong indicator of the cell-values $v_i$. We represent the column description tokens based on their word embeddings, specifically we use pre-trained Glove word embeddings~\cite{DBLP:conf/emnlp/PenningtonSM14}. In the case of multiple tokens, we average the respective word embeddings.
One disadvantage with this representation is that column descriptions can be ambiguous. For instance, \emph{``Title''} can refer to various different values, e.g. \texttt{Movies, Books} etc. Thus, relying solely on column titles is not optimal for the table alignment process.
\textbf{Instance--Values.} In case $c_i$ contains \emph{instance values}, we represent $c_i$ through the average embeddings of the individual cell-values $v_i$ based on pre-computed graph embeddings. In our experimental evaluation, we used \emph{node2vec} embeddings~\cite{DBLP:conf/kdd/GroverL16}, which we trained on the Wikipedia \emph{anchor graph}\footnote{The anchor graph consists of nodes (Wikipedia articles and categories), while the edges correspond to the anchor text and the category-article associations.}.
The combination of column \emph{description} and \emph{instance values} improves the representation of a column and reduces its ambiguity. This can be mostly attributed to the cases where $c_i$ consists of more than one single instance, whereby by averaging the embeddings we establish the context in which such values can appear.
\textbf{Column--Type.} Representing the columns based solely on instance values poses a risk of biasing the column representation towards articles that are often linked together in the Wikipedia anchor graph, and thus it may ignore the topic information that is present in such articles based on their category associations.
Hence, for columns that contain instance values, we additionally represent it through its \emph{type} or \emph{category}. That is, for all the instance values in $v_i$ for $c_i$, we extract their lowest common ancestor category from $\Psi$. A similar idea was employed by Das Sarma et al.~\cite{DBLP:conf/sigmod/SarmaFGHLWXY12}, where the columns are represented by the topics they are most often associated with, an information extracted from Google's query logs (e.g. \emph{India} \texttt{Asian country}). Similar as for \emph{instance-value} representation, here too, we represent the LCA category through graph embeddings. As we will see later in our experimental setup (see Section~\ref{sec:setup}), since we we only ensure that $\Psi$ is a consistent hierarchical graph, in cases where the LCA categories can be more than one, then we average their corresponding representations.
\subsection{Table Alignment Architecture}
In our model, we differentiate the input from the different tables through a \emph{delimiter}. The model is an adoption of the one proposed by Rockt\"aschel~\cite{rocktaschel2016reasoning} in the task of textual entailment. For a table pair $r(t_i, t_j)$ the model predicts the relation $r\in\{$ \texttt{equivalent}, \texttt{subPartOf}, \texttt{none} $\}$.
The alignment model corresponds to an RNN with LSTM cells\cite{hochreiter1997long}, in that we read the sequence of columns for the table pair in both directions. Additionally, on top of the output layer from the RNN model, we compute a \emph{column-by-column} attention, which helps us generate soft-alignments between columns in the table schemas, and thus further improve the alignment accuracy. In the following we describe the encoding of the column tables, and the intuition behind the attention mechanism.
\paragraph{\textbf{Table Encoding.}} Since we have two separate tables, a precondition for accurate alignment is the encoding of the sequence of columns. Our model provides a \emph{conditional encoding}, in that it first reads the columns from $C(t_i)$, then the cell state $c_d$, which is initialized with the last state of $t_i$ (in this case $c_n^i$) is used to conditionally encode the sequence of columns in $C(t_j)$.
The advantage of the conditional encoding is that by encoding table $t_j$ with initial cell state that corresponds to the last column cell state of $t_i$, we bias the model to learn encodings that are optimal for the task of table alignment. That is instead of trying to encode all columns, it will learn to encode the columns of $t_j$ such that it can best predict the relation for the table pair. Since we have a bidirectional LSTM, we encode in a similar fashion the table $t_i$ by conditioning it on the last state of $t_j$.
\paragraph{\textbf{Attention Mechanism.}} In our case, for a table pair $r(t_i, t_j)$ to be aligned with either \texttt{equivalent} or \texttt{subPartOf} relation, we expect that the most important columns in each of the tables to have their corresponding matches in the respective schemas. This follows the intuition that not all columns in a table are equally important~\cite{DBLP:conf/sigmod/SarmaFGHLWXY12}.
In this case, if we use the last cell state of the encoded table pair for classification, we enforce the model to weigh equally all the columns for determining the relation type for the table pair. Furthermore, for larger tables, the last cell state is expected to capture the information from all the previous states. A common workaround in such cases is to consider RNNs with attention mechanism~\cite{bahdanau2014neural}. In such cases the models are able to attend over all sequences with a specific \emph{attention weight}. This has the advantage in that classification task is not carried solely based on the last state in a sequence, but instead the sequences are weighed based on their importance.
\textbf{Column-by-Column Attention.} In TableNet, we employ a more sophisticated attention mechanism, which addresses several disadvantages from the global attention mechanism~\cite{bahdanau2014neural}. The \emph{column-by-column} attention mechanism works as following. After having encoded the last column from $t_i$, we process the columns in $t_j$ individually and generate the attention weights w.r.t the columns in $t_i$. As a consequence, for each column in $t_j$ we generate soft alignments to highest matching columns in $t_j$. After having processed all the columns in $t_j$ and computing the corresponding attention weights (the upper part in Figure~\ref{fig:alignment_neural_model}), for classification of the table pair $r(t_i, t_j)$ we will use a non-linear combination of the weighted representation of the last column $c_n^j$ in $t_j$. We use \emph{softmax} classification function for determining the label for $r(t_i, t_j)$.
The advantages of the \emph{column-by-column} attention, is that it allows to encode all the desired table relation semantics, and additionally not enforce for two tables to have the same set of columns, given that not all columns are important for alignment. Thus, the alignment model in TableNet has the following properties:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=*]
\item we can distinguish between columns from the different table schemas $C(t_i)$ and $C(t_j)$,
\item for each column in $C(t_j)$ we can compute alignment weights to the column in $C(t_i)$ which function as \emph{soft alignments} between columns in the respective schemas, and
\end{itemize}
\section{Experimental Setup}\label{sec:setup}
Here we describe the experimental setup for evaluating \emph{TableNet}. First, we introduce the evaluation datasets, and then describe the setup for: (i) candidate generation, and (ii) table alignment.
The evaluation datasets and the code developed for all stages of TableNet are available for download\footnote{\url{https://github.com/bfetahu/wiki_tables}}.
\subsection{Datasets}\label{subsec:datasets}
The main dataset in our experimental setup is Wikipedia. We use the entire set of Wikipedia articles from the snapshot of \texttt{20.10.2017}, with 5.5 million articles. Additionally, we use the Wikipedia categories, with nearly 1 million categories.
\subsubsection*{Wikipedia Tables.} We extract tables from the HTML content of Wikipedia articles.
From the entire snapshot of Wikipedia, only 529,170 Wikipedia articles contain tables. This resulted in a total of 3,238,201 Wikipedia tables.
On average there are \textbf{6 tables per article} with an average of \textbf{6.6 columns}, and with an average of \textbf{10 rows} per table.
In more details, if we consider the composure of columns in the table schemas, more than 20\% of columns in total consist of cell-values that are \emph{instances} (see Section~\ref{sec:problem}). Furthermore, if we consider the number of tables that contain columns with instance values, this number is significantly higher with 85\%. This shows that in the vast majority of cases, we can represent tables, specifically the columns with highly rich semantic representations.
\subsubsection*{Wikipedia Categories.} The category graph $\Psi$ consists of nearly 1M distinct categories, organized in a \emph{parent-child} graph. However, there are two main issues with using $\Psi$ as is. First, it contains cycles, and second, categories are not depth-consistent, that is, the parents of a category do not belong to the same depth in $\Psi$.
We resolve these two issues, by first breaking any cycle in $\Psi$, and establish a depth-consistent graph s.t. for every Wikipedia category we remove any edge to its parents ($\psi \text{\texttt{ childOf }} \psi_p$), where the level of the parent category $\lambda_{\psi_p} < \max_{\psi'\in \psi_p}\lambda_{\psi'}$, where with $\Psi_p$ we denote all the parent categories of $\psi$. Removing such edges does not incur any loss in terms of \emph{parent-child} relations between categories, as such categories can be reached through intermediate categories in $\Psi$. This process is performed iteratively from the root category until we have reached the leafs of $\Psi$.
\subsection{Table Alignment Ground-Truth}\label{subsec:table_alignment_gt}
We are the first to generate a large scale ground-truth for table alignment. Additionally, we are the first to distinguish between \emph{fine-grained relations}, and additionally provide \emph{coverage} guarantees for any given table in terms of its relations.
Our ground-truth consists of a sample of 50 source Wikipedia articles from which we construct article candidate pairs. Since the \emph{naive} approach would generate 26.5M pairs, we apply a set of \emph{filtering keywords} to filter out irrelevant article pairs. We filter articles by checking if a keyword appears \emph{anywhere} in the article's content. The filtering keywords are chosen to fulfill two main criteria:
\begin{itemize}[leftmargin=*]
\item \emph{keywords are \textbf{generic}, in order not to filter out relevant pairs},
\item \emph{topical keywords are \textbf{broad} s.t they can capture both coarse/fine grained topics (e.g. ``athletics'' vs. ``jumper'').}
\end{itemize}
We manually inspect a random sample of pairs that are filtered out, and assess if we remove pairs that should be considered relevant, and consequentially refine the keywords. For article pair that remain after filtering, we check if they can be seen as \emph{false positives} and similarly refine our filtering keywords to remove such cases. We iteratively apply the refine and filtering steps, until we are left with an initial set of article pairs that we deploy for evaluation through crowdsourcing. For the remainder of article pairs, we construct all table pairs and rely on crowdsourcing to assess the table relations. Table~\ref{tbl:candidate_pairs} shows the stats for the three filtering iterations w.r.t the 50 source articles.
From the resulting 3.7k pairs, we have a set of 17k table pairs which we evaluate by means of crowdsourcing.
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{l l l l}
\toprule
\emph{all pairs} & \emph{iter-1} & \emph{iter-2} & \emph{iter-3}\\
\midrule
26.5M & 416506 ($\blacktriangledown 63\times$) & 10701 ($\blacktriangledown 38\times$) & 3702 $(\blacktriangledown 2.9\times)$\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\caption{For 50 random source articles we applied three iterations of refine and filtering steps based on manual inspection. The reduction shows the factor with which the filtering reduces the pairs between each consecutive step is w.r.t the previous step. The final set of article pairs, whose table pairs we evaluate through crowdsourcing is 3.7k article pairs.}
\label{tbl:candidate_pairs}
\end{table}
\subsubsection{Evaluation Protocol}
The table alignment can be of three categories: (i) \texttt{equivalent}, (ii) \texttt{subPartOf}, and (iii) \texttt{none}. To get reliable judgments, we provide detailed instructions and examples to the crowdworkers on how to determine the correct alignment relation. We guide the crowdworkers through the steps below:
\begin{enumerate}[leftmargin=*]
\item Find \emph{important} columns that can be interpreted in isolation from the remaining columns in a table schema (such columns are known also as \emph{subject columns}).
\item Find matching columns in the two tables (that can be considered abstractly as \emph{join keys}), where a match is considered if the columns contain \emph{topically} similar information or the \emph{same} information, and that their column descriptions are matching (e.g. \emph{Nation} is equivalent to \emph{Country}).
\item If the previous two conditions are met, a table is considered as \texttt{equivalent} if the two tables contain similar or the same information, and where for the important columns in a table there are corresponding columns in the candidate table.
\item The alignment \texttt{subPartOf} holds if one of the tables is a super set in the sense that it \emph{contains} the information contained in the other table, or if \emph{semantically} it is the superset of the other table (e.g. \emph{``List of All Movies''} vs. \emph{``List of Award Winning Movies''} for the same movie director). Alternatively, this can be seen as a table generated as a result of a selection over the superset table.
\end{enumerate}
\subsubsection{Evaluation Efforts}
We ensure the quality of the labeling process by using only the highest level workforce in FigureEight. We follow guidelines on how to avoid unreliable workers by establishing a set of \emph{test questions} that we generate manually~\cite{DBLP:conf/chi/GadirajuKDD15}. Every crowdworker needs to pass them successfully with an accuracy of above 70\%. Finally, if a crowdworker takes time less than an estimated \emph{minimum amount of time} for completing the task, we discard their judgments.
On average, it took \textbf{2 mins} for the crowdworkers to judge 5 table pairs. This resulted in a total of \textbf{1,162 hours of work} for the entire ground-truth, for which we payed crowdworkers according to the minimum wage in Germany.
\subsubsection{Ground-Truth Statistics}
From \textbf{17,047 table pairs}, after labeling our ground-truth consists of 52\% table pairs marked with \texttt{noalignment} relation, 24\% marked with as having \texttt{equivalent} alignment, and the remaining 23\% with \texttt{subPartOf} relation. The 47\% portion of table pairs with a relation, result from \textbf{876 article pairs}, which presents a further $\blacktriangledown 4.2\times$ reduction of article pairs from our initial filtering step.
The \emph{average agreement rate} amongst crowdworkers for table pairs is 0.91, which is measured as a combination of the worker's confidence score and the agreement rate.
\subsection{Baselines and TableNet setup}\label{subsec:baselines}
We compare \emph{TableNet} in two main aspects: (i) efficiency in candidate pair generation, and (ii) table alignment.
\subsubsection{Candidate Generation Baselines}
In the candidate generation phase we first look for article pairs whose tables are likely to yield an alignment $r(t_i, t_j)\neq\emptyset$.
\noindent\textbf{Greedy -- G.} For each article we consider as pairs all other articles containing a table. It has maximal coverage, however the amount of irrelevant pairs is extremely high.
\noindent\textbf{Direct Categories -- C1.} We consider as pairs articles that are associated with the same \emph{directly connected} categories. Due to the noisy article-category associations, there is no guarantee that we will have maximal coverage of relevant pairs.
\noindent\textbf{Deepest Category -- C2.} Wikipedia articles are associated with categories that belong to different levels in the category hierarchy. As pairs we consider all articles that belong to the \emph{deepest category} in the hierarchy in $C$.
\noindent\textbf{Parent Categories -- PC.} To increase the coverage of relevant pairs, we consider as pairs, articles that have the same \emph{parent categories} based on their directly associated categories.
\noindent\textbf{Milne-Witten -- MW.} In MW we consider as pairs all articles that are related (for some threshold $\tau$) based on the Milne and Witten relatedness score~\cite{DBLP:conf/cikm/MilneW08}. We compute the relatedness score on the Wikipedia anchor graph.
\subsubsection{Table Alignment Baselines} We consider the following baselines for the table alignment step.
\textbf{Google Fusion.} The work in \cite{DBLP:conf/sigmod/SarmaFGHLWXY12} finds related tables for a given table by computing a set relatedness scores against all possible table candidates. Two tables are related if their schemas are related based on max-weight bipartite graph matching score (see Section~\ref{sec:relatedwork} for a detailed discussion).
Google Fusion is unsupervised, thus, we use a threshold $\tau$ (we fine tune $\tau$ s.t we find the best F1 score) to classify table pairs as either having a relation or not.
\textbf{TableNet$_{LR}$}. Here, we consider as a competitor a standard supervised model based a logistic regression model, which we train using the features in Table~\ref{tbl:candidate_feature_list}. Here, our aim is to show the necessity of using more computationally heavy approaches like RNNs.
\textbf{LSTM and BiLSTM.} We use standard long-term short-memory networks to train a strong baseline for table alignment. Similarly, as in TableNet, here too, we will use the different column representations introduced in Section~\ref{subsec:table_alignment}. Similarly, we use a bidirectional LSTM as a baseline.
\paragraph*{Setup: LSTM, BiLSTM \& TableNet.} We set the number of dimensions for the \emph{hidden layer} to be 100. We train the models for 50 epochs and use 60\% of the data for training, 10\% for validation, and the remaining 30\% for testing.
We represent columns based on three main representations, which we explained in Section~\ref{subsec:table_alignment}. The simplest representation is based on the column description which we mark with TableNet$^{desc}$, and then incrementally add the instance-value representation which we denote with TableNet$^{+val}$, and finally add the \emph{type} representation denoted with TableNet$^{+type}$. In the cases where we represent a column through more than one representation, we simply add up the different representations. Similarly are represented the baselines LSTM and BiLSTM.
For classification we use the \emph{softmax} function, and optimize the models to minimize the \emph{categorical cross-entropy} loss.
\subsection{Evaluation Metrics}\label{subsec:eval_metrics}
We distinguish between two sets of evaluation metrics, aimed at measuring the performance of the candidate generation process, and the table alignment.
\textbf{Candidate Generation.} The main aim is to \emph{minimize} the amount of \emph{irrelevant article pairs} $\langle a_i, a_j\rangle = \emptyset$, and at the same time retain pairs whose tables have an alignment. We compute $\Delta$ as the metric measuring the amount of reduction we achieve w.r.t the \emph{greedy} approach in generating article pairs.
\begin{equation}
\Delta = 1 - \frac{\langle a_i, a_j\rangle}{k * |A|}\,\, \text{where } a_i \neq a_j \wedge a_i, a_j \in A
\end{equation}
where, $k$ is the number of source articles.
Coverage we measure through \emph{micro} and \emph{macro} recall indicated with $R_{\mu}$ and $R$, respectively. $R_\mu$ represents the recall in terms of all table pairs from all the source articles, whereas macro recall measures the average recall scores from all source articles.
\textbf{Table Alignment.} We rely on standard evaluation metrics, such as \emph{precision} (P), \emph{recall} (R), and \emph{F1 score} (F1).
\section{Evaluation Results}\label{sec:evaluation}
In this section, we present in details the evaluation results for TableNet and our competitors in terms of candidate generation efficiency and coverage, and the performance in table alignment.
\subsection{Candidate Generation}
Here we discuss the evaluation results in terms of efficiency in generating relevant article candidate pairs, and compare w.r.t $\Delta$ against \emph{greedy approach}. Additionally we show the recall scores in retaining relevant article pairs.
\paragraph*{Baselines} Table~\ref{tbl:baseline_candidate} shows the efficiency and coverage results for the baseline strategies. From the baselines we notice that the use of the Wikipedia category graph $\Psi$ reduces the amount of irrelevant pairs drastically. In terms of recall, baseline \textbf{PC} maintains high recall with $R=0.83$, and at the same time reduces by $\Delta=87\%$ the amount of irrelevant pairs when compared to \emph{greedy} approach.
\textbf{MW} and \textbf{C2} achieve the highest reduction rate $\Delta$. However, for \textbf{MW} the coverage of relevant article pairs is very low with $R=0.49$.
The results in Table~\ref{tbl:baseline_candidate} show that despite the high reduction rates for the different baselines, we still face the issue of either having a highly imbalanced ratio of relevant and irrelevant pairs, or in some cases like \textbf{C2} where the reduction rate is the highest, the recall is low $R=0.49$. Thus, the balance between coverage and efficiency is not maintained. We show that we can improve the deficiencies of the baseline approaches through our feature set in Table~\ref{tbl:candidate_feature_list}.
\begin{table}[ht!]
\centering
\scalebox{1.0}{
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l}
\toprule
& $|\langle a_i, a_j\rangle|$ & $\Delta$ & \emph{rel. pairs} & $R$ \\
\midrule
\textbf{G} & 26,500,000 & - & 876 & 1.0\\
\textbf{PC} & 3,486,031 & 0.87 & 724 & 0.83\\
\textbf{C1} & 792,701 & 0.97 & 571 & 0.65\\
\textbf{MW} & 33,890 & 0.99 & 429 & 0.49\\
\textbf{C2} & 6,738 & 0.99 & 440 & 0.50\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Reduction rate for baselines. Higher $\Delta$ means that there are less irrelevant pairs for the table alignment step.}
\label{tbl:baseline_candidate}
\end{table}
\paragraph*{TableNet: Filtering \& Classification} We first filter out article pairs whose tables are unlikely to yield a relation and then classify the remaining pairs to further filter out irrelevant pairs.
\textbf{Filtering. } The filtering step uses the features in Table~\ref{tbl:candidate_feature_list} to remove irrelevant article pairs. Figure~\ref{fig:feature_filtering_impact} shows the impact of the different features in reducing the amount of article pairs w.r.t \emph{greedy} approach. For instance, the $f_2$ feature, which computes the similarity of article abstracts based on their \emph{doc2vec} representation, provides a high reduction with $\Delta=0.91$. This feature follows our intuition on generating the article pairs for the ground-truth (see Section~\ref{sec:setup}), where the \emph{topic} and other semantic similarities for an article pair can be extracted from the article's content.
In terms of recall, we see that in majority of the cases the individual features have $R \geq 0.80$ coverage.
Since different features capture different notions of similarity, we apply them in \emph{conjunction}, resulting in very high reduction rate of article pairs with $\Delta > 0.99$, and at the same time retaining a relatively high coverage with $R=0.68$. The reduction compared to the greedy approach is more than $\blacktriangledown 255$ times less pairs.
We believe that this high reduction rate and at the same time the relatively high recall of relevant pairs, when compared to the baseline approaches can be attributed to the fact that we consider the similarities of articles, and their corresponding categories and articles' content in the embedding space. This allows us to capture implicit semantics that cannot be capture for instance through the simple link-based structure in the category graph $\Psi$.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{candidate_features
\caption{Feature impact in terms of reducing the amount of irrelevant pairs and the coverage of $\langle a_i, a_j\rangle_{r}$ pairs. On top of each bar we show the corresponding number of article pairs (for $\Delta$) and the number of retained relevant pairs (for $R$).}
\label{fig:feature_filtering_impact}
\end{figure}
With the precomputed features we train a classifier and further filter out irrelevant pairs from the filtered articles in Figure~\ref{fig:feature_filtering_impact}.
\textbf{Classification.} Determining whether a pair of articles, specifically, if their corresponding tables will result in a alignment relation is a difficult learning task.
From the previous filtering step, irrespective of the high reduction rate from 26M pairs to only 103k pairs, the amount of irrelevant pairs is still too high for any supervised approach to be able to learn models that predict with great accuracy the table relations. Thus, based on the configured RF model for high coverage (see Section~\ref{sec:setup}), we train it on the feature set in Table~\ref{tbl:candidate_feature_list} to further classify irrelevant pairs and filter them out.
Figure~\ref{fig:threshold_coverage} shows the evaluation results for varying confidence thresholds of the RF model. With increasing threshold $\tau$ we can predict with higher accuracy pairs into their respective classes, whereas with lower thresholds we allow for more misclassifications. The increase of the confidence $\tau$ is directly proportional with the decrease in the amount of relevant pairs. This is intuitive as from the 103k pairs, only 876 pairs are actually relevant. However, based on the configuration of the RF (see Section~\ref{sec:setup}), we are able to retrieve relevant pairs with high coverage, by slightly allowing irrelevant pairs to pass through.
We choose the confidence score to be $\tau = 0.5$, as it shows the best trade-off between the coverage of relevant pairs, and the amount of irrelevant pairs that are passed onto the table alignment step. We achieve a high reduction rate of $\Delta = 0.982$ leaving us with only 1.8k pairs, and with a recall of $R_\mu=0.81$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\columnwidth]{precision_recall_candidate_pairs}
\caption{For varying classification confidence $\tau$ in the x-axis, we show the scores for $R_{\mu}$ (turquoise line), and the precision $P$ (red line). For each confidence score $\tau$ we show the corresponding amount of relevant pairs we retain in the case of recall, whereas for precision we show the amount of total pairs. We choose $\tau = 0.5$ which results in $R_\mu = 0.81$ and a $\Delta=0.982$ w.r.t the 103k pairs from the filtering step. }
\label{fig:threshold_coverage}
\end{figure}
Furthermore, if we compare this to the original amount of pairs from the greedy approach with 26M pairs, 103k from our pre-filtered candidates, and finally this drops to only 1.8k pairs in total after the classification step. Depending on the use case, one can use higher thresholds and thus have a higher ratio of relevant pairs, which makes the alignment task more efficient.
\subsection{Table Alignment}\label{subsec:table_alignment_evaluation}
\begin{table*}[ht!]
\centering
\scalebox{1.0}{
\begin{tabular}{l l l l l l l l l l l l l}
\toprule
& \multicolumn{3}{c}{\texttt{equivalent}} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\texttt{subPartOf}} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{\texttt{noalignment}} & & &\\
\midrule
& \textbf{P} & \textbf{R} & \textbf{F1} & \textbf{P} & \textbf{R} & \textbf{F1} & \textbf{P} & \textbf{R} & \textbf{F1} & \textbf{Acc} & \textbf{R} & \textbf{F1}\\
\midrule
\emph{Google Fusion} & 0.809 & 0.405 & 0.540 & - & - & - & - & - & -\\
\emph{TableNet}$_{LR}$ & 0.824 & 0.790 & 0.804 & 0.612 & 0.688 & 0.648 & 0.754 & 0.730 & 0.742 & 0.730 & 0.723 & 0.731 \\[1ex]
\emph{LSTM}$^{desc}$ & 0.851 & \textbf{0.926} & 0.887 & \textbf{0.696} & 0.816 & 0.751 & 0.870 & \textbf{0.770} & 0.817 & 0.806 & 0.837 & 0.818\\
\emph{LSTM}$^{+val}$ & 0.865 & 0.913 & 0.888 & 0.668 & 0.977 & 0.794 & 0.936 & 0.722 & 0.815 & 0.823 & 0.871 & 0.832\\
\emph{LSTM}$^{+type}$ & 0.839 & 0.935 & 0.884 & 0.547 & 0.976 & 0.701 & 0.933 & 0.564 & 0.703 & 0.773 & 0.825 & 0.763\\[1ex]
\emph{BiLSTM}$^{desc}$ & 0.883 & 0.891 & 0.887 & 0.684 & 0.960 & 0.799 & 0.918 & 0.752 & 0.827 & 0.828 & 0.868 & 0.838\\
\emph{BiLSTM}$^{+val}$ &0.877 & 0.871 & 0.874 & 0.684 & 0.975 & 0.804 & 0.915 & 0.747 & 0.823 & 0.826 & 0.864 & 0.834\\
\emph{BiLSTM}$^{+type}$ & 0.854 & 0.908 & 0.880 & 0.690 & 0.957 & 0.802 & 0.925 & 0.741 & 0.823 & 0.823 & 0.869 & 0.835\\[1ex]
\emph{TableNet}$^{desc}$ & \textbf{0.888} & 0.884 & 0.886 & 0.686 & 0.947 & 0.796 & 0.909 & 0.759 & 0.827 & 0.828 & 0.863 & 0.836\\
\emph{TableNet}$^{+val}$ & 0.856 & \textbf{0.926} & \textbf{0.890} & 0.675 & \textbf{0.993} & 0.804 & \textbf{0.952} & 0.719 & 0.819 & 0.828 & \textbf{0.880} & 0.838\\
\emph{TableNet}$^{+type}$ & 0.872 & 0.903 & 0.887 & 0.692 & 0.961 & \textbf{0.805} & 0.925 & 0.752 & \textbf{0.829} & \textbf{0.830} & 0.872 & \textbf{0.840} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Evaluation results for the tasks of table alignment for the different competitors and TableNet. The evaluation results correspond to our manually constructed ground-truth dataset.}
\label{tbl:alignment_results}
\end{table*}
In this section, we show the results for the table alignment step. From the article pairs marked as relevant in the previous step, we classify the corresponding tables into their corresponding alignment relation, $r(t_i, t_j) \rightarrow$ \{\texttt{equivalent}, \texttt{subPartOf}, \texttt{none}\}.
\paragraph*{\textbf{Performance}} Table~\ref{tbl:alignment_results} shows the alignment evaluation results for TableNet and all the competitors. Apart from the \emph{Google Fusion} baseline, all the baselines are supervised models. In the case of \emph{Google Fusion}, we consider a table pair to be related if their matching score is above some threshold that we determine empirically s.t we have the highest F1 score.
\textbf{Google Fusion.} This baseline has a reasonably high accuracy in determining whether a $r(t_i,t_j)\neq \emptyset$. Here we cannot distinguish between the different classes as the approach is unsupervised. In terms of recall it has the lowest score. This is due to the fact that the matching is performed by considering only the \emph{column type} and the \emph{column title}similarity. Additionally, the \emph{bipartite} matching algorithm cannot retain the order of the columns, which is highly important for determining the alignment relation.
\textbf{TableNet$_{LR}$.} In this baseline we trained a \emph{logistic regression} (LR) model with the feature set in Table~\ref{tbl:candidate_feature_list}, which classifies the \texttt{equivalent} and \texttt{subPartOf} relations with $F1=0.804$ and $F1=0.648$, respectively. When compared to Google Fusion, it achieves a 52\% relative improvement in terms of F1 score for \texttt{equivalent} class, whereas if we take the average of both classes \texttt{equivalent} and \texttt{subPartOf} then the F1 improvement is 37\%.
This shows that the proposed feature set is able to capture relations of type \texttt{equivalent} with high accuracy. However, it often misclassifies the \texttt{subPartOf} into the \texttt{none} and \texttt{equivalent} classes. One reason for this misclassification is since the features and the LR model cannot capture the sequence of columns, and it is not trivial to incorporate the information from the cell-values into the model for classifying the table relation.
\textbf{LSTM and BiLSTM.} One key motivation in this work is the hypothesis that through sequence based models, we can retain the order of columns in their respective schemas, an important aspect in determining the table alignment relation. The LSTM and BiLSTM approaches represent very competitive baselines. An additional advantage which addresses a deficiency in the standard supervised models, is that we jointly encode the different representations of a column for the classification task. Representing the columns as a combination of their description in the word embedding space, and the type and instance values through graph embeddings, we can capture complex relationship between the column description and the underlying cell-values.
For \texttt{equivalent} relations, LSTM$^{+val}$ and BiLSTM$^{+desc}$ achieve the highest F1 scores with $F1=0.886$ and $F1=0.887$, respectively. For \texttt{subPartOf} relations, the results look slightly different, with LSTM$^{+val}$ still having the highest F1 score, whereas for BiLSTM, BiLSTM$^{+val}$ the representation based on the column description and instance values achieves the highest F1 scores. The introduction of the column type in BiLSTM$^{+type}$ provides a further boost in the accuracy of determining \texttt{subPartOf} relations. One conclusion we draw from the comparison between the two relations and two models, is that for \texttt{subPartOf} relations the \emph{column type} provides additional power on determining the table alignment relation, whereas for \texttt{equivalent} it does not provide an additional advantage. These findings are inline with \cite{DBLP:conf/sigmod/SarmaFGHLWXY12}, where column type can provide important information in finding related tables. Comparing the LSTM and BiLSTM baselines against TableNet$_{LR}$, we gain 10\% relative improvement in terms of F1 score for \texttt{equivalent} relation, and with 22\% in the case of \texttt{subPartOf} relation. While for \emph{Google Fusion} we have a 64\% improvement for \texttt{equivalent} relation.
\textbf{TableNet.} In our approach, we addressed several deficiencies from the related work. Through our \emph{column-by-column} attention mechanism, we can compute soft alignments between columns in the respective table schemas and thus take into account the position of the matching columns in the corresponding schemas. Additionally, the column representations allow us to capture the similarity between columns and the schema context in which they appear, and additionally the representation context based on their description, type and its instance values.
The evaluation results reflect this intuition. Comparing our best performing setup, TableNet$^{+type}$ achieves an overall $F1=0.840$ across all three classes. We achieve a relative improvement of 64\% when comparing F1 scores for the \texttt{equivalent} class against \emph{Google Fusion}, or 56\% if we compare the average F1 score for both alignment relations (\texttt{equivalent} and \texttt{subPartOf}). Against TableNet$_{LR}$ we observe high improvements for both alignment relation classes with a relative increase of 10\% and 24\% in terms of F1 score, for \texttt{equivalent} and \texttt{subPartOf}, respectively.
LSTM and BiLSTM are two strong competitors. They are able to capture the sequence information in the table schemas, and additionally provide the means to capture the contextual similarity between the column description, type and instance cell-values. TableNet$^{+type}$ outperforms both approaches on average F1 score across all classes. For the individual classes, we note a variations amongst the different configurations of TableNet that perform best (marked in bold). The relative improvements are not as high as when compared against Google Fusion and TableNet$_{LR}$, however, they are consistent in nearly all cases. This confirms the usefulness of the attention mechanism for the alignment task, where we achieve an overall better performance in terms of F1 score.
\section{Conclusions and Future Work}\label{sec:conclusions}
In this work, we presented TableNet, an approach for table alignment by taking into account the coverage of table relations by providing an efficient approach for generating article pairs, whose tables we consider for alignment with a high accuracy. We provide fine-grained relations \texttt{equivalent}, \texttt{subPartOf}, or \texttt{none}, a significant improvement over existing works.
We constructed an exhaustive ground truth for a random sample of 50 Wikipedia articles for which we labeled all possible table pairs, providing a dataset against which we can measure the coverage of table relations, and additionally provide high quality labels for more than 17k table pairs in our ground-truth.
In terms of \emph{efficiency}, we show that from a naive approach which produces 26.5M pairs we can provide an efficient means that guarantees a high coverage of more than 68\% and at the same time reducing the amount of pairs by $\blacktriangledown 255$ times. In terms of \emph{table alignment}, we show that we can improve over strong baselines. We showed relative improvement of 56\% when compared to \emph{Google Fusion}, and with 17\% when compared against TableNet$_{LR}$, a standard feature based model. If we compare against LSTM$^{+type}$ and BiLSTM$^{+type}$, we again achieve improvements in terms of F1 score, thus, validating our hypothesis that a \emph{column-by-column} attention mechanism provides soft alignments for columns across table schemas.
\paragraph*{Future Work} As future work we foresee the task of \emph{relation typing} s.t we can provide a attribute-based explanation of the relations in the case \texttt{equivalent} alignment, and for \texttt{subPartOf} provide attribute restrictions, i.e., in terms of the semantics of the respective tables, or in the form of \emph{selection} criteria that may apply to generate a sub or superset from a table s.t. the \texttt{subPartOf} alignment holds.
|
\section{Introduction}
\subsection{Critical exponents and Hausdorff dimension}
Let $\Gamma$ be a discrete group of isometries of a metric space $(X,d)$. A well-known metric invariant of $\Gamma$ is its \emph{critical exponent}, which measures the exponential growth rate of its orbits. It can be defined by
\[\delta_\Gamma = \limsup_{R\to +\infty} \frac{1}{R}\log\left(\Card\{g\in \Gamma \mid d(x,g \cdot x) \leq R\}\right)~,\]
where $x$ is any base point in $X$.
When $(X,d)$ is the hyperbolic space $\mathbb{H}^n$ and $\Gamma$ is \emph{convex-cocompact} (i.e. acts cocompactly on a non-empty convex subset of $\mathbb{H}^n$), Sullivan \cite{sullivan1979density} proved that the critical exponent of $\Gamma$ equals the Hausdorff dimension of the \emph{limit set} of $\Gamma$ inside $\partial_\infty \mathbb{H}^n$. The proof relies on the Ahlfors regularity of the \emph{Patterson--Sullivan measure} on the limit set.
This famous theorem has known a number of generalizations. See for instance \cite{DOP,roblin2003ergodicite,Coornaert} for generalizations to other discrete groups acting on hyperbolic spaces. This paper is mainly interested in extensions to other non-positively curved geometries. A fairly general version of Sullivan's theorem was given by Coornaert for a discrete group $\Gamma$ acting convex cocompactly on a Gromov hyperbolic space $X$ (see \cite[Corollaire 7.6]{Coornaert}). In this setting, the critical exponent equals the Hausdorff dimension of the limit set of $\Gamma$ in $\partial_\infty X$ measured with respect to the Gromov metric on the boundary (see Section \ref{subsec-gromov metric on the boundary}). When $X$ is a Riemannian manifold with variable negative curvature, this metric may differ from the visual metric on the boundary. For instance, the Gromov metric on the boundary of the complex hyperbolic space $\mathbb{H}^n_\C$ coincides with the Carnot--Caratheodory metric of the unit sphere in $\C^n$.
There have also been several important works aiming at generalizing Patterson--Sullivan theory to discrete subgroups of a semi-simple Lie group $G$ of higher rank acting on its symmetric space $X$ \cite{link2005measures,quint2002mesures}. A new feature of the higher rank is the existence of several critical exponents corresponding to several $G$-invariant ``metrics'' on $X$. Quint studied in \cite{quint2002mesures} the dependence of those critical exponents on such a choice an constructed analogs of Patterson--Sullivan measures on the space $G/P_{min}$, where $P_{min}$ is a minimal parabolic subgroup.
The recently developed theory of Anosov subgroups of higher rank Lie groups motivates a further investigation of these generalizations. Anosov subgroups are in many aspects the ``right'' generalization of convex cocompact groups in rank $1$. In particular, they are Gromov hyperbolic, and their Gromov boundary is realized geometrically as a limit set in some flag variety $G/P$. It is natural to ask how the Hausdorff dimension of this limit set relates to the different critical exponents of the group.
\subsection{Statement of the results}
The present work focuses on \emph{projective Anosov subgroups} of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$. We explain in paragraph \ref{subsubsec-Anosov representation} that general Anosov subgroups of a semi-simple Lie group $G$ can be seen as projective Anosov groups via a suitably chosen linear representation.
Let $\Gamma$ be a projective Anosov subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$. Then $\Gamma$ is Gromov hyperbolic and comes with two injective equivariant maps $\xi : \partial_\infty \Gamma \to \mathbf{P} (\R^n)$ and $\xi^* : \partial_\infty \Gamma \to \mathbf{P} ({\R^n}^*)$. We denote by $\xi^{sym}$ the map $(\xi,\xi^*): \partial_\infty \Gamma \to \mathbf{P} (\R^n) \times \mathbf{P}({\R^n}^*)$. If moreover $\Gamma$ preserves a proper convex subset of $\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$, then $\Gamma$ is \emph{strongly projectively convex-cocompact} in the sense of \cite{DGK}.
Given $g\in \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$, define $\mu_i(g)$ as the logarithm of the $i$-th eigenvalue of $\sqrt{g g^T}$ (in decreasing order). We define the \emph{simple root critical exponent} of $\Gamma$ by
\[\delta_{1,2}(\Gamma) = \limsup_{R\to +\infty} \frac{1}{R} \log \left(\Card \{\gamma \in \Gamma \mid \mu_1(\gamma) - \mu_2(\gamma) \leq R\}\right)\}\]
and the \emph{Hilbert critical exponent} of $\Gamma$ by
\[\delta_{1,n}(\Gamma) = \limsup_{R\to +\infty} \frac{1}{R} \log \left(\Card \{\gamma \in \Gamma \mid \mu_1(\gamma) - \mu_n(\gamma) \leq R\}\right)\}~.\]
These critical exponents are relevant for different reasons: the projective Anosov property means that $\mu_1(\gamma) - \mu_2(\gamma)$ grows linearly with the word length of $\gamma$, so $\delta_{1,2}(\Gamma)$ can be seen as a ``measure'' of the Anosov property. The critical exponent $\delta_{1,n}(\Gamma)$ is the critical exponent associated to the Hilbert metric on $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)/\mathrm{SO}(n)$ seen as the projectivization of the cone of positive definite quadratic forms on $\R^n$. Our main result compares these two critical exponents with the Hausdorff dimension of $\xi^{sym}(\partial_\infty \Gamma)$.\\
Our first comparison result between Hausdorff dimensions concerns strongly projectively convex cocompact subgroups of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$, introduced by Crampon and Marquis \cite{crampon2014finitude}. It is shown in \cite{DGK} that these groups are projective Anosov.
\begin{theo} \label{theo-MainTheorem}
Let $\Gamma$ be a strongly projectively convex cocompact subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$. Then
\[2 \delta_{1,n}(\Gamma) \leq \DimH(\xi^{sym}(\partial_\infty \Gamma)) \leq \delta_{1,2}(\Gamma)~.\]
\end{theo}
For projective Anosov subgroups that are not convex cocompact, composing with the representation of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ into $\mathrm{SL}(\mathrm{Sym}^2(\R^n))$ gives the following weaker result:
\begin{coro} \label{coro-NotConvexCocompact}
Let $\Gamma$ be a projective Anosov subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$. Then
\[\delta_{1,n}(\Gamma) \leq \DimH(\xi^{sym}(\partial_\infty \Gamma)) \leq \delta_{1,2}(\Gamma)~.\]
\end{coro}
Note that Theorem \ref{theo-MainTheorem} is ``sharp'' in the sense that if $\Gamma$ is a convex cocompact subgroup in $\mathrm{SO}(n-1,1)\subset \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$, then
\[2\delta_{1,n}(\Gamma) = \DimH(\xi^{sym}(\partial_\infty\Gamma)) = \delta_{1,2}(\Gamma)~.\]
Corollary \ref{coro-NotConvexCocompact} is weaker since $\delta_{1,n}(\Gamma)$ is always less or equal to $\frac{1}{2} \delta_{1,2}(\Gamma)$. However, it cannot be sharpened in full generality. For instance, let $\Gamma$ be a cocompact lattice in $\mathrm{SL}(2,\R)$ and let $\rho_{irr}$ and $\rho_{red}$ denote respectively the irreducible and reducible representations of $\mathrm{SL}(2,\R)$ into $\mathrm{SL}(3,\R)$. Then $\rho_{irr}(\Gamma)$ and $\rho_{red}(\Gamma)$ are projective Anosov with limit set a smooth curve (of Hausdorff dimension $1$). However, their critical exponents differ:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\rho_{irr}(\Gamma)$ is convex cocompact and
\[2\delta_{1,3}(\rho_{irr}(\Gamma)) = \delta_{1,2}(\rho_{irr}(\Gamma)) = 1~.\]
\item $\rho_{red}(\Gamma)$ is not convex cocompact and
\[\delta_{1,3}(\rho_{red}(\Gamma)) = \frac{1}{2} \delta_{1,2}(\rho_{red}(\Gamma)) = 1~.\]
\end{itemize}
Let us discuss further these results.
\subsubsection*{Lower inequality}
The main motivation for the lower inequality in Theorem~\ref{theo-MainTheorem} was to generalize the following theorem of Crampon:
\begin{theo}[\cite{crampon2011dynamics}]
Let $\Gamma \subset \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ be a Gromov hyperbolic group acting properly discontinuously and cocompactly on a strictly convex open domain $\Omega$ in $\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$. Then
\[2\delta_{1,n} \leq n-2~,\]
with equality if and only if $\Gamma$ is conjugate to a subgroup of $\mathrm{SO}(n-1,1)$ (in which case $\Omega$ is projectively equivalent to the hyperbolic space $\mathbb{H}^{n-1}$).
\end{theo}
In that case, $\Gamma$ is projective Anosov, $\xi(\partial_\infty \Gamma)$ is the boundary of $\Omega$ and $\xi^*(\partial_\infty \Gamma)$ the boundary of the dual convex set. One can show that $\xi^{sym}(\partial_\infty \Gamma)$ is a Lipschitz manifold of dimension $n-2$, hence $\DimH(\partial_\infty \Gamma) = n-2$. Theorem \ref{theo-MainTheorem} thus recovers Crampon's inequality as a particular case.
Initially, we hoped to get a lower bound on Hausdorff dimension of $\xi(\partial_\infty \Gamma)$. But several attempts with slightly different methods always led to a ``symmetric'' version of the limit set. This raised the following question:
\begin{question} \label{ques-HaudorffDimensionSymmetric}
Let $\Gamma \subset \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ be a projective Anosov subgroup. Do we have
\[\DimH(\xi(\partial_\infty \Gamma)) = \DimH(\xi^*(\partial_\infty \Gamma)) = \DimH(\xi^{sym}(\partial_\infty \Gamma))~?\]
\end{question}
While our na\"ive intuition leaned towards a positive answer, the following case might actually provide a counter-example:
Let $\Gamma$ be a lattice in $\mathrm{SL}(2,\R)$, $u:\Gamma \to \R^2$ a function satisfying the cocycle relation
\[u(\gamma \eta) = u(\gamma) + \gamma \cdot u(\eta)~,\]
and let $\rho_u$ be the representation of $\Gamma$ into $\mathrm{SL}(3,\R)$ given by
\[\rho_u(\gamma) = \left( \begin{matrix} \gamma & u(\gamma) \\ 0 & 1\end{matrix} \right)~.\]
Then $\rho_u(\Gamma)$ is projective Anosov. Let $\xi_u: \partial_\infty \Gamma \to \mathbf{P}(\R^3)$ and $\xi_u^*: \partial_\infty \Gamma \to \mathbf{P}({\R^3}^*)$ denote the boundary maps associated to $\rho_u(\Gamma)$. Then $\xi_u(\partial_\infty\Gamma) = \xi_0(\partial_\infty \Gamma)$ is a projective line. On the other side, the dual limit set $\xi_u^*(\partial_\infty \Gamma)$ is not a projective line as soon as $u$ is not a coboundary\footnote{Recall that a cocycle $u$ is a coboundary if there exists $v\in \R^2$ such that $u(\gamma) = \gamma \cdot v - v$ for all $\gamma \in \Gamma$.}, and some numerical simulations seem to show that $\xi_u^*(\partial_\infty \Gamma)$ has typically Hausdorff dimension$>1$.\\
There are situations where the equality in Question \ref{ques-HaudorffDimensionSymmetric} is known to be true: If $\Gamma$ preserves a non-degenerate quadratic form $\mathbf q$ on $\R^n$, then $\xi^*$ is the image of $\xi$ by the isomorphism $\R^n\simeq {\R^n}^*$ defined by $\mathbf q$, and therefore
\[\DimH(\xi(\partial_\infty \Gamma)) = \DimH(\xi^*(\partial_\infty \Gamma)) = \DimH(\xi^{sym}(\partial_\infty \Gamma))~.\]
In that case we also have that $\mu_n(\gamma) = - \mu_1(\gamma)$ for all $\gamma \in \Gamma$, so that
\[2\delta_{1,n}(\Gamma) = \delta_1(\Gamma) \overset{\textrm{def}}{=} \limsup_{R\to +\infty} \frac{1}{R} \log \left(\Card \{\gamma \in \Gamma \mid \mu_1(\gamma) \leq R\}\right)~.\]
Those projectively convex cocompact groups preserving a non degenerate quadratic form are precisely the $\mathbb{H}^{p,q}$-convex cocompact groups introduced in \cite{DGKSOpq}, whose critical exponent was studied by the first two authors in \cite{GM18}. In this setting, Theorem \ref{theo-MainTheorem} gives an alternative proof of the inequality
\[\delta_{\mathbb{H}^{p,q}}(\Gamma) \leq \DimH(\Lambda(\Gamma))\]
in \cite[Theorem 1.2]{GM18}.
A rigidity statement in that context was obtained by Collier--Tholozan--Toulisse in \cite{CCT17} for $\mathbb{H}^{2,q}$-convex cocompact surface groups, which are the images of fundamental groups of closed surfaces by maximal representations into $\mathrm{SO}(2,q+1)$. Their limit set is a Lipschitz curve (of Hausdorff dimension $1$), and they prove that the critical exponent $\delta_1$ is $\leq 1$, with equality if and only the group is contained in $\mathrm{SO}(2,1)\times \mathrm{SO}(q)$ (up to conjugation and finite index). Together with Crampon's theorem, this leads us to formulate the following conjecture:
\begin{conj}
Let $\Gamma \subset \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ be a projectively convex cocompact subgroup. If $2\delta_{1,n} = \DimH(\xi^{sym}(\partial_\infty \Gamma))$, then $\Gamma$ is conjugate to a subgroup of $\mathrm{SO}(n-1,1)$.
\end{conj}
Note finally that Potrie--Sambarino proved in \cite{potrie2014} a similar but stronger inequality for Hitchin representations of surface groups. If $\Gamma$ is the fundamental group of a closed surface and $\rho:\Gamma\to \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ is a Hitchin representation, then $\rho(\Gamma)$ is projective Anosov and $\xi_\rho(\partial_\infty \Gamma)$ is a $\mathcal{C}^1$ curve, of Hausdorff dimension $1$. However, they prove that
\[2\delta_{1,n}(\rho(\Gamma)) \leq \frac{2}{n-1}~.\]
with equality if and only if $\rho = m_{irr} \circ j$ where $j:\Gamma \to \mathrm{SL}(2,\R)$ is Fuchsian and $m_{irr}: \mathrm{SL}(2,\R) \to \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ is irreducible.
\subsubsection*{Upper inequality}
The upper inequality $\DimH(\xi^{sym}(\partial_\infty \Gamma)) \leq \delta_{1,2}(\Gamma)$ is proven independently by Pozzetti--Sambarino--Wienhard in \cite{PSW19}. There, they also find a sufficient criterion for this inequality to be an equality. This criterion is satisfied by many families of Anosov groups, showing in particular that the equality can be stable under small deformations of $\Gamma$. Their work generalizes a result of Potrie--Sambarino for surface groups embedded in $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ via a Hitchin representation. They are in stark contrast with the rigidity phenomena for the $\delta_{1,n}$ discussed above.
Here we merely give an example where equality holds:
\begin{theo}
Let $\Gamma$ be the fundamental group of a closed surface of genus greater than $1$ and let $j_1$ and $j_2$ be two Fuchsian representations of $\Gamma$ into $\mathrm{SL}(2,\R)$. Then $j_1\otimes j_2(\Gamma) \subset \mathrm{SL}(2,\R)\times \mathrm{SL}(2,\R) \subset \mathrm{SL}(4,\R)$ is projective Anosov, $\xi_{j_1\otimes j_2}^{sym}(\partial_\infty \Gamma)$ is a Lipschitz curve and
\[\delta_{1,2}(j_1\otimes j_2(\Gamma)) = 1~.\]
\end{theo}
The groups to which this theorem applies are the fundamental groups of globally hyperbolic Cauchy compact anti-de Sitter spacetimes studied by Mess \cite{mess2007lorentz}. They form a connected component in the space of surface groups embedded in $\mathrm{SL}(2,\R)\times \mathrm{SL}(2,\R) \simeq \mathrm{SO}(2,2)$. To our knowledge, this class of example is not covered by the main result of Pozzetti--Sambarino--Wienhard.
On the other hand, a Fuchsian group of $\mathrm{SL}(2,\R)$ embedded reducibly in $\mathrm{SL}(3,\R)$ gives an example where $\DimH(\xi^{sym}(\Gamma)) < \delta_{1,2}$. Determining a necessary and sufficient criterion for the equality to hold seems difficult.
\subsection*{Acknowledgements}
While writing this paper, we have been informed that Beatrice Pozzetti, Andres Sambarino and Anna Wienhard were working on similar results. We thank them for sharing their work in progress.
Nicolas Tholozan's research is partially supported by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche through the grant DynGeo
(ANR-11-BS01-013)
\section{Background}
\subsection{Hausdorff dimension}
Let $(X,d)$ be a metric space. For $s>0$, the $s$-dimensional Hausdorff measure of $X$ is defined by
$$H^s(X) = \lim_{\epsilon\rightarrow 0} \inf \{ \sum_i r_i^s \, | \, X \subset \bigcup_{i\in I} B(x_i, r_i)\mid r_i \leq \epsilon\}$$
where the infimum is taken over all countable covers of $X$ by balls of radius less than $\epsilon$.
One can show that there exists a critical parameter $s_0>0$ such that $H^s(X) = +\infty$ for all $s<s_0$ and $H^s(X) = 0$ for all $s>s_0$. This number $s_0$ is called the Hausdorff dimension of $(X,d)$ and is denoted by $\DimH(X,d)$.
In this paper, we will compare the Hausdorff dimension of different metrics on a compact set. The following proposition summarizes the comparison properties that we will need. It easily follows from the definition.
\begin{prop} \label{p:GeneralComparisonHDim}
Let $d$ and $d'$ be two distances on a space $X$. If there exists $C$ and $\alpha>0$ such that
\[d' \leq C d^{\alpha}~,\]
then
\[\DimH(X,d') \geq \alpha \DimH(X,d)~.\]
\end{prop}
In particular, if $d$ and $d'$ are bi-Lipschitz, then \[\DimH(X,d) = \DimH(X,d')~.\]
Assume now that $X$ is a compact subset of a smooth manifold $M$. Any two Riemannian (or even Finsler) metrics on $M$ are bi-Lipschitz equivalent in a neighbourhood of $X$. Hence the Hausdorff dimension of $X$ with the induced distance is independent of the choice of such a metric. We denote this Hausdorff dimension by $\DimH(X)$ and we have:
\[\DimH(X)= \DimH(X,d)\]
where $d$ is the distance induced by any Riemannian metric on $M$.
\subsection{Cartan and Jordan projections}
\subsubsection{Cartan subspaces and restricted roots}
We present in this subsection the basic structure theory of semi-simple real Lie groups. A detailed exposition of this theory can be found in \cite{eberlein1996geometry}.
Let $G$ be a semisimple Lie group with finite center, $K$ a maximal compact subgroup of $G$ and $X=G/K$ the symmetric space of $G$. We denote by $\mathfrak{g}$ the Lie algebra of $G$ and by $\mathfrak{k}\subset \mathfrak{g}$ the Lie algebra of $K$. Let $\mathfrak{p}$ denote the orthogonal of $\mathfrak{k}$ with respect to the Killing form of $\mathfrak{g}$. A \emph{Cartan subspace} $\mathfrak{a}$ is a maximal Abelian subalgebra of $\mathfrak{p}$.
A \emph{restricted root} is a non-zero linear form $\alpha$ on $\mathfrak{a}$ for which there exists $u\in \mathfrak{g}$, $u\neq 0$ such that
\[\ad_a(u) = \alpha(a) u\]
for all $a\in \mathfrak{a}$. We will denote by $\Delta$ the set of restricted roots.
The \emph{Weyl group} $W(\mathfrak{a})$ is the finite group $N(\mathfrak{a})/Z(\mathfrak{a})$,where $N(\mathfrak{a})$ and $Z(\mathfrak{a})$ denote respectively the normalizer and the centralizer of $\mathfrak{a}$ in $K$. The kernels of the restricted roots cut $\mathfrak{a}$ into fundamental domains for the action of $W(\mathfrak{a})$. Choosing a connected component of $\mathfrak{a} \backslash \bigcup_{\alpha \in \Delta} \ker \alpha$, we define the set of \emph{positive roots} $\Delta^+$ as those roots that are positive on this connected component, and the \emph{Weyl chamber} as the closure of this connected component, i.e.
\[\mathfrak{a}_+ = \{b\in \mathfrak{a} \mid \alpha(b) \geq 0 \textrm{ for all $\alpha\in \Delta^+$}\}~.\]
With those choices, the \emph{simple roots} are the positive roots that are not a positive linear combination of other positive roots. They form a basis of $\mathfrak{a}^*$. We denote by $\Delta^s$ the set of simple roots.
Finally there is a unique element $w\in W(\mathfrak{a})$ such that $-w$ preserves $\mathfrak{a}^+$. The transformation $-w$ is an involution called the \emph{opposition involution} and denoted by $i$. The opposition involution preserves $\Delta^s$.\\
\paragraph{\textit{Main example}} The main example we will be interested in here is when $G$ is the group $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$. A canonical choice for a maximal compact subgroup $K$ is the subgroup $\mathrm{SO}(n,\R)$ of orthogonal matrices. The symmetric space $X_n = \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)/\mathrm{SO}(n)$ can be identified with the space of scalar products on $\R^n$ up to scaling, with the standard scalar product as base point $o$.
The Lie algebra $\mathfrak{k}$ is the space of anti-symmetric matrices and its orthogonal $\mathfrak{p} \subset \mathfrak{sl}(n,\R)$ is the space of symmetric matrices of trace $0$. A canonical choice of Cartan subspace is $\mathfrak{a}= \{\textrm{Diagonal matrices of trace $0$}\}= \{ \mathrm{diag}(\lambda_1, ... , \lambda_n), \sum_i \lambda_i=0\} $. The Weyl group is the symmetric group $\mathfrak{S}_n$ acting by permuting the eigenvalues. Denote by $\epsilon_i\in \mathfrak{a}^*$ the linear form on $\mathfrak{a}$ corresponding to the $i$-th eigenvalue. The restricted roots are the $\alpha_{i,j}=\epsilon_i - \epsilon_j$, for $1\leq i, j \leq n$. A canonical choice of Weyl chamber is $\mathfrak{a}^+ =\{\textrm{Diagonal matrices with ordered eigenvalues}\} =\{ \mathrm{diag}(\lambda_1, ... , \lambda_n), \, \lambda_1 \geq \lambda_2\geq \ldots \geq \lambda_n, \, \sum_i \lambda_i=0\}$, with associated set of positive restricted roots $\{\alpha_{i,j}, 1\leq i < j \leq n\}$. The simple roots are the roots $\alpha_{i,i+1}$, $1\leq i \leq n-1$. Finally, the opposition involution $i$ maps $\mathrm{diag}(\lambda_1,\ldots, \lambda_n)$ to $\mathrm{diag}(-\lambda_n,\ldots, -\lambda_1)$.
\subsubsection{Cartan projections}
From now on, we always assume a fixed choice of
\begin{itemize}
\item a maximal compact subgroup $K$,
\item a Cartan subalgebra $\mathfrak{a} \subset \mathfrak{p}$,
\item a Weyl chamber $\mathfrak{a}_+ \subset \mathfrak{a}$, with associated positive roots $\Delta^+$ and simple roots $\Delta^s$.
\end{itemize}
Note that the choice of a maximal compact subgroup $K$ corresponds to the choice of a base point $o = \mathrm{Fix}(K)$ in the symmetric space $X$.
\begin{theo}[Cartan decomposition]
For every $g\in G$, there is a unique vector $\mu(g) \in \mathfrak{a}_+$ such that
\[g = k \exp(\mu(g)) k'\]
for some $k,k'\in K$. The map $\mu: G \to \mathfrak{a}_+$ is called the \emph{Cartan projection}.
\end{theo}
\begin{rmk}
The Cartan projections of $g$ and its inverse are related by the following formula:
\[\mu(g^{-1}) = i(\mu(g))~.\]
This relation characterizes the opposition involution.
\end{rmk}
The Cartan projection allows to define a ``vector valued distance'' on the symmetric space $X$. If $x$ and $y$ are two points in $X$, we define
\[\mu(x,y) = \mu(g^{-1}h)~,\]
where $g$ and $h$ are elements of $G$ such that $g\cdot o = x$ and $h\cdot o = y$. This is a vector valued distance in the following sense: if $\norm{\cdot}$ is a $W(\mathfrak{a})$-invariant norm on $\mathfrak{a}$, then
\[(x,y) \mapsto \norm{\mu(x,y)}\]
is a $G$-invariant Finsler distance on $X$. In particular, if $\norm{\cdot}_{\textit{eucl}}$ is the Euclidean norm on $\mathfrak{a}$ given by the Killing form, then
\[\norm{\mu(x,y)}_{\textit{eucl}} = d_R(x,y)~,\]
where $d_R$ is the symmetric Riemannian distance of $X$.
Benoist showed that the Cartan projection satisfies a generalized triangle inequality:
\begin{prop}\cite{benoist1997proprietes}\label{prop - Benoist cartan projection continuous}
For every compact subset $L$ of $G$, there is a constant $C>0$ such that
\[\norm{\mu(lgl') - \mu(g)}_{\textit{eucl}} \leq C\]
for all $g\in G$ and all $l,l'\in L$.
\end{prop}
In particular, given two points $x$ and $y\in X$, there is a constant $C$ such that
\[\norm{\mu(x,z) - \mu(y,z)}_{\textit{eucl}} \leq C\]
for all $z\in X$.
\subsubsection{Jordan projections}
For a restricted root $\alpha\in \Sigma$ we denote by $\frak{g}_\alpha := \{ u \in \gamma, \ad_a(u) = \alpha(a) u , \, \forall a \in \mathfrak{a} \} $ the corresponding eigenspace. We denote by $A^+ := \exp(\mathfrak{a}^+)$ and $N=\exp(\oplus_{\alpha \in \Sigma^+} \frak{g}_\alpha) $.
An element of $G$ is called elliptic (resp. hyperbolic, unipotent) if it is conjugated to an element of $K$ (resp. $A^+$, $N$).
\begin{theorem}[Jordan decomposition]\cite[ Theorem 2.19.24]{helgason1978differential}
There is a unique triple $(g_e, g_h, g_p)$ of commuting elements, such that $g_e$ is elliptic, $g_h$ hyperbolic and $g_p$ unipotent, that satisfies: $g=g_eg_hg_p$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{defi}
The Jordan projection of $g$ is the element $\lambda(g)\in \mathfrak{a}^+$ such that $g_h$ is conjugated to $\exp(\lambda(g))$.
\end{defi}
While the Cartan projection depends on the choice of a base point in $X$, the Jordan projection is a conjugacy invariant. One has the following alternative definition of $\lambda(g)$:
\begin{prop}
For every $g\in G$,
\[\lambda(g) = \lim_{n\to +\infty} \frac{1}{n}\mu(g^n)\]
\end{prop}
\begin{rmk}
Similarly to the Cartan projection, we have the following relation:
\[\lambda(g^{-1}) = i(\lambda(g))~.\]
\end{rmk}
\paragraph{\textit{Main example}}
The Cartan decomposition for $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ is usually called the polar decomposition, and the Cartan projection associates to a matrix $g\in \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ the logarithm of the eigenvalues of $\sqrt{g g^t}$ in decreasing order. We will denote by $\mu_i(g) = \epsilon_i(\mu(g))$ the $i$-eigenvalue of the Cartan projection of~$g$.
The decomposition $g = g_e g_h g_p$ in that case is sometimes called the Dunford decomposition. The Jordan projection associates to $g$ the logarithm of the module of the complex eigenvalues of $g$, in decreasing order. We will denote similarly by $\lambda_i(g)= \epsilon_i(\lambda(g))$ the $i$-th eigenvalue of the Jordan projection of $g$.
\subsection{Anosov groups}\label{subsubsec-Anosov representation}
Anosov subgroups of higher rank Lie groups have been introduced by Labourie \cite{labourie2006anosov} as a reasonable generalization of convex-cocompact subgroups in rank 1. The original definition for deformations of uniform lattices in rank 1 was extended by Guichard and Wienhard to Gromov hyperbolic groups. More recently, Gueritaud--Guichard--Kassel--Wienhard \cite{gueritaud20017anosov} and Kapovich--Leeb--Porti \cite{kapovich2017anosov} independently gave a characterization of Anosov subgroups in terms of their Cartan projections. While the first team assumes \emph{a priori} that the group is hyperbolic, the second team shows moreover that their condition implies Gromov hyperbolicity. Here, we use their characterization as a definition, that can be found under this formulation in \cite{Guichard}
Let $G$ be a semisimple Lie group. Fix a choice of $K$, $\mathfrak{a}$ and $\mathfrak{a}_+$ as before. Let $\Theta$ be a non-empty subset of the set of simple roots $\Delta_s$.
\begin{defi}
A finitely generated group $\Gamma \subset G$ is called \emph{$\Theta$-Anosov} if there exist constants $C, C'>0$ such that
\[\theta(\mu(g)) \geq C \vert g \vert -C' \]
for all $g\in \Gamma$ and all $\theta \in \Theta$.
(Here, $\vert g \vert$ denotes the word length of $g$ with respect to a finite generating set.)
\end{defi}
The definition implies in particular that $\Gamma$ is discrete and quasi-isometrically embedded in $G$. One of the nice features of this definition is that it forces $\Gamma$ to have some ``negatively curved behaviour'':
\begin{theo}\cite[Theorem 6.15]{kapovich2018anosov}
Let $\Gamma \subset G$ be a $\Theta$-Anosov subgroup, for some non-empty subset $\Theta$ of $\Delta^s$. Then $\Gamma$ is Gromov hyperbolic.
\end{theo}
\begin{rmk}
Since $\Gamma$ is invariant by $g\mapsto g^{-1}$ this definition readily implies that a $\Theta$-Anosov subgroup is also $i(\Theta)$-Anosov, and thus $\Theta^{sym}$-Anosov, where $\Theta^{sym} = \Theta \cup i(\Theta)$. There is thus no loss of generality in assuming that $\Theta$ is invariant by the opposition involution.
\end{rmk}
\paragraph{{\it Main example}}
Let us describe more properties of Anosov subgroups in a specific case. In the next section, we will explain how to reduce the general case to this specific case.
\begin{defi}
A finitely generated group $\Gamma \subset \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ is called \emph{projective Anosov} if there exist constants $C, C'>0$ such that
\[\mu_1(g) - \mu_2(g) \geq C \vert g \vert - C',\]
for all $g\in \Gamma$.
\end{defi}
\begin{rmk}
By definition, a projective Anosov subgroup is $\Theta$-Anosov for $\Theta =\{\alpha_{1,2}\}$. Since the opposition involution sends $\alpha_{1,2}$ to $\alpha_{n-1, n}$, projective Anosov subgroups are actually $\Theta^{sym}$-Anosov for $\Theta^{sym} =\{\alpha_{12}, \alpha_{n-1,n}\}$
\end{rmk}
The group $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ acts on the projective space $\mathbf{P}(\R^n) = \{\textrm{lines in }\R^n\}$ and on the ``dual'' projective space $\mathbf{P}({\R^n}^*)= \{\textrm{hyperplanes in }\R^n\}$. Recall that the \emph{Gromov boundary} $\partial_\infty \Gamma$ of a Gromov hyperbolic group $\Gamma$ is a compact metrizable space on which $\Gamma$ acts by homeomorphisms. The following theorem says that the Gromov boundary of a projective Anosov subgroup is ``realized'' in the projective space:
\begin{theo}[\cite{labourie2006anosov},\cite{kapovich2017anosov}] \label{t:BoundaryMapsAnosov}
Let $\Gamma\subset \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ be a projective Anosov subgroup. Then there exist $\Gamma$-equivariant maps $\xi: \partial_\infty \Gamma \to \mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ and $\xi^*: \partial_\infty \Gamma \to \mathbf{P}({\R^n}^*)$ such that
\[\xi(\eta)\subset \xi^*(\eta') \Longleftrightarrow \eta = \eta'~.\]
Moreover, every element $g\in \Gamma$ of infinite order has a unique eigenvalue of highest module, with corresponding eigenspace $\xi(g_+)$ (where $g_+$ denotes the attracting fixed point of $g$ in $\partial_\infty \Gamma$).
\end{theo}
\subsubsection{Fundamental weights and fundamental representations}
Here, we explain how to interpret the $\Theta$-Anosov property as several projective Anosov properties, via linear representations of the Lie group $G$. The content of this section is already described in \cite[Section 3]{gueritaud20017anosov}.
Let $\scal{\cdot}{\cdot}$ denote a scalar product on $\mathfrak{a}^*$ invariant under the Weyl group action.
\begin{defi}
The \emph{fundamental weight} $w_\theta$ associated to a simple root $\theta$ is the unique element of $\mathfrak{a}^*$ such that
\[2\frac{\scal{w_\theta}{\alpha}}{\scal{\alpha}{\alpha}}= \delta_{\alpha,\theta}~,\]
where $\delta_{\alpha,\theta}$ is the Kronecker symbol.
\end{defi}
The classical representation theory of semi-simple Lie algebras gives the following:
\begin{lemme}
For every $\theta \in \Delta_s$ there is an integer $n_\theta \geq 2$, an integer $k_\theta$ and an irreducible representation $\rho_\theta: G\to \mathrm{SL}(n_\theta,\R)$ mapping $K$ into $\mathrm{SO}(n_\theta)$ and such that
\begin{itemize}
\item $\theta(\mu(g))= \mu_1(\rho_\theta(g)) - \mu_2(\rho_\theta(g))$,
\item $k_\theta w_\theta(\mu(g)) = \mu_1(\rho_\theta(g))$,
\item $\theta\circ i(\mu(g))= \mu_{n_\theta-1}(\rho_\theta(g)) - \mu_{n_\theta}(\rho_\theta(g))$,
\item $w_{\theta\circ i}(\mu(g)) = -\mu_{n_\theta}(\rho_\theta(g))$
\end{itemize}
for all $g\in G$. We call this $\rho_\theta$ the \emph{fundamental representation}. \footnote{These properties actually do not characterize a representation, but they do if we assume moreover that $k_\theta$ is minimal. When $G$ is the split real form of a complex Lie group (such as $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$), we can have $k_\theta= 1$.}
\end{lemme}
\begin{rmk}
The equalities above hold when replacing Cartan projections with Jordan projections.
\end{rmk}
\begin{rmk}
The fundamental representation $\rho_{\theta\circ i}$ is dual to the the representation $\rho_\theta$.
\end{rmk}
The following proposition easily follows from the definitions of Anosov representation:
\begin{prop}
Let $\Gamma$ be a finitely generated subgroup of $G$ and $\Theta$ be a non-empty subset of $\Delta_s$. Then $\Gamma$ is $\Theta$-Anosov if and only if $\rho_\theta(\Gamma)$ is projective Anosov for all $\theta \in \Theta$.
\end{prop}
\begin{example}
For $G= \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$, let $\theta_i$ denote the simple root $\alpha_{i,i+1}$ then the fundamental weight $w_i = w_{\theta_i}$ associated to $\theta_i$ is the linear form $\epsilon_1+\ldots + \epsilon_i$, and the fundamental representation $\rho_{\theta_i}$ is the representation of dimension $C_n^i$ given by the action of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ on $\Lambda^i(\R^n)$.
\end{example}
Taking tensor products of fundamental representations, one obtains representations for which $\mu_1- \mu_2$ captures the behaviour of several simple roots at once. Given $\Theta$ a non-empty subset of simple roots, denote by $\rho_\theta: G \to \mathrm{SL}(V_\theta)$ the fundamental representations associated to each $\theta\in \Theta$ and by
\[\rho_\Theta = \bigotimes_{\theta \in \Theta} \rho_\theta : G \to \mathrm{SL}\left( \bigotimes_{\theta \in \Theta} V_\theta\right)\]
the tensor product representation.
\begin{prop} \label{prop - SimpleRootsTensorProduct}
For all $g\in G$, we have
\begin{itemize}
\item $\mu_1(\rho_\Theta(g)) = \sum_{\theta \in \Theta} k_\theta w_\theta(\mu(g))$,
\item $\mu_1(\rho_\Theta(g)) - \mu_2(\rho_\Theta(g)) = \inf_{\theta\in \Theta} \theta(\mu(g))$.
\end{itemize}
\end{prop}
As a corollary we obtain the following:
\begin{coro}
A subgroup $\Gamma\subset G$ is $\Theta$-Anosov if and only if $\rho_\Theta(\Gamma)$ is projective Anosov.
\end{coro}
The behaviour of the limit maps under these tensor products is given by the following proposition. Let $\Gamma \subset G$ be a $\Theta$-Anosov subgroup and let $\xi_\theta: \partial_\infty \Gamma \to \mathbf{P}(V_\theta)$ be the boundary map associated to $\rho_\theta(\Gamma)$, seen as a projective Anosov subgroup of of $\mathrm{SL}(V_\theta)$.
\begin{prop}
The boundary map $\xi_\Theta$ associated to $\rho_\Theta(\Gamma)$ sends a point $x\in \partial_\infty \Gamma$ to
\[\xi_\Theta(x) = \bigotimes_{\theta\in \Theta} \xi_\theta(x) \in \mathbf{P}\left(\bigotimes_{\theta\in \Theta} V_\theta\right)~.\]
\end{prop}
\begin{rmk}
The boundary map $\xi_\Theta$ takes values in the algebraic set of pure tensors in $\mathbf{P}\left(\bigotimes_{\theta\in \Theta} V_\theta\right)$ which is canonically isomorphic to $\prod_{\theta \in \Theta} \mathbf{P} (V_\theta)$.
\end{rmk}
\begin{example}
Let $\Gamma \subset \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ be a projective Anosov subgroup. Then $\Gamma$ is $\Theta$-Anosov with $\Theta = \{\alpha_{1,2}, \alpha_{n-1,n}\}$. Let $V$ denote the space $\R^n$ seen as the standard representation of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$. Then $\rho_\Theta: \mathrm{SL}(n,\R) \to \mathrm{SL}(V\otimes V^*)$ is the tensor product of the standard representation and its dual.
If $\xi:\partial_\infty \Gamma \to \mathbf{P} (V)$ and $\xi^*:\partial_\infty \Gamma \to \mathbf{P}(V^*)$ denote the boundary maps from Theorem \ref{t:BoundaryMapsAnosov}, then the boundary map associated to $\rho_\Theta$ is the map
\[\xi^{sym} = (\xi, \xi^*): \partial_\infty \Gamma \to \mathbf{P}(V)\times \mathbf{P}(V^*) \subset \mathbf{P}(V\otimes V^*)~.\]
\end{example}
We will see in Section \ref{subsec - projectively cc representations} that projective Anosov representations are deeply connected to the notion of convex-cocompact subgroups of $\PGL(n, \R)$ as defined by Danciger-Guéritaud-Kassel.
For future use, we introduce the following notations. Given a subset $\Theta$ of $\Delta_s$, we define
\[C(\Theta) = \bigcup_{\theta \in \Theta}\{v\in \mathfrak{a}_+ \mid \theta(v) = 0\}\]
and
\[C^*(\Theta) = \Span_{\R_+}(\Theta)~.\]
Define also
\[\mathfrak{a}_+(\Theta) = \mathfrak{a}_+ \setminus C(\Theta)\]
and
\[\mathfrak{a}_+^*(\Theta) = \mathfrak{a}_+^* \setminus C^*(\Delta_s -\Theta) = \{\phi \in \mathfrak{a}_+^*\mid \phi_{\vert \mathfrak{a}_+(\Theta)} >0\}.\]
\begin{rmk}
The motivation to consider such a subset of linear forms comes from the counting of elements of the group, as we will see in the next section. For a $\Theta$-Anosov subgroup $\Gamma$, we know that the Cartan projections of elements of $\Gamma$ lie in a closed cone contained in $\mathfrak{a}_+(\Theta)$. In particular, $\phi(\mu(g))$ grows linearly with $|g|$ for all $\phi\in\mathfrak{a}_+^*(\Theta)$.
\end{rmk}
\paragraph{{\it Main example.}} Let $G$ be $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ and $\Theta = \{\alpha_{1,2}, \alpha_{n-1,n}\}$. We then have
$$C(\Theta) := \{v\, \in \mathfrak{a}_+\, |\, \alpha_{1,2} (v) = 0 \}\cup \{v\, \in \mathfrak{a}_+\, |\, \alpha_{n-1,n} (v) = 0 \}.$$
Thus the set $\frak{a}_+(\Theta)$ consists of diagonal matrices for which there is a spectral gap between the two highest, and between the two lowest eigenvalues.
Finally, $\mathfrak{a}_+^*(\Theta)$ is the set of linear forms on $\mathfrak{a}$ which are strictly positive on $\mathfrak{a}^+$ except maybe on the walls of the Weyl chambers defined by the equality of the two highest (resp. smallest) eigenvalues. In coordinates this means that any linear form $\phi\in \mathfrak{a}_+^*(\Theta)$ can be written as $\phi= \sum_{i=1}^{n-1} x_i \alpha_{i,i+1}$, for $x_i \in \R^{n-1}$ where $x_i> 0$ for all $i \in \{ 2, ..., n-2\}$ and $x_i\geq 0$ for $i\in \{ 1, n-1\}$. \\
\subsubsection{Critical exponents and entropies}
The critical exponent for a discrete group of isometries of a metric space is the exponential growth rate of the orbit of a basepoint. In the case of a discrete subgroup $\Gamma$ of a higher rank semisimple Lie group $G$ acting on its symmetric space $X$, one can define a several critical exponents for each $G$-invariant distance on $X$, and more generally for every choice of a way of measuring the ``size'' of Cartan projections. Following Quint \cite{quint2002divergence}, we focus here on non-negative linear forms on the Weyl chamber.
\begin{defi}
Let $\Gamma$ be a discrete subgroup of $G$ and $\varphi$ a linear form on $\mathfrak{a}$ which is non-negative on the Weyl chamber. We define the \emph{$\varphi$-critical exponent} of $\Gamma$ as
\begin{eqnarray*}
\delta_\varphi(\Gamma) &=& \limsup_{R\rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{R} \log \left(\Card \{ \gamma \in \Gamma \, |\, \varphi(\mu(\gamma)) \leq R\} \right)\\
&=& \inf\{s>0\mid \sum_{g\in \Gamma} e^{-s\varphi(\mu(g))} < +\infty\}~.
\end{eqnarray*}
\end{defi}
In full generality, $\delta_\varphi(G)$ has no reason to be finite. However, for finitely generated groups, Quint showed in \cite{quint2002divergence} that $\delta_\phi(G)$ is finite as soon as $\varphi$ is positive on the \emph{limit cone} of $\Gamma$, defined as
\[\mathrm{Cone}(\Gamma) = \bigcap_{n\in \N}\overline{\bigcup_{\gamma \in \Gamma, \| \gamma\| \geq n} \mu(\gamma)}~.\]
Applying his results to the case of Anosov representations gives the following
\begin{prop}[Quint, \cite{quint2002divergence}]
Let $\Theta$ be a non-empty subset of $\Delta_s$. Then
\[\delta_\varphi(\Gamma) < +\infty\]
for every linear form $\varphi$ in $\mathfrak{a}_+^*(\Theta)$ and every $\Theta$-Anosov subgroup $\Gamma$. Moreover, the map
\[\varphi \mapsto \delta_\varphi\]
is convex and homogeneous of degree $-1$ on $\mathfrak{a}_+^*(\Theta)$.
\end{prop}
In a similar way, one can consider the exponential growth rate of the Jordan projections.
\begin{defi}
Let $\Gamma$ be a discrete subgroup of $G$ and $\varphi$ a linear form on $\mathfrak{a}$ which is non-negative on the Weyl chamber. We define the \emph{$\varphi$-entropy} of $\Gamma$ as
\begin{eqnarray*}
h_\varphi(\Gamma) &=& \limsup_{R\rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{R} \log \Card \{ [\gamma] \in [\Gamma] \mid \varphi(\lambda(\gamma)) \leq R\} \\
&=& \inf\{s>0\mid \sum_{[\gamma]\in [\Gamma]} e^{-s\varphi(\lambda(\gamma))} < +\infty\}~,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $[\Gamma]$ denotes the set of conjugacy classes in $G$.
\end{defi}
The term ``entropy'' comes from the analogy with the geodesic flow of a closed negatively curved manifold, whose closed orbits are in bijection with conjugacy classes in the fundamental group, and whose topological entropy equals the exponential growth rate of lengths of closed orbits. In the case where $\phi$ is a linear combination of the fundamental weights $w_\theta, \theta \in \Theta$, this is more than an analogy: One can associate to a $\Theta$-Anosov subgroup $\Gamma$ of $G$ a ``geodesic flow'' on a compact metric space, whose orbits are in bijection with conjugacy classes in $\Gamma$, and such that the length of the orbit associated to $g$ is given by $\phi(\lambda(g))$. This flow has a hyperbolicity property, and its topological entropy is $h_\phi$.\\
For sufficiently nice discrete groups of isometries of a negatively curved manifold, the critical exponent equals the entropy. For a Zarisky dense $\Theta$-Anosov group, Sambarino obtained in \cite{sambarino2014quantitative} precise counting estimates for
\[\Card \{\gamma \in \Gamma \mid w_\theta(\mu(\gamma))\leq R\}~,\]
implying in particular that $h_\phi(\Gamma) = \delta_\phi(\Gamma)$ when $\phi$ is a linear combination of the fundamental weights $\{w_\theta,\theta \in \Theta\}$. The tool he uses, however, do not seem to apply to simple root critical exponents in general. Here we prove the equality $\delta_\phi = h_\phi$ whenever we manage to generalize the classical arguments that work in negative curvature.
For the sake of clarity, let us first state our result in the main case of interest for us.
\begin{theorem}\label{theo-specialcaseSL(n,R)}
Let $\Gamma$ be a projective Anosov subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$, then
\begin{itemize}
\item $h_{12}(\Gamma)\leq \delta_{12}(\Gamma),$
\item $h_{1n}(\Gamma)= \delta_{1n}(\Gamma).$
\end{itemize}
Moreover, if $\Gamma$ is Zariski dense, then
\begin{itemize}
\item $h_{12}(\Gamma) = \delta_{12}(\Gamma)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
This theorem will be a particular case of a more general result for $\Theta$-Anosov subgroups of a semi-simple Lie group $G$. Let $\overline{C}^*(\Theta)$ be the set of non-negative linear combinations simple roots $\theta \in \Theta$, $W(\Theta)$ the span of $\{w_\theta, \theta \in \Theta\}$, and define
\[D^*(\Theta) = \{\phi = \alpha + \beta, \alpha \in \overline{C}^*(\Theta), \beta \in W(\Theta)\} \subset \mathfrak{a}^*~.\]
\begin{theo} \label{theo-GeneralComparisonEntropyCriticalExponent}
Let $\Gamma$ be a $\Theta$-Anosov subgroup of $G$, then
\begin{itemize}
\item $h_\phi(\Gamma) \leq \delta_\phi(\Gamma)$ for all $\phi\in D^*(\Theta)\cap \mathfrak{a}_+^*(\Theta)$,
\item $h_\phi(\Gamma) = \delta_\phi(\Gamma)$ for all $\phi \in W(\Theta)$.
\end{itemize}
Moreover if $\Gamma \subset G$ is Zariski dense, then
\begin{itemize}
\item $h_\phi(\Gamma) \geq \delta_\phi(\Gamma)$ for all $\phi \in \mathfrak{a}_+^*$.
\end{itemize}
In particular, when $\Gamma$ is $\Theta$-Anosov and Zariski dense, then $h_\phi(\Gamma) =\delta_\phi(\Gamma)$ for all $\phi \in D^*(\Theta)\cap \mathfrak{a}_+^*(\Theta)$.
\end{theo}
\paragraph{{\it Main example}} Let $\Gamma \subset \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ be a projective Anosov subgroup, which is thus $\Theta$-Anosov for $\Theta=\{\alpha_{1,2}, \alpha_{n-1,n}\}$. The fundamental weights associated to $\alpha_{1,2}$ and $\alpha_{1,n}$ are respectively $\epsilon_1$ and $\epsilon_n$. Therefore, $\alpha_{1,2}$ belongs to
$D^*(\Theta)\cap \mathfrak{a}_+^*(\Theta)$ and $\alpha_{1,n}$ belongs to $W(\Theta)\cap \mathfrak{a}_+^*(\Theta)$. Thus Theorem \ref{theo-GeneralComparisonEntropyCriticalExponent} implies Theorem \ref{theo-specialcaseSL(n,R)}.
\begin{rmk}The conditions on $\phi$ might look exotic however they appear naturally in view of Lemma \ref{lem - ComparisonMuLambdaProximalElement}.
\end{rmk}
\begin{rmk}
Note the second part of Theorem \ref{theo-GeneralComparisonEntropyCriticalExponent} actually holds as soon as the Zariski closure of $\Gamma$ is semi-simple (by simply restricting to the Zariski closure). A typical example where we don't know whether the equality $\delta_{1,2} = h_{1,2}$ holds is a deformation of a projective Anosov subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ inside $\mathrm{Aff}(\R^n) \subset \mathrm{SL}(n+1,\R)$.
\end{rmk}
\paragraph{{\it Proof of Theorem \ref{theo-GeneralComparisonEntropyCriticalExponent}}}
Let us first introduce the notion of \emph{proximality}.
\begin{defi}
We say that a matrix $g\in \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ is \emph{proximal} if $g$ preserves a splitting of $\R^n$ as $\R u\oplus H$, where $u$ is an eigenvector for the eigenvalue $\lambda_1(g)$ and if the spectral radius $\lambda_2(g)$ of $g_{|H}$ is strictly less than $\lambda_1(g)$. We says that $g$ is \emph{$\epsilon$-proximal} if, moreover, the line $\R u$ and the hyperplane $H$ form an angle greater than $\epsilon$.\\
If $\theta$ is a simple root of $G$, we say that $g\in G$ is \emph{$(\theta,\epsilon)$-proximal} if $\rho_\theta(g)$ is $\epsilon$-proximal. If $\Theta$ is a subset of $\Delta_s$, we say that $g\in G$ is \emph{$(\Theta,\epsilon)$-proximal} if $g$ is $(\theta,\epsilon)$-proximal for all $\theta\in \Theta$. Finally, we says that $g$ is \emph{$\epsilon$-loxodromic} if $g$ is $(\Delta_s,\epsilon)$-proximal.
\end{defi}
We need to compare the Cartan and Jordan projections of proximal elements, this is the purpose of Lemma \ref{lem - ComparisonMuLambdaProximalElement}. We will use the following topological result:
\begin{lemme}\label{lem- compactity of loc compact transitive action}
Let $G$ be a locally compact group acting transitively on a Hausdorff space $X$. Let $x\in X$.
For all compact subset $K$ of $X$ there exists a compact $K'$ of $G$ such that
$K\subset K' \cdot x $.
\end{lemme}
\begin{proof}
Let $C$ be a compact neighborhood of $Id\in G$. Since $G$ acts transitively on $X$, $\bigcup_{g\in G} gC \cdot x $ covers $K$. By compactness of $K$ we can extract a finite cover, $K\subset \bigcup_{i\in [1, n]} g_i C\cdot x $, for some $g_i \in G$.
Then $K' = \bigcup_{i\in [1, n]} g_i C$ fulfills the conclusion of the Lemma.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemme} \label{lem - ComparisonMuLambdaProximalElement}
Let $\theta$ be a simple root of $G$ and fix $\epsilon>0$. Then there exists a constant $C$ (depending on $\epsilon$) such that for every $(\theta,\epsilon)$-proximal element $g$, we have
\[\vert w_\theta(\mu(g)) - w_\theta(\lambda(g))\vert < C\]
and
\[ \theta(\mu(g)) \leq \theta(\lambda(g)) + C~.\]
\end{lemme}
\begin{proof}
Taking the fundamental linear representation $\rho_\theta$ it is sufficient to prove there exists $C>0$ such that for any $g\in \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ which is $(\alpha_{12},\epsilon)$-proximal,
$$|\mu_1(g) - \lambda_1(g) ) |< C,$$
and
$$ (\mu_1-\mu_2)(g) \leq (\lambda_1-\lambda_2 )(g) + C.$$
The subset of $\mathbf{P}(\R^n)\times \mathbf{P}({\R^n}^*)$ consisting of pairs of a line $\ell$ and a hyperplane $H$ such that $d(\ell , H) \geq \epsilon $ and $d(\ell, [e_1]) \leq \epsilon$ is a compact subset of the set of pairs $(\ell,H)$ which are in general position. Since $\mathrm{SL}(n, \R) $ is locally compact and acts transitively on this latter set, by Lemma \ref{lem- compactity of loc compact transitive action}, there exists a compact set $K'\subset \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ such that for all $(\alpha_{12},\epsilon)$-proximal $g\in\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$, there exists $P\in K'$ such that
\[\left\{\begin{array}{l}
P\cdot g^+ = (Pg P^{-1})^+ = [e_1]\\
P \cdot H^-(g)= H^-(Pg P^{-1}) = \mathrm{span} (e_2, ... , e_n)
\end{array}
\right.\]
We then have $\lambda_1(g) = \lambda_1 (Pg P^{-1})= \mu_1(Pg P^{-1})$ and $\lambda_2(g) = \lambda_2(Pg P^{-1})= \lambda_1(\widehat{Pg P^{-1}})$ where $\widehat{Pg P^{-1}}$ is the restriction of $Pg P^{-1}$ to $ \mathrm{span} (e_2, ... , e_n)$. Note also that $\mu_1(\widehat{Pg P^{-1}})=\mu_2(PgP^{-1})$. Since any matrix $h$ satisfies $\lambda_1(h)\leq\mu_1(h)$, we find that $\lambda_2(Pg P^{-1})\leq \mu_2(PgP^{-1})$. Hence
\[(\mu_1-\mu_2)(PgP^{-1}) \leq (\lambda_1-\lambda_2)(g)~.\]
Finally, by Proposition \ref{prop - Benoist cartan projection continuous}, there is a constant $C'$ (depending only on $K'$) such that
\[|\mu_1(PgP^{-1}) - \mu_1(g)| < C'\]
and
\[|\mu_2(PgP^{-1}) - \mu_2(g)| < C'~.\]
It follows that $(\mu_1-\mu_2)(g)\leq (\lambda_1-\lambda_2)(g)+2C'$.
Finally, we also have \[\lambda_1(g)\leq \mu_1(g) \leq \mu_1(PgP^{-1})+C'=\lambda_1(PgP^{-1})+C'=\lambda_1(g)+C'.\]
\end{proof}
A lemma of Abels-Margulis-Soifer \cite{abels1995semigroups} states that in a Zariski dense subgroup, it is possible to make all elements $\epsilon$-loxodromic up to left multiplication by a finite set. If $\Gamma$ is not supposed Zariski dense, then it may not contain loxodromic elements. However, if $\Gamma$ is $\Theta$-Anosov, it certainly contains $\Theta$-proximal elements, and we have the analoguous lemma:
\begin{lemme}\cite[Theorem 5.9]{guichard2012anosov}\label{lem-AMS guichard wienhard}
Let $\Gamma$ be (not necessarily Zariski dense) $\Theta$-Anosov subgroup of $G$. Then there exists $\epsilon>0$ and a finite subset $F$ of $\Gamma$ such that, for every $\gamma \in \Gamma$, there exists $f\in F$ such that $f\gamma$ is $(\Theta,\epsilon)$-proximal.
\end{lemme}
Finally if $\Gamma$ is $\Theta$-Anosov, one can also find $\Theta$-proximal elements in essentially every conjugacy class.
\begin{lemme} \label{lem - ProximalConjugacyClass}
Let $\Gamma$ be a $\Theta$-Anosov subgroup of $G$. Then there exists $\epsilon>0$ and $C>0$ such that every conjugacy class of an infinite order element $[g]\in [\Gamma]$ contains at least one and at most $C \norm{\lambda(g)}_{\textit{eucl}} + C$ $(\Theta,\epsilon)$-proximal elements.
\end{lemme}
\begin{proof}
Let $d$ be the distance on $\Gamma$ associated to a finite set of generators, and let $d_\infty$ be a Gromov distance on $\partial_\infty \Gamma$. Since $\Gamma$ is $\Theta$-Anosov, there exists $\eta>0$ such that $g\in \Gamma$ is $(\Theta,\epsilon)$-proximal whenever $d_\infty(g_-,g_+) >\eta$. Moreover, there exists a constant $C$ such that for all $[\gamma] \in [\Gamma]$,
\[l(\gamma) \leq C\norm{\lambda(g)}_{\textit{eucl}}+ C~,\]
where $l(g) = \inf_{x\in\Gamma} d(x,gx)$. The lemma thus follows from a classical result on Gromov hyperbolic groups (see \cite{CK}).
\end{proof}
We now have all the tools to prove Theorem \ref{theo-GeneralComparisonEntropyCriticalExponent}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{theo-GeneralComparisonEntropyCriticalExponent}]
We first prove the inequality $h_\varphi \leq \delta_\varphi$ then the reverse inequality.\\
$h_\varphi \leq \delta_\varphi$.
First, recall that, in a finitely generated hyperbolic group, there are only finitely many conjugacy classes of elements of torsion. Let $\varphi$ be an element of $D^*(\Theta)\cap \mathfrak{a}_+^*(\Theta)$.
By Lemma \ref{lem - ProximalConjugacyClass}, there exists $\epsilon >0$ such that every conjugacy class in $G$ of infinite order contains an $\epsilon$-loxodromic element. By Lemma \ref{lem - ComparisonMuLambdaProximalElement} and by definition of $\varphi$, there exists a constant $C$ such that $\varphi(\mu(g)) \leq \varphi(\lambda(g))+C$ for all $g$ $(\Theta,\epsilon)$-proximal.
For every $R>0$ and every conjugacy class $[\gamma] \in [G]$ of infinite order such that $\varphi(\lambda(g)) \leq R$, we can thus find $g\in [g]$ such that $\varphi(\mu(g)) \leq \varphi(\lambda(g))+C \leq R+C$ y Lemma \ref{lem - ProximalConjugacyClass}. We deduce that
\[\Card \{g\in \Gamma \mid \varphi(\mu(\gamma)) \leq R+C\} \geq \Card \{[g] \in [\Gamma] \textrm{ of infinite order } \mid \varphi(\lambda(g))\leq R\}\]
from which the inequality $\delta_\varphi \geq h_\varphi$ easily follows.\\
$\delta_\varphi \leq h_\varphi$. Assume first that $\Gamma$ is Zariski dense. Let $\varphi$ be any element of $\mathfrak{a}_+^*$. By Abels--Margulis--Soifer's lemma, there exists $\epsilon>0$ and a finite subset $F\subset \Gamma $ such that for any $\gamma\in \Gamma$, there exists $f\in F$ such that $f\gamma$ is $\epsilon$-loxodromic. By Proposition \ref{prop - Benoist cartan projection continuous} and Lemma \ref{lem - ComparisonMuLambdaProximalElement}, there is a constant $C$ depending on $F$ and $\epsilon$ such that $|\varphi(\lambda(fg)) - \varphi(\mu(g))|\leq C$. We thus have
\[
\Card\{\gamma\in \Gamma \mid \varphi(\mu(\gamma)) \leq R \} \leq \Card(F) \cdot \Card\{ \gamma \in \Gamma \mid \varphi(\mu(\gamma)) \leq R+C \text{ and $\gamma$ is $\epsilon$-loxodromic }\}.\]
Now, the map
\[\begin{array}{rcl}
\{ \gamma \in \Gamma \mid \varphi(\lambda(\gamma)) \leq R+C \text{ and $\gamma$ is $\epsilon$-proximal }\} & \to & \{[g]\in [\Gamma] \mid \varphi(\lambda(g)) \leq R+C\}\\
g & \mapsto & [g]
\end{array}\]
has fibers of cardinal at most $C' R$ by Lemma \ref{lem - ProximalConjugacyClass}. We thus obtain
\[\Card\{\gamma\in \Gamma \mid \varphi(\mu(\gamma)) \leq R \}\leq C' R \Card F \cdot \Card \{[g]\in \Gamma \mid \varphi(\lambda(g))\leq R+C\}~,\]
from which the inequality $\delta_\varphi \leq h_\varphi$ easily follows.\\
If $\Gamma$ is not assumed Zariski dense, we can still apply Lemma \ref{lem-AMS guichard wienhard} to make every element $\gamma\in \Gamma$ $(\Theta,\epsilon)$-proximal by multiplying it by an element $f$ chosen in a finite set. By Lemma \ref{lem - ComparisonMuLambdaProximalElement}, we do have $|\phi(\lambda(fg)) - \phi(\mu(g))| C$ provided that $\phi$ belongs to $W(\Theta)$. The rest of the proof works the same and we eventually obtain the inequality $\delta_\phi \leq h_\phi$ for $\phi \in W(\Theta)$.
\end{proof}
Recall that, if $\rho_\Theta$ denotes the tensor product of the fundamental representations $\{\rho_\theta , \theta \in \Theta\}$, the for any $g\in \Gamma$ we have
\[(\mu_1 - \mu_2)(\rho_\Theta(g)) = \inf_{\theta \in \Theta} \theta(\mu(g))~.\]
The following lemma describes the corresponding relation between critical exponents.
\begin{lemme} \label{l:CriticalExponentInf}
Let $\Gamma$ be a $\Theta$-Anosov subgroup of $G$. Then
\[\delta_{1,2}(\rho_\Theta(\Gamma)) = \sup_{\theta \in \Theta} \delta_\theta(\Gamma)~.\]
\end{lemme}
\begin{proof}
For every $\theta \in \Theta$, we have
\[\Card \{\gamma \in \Gamma \mid \theta(\gamma)\leq R\} \leq \Card \{\gamma \in \Gamma \mid (\mu_1 - \mu_2)(\rho_\Theta(g)) \leq R\}\]
from which we deduce
\[\delta_\theta(\Gamma) \leq \delta_{1,2}(\rho_\Theta(\Gamma))\] for all $\theta \in \Theta$. Moreover
\[\Card \{\gamma \in \Gamma \mid (\mu_1 - \mu_2)(\rho_\Theta(g)) \leq R\} \leq \sum_{\theta \in \Theta} \Card \{\gamma \in \Gamma \mid \theta(\mu(g)) \leq R\}~,\]
from which we get
\[\delta_{1,2}(\rho_\Theta(\Gamma)) \leq \sup_{\theta \in \Theta} \delta_\theta(\Gamma)~.\]
\end{proof}
\subsection{Projectively convex cocompact representations}\label{subsec - projectively cc representations}
\subsubsection{Hilbert geometries}
We recall in this section some classical facts on convex subsets of $\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ and their Hilbert geometry. The main references for this are Benoist \cite{Benoist2001convexe}, Crampon \cite{crampon2009entropies,crampon2011dynamics} Dancinger--Guéritaud--Kassel \cite{DGK}.
An open domain $\Omega$ of $\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ is said to be \emph{properly convex} if it is convex and bounded in some affine chart. Hilbert constructed a natural projective invariant distance on a properly convex domain in $\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$. To define it, let us choose an affine chart in which $\Omega$ is bounded. Given $u$ and $v$ two points in this affine chart, we denote by $uv$ the length of the segment $[u,v]$.
\begin{defi}
Let $x,y$ be two points in $\Omega$. Let $a$ and $b$ denote respectively the intersections of the half lines $[y,x)$ and $[x,y)$ with $\partial \Omega$. Then the Hilbert distance between $x$ and $y$ is given by
\[d_H(x,y) = \frac{1}{2}\log\left(\frac{xb\cdot ay}{ax \cdot yb}\right)~.\]
\end{defi}
This distance actually does not depend on the chosen affine chart (it is essentially the logarithm of a projective cross-ratio), and if a projective transformation maps $\Omega$ to $\Omega'$, then it induces an isometry between the Hilbert distances of $\Omega$ and $\Omega'$. In particular, the group of projective transformations preserving $\Omega$ acts by isometries for the Hilbert distance.
The Hilbert distance is induced by a Finsler metric for which straight lines are geodesic. We will say that a proper convex domain $\Omega$ is \emph{hyperbolic} if $(\Omega,d_H)$ is Gromov hyperbolic. This implies in particular that $\Omega$ is srictly convex and has $\mathcal C^1$ boundary. Benoist gave in \cite{Benoist2001convexe} a characterization of Gromov hyperbolic convex sets.
\begin{example} \label{ex:Ellipsoid}
Let $\Omega \subset \mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ be the set of lines in $\R^n$ in restriction to which the quadratic form
\[\mathbf q(x_1,\ldots,x_n) \mapsto x_1^2+ \ldots + x_{n-1}^2 - x_n^2\]
is negative. $\Omega$ identifies with the symmetric space of the group $\mathrm{SO}(n-1,1)$ of linear transformations preserving $\mathbf q$, that is, the hyperbolic space of dimension $n-1$. In that case, the Hilbert distance on $\Omega$ is induced by the $\mathrm{SO}(n-1,1)$ Riemannian metric of constant curvature $-1$. In particular, $\Omega$ is a hyperbolic convex domain.
\end{example}
\begin{example} \label{ex:ConvexSymmetricSpace}
Let $E\simeq \R^{k(k+1)/2}$ be the space of quadratic forms on $\R^k$ and let $\Omega \subset \mathbf{P}(\R^{k(k+1)/2})$ be the projectivization of the cone of positive definite quadratic forms. Then the group $\mathrm{SL}(k,\R)$ acts transitively on $\Omega$, and $\Omega$ identifies with the symmetric space $\mathrm{SL}(k,\R)/\mathrm{SO}(k)$. In that case, the Hilbert distance on $\Omega$ is related to the Cartan projection in the following way:
\[d_H(x,y) = \epsilon_1(\mu(x,y)) - \epsilon_n(\mu(x,y))~.\]
Note that, for $k\geq 3$, $\Omega$ is not hyperbolic.
\end{example}
\begin{defi}\label{def - convex cocompact}
We say that a discrete subgroup $\Gamma$ of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ acts \emph{convex-cocompactly} on a proper convex domain $\Omega$ if $\Gamma$ preserves $\Omega$ and there exists a non-empty $\Gamma$-invariant convex subset $C\subset \Omega$ such that $\Gamma$ acts properly discontinuously and cocompactly on $C$.
We say that $\Gamma$ is \emph{strongly projectively convex-cocompact} it acts convex-cocompactly on a Gromov hyperbolic convex domain $\Omega$.
\end{defi}
\begin{example}\label{example - projetive anosov are convex cocompact}
If $\Gamma \subset \mathrm{SO}(n-1,1)$ is a convex-cocompact group of hyperbolic isometries, then it preserves the convex domain $\Omega \simeq \mathbb{H}^{n-1}$ introduced in Example \ref{ex:Ellipsoid} and acts properly discontinuously on its convex core $C \subset \Omega$. It is thus projectively convex-cocompact.
\end{example}
\begin{theorem}\cite{DGK}
Let $\Gamma$ be a discrete subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$. If $\Gamma$ is strongly projectively convex-cocompact, then $\Gamma$ is projective Anosov.
\end{theorem}
More precisely, we have the following description of the boundary maps $\xi$ and $\xi^*$ associated to $\Gamma$:
\begin{theorem} \label{theo - BoundaryMapsConvexCocompact}
Let $\Gamma$ be a discrete subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ preserving a Gromov hyperbolic convex domain $\Omega$ and acting properly discontinuously and cocompactly on a non-emply convex set $C\subset \Omega$. Let $\overline{C}$ denote the closure of $C$ in $\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$. Then $\Gamma$ is projective Anosov and
\begin{itemize}
\item the boundary map $\xi$ is a homeomorphism from $\partial_\infty \Gamma$ to $\overline{C} \cap \partial \Omega$,
\item for every $x\in \partial_\infty \Omega$, $\xi^*(x)$ is the hyperplane tangent to $\partial \Omega$ at $\xi(x)$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
Conversely, Danciger--Gu\'eritaud--Kassel prove that a projective Anosov subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ is strongly projectively convex-cocompact as soon as it preserves a proper convex domain. In particular, we have the following:
\begin{theorem} \cite{DGK} \label{th - projective anosov are convex cocompact}
Let $\iota: \mathrm{SL}(n,\R) \to \mathrm{SL}(\frac{n(n+1)}{2},\R)$ be the representation given by the action of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ on the space of quadratic forms on $\R^n$. If $\Gamma \subset \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ is projective Anosov, then $\iota(\Gamma) \subset \mathrm{SL}(\frac{n(n+1)}{2},\R)$ is strongly projetively convex cocompact.
\end{theorem}
\begin{rmk}
The adjective ``strongly'' is here to distinguish the notion from a weaker notion of convex-cocompactness that includes discrete subgroups that are not hyperbolic. We omit it from now on.
\end{rmk}
\subsubsection{Hilbert entropy and critical exponent}
Let $\Gamma$ be a discrete subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$, preserving a proper convex subset $\Omega\subset \mathbf{P}(\R^n)$. Then $\Gamma$ is a subgroup of isometries of $(\Omega,d_H)$ where $d_H$ is the Hilbert distance on $\Omega$. We denote the critical exponent associated to this metric by $\delta_H$:
$$\delta_H =\limsup_{R\rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{R} \log \Card \{ \gamma \in \Gamma \, |\, d_H(x,\gamma x) \leq R\}.$$
\begin{rmk}
Any projective Anosov representation in $\mathrm{SL}(n, \R)$ preserves a proper, strictly convex subset in $\mathbf{P}(\R^{n(n-1)/2})$ as explained by Example \ref{example - projetive anosov are convex cocompact} and Theorem \ref{th - projective anosov are convex cocompact}, and we can look at this critical exponent. For a subgroup $\Gamma\subset \mathrm{SL}(n, \R)$ which is strongly convex cocompact, we can look at the proper convex subset preserved in $\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ or the one $\mathbf{P}(\R^{n(n-1)/2})$. The two choices give two Hilbert critical exponents, which only differ by a factor 2.
\end{rmk}
Let $\Gamma$ be a strongly convex cocompact subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ and $\Omega\subset \mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ be a proper convex subset preserved by $\Gamma$. There is a one-to-one correspond between the set of conjugacy classes $ [\Gamma]$ and the closed geodesics of $\Omega/\Gamma$. For a conjugacy class $[\gamma]\in[\Gamma] $ we denote by $\ell_H(\gamma)$ be the length of the corresponding closed geodesic for the Hilbert metric on $\Omega/\Gamma$. The exponential growth of the number of closed geodesics is denoted by $h_H$:
$h_H:=\limsup_{R\rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{R} \log \Card \{ [\gamma] \in [\Gamma] \, |\, \ell_H(\gamma)\leq R\}.$
The work of Coornaert--Knieper on growth rate of conjugacy classes in Gromov hyperbolic groups has the following consequence:
\begin{theorem}[Coornaert -- Knieper, \cite{CK}]\label{th - delta = h for convex cocompact gromov hyperbolic}
Let $\Gamma$ be a strongly convex cocompact subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ and $\Omega\subset \mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ be a proper convex subset preserved by $\Gamma$, then:
$$ \delta_H(\Gamma)=h_H(\Gamma).$$
\end{theorem}
For any element $\gamma\in \Gamma$ we can compute the length of the closed geodesic corresponding to $[\gamma]$ in the quotient manifold. A direct computation shows that $\gamma$ acts by translation on the geodesic joining $\gamma^-$ to $\gamma^+$ and the translation distance is given by $\ell_{H}(\gamma) := \frac{1}{2}(\epsilon_1((\lambda)(\gamma))-\epsilon_n((\lambda)(\gamma)))$. Therefore one has:
\begin{coro}
Let $\Gamma$ be a strongly convex cocompact subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ then;
$$\delta_H(\Gamma)= 2 \delta_{1n}.$$
\end{coro}
\begin{rmk}
As mentioned previously, when $\Gamma$ is only supposed to be a projective Anosov subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ then it can be seen as a strongly convex cocompact subgroup in $\mathrm{SL}(n(n+1)/2,\R)$. In this case, the length of the closed geodesic corresponding to $\gamma\in \mathrm{SL}(n(n+1)/2,\R)$ is given by $\delta_{1n} (\lambda(\gamma))$, and therefore $\delta_H(\Gamma) = \delta_{1n}$.
\end{rmk}
Let $\Gamma$ be a discrete subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ acting convex-cocompactly on a Gromov hyperbolic convex domain $\Omega$.
\begin{coro}\label{cor:deltaH=2delta1n}
$\delta_{\textit{Hilb}} = 2 \delta_{1n}$.
\end{coro}
\section{Lower bound}
This section is devoted to the proof of the following lower bound on the Hausdorff dimension. For a projective Anosov subgroup $\Gamma \subset \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$, we write
\[\Lambda_\Gamma = \xi(\partial_\infty(\Gamma)) \subset \mathbf{P}(\R^n)~,\]
\[\Lambda^*_\Gamma = \xi^*(\partial_\infty(\Gamma)) \subset \mathbf{P}({\R^n}^*)\]
and
\[\Lambda^{\mathrm{sym}}(\Gamma) = (\xi,\xi^*)(\partial_\infty \Gamma) \subset \mathbf{P}(\R^n)\times \mathbf{P}({\R^n}^*)~.\]
\begin{theorem} \label{th - lower bound}
Let $\Gamma$ be a strongly projectively convex-cocompact subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$. Then we have
\[ 2\delta_{\alpha_{1,n}}(\Gamma) \leq \DimH(\Lambda^{\mathrm{Sym}}_\Gamma) \]
\end{theorem}
The proof is divided into two parts. First, we use the Hilbert distance on a $\Gamma$-invariant proper convex domain $\Omega\subset\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ to establish the equality between $2\delta_{\alpha_{1,n}}(\Gamma)$ and the Hausdorff dimension of $\Lambda_\Gamma\subset \partial\Omega$ for Gromov's "quasi-distance" on $\partial \Omega$. Then, we compare this quasi-distance with a Riemannian distance on $\mathbf{P}(\R^n)\times\mathbf{P}({\R^n}^*)$.
\subsection{Gromov metric on the boundary}\label{subsec-gromov metric on the boundary}
Let $\Gamma$ be a strongly projectively convex-cocompact subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$. Let $\Omega$ be a $\Gamma$-invariant Gromov hyperbolic convex domain $\Omega\subset\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ and $\mathcal{C}\subset \Omega$ a closed $\Gamma$-invariant subset of $\Omega$ on which $\Gamma$ acts cocompactly. Let $d_\Omega$ denote the Hilbert distance on $\Omega$.
Recall that Theorem \ref{theo - BoundaryMapsConvexCocompact} states that $\Lambda_\Gamma$ is the intersection of the closure of $\mathcal{C}$ in $\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ with $\partial \Omega$ and that $\Lambda_\Gamma^*$ is the set of hyperplanes tangent to $\Omega$ at a point in $\Lambda_\Gamma$.
Given $x\in \Omega$ and $\xi,\eta\in \partial\Omega$, we define the Gromov product $(\xi\vert\eta)_x$ by
\[( \xi \vert \eta)_x = \lim_{k\rightarrow +\infty} \frac{1}{2}[ d_\Omega(x_k, x) +d_\Omega(y_k, x) -d_\Omega(x_k, y_k)],\]
where $(x_k)$ and $(y_k)$ are sequences in $\Omega$ such that $x_k \rightarrow \xi $ and $y_k\rightarrow \eta$. Then the Gromov distance between $\xi $ and $\eta$ is
\[d_x(\xi, \eta)= e^{-( \xi\vert \eta)_x }.\]
This definition makes sense for all $x\in\Omega$ and $\xi,\eta\in \partial\Omega$. However, in the rest of this discussion, we will only consider it for $x\in \mathcal{C}$ and $\xi,\eta\in\Lambda_\Gamma=\partial_\infty\mathcal{C}$ in order to apply the theory of Gromov hyperbolic spaces.\\
\indent There is a small caveat to this definition, that $d_x$ is not in general a distance. However, $d_x^\epsilon$ for $\epsilon>0$ small enough is. We can apply here the main result of \cite{Coornaert}:
\begin{theorem}[Coornaert, \cite{Coornaert}]
Let $(X,d)$ be a complete Gromov hyperbolic space, and let $\Gamma$ be a discrete group of isometries that acts cocompactly on $X$. Fix $x\in X$, and consider the Gromov distance $d_x$ on the visual boundary $\partial_\infty X$. For $\varepsilon>0$ small enough, one has $\DimH((X,d_x^\epsilon))=\epsilon \delta(\Gamma)$, where $\delta(\Gamma)$ is the critical exponent of the action of $\Gamma$ on $(X,d)$.
\end{theorem}
Applying this result to $(X,d)=(\mathcal{C},d_\Omega)$, we get that $\frac{1}{\epsilon}\DimH(\Lambda_\Gamma,d_x^\epsilon)=\delta_H(\Gamma)$. By Corollary \ref{cor:deltaH=2delta1n}, we get $\frac{1}{\epsilon}\DimH(\Lambda_\Gamma,d_x^\epsilon)=2\delta_{1,n}(\Gamma)$.
We need to consider small enough powers of $d_x$ to get a distance, but the theorem states in particular that $\frac{1}{\epsilon} \DimH(( X,d_x^\epsilon))$ does not depend on $\epsilon$ (which also followed from Proposition \ref{p:GeneralComparisonHDim}). Alternatively, one could consider coverings of $\Lambda_\Gamma$ by "balls" for the function $d_x$, where we call balls the sets $B_x(\xi, r): =\{ \eta \in \partial \Omega, \, d_x(\xi, \eta) \leq r\}$. Mimicking the definition of Hausdorff dimension, we would get a non negative real number $\DimH(\Lambda_\Gamma,d_x)$ such that $\DimH(\Lambda_\Gamma,d_x)=\frac{1}{\epsilon}\DimH(\Lambda_\Gamma,d_x^\epsilon)$ for all $\epsilon>0$. We could then rephrase Coornaert's theorem in our case in the following more synthetic way:
\begin{prop} \label{prop - dimension Gromov = exposant critique} Let $\Gamma$ be a strongly projectively convex-cocompact subgroup of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$, and let $\Omega\subset\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ be a $\Gamma$-invariant Gromov hyperbolic convex domain on which $\Gamma$ acts convex-cocompactly. For any $x\in \Omega$, we have:
\[ \DimH(\Lambda_\Gamma,d_x)=2\delta_{1,n}(\Gamma).\]
\end{prop}
\subsection{Gromov distance VS Euclidean distance}
We keep the same notations as in the previous subsection. We now wish to show that $\DimH(\Lambda_\Gamma,d_x)\leq \DimH(\Lambda_\Gamma^{\mathrm{sym}})$. For $p\in \partial \Omega$, let $p^*=T_p\partial\Omega \in \mathbf{P}({\R^n}^*)$. The required inequality will easily follow from the following comparison lemma:
\begin{lemma} \label{lemma gromov smaller euclid}
Given $d$ and $d^*$ Riemannian distances on $\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ and $\mathbf{P}({\R^n}^*)$, there is a constant $C>0$ such that:
\[ \forall p,q\in\partial \Omega~ d_x(p,q) \leq C \sqrt{d(p,q) d^*(p^*,q^*)}\]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
First of all, since $\Omega$ and $\Omega^*$ are proper convex sets, we can assume without loss of generality that $d$ and $d^*$ are Euclidean distances in affine charts in which $\Omega$ and $\Omega^*$ are bounded.
Consider sequences $p_n\in[xp)$, $q_n\in[xq)$ that converge to $p$ and $q$ respectively. Consider $p^-$ (resp. $q^-$) the other intersection point between $\partial \Omega$ and the projective line $(xp)$ (resp. $(xq)$). Finally, consider $a_n,b_n\in \partial \Omega$ the endpoints of the geodesic joining $p_n$ and $q_n$ (see Figure \ref{figure gromov distance}).\\
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{tikzpicture}[line cap=round,line join=round,>=triangle 45,x=1.0cm,y=1.0cm,scale=0.5]
\clip(-1.5,-8) rectangle (42.38259224255556,8.05699233262419);
\draw [rotate around={32.730897488532186:(7.71,-1.62)}] (7.71,-1.62) ellipse (8.500687972956655cm and 3.0025982104787134cm);
\draw (5.41442766453723,0.45771305753372005)-- (7.26,-2.54);
\draw (13.64,3.6)-- (7.26,-2.54);
\draw (1.8144447318306245,-2.704193078492863)-- (14.96254162624239,2.773947370585196);
\draw [shift={(10.493891698519631,3.969887782684295)}] plot[domain=-0.11703268366256303:0.6049618762811327,variable=\t]({1.*0.681832435596674*cos(\t r)+0.*0.681832435596674*sin(\t r)},{0.*0.681832435596674*cos(\t r)+1.*0.681832435596674*sin(\t r)});
\draw (7.751563986137476,-2.0468817028004826) node[anchor=north west] {$x$};
\draw [dash pattern=on 6pt off 6pt] (7.26,-2.54)-- (2.8001903823373118,-6.8320424847098575);
\draw [dash pattern=on 6pt off 6pt] (7.26,-2.54)-- (8.54690646511876,-4.630287245958173);
\draw (8.913509500211314,-4.572850211656651) node[anchor=north west] {$p^-$};
\draw (3.1037819298421243,-6.694663759095833) node[anchor=north west] {$q^-$};
\draw (4.871959886041442,1.312656413978221) node[anchor=north west] {$p$};
\draw (13.990706203012216,4.59641547549124) node[anchor=north west] {$q$};
\draw (15,3) node[anchor=north west] {$b_n$};
\draw (11.212140843270427,1.2621370438010977) node[anchor=south east] {$q_n$};
\draw (6.6148781571522,-0.5313005974867817) node[anchor=north west] {$p_n$};
\draw (1.8407976754140396,-2.4762963493060313) node[anchor=north west] {$a_n$};
\draw [dash pattern=on 6pt off 6pt] (14.96254162624239,2.773947370585196)-- (16.21776025931955,3.2969328658639094);
\draw [dash pattern=on 6pt off 6pt] (1.8144447318306245,-2.704193078492863)-- (-0.6335899569568746,-3.724164102215152);
\draw (-1.6197791817189124,-2.5520754045717164) node[anchor=north west] {$a'_n$};
\draw (16.466155341691262,4.1670008289856915) node[anchor=north west] {$b'_n$};
\draw (11,5) node[anchor=north west] {$\gamma(p,q)$};
\draw (4.676918376644277,4.653789021223915)-- (19.88073796019969,2.866276775873923);
\draw (12.172636678756389,5.1306491642228735)-- (-1.7450583457772426,-4.492684394297657);
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Computing the Gromov product}
\label{figure gromov distance}
\end{figure}
We have that:
\begin{align*}
(p_n\vert q_n)_x &= \frac{1}{2}\left( d_\Omega(x,p_n)+d_\Omega(x,q_n)-d_\Omega(p_n,q_n)\right)\\
&= \frac{1}{4} \mathrm{Log}\left( \frac{p^-p_n\cdot px}{p^-x\cdot pp_n} \cdot\frac{q^-q_n \cdot qx}{q^-x\cdot qq_n}\cdot \frac{a_np_n\cdot b_nq_n}{a_nq_n\cdot b_np_n} \right) \\
&= \frac{1}{4}\mathrm{Log} \left(\frac{a_np_n\cdot b_nq_n}{pp_n\cdot qq_n} \right)+\underbrace{\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{Log} \frac{1}{a_nq_n\cdot b_np_n}}_{\to -\mathrm{Log} \sqrt{d(p,q)}} + \underbrace{\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{Log} \left(\frac{p^-p_n\cdot px\cdot q^-q_n\cdot qx}{p^-x\cdot q^-x}\right)}_\textrm{bounded}
\end{align*}
This gives us a constant $C_1>0$ such that:
\[ e^{-(p_n\vert q_n)_x} \leq C_1 \sqrt{pq} \left( \frac{pp_n}{a_np_n}\cdot \frac{qq_n}{b_nq_n}\right)^\frac{1}{4} \]
In order to deal with the terms $\frac{pp_n}{a_np_n}$ and $\frac{qq_n}{b_nq_n}$, we consider the affine plane $\mathcal P_{p,q}$ containing $x,p,q$. Note that it also contains all the points defined above.\\
\indent Denote by $a'_n$ (resp. $b'_n$) the intersection of the line $(p_na_n)$ with the tangent space to $\partial \Omega$ at $p$. Note that $\frac{a_np_n}{a'_np_n}\to 1$ as $n\to +\infty$, so that we can work with $\frac{pp_n}{a'_np_n}$ instead of $\frac{pp_n}{a_np_n}$.\\
Now look at the triangle $a'_np_np$, denote by $\alpha_n$ the angle at $a'_n$, and $\theta(p)$ the angle at $p$ ($\theta(p)$ does not depend on $n$ as it is the angle between the line $(xp)$ and the tangent line $T_p\partial\Omega \cap \mathcal P_{p,q}$ (see Figure \ref{figure angles gromov distance}). The law of sines gives us $\frac{pp_n}{a'_np_n}=\frac{\sin \alpha_n}{\sin \theta(p)}$.\\
We now consider the triangle $b'_nq_nq$, and denote by $\beta_n$ the angle at $b'_n$, and $\varphi(q)$ the angle at $q$. Just as in the previous case, we get $\frac{qq_n}{b'_nq_n}=\frac{\sin \beta_n}{\sin\varphi(q)}$.
We now find:
\[ e^{-(p_n\vert q_n)_x} \leq \frac{C_1}{(\sin \theta(p) \sin \varphi(q))^\frac{1}{4}} \sqrt{pq} \left( \sin \alpha_n \sin \beta_n \right)^\frac{1}{4} \]
Notice that the sequence $(\alpha_n)$ (resp. $(\beta_n)$) has a limit $\alpha(p,q)$ (resp. $\beta(p,q)$) which is the angle at $p$ (resp. at $q$) between the line $(pq)$ and $T_p\partial\Omega \cap \mathcal P_{p,q}$ (resp. $T_q\partial\Omega \cap \mathcal P_{p,q}$).\\
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{tikzpicture}[line cap=round,line join=round,>=triangle 45,x=1.0cm,y=1.0cm,scale=0.5]
\clip(2,-10) rectangle (35.22129696652094,5.840067118880246);
\draw (2.722715048128429,-7.643843188948834)-- (15.392017102066404,4.832525331172827);
\draw (10.161374629712993,3.5034276537715505)-- (29.69053566378659,-0.33380596324181266);
\draw (8.49064911030651,-1.9637456860932616)-- (21.027452918105787,1.3683804379402549);
\draw (5.9630864754107265,-4.452817519442409)-- (28.18047073874233,-0.03709726776110722);
\draw (8.49064911030651,-1.9637456860932616)-- (16.163751237331663,-7.965399078642691);
\draw (21.027452918105787,1.3683804379402549)-- (19.722303083277016,-7.7939026041393005);
\draw [shift={(8.49064911030651,-1.9637456860932616)}] plot[domain=3.9193183332717356:5.619412631936143,variable=\t]({1.*0.4707072634791916*cos(\t r)+0.*0.4707072634791916*sin(\t r)},{0.*0.4707072634791916*cos(\t r)+1.*0.4707072634791916*sin(\t r)});
\draw [shift={(8.49064911030651,-1.9637456860932616)}] plot[domain=0.25978144193853264:0.7777256796819427,variable=\t]({1.*0.9765263309181195*cos(\t r)+0.*0.9765263309181195*sin(\t r)},{0.*0.9765263309181195*cos(\t r)+1.*0.9765263309181195*sin(\t r)});
\draw [shift={(13.396812837983548,2.8677048883704206)}] plot[domain=-0.1940157670578886:0.7777256796819425,variable=\t]({1.*0.6715659744278283*cos(\t r)+0.*0.6715659744278283*sin(\t r)},{0.*0.6715659744278283*cos(\t r)+1.*0.6715659744278283*sin(\t r)});
\draw [shift={(21.027452918105787,1.3683804379402549)}] plot[domain=2.9475768865319045:3.401374095528326,variable=\t]({1.*1.5430717203064408*cos(\t r)+0.*1.5430717203064408*sin(\t r)},{0.*1.5430717203064408*cos(\t r)+1.*1.5430717203064408*sin(\t r)});
\draw [shift={(21.027452918105787,1.3683804379402549)}] plot[domain=4.570892808167798:6.089169540121698,variable=\t]({1.*0.6145496508903783*cos(\t r)+0.*0.6145496508903783*sin(\t r)},{0.*0.6145496508903783*cos(\t r)+1.*0.6145496508903783*sin(\t r)});
\draw [shift={(28.18047073874233,-0.03709726776110722)}] plot[domain=2.9475768865319045:3.3377866570401675,variable=\t]({1.*1.753050834530312*cos(\t r)+0.*1.753050834530312*sin(\t r)},{0.*1.753050834530312*cos(\t r)+1.*1.753050834530312*sin(\t r)});
\draw [shift={(5.9630864754107265,-4.4528175194424096)}] plot[domain=0.19619400345037571:0.7777256796819437,variable=\t]({1.*0.7162176818659123*cos(\t r)+0.*0.7162176818659123*sin(\t r)},{0.*0.7162176818659123*cos(\t r)+1.*0.7162176818659123*sin(\t r)});
\draw (14.255852958481443,3.8035464841524838) node[anchor=north west] {$\gamma(p,q)$};
\draw (19.5,1.8742111459893405) node[anchor=north east] {$\beta(p,q)$};
\draw (9.7,0) node[anchor=north west] {$\alpha(p,q)$};
\draw (6.902941614148573,-3.2) node[anchor=north west] {$\alpha_n$};
\draw (8.23203929154985,-2.28457836071788) node[anchor=north west] {$\theta(p)$};
\draw (21.523016065562615,1.102477010724083) node[anchor=north west] {$\varphi(q)$};
\draw (25,0.5022393499622162) node[anchor=north west] {$\beta_n$};
\draw (7.8,-1.2) node[anchor=north west] {$p$};
\draw (21.008526642052445,2.131455857744426) node[anchor=north west] {$q$};
\draw (11.533346425740117,-3.4207425043028423) node[anchor=north west] {$p_n$};
\draw (20.901341345487825,-1.3842218695750796) node[anchor=north west] {$q_n$};
\draw (4.4,-3.677987216057928) node[anchor=north west] {$a'_n$};
\draw (28.361437986385315,0.9524175955336163) node[anchor=north west] {$b'_n$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{}
\label{figure angles gromov distance}
\end{figure}
We thus obtain:
\[ d_x(p,q) \leq \frac{C_1}{(\sin \theta(p) \sin \varphi(q))^\frac{1}{4}} \sqrt{pq} \left( \alpha(p,q)\beta(p,q) \right)^\frac{1}{4} \]
The function $\theta$ is continuous on the compact set $\partial \Omega$ (because $\Omega$ has $\mathcal C^1$ boundary), and never vanishes (because $x$ is in the interior of $\Omega$), hence is bounded away from $0$. The same goes for $\varphi$ (notice that $\varphi(q)=\pi-\theta(q)$), and we can thus find a constant $C_2>0$ such that:
\[ d_x(p,q)\leq C_2 \sqrt{pq} (\alpha(p,q)\beta(p,q))^\frac{1}{4}~.\]
Consider now the exterior angle $\gamma(p,q)$ between the lines $T_p\partial\Omega \cap \mathcal P_{p,q}$ and $T_q\partial\Omega \cap \mathcal P_{p,q}$.\\
Notice that we have $\alpha(p,q)+\beta(p,q)=\gamma(p,q)$, so we can find an inequality involving only the angle $\gamma(p,q)$:
\[ d_x(p,q)\leq C_2 \sqrt{pq} \sqrt{\gamma(p,q)} \]
Finally, there is a constant $C_3$ such that the angle $\gamma(p,q)$ between the lines $p^*\cap \mathcal P_{p,q}$ and $q^* \cap \mathcal P_{p,q}$ is smaller than $C_3 d^*(p^*,q^*)$. This gives the desired inequality.
\end{proof}
Let us now conclude the proof of Theorem \ref{th - lower bound}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{th - lower bound}]
By Lemma \ref{lemma gromov smaller euclid}, we have
\[d_x(p,q) \leq \frac{1}{2}(d(p,q) + d^*(p^*,q^*))\]
for all $p,q \in \Lambda_\Gamma$. Since $\frac{1}{2}(d+d^*)$ defines a Finsler metric in a neigbourhood of $\Lambda^{\mathrm{sym}}(\Gamma) \subset \mathbf{P}(\R^n) \times \mathbf{P}({\R^n}^*)$, we deduce that
\[\DimH(\Lambda_\Gamma, d_x) \leq \DimH(\Lambda^{\mathrm{sym}}(\Gamma))~.\]
Since
\[2\delta_{1,n}(\Gamma) = \DimH(\Lambda_\Gamma, d_x)\]
by Proposition \ref{prop - dimension Gromov = exposant critique}, the theorem follows.
\end{proof}
Let us finally recall the following consequence for every projective Anosov group:
\begin{coro}
Let $\Gamma \subset \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ be a projective Anosov group. Then
\[\delta_{1,n}(\Gamma) \leq \DimH(\Lambda^{\mathrm{sym}}(\Gamma))~.\]
\end{coro}
\begin{proof}
Let $\rho$ be the representation of $\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ into $\mathrm{SL}(\mathrm{Sym}^2(\R^n))$. Then $\rho(\Gamma)$ is projective Anosov and preserves the proper convex cone of positive definite quadratic forms in $\mathrm{Sym}^2(\R^n)$. Thus $\rho(\Gamma)$ is projectively convex cocompact by Theorem \ref{th - projective anosov are convex cocompact}. Applying Theorem \ref{th - lower bound}, we obtain
\[\delta_{1,n}(\Gamma) = 2 \delta_{1, n(n+1)/2}(\rho(\Gamma)) \leq \DimH(\Lambda^{\mathrm{sym}}(\Gamma))~.\]
\end{proof}
\section{Upper bound}
In this section we prove the upper inequality for the Hausdorff dimension of the limit set of a general projective Anosov subgroup:
\begin{theorem} \label{th - upper bound}
Let $\Gamma\subset \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ be a projective Anosov subgroup. Then
$$\DimH(\Lambda_\Gamma) \leq \delta_{1,2}(\Gamma)~.$$
\end{theorem}
Applying this theorem to $\rho(\Gamma)$ where $\rho: \mathrm{SL}(n,\R) \to \mathrm{SL}(\R^n \otimes {\R^n}^*)$ is the tensor product of the standard representation with its dual, we obtain the a priori stronger inequality:
\begin{coro} \label{c - upper bound symmetric}
Let $\Gamma\subset \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ be a projective Anosov subgroup. Then
$$\DimH(\Lambda^{\mathrm{sym}}_\Gamma) \leq \delta_{1,2}(\Gamma)~.$$
\end{coro}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Corollary \ref{c - upper bound symmetric} assuming Theorem \ref{th - upper bound}]
By Theorem \ref{th - upper bound}, we have
\[\DimH(\Lambda^{\mathrm{sym}}_\Gamma) \leq \delta_{1,2}(\rho(\Gamma))~.\]
By Proposition \ref{prop - SimpleRootsTensorProduct}, we have
\[(\mu_1-\mu_2)(\rho(g)) = \inf\{\mu_1 - \mu_2)(g), (\mu_{n-1} - \mu_n)(g)\}\]
for all $g\in \Gamma$, hence
\[\delta_{1,2}(\rho(\Gamma)) = \sup \{\delta_{1,2}(\Gamma), \delta_{n-1,n}(\Gamma)\}\]
by Lemma \ref{l:CriticalExponentInf}. Finally, since $(\mu_{n-1}-\mu_n)(g) = (\mu_1 - \mu_2)(g^{-1})$, we have
\[\delta_{1,2}(\Gamma) = \delta_{n-1,n}(\Gamma)~.\]
We conclude that
\[\delta_{1,2}(\rho(\Gamma)) = \delta_{1,2}(\Gamma)\]
and the corollary follows.
\end{proof}
Let us now turn to the proof of Theorem \ref{th - upper bound}. The main technical tool for the proof is Lemma \ref{lem - quantified distortion of balls by loxodromic element} that quantifies the distortion of balls by proximal elements. The second part of the proof presents a covering of the limit set by images of a fixed ball in order to obtain the upper bound.
\subsection{Distortion of balls by loxodromic elements}
For a proximal element $g\in\mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ we denote by $g^+\in\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ its attractive line and by $H^-(g)\in\mathbf{P}({\R^n}^*)$ its repelling hyperplane.
We endow $\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ with the Riemannian metric that lifts to the round metric on $\mathbb{S}^{n-1}$.
Let $(e_1,\dots,e_n)$ be the canonical basis of $\R^n$. If $g \in \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ is proximal and $g^+=[e_1]$ and $H^-(g) = \mathrm{span}(e_2,..., e_n)$, then the norm of the restriction of $g$ to $H^-(g)$ is $e^{\mu_2(g)}$. A simple computation then gives the following estimate for the distortion of balls in $\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ under the action of $g$.
\begin{lemme}\label{lem - distortion for orthogonal hyperplane}
There are $r_0>0$ and $L>0$ such that, for all $g \in \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ proximal satisfying $g^+=[e_1]$ and $H^-(g) = \mathrm{span}(e_2,..., e_n)$, and for all $r\in (0,r_0)$, we have
$$g\cdot B([e_1], r) \subset B([e_1],L re^{(\mu_2-\mu_1)(g)}).$$
\end{lemme}
Fix $\epsilon >0$ smaller than the $r_0$ given by Lemma \ref{lem - distortion for orthogonal hyperplane}. Let $B(x,\epsilon) $ be the ball of radius $\epsilon$ about $x\in \mathbf{P}(\R^n)$.
Let $\Gamma_{x,\epsilon}$ be the set of elements $\gamma\in\Gamma$ that are $\epsilon$-proximal and such that $\gamma^+ \in B(x,\epsilon)$. The following lemma controls the distortion of balls by elements of $\Gamma_{x,\epsilon}$.
\begin{lemme}\label{lem - quantified distortion of balls by loxodromic element}
$\exists C >0$ such that for all $x\in \mathbf{P}(\R^n)$, all $r_0>\epsilon>0$ and all $\gamma \in \Gamma_{x,\epsilon}$, the diameter of $\gamma\cdot B(x,\epsilon) $ is at most $C\epsilon e^{\mu_2(\gamma)- \mu_1 (\gamma)}$~.
\end{lemme}
\begin{proof}
Since the metric on $\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ is $\mathrm{SO}(n,\R)$ invariant and multiplication by $\mathrm{SO}(n,\R)$ does not change the Cartan projections, we can assume that $x=[e_1]$.
The subset of $\mathbf{P}(\R^n)\times \mathbf{P}({\R^n}^*)$ consisting of pairs of a line $\ell$ and a hyperplane $H$ such that $d(\ell , H) \geq \epsilon $ and $d(\ell, [e_1]) \leq \epsilon$ is a compact subset of the set of pairs $(\ell,H)$ which are in general position. Since $\mathrm{SL}(n, \R)$ is locally compact and acts transitively on this latter set,
there exists a compact set $K'\subset \mathrm{SL}(n,\R)$ such that for all $\gamma\in \Gamma_{[e_1], \epsilon}$, there exists $k\in K'$ such that
$\left\{\begin{array}{l}
k\cdot \gamma^+ = (k\gamma k^{-1})^+ = [e_1]\\
k \cdot H^-(\gamma)= H^-(k\gamma k^{-1}) = \mathrm{span} (e_2, ... , e_n)
\end{array}
\right.$
Take $\gamma\in \Gamma_{[e_1], \epsilon}$ and let $k\in K'$ be as above. We have $$\gamma \cdot B(e_1, \epsilon) \subset \gamma \cdot B(\gamma^+, 2\epsilon) = k^{-1} (k\gamma k^{-1} ) k \cdot (B(\gamma^+, 2\epsilon)).$$
By compactness of $K'$ there exists $C_1>1$ such that for all $k\in K'$, all $\xi \in B(e_1, \epsilon)$ and all $ r>0$, we have $k \cdot B(\xi , r) \subset B(k\xi , C_1 r).$
Therefore:
$$\gamma \cdot B(e_1, \epsilon) \subset k^{-1} (k\gamma k^{-1} ) B(e_1, 2C_1\epsilon).$$
By Lemma \ref{lem - distortion for orthogonal hyperplane}:
$$ (k\gamma k^{-1} ) B(e_1, 2C_1\epsilon) \subset B(e_1,2C_1 L\epsilon e^{(\mu_2-\mu_1)(Pk\gamma k^{-1})}).$$
By Proposition \ref{prop - Benoist cartan projection continuous} , there exists $C_2>1$ such that for all $k\in K'$:
$$|(\mu_2-\mu_1)(k \gamma k^{-1})- (\mu_2-\mu_1)( \gamma ) | \leq \log(C_2).$$
In particular, $\gamma \cdot B(e_1 , \epsilon) \subset k^{-1} B(e_1,2C_1 L C_2\epsilon e^{(\mu_2-\mu_1)( \gamma )})$
By using compactness of $K'$ another time we have:
$$\gamma \cdot B(e_1 , \epsilon) \subset B(\gamma^+,2C_1^2 L C_2\epsilon e^{(\mu_2-\mu_1)( \gamma )}),$$
this concludes the proof of Lemma \ref{lem - quantified distortion of balls by loxodromic element}.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of the upper bound}
To prove an upper bound on Hausdorff dimension it is sufficient to find a good cover of the sets. We show in the lemma that $\Lambda$ can be covered by translate of a ball by some particular proximal elements
Let $B $ and $ B'$ be two open balls of $\mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ with disjoint closure and intersecting $\Lambda$.For every $\epsilon>0$, define $\Gamma_0^\epsilon$ to be the set of elements $g\in \Gamma$ such that
\begin{itemize}
\item $g(^cB') \subset B$,
\item $g(B)$ has diameter less than $\epsilon$.
\end{itemize}
One easily verifies that $\Gamma_0^\epsilon$ is a semi-group.
\begin{lemme} \label{lem - covering the limit set}
For any $\epsilon>0$,
$ \cup_{\gamma \in \Gamma_0^\epsilon} \gamma \cdot B $ is a covering of $\Lambda\cap B$.
\end{lemme}
\begin{proof}
Set $O^\epsilon = \cup_{\gamma \in \Gamma_0^\epsilon} \gamma \cdot B $.
By definition it is a $\Gamma_0^\epsilon$-invariant open subset of $B$ such that $\Lambda_\Gamma \cap O^\epsilon \neq \emptyset$. The set $C^\epsilon = \Lambda_\Gamma \cap (B\setminus O^\epsilon)$ is closed in $B$ and $\Gamma_0^\epsilon$-invariant. We want to prove that $C^\epsilon$ is empty. Assume by contradiction that it is not the case, and pick $c \in C$.
Let $\gamma \in \Gamma$ be an element such that $\gamma_- \in B'$ and $\gamma_+ \in B$. Then for $k$ large enough, $\gamma^k$ belongs to $\Gamma_0^\epsilon$. Since $c\neq \gamma_-$, $\gamma^k c$ converges to $\gamma_+$ as $k$ goes to $+\infty$. Since $C^\epsilon$ is $\Gamma_0^\epsilon$-invariant and closed, we obtain that $\gamma_+\in C^\epsilon$.
By Corollary 8.2.G of \cite{Gromov}, the set of pairs $(\gamma^+,\gamma^-)$ of elements $\gamma\in\Gamma$ is dense in $\Lambda_\Gamma\times\Lambda_\Gamma$. We thus obtain that $C^\epsilon = \Lambda_\Gamma\cap B$, contradicting the fact that $\Lambda_\Gamma \cap O^\epsilon$ is non-empty.
\end{proof}
We now have all the tools to prove Theorem \ref{th - upper bound}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem \ref{th - upper bound}]
By compactness of $\Lambda_\Gamma$ it is sufficient to prove that the Hausdorff dimension of $\Lambda\cap B$ is less than $ \delta_{1,2}(\Gamma)$ for any ball $B$ of radius less than $r_0$ given by Lemma \ref{lem - distortion for orthogonal hyperplane}.
Fix such a ball $B$, and let $r>0$ be its radius. Consider a ball $B'\subset \mathbf{P}(\R^n)$ whose closure is disjoint from $\overline{B}$. There thus exists a $\eta>0$ such that every element $\gamma/in \Gamma$ with $\gamma_- \in B'$ and $\gamma_+ \in B$ is $\eta$-proximal. Let $C>0$ be given by Lemma \ref{lem - quantified distortion of balls by loxodromic element}.
By Lemma \ref{lem - covering the limit set}, we have $\Lambda_\Gamma\cap B\subset \cup_{\gamma \in \Gamma_0^\epsilon} \gamma \cdot B$. By definition of $\Gamma_0^\epsilon$, this gives a covering of $\Lambda_\Gamma\cap B$ by balls of radius less than $\epsilon$.
Let $s>0$. By definition of $s$-dimensional Hausdorff measure, we have :
$$H^{s}_\epsilon (\Lambda_\Gamma \cap B) \leq \sum_{\gamma\in \Gamma_0^\epsilon} \mathrm{diam}(\gamma \cdot B(r)) ^s.$$
Hence by Lemma \ref{lem - quantified distortion of balls by loxodromic element},
\begin{eqnarray*}
H^{s}_\epsilon (\Lambda_\Gamma \cap B(r))& \leq & C^s r^s \sum_{\gamma\in \Gamma_0\setminus F_\epsilon} e^{s(\mu_2(\gamma)- \mu_1 (\gamma))}\\
&\leq & C^s r^s \sum_{\gamma\in \Gamma} e^{-s(\mu_1- \mu_2) (\gamma)} \\
\end{eqnarray*}
Since $\epsilon$ can be taken arbitrarily small, we obtain :
$$H^{s} (\Lambda_\Gamma \cap B)\leq C^s r^s \sum_{\gamma\in \Gamma} e^{-s(\mu_1- \mu_2) (\gamma)}~.$$
Therefore, for all $s>\delta_{\alpha_{1,2}}$,
$H^{s} (\Lambda_\Gamma \cap B)<+\infty$ which in turns implies that $\DimH(\Lambda_\Gamma\cap B) \leq \delta_{\alpha_{1,2}}$.
\end{proof}
|
\section{Introduction}
\justifying
Ultrasonically excited MBs have shown to exhibit highly nonlinear and complex dynamics \cite{1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19,20}. Due to their high echogenicity, MBs are employed in ultrasound imaging as contrast agents \cite{21,22}. In context of ultrasound imaging, nonlinear subharmonic (SH) and ultraharmonic (UH) response of MBs is exploited in diagnostic ultrasound to enhance detection of vascular tissues \cite{23,24,25} since tissue generates negligible amounts of subharmonics and ultraharmonics in response to ultrasonic waves \cite{24,26}. SH oscillations of the microbubbles may also be employed for non-invasive pressure estimation in medical ultrasound \cite{27,28}. This can generate significant suppression of tissue signal that results in high sensitivity contrast enhanced imaging. Using certain ultrasound exposure parameters \cite{29}, MBs can undergo inertial collapse generating powerful shockwaves and high velocity jets which are exploited in shockwave lithotripsy \cite{30} and histotripsy \cite{31}.Oscillations of MBs can also generate microstreaming in the surrounding liquid \cite{32}, exerting shear stress on the nearby objects \cite{33} allowing for therapeutic approaches such as site specific drug and gene delivery \cite{34} through the creation of pores on the cell membrane \cite{35}. Similar mechanisms are implicated in the reversible opening of the blood-brain-barrier (BBB) to deliver macromolecules to better treat central nervous system disorders and brain cancers \cite{37,38}; SH response of the bubbles have been proposed as a marker for monitoring the treatment \cite{39} BBB opening \cite{40,41} and enhancement of thrombolysis \cite{42}. MBs are involved in sonoluminescence, further enhancing the efficacy of chemical reactions in sonochemical reactors \cite{43,44}. In microfluidic applications, the response of MBs to an ultrasonic wave has been utilized to stir or pump liquids on miniature scales \cite{45}. MBs are also of interest in underwater acoustics \cite{46} and oceanography \cite{48}.
Understanding the complex dynamic of ultrasonically driven MBs is the key to optimize their performance in applications ranging from underwater acoustics to medicine.
There have been decades of theoretical and experimental investigation on the dynamics of MBs under acoustic excitation. Most of these studies are based on the assumption that MBs within a cluster are sufficiently apart from each other so that their oscillations are independent. These investigations have provided valuable insight on the dynamic behavior of acoustically excited isolated individual MBs in an infinite liquid domain. Nevertheless, the majority of MB applications involve dense clusters of polydisperse MBs \cite{48,49,50}.
Oscillations of each MB within a bubble cluster generates secondary pressure waves \cite{50}, exerting pressure on the neighboring MBs. Therefore, each bubble oscillates in response to two main pressure fields, the primary acoustic ultrasound pressure wave and secondary pressure waves scattered from all the bubbles in proximity. Hence, a MB cluster can be considered as a system of coupled oscillators where the dynamics of each oscillator depends on the rest \cite{51}.
It has been shown that when MBs are close to each other the effects of coupling can be significant. For instance, previous investigations have concluded that independent oscillations of MBs are suppressed due to inter-bubble interactions and therefore a collective behavior within a bubble cluster emerges \cite{51}. Moreover, it has been shown that inter-bubble interactions can increase the maximum radius of MB oscillation \cite{52}. Another study has concluded that route to chaos could be altered by inter-bubble interactions where suppression of chaotic oscillations is possible by changing cluster size \cite{53}. It was shown in the same study that larger MBs have a significant impact on the oscillations of smaller MBs. Pioneering work of Allen et al. \cite{54} on the interaction of two ultrasound contrast agents showed that the total radiated pressure from the bubbles depends on the extent of coupling, which is a function of the separation distance of the two agents and during in vivo experimental and clinical conditions, coupling becomes an important issue.
Although these studies have highlighted the importance of inter-bubble interactions, they lack a general framework by which one can predict the emergent collective behavior within MB clusters.
This work aims to address this by studying the effects of MB interactions in polydisperse MB clusters. The aim of this work is to provide a framework where one can predict the emergent collective dynamics of interacting MBs within a cluster. Inter-bubble interactions are classified into two general categories characterized by destructive and constructive interactions. Using the proposed classification of inter-bubble interactions, one can predict the emergent collective behavior of MB clusters.
In this work, a set of detailed numerical simulations for a wide range of geometric and acoustic parameters are performed. The resulting time dependent radius of oscillators were studied through resonance and bifurcation analysis techniques. The emergent behavior of isolated MBs when they interact within a cluster can be predicted using their frequency response diagrams. Two general trends from the study of the frequency response diagrams of isolated and interacting MBs are observed. In the first trend, the resonance modes of smaller MBs are enhanced (or new resonances are formed) upon interaction with other MBs (constructive interaction). In the second trend, a weakening (or disappearance) of resonance modes are observed upon interaction with other MBs (destructive interaction). Furthermore, the contribution of smaller and larger MBs to the emergent collective behavior of polydisperse MB clusters is investigated. A special case of constructive interaction where the largest MB within the cluster can force smaller MBs into period two oscillations is studied in detail with the aid of frequency dependent bifurcation diagrams.
\section{Methods}
\subsection{The Bubble Model}
\justifying
Dynamics of a single isolated bubble in an infinite domain of liquid is governed by the well-known Keller-Miksis equation (Eq.1) which assumes small Mach numbers for the oscillating bubble wall \cite{55}. The Keller-Miksis equation is a highly nonlinear second order ordinary differential equation given by
\begin{equation}
\rho{}\left(1-\frac{\dot{R}}{c}\right)R\ddot{R}+\frac{3}{2}\rho{}{\dot{R}}^2\left(1-\frac{\dot{R}}{3c}\right)=\frac{P_B(R,\dot{R},t)}{\rho_l}
\end{equation}
Where the nonlinear term $P_B$ can be written as:
\begin{equation}
P_B=[1+\frac{\dot{R}}{c}+\frac{R}{c}\frac{d}{dt}][(P_\infty+\frac{2\sigma{}}{R_0}){(\frac{R_0}{R})}^{3k}-\frac{2\sigma{}}{R}-\frac{4\mu_L{}\dot{R}}{R}-P_\infty+P_asin\left(2\pi{}ft\right)]
\end{equation}
In Eq.1 and Eq.2 $R$, $\dot{R}$, $\ddot{R}$ respectively are instantaneous radius, wall velocity and wall acceleration of the bubble. $R_0$ is the initial radius of the bubble and $\sigma$, $\mu_L$ and $c$ respectively are the surface tension, viscosity and speed of sound in the liquid. $\gamma$ is the ratio of specific heats of the gas within the bubble, $P_\infty$ is the ambient pressure in the surrounding liquid, $P_a$ and $f$ respectively are the pressure amplitude and frequency of the incoming acoustic field.
Successive expansions and contractions of an oscillating bubble in an incompressible fluid generates pressures waves whose amplitude can be calculated using Euler's equation of fluid flow as:
\begin{equation}
P_{sc}=\frac{\rho_L}{r}\frac{d(R^2 \dot{R})}{dt}+o(\frac{1}{r^4})
\end{equation}
Neglecting higher orders terms in Eq.3 leads to Eq.4 which was suggested in \cite{56}
\begin{equation}
P_{sc}=\rho_L\frac{2R\dot{R}^2+\ddot{R}R^2}{r}
\end{equation}
where $r$ denotes the distance of the point of interest from center of the bubble. In Eq.1, the term $P_B$ refers to the pressure on the bubble wall. In a cluster of multiple MBs, the pressure at the wall of each bubble is equal to $P_B$ and the summation of all scattered pressure waves from other bubbles in the cluster. Therefore, coupling between MBs is done through inclusion of backscattered pressure fields from all the MBs in the cluster at the location of each MB. Thus, the Keller-Miksis equation for a cluster of interacting bubbles can be written as
\begin{equation}
\left[1-\frac{\dot{R_i}}{c}\right]R_i\ddot{R_i}+\frac{3}{2}\left[1-\frac{\dot{R_i}}{3c}\right]\dot{R_i^2}=\frac{P_B(R_i,\dot{R_i},t)}{\rho_L}-\sum_{j=1,j\neq i}^{N} \frac{2R_j\dot{R_j}^2+\ddot{R_j}R_j^2}{d_{ij}}
\end{equation}
where $R_i$, $\dot{R_i}$ and $\ddot{R_i}$ respectively represent instantaneous radius, wall velocity and wall acceleration of each bubble. $d_{ij}$ represents the distance between centers of $i$th and $j$th bubble. $R_{i0}$ is the initial radius of the $i$th bubble and $N$ is the number of bubbles in the cluster.
Eq.5 is a system of $N$ linearly coupled, second order differential equations; a solution requires $2N$ initial conditions. Initial conditions can be specified by assuming all bubbles are initially at rest (no radial velocity) and that their initial radii are known. The initial conditions can be written as:
\begin{equation}
\begin{cases}
R_i(t=0)=R_{i0}\\
\dot{R_i}(t=0)=0
\end{cases} i=1,2,...,N
\end{equation}
\justifying
Therefore, Eq.5 can be treated as an initial value problem for which the Runge-Kutta numerical algorithms can be employed to obtain a solution. Furthermore, the geometry of the problem needs be specified to determine the MB distances ($d_{ij}$).
The aim of this study is to investigate nonlinear effects of inter-bubble interactions, therefore, additional nonlinearities such as the effects of the encapsulating shell \cite{57,58} are not introduced in this study. To further reduce the ambiguity in the source of the observed effects, spatial formations were chosen in which the inter-bubble distances between all MBs are equal ($d_{ij}=d$). Therefore, equilateral tetrahedrons (4 MBs) and equilateral triangles (3 MBs) were chosen to specify the geometry of the problem (Fig.1).
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.2}{\includegraphics{fig1.eps}}
\caption{Schematic diagrams of the (a) equilateral tetrahedron formation for the 4-MB cases, (b) equilateral triangle formation for the 3-MB case}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Numerical analysis methods}
\justifying
Since analytical solutions are not available for Eq.5, numerical methods are employed to solve the equations. Eq.5 should be solved for a wide range of the parameters of interest to evaluate the impact of these parameters on the dynamics of the system. Bifurcation and frequency response analysis were used to investigate the behavior of this complex system for a wide range of control parameters. These methods have been pioneered by Lauterborn and Parlitz \cite{38,39}. Here, a brief description of the bifurcation and frequency response analysis is presented.
\subsubsection{Bifurcation analysis}
\justifying
Stroboscopic maps based on mapping of radius of MBs after each forcing period have been used to evaluate the dynamics of MBs for a wide range of control parameters \cite{1,4,8,61,62}. After the system reaches its steady state, the MB radii are sampled and plotted as a function of the controlling parameter in a Poincare plot. The procedure continues by modifying the control parameter and obtaining a new set of points to be plotted against the control parameter. For instance, here we consider a MB with an initial radius of 2$\mu$m sonicated with ultrasound waves of with a frequency of 2MHz and pressures ranging from 1kPa up to 400kPa. A solution to the time dependent radial oscillations of the MB at lower pressures is show in Fig.2a. Oscillations are repeated after each forcing period resulting in the same $R/R_0$ values for the sampled radius after each forcing period (Period-1 oscillations). The sampled points (after the transient phase) from Fig.2a results in a single point in Fig.2d for a particular set of exposure parameters. Increasing the incident pressure increases $R/R_0$, and above a certain pressure threshold the time-radius curves change shape (Fig.2b). Periodic sampling of the MB radius results in two values (Period-2 oscillations). Plotting the sampled points on a Poincare diagram as a function of pressure amplitude results in two points as shown in Fig.2d. Further increasing of pressure above a specific threshold results in chaotic oscillations depicted in Fig.2c where sampling of the points results in many different values (Chaotic oscillations). The chaotic oscillations generate multiple points on the bifurcation diagrams presented in Fig.2d. Similar analysis can be performed to investigate the influence of any control parameter.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.15}{\includegraphics{fig2.eps}}
\caption{Radial Oscillations of a MB with initial radius of 2$\mu$m exposed to an ultrasound wave with a frequency of 2MHz, (a) Peroid-1 oscillations ($P_a$=100 kPa), (b) Period-2 oscillations ($P_a$=250 kPa), (c) Chaotic oscillations ($P_a$=350 kPa), (d) Pressure dependent bifurcation diagram of a 2$\mu$m MB excited with an ultrasound wave with a frequency of 2MHz.}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Frequency response analysis}
\justifying
Frequency response graphs characterize the MB radial oscillation amplitude at a fixed pressure as a function ultrasound of frequency. The graphs can be used to determine the MB resonance frequencies and their dependence on various parameters \cite{55,59} . They are generated through the following steps:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Radial MB oscillations are generated using an ultrasound wave with a fixed pressure amplitude using multiple frequencies ranging from $f_{min}$ to $f_{max}$ with steps of $f_{step}$.
\item The steady state portion of the oscillations is examined for a range of ultrasound frequencies.
\item The maximum $R/R_0$ value within each selected window is plotted as a function of frequency in a separate graph
\end{enumerate}
Fig.3 illustrates this process for a MB of 2$\mu$m initial radius excited at a pressure amplitude of 1kPa using frequencies ranging from 0.5MHz up to 5MHz with steps of 0.01MHz. Oscillations at these low pressures are termed as linear \cite{63} where $\mid R/R_0\mid<<1 $. In linear oscillation regimes, the frequency response graph has only one peak that corresponds to linear resonance frequency of the MB (Fig.3d).
At higher pressure amplitudes, secondary peaks (subharmonics, higher harmonics, etc.) will appear on the frequency response graph which was shown and named previously \cite{59}.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.21}{\includegraphics{fig3.eps}}
\caption{Radial oscillations of a MB with initial radius of 2$\mu$m excited with ultrasound wave of 1kPa pressure amplitude (a) below resonance oscillations (f=1MHz), (b) Resonant oscillations (f=2.04 MHz), (c) Above resonance oscillations (f=3MHz). (d) Frequency response graph of a MB with initial radius of 2$\mu$m excited with ultrasound wave of 1kPa pressure amplitude}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Parameters}
\justifying
Two main classes of 3 microbubbles (3-MB) and 4 microbubbles (4-MB) clusters are simulated under a wide range of ultrasonic and geometric scenarios. Initial radii of MBs are chosen as 0.5$\mu$m, 0.8$\mu$m, 1.0$\mu$m and 1.5$\mu$m to represent a size range of interest in medical applications \cite{64,65}. 4-MB clusters are formed by placing centers of the MBs on the vertices of an equilateral tetrahedron of side $d$ illustrated in Fig.1a. 3-MB clusters are then assembled with removal of the largest MB from the 4-MB cluster, resulting in a equilateral triangle spatial formation. This allows the examination of the influence of the largest MB within the cluster on the dynamics of smaller MBs and consequently the collective behaviour of the MB cluster. In the 4-MB cluster the largest MB has a 1.5$\mu$m initial radius and in the 3-MB cluster the largest MB has a 1.0$\mu$m initial radius. $d$s represent the equal distance between MBs, ranging from 5$\mu$m to 300$\mu$m for the largest separation distance. Simulation results were generated as a function of distance between the MBs in steps of 0.1$\mu$m from 5$\mu$m up to 20$\mu$m and in steps of 0.5$\mu$m for larger distances. 60 ultrasound pulses with pressure amplitudes of 120kPa and frequencies ranging from 0.5MHz up to 15MHz with 3kHz increments were utilized to excite the MBs. The pressure amplitude is chosen such that only the largest chosen MB ($R_0=1.5\mu m$) can exhibit subharmonic resonance in isolation in the chosen frequency range.
\section{Results}
\justifying
The frequency response and bifurcation diagrams of isolated and interacting MBs were compared. Fig.4a illustrates the frequency response for each of the MBs in the 4-MB cluster without interaction ($d\to\infty$). Fig.4b depicts the frequency response graph of interacting MBs at a separation distance of 5$\mu$m. Removal of the largest MB in the 4-MB cluster results in the frequency response graph shown in Fig.4c. The interaction of MBs significantly change the MB oscillation dynamics.In the following section details of Fig.4 are discussed.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.45}{\includegraphics{fig4.eps}}
\caption{Frequency response graph of non-interacting 4-MB (a), Interacting 4-MB at $d=$5$\mu$m (b), interacting 3-MB at d=5$\mu$m using an ultrasound wave of $P_a$= 120kPa with frequencies ranging from 0.5MHz up to 15MHz}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Resonance formation, enhancement and suppression}
\justifying
Fig.5a and Fig.5b respectively present the frequency response diagrams of isolated non-interacting and a cluster of interacting MBs at a separation distance of 5$\mu$m presented in Fig. 4, focused on the range of frequencies between 0.5-3MHz. In Fig.5a, the 1/1 harmonic resonance peak of the 1.5$\mu$m MB (black arrow) is aligned (similar frequencies) with the 2/1 harmonic resonance peak of the 1.0$\mu$m MB (blue arrow) as well as the 3/1 harmonic resonance peak of the 0.8$\mu$m MB (magenta arrow). Moreover, Fig.5a shows that the 2/1 harmonic resonance mode of the largest MB (orange arrow) is aligned with 4/1 harmonic mode of the 1.0$\mu$m MB (green arrow). Furthermore, Fig.5a shows that the smallest isolated MB does not have any resonance modes in frequencies lower than 3.5MHz and its 1/1 harmonic resonance mode occurs at approximately 11 MHz (Fig.4a).
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.85}{\includegraphics{fig5.eps}}
\caption{Frequency response graph of (a) non-interacting 4-MB cluster (b) Interacting 4-MB cluster at $d$=5$\mu$m using an ultrasound wave of $P_a$=120kPa with frequencies ranging from 0.5MHz up to 3.5MHz}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
Fig.5b shows how bubble interactions change the oscillation dynamics. Fig.5b demonstrates a significant enhancement in the aforementioned aligned peaks in Fig.5a and also the formation of new resonance modes for the 0.5$\mu$m MB (red arrows). There is a negligible weakening in the resonance amplitudes of the largest MB. Moreover, Fig.5a shows that all of the resonance modes of the smaller MBs that are not aligned with any of the resonance modes of the largest MB are suppressed. This is shown in Fig.5b for which MBs are interacting. For instance, the 3/1 harmonic resonance mode of the 1$\mu$m MB (yellow arrow) and 2/1 harmonic resonance mode of the 0.8$\mu$m MB (cyan arrow) in Fig.5a, as well as the 1/1 harmonic resonance mode of the 0.5$\mu$m MB in Fig.4a, are suppressed significantly when MBs are interacting.
Next, the largest MB ($R_0=1.5\mu m$) from 4-MB clusters is removed to form a 3-MB clusters. The resonance analysis with control parameters equal to the ones used in 4-MB cluster case were performed. The resulting frequency response diagrams for the non-interacting 3-MB cluster and interacting 3-MB cluster are illustrated respectively in Fig.6a and Fig.6b.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.85}{\includegraphics{fig6.eps}}
\caption{Frequency response graph of (a) non-interacting 3-MB cluster (b) Interacting 3-MB cluster at $d$=5$\mu$m using an ultrasound wave of $P_a$=120kPa with frequencies ranging from 0.5MHz up to 4.5MHz}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
A trend similar to the one observed in the 4-MB case is also present in the 3-MB case. In the 3-MB configuration, the largest MB in the cluster has an initial radius of 1$\mu$m. Fig.6a shows that the 3/1 (black arrow) and 4/1 (yellow arrow) harmonic mode of the 0.8$\mu$m MB (which are aligned respectively with 2/1 (red arrow) and 3/1 (green arrow) harmonic modes of the 1.0$\mu$m MB) are enhanced in Fig.6b in which the MBs are interacting. Moreover, similar to the 4-MB case, Fig.6a shows that 2/1 harmonic (orange arrow) resonance peak of the 0.8$\mu$m MB (not aligned with any of the peaks of the largest MB) is weakened in Fig.6b when the MBs are interacting. Formation of secondary new peaks due to the MB interaction is also evident in Fig.6b, similar to the ones formed under the 1/1 harmonic resonance mode of the largest MB (red arrows).
\subsection{Forced subharmonic resonance and period doubling}
Fig.7 illustrates the frequency response curve for all three configurations when $P_a=120kPa$. Fig.7a shows that in the absence of interaction, only the largest MB ($R_0=1.5\mu m$) exhibits a 1/2 subharmonic resonance peak (black arrow). Fig.7b illustrates that at an inter-bubble distance of 5$\mu m$, new resonance peaks in the frequency response of the smaller MBs (red, magenta and blue arrows) are formed. Removal of the largest MB from the 4-MB cluster (Fig. 7c) results in elimination of the new resonance modes of the smaller MBs in the examined frequency range. This suggests that the largest MB in the cluster is responsible for the formation of new resonance peaks in the frequency response curve of the smaller MBs. The new resonance peak results in period-2 (SH) oscillations in all the bubbles within the examined cluster.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\scalebox{1.2}{\includegraphics{fig7.eps}}
\caption{Frequency response graph of non-interacting 4-MBs (a), Interacting 4-MB at $d$=5$\mu$m (b), interacting 3-MB at $d$=5$\mu$m using an ultrasound wave of $P_a$=120kPa with frequencies ranging from 5MHz up to 7MHz}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
To better examine the nature of the resonance behaviors in Fig.7, the frequency dependent bifurcation structure of the MBs (Fig.8) in all three configurations (5-6.2 MHz) were generated. Fig.8a shows that in the absence of interaction, only the largest MB with an initial radius of $1.5\mu m$ exhibits P-2 oscillations. However, due to interaction all MBs in the 4-MB cluster perform P-2 oscillations (Fig.8b), in other words the largest MB within the cluster forces the smaller MBs to exhibit P-2 oscillations. Removing the largest MB from the 4-MB cluster reshaped the P-2 oscillations back into P-1 (Fig.8c) indicating the role of the largest MB in forcing smaller MBs to oscillate in P-2 mode.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.85}{\includegraphics{fig8.eps}}
\caption{Frequency dependent bifurcation structure of non-interacting 4-MBs (a), Interacting 4-MB at $d$=5$\mu$m (b), interacting 3-MB (removal of largest MB) at $d$=5$\mu$m using an ultrasound wave of $P_a$=120kPa with frequencies ranging from 5MHz up to 6.2MHz }
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
Further investigation into the forced P-2 oscillations was performed with bifurcation analysis as a function of inter-bubble distance. An ultrasound wave with 120 kPa of pressure amplitude and frequency of 5.4MHz was used. For this exposure parameters, all of the MBs in Fig.8b undergo period doubling when the separation distance is set at $5.0\mu m$.
\begin{figure*}
\begin{center}
\scalebox{0.85}{\includegraphics{fig9.eps}}
\caption{Inter-bubble distance dependent bifurcation diagram of the 4-MB cluster excited with an ultrasound wave with a frequency of 5.4 MHz and pressure ampltiude of 120 kPa (a) $d$= 5$\mu$m - 300$\mu$m (b) $d$= 5$\mu$m – 22.5$\mu$m}
\end{center}
\end{figure*}
Fig.9 displays the bifurcation structure of the 4 bubbles as a function of the separation distance when $f=$5.4 MHz and $P_a=$120 kPa. Fig.9a shows that if MBs are sufficiently far apart from each other, none of the smaller MBs undergo period doubling. At closer inter-bubble distances, all of the smaller MBs undergo period doubling. The closer the size of smaller MB to the largest MB, the shorter the distance required for the forced oscillation to occur. The $1.0\mu m$ MB was forced into period doubling at a separation distance of $15.3\mu m$. At this distance, the rest of MB within the cluster are maintaining their P-1 mode. Further reducing the distance between the MBs results in period doubling of the $0.8\mu m$ and $0.5\mu m$ MBs at distances of $11.6\mu m$ and $10.3\mu m$, respectively.
\section{Discussion and summary}
\justifying
In this study, we investigated the effects of coupling and inter-bubble interactions on the collective behavior of polydisperse MB clusters. A system of coupled Keller-Miksis equations were used to assess the dynamics of individual interacting MBs within a MB cluster. Coupling was achieved through the inclusion of the backscattered pressure from all the MBs within the cluster at the location of each MB. The resulting system of coupled second order differential equations were solved by defining initial conditions and the spatial geometry of the clusters as equilateral tetrahedron (4 MBs) and equilateral triangles (3 MBs). Numerical solutions of the mathematical model were obtained through a wide range of ultrasonic frequencies and geometric configurations that were solved employing a Runge-Kutta algorithm. The time dependent radial oscillations of each MB were recorded and analyzed with the aid of bifurcation and frequency response analysis techniques.
Our findings further validate previous observations affirming the significance of the largest MBs and their influence on the smaller MBs within a cluster while remaining mostly unaffected by the oscillations of the smaller MBs. Furthermore, our findings build upon previous observations and suggest a pattern of destructive and constructive interactions within the cluster mainly dictated by the largest MB. We have shown that smaller MBs within the cluster are forced to reshape their oscillations through constructive and destructive interactions to match the largest MB within the cluster. In this regard the important findings can be summarized as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Destructive inter-bubble interactions occur if a resonance mode of a smaller isolated MB is not aligned with a resonance mode of the largest isolated MB within the cluster. This results in significant suppression of the non-aligned resonance mode of the smaller MBs.
\item Constructive inter-bubble interactions occur if a resonance mode of a smaller isolated MB is aligned with a resonance mode of the largest isolated MB within the cluster. The aligned resonance modes of the smaller MBs are enhanced due to constructive inter-bubble interactions.
\item Smaller MBs can be forced to generate subharmonic resonance modes due to constructive inter-bubble interactions in a lower frequency than their natural subharmonic resonance mode ($~ 2 \times $natural resonance frequency \cite{66}). Following the subharmonic resonance generation, the largest MB within the cluster forced smaller MBs to reshape their oscillations from P-1 into P-2 oscillations.
\item The closer the size of the smaller MB to the largest MB within the cluster, the larger the distance for which it can be forced into P-2 oscillations. Smaller MBs require closer proximity to the largest MB to be forced into P-2 oscillations.
\end{enumerate}
The forced oscillations would amplify or dictate the mode of the oscillatory behavior of the smaller MBs in the MB clusters which thereby controls the behavior of the system. In other words, by controlling the behavior of the largest MBs in the population one may control the behavior of the whole system. For high concentration MB solutions, for which the distance between the MBs are small enough for strong interaction, the larger MBs could amplify the oscillatory behavior of the smaller MBs, thereby amplifying their effect in imaging or therapy applications. Our numerical calculation showed that the smaller bubbles in the cluster were forced by the bigger bubble to exhibit P-2 oscillations when the separation distance was below $15.3\mu m$ and below the separation distance of $10.3\mu m$ all of the three smaller bubbles were forced by the bigger bubble to exhibit P-2 and SH oscillations. Allen et al.\cite{54} estimated the separation distances between the bubbles in a real clinical application. He considered a typical $3cc$ injection of MBs into $5L$ human blood and estimated an average separation distance of a $14.4\mu m$ and $8.4\mu m$ for monodisperse populations of $1\mu m$ radius bubbles representative of the concentrations that is used in clinical applications. Thus, our findings show that interaction will become significant in clinical applications of MBs and the behavior of the cluster needs to be optimized by taking into account the interaction.
Findings of this study may provide basic fundamental framework to optimize the behavior of a polydisperse population of MBs. As an example, the concentration and the size distribution of the population maybe engineered to enhance SH oscillations. This effect can be particularly important in the case of nanobubbles, for which higher concentrations are typically used \cite{67,68,69}. Another example is to choose exposure parameters (frequency and pressure) by which the destructive interference is avoided; this will result in a signal with higher strength and may enhance the signal to noise ratio in imaging applications or enhancing the streaming velocities and the corresponding shear stresses on the nearby cells in therapeutic applications like drug delivery.
This study further supports the importance of the consideration of inter-bubble interactions in designing and optimizing applications using MBs. The majority of the applications using MBs in combination with ultrasound use polydisperse MB clusters. Our findings indicate that the sole consideration of isolated MB behavior as the basis to optimize their use in applications may be insufficient since the behavior of MBs can be altered dramatically due to constructive and destructive inter-bubble interactions. We have previously shown the crucial importance of considering the bubble-bubble interaction when characterizing the shell parameters through attenuation and sound speed measurements experiments \cite{70,71}
In this work we have investigated the nonlinear behavior of a polydisperse MB cluster. We were able to classify three important regimes of interaction. The findings of this paper provides a fundamental insight on the behavior of interacting bubbles and can generate the building blocks of future analysis of larger bubble clusters and optimizing their behavior to enhance the relevant applications.
\section{Acknowledgement}
\justifying
The work is supported by the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (Discovery Grant RGPIN-2017-06496), NSERC and the Canadian Institutes of Health Research ( Collaborative Health Research Projects ) and the Terry Fox New Frontiers Program Project Grant in Ultrasound and MRI for Cancer Therapy (project \#1034). A. J. Sojahrood is supported by a CIHR Vanier Scholarship.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:introduction}}
\subsection{Background}
\IEEEPARstart{T}{he} design of efficient load scheduling algorithms has long been a pivotal concern in parallel processing applications. A parallel system refers to all classes of parallel computers from multicore CPUs to wide area computational grids comprising distributed and heterogeneous installations owned by mutually unrelated institutions [1]. A schedule is an assignment of tasks to processors in time. Parallel systems cannot be fully utilized if the applications are not properly scheduled. In modern networked systems, scheduling becomes more crucial due to the increasing prevalence of data-intensive computing. To deal with the large amount of data in modern computation system, divisible load theory (DLT) has emerged as a potential tool.\par
DLT assumes that computation and communication loads can be divided into parts of arbitrary sizes, which can be processed independently in parallel [2]. There are two assumptions for the loads in DLT. First is arbitrary divisibility and second is independence of execution. Loads may be divisible in fact or as an approximation. Such loads are commonly encountered in applications which are processing great amount of similar data units, such as image processing, signal processing, processing of massive experimental data, and so on [3]. In classic DLT models, there is usually a control processor holding all the data originally and then one can distribute such loads to several processors. The main problem is to decide the optimal schedule of loads distribution to the processors to achieve the minimum solution time. Many DLT applications allow users to model the parallel system with linear equations or recursion, which can be solved efficiently.\par
Analysis in DLT was first studied by Cheng and Robertazzi in [4], which was designed originally for intelligent sensor networks. The formal proof of the DLT optimality principle was in [5], where a linear daisy chain network was applied. Since then, DLT has been well established and used in many scheduling problems. An analytic proof for a bus network that all processors must stop computing at the same time to obtain a minimal time solution was provided in [6]. In [7], optimal load distribution sequences for tree networks were investigated and in [8] computing cost was considered along with job finishing time. Closed-form expression for the processing time in the nonblocking mode of communication was derived in [9]. Scheduling divisible loads in a single-level tree network was considered in [9-14]. An optimal time-varying load scheduling for divisible loads was studied in [15], where the computing system was modeled as a bus-oriented network.\par
Most previous works assume that the channel speed and processing speed are constant throughout the whole processing time. It is often assumed that one processor can only process a single job at a time, which may not be true since in most practical computer systems one processor can both communicate with multiple networks and process multiple jobs. Such multi-task processors are commonly encountered in resource-sharing systems such as virtualized networks. In Wireless Sensor Networks (WSN) the same piece of WSN's physical resources can be virtualized into logical units, which can be used by multiple users [24]. Also, in the network-slicing technology for 5G networks, resource sharing among slices is sometimes permitted in order to maintain certain performance levels [25]. As a result, in such resource sharing systems those extra connections and jobs will take up the system resources and hence hinder the system processing of a specific job of our interest. In other word, the system speed may be time-varying according to the number of those extra loads. In this paper, the extra jobs running on a certain processor in addition to the job of our interest are called background jobs. For the area of time-varying scheduling studies, a data gathering problem is discussed in [23] where only data transmission is considered and the communication speed is time-varying.
\subsection{Our Contribution}
The first work examining time-varying DLT is in [15] by Sohn and Robertazzi, where the loads are distributed through a bus network. The control processor, however, does not process data. In [15], the arrivals and departures times of background jobs are assumed to be exactly same for every processor, which is usually not true in practical situations. In our paper, each processor has its own background arrival and departure sequence, which is independent from others. Also, the processor sharing rule is updated in our paper. Instead as the processor (channel) devoting all its computational (transmission) power evenly to each job in [15], we assume that the processor (the channel) can assign an arbitrary ratio of its computational power (transmission power) to each job, as long as the sum of these ratio does not exceed one. Such an assumption is more realistic since modern virtualization technique allows users to divide the processor's computational (transmission) power according to their preference when a single physical processor is virtualized into multiple virtual processors. \par
Furthermore, a single level tree network with heterogeneous channels is used instead of the bus network at [15]. The single level tree network can model a variety of parallel systems using master-slave, or controller-worker paradigm. For instance, [16] models the case where several computers interconnected with an Ethernet as a single level tree network. Moreover, in [13] a single level tree network can be modeled as a set of computing clusters connected to a master controller via Internet. Moreover, this paper provides two algorithms for the stochastic analysis, which delivers superior performance compared to the one in [15].\par
Also, in this paper, unlike [15], the control processor is equipped with a front-end sub-processor, which means it not only transfers data to other processors, but also processes data as well.\par
Our objective is to determine the optimal partitions of the full load for each processor to achieve the minimum finishing time (makespan). Two cases are discussed in our paper: whether the control processor is a time-invariant processor or a time-varying processor, where the former one is a special case and latter one is more general. We first studied the deterministic model where the arrival and departure time points for the background jobs and extra connections are exactly known a priori. Two algorithms are provided for the two cases to solve the scheduling problem. Then a stochastic analysis is performed when those time points are not known a priori.\par
\subsection{Organization}
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. Section 2 first briefly introduces the classic solution of DLT scheduling problem in a time-invariant single level tree network. Then two time-varying cases are studied, respectively. The stochastic model is studied in section 3 and section 4 provides verification and evaluation of our method via different criterion. The conclusion appears in section 5.\par
The following notations are used in this paper:
\begin{enumerate} [leftmargin=1em,align=left]
\item[$\alpha_{i}$] The partition of the entire divisible load that is assigned to processor $i$.
\item[$W_{i}$] Inverse of processing speed of $ith$ processor when there is only one job.
\item[$W_{i}(t)$] Inverse of time-varying processing speed of $ith$ processor applied to the divisible job at interest.
\item[$\bar{W}_{i}$] Equivalent constant value of $W_{i}(t)$ during the processing time.
\item[$T_{cp}$] Time to process the entire load when $W_{i} = 1$ for the $ith$ processor.
\item[$Z_i$] Inverse of channel speed when control processor is only communicating with $ith$ processor.
\item[$Z_{i}(t)$] Inverse of time-varying channel speed applied to the divisible job at interest.
\item[$\bar{Z}_{i}$] Equivalent constant value of $Z_{i}(t)$ when control processor is communicating with $ith$ worker processor
\item[$Exp(\lambda)$] Negative exponential distribution with parameter $\lambda$.
\item[$Unif(a,b)$] Uniform distribution with parameter $a,b$.
\item[$T_{cm}$] Time to transmit the entire load when $Z = 1$.
\item[$T_{f}$] The finishing time of processing the entire load.
\end{enumerate}
\section{Deterministic Analysis}
In this section, we assume that the arrival and departure times of background jobs are exactly known, which is referred as the deterministic model. We study the optimal scheduling for a time-varying single level tree system. To this end, we first briefly introduce the classic time-invariant problem, which will be helpful to understand the time-varying problem. The case that the exact arrival and departure times of background jobs are not known will be studied in the next section.
\subsection{Preliminaries}
Let's consider the single level tree network in Fig. \ref{fig:singleleveltree}. Assume that there are totally $N+1$ processors for the whole system.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
[processor/.style = {circle,draw,inner sep=0pt,minimum size=6mm}]
\node[processor] (p0) at (0,1.5) {$P_{0}$};
\node[processor] (p1) at (-1.5,-0.5) {$P_{1}$};
\node[processor] (p2) at (-0.2,-0.5) {$P_{2}$};
\node[processor] (p3) at (1.5,-0.5) {$P_{N}$};
\draw [->] (p0) to (p1);
\draw [->] (p0) to (p2);
\draw [->] (p0) to (p3);
\filldraw [black] (0.5,-0.5) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\filldraw [black] (0.6,-0.5) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\filldraw [black] (0.7,-0.5) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Single level tree network}
\label{fig:singleleveltree}
\end{figure}
The processor $P_{0}$ is the control processor where the divisible load first arrived at. The control processor $P_{0}$ divides the divisible load to $N$ parts which is indicated by $\alpha_{1}, \alpha_{2},....,\alpha_{N}$ and assigns those $N$ parts to the worker processors $P_{1},P_{2},....,P_{N}$. In this paper we normalize the total amount of loads to be $1$, which means that $\alpha_{1} + \alpha_{2} + .... + \alpha_{N} = 1$. The worker processors are numbered in the order of receiving the loads. There are several assumptions for the processor:
\begin{itemize}
\item A processor can only compute after it has finished the communication unless it is equipped with a front-end processor.
\item The control processor can only communicate with one worker processor at a time (sequential load distribution).
\item There is no communication between the worker processors.
\end{itemize}
In this case, we assume that due to a limitation of resources, only the control processor has a front-end processor, which means that it can compute at the same time as it communicates with other worker processors. According to the notation we define in section 1, the piece of load $\alpha_{i}$ is transferred to worker processor $P_{i}$ in time $\alpha_{i}ZT_{cm}$ and is processed in time $\alpha_{i}W_{i}T_{cp}$. All the processors should finish computing at the same moment to achieve the smallest $T_{f}$ by the optimality principle proved in [4,13,17-20]. Our problem is to find the load partitions $\alpha_{1}, \alpha_{2},....,\alpha_{N}$ when the optimality principle is achieved.\par
We can draw the timing diagram according to those conditions in Fig. \ref{fig:timeinvariant}.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[->] (-4.5,3) -- (3.5,3);
\draw (-4.5,2) -- (-4.5,4);
\draw (-4.8,3) node {$P_{0}$};
\draw (-4.5,3) rectangle (-3.2,3.5);
\draw (-3.8,3.25) node {\scriptsize $\alpha_{1}Z_{1}T_{cm}$};
\draw (-3.2,3) rectangle (-1.9,3.5);
\draw (-2.5,3.25) node {\scriptsize $\alpha_{2}Z_{2}T_{cm}$};
\draw (0.1,3) rectangle (1.4,3.5);
\draw (0.8,3.25) node {\scriptsize $\alpha_{N}Z_{N}T_{cm}$};
\filldraw [black] (-1.1,3.25) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\filldraw [black] (-0.9,3.25) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\filldraw [black] (-0.7,3.25) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\draw (-4.5,3) rectangle (3,2.5);
\draw (-4.8,2.5) node {$W_{0}$};
\draw (-0.5,2.75) node {$\alpha_{0}W_{0}T_{cp}$};
\draw[->] (-4.5,1.2) -- (3.5,1.2);
\draw (-4.5,0.2) -- (-4.5,1.5);
\draw (-4.8,1.2) node {$P_{1}$};
\draw (-3.2,1.2) rectangle (3,0.7);
\draw[dashed] (-4.5,0.7) -- (-3.2,0.7);
\draw (-4.8,0.7) node {$W_{1}$};
\draw (-0.5,0.95) node {$\alpha_{1}W_{1}T_{cp}$};
\draw[dashed] (-3.2,2.5) -- (-3.2,1.2);
\draw (-3.4,1.4) node {$T_{1}$};
\draw[->] (-4.5,-0.6) -- (3.5,-0.6);
\draw (-4.5,-1.6) -- (-4.5,-0.3);
\draw (-4.8,-0.6) node {$P_{2}$};
\draw (-1.9,-0.6) rectangle (3,-1.1);
\draw[dashed] (-4.5,-1.1) -- (-1.9,-1.1);
\draw (-4.8,-1.1) node {$W_{2}$};
\draw (0.5,-0.85) node {$\alpha_{2}W_{2}T_{cp}$};
\draw[dashed] (-1.9,2.5) -- (-1.9,1.2);
\draw[dashed] (-1.9,0.7) -- (-1.9,-0.6);
\draw (-2.1,-0.4)node {$T_{2}$};
\filldraw [black] (-3.2,-1.8) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\filldraw [black] (-3.2,-2.0) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\filldraw [black] (-3.2,-2.2) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\draw[->] (-4.5,-2.9) -- (3.5,-2.9);
\draw (-4.5,-3.9) -- (-4.5,-2.6);
\draw (-4.8,-2.9) node {$P_{N}$};
\draw (1.4,-2.9) rectangle (3,-3.4);
\draw[dashed] (-4.5,-3.4) -- (1.4,-3.4);
\draw (-4.8,-3.4)node {$W_{N}$};
\draw (2.2,-3.15) node {$\alpha_{N}W_{N}T_{cp}$};
\draw[dashed] (1.4,2.5) -- (1.4,1.2);
\draw[dashed] (1.4,0.7) -- (1.4,-0.6);
\draw[dashed] (1.4,-1.1) -- (1.4,-2.9);
\draw(1.2,-2.7)node {$T_{N}$};
\draw[dashed] (3,2.5) -- (3,1.2);
\draw[dashed] (3,0.7) -- (3,-0.6);
\draw[dashed] (3,-1.1) -- (3,-2.9);
\draw(3,3.2)node {$T_{f}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Timing diagram for single level tree network}
\label{fig:timeinvariant}
\end{figure}
For each time axis in the timing diagram, communication appears above the axis while computing appears below the axis. At $t=0$, the control processor starts sending partition $\alpha_{1}$ to worker $P_{1}$ in time $\alpha_{1}Z_{1}T_{cm}$. At $t=T_{1}$, after receiving the loads, $P_{1}$ starts processing and finishes in time $\alpha_{1}W_{1}T_{cp}$. This procedure repeats for every worker processor and all the processors finish computing at the same time $t = T_{f}$. The linear system equations can then be expressed as:\\
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
T_{f} = \alpha_{0}W_{0}T_{cp}\\
T_{f} = \sum_{k = 1}^{i} \alpha_{k}Z_{k}T_{cm} + \alpha_{i}W_{i}T_{cp}, \hspace{0.2cm} i = 1,2,...N\\
\sum_{k = 1}^{N}\alpha_{k} = 1
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Since there are $N+2$ unknowns and $N+2$ linear equations, load partitions $\alpha_{1}, \alpha_{2},....,\alpha_{N}$ can be uniquely solved as well as the $T_{f}$.
\subsection{Time-varying System with A Time-invariant Control Processor}
Now we consider that the processors can simultaneously process multiple jobs, which means in addition to the divisible job we studied in section 2.1, the processor also processes some other jobs. We call those jobs as background jobs. The background jobs will take the computing power from the processor and as a result the processor's processing speed will vary according to the amount of workload over time. In this section, we only consider that the worker processors are time-varying. The time-varying control processor will be discussed in the next section.\par
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{vir.png}
\caption{Processor virtualization}
\label{fig:vir}
\end{figure}
When a processor processes multiple jobs in parallel, the processor is virtualized into multiple virtual processors. In this way, each user of the system feels that it is the exclusive user of the processor. As shown in Fig. \ref{fig:vir}, there is a hypervisor controlling the virtualization process. The hypervisor can assign any ratio of computation power to any virtual processor, as long as the sum computation power of all virtual processors does not exceed the physical processor's maximum computation power. The protocol for the hypervisor to assign the physical processor's computation power is pre-defined in the hypervisor. As a result, the processing speed for the divisible load job of our interest is a function of the number of jobs in the processor defined by the hypervisor. For the case that $n$ jobs in the processor $i$, we use $W_{i}^{h}(n)$ to denote the inverse of computing speed applied to the divisible job of interest. This $W_{i}^{h}(n)$ is supposed to be known once $n$ is given. If $n=1$ and there is only the divisible load job in the processor, we denote the processing speed as $W_{i}$ for simplicity. We also use $W_i(t)$ to represent the general time-varying inverse of computing speed applied to the divisible job at interest and $\bar{W}_i$ to represent the equivalent constant value of $W_i(t)$ during processing for processor $i$. The background jobs arrive and leave independently on different processor. The method to define $\bar{W}_i$ will be introduced in this section. By adapting the time-varying processing speed to Fig. \ref{fig:timeinvariant}, the timing diagram for this condition can be depicted in Fig. \ref{fig:case1time}. \par
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[->] (-4.5,3) -- (3.5,3);
\draw (-4.5,2) -- (-4.5,4);
\draw (-4.8,3) node {$P_{0}$};
\draw (-4.5,3) rectangle (-3.2,3.5);
\draw (-3.8,3.25) node {\scriptsize $\alpha_{1}Z_{1}T_{cm}$};
\draw (-3.2,3) rectangle (-1.9,3.5);
\draw (-2.5,3.25) node {\scriptsize $\alpha_{2}Z_{2}T_{cm}$};
\draw (0.1,3) rectangle (1.4,3.5);
\draw (0.8,3.25) node {\scriptsize $\alpha_{N}Z_{N}T_{cm}$};
\filldraw [black] (-1.1,3.25) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\filldraw [black] (-0.9,3.25) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\filldraw [black] (-0.7,3.25) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\draw (-4.5,3) rectangle (3,2.5);
\draw (-0.5,2.75) node {$\alpha_{0}W_{0}T_{cp}$};
\draw (-4.8,2.5) node {$W_{0}$};
\draw[->] (-4.5,1.2) -- (3.5,1.2);
\draw (-4.5,0) -- (-4.5,1.5);
\draw (-4.8,1.2) node {$P_{1}$};
\draw (-3.2,1.2) -- (-3.2,0.7);
\draw (-3.2,0.7) -- (-1.6,0.7);
\draw (-1.6,0.7) -- (-1.6,0.2);
\draw (-1.6,0.2) -- (1,0.2);
\draw (1,0.2) -- (1,0.7);
\draw (1,0.7) -- (3,0.7);
\draw (3,0.7) -- (3,1.2);
\draw (-0.4,0.75) node {$\alpha_{1}\bar{W}_{1}T_{cp}$};
\draw[dashed] (-3.2,2.5) -- (-3.2,1.2);
\draw (-3.4,1.4) node {$T_{1}$};
\draw[dashed] (-1.6,1.2) -- (-1.6,0.7);
\draw (-1.3,1.4) node {$T_{11}$};
\draw[dashed](1,1.2) -- (1,0.7);
\draw (0.7,1.4) node {$T_{12}$};
\draw[dashed] (-4.5,0.7) -- (-3.2,0.7);
\draw (-4.8,0.7) node {$W_{1}$};
\draw[dashed] (-4.5,0.2) -- (-1.6,0.2);
\draw (-5.1,0.2) node {$W_{1}^{h}(2)$};
\draw[->] (-4.5,-0.6) -- (3.5,-0.6);
\draw (-4.5,-1.8) -- (-4.5,-0.3);
\draw (-4.8,-0.6) node {$P_{2}$};
\draw (-1.9,-0.6) -- (-1.9,-1.6);
\draw (-1.9,-1.6) -- (1.6,-1.6);
\draw (1.6,-1.6) -- (1.6,-1.1);
\draw (1.6,-1.1) -- (3,-1.1);
\draw (3,-1.1) -- (3,-0.6);
\draw (0.5,-1.05) node {$\alpha_{2}\bar{W}_{2}T_{cp}$};
\draw[dashed] (-4.5,-1.1) -- (-1.9,-1.1);
\draw (-4.8,-1.1) node {$W_{2}$};
\draw[dashed] (-4.5,-1.6) -- (-1.9,-1.6);
\draw (-5.1,-1.6) node {$W_{2}^{h}(2)$};
\draw[dashed] (-1.9,2.5) -- (-1.9,1.2);
\draw[dashed] (-1.9,0.7) -- (-1.9,-0.6);
\draw (-2.1,-0.4)node {$T_{2}$};
\filldraw [black] (-3.2,-2.0) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\filldraw [black] (-3.2,-2.2) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\filldraw [black] (-3.2,-2.4) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\draw[->] (-4.5,-2.9) -- (3.5,-2.9);
\draw (-4.5,-3.9) -- (-4.5,-2.6);
\draw (-4.8,-2.9) node {$P_{N}$};
\draw (1.4,-2.9) rectangle (3,-3.4);
\draw (2.2,-3.15) node {$\alpha_{N}\bar{W}_{N}T_{cp}$};
\draw[dashed] (-4.5,-3.4) -- (1.4,-3.4);
\draw (-4.8,-3.4) node {$W_{N}$};
\draw[dashed] (1.4,2.5) -- (1.4,1.2);
\draw[dashed] (1.4,0.7) -- (1.4,-0.6);
\draw[dashed] (1.4,-1.6) -- (1.4,-2.9);
\draw(1.2,-2.7)node {$T_{N}$};
\draw[dashed] (3,2.5) -- (3,1.2);
\draw[dashed] (3,0.7) -- (3,-0.6);
\draw[dashed] (3,-1.1) -- (3,-2.9);
\draw(3,3.2)node {$T_{f}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Timing diagram for single level tree network with time-varying worker processor speed}
\label{fig:case1time}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{fig:case1time}, we use steps to represent the arrival and departure of the background jobs, and the value of $W(t)$ is noted on the vertical axis. For example, processor $P_1$ starts processing the data at time $T_{1}$, then one background job arrives at time $T_{11}$ where a down step appears. Note that $W$ is the inverse of processing speed, and processing speed jumps from $\frac{1}{W_{1}}$ to $\frac{1}{W_{1}^{h}(2)}$ at this time point, thus $W_{1}(t)$ jumps from $W_{1}$ to $W_{1}^{h}(2)$. Afterwards, this background job departs at time $T_{12}$ where an up step appears. $W_{1}(t)$ also jumps back from $W_{1}^{h}(2)$ to $W_{1}$. In this section we assume that the time points of arrival and departure of the background jobs are exactly known, which mean that $W_{i}(t), i=1,2,...,N$ are exactly known. \par
Theorem I shows how to achieve the $\bar{W}_{i}, i = 1,2,...,N$.
\begin{theorem}
The equivalent constant value of $W_{i}(t)$ during the processing of $ith$ processor equals to:
\[\bar{W}_{i} = \frac{T_{f} - T_{i}}{\int_{T_{i}}^{T_{f}} \frac{1}{W_{i}(t)}dt}\]
where the $T_{i}$ denotes the start time of $ith$ processor's computation and $T_{f}$ denotes the finishing time.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Since the changes in $W_{i}(t)$ are all steps at certain time points where background jobs arrive and depart, let's assume that for $ith$ processor there are $k$ changes in $W_{i}(t)$ between time $T_{i}$ to $T_{f}$ and let $T_{ij}, j = 1,2,3...k$ denote the $jth$ change time point. For example in Fig. \ref{fig:case1time}, $T_{11}$ is the first time point of the change in $W_{1}(t)$ after $T_{1}$ and $T_{12}$ is the last time point of change in $W_{1}(t)$ before $T_{f}$. Let $W_{i(j+1)}$ denotes the value of $W_{i}(t)$ between $T_{ij}$ to $T_{i(j+1)}$, where $j = 1,2,...k-1$ and $W_{i1}$ between time $T_{i}$ to $T_{i1}$, $W_{i(k+1)}$ between time $T_{ik}$ to $T_{f}$. Also, in the same manner, let $\alpha_{i(j+1)}$ denotes the partition of loads that processed between time $T_{ij}$ to $T_{i(j+1)}$, where $j = 1,2,...k-1$ and $\alpha_{i1}$ between time $T_{i}$ to $T_{i1}$, $\alpha_{i(k+1)}$ between time $T_{ik}$ to $T_{f}$. Then we have the equations:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
T_{i1} - T_{i} = \alpha_{i1}W_{i1}T_{cp}\\
T_{i(j+1)} - T_{ij} = \alpha_{i(j+1)}W_{i(j+1)}T_{cp}, j=1,2,..,k-1\\
T_{f} - T_{ik} = \alpha_{i(k+1)} W_{i(k+1)}T_{cp}\\
\alpha_{i} = \sum_{j=1}^{k+1}\alpha_{ij}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Since by definition $T_{f} - T_{i} = \alpha_{i}\bar{W}_{i}T_{cp}$, then:
\begin{align}
\bar{W}_{i} = \frac{T_{f} - T_{i}}{\alpha_{i}T_{cp}}
\end{align}
By substituting equation (2) into equation (3), we can get:
\begin{align*}
\bar{W}_{i} &= \frac{T_{f} - T_{i}}{\alpha_{i}T_{cp}}\\
&= \frac{T_{f} - T_{i}}{(\sum_{j=1}^{k+1}\alpha_{ij})T_{cp}}\\
&= \frac{T_{f} - T_{i}}{\frac{T_{i1} - T_{i}}{W_{i1}} + \sum_{j=1}^{k-1}\frac{T_{i(j+1)} - T_{ij}}{W_{i(j+1)}} + \frac{T_{f} - T_{ik}}{W_{i(k+1)}}}\\
&= \frac{T_{f} - T_{i}}{\int_{T_{i}}^{T_{f}} \frac{1}{W_{i}(t)}dt}
\end{align*}
This completes the proof of Theorem I.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
The inverse of $\bar{W}_{i}$ equals to $\frac{\int_{T_{i}}^{T_{f}} \frac{1}{W_{i}(t)}dt}{T_{f} - T_{i}}$, which is the average value of $\frac{1}{W_{i}(t)}$ between $T_{i}$ to $T_{f}$. Since $W_{i}(t)$ is defined as the inverse of computation speed of the $ith$ processor, $\bar{W}_{i}$ can also be taken as the inverse of the average computing speed, which is the inverse of the average value of $\frac{1}{W_{i}(t)}$.
\end{remark}
Based on the expression of $\bar{W}_{i}$, the system equations can be written as:\\
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\alpha_{0}W_{0}T_{cp} = T_{f}\\
T_{i} = \sum_{k=1}^{i} \alpha_{k}Z_{k}T_{cm}, i = 1,2,...,N\\
T_{f} - T_{i} = \alpha_{i}\bar{W}_{i}T_{cp}, i = 1,2,...,N\\
\alpha_{0} + \alpha_{1} + ... + \alpha_{N} = 1
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
where equation (4b) represents the communication time for each processor and equation (4a) and (4c) represent the computation time. Equation (4d) guarantees that all the partitions sum up to 1. From equation (4b), we can express $\alpha_{i}$ as a function of $T_{i-1}$ and $T_{i}$ as $\alpha_{i} = \frac{T_{i} - T_{i-1}}{Z_{i}T_{cm}}$. By substituting this transformation into equation (4c) we have:\\
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
T_f &= T_i + \frac{T_{i} - T_{i-1}}{Z_{i}T_{cm}}\bar{W}_{i}T_{cp}\\
&= T_i + \frac{T_{i} - T_{i-1}}{Z_{i}T_{cm}}\frac{T_{f} - T_{i}}{\int_{T_{i}}^{T_{f}} \frac{1}{W_{i}(t)}dt}T_{cp}
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Starting from processor $1$, equation (5b) can be reduced as $T_f = T_1 + \frac{T_{1}}{Z_{1}T_{cm}}\frac{T_{f} - T_{1}}{\int_{T_{1}}^{T_{f}} \frac{1}{W_{1}(t)}dt}T_{cp}$, which is an equation of $T_{1}$ and $T_{f}$ only. Thus $T_{1}$ can be expressed as a function of $T_f$ only. By the definition $\alpha_1$ can also be expressed as a function of $T_f$ only. This provide an intuition that this problem can be solved recursively. A recursive algorithm is introduced to calculate the optimal finishing time $T_{f}$ and partitions $\alpha_{i}$ as Algorithm I.
\begin{algorithm}
1. Express $\alpha_{0}$ as a function of $T_{f}$ using the equation:
\begin{align*}
\alpha_{0} = \frac{T_{f}}{W_{0}T_{cp}}
\end{align*}
\\
2. Express $T_{1}$ as a function of $T_{f}$ using the equation:
\begin{align*}
T_f = T_1 + \frac{T_{1}}{Z_{1}T_{cm}}\frac{T_{f} - T_{1}}{\int_{T_{1}}^{T_{f}} \frac{1}{W_{1}(t)}dt}T_{cp}
\end{align*}
Express $\alpha_{1}$ as a function of $T_{f}$ using the equation:
\begin{align*}
\alpha_{1} = \frac{T_{1}}{Z_{1}T_{cm}}
\end{align*}
3. Express $T_{2}$ as a function of $T_{f}$ using the equation:
\begin{align*}
T_f =T_2 + \frac{T_{2} - T_{1}}{Z_{2}T_{cm}}\frac{T_{f} - T_{2}}{\int_{T_{2}}^{T_{f}} \frac{1}{W_{2}(t)}dt}T_{cp}
\end{align*}
where $T_{1}$ is a function of $T_{f}$\\
Express $\alpha_{2}$ as a function of $T_{f}$ using the equation:
\begin{align*}
\alpha_{2} = \frac{T_{2} - T_{1}}{Z_{2}T_{cm}}
\end{align*}
where $T_{1}$ and $T_{2}$ are functions of $T_{f}$\\
4.Repeat the procedure until $\alpha_{N}$ is expressed as a function of $T_{f}$. Now, every $\alpha_{i}$ has been expressed as a function of $T_{f}$. \\
5.Apply the normalization equation:
\begin{align*}
\alpha_{0} + \alpha_{1} + ... + \alpha_{N} = 1
\end{align*}
to calculate the optimal finishing time $T_{f}$, as well as all the partitions $\alpha_{i}$s.
\caption{Recursive algorithm to solve the optimal scheduling problem in a time-varying system with a time-invariant control processor}
\end{algorithm}
\subsection{Time-varying Control Processor, Processing and Communication Speed}
In the previous section, we studied the optimal scheduling problem for a single level tree network where the worker processors have time-varying processing speeds due to the arrival and departure of background jobs. In this section, we consider the general case that the background jobs appear on the control processor as well, which will make the processing speed time-varying for $P_{0}$. Also, we assume that there will be other transmissions such as the control processor communicating with other networks when assigning the loads, which will slow down the communication speed for the job of our interest. This will make the communication speed time-varying. Similar as the previous subsection a processor is virtualized into multiple virtual processors to share the communication power and there is a hypervisor to control them. Same as $W_i^h(n)$ and $W_i(t)$, we use $Z_i^h(n)$ and $Z_i(t)$ to represent the time-varying inverse of communication speed applied to the divisible job at interest. As a result, $Z_i(t)$ will also be a function of steps. Again, we assume that the time points when links established and finished with other networks are known for each processor, which means $Z_i(t)$ is exactly known. For simplicity we use $Z_i$ to represent the inverse of communication speed when there is only the divisible load job of our interest in the control processor for distribution.\par
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}
\draw[->] (-4.5,3) -- (3.5,3);
\draw (-4.5,1.8) -- (-4.5,4.4);
\draw (-4.8,3) node {$P_{0}$};
\draw (-4.5,3.5) -- (-4,3.5);
\draw (-4,3.5) -- (-4,3.8);
\draw (-4,3.8) -- (-2,3.8);
\draw (-2,3.8) -- (-2,4.1);
\draw (-2,4.1) -- (-0.5,4.1);
\draw (-0.5,4.1) -- (-0.5,3.8);
\draw (-0.5,3.8) -- (1.4,3.8);
\draw (1.4,3.8) -- (1.4,3);
\draw (-2.8,3.8) -- (-2.8,3)
\draw (-3.6,3.25) node {$\alpha_{1}\bar{Z_{1}}T_{cm}$};
\draw (-1.1,4.1) -- (-1.1,3)
\draw (-1.9,3.25) node {$\alpha_{2}\bar{Z}_{2}T_{cm}$};
\draw (-0.3,3.8) -- (-0.3,3)
\draw (0.6,3.25) node {$\alpha_{N}\bar{Z}_{N}T_{cm}$};
\draw[dashed] (-4.5,3.8) -- (-4,3.8);
\draw[dashed] (-4.5,4.1) -- (-2,4.1);
\draw (-4.8,3.5) node {$Z_1$};
\draw (-5.0,3.9) node {$Z_1^h(2)$};
\draw (-5.0,4.3) node {$Z_2^h(3)$};
\filldraw [black] (-0.8,3.25) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\filldraw [black] (-0.7,3.25) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\filldraw [black] (-0.6,3.25) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\draw (-4.5,2.5) -- (-3.5,2.5);
\draw (-3.5,2.5) -- (-3.5,2);
\draw (-3.5,2) -- (-2.6,2);
\draw (-2.6,2) -- (-2.6,2.5);
\draw (-2.6,2.5) -- (-2,2.5);
\draw (-2,2.5) -- (-2,2);
\draw (-2,2) -- (1,2);
\draw (1,2) -- (1,2.5);
\draw (1,2.5) -- (2,2.5);
\draw (2,2.5) -- (2,2);
\draw (2,2) -- (3,2);
\draw (3,2) -- (3,3);
\draw[dashed] (-4.5,2) -- (-3.5,2);
\draw (-4.8,2.5) node {$W_{0}$};
\draw (-5.0,2) node {$W_{0}^h(2)$};
\draw (-0.5,2.55) node {$\alpha_{0}\bar{W}_{0}T_{cp}$};
\draw[->] (-4.5,1.2) -- (3.5,1.2);
\draw (-4.5,0) -- (-4.5,1.5);
\draw (-4.8,1.2) node {$P_{1}$};
\draw (-2.8,1.2) -- (-2.8,0.7);
\draw (-2.8,0.7) -- (-1.6,0.7);
\draw (-1.6,0.7) -- (-1.6,0.2);
\draw (-1.6,0.2) -- (1,0.2);
\draw (1,0.2) -- (1,0.7);
\draw (1,0.7) -- (3,0.7);
\draw (3,0.7) -- (3,1.2);
\draw[dashed] (-4.5,0.7) -- (-2.8,0.7);
\draw[dashed] (-4.5,0.2) -- (-1.6,0.2);
\draw (-4.8,0.7) node {$W_{1}$};
\draw (-5.0,0.2) node {$W_{1}^h(2)$};
\draw (-0.4,0.75) node {$\alpha_{1}\bar{W}_{1}T_{cp}$};
\draw[dashed] (-2.8,3) -- (-2.8,1.2);
\draw (-3,1.4) node {$T_{1}$};
\draw[->] (-4.5,-0.6) -- (3.5,-0.6);
\draw (-4.5,-1.8) -- (-4.5,-0.3);
\draw (-4.8,-0.6) node {$P_{2}$};
\draw (-1.1,-0.6) -- (-1.1,-1.6);
\draw (-1.1,-1.6) -- (1.6,-1.6);
\draw (1.6,-1.6) -- (1.6,-1.1);
\draw (1.6,-1.1) -- (3,-1.1);
\draw (3,-1.1) -- (3,-0.6);
\draw[dashed] (-4.5,-1.6) -- (-1.1,-1.6);
\draw[dashed] (-4.5,-1.1) -- (-1.1,-1.1);
\draw (-4.8,-1.1) node {$W_{2}$};
\draw (-5.0,-1.6) node {$W_{2}^h(2)$};
\draw (0.5,-1.05) node {$\alpha_{2}\bar{W}_{2}T_{cp}$};
\draw[dashed] (-1.1,3) -- (-1.1,1.2);
\draw[dashed] (-1.1,0.2) -- (-1.1,-0.6);
\draw (-1.3,-0.4)node {$T_{2}$};
\filldraw [black] (-3.2,-2.0) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\filldraw [black] (-3.2,-2.2) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\filldraw [black] (-3.2,-2.4) circle [radius=0.5pt];
\draw[->] (-4.5,-2.9) -- (3.5,-2.9);
\draw (-4.5,-3.9) -- (-4.5,-2.6);
\draw (-4.8,-2.9) node {$P_{N}$};
\draw (1.4,-2.9) rectangle (3,-3.4);
\draw[dashed] (-4.5,-3.4) -- (1.4,-3.4);
\draw (-4.8,-3.4) node {$W_{N}$};
\draw (2.2,-3.15) node {$\alpha_{N}\bar{W}_{N}T_{cp}$};
\draw[dashed] (1.4,2.5) -- (1.4,1.2);
\draw[dashed] (1.4,0.7) -- (1.4,-0.6);
\draw[dashed] (1.4,-1.6) -- (1.4,-2.9);
\draw(1.2,-2.7)node {$T_{N}$};
\draw[dashed] (3,2.5) -- (3,1.2);
\draw[dashed] (3,0.7) -- (3,-0.6);
\draw[dashed] (3,-1.1) -- (3,-2.9);
\draw(3,3.2)node {$T_{f}$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Timing diagram for single level tree network with time-varying channel speed and computing speed }
\label{fig:case2time}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig:case2time} demonstrates the timing diagram for a general time-varying single level tree system. The channel speed varies as well as the computing speed for each processor. At the beginning, $P_{0}$ starts to transmit partition $\alpha_{1}$ of the loads to $P_{1}$ and finishes at time $T_{1}$. After finishing receiving the loads, $P_{1}$ starts to process at the time point $T_{1}$, while $P_{0}$ starts to transmit the partition $\alpha_{2}$ to $P_{2}$. This procedure repeats for every processor, and again, every processor finishes at the same time $T_{f}$ for the optimal condition.\par
Apparently, Theorem I still works in this situation. Similarly, we can find the expression for the equivalent time-invariant value of $Z(t)$:
\begin{theorem}
The equivalent constant value of $Z_i(t)$ when $P_{0}$ communicates with $P_{i}$ equals to:
\[\bar{Z}_{i} = \frac{T_{i} - T_{i-1}}{\int_{T_{i-1}}^{T_{i}} \frac{1}{Z_i(t)}dt}\]
where the $T_{i}$ denotes the $ith$ processor's start computing time, $i = 1,2,...,N$, $T_{0} = 0$.
\end{theorem}
The proof should be similar to the proof of the Theorem 1. Also, the $\bar{Z}_{i}$ can be taken as the inverse of average communication speed, in the same manner as $\bar{W}_{i}$ in the remark of Theorem I. \par
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
\alpha_{0}\bar{W}_{0}T_{cp} = T_{f}\\
T_{i} - T_{i-1} = \alpha_{i}\bar{Z}_{i}T_{cm}, i = 1,2,...,N\\
T_{i} = \sum_{k=1}^{i}\alpha_{i}\bar{Z}_{i}T_{cm}, i = 1,2,...,N \\
T_{f} - T_{i} = \alpha_{i}\bar{W}_{i}T_{cp}, i = 1,2,...,N\\
\alpha_{0} + \alpha_{1} + ... + \alpha_{N} = 1
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
Equations (6a) - (6d) demonstrate the system equations when $P_{0}$ is also time-varying. Similar to equations (4a) to (4d), equations (6a) and (6d) represent the processing part for each processor, (6b) and (6c) represent the communication part and (6e) represents the normalization equation. \\
By applying Theorem II to equation (6b):
\begin{subequations}
\begin{align}
T_{i} - T_{i-1} = \alpha_{i}\frac{T_{i} - T_{i-1}}{\int_{T_{i-1}}^{T_{i}} \frac{1}{Z_i(t)}dt} T_{cm}\\
\Longrightarrow
\alpha_{i} = \frac{1}{T_{cm}}\int_{T_{i-1}}^{T_{i}} \frac{1}{Z_i(t)}dt
\end{align}
\end{subequations}
We can find that $\alpha_{i}$ is the integral of $\frac{1}{Z_i(t)}$ from $T_{i-1}$ to $T_{i}$ times a constant $T_{cm}$. Since $Z_i(t)$ is assumed to be known, by applying the same recursive method as last subsection, we can express every $\alpha$s as a function of $T_f$ and using the normalization equation to solve the optimal scheduling problem. The detailed steps are introduced in Algorithm II.
\begin{algorithm}
1. Express $\alpha_{0}$ as a function of $T_{f}$ using the equation:
\begin{align*}
\alpha_{0} = \frac{1}{T_{cp}}\int_{0}^{T_{f}} \frac{1}{W_{0}(t)}dt
\end{align*}
\\
2. Express $T_{1}$ as a function of $T_{f}$ using the equation:
\begin{align*}
T_f = T_1 + \frac{1}{T_{cm}}\int_{0}^{T_{1}}\frac{1}{Z_1(t)}dt\frac{T_{f} - T_{1}}{\int_{T_{1}}^{T_{f}} \frac{1}{W_{1}(t)}dt}T_{cp}
\end{align*}
Express $\alpha_{1}$ as a function of $T_{f}$ using the equation:
\begin{align*}
\alpha_{1} = \frac{1}{T_{cm}}\int_{0}^{T_{1}}\frac{1}{Z_1(t)}dt
\end{align*}
where $T_{1}$ is a function of $T_{f}$ \\
3. Express $T_{2}$ as a function of $T_{f}$ using the equation:
\begin{align*}
T_f = T_2 + \frac{1}{T_{cm}}\int_{T_{1}}^{T_{2}}\frac{1}{Z_2(t)}dt\frac{T_{f} - T_{2}}{\int_{T_{2}}^{T_{f}} \frac{1}{W_{2}(t)}dt}T_{cp}
\end{align*}
where $T_{1}$ is a function of $T_{f}$\\
Express $\alpha_{2}$ as a function of $T_{f}$ using the equation:
\begin{align*}
\alpha_{2} = \frac{1}{T_{cm}}\int_{T_{1}}^{T_{2}}\frac{1}{Z_2(t)}dt
\end{align*}
where $T_{2}$ and $T_{1}$ are functions of $T_{f}$\\
4.Repeat the procedure until $\alpha_{N}$ is expressed as a function of $T_{f}$. Now, every $\alpha_{i}$ has been expressed as a function of $T_{f}$. \\
5.Apply the normalization equation:
\begin{align*}
\alpha_{0} + \alpha_{1} + ... + \alpha_{N} = 1
\end{align*}
to calculate the optimal finishing time $T_{f}$, as well as all the partitions $\alpha_{i}$s.
\caption{Recursive algorithm to solve the optimal scheduling problem in a time-varying single level tree system}
\end{algorithm}
\section{Stochastic Analysis}
In the previous two subsections, two recursive algorithms to solve the optimal load fraction in the time-varying system were studied. However, the assumption that the time points of arrival and departure of background jobs are known a priori may not hold for many realistic circumstances. As a result, it is necessary to perform a more general analysis where the time points of arrival and departure of background jobs remain unknown.\par
In this section, we establish a stochastic model where the time points of arrival and departure of background jobs are not exactly known. To model the system, we assume Markovian statistics for the arrival and departure processes. Similar to the nature of arriving customers, the arrivals of background jobs are modeled as a Poisson random process with parameter $\lambda$ and the stay time for each of the background job followed an negative exponential distribution with parameter $\mu$. In this way, the system can be modeled as a M/M/1 queue. In [15], the average number of customers in the M/M/1 chain is used as the average number of the background jobs in each processor. However, this method may not be accurate given that the starting state and processing time are not taken into consideration. Also, [15] assumed that the system parameters $\lambda$ and $\mu$ were known, which may also not be possible. To deal with these issues, we first perform an estimation of $\lambda$ and $\mu$ based on the previous information of the system using a fading memory window. Then a simulation-based method is introduced to solve the optimal scheduling problem. In order to simplify and accelerate, an iterative algorithm is studied to achieve much faster running time with a sacrifice of negligible precision.\par
In this section the discussion is in the context that all the processors are time-varying (section 2.3) but this algorithm can work for both cases in section 2.2 and 2.3. Also, since we assume that the other transmissions have the same effect as the background jobs, we will just focus on the background jobs (processing speed) since the results also works for the other transmissions (communication speed). The numerical tests show that our stochastic model outperforms the method in [15].
\subsection{System Parameter Estimation}
In our system we assume that for any time-varying processor, the arrivals of background jobs follows a Poisson random process with parameter $\lambda$ and the stay time for each background job follows an exponential distribution. As a result, the arrivals and departures of background jobs form a M/M/1 queuing model. To this end, let ${x_1,x_2,x_3,....,x_n}$ be the samples of background jobs' inter-arrival interval times within the fading memory window. The fading memory window contains $n$ nearest samples before the divisible load job arrives, and the samples that are closer to the end point will receive a higher weight in the estimation. As a result, the fading memory estimation will deliver a more stable result once the parameter varies with the time, otherwise it will be just same as the normal estimation. These $n$ samples should be independent and identically distributed with $Exp(\lambda)$. To estimate the value of $\lambda$, the weighted maximum likelihood estimation (WMLE) method is used:
\begin{align}
lik(\lambda) = \prod_{i=1}^{n}(\lambda e^{-\lambda x_i})^{\beta_i}\\
\hat{\lambda} = \argmax_\lambda log(lik(\lambda))
\end{align}
where the $\beta_1,\beta_2,...,\beta_n$ are the fading memory weights with an ascending order. By solving the WMLE, the estimate of $\lambda$ can be achieved:\\
\begin{align}
\hat{\lambda} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{n}\beta_{i}}{\sum_{i=1}^{n}\beta_i x_i}
\end{align}
For the estimation of $\mu$, let ${y_1,y_2,...,y_n}$ be the samples of background stay time within the fading memory window. By applying the same method, the estimate of $\mu$ can be achieved as:\\
\begin{align}
\hat{\mu} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{n}\alpha_{i}}{\sum_{i=1}^{n}\alpha_i y_i}
\end{align}
where the $\alpha_1,\alpha_2,...,\alpha_n$ are the fading memory weights for $\mu$.
\subsection{Stochastic Model}
To solve the optimal scheduling using the stochastic model, we first introduce a simulation-based method. We take the median of a large number of samples to approximate the real case. Then a simplified iterative algorithm is introduced to reduce running time.
\subsubsection{Simulation-based Approach}
In the case where the actual arrival and departure times of background jobs are not known, it is impossible to make accurate schedule for the system since the real $W(t)$ and $Z(t)$ can never be obtained. To this end, a proper approximation is necessary for scheduling. Since the arrivals and departures of background jobs are modeled as a M/M/1 queue, it is naturally to gather statistic information from the M/M/1 queue with proper system parameter. In [15], given the system parameter $\lambda_i$ and $\mu_i$ for $ith$ processor, the average number of background jobs $n_i$ in the M/M/1 system can be estimated by $\frac{\rho_i}{1-\rho_i}$ where the $\rho_i = \frac{\lambda_i}{\mu_i}$. Then the average inverse of the processing speed was model as $\bar{W_i} = (n_i + 1)W_i$ since every background job is assume to share the equal computing power in [15]. In this way, the schedule can be achieved by solving equations (4) or (6). However, in the real case the average number of background jobs for processor $i$ during its processing time may not simply equal to the average state for the M/M/1 model due to two reasons. First, the processor may already have some background jobs be processed at the time when the divisible load job of our interest arrives, which means the start state of the M/M/1 model is not zero. Also, the average number of background jobs of a certain processor during its processing time may depend on how much time it takes to process. The divisible load job may terminate before the the M/M/1 queue reaches its equilibrium, so the average number of background jobs may not equal to the average number in the M/M/1 queue. \par
To deal with this issue, instead simply using the average number of background jobs as an approximation, a simulation based method is introduced in this paper. The main idea is to simulate background sequence for each processor, then the deterministic algorithm I or II can be applied. By operating this simulation for abundant times, the trial which achieves statistical median of the finishing time can be taken as the final schedule. The simulation of background jobs is based on the natural properties of M/M/1 queue: the time to stay in one state is a random variable with $Exp(\lambda + \mu)$ (except for the first state, which is $Exp(\lambda)$ since there is no departure), and the probability to move to the next largest state is $p_{next}=\frac{\lambda}{\lambda + \mu}$. Given the starting state $N_0$ and system parameters $\lambda$ and $\mu$ for each processor, the details of simulating M/M/1 based background sequence is described in Algorithm III.\par
\begin{algorithm}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\Require $N_0$, $\lambda$ and $\mu$
\Ensure Background sequence
\State Set $t=0$;
\State Set M/M/1 state equals to $N_0$ at $t=0$;
\Comment{The state represents the number of background jobs}
\While{$t<T_f$}
\If{current state equals to $0$}
\State Generate a random variable $\tilde{t} \sim Exp(\lambda)$;
\State $t=t+\tilde{t}$, move the state to $1$
\Else
\State Generate a random variable $\tilde{t} \sim Exp(\lambda +\mu)$;
\State $t=t+\tilde{t}$;
\State Generate a random variable $p \sim Unif(0,1)$;
\If{$p <= p_{next}$}
\State Move the M/M/1 queue to the next state;
\Else
\State Move the M/M/1 queue to the previous state;
\EndIf
\EndIf
\EndWhile
\end{algorithmic}
\caption{Algorithm to simulate the background sequence}
\end{algorithm}
The system parameters $\lambda$ and $\mu$ can be estimated by the estimation step in section 3.1. This simulation can be done beforehand and the results stored in a table for future use. Based on the background jobs sequence and the pre-defined hypervisor function to assign a processor computation/communication power, $W(t)$ and $Z(t)$ can be achieved. Then the recursive deterministic algorithm I or II can be applied to obtain a schedule. By repeating this procedure for abundant times, various schedule plans can be achieved. The trial that achieve the median of all the finishing times is chosen as the final stochastic schedule plan.
\subsubsection{Iterative Algorithm for Simplification}
One drawback of the simulation-based algorithm is that it requires to run the recursive deterministic algorithm for abundant times. This procedure may become quite time-consuming when the system scale grows large since the recursive deterministic algorithm could be quite slow when the number of processors grows large. The running time can be significantly decreased if we can solve the linear equations (4) or (6) directly. However, solving the linear equations (4) or (6) requires the prior knowledge of $\bar{W}$ and $\bar{Z}$ for each processor, which can only be accessed after scheduling based on theorem I and II.\par
To deal with this issue, an incorrect initial guess of the scheduling is made. This initial guess can be achieved either from the time-invariant approach or the result generated by [15]. After we achieve the initial scheduling, random background sequences are generated for each processor using algorithm III. Same as in the last subsection, $W(t)$ and $Z(t)$ can be estimated. Since we already have the initial schedule, we know the starting processing time of each processor. Based on theorem I and II $\bar{W}$ and $\bar{Z}$ can be estimated for each processor. An updated schedule can be achieved from solving linear equations (4) or (6). Then the background jobs sequences are generated again for each processor, and the updated $\bar{W}$ and $\bar{Z}$ can be achieved based on the new background jobs sequences. The updated $\bar{W}$ and $\bar{Z}$ could be utilized to update the schedule again. Similar as the previous subsection, abundant iterations of this procedure are performed and the trial that achieves the median of all the finishing times is chosen as the final stochastic schedule plan. An simplified algorithm description is shown in algorithm IV.\par
\begin{algorithm}
1. Perform an initial scheduling. The communication and processing time for each processor can be obtained.\\
2. Run the Algorithm III to generate random background sequences for each processor.\\
3. Achieve the updated $\bar{W}_i$ and $\bar{Z}_i$ for each processor $i$ based on theorem I and II.\\
4. Updating the schedule based on the new $\bar{W}$ and $\bar{Z}$. The updated communication and processing time for each processor can be obtained.\\
5. Repeat step 2 to 4 for an abundant number of times.\\
6. The trial that achieve the median of all the finishing times is chosen as the final stochastic schedule plan.\\
\caption{Simplified Scheduling}
\end{algorithm}
Due to that each time the $\bar{W}$ and $\bar{Z}$ are estimated from the information of the last iteration, the overall scheduling may not as accurate as the simulation based method introduced in last subsection. However, the time-saving property of this method plays an important role when the system scale grows large. Numerical tests shows that for the system with large number of processors, this simplified iterative method can save significant time with negligible errors.
\section{Numerical Test and Evaluation}
In this section we perform numerical tests for both deterministic and stochastic models. The first two subsections illustrates our results for the deterministic model using Algorithm I and II. We simulate each of the two algorithms in 50 time units and each time unit contain 100 time slots. That is to say, each time slot is equivalent to 0.01 unit of time. Usually the total process is finished within 50 time units. In these two subsections we use a simple way to generate the number of background jobs such that it is easier to perform evaluation of the system. A certain number of background jobs are generated throughout the 50 time units. The arrivals and departures of background jobs are simulated as uniformly distributed random time points in pairs and the departure time of a certain background jobs must be later than the arrival time. For simplicity we assume that the hypervisor evenly distributes the physical processor's computation/communication power among the virtual processors, which means that $W^h_i(n) = nW_i$. As a result, $W_{i}(t)$ and $Z_i(t)$ can be obtained based on the pre-defined $W_{i}$ and $Z_i$. For Algorithm I, $Z_i(t) = Z_i$ and $W_{1}(t) = W_{1}$ are set to be constant since the control processor is not time-varying. In our test, we arrange the processors' sequence according to their speed. That is to say, the faster processors will receive load prior to the slower ones. Based on this concept, we set the inverse of communication speed $Z_i = 1 + 0.1(i-1), i = 1,2,3,...,N$ for the processor $i$. Also, the parameters are set as: $T_{cm} = 1$, $T_{cp} = 4$ throughout the whole numerical test.\par
The third subsection illustrates our results by the stochastic model. The background jobs are generated by an M/M/1 queuing model instead of the simple method. We also compare our result with the result in [15]. It shows that our stochastic result better matches the deterministic result in terms of statistics.
\subsection{Time-varying System with A Time-invariant Control Processor}
\subsubsection{Solution and Verification}
In this subsection, the control processor is time-invariant while the work processors are all time-varying. The link speed is assumed to be time-invariant. The $W_{i}$ is set to be equal for all processors and denoted as $W$. The Algorithm I is solved by starting with an initial $T_{f}$, then changing the value of $T_{f}$ gradually until achieving a sum of all $\alpha$s that is enough equal to 1. In this case, since $\alpha_{0}$ must be smaller than $1$, by the equation (4a), $\alpha_{0} = \frac{T_{f}}{W_{0}T_{cp}}$, then $T_{f}$ must be smaller than $W_{0}T_{cp}$. So the $T_{f}$ is initialized with its upper-bound $W_{0}T_{cp}$ and is decreased by a step of a time slot to achieve the correct solution. \par
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{a1_basis.jpg}
\caption{Finishing time vs the partitions of each processor by Algorithm I}
\label{fig:a1_basis}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig:a1_basis} shows how to achieve the optimal $T_f$ and all the partitions through Algorithm I. In this case, there are 3 worker processors and each worker processor has 40 background jobs for the whole 50 time units randomly generated. On average there are 0.8 background jobs each time unit for each processor. $W$ is set to be 1 and $T_{f}$ is initialized by $W_{0}T_{cp} = 4$ in this case. Our solution lays where the sum of alpha curve intersects with the line where the sum of the alphas equals to one.\par
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Two closest solution points for Fig. \ref{fig:a1_basis}}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||c c c c c c||}
\hline
$T_{f}$ & $\alpha_{0}$ & $\alpha_{1}$ & $\alpha_{2}$ & $\alpha_{3}$ & sum \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
2.0800 & 0.5200 & 0.2182 & 0.1583 & 0.1000 & 0.9965 \\
\hline
2.0900 & 0.5225 & 0.2182 & 0.1583 & 0.1077 & 1.0067 \\ [1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Table I shows the two closest solution points for Fig. \ref{fig:a1_basis}, where the sum of alphas is closest to $1$. From the solutions we can find that the sequence of divisible loads each processor takes is $\alpha_{0} > \alpha_{1} > \alpha_{2} > \alpha_{3}$, that is because the processor with the smaller index finishes communication before the one with larger index. In other words, the processor with smaller index has more time to process the loads. However in general the inequality part $\alpha_{1} > \alpha_{2} > \alpha_{3}$ does not always hold. Since the background jobs are generated randomly over the whole time interval, so it is possible that the processor with a larger index has less background jobs than the processor with smaller index during the processing time. Taking less background jobs means processing in a higher average speed. As a result, even with less time to process the loads, the processor with a larger index is possible to take more loads due to its fast speed. Especially, processor $0$ (control processor) would always take the majority part of the loads since it does not require communication and it always has a higher processing speed than other processors, because there is no background job on $P_{0}$. Either one of these two points can be taken as the solution of Algorithm I, one can also average these 2 points to achieve the solution. \par
To verify the accuracy of Algorithm I, we use Algorithm I to solve a time-invariant case where there is no background job and compare the result with the solution generated from equations (1a) to (1c) using the same parameters mentioned before.\par
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Solutions of equation (1)}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||c c c c c c||}
\hline
$T_{f}$ & $\alpha_{0}$ & $\alpha_{1}$ & $\alpha_{2}$ & $\alpha_{3}$ & sum \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
1.4070 & 0.3517 & 0.2759 & 0.2122 & 0.1602 & 1.0000 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Closest solution point by Algorithm I without background job}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||c c c c c c||}
\hline
$T_{f}$ & $\alpha_{0}$ & $\alpha_{1}$ & $\alpha_{2}$ & $\alpha_{3}$ & sum \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
1.4100 & 0.3525 & 0.2755 & 0.2117 & 0.1600 & 0.9996 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Table II shows the solution of equation (1a) to (1c) while table III is the closest point by Algorithm I. One can find that the solution by Algorithm I matches the solution of equation (1a) to (1c) well.
\subsubsection{System Evaluation}
Two criteria are used to evaluate the time-varying system with a time-invariant control processor: finishing time and speedup. We will see how the system performs via these two criteria with a changing number of processors and background jobs. When the number of processors is changing, the number of background jobs is set to be 40 for each worker processor throughout 50 time units and when the number of background jobs is changing, the number of processors is set to be 4 (including the control processor). The definition of speedup will be introduced in the latter part of this subsection. In this subsection for each certain number of background jobs or processors, we run the Algorithm I 1000 times and average these trials to get a stable result.\par
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{a1_1.jpg}
\caption{}
\label{fig:a1_1}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{a1_2.jpg}
\caption{}
\label{fig:a1_2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[]{For a time varying system with time-invariant control processor (a) Number of background jobs vs finishing time (b) Number of processors vs finishing time.}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig:a1_1} shows how the finishing time varies with a increasing number of background jobs. One can find that the finishing time increases as the number of background jobs increases, which makes sense since more background jobs means less allocated to to the main job for a certain processor. Also, recall that all processors share a same inverse of processing speed $W$ when there is no background job, it is obvious that a higher $W$ (means lower speed) will make the system finish the job slower. This is also shown in the both Fig. \ref{fig:a1_1} and Fig. \ref{fig:a1_2}, where higher $W$ has higher finishing time. Fig. \ref{fig:a1_2} shows the number of processors vs finishing time when each worker processor has 40 background jobs in total. With more processors sharing the same amount of job, the job should be finished faster, as shown in Fig. \ref{fig:a1_2}.\par
Since parallelism can accelerate the processing, one may wonder how much faster the parallel system can be compared with the sequential system. Defined by the well known Amdahl's law [21,22], speedup is the ratio of sequential processing time to parallel processing time for the same amount of load, which is:
\begin{align}
Speedup = \frac{T_{fs}}{T_{fp}}
\end{align}
Where $T_{fs}$ is the finishing time with a single processor while $T_{fp}$ is the finishing time with multiple parallel processors. The speedup can reflect how much faster the parallel system is compared with the sequential system. By taking the control processor as the single sequential processor, $T_{fs}$ can be achieved by:
\begin{align}
T_{fs} = 1WT_{cp} = WT_{cp}
\end{align}
As defined in equation (12) and (13), the speedup should have a positive correlation with the number of processor. Increasing of the number of processors means an increase of the parallelism in the system, which will result in a higher speedup value. \par
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{a1_4.jpg}
\caption[]{ For a time varying system with time-invariant control processor: number of processors vs speedup.}
\label{fig:a1_4}
\end{figure}
To verify our expectations, Fig. \ref{fig:a1_4} demonstrates how speedup varies with the number of processors. This matches our expectation. For the relationship between $W$ and speedup, from the figure we can find that the higher $W$ results in higher speedup. This is because the $T_{fs}$ is linear to $W$, which should be more sensitive than $T_{fp}$ to $W$. In other words, $T_{fs}$ changes faster than $T_{fp}$ when $W$ changes. Then, for a certain number of processors, a higher $W$ will result in a higher speedup. In other words, parallelism has a bigger benefit for the slower system.
\subsection{Time-varying System with Time-varying Control Processor, Processing and Communication Speed}
\subsubsection{Solutions and Verification}
In this subsection, there are background jobs at the control processors as well. Furthermore, there will be interfering communications, which will make the control processor have both time-varying processing speed and communication speed. The number of extra connections in control processor is set to be equal to the number of background jobs in this processor for the whole time interval. $Z(t)$ is generated in the same manner as $W(t)$ described at the beginning of this section.\par
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{a2_basis.jpg}
\caption{Finishing time vs the partitions of each processor by Algorithm II}
\label{fig:a2_basis}
\end{figure}
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Two closest solution points for Fig. \ref{fig:a2_basis}}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||c c c c c c||}
\hline
$T_{f}$ & $\alpha_{0}$ & $\alpha_{1}$ & $\alpha_{2}$ & $\alpha_{3}$ & sum \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
4.8900 & 0.4244 & 0.2113 & 0.1849 & 0.1774 & 0.9980\\
\hline
4.9000 & 0.4257 & 0.2137 & 0.1866 & 0.1777 & 1.0037\\ [1ex]
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Similar to the previous subsection, Fig. \ref{fig:a2_basis} and Table IV shows how to get the solution using Algorithm II. There are one control processor and three worker processors and each processor has 40 background jobs. The control processor also has 40 other incoming and outcoming network connections. Again, all processors share the same processing speed when there is no background job, as $W=1$ for all.\par
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{Closest solution point by Algorithm II without background job}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{||c c c c c c||}
\hline
$T_{f}$ & $\alpha_{0}$ & $\alpha_{1}$ & $\alpha_{2}$ & $\alpha_{3}$ & sum \\ [0.5ex]
\hline\hline
1.4110 & 0.3528 & 0.2755 & 0.2117 & 0.1600 & 0.9999 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
The same method as the previous subsection is applied to verify our program. The result is shown in Table V. Again our solution matches the solution in Table II.
\subsubsection{System Evaluation}
The same two criteria: finishing time and speedup are used to evaluate the time-varying system with time-varying control processor, processing and communication speed. Again we change the number of processors and background jobs to see how the system performs. The number of background jobs is set to be 40 and the number of processors is set to be four (one control processor and three worker processors) when the other one is changing. Algorithm II is also averaged over 1000 trails for a stable result.\par
Fig. \ref{fig:a2_12} shows how the finishing time varies with a increasing number of processors and background jobs for three different $W$ values. As the previous subsection, finishing time has a positive correlation with the number of background jobs but negative correlation with the number of processors for the same reason. \par
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{a2_1.jpg}
\caption{}
\label{fig:a2_1}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{a2_2.jpg}
\caption{}
\label{fig:a2_2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[]{For a time-varying system with time-varying control processor (a) Number of background jobs vs finishing time (b) Number of processors vs finishing time.}
\label{fig:a2_12}
\end{figure}
In case of Speedup, it is more complicated since now our reference single sequential processor $P_{0}$ is also time-varying. Equation (12) is still used to define Speedup, but equation (13) cannot achieve $T_{fs}$ for this case. To solve this problem, by taking $\alpha_{0}$ as $1$ in equation (6a), $T_{fs}$ can be obtained by solving the following equation:
\begin{IEEEeqnarray}{rCl}
T_{fs} = 1\bar{W}_{0}(t)T_{cp} = \frac{T_{fs}}{\int_{0}^{T_{fs}}\frac{1}{W_{0}(t)}dt}T_{cp} \nonumber\\
\Longrightarrow
\frac{1}{T_{cp}}\int_{0}^{T_{fs}}\frac{1}{W_{0}(t)}dt = 1
\end{IEEEeqnarray}
Fig. \ref{fig:a2_4} demonstrates the relationship between speedup and the number of processors. One can see that speedup will increase as the number of processors increases. This is similar to Fig. \ref{fig:a1_4} and also meets our expectation.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{a2_4.jpg}
\caption[]{For a time varying system with time-varying control processor: number of processors vs speedup.}
\label{fig:a2_4}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Stochastic Model}
In this subsection the background jobs are generated by a M/M/1 model. The generation is similar to the method described in section 3.2. The starting state for each processor is taken to be zero for simplicity. Both cases where the control processor is time-varying or time-invariant are tested. In the test, we call the result generated by the simulation-based method as the \enquote{simulation-based}. We also note the result provided by [15] as \enquote{before correction} and our simplified iterative Algorithm as \enquote{iterative}. A result for 4 processors (one control processor and three worker processors) are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:st1}.\par
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{s0_4.jpg}
\caption{}
\label{fig:Ng9}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{s1_4.jpg}
\caption{}
\label{fig:Ng10}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[]{Result for 4 processors (a) Time-invariant control processor (b) Time-varying control processor, processing and communication speed.}
\label{fig:st1}
\end{figure}
In Fig. \ref{fig:st1} we use box-plotted finishing time as the criterion to compare the three methods. The details of box plot can be found at [26]. Briefly speaking the box contains 50\% of the data, whose lower and upper boundary lines are at the 25\%/75\% quantile of the data. A central line indicates the median of the data and some outliers of data are plotted out as dots. The median of each data is picked as the stochastic solution. In this case, the starting states for all processors are set to be zero homogeneously. Here $\lambda$ is set to be 0.1 and $\mu$ is set to be 0.125. Based on these settings, the scheduling will be finished before the M/M/1 queue reaches its average state number in general. As a result, \enquote{before correction} method will deliver a higher finishing time since that \enquote{before correction} method will get an incorrect higher number of background jobs which will results in a slower processing speed in general. From the figure we can find that our \enquote{iterative} method delivers similar result as the \enquote{deterministic} result in statistics, which is lower than the \enquote{before correction} method for both cases whether the control processor is time-varying or not. In this case there is only 4 processors and the times to run the two algorithms are quite close. The simulation-based method turns out to be a better solution than the simplified iterative one since it is more accurate. Another case with more processors in shown in Fig. \ref{fig:st2}. \par
\begin{figure}[!h]
\centering
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{s0_15.jpg}
\caption{}
\label{fig:s30_1}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}[b]{0.5\textwidth}
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{s1_15.jpg}
\caption{}
\label{fig:s30_2}
\end{subfigure}
\caption[]{Result for 15 processors (a)Time-invariant control processor (b)Time-varying control processor, processing and communication speed.}
\label{fig:st2}
\end{figure}
Fig. \ref{fig:st2} demonstrates the result for 15 processors (one control processor and 14 worker processors). The performance of the simplified iterative algorithm is similar as the case when there is only 4 processors. However in this case, running the simulated based algorithm is overwhelmingly time-consuming (2213 seconds for Fig. \ref{fig:s30_1} and 2418 seconds for Fig. \ref{fig:s30_2}) while the simplified iterative algorithm can be time-saving (182 seconds for Fig. \ref{fig:s30_1} and 267 seconds for Fig. \ref{fig:s30_2}).\par
One thing to note is that once the system parameters $\lambda$ and $\mu$ are fixed, the only factor that influences the stochastic model are the starting state of each processor. This is totally different from the deterministic case, which is dependent on the real distribution of the background jobs on each trial.
\section{Conclusion}
This paper studied optimal divisible loads scheduling of time-varying single level tree network. The time-varying processing speed and channel speed were transformed into equivalent time-invariant ones. The deterministic analysis was first studied where the arrival and departure times are known To achieve the optimal partition for each processor, two recursive algorithms were developed in case whether the control processor is time-invariant or time-varying. For stochastic analysis, the arrival and departure of background jobs are modeled as a M/M/1 queuing model and two algorithms are provided to solve the scheduling problem. Extensive numerical tests were performed to demonstrate the relationships between finishing time, speedup, background job number and processor number.\par
Future enhancement for this research can be pursued under the context of various network topologies such as multi-level tree or mesh. Also, the system model can be extended to handle more complicated cases, such as a general distribution of the arrivals and departures of background jobs/transmissions in stochastic analysis.
\ifCLASSOPTIONcaptionsoff
\newpage
\fi
|
\section{Introduction}
Tipping points are strongly nonlinear phenomena which can be described in layman's terms as
large, sudden and often unexpected changes in the state of a system, caused by small and slow changes
in the external inputs~\cite{scheffer2009critical,ashwin2012tipping}. The notion of a tipping point was
popularised by Gladwell~\cite{gladwell2000tipping} and has since been used in a wide
range of applications including climate science~\cite{lenton2008tipping,held2004detection,bathiany2016beyond}
and ecology~\cite{scheffer2009critical,scheffer2008pulse,laurance201110,boettiger2013,siteur2016ecosystems,vanselow2018,morris2002responses}.
Scientists have identified interesting questions in relation to different tipping
mechanisms~\cite{ashwin2012tipping,shi2016towards}, generic early warning signals near a tipping point~\cite{scheffer2009early,dakos2008slowing,scheffer2012anticipating,ritchie2016early},
and the possibility of preventing tipping~\cite{biggs2009turning,hughes2013living,bolt2018climate,ritchie2017inverse,alkhayuon2019}, that need to be addressed in more rigorous terms. For example, Article 2 of the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC)
pointed out two {\em critical factors}: the {\em level} and the {\em time frame} for changing
greenhouse gas concentrations~\cite{unfccc1992united}, suggesting that there are at
least two tipping mechanisms of great importance to the contemporary climate.
More generally, tipping phenomena can be classified by a type of instability and
analysed in more depth, although this often requires mathematical techniques
beyond traditional stability theory~\cite{CRITICSwebsite,wieczorek2011excitability,ashwin2012tipping,wieczorek2018}.
Early mathematical models described tipping points as dangerous
bifurcations that occur at {\em critical levels} of an input parameter~\cite{thompson2011predicting,kuehn2011mathematical}.
Such bifurcations have a discontinuity in the branch of stable states (attractors) at the
bifurcation point, which explains why a system can remain near one stable state up to a
critical level, but is destined to transition to a different state past the critical
level~\cite{thompson1994safe}.
However, tipping points are not just bifurcations.
Some systems have {\em critical rates} of parameter change, meaning that they are very
sensitive to how fast external conditions or inputs change. Such systems can tip to a
different state, despite the absence of any classical bifurcation, when the input parameter
varies slowly but fast enough~\cite{wieczorek2011excitability,siteur2014beyond,scheffer2008pulse,luke2011soil,alkhayuon2019}.
Ashwin et al. used the framework of non-autonomous dynamical systems to identify three different tipping mechanisms~\cite{ashwin2012tipping}. Bifurcation-induced tipping (B-tipping) occurs when the
changing parameter passes through a {\em critical level} or a {\em (dangerous) bifurcation},
at which point the stable state loses stability or simply disappears. In other words,
B-tipping describes the adiabatic effects of a parameter change. Rate-induced
tipping (R-tipping) occurs when the parameter changes faster than some {\em critical rate}
and the system deviates from the moving stable state sufficiently far to cross some tipping
threshold, e.g. the boundary of the domain of attraction. In other words, R-tipping
describes the non-adiabatic effects of a parameter change.
Noise-induced tipping (N-tipping) occurs when noisy fluctuations drive the system past
some tipping threshold.\footnote{In a certain sense, N-tipping can be thought of as a special case of
R-tipping.} Shi et al. gave an alternative but similar classification of tipping mechanisms
based on relative timescales of the input and of the noisy system alone~\cite{shi2016towards}.
Additionally, tipping points can be described as either reversible or irreversible, depending
on whether or not the system returns to the original stable state in the long term~\cite{wieczorek2018}.
So far, B-tipping and R-tipping have been discussed in isolation in the literature. However,
real-world tipping phenomena will often involve different critical factors and
different tipping mechanisms. Motivated by this observation, we use classical
bifurcation analysis~\cite{kuznetsovelements} in conjunction with the concepts
of {\em parameter paths} and {\em basin instability}~\cite{ashwin2012tipping,wieczorek2018}
to analyse the effects of the rate of parameter change near the two generic
dangerous bifurcations of equilibria: saddle-node and subcritical Hopf bifurcations~\cite{thompson1994safe}. In this way, we give new insight into testable
criteria for R-tipping and reveal non-trivial phenomena
such as multiple critical rates that arise from the interaction between
B-tipping and R-tipping.
Ecological models appear to be a perfect test bed for this type of study.
B-tipping has been observed and studied extensively in different ecosystems~\cite{lewontin1969meaning,noy1975stability,scheffer1993alternative,scheffer2001catastrophic,leemans2004another,lenton2008tipping}, although the concept of a ``global tipping point" in the context of planetary
boundaries has recently received some criticism~\cite{montoya2018planetary}. Ecologists speak of a
``regime shift" when the bifurcation is safe or explosive, and of a ``critical transition" when the
bifurcation is dangerous~\cite{scheffer2009critical}; we refer to~\cite{thompson1994safe} for the
classification of bifurcations into safe, explosive and dangerous.
Similarly, there is great and rapidly growing interest in R-tipping in the context of ecological dynamics~\cite{leemans2004another,jezkova2016}.
To the best of our knowledge, the first examples of
R-tipping were reported in ecosystems~\cite{morris2002responses,scheffer2008pulse,
siteur2014beyond,siteur2016ecosystems,vanselow2018}. More precisely, R-tipping conceptualises
a failure to adapt to changing environments~\cite{botero2015evolutionary} in the sense that
the stable state is continuously available but the system is unable to adjust to its changing
position when the change happens too fast. This raises the interesting research question
of whether tipping phenomena observed
in nature are predominantly rate induced. What is more, the related question of whether tipping
can be avoided or prevented has recently received much attention in the ecosystem literature~\cite{hughes2013living,biggs2009turning,bolt2018climate,ritchie2017inverse}. Proper mathematical
analysis of the interaction between critical levels and critical rates, or between
B-tipping and R-tipping, is exactly what is needed to gain more insight into these questions.
Lastly, there is a strong need to better understand whether ecosystems are
sensitive to the magnitudes of environmental change, the rates of environmental change, or to both.
This is of particular importance in view of a highly variable contemporary climate,
intensifying human activity and rapidly declining resources.
The paper is organised as follows.
Section~\ref{sec:keynon} introduces the ecological model given by two non-autonomous
ordinary differential equations and discusses the key nonlinearity due to a modified
type-III functional response. It also introduces the concepts of a parameter path and
a moving equilibrium.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:Btip} we perform classical bifurcation analysis of the corresponding
autonomous system with fixed in time parameters, obtain two-dimensional bifurcation
diagrams in the parameter plane of the plant growth rate and herbivore mortality rate,
and uncover a codimension-three degenerate Bogdanov-Takens bifurcation as the organising
centre for B-tipping and the source of a dangerous subcritical Hopf bifurcation. We give simple criteria for B-tipping in the non-autonomous system
in terms of dangerous bifurcations in the autonomous system.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:Rtip} we introduce the concept of basin instability for the
corresponding autonomous system to give testable criteria for R-tipping
in the non-autonomous system. We superimpose regions of basin instability on classical
bifurcation diagrams to highlight rate-induced instabilities that cannot be captured by
classical bifurcation analysis. We then obtain two-dimensional R-tipping diagrams in
the parameter plane of the \emph{rate} and \emph{magnitude} of parameter shift for monotone
and non-monotone parameter shifts, uncover R-tipping tongues with two critical rates,
draw parallels between R-tipping tongues and resonance tongues, and demonstrate that
tracking-tipping transitions correspond to canard-like solutions that, rather surprisingly,
track moving unstable states.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:BRtip} we describe non-trivial tipping phenomena arising from the interaction
between B-tipping and R-tipping such as tipping diagrams with multiple critical rates, which
we explain in terms of different timescales and bifurcation delays.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:pnr} we partition the tipping diagrams into ``points of tracking'',
``points of return", ``points of no return" and ``points of return tipping" to give
new insight into the problem of preventing tipping by a parameter trend reversal. We then
depart from the ecological model and produce tipping diagrams capturing both B-tipping
and R-tipping for modified (tilted) normal forms of the two generic dangerous bifurcations
of equilibria namely saddle-node and subcritical Hopf. By comparison with
the ecological model we show that the tipping diagram from Sec.~\ref{sec:BRtip}
appears to be typical for non-monotone parameter shifts that cross
a basin instability boundary and a generic dangerous bifurcation
and then turn around.
Section~\ref{sec:concl} summarises our findings.
\begin{comment}
Section 2 begins with an autonomous model describing the interaction between plants and herbivores and a feature of the system, \emph{the nonlinearity parameter}, is discussed in relation to how it is responsible for the per-capita growth of herbivores not being a strictly increasing function of the plant growth. This is a very important property as it is what makes the system highly prone to R-tipping. We then declare our two main input parameters, $r$ the growth rate of plants and $m$ the mortality rate of herbivores. We also introduce the concept of a moving equilibrium, a property of the non-autonomous system necessary for understanding the mechanism of rate-induced tipping. In Section 3 we perform traditional bifurcation analysis on the autonomous system with a focus on identifying the \emph{critical levels} of parameters $r$ and $m$. These we show in bifurcation diagrams for the two parameters which are made qualitatively different by having distinct but fixed values for the nonlinearity parameter. All indicated phase spaces have their own accompanying phase portraits.
The idea of rate-induced tipping is introduced in Section 4 by first describing the concept of ``\emph{basin instability}''~\cite{ashwin2017parameter}, a feature of the autonomous system that provides an understanding of R-tipping in the non-autonomous system. We perform rate sensitivity analysis on the system using \emph{forcing functions}, one to represent a monotonic shift simulating a steady increase in environmental drivers, the second steadily increases towards a maximum and then reverses, thus simulating a reversal of the driving mechanism. This allows us to examine transitions that are due to \emph{critical rates}~\cite{scheffer2008pulse,wieczorek2011excitability, luke2011soil}. The motivation for this is the question; \emph{if one accepts the possibility of anthropogenic climate change towards a tipping point, can a reversal of our behaviour recover the stability of our system?} Also introduce here are tipping diagrams that plot the magnitude (length) against the rate (amplitude) of parameter shifts through a region with no traditional bifurcation and show quantitatively areas of R-tipping and R-tracking. The non-monotone shifts reveals what will become a familiar feature of R-tipping, a tongue shaped area of tipping bounded above and below by critical rates.
Section 5 investigates the interaction between B-tipping and R-tipping beginning with monotone and non-monotone shifts through a (dangerous) subcritical Hopf bifurcation. The resulting tipping diagram for the non-monotone shifts shows this interaction clearly with the result of three critical rates for a relatively large range of magnitude of parameter shift, two critical rates representing R-tipping and a third B-tipping critical rate that begins far beyond the bifurcation but reverses and converges back towards it. We then explore a region at a very close proximity to the subcritical Hopf bifurcation where there is no basin instability as a parameter shifts through the bifurcation. What results is a tipping diagram that has the two similar characteristics to the previous one; R-tipping tongue shape and B-tipping convergence to the bifurcation but an additional oscillation between the two that results in multiple critical rates.
In Section 6 we superimpose the non-monotone tipping diagram on top of the monotone tipping diagram to reveal two different types of tipping point. One where it is possible to recover the system (``\emph{points of return}'') and the other where tipping is truly irreversible (``\emph{points of no return}''). We then extend our methods to the normal forms of a saddle-node bifurcation and of a subcritical Hopf bifurcation. These results show genericity in our findings and furthermore, an additional tipping point presents itself, upon the parameter trend reversal (non-monotone) there are conditions in which the system can tip, we call these ``\emph{points of return tipping}''.
There are two generic dangerous bifurcations of equilibria: saddle-node bifurcation and subcritical Hopf bifurcation. Points of no return near a saddle-node bifurcation have been studied by Sieber, et al.. We address the question of points of no return near a subcritical Hopf bifurcation.
This paper concerns rate induced bifurcations, specifically the rates that mark a critical transition in a system. A rate induced bifurcation is where a parameter does not cross a classical bifurcation, but varies too fast for the system to track the moving stable state~\cite{ashwin2012tipping}.
A critical transition or \emph{``tipping point''} is the threshold in which a system's stable state destabilises or disappears entirely due to a change in a system's parameter~\cite{kuehn2011mathematical}.
In environmental science a concept has developed where the concern is not so much the tipping point but actually the rate at which a system approaches it.
In environmental science tipping points refer to critical transitions by which small perturbations in an ecosystem results in an immediate and irreversible change~\cite{scheffer2001catastrophic,scheffer2009critical}. Motivated by this was the proposal of \emph{planetary boundaries}~\cite{rockstrom2009safe,steffen2015planetary}, thresholds by which humanity needs to stay within so as to avoid a catastrophic anthropogenic environmental event. Steady state analysis can easily be employed to find these critical thresholds, however this does not take into consideration the potential rate sensitivity of a particular ecosystem.
There is now almost universal acceptance of the immediate threat of climate change. In 2009 Johan Rockström et al proposed the need for thresholds by which humanity needs to stay within so as to avoid a catastrophic anthropogenic enviromental event. These were identified and quantified calling these thresholds \emph{planetary boundaries}~\cite{rockstrom2009safe}. In relation to climate change the planetary boundary was set at the limiting of CO$_2$ concentration in the atmosphere to less than 350 ppm above the pre-industrial level. Beyond that would create a zone of uncertainty up to 550ppm after which there would be a tipping point. An update to the planetary boundaries was published in 2015 where evidence now supported narrowing this zone of uncertainty from 350 to 550 ppm to 350 to 450 ppm~\cite{steffen2015planetary}. We exceeded 400 ppm in 2013 and the number continues to rise, 411.97 ppm was observed at atmospheric baseline station, Mauna Loa Observatory in Hawaii on May 19, 2018.
...recently a paradigm has been put forward that is a set of preconditions that must be met to ensure human survival on a global scale called \emph{planetary boundaries}~\cite{steffen2015planetary}, as these conditions are based on a system's critical levels they do not take in to account the rate sensitivity of the system.
Upon applying a rate parameter that has a time dependence on a system's parameter we can examine transitions that are due to \emph{critical rates}~\cite{scheffer2008pulse, luke2011soil, wieczorek2011excitability}.
Using a hyperbolic trigonometric forcing function to increase a systems parameter and another to increase a parameter and then decrease it back to its original state, we indicate critical transitions of a system which signify \emph{points of return} and \emph{points of no return}.
\end{comment}
\section{The Ecosystem Model and its Key Nonlinearity}
\label{sec:keynon}
We consider a simple ecosystem model, where the time evolution of
plant $P\ge 0$ and herbivore $H\ge 0$ biomass concentrations
is modelled using two coupled autonomous ordinary differential
equations~\cite{scheffer2008pulse}:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:dP/dt}
\frac{dP}{dt} &= r P - C P^2 - H\, g(P), \\
\label{eq:dH/dt}
\frac{dH}{dt} &= \left(E\, e^{-bP} g(P)-m\right)\!H,
\end{align}
together with eight parameters listed in Table~\ref{tab:1}.
The first two terms on the right-hand side (r.h.s.) of Eq.~(\ref{eq:dP/dt})
describe logistic plant growth from 0 to the carrying capacity $r/C$. The
third term describes grazing with a nonlinear dependence on the plant biomass $P$.
Specifically, the functional response in units inverse day
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:g(P)}
g(P) = c_{max}\,\dfrac{P^2}{P^2+a^2}\,e^{-b_c P},
\end{equation}
is a modification of the classical monotone and strictly-increasing
type-III functional response $c_{max} P^2/(P^2 + a^2)$~\cite{holling1959components}
with an exponential factor $e^{-b_c P}$ to account for
a decline in foraging at high plant biomass.
The resulting non-monotone $g(t)$,
shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:graz}(a) for different predation
efficiency $b_c$, is believed to describe a wide range of terrestrial
and aquatic ecosystems; see~\cite{van1996patterns,scheffer2008pulse} and
references therein. For example, rabbits graze more with faster-growing
plants as long as the plants are small enough, but avoid overgrown
bushes in fear of predators and are unable to graze on
plants that have grown too tall. Similarly, in aquatic ecosystems,
phytoplankton can be heavily consumed at early life stages by
herbivorous zooplankton, but higher-density phytoplankton colonies
become less prone to exploration and foraging.
Moving on to the herbivore dynamics, the first term on the r.h.s.
of~Eq.(\ref{eq:dH/dt}) describes an increase in herbivore biomass.
The increase term consists of three factors: reproduction and grazing $g(P)$,
herbivore assimilation efficiency $E$,
and exponential decline $e^{-b P}$ due to reduced food quality at
high plant biomass. The last term on the r.h.s.
of Eq.~(\ref{eq:dH/dt}) represents herbivore death at the constant rate $m$.
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\caption{Description of the system parameters and their values~\cite{scheffer2008pulse}.}
\begin{tabular}{cllc}
\hline
Symbol & Description & Units & Default value\\
\hline
\rowcolor{ggray!50}$C > 0$ & Competition factor of plants & m$^2$g$^{-1}$d$^{-1}$ & 0.02 \\
$a > 0$ & Half-saturation constant of functional & g\,m$^{-2}$ & 10 \\
& response & & \\
\rowcolor{ggray!50}$b \geq 0 $ & Exponent determining the reduced quality& m$^2$g$^{-1}$ & 0 - 0.04\\
\rowcolor{ggray!50}&of food if food biomass is too high & & \\
$b_c \geq 0$ & Exponent determining the predation & m$^2$g$^{-1}$ & 0 - 0.04\\
& efficiency of herbivores at high food biomass & & \\
\rowcolor{ggray!50}$E > 0$ & Assimilation efficiency of herbivores & dimensionless & 0.4 \\
$c_{max} > 0$ & Maximum food intake of herbivores when & d$^{-1}$ & 1 \\
& $b_c = 0$ & & \\
\rowcolor{ggray!50}$m > 0$ & Herbivore mortality rate & d$^{-1}$ & 0 - 0.2 \\
$r > 0$ & Maximum plant growth rate& d$^{-1}$ & 0 - 2.5 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab:1}
\end{center}
\end{table}
In mathematical terms, the ecosystem model~\eqref{eq:dP/dt}--\eqref{eq:dH/dt} with the modified functional response~\eqref{eq:g(P)} is a singular perturbation problem because it has a different number of equlibrium solutions for $b+b_c =0$ and $0<b+b_c\ll 1$. To see that, consider the net per-capita herbivore growth shown in in Fig.~\ref{fig:graz}(b):
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:hg}
h(P) = \frac{dH/dt}{H} = E \,c_{max} \dfrac{P^2}{P^2+a^2}\,e^{-(b+b_c) P} - m,
\end{equation}
whose roots correspond to non-zero herbivore equilibrium concentrations.
When $b + b_c = 0$, the net per-capita herbivore growth
is a strictly-increasing function of $P$ with a single root $P_3$
[Fig.\ref{fig:graz}(b)]. However, when $0<b+b_c\ll 1$, the net per-capita
herbivore growth has a maximum at the optimal plant biomass
$$
P_{opt} \approx \left(\frac{2a^2}{b + b_c}\right)^{\!\frac{1}{3}},
$$
and can have no roots at all, one double root, or two distinct roots
at $P_3 < P_{opt}$ and $P_4 > P_{opt}$ [Fig.\ref{fig:graz}(b)]; see the Appendix
for the derivation of $P_{opt}$, $P_3$ and $P_4$.
The additional nonlinearity of $h(p)$ that arises from a decline in foraging at high
plant biomass $(b_c > 0)$, from reduced food quality at high plant
biomass $(b > 0)$, or from a combination of both [Fig.\ref{fig:graz}(b)], is key to our study.
Throughout the paper, we refer to $b+ b_c$ as the
{\em nonlinearity parameter}, and work with different but fixed-in-time
values of $b$ and $b_c$, as indicated in Table~\ref{tab:1}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[]{graz_percap.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{(a) The functional response $g(P)$ with dependence on $b_c$.
(b) The key system nonlinearity: For $b + b_c > 0$, the net per-capita
herbivore growth $h(P) = (dH/dt)/H$ has optimal plant biomass $P_{opt}$
where the growth is maximal, and may change sign twice at $P_3$
and $P_4$; $m = 0.1$.}
\label{fig:graz}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Changing Environment and the Non-autonomous Model}
Ecosystems are open systems that are inevitably subject to changing
environmental conditions. These include climatic changes and weather
anomalies, disease outbreaks, decline in resources or habitat quality,
and human activity. In the model, environmental changes
can be described by a time-dependent plant growth rate $r(t)$ and
herbivore mortality rate $m(t)$, which are the {\em input
parameters} for this study. Specifically, we fix six of the
system parameters to the values or ranges given in Table~\ref{tab:1},
and allow $r(t)$ or $m(t)$ to vary smoothly in time from one
asymptotic value to another. For example, $r(t)$ could
describe the occurrence of a wet season, owing to a weather anomaly
or El Niño Southern Oscillations (ENSO), while $m(t)$ could describe
a disease outbreak among herbivores. This gives in the non-autonomous
ecosystem model
\begin{align}
\label{eq:dPdt_na}
\frac{dP}{dt} &= r(t) P - C P^2 - H\, g(P), \\
\label{eq:dHdt_na}
\frac{dH}{dt} &= \left(E\, e^{-bP} g(P)-m(t)\right)\!H.
\end{align}
The exact time-dependence of $r(t)$ and $m(t)$
is specified in Secs.~\ref{sec:Rtip} and~\ref{sec:pnr} ahead.
Our analysis of tipping points in the non-autonomous system~\eqref{eq:dPdt_na}--\eqref{eq:dHdt_na}
with time-varying environmental conditions is motivated
by the need to better understand whether ecosystems are sensitive
to the magnitude of environmental change, the rate of environmental
change, or to both.
\subsubsection{Moving Equilibria and Parameter Paths}
An equilibrium or a steady state for the autonomous
system~\eqref{eq:dP/dt}--\eqref{eq:dH/dt} is a pair
$$
e(r,m) = (P,H),
$$
for which $dP/dt = dH/dt = 0$. Typically, the position of
an equilibrium depends on the input parameters $r$ and/or $m$.
When the input parameters vary over time, $e(r,m)$ changes its position
in the $(P,H)$ phase space,
and we speak of a {\em moving equilibrium}
$$
e(t) = e(r(t),m(t)),
$$
also known as a quasistatic equilibrium~\cite{ashwin2012tipping}.
Note that $e(t)$ is a property of the autonomous
system~\eqref{eq:dP/dt}--\eqref{eq:dH/dt} and the changing
environment, but it is not a solution to the non-autonomous
system~\eqref{eq:dPdt_na}--\eqref{eq:dHdt_na}.
As the input parameters $r(t)$ and $m(t)$ evolve smoothly over time,
they trace out a continuous {\em parameter path} in the two-dimensional
$(r,m)$ parameter plane. We use the notions of a {moving equilibrium}
and a {parameter path} to discuss the differences and interaction
between B-tipping and R-tipping.
\section{B-tipping: Classical Bifurcations}
\label{sec:Btip}
In the non-autonomous system~\eqref{eq:dPdt_na}--\eqref{eq:dHdt_na},
{\em B-tipping} occurs when the input
parameters pass through a dangerous bifurcation of the
corresponding autonomous system~\eqref{eq:dP/dt}--\eqref{eq:dH/dt}.
``Dangerous" means that, in a one-parameter bifurcation diagram
like the ones shown in Fig.~\ref{PH}, there is a discontinuity
in the attracting set at a bifurcation point~\cite{thompson2011predicting}.
Thus, B-tipping mechanisms in system~\eqref{eq:dPdt_na}--\eqref{eq:dHdt_na} can be identified using classical bifurcation analysis in
conjunction with singular perturbations of the autonomous
system~\eqref{eq:dP/dt}--\eqref{eq:dH/dt}.
Specifically, in this section we treat the input parameters $r$ and $m$ as
fixed-in-time {\em bifurcation parameters}, compute bifurcation
curves in the $(r,m)$ parameter plane, and uncover the two
generic damngerous bifurcations of equilibria namely
saddle-node and subcritical Hopf bifurcations. In this way,
given a parameter path of environmental change, we identify
{\em critical levels} of $r$ and $m$ along the path whenever the
path crosses a dangerous bifurcation.
\subsection{Existence of Equilibrium Solutions}
Equilibrium solutions for the autonomous system~\eqref{eq:dP/dt}--\eqref{eq:dH/dt}
are pairs $e=(P,H)$ of non-negative $P$ and $H$, which satisfy the following
conditions:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:equilibrium1}
r P - C P^2 - H\,g(P) = 0, \\
\label{eq:equilibrium2}
\left(E\, e^{-bP} g(P)-m\right)\!H = 0.
\end{align}
When $H=0$, there are at most two equilibria: a {\em trivial}
equilibrium $e_1$, and a \emph{plant-only} equilibrium $e_2$:
$$
e_1 = (0,0),\quad e_2 = \left(r/C,0\right).
$$
When $H \neq 0$, the equilibrium conditions
(\ref{eq:equilibrium1})--(\ref{eq:equilibrium2}) become
\begin{align}
\label{eq:nonzeroHequilibrium2}
H &= \frac{(r - CP)(P^2 + a^2)}{c_{max} \,P \,e^{-b_c P}},\\
\label{eq:nonzeroHequilibrium1}
h(P) &= E\,c_{max} \,\frac{P^2 e^{-(b+b_c) P}}{P^2+a^2} - m = 0.
\end{align}
Note that condition~\eqref{eq:nonzeroHequilibrium1},
which gives the $P$-component of equilibrium solutions,
depends on the nonlinearity parameter $b + b_c$ rather than on
$b$ and $b_c$ individually, which simplifies the discussion.
What is more, the condition and thus the $P$-components of
the ensuing equilibrium solutions are $r$-independent.
Independently of $b+b_c$, the net per-capita herbivore growth
$h(P)$ equals $-m$ for $P=0$.
When $b + b_c = 0$, the herbivore growth $h(P)$
is strictly increasing and levels off
at $E c_{max} - m > 0$ for large $P$ [Fig.~\ref{fig:graz}(b)].
Thus, Eq.~\eqref{eq:nonzeroHequilibrium1} has one positive root,
giving at most three equilibrium solutions for the system.
However, the maximum number of equilibrium solutions increases
in the presence of the key nonlinearity. When $b + b_c > 0$,
the herbivore growth $h(P)$ has a global maximum at $P = P_{opt} >0$,
and tends back to $-m$ for large $P$ [Fig.~\ref{fig:graz}(b)].
Thus, Eq.~\eqref{eq:nonzeroHequilibrium1} has at most two
positive roots, giving at most four equilibrium
solutions for the system. Although the roots of
Eq.~\eqref{eq:nonzeroHequilibrium1} cannot be expressed in a closed-form,
one can take advantage of the small nonlinearity parameter
$0< b+b_c\ll 1$ and use perturbation theory to obtain closed-form
approximations in terms of an asymptotic expansion in different powers of
$b+b_c$; see the Appendix for the details of the derivations.
Regular perturbation about $b + b_c = 0$ gives the $P$-\,component of
the \emph{herbivore-dominating} equilibrium $e_3$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:pert1}
P_3 = \sqrt{\frac{a^2\, m}{E\,c_{max}-m}} + \frac{a^2\, m\,E\,c_{max}}{2\left(E\,c_{max} - m\right)^{\,2}}\, (b+b_c) + \mathcal{O}\!\left((b+b_c)^2\right),
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon^n)$ is the error term of order
$n$ as $\epsilon\to 0$, and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:e3}
e_3 = \left(\sqrt{\dfrac{a^2\, m}{E\,c_{max}-m}} + \mathcal{O}(b+b_c),\frac{(r - CP_3)(P_3^2 + a^2)}{c_{max}\, P_3 \,e^{-b_c P_3}}\right).
\end{equation}
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=15cm]{Pert_16cm_2.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{$P$ and $H$ components of the herbivore-dominating
equilibrium $e_3$ and the plant-dominating equilibrium
$e_4$ obtained from (solid curve) numerically solving
Eqs.~\eqref{eq:nonzeroHequilibrium2}--\eqref{eq:nonzeroHequilibrium1},
and from (dashed curves) first-order asymptotic approximations.
Panels (a) and (b) show the dependence on $m$ for fixed $r=1$,
and panels (c) and (d) show the dependence on $r$ for fixed $m=0.1$;
$e_1$ and $e_2$ are included for reference. $b = b_c = 0.02$,
see Table 1 for other parameter values.}
\label{fig:2Dph}
\end{figure}
Singular perturbation about $b + b_c = 0$ using a stretched variable
$\tilde{P} = (b + b_c) P$ gives the $P$-\,component of
the \emph{plant-dominating} equilibrium $e_4$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:pert2}
P_4 = \frac{\ln\!\left(E\,c_{max}/m\right)}{b+b_c} -
\frac{a^2(b+b_c)}{\left(\ln\!\left(E\,c_{max}/m\right)\!\right)^{\,2}}+ \mathcal{O}\!\left((b+b_c)^2\right),
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:e4}
e_4 = \left(\frac{\ln\!\left(E\,c_{max}/m\right)}{b+b_c} + \mathcal{O}(b+b_c),\frac{(r - CP_4)(P_4^2 + a^2)}{c_{max}\,P_4 \,e^{-b_c P_4}}\right).
\end{equation}
The solid curves in Fig.~\ref{fig:2Dph} show the numerically
computed $e_3$ and $e_4$, and the dashed curves show the
first-order approximations for $e_3$ and $e_4$ using the
$P$-formulas (\ref{eq:pert1}) and (\ref{eq:pert2}) with
$\mathcal{O}((b+b_c)^2) = 0$, and the $H$-formula~\eqref{eq:nonzeroHequilibrium2}.
The main advantage of the closed-form approximations is the
information about the dependence of the equilibrium positions on the
system parameters. In particular, the effect of the nonlinearity
parameter $b + b_c$ can now be discussed in qualitative terms.
First of all, R-tipping from the herbivore-dominating equilibrium
$e_3$ to the plant-only equilibrium $e_2$ requires that both equilibria
are stable for the same parameter settings
(bistability between $e_2$ and $e_3$). In the absence of unstable limit cycles,
bistability requires one additional equilibrium $e_4$ that provides a
separatrix between the two stable equilibria $e_2$ and $e_3$. It is clear
from Eq.~\eqref{eq:pert2} that non-monotone herbivore growth
due to $b + b_c > 0$ together with $m > 0$ are necessary for the
additional equilibrium $e_4$ to exist.
Figure~\ref{fig:2Dph} shows that $e_3$ and $e_4$ may become degenerate
with each other, or each of them may become degenerate with $e_2$.
These degeneracies are indicative of transcritical and saddle-node bifurcations.
\noindent
{\bf Degeneracy of $e_2$ with $e_3$ or $e_4$ via transcritical bifurcation.}
Equilibrium $e_3$ or $e_4$ becomes degenerate with $e_2$ in a
transverse crossing if $P=r/C$ in
Eqs.~\eqref{eq:nonzeroHequilibrium2}--\eqref{eq:nonzeroHequilibrium1}.
Thus, substituting $P=r/C$ into Eq.~\eqref{eq:nonzeroHequilibrium1}
defines a curve $T$ of transcritical bifurcations in the $(r,m)$ parameter plane
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:trans1}
T = \left\{ (r,m):
m = \frac{E\,c_{max} e^{-(b+b_c)r/C}}{(a\,C/r)^2 + 1}
\right\}.
\end{equation}
If $b + b_c = 0$, curve $T$ emerges from the origin
and levels off at $m = E\,c_{max}$ for large $r$ [Fig.\ref{fig:rm2}(a)].
Equilibrium $e_3$ that bifurcates from $e_2$ exists
below $T$.
If $b + b_c > 0$, curve $T$ emerges from the origin,
has a maximum denoted with $ST$, and approaches $m=0$ from above
for large $r$ [Fig.\ref{fig:rm2}(b)]. Now, $T$ consists
of two different branches separated by $ST$.
Equilibrium $e_3$, that bifurcates from $e_2$ along the
left-hand branch of $T$, exists below the left-hand branch of $T$.
In contrast, equilibrium $e_4$, that bifurcates from $e_2$ along the
right-hand branch of $T$, exists above the right-hand branch of $T$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[]{Simple_2ParBifnostab_16cm.pdf}
\caption{Two-parameter bifurcation diagrams obtained
analytically for (a) $b=b_c=0$ and (b) $b\,+\,b_c=0.04$,
showing the curve
$T$ of transcritical bifurcations, and the half-line
$S_e$ of saddle-node bifurcations. $S_e$ emerges from a
codimension-2 saddle-node-transcritical bifurcation point
$ST$. $T$ and $S_e$ divide the $(r,m)$-parameter plane
into regions with different numbers of equilibria.
See Table 1 for other parameter values.}
\label{fig:rm2}
\end{figure}
\noindent
{\bf Degeneracy of $e_3$ with $e_4$ in a saddle-node bifurcation.}
Equilibria $e_3$ and $e_4$ become degenerate in a quadratic tangency
when $r$-independent Eq.~\eqref{eq:nonzeroHequilibrium1} has a
non-negative double root, meaning that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:12}
h(P) = \frac{dh}{dP} = 0\; \text{ and }\; \frac{d^2h}{dP^2} \ne 0\; \text{ for }\; P \geq 0, \end{equation}
and the corresponding $H$ from Eq.(\ref{eq:nonzeroHequilibrium2})
is non-negative, meaning that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:13}
r \geq C P .
\end{equation}
Conditions~\eqref{eq:12} give the cubic equation for $P$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:7}
q(P) = (b+b_c)P^3 + a^2(b+b_c)P - 2\,a^2 = 0.
\end{equation}
A positive root of $q(P)$ is used in
Eq.~\eqref{eq:nonzeroHequilibrium1} to determine the value of
$m$ at which $e_3$ and $e_4$ become degenerate
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:14}
m = \dfrac{E\,c_{max}\,e^{-(b + b_c) P}}{(a/P)^2 + 1},
\end{equation}
and in Eq.~\eqref{eq:13} to determine the corresponding range of $r$
where $e_3$ and $e_4$ become degenerate.
Thus, conditions~\eqref{eq:13}--\eqref{eq:14} define a half-line
of saddle-node bifurcations of equilibria in the $(r,m)$ parameter
plane
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:saddle1}
S_e = \left\{(r,m):q(P) = 0 \text{, } r \geq C P \text{ and } m = \dfrac{E\,c_{max}\,e^{-(b + b_c) P}}{(a/P)^2 + 1} \right\}.
\end{equation}
If $b + b_c = 0$, then $q(P)$ has no roots,
meaning that there is no saddle-node bifurcation
of equilibria [Fig.\ref{fig:rm2}(a)].
If $b + b_c > 0$, $q(P)$ is negative for $P=0$,
monotonically increasing, and positive for $P$ large enough,
meaning that Eq.~\eqref{eq:7} has a unique positive root. This root
corresponds to a unique saddle-node half-line $S_e$.
Equilibria $e_3$ and $e_4$ exist below $S_e$, and become degenerate and disappear along $S_e$.
What is more, conditions~\eqref{eq:trans1} and~\eqref{eq:saddle1} become identical when $r=CP$, meaning that the end of the half-line $S_e$ lies on $T$. Indeed, Fig.\ref{fig:rm2}(b) shows that $S_e$ emerges from the special
saddle-node-transcritical bifurcation point $ST$, where all three
equilibria $e_2$, $e_3$ and $e_4$ become degenerate.
\subsection{Stability and Bifurcation Analysis}
Linear stability of equilibria can be determined from the
eigenvalues of the Jacobian matrix
\begin{equation}
\label{mat:2}
J = \left(\! \begin{array}{cc}
r - 2CP - Hg'(P) & - g(P)\\
E e^{-bP}\left(g'(P) - b\, g(P)\right) H & E g(P)e^{-bP}- m
\end{array} \!\right)
\end{equation}
where
$$
g'(P) = - g(P)\left(\frac{2P}{P^2 + a^2} - \frac{2}{P} + b_c \right).
$$
At the trivial equilibrium $e_1=(0,0)$, the Jacobian matrix
has eigenvalues $\lambda_1 = r > 0$ and $\lambda_2 = - m<0$,
meaning that $e_1$ is always a saddle.
At the plant-only equilibrium $e_2=(r/C,0)$, the Jacobian matrix
has eigenvalues $\lambda_1 = -r<0$ and
$\lambda_2 = E c_{max}\, e^{-(b+b_c)r/C}/\left((a\,C/r)^2 + 1\right) -m$.
Hence, $e_2$ is a stable node when $\lambda_2 < 0$, a saddle when
$\lambda_2 > 0$, and undergoes a transcritical bifurcation
whenever $\lambda_2 = 0$; one can verify that $\lambda_2 = 0$ gives
the transcritical bifurcation condition~\eqref{eq:trans1}.
Stability and bifurcations of the herbivore-dominating equilibrium $e_3$
and the plant-dominating equilibrium $e_4$ are obtained
numerically. The Jacobian matrix shows that the stability of
$e_3$ and $e_4$ depends on the nonlinearity parameter $b+b_c$ as well
as on $b_c$ alone, meaning that it needs to be discussed with dependence
on $b$ and $b_c$ individually.
To showcase different types of dynamics and bifurcations
in the autonomous ecosystem~\eqref{eq:dP/dt}--\eqref{eq:dH/dt},
we plot one-dimensional bifurcation diagrams in Fig.~\ref{PH}
for two types of parameter paths. In the left column we fix $r$ and
consider a range of $m\in(0,0.2]$.
In the right column we fix $m$ and consider a range of $r\in(0,2]$.
In addition to the transcritical $T$ and saddle-node $S_e$ bifurcations
of equilibria identified in the previous section, there are
sub- and supercritical Hopf bifurcations $H_e$. In a supercritical
Hopf bifurcation, a stable equilibrium turns unstable and gives rise
to a stable limit cycle [Fig.~\ref{PH}(e)--(f)]. Thus, this bifurcation
is safe. In a subcritical Hopf bifurcation, an unstable
limit cycle shrinks onto a stable equilibrium and the equilibrium becomes
unstable [Fig.~\ref{PH}(b)--(c)]. The subcritical Hopf bifurcation is
classified as dangerous because it gives rise to a discontinuity in the attracting
set that is the branch of stable equilibria. What is more, a limit
cycle can connect to the saddle equilibrium
$e_4$ and disappear in a homoclinic bifurcation $h$ [Fig.~\ref{PH}(b)--(c)
or (e)--(f)]. For more details and background on bifurcation theory,
we refer to~\cite{kuznetsovelements}.
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = 15cm]{3D_mPH_rPH.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{One-parameter bifurcation diagrams showing the position and stability
of equilibria and limit cycles.
The left column shows the $(P,H,m)$-space for (a) $r=0.5$, $(b,b_c)= (0.025,0.025)$
(c) $r=1$, $(b,b_c)= (0.02,0.02)$ and (e) $r=1.5$, $(b,b_c)= (0.001,0.005)$.
The right column shows the $(P,H,r)$-space for (b) $m=0.115$,
$(b,b_c)= (0.025,0.025)$ (d) $m=0.1$, $(b,b_c)= (0.02,0.02)$ and (f) $m=0.25$,
$(b,b_c)= (0.001,0.005)$. Solid branches indicate stable
solutions, dashed branches indicate unstable solutions. Projections onto
the $(m,P)$ and $(r,P)$ planes are shown in grey. For the labeling of different
bifurcations see Table~\ref{tab:3}.
}
\label{PH}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{table}[t]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cl}
\hline
Symbol & Description \\
\hline
\rowcolor{ggray!50}$T$ & Transcritical bifurcation \\
$S_e$ & Saddle-node of equilibria bifurcation \\
\rowcolor{ggray!50}$ST$ & Saddle-node-transcritical bifurcation\\
$H_e$ & Hopf bifurcation \\
\rowcolor{ggray!50}$h$ & Homoclinic bifurcation \\
$BT_{I(II)}$ & Bogdanov-Takens type I(II) bifurcation \\
\rowcolor{ggray!50}$GH$ & Generalised Hopf (Bautin) bifurcation \\
$S_{lc}$ & Saddle-node of limit cycles bifurcation \\
\rowcolor{ggray!50}$h_{res}$ & Resonant homoclinic bifurcation \\
$BI$ & Basin Instability \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Glossary of terms for bifurcation diagrams.}
\label{tab:3}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = 14.5cm]{r-m_2X2_16cmcolsubdash.pdf}
\caption{Examples of four qualitatively different $(r,m)$-bifurcation
diagrams obtained for different but fixed $(b, b_c)$ = (a) $(0,0)$, (b) $(0.001,0.005)$, (c) $(0.005,0.01)$, (d) $(0.025,0.025)$.
Supercritical (subcritical) bifurcations are plotted as solid
(dashed) curves. For the labelling of different bifurcations See Table~\ref{tab:3}.
}
\label{fig:rm}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
To provide a systematic bifurcation analysis, we obtain
two-dimensional $(r,m)$ bifurcation diagrams for different
but fixed values of $b$ and $b_c$ [Fig.~\ref{fig:rm}].
We plot codimension-one supercritical bifurcations as
solid curves and
subcritical bifurcations as dashed curves.
Along a solid (dashed) transcritical bifurcation,
the bifurcating branch of equilibria is stable
(of saddle type); along a solid (dashed) saddle-node
bifurcation, a saddle collides with an attractor
(repeller); and along solid (dashed) Hopf
and homoclinic bifurcations, the bifurcating limit
cycle is attracting (repelling). Transcritical and
saddle-node bifurcations of equilibria are obtained
using conditions~\eqref{eq:trans1} and~\eqref{eq:saddle1},
respectively. Hopf, homoclinic and saddle-node bifurcations
of limit cycles are computed using the numerical continuation
software AUTO~\cite{doedel2007auto}.
For each bifurcation diagram, we identify regions with
qualitatively different dynamics and illustrate these
with examples of phase portraits in the $(P,H)$ phase plane
[Fig.~\ref{fig:pp}].
It turns out that there are at least four qualitatively different
$(r,m)$ bifurcation diagrams, depending on the
settings of $b$ and $b_c$.
In the absence of the key nonlinearity, that is when $b + b_c = 0$
giving the classical type-III functional response,
there are just two bifurcation curves:
curve $T$ of supercritical transcritical bifurcations, and curve $H_e$ of
supercritical Hopf bifurcations [Fig.~\ref{fig:rm}(a)].
These two curves do not interact, and separate the $(r,m)$ parameter
plane into three distinct regions with qualitatively different
dynamics [Fig.~\ref{fig:pp}, {1}--{3}]. In particular,
$H_e$ gives rise to a stable limit cycle in region {3}, which
represents stable but oscillatory coexistence between plants
and herbivores. These simple dynamics change drastically in the
presence of the key nonlinearity.
When $b + b_c$ becomes small but non-zero, a number of
qualitative changes take place in the bifurcation diagram as
expected from the singular perturbation nature of the problem.
Specifically, there are three additional co-dimension one bifurcation curves, and four
special codimension-two bifurcation points [Fig.~\ref{fig:rm}(b)].
Understanding the new bifurcation diagram is reminiscent of
assembling a jigsaw-puzzle.
Firstly, a half-line $S_e$ of saddle-node bifurcations
of equilibria appears. $S_e$ emerges from the
saddle-node-transcritical bifurcation point $ST$ on $T$,
where $T$ changes from super- to subcritical.
Secondly, $H_e$ is no longer unbounded at both ends,
but emerges from the
Bogdanov-Takens bifurcation point $BT_I$ on $S_e$,
where $S_e$ changes from super- to subcritical. There are
two possible types of Bogdanov-Takens bifurcation,
and $BT_I$ is type-I according to
the classification in~\cite[Sec.8.4]{kuznetsovelements}.
It is known from the unfolding of a Bogdanov-Takens
bifurcation that an additional bifurcation curve,
namely the curve of homoclinic bifurcations $h$,
must emerge from $BT_I$. Along $h$, the limit cycle
originating from $H_e$ becomes a connecting orbit to the saddle
equilibrium $e_3$ and disappears [Fig.~\ref{fig:pp} {$h$}].
Thirdly, there is a generalised Hopf (or Bautin) bifurcation point
$GH$ on $H_e$, where $H_e$ changes from super- to
subcritical~\cite[Sec.8.3]{kuznetsovelements}.
It is known from the unfolding of a generalised Hopf
bifurcation that an additional bifurcation curve,
namely the curve of saddle-node of limit cycles $S_{lc}$,
must emerge from $GH$. Along $S_{lc}$, two limit cycles
of which one is stable and the other repelling collide and disappear.
Finally, $S_{lc}$ terminates on $h$ at a resonant homoclinic
bifurcation point $h_{res}$, where $h$ changes from super-
to subcritical. This new bifurcation structure has five additional
regions {4}--{8} with qualitatively different dynamics;
for regions {7}--{8} see the inset in Fig.~\ref{fig:rm}(c).
We would like to point out the appearance of adjacent regions {5}
and {7} with bistability between the plant-only equilibrium $e_2$ and
the herbivore-dominating equilibrium $e_3$.
When the combination of $b$ and $b_c$ is increased further,
bifurcation points $GH$ and $h_{res}$ approach
$BT_I$ [Fig.~\ref{fig:rm}(c)].
In the process, region {3} with stable self-sustained
oscillations disappears, while bistable region {5}
becomes noticeably larger.
Then, there are { special combinations} of $b$ and $b_c$,
where $GH$ and $h_{res}$ collide simultaneously with $BT_I$
and disappear in a codimension-three degenerate Bogdanov-Takens
bifurcation (not shown in the figure). This collision
eliminates $S_{lc}$ together with the supercritical part of $H_e$
and with regions {6} and {8}. What is more,
the Bogdanov-Takens bifurcation point changes to type II.
The difference from $BT_{I}$ is that $H_e$ and $h$ emerging
from $BT_{II}$ swap their relative positions and become subcritical
[Fig.~\ref{fig:rm}(d)].
Past the special combination of $b$ and $b_c$,
there are four bifurcation curves,
including the two dangerous bifurcations of equilibria that
are of interest for B-tipping:
the (solid) half-line $S_e$ of supercritical saddle-node bifurcations,
and the (dashed) curve $H_e$ of subcritical Hopf bifurcations.
Additionally, there are two special bifurcation points, one of which
is the type-II Bogdanov-Takens bifurcation point $BT_{II}$.
$H_e$ gives rise to a repelling limit cycle in region {7},
which becomes a connecting orbit to the saddle equilibrium $e_4$ and disappears in a
homoclinic bifurcation along $h$. Finally, a substantial part of
the diagram is occupied by adjacent bistable regions {5}
and {7}. In these two regions, the plant-only
equilibrium $e_2$ and the herbivore-dominating equilibrium $e_3$
are both stable, which is of interest for R-tipping from
$e_3$ to $e_2$ studied in the next section.
To conclude the bifurcation analysis, we quantify in
Fig.~\ref{fig:bbc} ``the special combinations of $b$ and $b_c$''
that give rise to a codimension-three degenerate Bogdanov-Takens
bifurcation. In the $(b,b_c)$ parameter plane, these ``special combinations"
lie on a curve which separates the regions with type-I and type-II
Bogdanov-Takens bifurcation points.
In other words, Fig.~\ref{fig:bbc} shows the projection of a
codimension-three bifurcation curve from the four-dimensional
$(r,m,b,b_c)$ parameter space onto the $(b,b_c)$ parameter
plane. Points labeled (a)--(d) in Fig.~\ref{fig:bbc} refer to the
values of $b$ and $b_c$ chosen for the $(r,m)$ bifurcation
diagrams in Fig.~\ref{fig:rm}. The asterisk indicates the
values of $b$ and $b_c$ used in Ref.~\cite{scheffer2008pulse}.
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width = 14.5 cm]{PhasePortraits16cm_e.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Examples of qualitiatively different $(P,H)$-phase portraits
for the autonomous system~\eqref{eq:dP/dt}--\eqref{eq:dH/dt} showing
(filled circles) stable equilibria, (open circles) unstable equilibria,
(thick curves) limit cycles and stable/unstable invariant
manifolds of saddle equilibria, and (thin curves) examples of
typical trajectories. Note the stable limit cycle in regions
3 and 6, the unstable limit cycle in region 7, and two
limit cycles in region 8. See Table \ref{tab:2} for
parameter values.}
\label{fig:pp}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{table}[]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{cllll}
\hline
Phase Portrait & $r$ & $m$ & $b$ & $b_c$\\
\hline
\rowcolor{ggray!50} {1} & 0.5 & 0.14 & 0.025 & 0.025 \\
{2} & 0.5 & 0.05 & 0.025 & 0.025 \\
\rowcolor{ggray!50} {3} & 1.5 & 0.23 & 0.001 & 0.005 \\
{4} & 1 & 0.125 & 0.025 & 0.025 \\
\rowcolor{ggray!50} {5} & 1 & 0.075 & 0.025 & 0.025 \\
{6} & 1 & 0.21 & 0.005 & 0.01 \\
\rowcolor{ggray!50} {7} & 1 & 0.12 & 0.025 & 0.025 \\
{8} & 1.5 & 0.18025 & 0.005 & 0.01 \\
\rowcolor{ggray!50} {\small{$h$}} & 1.5 & 0.2684 & 0.001 & 0.005 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Parameter values chosen for phase portraits in Fig.\ref{fig:pp}}
\label{tab:2}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[]{Codim3_BT.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Projection of codimension-three degenerate Bogdanov-Takens
bifurcation curve onto the $(b, b_c)$-parameter plane. Also shown are
the $(b,b_c)$ pairs used for generating diagrams (a)--(d)
in Fig.\ref{fig:rm}. The asterisk indicates the values of $b$ and
$b_c$ used in Ref.~\cite{scheffer2008pulse}.
}
\label{fig:bbc}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\subsection{Summary of B-tipping: Simple Criteria and Robustness}
In summary, classical bifurcation analysis defined for fixed-in-time input
parameters describes {\em quasistatic} or {\em adiabatic effects}
of the plant growth rate $r$, the herbivore mortality rate $m$, and
the decline in herbivore growth at high plant biomass quantified by the
nonlinearity parameter $b + b_c$.
When $b + b_c = 0$, we do not expect any B-tipping owing to the lack
of dangerous bifurcations. However, when $b + b_c > 0$, meaning that there is a decline in herbivore growth at high plant biomass, a number
of different critical transitions appear in the ecosystem.
The two most dominant are the two generic dangerous bifurcations
of equilibria, namely supercritical saddle-node and
subcritical Hopf bifurcations. Additionally, but less
important for this study, there is a subcritical
transcritical bifurcation [Fig.~\ref{PH}(b), (d) and (f)],
a supercritical saddle-node bifurcation of limit cycles
[e.g. see the inset in Fig.~\ref{fig:rm}(c)], and a supercritical
homoclinic bifurcation [Fig.~\ref{PH}(e)--(f)]. Thus, to identify
B-tipping in the non-autonomous system~\eqref{eq:dPdt_na}--\eqref{eq:dHdt_na}, it is sufficient to consider an $(r,m)$ bifurcation
diagram for the autonomous system~\eqref{eq:dP/dt}--\eqref{eq:dH/dt}
with a prescribed parameter path.
{\em Testable criterion for B-tipping.} If a parameter
path in a $(r,m)$ bifurcation diagram crosses one of the
dangerous bifurcations, then there is a time-varying external
input $\Lambda(t) = (r(t),m(t))$ that traces out this path and
gives rise to B-tipping.
Figure~\ref{fig:pht0} shows an example of such a path, denoted
with $\Delta_m$ in panel (a), together with the dynamics of the
non-autonomous system~\eqref{eq:dPdt_na}--\eqref{eq:dHdt_na},
where $m(t)$ drifts slowly along the path [panel (b)].
If the system starts near the stable
equilibrium $e_3$ at the lower end $p_1$ of the path and
$m(t)$ increases over time, then the non-autonomous
system tracks the moving stable equilibrium $e_3(t)$ up to the point
of the dangerous bifurcation $S_e$ [Figure~\ref{fig:pht0}(b)].
As $m(t)$ passes through the bifurcation, which defines the
{\it critical level} of $m$, the system undergoes a sudden and
abrupt transition to the other stable equilibrium $e_2(t)$.
Such instability is also described as a {\em dynamic} or {\em adiabatic
bifurcation}~\cite{Benoit1991,Rasmussen2007}.
To discuss the robustness of B-tipping, we can invoke the notions
of genericity and co-dimension of a bifurcation~\cite[Sec.2.5]{kuznetsovelements}.
Specifically, B-tipping due to generic co-dimension one bifurcations
is unaffected by small perturbations to the system or to the
parameter path. We refer to~\cite{ashwin2017parameter} for
a more general and precise definition of B-tipping, and for
rigorous criteria for B-tipping.
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[]{Tanh_through_saddle.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{(a) Example of a parameter path $\Delta_m$ that crosses a saddle-node
bifurcation of equilibria $S_e$ in the $(r,m)$-bifurcation diagram.
(b) As $m(t)$ is increased from $p_1 = (0.5,0.12)$ along the path,
the non-autonomous system initially follows the moving stable equilibrium $e_3(t)$,
but then undergoes B-tipping from $e_3(t)$ to $e_2(t)$ as $m(t)$ passes through $S_e$.
$b = b_c = 0.025$, and $m(t) = 0.12 + 0.015 (\tanh(10^{-3} t) + 1)/2$.
The moving equilibria are obtained for $\varepsilon = 10^{-3}$.
}
\label{fig:pht0}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[]{Tanh_r75m075_dyndel.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{(a) Example of a parameter path $\Delta_r$ that does not cross
any bifurcation curves in the $(r,m)$-bifurcation diagram. (b) As $r(t)$
is increased from $p_1 = (0.75,0.075)$ along the path at a rate
$\varepsilon^-$, (blue trajectory) the non-autonomous system tracks
the moving stable equilibrium $e_3(t)$. However, for a faster
rate $\varepsilon^+ > \varepsilon^-$, (red trajectory) there is
irreversible R-tipping from $e_3(t)$ to $e_2(t)$ even though $e_3(t)$
never disappears or loses stability.
$b = b_c = 0.025$, and $r(t) = 0.75 + 0.6 (\tanh(\varepsilon t) + 1)/2$,
with $\varepsilon^- = 0.1$ and $\varepsilon^+ = 0.2$. The moving equilibria
are obtained for $\varepsilon \approx 0.14$.
}
\label{fig:pht01}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Irreversible R-Tipping: Beyond Classical Bifurcations}
\label{sec:Rtip}
In this section we go beyond the adiabatic effects of parameter
change. Specifically, we consider genuine non-autonomous
instabilities that
arise solely from the time variation of the input parameters $r$ and $m$, and cannot
be captured by classical bifurcation analysis. Specifically,
we ask : {\em Are there parameter paths in the $(r,m)$ bifurcation diagram
that do not cross any bifurcations
of the stable equilibrium $e_3$ but give rise to tipping?} The
answer is yes. This was demonstrated in~\cite{scheffer2008pulse}
and is examined here in more depth. Consider the $(r,m)$ bifurcation diagram
with a parameter path $\Delta_r$ that does not cross any bifurcations
in Fig.~\ref{fig:pht01}(a). If the non-autonomous system starts
at the stable equilibrium $e_3$ near the lower end $p_1$ of the path,
and $r(t)$ increases slowly enough along the path, then the
non-autonomous system is able to adapt to the changing environment
and track the moving stable equilibrium $e_3(t)$ along
the entire path [blue trajectory in Fig.~\ref{fig:pht01}(b)].
However, if $r(t) $ increases slowly but faster than some critical rate,
the non-autonomous system fails to adapt to the changing environment and
undergoes a critical transition from $e_3(t)$ to the other stable
equilibrium $e_2(t)$ [red trajectory in Fig.~\ref{fig:pht01}(b)].
This happens even though $e_3(t)$ never loses stability along the path.
Such instability is called {\em irreversible R-tipping}.\footnote{This is in contrast
to the transient
phenomenon of {\em reversible R-tipping}, where the system fails to
track the moving stable state, suddenly moves to a different state,
but in the long term returns to and tracks the original stable state~\cite{wieczorek2011excitability,wieczorek2018}.}
\subsection{The Vicious Cycle}
\label{sec:vc}
Intuitively, R-tipping is the result of
a {\em vicious cycle} that could potentially tip
the system to a different state if the input parameters vary
too fast. In the ecosystem model, the vicious cycle arises
from the key nonlinearity identified in Sec.~\ref{sec:keynon},
that is from non-monotone
herbivore growth~\eqref{eq:hg} that changes sign from positive to
negative at high plant biomass $P=P_4$ [see Fig.\ref{fig:graz}(b)].
The effect can be understood as follows.
Consider a stable herbivore population with a lower than optimal
plant biomass $P_3$ for some $r=r_-$. Then, consider a smooth increase
in the plant growth rate from $r_-$ to $r_+$. The increase results
in faster growing plants, and moves the stable equilibrium to a
larger herbivore population with the same plant biomass $P_3$.
If $r(t)$ increases slowly enough, herbivores manage to graze
and grow fast enough so that the larger herbivore population
is able to maintain the same plant biomass at larger $r=r_+$. However,
if $r(t)$ increases too fast, herbivores may be unable to keep
up and prevent the plant biomass from growing past its optimal
value $P_{opt}$. This, in turn, triggers the vicious cycle: past the optimal
plant biomass, the larger the plant biomass gets, the less the
herbivores graze and grow, allowing the plant biomass to get even larger. The ultimate result is negative net
herbivore growth causing a sudden collapse of the herbivore
population. This is accompanied by a sudden increase in the plant
biomass to $P_4$. Even though there is no classical bifurcation along the
parameter path between $r_-$ and $r_+$, the rate of change of $r(t)$ alone
prevents the system from adapting to the modified stable equilibrium.
In the proceeding sections, we perform a systematic mathematical analysis
of the vicious cycle mechanism that gives rise to irreversible
R-tipping as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:pht01}(b).
\subsection{Simple Criteria for Irreversible R-tipping}
\label{sec:tcTtip}
It turns out that,
similarly to B-tipping, much can be understood about irreversible
R-tipping in the non-autonomous system~\eqref{eq:dPdt_na}--\eqref{eq:dHdt_na}
from certain properties of the corresponding autonomous
system~\eqref{eq:dP/dt}--\eqref{eq:dH/dt}. The difference is
that R-tipping is related to global, rather than local,
properties of the stable state (an attractor). Specifically, we
need the following ingredients to give testable criteria for
irreversible R-tipping:
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] A {\em stable base equilibrium} $e(p)$ whose position
depends on the input parameter(s) $p$. For example,
stable equilibrium $e_3$ for the ecosystem model can be given in
terms of parameters $r$ and $m$ by the asymptotic expansion formula~\eqref{eq:e3}.
\item[(ii)]
{\em Bistability or multistability} - at
least one additional attractor $a$ that coexists
with $e$ for the same setting of the input parameters.
For example, there is bistability between $e_3$ and $e_2$
in the $(r,m)$ parameter regions 5 and 7.
\item[(iii)] A continuous {\em parameter path} $\Delta$ in the
space of the input parameters, that does not cross any dangerous bifurcations
of the base equilibrium $e$. For example, the horizontal
path $\Delta_r$ in the $(r,m)$ bifurcation diagram from Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs0}(a)
does not cross any bifurcations.
\item[(iv)] {\em The basin of attraction} of the base equilibrium, defined as
the set of all initial states $(P_0,H_0)$ that converge to the stable base
equilibrium $e(p)$ in time
$$
B(e,p) = \{
(P_0,H_0)\in\mathbb{R}^2: (P(t),H(t))\to e(p),\; t\to +\infty
\},
$$
together with the evolution of $B(e,p)$ along the
chosen parameter path.
For example, Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs0}(b)--(d) shows the (blue shaded) basin
of attraction of $e_3$ for three different settings of $r$ along
the parameter path $\Delta_r$. The boundary between the basins
of attraction of $e_3$ and $e_2$ is given by the stable invariant
manifold of the saddle equilibrium $e_4$.
\item[(v)] {\em Basin instability on a path}.
Let $\overline{B(e,p)}$ denote the basin of attraction
of $e(p)$ together with its basin boundary.
Then, we say that
the stable base equilibrium $e(p)$ is basin unstable on a
parameter path $\Delta$ if there are two points on the path,
$p_1,p_2\in\Delta$, such that $e(p_1)$ is outside the basin
of attraction of $e(p_2)$:
$$
e(p_1) \notin \overline{B(e,p_2)}.
$$
For example, consider $\Delta_r$ from Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs0}(a)
and pick $r_-$. The stable equilibrium $e_3(r_-)$ is contained
within the basin of attraction of $e_3(r)$ for all $r_- < r < r_*$,
lies on the basin boundary of $e_3(r_*)$ [Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs0}(c)],
and is outside the basin of attraction of $e_3(r)$ for all
$r_* < r \le r_+$ [Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs0}(d)]. Thus, $e_3$ is
basin unstable on the path $\Delta_r$ because, for $r_1 = r_-$
and any $r_2\in(r_*, r_+]$, we have that $e_3(r_1)\notin \overline{B(e_3,r_2)}$.
\end{itemize}
{\em Testable criterion for irreversible R-tipping.}
If a stable equilibrium $e(p)$ is basin unstable on a parameter
path $\Delta$, meaning that there are $p_1,p_2\in\Delta$ such that
$e(p_1) \notin \overline{B(e,p_2)}$, then there
is an external input $\Lambda(t)=(r(t),m(t))$ that traces out
the path from $p_1$ to $p_2$ and gives irreversible
R-tipping from $e(p)$. More generally, basin instability is
necessary and sufficient to observe irreversible R-tipping in
one-dimensional systems~\cite{ashwin2017parameter},
and sufficient but not necessary to observe irreversible R-tipping in
higher-dimensional systems~\cite{wieczorek2018}.
The criterion above can be understood intuitively using the
example from Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs0}. Suppose the system starts
in the basin of attraction and near the stable equilibrium
$e_3$ at $r=r_-$, and undergoes a monotone parameter shift from
$r_-$ to any $r\in(r_*,r_+]$. We choose a shift from $r_-$ to $r_+$,
and consider two extreme scenarios. If $r(t)$ varies sufficiently slowly,
meaning that the speed of the moving equilibrium $|\dot{e}(t)|$ is much
slower than the natural timescales of $H(t)$ and $P(t)$, the non-autonomous
system is guaranteed to closely track (adiabatically follow)
the moving stable equilibrium $e_3(t)$ along the
path~\cite{ashwin2017parameter,wieczorek2018}.
However, the dynamics are different when $r(t)$ shifts
smoothly but abruptly from $r_-$ to $r_+$ at some
point in time, remains almost constant otherwise,
and the speed $|\dot{e}(t)|$ during the shift is much
faster than the natural timescales of $H(t)$ and $P(t)$.
Initially, the system approaches $e_3(r_-)$ because $r(t)$
is almost constant. Then comes the shift from $r_-$
to $r_+$, the stable equilibrium $e(t)$ changes its position,
but the system is too slow to respond.
Thus, just after the shift, the system is still
at its earlier position near $e_3(r_-)$, which now lies outside
the basin of attraction of $e_3(r_+)$ and inside the basin of
attraction of $e_2(r_+)$ [Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs0}(d)]. As $r(t)$
remains almost constant from now on, the system approaches
the other stable equilibrium $e_2(r_+)$. These two qualitatively
different scenarios indicate that there is an intermediate critical
rate of change of $r(t)$, above which the system R-tips from
$e_3$ to $e_2$.
We refer to~\cite{wieczorek2018,xie2018} for more general and precise
definitions of basin instability, for rigorous statements of the
sufficient criteria for irreversible R-tipping, and for extension
of these ideas to {\em threshold instability} that captures both
reversible and irreversible R-tipping.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[]{FBS_rm_ppx3.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{(a) A two-dimensional bifurcation diagram in the
$(r,m)$-parameter plane for $b = b_c = 0.025$ with
a parameter path $\Delta_r$. (b)--(d) Phase portraits for
system~\eqref{eq:dP/dt}--\eqref{eq:dH/dt} at three different
points along the path $\Delta_r$ reveal basin instability
of $e_3$ on $\Delta_r$. Blue shading indicates the basin of
attraction of stable equilibrium $e_3$ for (b) $ r= r_- = 0.75$,
(c) $r = r_* \approx 1.07672$ and (d) $r = r_+ = 1.25$. $e_3(r_-)$
is shown in (c)--(d) for reference to demonstrate that
$e_3(r_-)$ lies on the basin boundary of $e_3(r_*)$ and
outside the basin boundary of $e_3(r_+)$.
}
\label{fig:fbs0}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Beyond Traditional Bifurcation Diagrams: Basin Instability}
To examine the robustness of irreversible R-tipping from $e_3$,
we need to examine the persistence of its basin instability on
different parameter paths in the $(r,m)$ bifurcation diagram.
To this end, we fix $b = b_c = 0.025$ close to the values used in
Ref.~\cite{scheffer2008pulse} [point (d) in Fig.~\ref{fig:bbc}],
and explore different parameter
paths within adjacent regions ${5}$ and ${7}$
from Fig.~\ref{fig:rm}(d). Recall that $e_3$ remains
stable and does not bifurcate within or across the boundary $h$
between those two regions.
Specifically, we choose four different points $p_1$
within region ${5}$, and mark them with a black dot
on different panels in Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs1a}. For each $p_1$,
we identify the set of points $p_2$ within regions ${5}$
and ${7}$ such that $e_3(p_1)\notin \overline{B(e_3,p_2)}$,
and shade this set in grey in Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs1a}. We speak of
the {\em region of basin instability}
\begin{align}
\label{eq:BI}
BI(e_3,p_1) = \{p_2\in\circled{5}\cup\circled{7}: e_3(p_1)\notin \overline{B(e_3,p_2)}\}.
\end{align}
In other words, stable equilibrium $e_3$ is basin
unstable on any parameter path that stays within regions
${5}$ and ${7}$ and connects $p_1$ to some $p_2\in BI(e_3,p_1)$.
The analysis of $BI(e_3,p_1)$ unveils a robust region of basin instability
that can occupy almost the entirety of regions 5 and 7,
and is in line with the intuitive vicious cycle discussion from Section~\ref{sec:vc}.
R-tipping is expected for a variety of parameter paths,
even for small-magnitude shifts in $r$. Basin instability
is easily achieved for increasing $r$,
less easy to achieve for increasing $m$,
and appears impossible to achieve for decreasing $r$ alone
[Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs1a}(a)--(d)]. Moving $p_1$ to a different
position in the $(r,m)$ diagram clearly modifies the region of basin
instability in different ways. For example, starting at
lower values of $m$ gives a small section of basin instability
for shifts in $m$ alone [Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs1a}(b)]. Overall,
the region of basin instability persists upon moving $p_1$ to
near the upper [Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs1a}(c)] or the lower
[Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs1a}(d)] boundary of region ${5}$.
In addition to dangerous magnitudes of environmental
change,
the ecosystem model appears to be particularly sensitive to
how fast the plant growth rate $r$ increases over time.
The basin instability analysis quantifies this effect
in terms of different starting points $p_1$ in the
$(r,m)$ diagram, and
shows that sensitivity to the rate of environmental change
becomes greatly enhanced at higher herbivore mortality
rates $m$.
Beyond the specific ecosystem model, our approach can be used to analyse
tipping phenomena in nonlinear systems in general. Specifically,
the region of basin instability can be superimposed on a classical
bifurcation diagram to indicate rate-induced instabilities that cannot be
captured by classical bifurcation analysis. What is more, the additional
information about rate-induced instabilities can be made more specific
in different ways.
For example, one can specify the form of $\Lambda(t)=(r(t),m(t))$ and the shape of the parameter path (e.g. a straight line between $p_1$ and $p_2$) and use colour-scale instead of plane gray to indicate different critical rates for each point $p_2$ within $BI(e_3,p_1)$. Another possibility is to fix $p_1$ and $p_2$ and analyse critical rates with dependence on the shape of parameter path between $p_1$ and $p_2$. This type of analysis is left for future work.
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[]{r-m_2X2_FBS_16cm.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{
(Shading) Region of basin instability $BI(e_3,p_1)$ in the
$(r,m)$ bifurcation diagram for stable equilibrium $e_3$ along
continuous parameter paths from $p_1$ consists of all
points $p_2$ such that $e_3(p_1)\notin \overline{B(e_3(p_2))}$
(or $e_3(p_1)\in B(e_2(p_2))$)
as defined by Eq.~\eqref{eq:BI}. $p_1$ is chosen to be at
$(r,m)$ = (a) $(0.5,0.12)$, (b) $(0.75,0.075)$, (c) $(1.25,0.11)$
and (d) $(1.25,0.025)$. $b = b_c = 0.025$.
}
\label{fig:fbs1a}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=11cm]{Forcing_Functions8cm.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{(a) ($c^{\uparrow}$) Monotone~\eqref{eq:force1} and
($c^{\, \updownarrow}$) non-monotone~\eqref{eq:force2} parameter
shifts $r(t)$ used in Sec.~\ref{sec:Rtip}. (b) ($c^{\uparrow}$)
Monotone~\eqref{eq:force3} and ($c^{\, \updownarrow}$)
non-monotone~\eqref{eq:force2} parameter shifts $r(t)$
used in Sec.~\ref{sec:pnr}. The dashed horizontal line
indicates $r_+ = r_- + \Delta_r$.}
\label{fig:monononmono}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Tipping Diagrams for Parameter Shifts}
\label{sec:IRtip}
Now, consider irreversible R-tipping from $e_3(t)$
in the non-autonomous system~\eqref{eq:dPdt_na}--\eqref{eq:dHdt_na}.
Guided by the basin instability analysis performed
in the previous section, we focus on shifts in the
plant growth rate $r$. Specifically, we analyse
the system response to two shapes of $r(t)$, each of
which is parameterized by its {\em magnitude} $\Delta_r$
and {\em rate} $\varepsilon$. Firstly, we consider a
monotone shift
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:force1}
r(t) = r_- + \dfrac{\Delta_{r}}{2}\left(\tanh(\varepsilon t) + 1\right),
\end{equation}
from $r_-$ to $r_+ = r_- + \Delta_r$ at the rate $\varepsilon$ in
units inverse day, and with $\dot{r}_{\scriptsize{max}} =
\varepsilon \Delta_r/2$ in units inverse day squared [$c^{\uparrow}$
in Fig.~\ref{fig:monononmono}(a)]. Secondly, we consider a non-monotone
shift
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:force2}
r(t) = r_- + \Delta_{r} \, \mbox{sech\,}(\varepsilon t),
\end{equation}
from $r_-$ to $r_+ = r_- + \Delta_r$ and then back to $r_-$
at the rate $\varepsilon$ and
$\dot{r}_{\scriptsize{max}} = \varepsilon \Delta_r/2$
[$c^{\,\updownarrow}$ in
Fig.~\ref{fig:monononmono}]. Such a setting enables parametric
study in the form of two-dimensional
$(\Delta_r, \varepsilon)$ or $(\Delta_r, \dot{r}_{max})$ {\em tipping diagrams}
to identify {\em critical rates} $\varepsilon_c$ at which
the system switches between tracking and irreversible
R-tipping.
In all instances, the non-autonomous
system~\eqref{eq:dPdt_na}--\eqref{eq:dHdt_na}
is initialised at the moving stable equilibrium
$$
(P(t_0),H(t_0)) = e_3(t_0),
$$
at some initial time $t_0$ such that
$$
r(t_0) = r_- + \delta,
$$
is $\delta$-close to $r_-$, and $\dot{r}(t_0)\ll \dot{r}_{max}$
to ensure that the speed of the moving equilibrium $|\dot{e}_3(t_0)|$ is sufficiently small.
(Note that initiating the system at $r_0 = r_-$ would require $t_0 = -\infty$.)
Henceforth, we set $\delta = \Delta_r/10^3$. This gives
$$
t_0(\varepsilon) = \frac{1}{\varepsilon} \tanh^{-1}\left(-0.998 \right)
\approx -\frac{3.453}{\varepsilon},
$$
with $\dot{r}(t_0) \approx 0.004\,\dot{r}_{max}$ for the monotone
input~\eqref{eq:force1}, and
$$
t_0 (\varepsilon) = \frac{1}{\varepsilon}\,\mbox{sech\,}^{-1}\left(10^{-3}\right)
\approx -\frac{7.6}{\varepsilon},
$$
with $\dot{r}(t_0) \approx 0.002\,\dot{r}_{max}$
for the non-monotone input~\eqref{eq:force2}.
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[]{RateBif_Tanh_16cm_a_r75m07.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{
The same as Fig.~\ref{fig:pht01} but with (a) the extended
path $\Delta_r$ and the addition of the shaded region of basin
instability $BI(e_3,p_1)$ for
$p_1 = (0.75,0.075)$ as defined by Eq.~\eqref{eq:BI}, and (b)
the addition of the green trajectory for
$\varepsilon \approx \varepsilon_c$ that (rather surprisingly)
follows the unstable moving equilibrium $e_4(t)$.
}
\label{fig:pht1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[]{RateBif_Tanh_16cm_b_r75m07.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Tipping diagrams in the (a) $(\Delta_r,\varepsilon)$
and (b) $(\Delta_r,\dot{r}_{max})$ parameter plane for monotone
shifts~\eqref{eq:force1} from $p_1 = (0.75,0.075)$ along the
extended parameter path $\Delta_r$ from Fig.~\ref{fig:pht1}(a).
The tipping-tracking transition curve $c^\uparrow$ separates the
diagram into regions of (white) tracking and (pink) irreversible
R-tipping. $BI$ indicates the boundary of the basin instability
region $BI(e_3,p_1)$. The critical rate $\varepsilon_c$ corresponds
to Fig.~\ref{fig:pht1}(b). $b = b_c = 0.025$.
}
\label{fig:epsrdot1}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[]{Tanh_r5m12_a_dyndel_p1.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{
(a) Example of a parameter path $\Delta_r$ across the homoclinic
bifurcation $h$ separating regions 5 and 7 together with (shading)
the region of basin instability $BI(e_3,p_1)$ for $p_1 = (0.5,0.12)$
in the $(r,m)$-bifurcation diagram.
(b) The non-autonomous system~\eqref{eq:dPdt_na}--\eqref{eq:dHdt_na}
with monotone parameter shift~\eqref{eq:force1} from $p_1$
along $\Delta_r$ (blue) tracks the moving stable
equilibrium when $\varepsilon = \varepsilon_c^- = 0.0175 < \varepsilon_c$,
(green) (rather surprisingly) tracks the repelling limit cycle
from region 7 when $\varepsilon = 0.020342768468207 \approx \varepsilon_c$,
and (red) R-tips when $\varepsilon = \varepsilon_c^+ = 0.021 > \varepsilon_c$.
The moving equilibria are obtained for $\varepsilon = \varepsilon_c$. $b = b_c = 0.025$.
}
\label{fig:pht3}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Monotone Shifts Across Basin Instability Boundary: Single Critical Rate}
Figure~\ref{fig:pht1} sheds more light on the R-tipping from
Fig.~\ref{fig:pht01}. Firstly, the stable equilibrium $e_3$ can be basin
unstable upon increasing $r$ from $p_1$ along the path $\Delta_r$
[Fig.~\ref{fig:pht1}(a)]. Secondly, there is a critical rate
$\varepsilon_c$ which defines the transition
between tracking and R-tipping. When $\varepsilon = \varepsilon_c$,
the non-autonomous system neither tracks $e_3(t)$ nor R-tips to $e_2(t)$
but, rather surprisingly, follows the unstable equilibrium
$e_4(t)$ [Fig.~\ref{fig:pht1}(b)]. This behaviour is akin to so-called canard trajectories
that follow unstable slow manifolds in slow-fast systems~\cite{gandhi2015dynamics,szmolyan2001canards}.
It is interesting to note that critical-rate canard trajectories can
follow different unstable states, depending on the basin boundary for the
future-limit autonomous system. For example, Fig.~\ref{fig:pht3}(a)
shows a parameter path $\Delta_r$ that starts at $p_1$ in region 5 and extends
past the subcritical homoclinic bifurcation $h$ to region 7.
Along this path, equilibrium $e_3$ is smoothly stable, but its basin
boundary changes from the stable invariant manifold of saddle $e_4$ (region
5) to a repelling limit cycle (region 7) [Fig.~\ref{fig:pp}].
Given a monotone shift from $p_1$ along $\Delta_r$ and across $h$,
there is R-tipping due to basin instability. The difference from Fig.~\ref{fig:pht1}(b)
is the (green) critical-rate canard trajectory which now
follows the unstable limit cycle [Fig.~\ref{fig:pht3}(b)].
A systematic analysis of R-tipping for monotone shifts~\eqref{eq:force1}
from $p_1$ along the path $\Delta_r$ from Fig.~\ref{fig:pht1}(a) gives the
$(\Delta_r,\varepsilon)$ and $(\Delta_r,\dot{r}_{max})$
tipping diagrams [Fig.~\ref{fig:epsrdot1}]. In the diagrams,
the tracking-tipping transitions occur along the curve $c^\uparrow$.
This curve divides the tipping diagram into separate regions of (white) tracking and
(pink) irreversible R-tipping [Fig.~\ref{fig:epsrdot1}].
The entire R-tipping region appears to be located past the basin
instability boundary $BI$. As $\Delta_r$ decreases,
the $c^\uparrow$ curve is asymptotic to $BI$ from the right. This suggests that
basin instability is both sufficient
and necessary for irreversible R-tipping in the ecosystem model.
In general, this need not be the case in higher (than one) dimensional systems,
where basin instability is guaranteed to be sufficient for R-tipping, but is not
guaranteed to be necessary for R-tipping;
see~\cite{xie2018,kiers2018conditions}
for examples of irreversible R-tipping in two dimensions in the
absence of basin instability. What is more, as $\Delta_r$ increases,
the $c^\uparrow$ curve appears to level off at $\dot{r}_{max}\approx 0.045$.
In other words, R-tipping in the ecosystem model requires sufficiently
large $\dot{r}_{max}$, rather than $\varepsilon$, independently of $\Delta_r$.
Thus, one can give simple approximate conditions for irreversible
R-tipping along this path in terms of $\Delta_r$ exceeding the boundary
$BI$ and $\dot{r}_{max}$ exceeding the critical value $\approx 0.045$.
Finally, we say that this R-tipping is unique,
meaning that there is a unique critical rate
$\varepsilon_c$ for every fixed magnitude $\Delta_r$
that exceeds the boundary $BI$.
\subsubsection{Non-monotone Shifts Across Basin Instability Boundary: Two Critical Rates}
Now, consider system~\eqref{eq:dPdt_na}--\eqref{eq:dHdt_na}
with non-monotone $r(t)$ tracing out the path $\Delta_r$ in
Fig.~\ref{fig:pht1}(a) from $p_1$ at $r_- = 0.75 $ to
$r_- + \Delta_r$ and then back to $p_1$. The six solutions for
different values of $\varepsilon$ shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:pht2}(a)--(b)
highlight the main difference from the monotone shift: two different
critical rates for the same $\Delta_r$. Specifically, the system tracks $e_3(t)$
below the first critical rate $\varepsilon < \varepsilon_{c1}$,
then switches from tracking to irreversible R-tipping when
$\varepsilon = \varepsilon_{c1}$, R-tips for a range of rates
$\varepsilon_{c1} < \varepsilon < \varepsilon_{c2}$, then switches
back from irreversible R-tipping to tracking when $\varepsilon = \varepsilon_{c2}$,
and continues to track $e_3(t)$ for $\varepsilon > \varepsilon_{c2}$.
In the $(\Delta_r,\varepsilon)$ and $(\Delta_r,\dot{r}_{max})$
tipping diagrams, tracking-tipping transitions occur along the
curve $c^{\,\updownarrow}$. This curve divides the tipping diagram
into two separate regions of (white) tracking and (pink) irreversible
R-tipping. The region of irreversible R-tipping is located
past the basin instability boundary $BI$, and is tongue-shaped.
The R-tipping tongue is reminiscent of a resonance tongue~\cite{marchionne2018synchronisation}
in the sense that the system exhibits a strongly enhanced response to external
inputs with optimal timing. This tongue shape can be understood in terms
of relative time scales. At high $\varepsilon$, the natural
timescales of $H(t)$ and $P(t)$ are slower than $e_3(t)$. Thus, the system
is unable to respond to a short impulse $r(t)$. As $\varepsilon$ is decreased,
the natural timescales of $H(t)$ and $P(t)$ get closer to $e_3(t)$, the
system starts to react to the input and R-tips due to basin instability.
This transition is marked by the higher critical rate. As $\varepsilon$
is decreased further, the natural timescales of $H(t)$ and $P(t)$ become
comparable to $e_3(t)$, giving rise to a strongly enhanced response in the form of
the tipping tongue. As $\varepsilon$ is decreased even further,
the natural timescales of $H(t)$ and $P(t)$ become faster than $e_3(t)$,
and the system starts to closely track $e_3(t)$. This transition
is marked by the lower critical rate. In summary, for a fixed $\Delta_r$
past the $BI$ boundary, the $\varepsilon$-interval of irreversible
R-tipping can be bounded by two critical rates, $\varepsilon_{c1}$
from below and $\varepsilon_{c2}$ from above [Fig.~\ref{fig:epsrdot2}(a)--(b)].
We describe this as non-unique R-tipping.
\clearpage
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[]{RateBif_Sech_16cm_a_dyndel.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{
Trajectories of the non-autonomous system~\eqref{eq:dPdt_na}--\eqref{eq:dHdt_na}
with non-monotone parameter shifts~\eqref{eq:force2} from $p_1=(1.0,0.075)$
along a path $\Delta_r$ with fixed $m=0.075$ and time-varying $r >1$.
(a) The system (blue) tracks the moving stable equilibrium $e_3(t)$ when
$\varepsilon = \varepsilon_{c1}^- = 0.1 < \varepsilon_{c1}$, (green) rather surprisingly
follows the moving unstable equilibrium $e_4(t)$ when
$\varepsilon = 0.166491526823788 \approx \varepsilon_{c1}$,
and (red) R-tips when $\varepsilon = \varepsilon_{c1}^+ = 0.2 > \varepsilon_{c1}$.
(b) Upon further increase in the rate, the system (green) again rather surprisingly
follows the moving unstable equilibrium when
$\varepsilon = 1.049396269470948 \approx \varepsilon_{c2}$, and (blue) switches
back to tracking $e_3(t)$ when $\varepsilon = \varepsilon_{c2}^+ = 1.5 > \varepsilon_{c2}$.
The moving equilibria are obtained for (a) $\varepsilon = \varepsilon_{c1}$
and (b) $\varepsilon = \varepsilon_{c2}$. $b = b_c = 0.025$.
}
\label{fig:pht2}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[]{RateBif_Sech_16cm_b_dyndel.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{
Tipping diagrams in the (a) $(\Delta_r,\varepsilon)$
and (b) $(\Delta_r,\dot{r}_{max})$ parameter plane for
non-monotone shifts~\eqref{eq:force2} from $p_1 = (1.0,0.075)$
along a path $\Delta_r$ with a fixed $m=0.075$ and varied $r>1$.
The tipping-tracking transition curve $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ separates the
diagram into regions of (white) tracking and (pink) irreversible
R-tipping.
$BI$ indicates the boundary of the basin instability region $BI(e_3,p_1)$.
The critical rates $\varepsilon_{c1}$ and $\varepsilon_{c2}$
correspond to Fig.~\ref{fig:pht2}(a) and (b), respectively.
$b = b_c = 0.025$.
}
\label{fig:epsrdot2}
\end{figure}
\clearpage
\section{Interaction Between R-tipping and B-tipping and Multiple Critical Rates}
\label{sec:BRtip}
So far, we have discussed B-tipping and R-tipping in isolation. At
the same time, we recognise that real-world tipping phenomena will often
involve both mechanisms, although the ensuing nonlinear dynamics is
less well understood. This section discusses three different types of interplay between
critical levels and critical rates, and reveals intriguing tipping
diagrams.
\subsection{Monotone Shifts Across Basin Instability Boundary and Dangerous
Bifurcation}
Figure~\ref{fig:pht3} shows a monotone parameter shift from $p_1$
along the parameter path $\Delta_r$ across the subcritical
homoclinic bifurcation $h$ in order to demonstrate the effects of a qualitative
change in the basin boundary along the path. To study the interaction
between B-tipping and R-tipping, we extend this parameter path away
from $p_1$ and past the dangerous (subcritical) Hopf bifurcation
[Fig.~\ref{fig:pht4}(a)]. The ensuing $(\Delta_r,\varepsilon)$ and
$(\Delta_r,\dot{r}_{max})$ tipping diagrams for monotone
shifts~\eqref{eq:force1} from $p_1$ along the extended path
are shown in Fig.\ref{fig:epsrdot3}. The tipping-tracking
transition curve $c^\uparrow$ consists of two distinct parts,
which correspond to two different tipping mechanisms.
The upper part, that has a $\Delta_r$-dependent critical rate
and is asymptotic to the basin instability boundary
$BI$ as $\Delta_r$ decreases, corresponds to unique R-tipping
due to basin instability.
The lower part, that is the vertical line along $\Delta_r = H_e$,
does not have any critical rates in the following sense. Critical transitions
occur past the critical level $\Delta_r = H_e$
independently of the rate, meaning that this part corresponds to B-tipping due to the
dangerous bifurcation $H_e$. The separation between the two tipping
mechanisms is particularly clear-cut in the $(\Delta_r,\dot{r}_{max})$
tipping diagram. When $\dot{r}_{max} > 0.005$,
unique R-tipping for $\Delta_r\gtrsim BI$ is the tipping
mechanism. As $\dot{r}_{max}$ is decreased,
there is an abrupt transition near $\dot{r}_{max}\approx 0.005$ to a different tipping mechanism.
When $\dot{r}_{max} < 0.005$, B-tipping for $\Delta_r > H_e$ is the tipping mechanism.
We would like to point out that the slow passage through a Hopf bifurcation
gives rise to a bifurcation delay that does not vanish if the rate of parameter
change tends to zero~\cite{baer1989slow,neishtadt1987persistence,neishtadt1988persistence}. This means that
trajectories follow the unstable equilibrium past the bifurcation
point for a noticeable time even if the rate of parameter change tends to zero~\cite{baer1989slow}.
Whereas the bifurcation delay has no effect on the tipping diagram for monotone
shifts~\eqref{eq:force1}, it is expected to manifest itself for non-monotone
shifts~\eqref{eq:force2} that are considered in the next section.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[]{Tanh_r5m12_b_dyndeldash.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{
Tipping diagrams in the (a) $(\Delta_r,\varepsilon)$-
and (b) $(\Delta_r,\dot{r}_{max})$-parameter plane for
monotone shifts~\eqref{eq:force1} from $p_1 = (0.5,0.12)$
along the parameter path $\Delta_r$ from Fig.~\ref{fig:pht4}(a).
The tipping-tracking transition curve $c^{\uparrow}$ separates the
diagram into regions of (white) tracking and (pink) tipping.
$BI$ indicates the boundary of the basin instability region $BI(e_3,p_1)$,
$h$ indicates the homoclinic bifurcation, and $H_e$ indicates the
(dangerous) subcritical Hopf bifurcation of $e_3$.
$b = b_c = 0.025$. The critical rate $\varepsilon_c$ indicated in (a) is the value of $(\Delta_r, \varepsilon)$ that was used to calculated the critical (green) trajectory in Fig.\ref{fig:pht3}(b).}
\label{fig:epsrdot3}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[]{Sech_r5m12_a_dyndel.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{
Example of a parameter path $\Delta_r$ across the basin instability
region $BI(e_3,p_1)$ and (dangerous) subcritical Hopf bifurcation $H_e$ in
the $(r,m)$ bifurcation diagram.
The non-autonomous system~\eqref{eq:dPdt_na}--\eqref{eq:dHdt_na}
with non-monotone parameter shift~\eqref{eq:force2} from $p_1=(0.5,0.12)$
along $\Delta_r$ (b) tips
below the first critical rate $\varepsilon < \varepsilon_{c1}$,
then switches from tipping to tracking when
$\varepsilon = 0.00165601005\approx \varepsilon_{c1}$
for a range of rates $\varepsilon_{c1} < \varepsilon < \varepsilon_{c2}$,
(c) switches back to tipping when $\varepsilon = 0.014830495837\approx\varepsilon_{c2}$, tips for a range of rates
$\varepsilon_{c2} < \varepsilon < \varepsilon_{c3}$,
and (d) switches again from tipping to tracking
when $\varepsilon = 0.700596344828672\approx \varepsilon_{c3}$.
The moving equilibria are obtained for (b) $\varepsilon = \varepsilon_{c1}$,
(c) $\varepsilon = \varepsilon_{c2}$ and (d) $\varepsilon = \varepsilon_{c3}$.
$b = b_c = 0.025$.
The three different critical rates $\varepsilon_{c1}, \varepsilon_{c2}$ and $\varepsilon_{c3}$ are indicated in the following tipping diagram Fig.\ref{fig:epsrdot4}(a) where one can observe the interaction between the bifurcation-induced $\varepsilon_{c1}$ and the rate-induced $\varepsilon_{c2}$ and $\varepsilon_{c3}$.
}
\label{fig:pht4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[]{Sech_r5m12_b_dyndel.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{
Tipping diagrams in the (a) $(\Delta_r,\varepsilon)$
and (b) $(\Delta_r,\dot{r}_{max})$ parameter plane for
non-monotone shifts~\eqref{eq:force2} from $p_1 = (0.5,0.12)$
along the parameter path $\Delta_r$ from Fig.~\ref{fig:pht4}(a).
The tipping-tracking transition curve $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ separates the
diagram into regions of (white) tracking and (pink) tipping.
$BI$ indicates the boundary of the basin instability region $BI(e_3,p_1)$,
$h$ indicates the homoclinic bifurcation, and $H_e$ indicates the
(dangerous) subcritical Hopf bifurcation of $e_3$.
The critical rates $\varepsilon_{c1}$, $\varepsilon_{c2}$
and $\varepsilon_{c3}$ in panel (a) correspond to
Fig.\ref{fig:pht4} (b), (c) and (d), respectively.
$b = b_c = 0.025$.
}
\label{fig:epsrdot4}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Non-monotone Shifts Across Basin Instability Boundary and Dangerous Bifurcation}
Monotone parameter shifts across basin instability and a dangerous
bifurcation give rise to an intuitive tipping diagram with two distinct regimes:
B-tipping for low rates and unique R-tipping for higher rates. Now, we consider
non-monotone shifts along the same path $\Delta_r$ from Fig.~\ref{fig:pht4}(a).
Specifically, $r(t$) increases from $p_1$, passes through the basin instability
boundary $BI$ and through the dangerous (subcritical) Hopf bifurcation $H_e$,
but then turns around and tends back to $p_1$. This turning around allows the
system to avoid tipping even if it goes past the critical level for B-tipping namely past the dangerous bifurcation $H_e$.
What is more, the bifurcation delay gives the system additional time to turn
back before tipping occurs.
The nine solutions for different values of $\varepsilon$ shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:pht4}(b)--(d) highlight the main difference from the monotone shift:
three different critical rates for the same $\Delta_r$.
The system tips from $e_3(t)$ to $e_2(t)$
below the first critical rate $\varepsilon < \varepsilon_{c1}$,
then switches from tipping to tracking when
$\varepsilon = \varepsilon_{c1}$ [Fig.~\ref{fig:pht4}(b)], tracks $e_3(t)$
for a range of rates $\varepsilon_{c1} < \varepsilon < \varepsilon_{c2}$,
switches back to tipping when $\varepsilon = \varepsilon_{c2}$
[Fig.~\ref{fig:pht4}(c)], tips for a range of rates
$\varepsilon_{c2} < \varepsilon < \varepsilon_{c3}$,
and switches again from tipping to tracking
when $\varepsilon = \varepsilon_{c3}$ [Fig.~\ref{fig:pht4}(d)].
The ensuing $(\Delta_r,\varepsilon)$ and $(\Delta_r,\dot{r}_{max})$
tipping diagrams for non-monotone shifts~\eqref{eq:force2}
from $p_1$ are shown in Fig.\ref{fig:epsrdot4}. Although
the separation between different tipping mechanisms is less
obvious now, the tipping-tracking transition curve $c^{\,\updownarrow}$
still consists of two different parts that can be associated with
the two different tipping mechanisms. At high $\varepsilon$ and
between $BI$ and $H_e$, we replicate the distinctive tongue-shaped
tipping region from Fig.~\ref{fig:epsrdot2}. Thus, we attribute this
part of the tipping diagram to irreversible R-tipping.
As $\varepsilon$ is decreased, we observe two new features.
Firstly, the curve $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ forms a deep wedge whose tip
delineates the change from R-tipping to B-tipping. Secondly,
as $\varepsilon\to 0$, the curve $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ approaches
the critical level $H_e$ for B-tipping. However, this approach is
`slow', which is in stark contrast to Fig.~\ref{fig:epsrdot2}. The
new features can be explained in terms of relative timescales and a bifurcation delay.
As $\varepsilon$ decreases below the tipping tongue, the natural timescales of $H(t)$ and $P(t)$
start to exceed the timescale of $e_3(t)$, meaning that the system becomes more able to
follow the moving stable equilibrium $e_3(t)$. On the one hand, we
start to lose R-tipping. On the other hand, the system acquires some
characteristics of a slow passage through a Hopf bifurcation. In particular,
there is a bifurcation delay that allows the system to spend a noticeable
time past the critical level $H_e$ before B-tipping actually occurs.
As a result, the tracking-tipping transition due to $H_e$ is shifted to
a much larger $\Delta_r$. Hence the deep wedge in $c^{\,\updownarrow}$.
As $\varepsilon$ is decreased further, $H(t)$ and $P(t)$ become much
faster than $e_3(t)$, and start to closely track $e_3(t)$. We move into the regime
of a slow passage through a Hopf bifurcation, which is characterised
by a noticeable bifurcation delay that does not vanish even when $\varepsilon\to 0$.\footnote{This is another example of a singular perturbation problem where the bifurcations delay is undefined if $\varepsilon = 1$ and is ${\cal{O}}(1)$ for $0<\varepsilon\ll 1$~\cite{baer1989slow,neishtadt1987persistence,neishtadt1988persistence}.}
Thus, the `slow' approach of $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ towards $H_e$ as $\varepsilon\to 0$
is attributed to this bifurcation delay.
In summary, the intricate tipping diagram captures
different aspects of the interaction between B-tipping and R-tipping, and explains
the non-unique tipping with three critical rates from Fig.~\ref{fig:pht4}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[]{Sech_r1m12_vary_m.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{
(a) Example of a parameter path $\Delta_m$ across the dangerous
bifurcation $H_e$, together with (shading) the region of basin
instability $BI(e_3,p_1)$ for $p_1= (1,0.12)$ in the $(r,m)$
bifurcation diagram.
(b) The tipping diagram in the $(\Delta_m,\varepsilon)$ parameter
plane for non-monotone shift~\eqref{eq:force2} from $p_1$ along
the parameter path $\Delta_m$. The tipping-tracking transition
curve $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ separates the diagram into regions of (white)
tracking and (pink) tipping. The inset shows the wiggling part of $c^{\,\updownarrow}$. $b = b_c = 0.025$.
}
\label{fig:fbs10}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Non-monotone Shifts Across Dangerous Bifurcation}
The third type of interaction arises during a non-monotone passage through
a dangerous bifurcation, and is more of an interplay between
critical levels and critical rates rather than between B-tipping
and R-tipping. To be more specific, we consider a parameter path
that crosses a dangerous bifurcation, but does not involve any
basin instability.
The path $\Delta_m$ through a subcritical Hopf bifurcation $H_e$
from Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs10}(a) is an example of such a path.
The difference from the first two types
of interaction is that neither basin instability nor pure R-tipping
occur along this path.
Nonetheless, the system response is expected to depend on the rate $\varepsilon$.
For example, the system may avoid tipping despite going
past the dangerous bifurcation if it turns around fast
enough~\cite{bolt2018climate,ritchie2017inverse}. Thus, in addition to
the critical level, we
also expect critical rate(s).
We fix $r = 1$, consider non-monotone shifts in the
herbivore death rate along $\Delta_m$:
\begin{align}
\label{eq:force_m}
m(t) = 0.12 + \Delta_m \sinh(\varepsilon t),
\end{align}
and initiate the non-autonomous system~\eqref{eq:dPdt_na}--\eqref{eq:dHdt_na}
at the stable equilibrium $e_3(t_0)$ at time $t_0 (\varepsilon) =
\mbox{sech\,}^{-1}\left(10^{-3}\right)/\varepsilon \approx -7.6/\varepsilon$.
The resulting tipping-tracking transition curve $c^{\,\updownarrow}$
in the $(\Delta_m,\varepsilon)$ tipping diagram shows a complicated rate dependence
and is far from trivial [Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs10}(b)]. Owing to the absence of basin
instability and R-tipping, it is expected that $\Delta_m$ has to
exceed the critical level $H_e$ for tipping to occur. What is
less obvious is the presence of multiple critical rates.
Past $H_e$, there is a range of shift magnitudes $\Delta_m$
with a unique critical rate. However, for larger $\Delta_m$,
the curve $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ has a `bump' that gives rise to three
critical rates for a fixed $\Delta_m$. One can think of this `bump'
as a remnant of the R-tipping tongue found for paths $\Delta_m$ starting
at lower values of $m$. Most interestingly, there is an interval of $\Delta_m$
where the `oscillating' part of $c^{\,\updownarrow\,}$ gives rise to
several critical rates for the same $\Delta_m$ [inset in Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs10}(b)].
\section{Points of Return, Points of No Return, Points of Return Tipping}
\label{sec:pnr}
Tipping is often defined as a large, sudden and possibly unexpected change
in the state of the system, caused by a slow or small change in the external
input (e.g. environmental conditions). Although ``sudden" and ``unexpected"
suggest that foreseeing and preventing tipping may be difficult, it should
in general be possible~\cite{hughes2013living}. In this section, we are
guided by the question:
{\em Given a monotone parameter shift that gives tipping, when can tipping be
prevented by a parameter-shift reversal?} Certain aspects of this question
have been explored in the context of B-tipping near a saddle-node bifurcation.
For example, Hughes et al.~\cite{hughes2013living} speak of ``living dangerously on
borrowed time'' to describe a window of opportunity for ecosystems to
return to safer conditions before an otherwise inevitable tipping occurs.
Biggs et al.~\cite{biggs2009turning} ask whether early-warning indicators for
tipping provide sufficient warning to modify the ecosystem's management and
avert undesired regime shifts by ``turning back from the brink".
Gandhi et al.~\cite{gandhi2015dynamics,gandhi2015localized} consider non-monotone
parameter shifts through the global saddle-node bifurcation
(saddle-node on a limit cycle) to identify a new resonance mechanism in
the context of spatially localised (vegetation) patterns.
Ritchie et al.~\cite{ritchie2017inverse} model systems near a saddle-node bifurcation
and analyse relations between the time and amplitude of a saddle-node
crossing to avoid B-tipping~\cite{ritchie2017inverse}.
Most recently, Alkhayuon et al.~\cite{alkhayuon2018rate} investigate ``avoided" B-tipping
and R-tipping near a subcritical Hopf bifurcation in the box model of
the Atlantic Meridional Overturning Circulation (AMOC) in the context of collapse of the AMOC
and climate change mitigation.
Here, we extend the existing literature on avoiding B-tipping to
(i) analyse a subcritical Hopf bifurcation,
(ii) obtain additional results on a
saddle-node bifurcation, and (iii)
describe R-tipping effects for shifts that start away from a bifurcation point.
What is more, we compare three different results: the ecosystem model results, analysis of canonical forms for the two generic dangerous bifurcations of
equilibria namely saddle-node and subcritical Hopf bifurcations, and the recent
theoretical predictions for a saddle-node bifurcation from Ref.~\cite{ritchie2017inverse}.
The canonical forms are modified (`tilted') normal forms to capture B-tipping near
the bifurcation point as well as R-tipping away from the bifurcation point.
Specifically, we consider paths in one parameter $\mu$. A path starts at $\mu=\mu_-$
and may traverse the bifurcation at $\mu=\mu_b$. Along a parameter path,
we consider modified monotone shifts that reach a maximum in finite time
[green in Fig.~\ref{fig:monononmono}(b)]:
\begin{equation}
\mu(t) = \begin{cases}
\mu_- + \Delta_{ \mu} \, \mbox{sech\,}(\varepsilon t), & \, t \leq 0, \\
\mu_- + \Delta_{ \mu}, & \, t > 0,
\end{cases}
\label{eq:force3}
\end{equation}
and are parametrised by the magnitude $\Delta_ \mu$ and rate $\varepsilon > 0$.
The parameter shift reversal of~\eqref{eq:force3} can, in general,
have two additional parameters $c,\tau > 0$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:force4}
\mu(t) = \begin{cases}
\mu_- + \Delta_{ \mu} \, \mbox{sech\,}(\varepsilon t), & \, t \leq 0, \\
\mu_- + \Delta_{ \mu}, & \, 0 < t < \tau \\
\mu_- + \Delta_{ \mu} \, \mbox{sech\,}(c\, \varepsilon (t - \tau)), & \, t \ge \tau,
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
where $c\ne 1$ allows for different rates of shifting back and forth,
and $\tau > 0$ allows for some `waiting time' before turning around~\cite{alkhayuon2019}.
Here, we consider a special case, obtained by setting $c=1$
and $\tau = 0$ in~\eqref{eq:force4}, which corresponds to the parameter
shift~\eqref{eq:force2} used in the previous section
[red in Fig.~\ref{fig:monononmono}(b)].
For each path, we obtain $(\Delta_\mu,\varepsilon)$ combinations where tipping can or
cannot be prevented by the parameter-shift reversal. In this way, we
uncover four possible regions in the $(\Delta_\mu,\varepsilon)$ tipping diagram:
\begin{itemize}
\item[$\bullet$] {\em Points of tracking} are defined as $(\Delta_\mu,\varepsilon)$
settings where the system avoids tipping for monotone and
non-monotone shifts. This is the safe region of tracking, sometimes refered to as the ``safe operating space"~\cite{scheffer2015creating}.
\item[$\bullet$] {\em Points of return} are defined as $(\Delta_\mu,\varepsilon)$
settings where the system tips for monotone shifts, but does not tip
for non-monotone shifts. Here, an otherwise imminent tipping is prevented
by the parameter-shift reversal.
\item[$\bullet$] {\em Points of no return} are defined as $(\Delta_\mu,\varepsilon)$
settings where the system tips for monotone and non-monotone shifts.
Here, tipping is not prevented by the parameter-shift reversal.
\item[$\bullet$] {\em Points of return tipping} are defined as
$(\Delta_\mu,\varepsilon)$ settings where the system does not tip
for monotone shifts, but tips for non-monotone shifts. Here,
the parameter shift reversal inadvertently induces tipping in an otherwise safe
situation.
\end{itemize}
Note that the existence, shape and location of the four regions in the
$(\Delta_\mu,\varepsilon)$ tipping diagram will, in general, depend on
the geometric form of the shift $\mu(t)$, on the difference between the rates for shifting back and
forth ($c\ne 0$), and on the waiting time ($\tau > 0$). These dependencies
are not addressed here and are left for future study.
To facilitate comparisons with other works that compute the exceedance time $t_e$, which is the time the system spends past a dangerous bifurcation, we give the formula for $t_e$ in terms of the magnitude $\Delta_\mu$ and rate $\varepsilon$ of the shift~\eqref{eq:force4}:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:texceed}
t_e = \dfrac{c + 1}{c\,\varepsilon}\, \mbox{sech\,}^{-1}\!\left(\dfrac{\mu_b - \mu_-}{\Delta_{\mu}}\right) + \tau,
\end{equation}
where $\mbox{sech\,}^{-1}x\ge 0$ for $0< x\le 1$. See the Appendix for the derivation of $t_e$.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[]{PieceSechr1m075r5m12dyndel.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{
Tipping diagrams from (a) Fig.~\ref{fig:epsrdot1}(a) and (b) Fig.~\ref{fig:epsrdot3}(a)
partitioned into (white) ``points of tracking", (green) ``points of return"
and (pink) ``points of no return".
The tipping-tracking transition curves $c^{\uparrow}$ and $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ are obtained
for monotone Eq.~\eqref{eq:force1} and non-monotone Eq.~\eqref{eq:force2}, respectively,
parameter shifts
from $p_1 = (0.5,0.12)$ along the parameter path $\Delta_r$ from Fig.~\ref{fig:pht4}(a).
}
\label{fig:fbs9}
\end{figure}
\subsection{The Ecosystem Model}
For the ecosystem model~\eqref{eq:dPdt_na}--\eqref{eq:dHdt_na}, we consider
two different parameter paths giving rise to two different diagrams in
Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs9}. The $(\Delta_r,\varepsilon)$ tipping diagram in Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs9}(a)
is obtained for a parameter path with a fixed $m=0.075$, $r_- = 1$, and $r(t)> 1$
such that the path crosses the boundary $BI$ of the basin instability $BI(e_3,p_1)$,
but does not cross any bifurcations. Thus, Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs9}(a) describes points of
return and no return for R-tipping alone. Points of no return are bounded by the
tipping-tracking transition curve $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ for the
non-monotone shift~\eqref{eq:force2}. Points of return are located between
$c^{\,\updownarrow}$ and the tipping-tracking transition curve $c^{\uparrow}$
for the monotone shift~\eqref{eq:force3} with $\mu = r$.
At higher $\varepsilon$, (green) points of return extend over the entire
$\Delta_r$ interval. This is indicative of R-tipping occurring after
the input $r(t)$ reaches its maximum. Here,
the natural timescales of $H(t)$ and $P(t)$ are slower than $e_3(t)$, and
the system is slow to respond to changes in $r(t)$. However,
as $\varepsilon$ is decreased, $c^{\uparrow}$ and $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ approach each
other so that the (green) points of return shrink and appear to vanish at
$\varepsilon\approx 0.2$. Overlapping of $c^{\uparrow}$ and $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ gives
rise to apparently direct transitions from (white) tracking to
(pink) points of no return. This is indicative of R-tipping occurring before the input
$r(t)$ reaches its maximum. Here, the natural timescales of $H(t)$ and $P(t)$
become comparable to $e_3(t)$, the system R-tips to $e_2(t)$ during the upshift in $r(t)$,
and the parameter-shift reversal has no effect on the overall response of the system.
Note that $e_2(t)$ is basin stable on any parameter path within regions 5 and 7.
The $(\Delta_r,\varepsilon)$ tipping diagram in Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs9}(b)
is obtained for the parameter path $\Delta_r$ from Fig.~\ref{fig:pht4}(a)
with a fixed $m=0.12$, $r_- = 0.5$, and $r(t)> 0.5$ such that the path
crosses the boundary $BI$ of the basin instability $BI(e_3,p_1)$
as well as the dangerous (subcritical) Hopf Bifurcation $H_e$.
Thus, Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs9}(a) describes points of return and no return for
the interplay between B-tipping and R-tipping. At higher $\varepsilon$,
R-tipping is the dominant tipping mechanism. Indeed, the part of the tipping
diagram between $BI$ and $H_e$ at higher $\varepsilon$ is the same as
in Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs9}(a), including the vanishing (green) region with
points of return. At intermediate $\varepsilon$, the competition between
B-tipping and R-tipping gives rise to a deep wedge in $c^{\,\updownarrow}$,
which opens up another (green) region with points of return.
At lower $\varepsilon$, B-tipping is the dominant tipping mechanism.
Here, the natural timescales of $H(t)$ and $P(t)$ become
faster than $e_3(t)$, and the problem resembles a slow passage through
a Hopf bifurcation. The associated bifurcation delay is responsible for
the lower boundary of the deep wedge in $c^{\,\updownarrow}$, and for the
`slow' convergence of $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ towards $c^{\uparrow}$ (or towards $H_e$)
as $\varepsilon\to 0$.
Overall, the intricate $(\Delta_r,\varepsilon)$ tipping diagram for the ecosystem model
is partitioned into regions of tracking, points of return and points of no return.
In particular, there appears to be two different regions of points of return
separated by direct transitions from tracking to points of no return.
This leads us to the final question: {\em How typical is the intricate tipping
diagram from Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs9}(b)?} To answer this question we analyse tipping
diagrams for a (slow) passage through the two generic dangerous bifurcations
of equilibria, namely saddle-node and subcritical Hopf bifurcations.
\subsection{The Two Generic Dangerous Bifurcations of Equilibria}
From among different dangerous bifurcations of equilibria, only sadddle-node and subcritical
Hopf bifurcations are generic in the sense that they persist under arbitrarily small
perturbations of the vector field. Here, we consider modified (`tilted') versions
of the saddle-node and subcritical Hopf normal forms to study typical effects
of non-monotone shifts across a dangerous bifurcation.
The modification involves an additional parameter $s$ that quantifies the `tilt' of the branches of solutions
in the one-parameter bifurcation diagram; see Fig~\ref{fig:S_H_NF1}. Both bifurcations occur at $\mu_b=0$, and
the regular normal forms are recovered when $s=0$.
As there is no basin instability in the regular normal forms, there can be no R-tipping
from the stable equilibrium when $s=0$.\footnote{
For the unmodified subcritical Hopf normal form, that is Eq.~\eqref{eq:nf10} with $s=0$, both B-tipping and R-tipping from the stable equilibrium
can be excluded because the branch of equilibria is a flow-invariant line in the $(z,t)$ phase space
of the non-autonomous system. For the unmodified saddle-node normal form, that is Eq.~\eqref{eq:snf4} with $s=0$, R-tipping can be excluded because
the stable equilibrium is basin stable and the system is one-dimensional~\cite{ashwin2012tipping}.} However, the dynamics change when $s\ne 0$. In particular, R-tipping can be
observed when the `tilt' is sufficient enough to give basin instability along the chosen parameter
path. In the following, we use $\mu_*$ to denote the basin instability boundary.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=13cm]{1DBif_Saddle_Hopf_NF.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{
One-parameter bifurcation diagrams for the modified (tilted) subcritical Hopf normal form
Eq.~\eqref{eq:nf8} with (a) $s>0$ and (b) $s<0$, and for the modified (tilted) saddle-node
normal form Eq.~\eqref{eq:snf1} with (c) $s>0$ and (d) $s<0$. Shown are branches of (solid)
stable and (dashed) unstable equilibria $e$, branches of the maxima $l_x^+$ and minima $l_x^-$
of the $x$-component of the unstable limit cycle, parameter paths $\Delta_\mu$ from $p_1=\mu_-$,
and the corresponding basin instability boundary $\mu^\pm_*$ of (a-b) $BI(e,\mu_-)$ and (c-d)
$BI(e^+,\mu_-)$.
}
\label{fig:S_H_NF1}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Modified Subcritical Hopf Normal Form}
To make direct comparisons with the ecosystem model, first
consider a system in $\mathbb{R}^2$ akin to the normal form of the subcritical Hopf bifurcation~\cite[Sec.3.4]{kuznetsovelements} written in terms of a complex variable $z = x + i y$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:nf8}
\dot z = \left(\mu + i\left[\omega + \alpha \left|z - \mu s \right|^2\right]\right) \left(z - \mu s\right) + \left|z - \mu s \right|^2 (z - \mu s).
\end{equation}
where $\mu$ is the bifurcation parameter, $\omega$ is the angular frequency of small-amplitude oscillations, $\alpha$ quantifies the amount of shear or amplitude-phase coupling and $s$ is the `tilt' parameter. The subcritical Hopf normal form is recovered when we set $s=0$ and apply a change of
coordinates to transform away the term proportional to $\alpha$~\cite[Sec.3.4]{kuznetsovelements}. There is one
branch of equilibria
$$
e(\mu,s) = \mu s + 0i,
$$
that is stable for $\mu<0$ and unstable for $\mu>0$, and one branch of unstable limit cycles
$$
l(\mu,s,t) = \mu s +\sqrt{-\mu}\,e^{i(\omega - \alpha\mu)t},
$$
that exists for $\mu<0$. The real part of the limit cycle solution oscillates between
$$
l_x^- (\mu,s)= -\sqrt{-\mu} + \mu s\;\; \mbox{and}\;\; l_x^+(\mu,s) = \sqrt{-\mu} + \mu s,
$$
as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:S_H_NF1}(a)--(b).
For every $s\ne 0$, there are two basin instability boundaries. They are obtained by fixing $\mu_-$ and solving
$$
\mbox{Re}[e(\mu_-,s)] = l_x^-(\mu_*,s)\;\; \mbox{and}\;\; \mbox{Re}[e(\mu_-,s)] = l_x^+(\mu_*,s),
$$
for $\mu_*$, which gives
$$
\mu_*^- = \mu_- -\frac{1 + \sqrt{1-4s^2\mu_- }}{2s^2} < \mu_-
\;\;\mbox{and}\;\;
\mu_*^+ = \mu_- -\frac{1 - \sqrt{1-4s^2\mu_- }}{2s^2} > \mu_-.
$$
Since we restrict to small enough and positive shift magnitudes $\Delta_\mu>0$,
the relevant basin instability boundary is $\mu_*^+>\mu_-$; see Fig.~\ref{fig:S_H_NF1}(a).
Now, consider the corresponding non-autonomous system
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:nf10}
\dot z = \left(\mu(t) + i\left[\omega + \alpha \left|z - s\mu(t) \right|^2\right]\right) \left(z - s\mu(t)\right) + \left|z - s\mu(t) \right|^2 (z - s\mu(t)),
\end{equation}
initialised at
$$
z(t_0) = e(\mu(t_0),s),\;\;t_0 = \frac{1}{\varepsilon}\,\mbox{sech\,}^{-1}\left(10^{-3}\right).
$$
Firstly, we analyse R-tipping for non-monotone $\mu(t)$ given by Eq.~\eqref{eq:force4}
with $\mu_- = -1$, $\Delta_\mu >0$, $c=1$, $\tau=0$ and different values of $s$
[Fig.~\ref{fig:HNF2}(a)]. Note that the line $e=\mu s + 0i$ is flow-invariant
when $s=0$, but not when $s\ne 0$.
Therefore, tipping from the stable equilibrium $e$ requires nonzero
$s$. For $s=10^{-4}$, we obtain $\mu_*^+\approx -10^{-8}$, meaning that the region of
basin instability between $\mu_*^+$ and $H_e$ is negligible. The only tipping
that occurs in the non-autonomous system
is B-tipping for $\Delta_\mu > 1$, as evidenced by the tipping-tracking
transition curve $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ in the $(\Delta_\mu,\varepsilon)$ tipping diagram.
When $s=0.5$, the basin instability boundary moves to $\mu_*^+=2\sqrt{2}-3\approx-0.17$
or $\Delta_\mu \approx 0.83$, and the region of basin instability becomes non-negligible.
As a result, the curve $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ deviates from the case $s=0$ in different ways.
While R-tipping still does not occur, basin instability gives rise to
a fold on $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ and a range of shift magnitudes $\Delta_\mu$ with three critical rates.
When the `tilt' is increased to $s=2$, the basin instability boundary moves to
$\mu_*^+\approx-0.61$ or $\Delta_\mu \approx 0.39$. Now, in addition to B-tipping and a range of $\Delta_\mu$
with three critical rates, there is R-tipping for $\Delta_\mu<1$. The tracking-tipping transition
curve $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ closely resembles the tipping diagram
for the ecosystem model from Fig.~\ref{fig:epsrdot4}. The R-tipping tongue at higher rates
is the result of basin instability. The `slow' approach (and possibly lack of convergence)
of the $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ curves towards $H_e$ as $\varepsilon\to 0$ is the result of
a surprising property of the slow passage through a Hopf bifurcation.
Namely, the distance the solution tracks the unstable equilibrium past the bifurcation point
is independent of the rate of parameter change and does not tend to zero as
$\varepsilon\to 0$~\cite{baer1989slow,neishtadt1987persistence,neishtadt1988persistence}.
In other words,
the system tracks the unstable equilibrium past the bifurcation point for a
noticeable amount of time, making it possible to turn around and avoid
tipping even for vanishing rates of parameter
change.
The most noticeable difference from the ecosystem model
is the absence of the ``deep wedge" at the intermediate rates. Instead, there is
a characteristic kink on the $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ curves near $\varepsilon=10^{-2}$
in Fig.~\ref{fig:HNF2}(a), possibly with multiple wiggles such as those shown in the inset
of Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs10}(b). The origin of the kink and the wiggles, as well as the scaling
law for $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ in the limit $\varepsilon\to 0$, are left for future study.
The agreement with the ecosystem model extends to ``points of return" and ``points of no
return" as shown in Figs.~\ref{fig:fbs9}(b) and~\ref{fig:SNHNF}(b1), where the
tracking-tipping transition curve $c^{\uparrow}$ is obtained for the monotone
parameter shift~\eqref{eq:force3}. Interestingly, for sufficiently high `tilt'
parameter $s$, a new region of ``points of return tipping" appears in the
diagram [Fig.~\ref{fig:SNHNF}(c1)] that is not present in the ecosystem model.
This means that, in general, all four regions identified in the beginning of
Sec.~\ref{sec:pnr} can be present for a non-monotone passage through a subcritical
Hopf bifurcation. What is more, the $c^{\uparrow}$ and $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ curves
need not approach each other like they do in the ecosystem model in Fig.~\ref{fig:fbs9}(b).
Finally, the rotational symmetry in the phase space of the (modified) Hopf normal form implies a symmetry
in the basin instability boundaries
$$
\mu_*^\pm(s) = \mu_*^\pm(-s),
$$
meaning that the system has the same basin instability properties for
$s$ and $-s$. According to the R-tipping criterion from Sec.~\ref{sec:tcTtip},
given a suitable $\mu(t)$ that increases over time,
R-tipping for $s$ and $-s$
requires the same shift magnitude. Similarly, given a suitable $\mu(t)$ that decreases
over time, R-tipping for $s$ and $-s$ requires the same shift magnitude. Thus,
we obtain the same tipping diagrams for $s$ and $-s$ in the left column of Fig.~\ref{fig:SNHNF}.
For a fixed $s\ne 0$, R-tipping for an increasing $\mu(t)$ requires a smaller shift
magnitude than R-tipping for the decreasing $\mu(-t)$. This is why the region of
``points of return tipping'' in Fig.~\ref{fig:SNHNF}(c1) is small.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[]{SaddleHopfNFSechAlldyndel1x2.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{
Tipping diagrams in the $(\Delta_\mu,\varepsilon)$
parameter plane for non-monotone shifts~\eqref{eq:force4}
with $\tau = 0$, $c = 1$ and $\mu_- = -1$
along the parameter path $\Delta_\mu$ from Fig.~\ref{fig:S_H_NF1}(a) and (c).
(a) Tipping-tracking transition curves $c^{\,\updownarrow}$
for the modified (tilted) subcritical Hopf normal form Eq.~\eqref{eq:nf10}
with $\alpha=1$, $\omega=1$ and different values of $s$.
(b) Tipping-tracking transition curves $c^{\,\updownarrow}$
for the modified (tilted) saddle-node normal form Eq.~\eqref{eq:snf4}
with different values of $s$. The dashed red curve in (b) is the approximation
to $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ obtained in Ref.~\cite{ritchie2017inverse} for $s \varepsilon$ small enough; see Appendix \ref{App:AppendixE}.
}
\label{fig:HNF2}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Modified Saddle-Node Normal Form}
To make comparisons with the other generic dangerous bifurcation of equilibria,
consider a system in $\mathbb{R}$ akin to the normal form of the saddle-node
bifurcation~\cite[Sec.3.2]{kuznetsovelements}:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:snf1}
\dot x = -(x-\mu s)^2 -\mu,
\end{equation}
where $\mu$ is the bifurcation parameter and $s$ is the `tilt' parameter. The branches of stable $e^+$ and unstable $e^-$ equilibria exist for $\mu\le 0$ and are given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:snfeqsol1}
e^+ (\mu,s)= \mu \, s + \sqrt{-\mu}, \;\;\mbox{and}\;\; e^-(\mu,s)= \mu \, s -\sqrt{-\mu},
\end{equation}
as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:S_H_NF1}(c)--(d). The basin instability boundary is obtained by fixing $\mu_-$ and solving
$$
e^+(\mu_-,s) = e^-(\mu_*,s),
$$
for $\mu_*$. The boundary exists for $s<0$ or $s>1/\sqrt{-\mu_-}$ and is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:snf3}
\mu_* = - \left(\sqrt{-\mu_-} - \frac{1}{s}\right)^2.
\end{equation}
Now, consider the corresponding non-autonomous system
\begin{align}
\label{eq:snf4}
\dot x = -(x-\mu(t) s)^2 -\mu(t),
\end{align}
initialised at
$$
x(t_0) = e^+(\mu(t_0),s),\;\;t_0 = \frac{1}{\varepsilon}\,\mbox{sech\,}^{-1}\left(10^{-3}\right).
$$
Firstly, we analyse R-tipping for non-monotone $\mu(t)$ given by Eq.~\eqref{eq:force4}
with $\mu_- = -1$, $\Delta_\mu>0$, $c=1$, $\tau=0$ and different values of $s$ [Fig.~\ref{fig:HNF2}(b)].
When $s=0$, there is no basin instability and R-tipping cannot occur.
The only tipping that occurs for $s=0$ is B-tipping for $\Delta_\mu>1$.
The tracking-tipping transition curve $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ in the $(\Delta_\mu,\varepsilon)$
tipping diagram is in very good agreement with the critical ``exceedance time" formula
$$
t_e \approx \frac{2}{\sqrt{\Delta_\mu + \mu_-}},
$$
derived
in Ref.~\cite{ritchie2017inverse} for small $s \varepsilon$.
To demonstrate the agreement, we use Eq.~\eqref{eq:texceed} with $c=1$, $\tau=0$ and $\mu_b=0$,
express the $t_e$ formula above in terms of the scalling law for $\varepsilon$ and
$\Delta_\mu$:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:texceedtrans}
\varepsilon \approx \sqrt{\Delta_\mu +\mu_-}\;\mbox{sech\,}^{-1}\left(\frac{-\mu_-}{\Delta_\mu} \right),
\end{equation}
and plot condition~\eqref{eq:texceedtrans} as a dashed red curve in Fig.~\ref{fig:HNF2}(b).
When $s=2$, there is a basin instability boundary at $\mu_*=-1/4$, meaning that the
stable equilibrium $e^+$ is basin unstable for $\Delta_\mu > \mu_*-\mu_-=3/4$.
Although the tracking-tipping transition curve $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ deviates noticeably
from the case $s=0$, especially at higher rates $\varepsilon$, the changes are
quantitative and R-tipping still does not occur.
When the `tilt' is increased to $s=3$, the basin instability boundary moves to
$\mu_*=-4/9$, meaning that $e^+$ is basin unstable for $\Delta_\mu > \mu_*-\mu_-=5/9$.
This results in two significant changes to the tracking-tipping transition curve $c^{\,\updownarrow}$.
Firstly, $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ develops two folds and becomes S-shaped, giving rise to
a range of shift magnitudes $\Delta_\mu$ with three different critical rates.
Secondly, in addition to B-tipping, there is an R-tipping tongue for $\Delta_\mu<1$.
In contrast to the Hopf bifurcation, different $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ curves appear
to converge to $S_e$ as $\varepsilon\to 0$. This is because the distance the
solution overshoots the saddle-node bifurcation point vanishes as the rate of parameter change tends to zero~\cite{berglund2006noise,majumdar2013transitions}.
In other words, in the limit of a vanishing rate of parameter change, the solution
jumps off the branch of stable equilibria at the bifurcation point with
no time to turn around and avoid tipping.
Apart from some differences at small $\varepsilon$ owing to the
different character of the bifurcation delay, the analysis of
``points of return" and ``points of no return" near a saddle-node bifurcation
reveals much similarity to the subcritical
Hopf bifurcation when $s>0$ [Fig.~\ref{fig:SNHNF}(b2)]. However,
the dynamics for $s<0$ are rather different. The striking difference for
$s=-3$ is the large region of ``points of return tipping'', where there is
R-tipping for non-monotone $\mu(t)$, but not for monotone increasing $\mu(t)$
[Fig.~\ref{fig:SNHNF}(c2)]. This difference is a consequence
of asymmetry in the (modified) saddle-node normal form. To be more specific,
$$
\mu_*(s) \ne \mu_*(-s),
$$
meaning that the system has different basin instability properties for
$s$ and $-s$. According to the R-tipping criterion from Sec.~\ref{sec:tcTtip},
given a suitable $\mu(t)$ that increases over time,
the system is guaranteed to R-tip for $s>0$, but not for $s<0$. Conversely,
given a suitable $\mu(t)$ that decreases over time, the system is guaranteed
to R-tip for $s<0$, but not for $s>0$. Thus, ``points of return tipping"
cannot occur for $s>0$, and are expected to occur for $s<0$, which
explains the diagrams for $s=3$ and $s=-3$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:SNHNF}(b2) and (c2).
\begin{figure}[]
\begin{center}
\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[]{SuperimposeNFasp725.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{
Tipping diagrams (a1--c1) for the modified (tilted) Hopf normal form Eq.~\eqref{eq:nf10}
and different values of $s$ and (a2--c2) for the modified (tilted)
saddle-node normal form Eq.~\eqref{eq:nf10} are partitioned into (white) ``points of tracking",
(green) ``points of return", (pink) ``points of no return" and (red) ``points of return tipping".
The tipping-tracking transition curves $c^{\uparrow}$ and $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ are obtained
for monotone Eq.~\eqref{eq:force3} and non-monotone Eq.~\eqref{eq:force4}
parameter shifts, respectively, with $\tau = 0$, $c = 1$ and $\mu_-=-1$ along the parameter path $\Delta_\mu$ from Fig.~\ref{fig:S_H_NF1}(a) and (c).
}
\label{fig:SNHNF}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Universal Properties of Non-monotone Passage Through a Dangerous Bifurcation}
A comparison between the tracking-tipping transition curves $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ for
the modified subcritical Hopf [Fig.~\ref{fig:HNF2}(a)] and saddle-node [Fig.~\ref{fig:HNF2}(b)]
normal forms reveals some universal qualitative properties of a non-monotone passage through a dangerous bifurcation that are independent of the bifurcation type. In both systems,
the tracking-tipping transition curve
$c^{\,\updownarrow}$ becomes S-shaped, gives rise to three critical rates and develops
an R-tipping tongue as the `tilt' parameter $s$ is increased. On the other hand, there are
differences between the two systems that are also worth pointing out. Multiple critical rates and R-tipping are achieved for a smaller `tilt' parameter $s$ in the
modified Hopf normal form, whereas the approach of $c^{\,\updownarrow}$ towards the bifurcation as $\varepsilon\to 0$ is much faster and follows a different scaling
law in the modified saddle-node normal form. What is more, owing to the basin instability properties, a saddle-node bifurcation may
give rise to a larger region of ``points of return tipping".
\section{Conclusion}
\label{sec:concl}
In this paper we analyse nonlinear tipping phenomena
using examples of an ecological model~\cite{scheffer2008pulse} and modified saddle-node
and subcritical Hopf normal forms with smooth parameter shifts.
The mathematical work is motivated and inspired
by two scientific concerns. One is Article 2 of the United Nations Framework Convention for Climate
Change (UNFCCC)~\cite{unfccc1992united} highlighting two critical factors for real-world tipping points: {\em critical levels} and {\em critical rates (time frames)} of changing environmental conditions. This was later extended to become the
Kyoto Protocol~\cite{protocol1997united} and the current Paris Agreement~\cite{paris2015united}.
The other is the question of whether tipping can be prevented
by a parameter trend reversal. We combine classical bifurcation analysis with the concept of
{\em basin instability} to give new insight into critical rates, uncover non-trivial effects arising
from the interplay between critical levels (B-tipping) and critical rates (R-tipping), and extend
the existing literature on preventing tipping by a parameter trend reversal.
We begin with classical bifurcation analysis of the corresponding autonomous ecosystem model with fixed in time parameters and identify a codimension-three degenerate Bogdanov-Takens
bifurcation as the organising centre for B-tipping and
the source of a dangerous subcritical Hopf bifurcation. We give testable criteria for B-tipping in the non-autonomous system in terms of parameter paths that cross a subcritical Hopf in the corresponding autonomous system.
Next, we perform basin instability analysis to reveal and give testable criteria for R-tipping
in the non-autonomous system in terms of parameter paths that do not cross any bifurcation
in the corresponding autonomous system. Finally, we produce a single diagram encompassing criteria for
both B-tipping and R-tipping by superimposing regions of basin instability on a classical two-parameter
bifurcation diagram of the plant growth rate vs. the herbivore mortality rate.
This approach gives new insight into system stability, beyond traditional bifurcation analysis, as it
captures both the adiabatic and non-adiabatic effects of a parameter change and guides tipping analysis
in the non-autonomous system.
In the non-autonomous system with time-varying parameters we obtain {\em tipping diagrams}
in the plane of the rate and magnitude of parameter shift and show that:
\begin{itemize}
\item R-tipping transitions in the tipping diagram correspond to {\em canard-like solutions}
in the phase
space that, rather surprisingly, track a moving unstable state.
\item
R-tipping transition curves in the tipping diagram for non-monotone parameter shifts that cross a basin instability boundary alone and then turn around can form {\em R-tipping tongues}
with two critical rates. This means that the system switches from tracking to tipping and
back to tracking again as the rate of the parameter shift increases. R-tipping tongues
are reminiscent of resonance tongues in the sense of enhanced response to optimally
timed external inputs.
\item
The interplay between critical levels and critical rates (or between B-tipping and R-tipping)
for non-monotone parameter shifts that cross a basin instability boundary and a dangerous
bifurcation and then turn around gives rise to an {\em S-shaped tipping-tracking transition curve} in
the tipping diagram with one critical level and multiple critical rates. This means the system
exhibits inverted behaviour to an R-tipping tongue and switches from tipping to tracking and
back to tipping again as the rate of the parameter shift increases.
\item
Given a monotone parameter shift and its non-monotone reversal, tipping diagrams can be partitioned
into {\em points of tracking}, {\em points of return} where tipping can be prevented by the reversal,
{\em points of no return} where tipping cannot be prevented by the reversal, and {\em points of return tipping}
where tipping is inadvertently induced by the reversal. This partitioning provides an alternative way
to categorise tipping phenomena.
\end{itemize}
Our results on the ecosystem model give new insight into the sensitivity of ecosystems
to the magnitudes and rates of environmental change. More generally, the method of
superimposing regions of {\em basin instability} on traditional bifurcation diagrams
can be extended to regions of {\em threshold instability} for tipping thresholds that
do not separate the phase space into different basins of attraction~\cite{wieczorek2018,xie2018}.
Such approach would capture, in addition to B-tipping due to dangerous bifurcations,
both {\em irreversible} and {\em reversible (transient) R-tipping},
and facilitate systematic in-depth analysis of tipping phenomena in any nonlinear system.
This is evidenced further by a comparison of the ecosystem model with the modified
saddle-node and subcritical Hopf normal forms that reveals some universal features of
non-monotone parameter shifts that cross a basin instability boundary and a dangerous
bifurcation and then turn around.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
P.E.O'K. thanks M. Mortell for useful discussions on singular perturbations.
S.W. has received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 202 research and innovation Programme under the Marie Sklodowska-Curie grant agreement No 643073.
\begin{comment}
We investigated how B-tipping and R-tipping interact with both monotone and non-monotone parameter shifts traversing catastrophic bifurcations. In doing so we introduced two concepts, that of a moving equilibrium and of basin instability. We provided criteria and methods for establishing both and use them to provide a structured means to describe and locate R-tipping within a system. The monotone parameter shifts provide tipping diagrams that are not surprising, going from a high to a lower rate of parameter shift, we get R-tipping beginning close to the region of basin instability that smoothly transforms to B-tipping close to the bifurcation while never crossing the bifurcation point. However, the non-monotone shifts reveal an intriguing tipping diagram where large ranges of parameter shift can have multiple critical rates.
Our analysis of the ecosystem model shows that there are rates of environmental change that are too high for the system to cope with and once exceeded will be forced to an alternative state. Van der Bolt et al. demonstrated that under the right conditions reversing the parameter trend will recover the system~\cite{bolt2018climate}. These conditions are illuminated by the superimposing of the tipping diagram for monotone shifts on top of the respective non-monotone shifts, where areas are revealed that are recoverable once tipping has been initiated as well as areas where recovery is not possible. Previous efforts to categorise tipping points focused on the drivers of the phenomenon (B-tipping, R-tipping and N-tipping), our work has led us to a sub-categorization of B-tipping and R-tipping: ``Points of return'', where a reversal of the trend can immediately recover the system and ``points of no return'' where tipping is unavoidable.
We end by applying our methods to modified versions of the normal form equations for a saddle-node bifurcation and a subcritical Hopf bifurcation. We show that the behaviour observed in the ecosystem model is also present in both normal form equations. Furthermore, the tipping diagrams of both equations led us to discovering an additional tipping point, one where upon reversing the parameter shift the system becomes susceptible to tipping. We call these ``points of return tipping''.
The ecosystem tipping diagrams can be seen in the context of the aforementioned Article 2 of the UNFCCC. The ``ultimate objective'' being the ``stabilization of greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a \emph{level} that
would prevent dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system. Such a level should be achieved within a \emph{time frame} sufficient to allow ecosystems to adapt naturally to climate change''~\cite{unfccc1992united}. Our methods specifically address this objective in our tipping diagrams, depicting both the level of environmental change as well as a wide ranging time frame giving a very good picture of what this change might entail.
In the broader picture, our success in recreating the tipping phenomena for passages through both dangerous bifurcations, saddle-node and subcritical Hopf, should have a profound effect in our understanding of the interaction between B-tipping and R-tipping.
\end{comment}
\clearpage
\section*{Appendix}
|
\section{Typesetting instructions -- please read carefully}
\section{Introduction}
Within the last two decades, there has been the development of Burrows Wheeler Transform (BWT)~\cite{burrows1994block} based indices for compressing a diverse collection of data structures. This list includes labeled trees~\cite{siren2014indexing}, certain classes of graphs~\cite{DBLP:journals/jacm/FerraginaLMM09,DBLP:journals/almob/NovakGP17}, and sets of multiple strings~\cite{FerraginaV10,DBLP:conf/cpm/MantaciRRS05}. This has motivated the search for a set of general conditions under which a structure can be indexed by a BWT based index, and consequently the introduction of Wheeler graphs. A Wheeler graph is a directed graph with edge labels which satisfies two simple axioms related to the ordering of its vertices. They were introduced by Gagie {\it et al.}~\cite{DBLP:journals/tcs/GagieMS17} (also see~\cite{Tunneling-Arxiv}). Although not general enough to encompass all BWT-based structures (e.g.,~\cite{soda/0002ST17}), the authors demonstrated that Wheeler graphs offer a unified way of modeling several BWT based data structures such as
de Bruijn graphs~\cite{BoweOSS12,de1946combinatorial},
generalized compressed suffix arrays~\cite{siren2014indexing}, multistring BWTs~\cite{DBLP:journals/tcs/MantaciRRS07}, XBWTs~\cite{DBLP:journals/jacm/FerraginaLMM09}, wavelet matrices~\cite{DBLP:journals/is/ClaudeNP15}, and certain types of finite automaton~\cite{AhoC75,Belazzougui10,HonKSTV13}. They also showed that there exists an encoding of a Wheeler graph $G=(V,E)$ which requires only $2(e+n) + e\log \sigma + \sigma\log e + o(n + e\log \sigma)$ bits where $\sigma$ is the size of the edge label alphabet, $e =|E|$, and $n =|V|$. This encoding allows for the efficient traversal of multiple edges while processing characters in a string, using an algorithm similar to the backward search in the FM-index~\cite{DBLP:journals/jacm/FerraginaM05}. Unfortunately, not all directed edge labeled graphs are Wheeler graphs, and thus not all directed edge labeled graphs allow for this encoding. The authors of \cite{DBLP:journals/tcs/GagieMS17} posed the question of \emph{how to reasonably recognize whether a given graph is a Wheeler graph}.
The question is of both theoretical and practical value, as it might be the first step before attempting to apply some compression scheme. For example, one could use the existence of a {\it Wheeler subgraph} to encode a graph. To do so, you could maintain an encoding of the subgraph using the framework in~\cite{DBLP:journals/tcs/GagieMS17} in addition to an adjacency list of the edges not included in the encoding. Depending on the size of the subgraph, such an encoding might provide a large space savings at the cost of a modest time trade-off while traversing the graph. This concept also motivates the portion of the paper where we look at \emph{optimization versions} of this problem that seek subgraphs of the given graph which are Wheeler graphs. Unfortunately for practitioners of such a method, this problem turns out to be computationally intractable as well. As a positive result, recognizing that the problem presented by Wheeler graphs is similar to that of identifying the queue number of a graph provides some insight and indicates a class of graphs where the problem becomes computationally tractable.
\subsection{Wheeler Graphs}
We first give the definition of a Wheeler graph. The notation $(u,v,k)$ is used for the directed edge from $u$ to $v$ with label $k$. We will assume the usual ordering on the edge labels which come from an alphabet $\{1,2,...,\sigma\}$.
\begin{definition}
A Wheeler graph is a directed graph with edge labels where there exists an ordering $\pi$ on the vertices such that for any two edges $(u,v,k)$ and $(u',v',k')$:
\bigskip
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item $k < k' \implies v <_\pi v'$;
\item $(k = k')\land(u <_\pi u') \implies v \leq_\pi v'$.
\end{enumerate}
\bigskip
In addition, vertices with in-degree zero must be placed first in the ordering.
\end{definition}
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{0.5\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{wheeler_graph.png}
\caption{An example of a wheeler graph with $\sigma = 3$. The ordering on the edge labels is:\\red (solid) < blue (long-dash) < green (short-dash)}
\label{fig:wheeler_graph}
\end{center}
\end{wrapfigure}
See Figure \ref{fig:wheeler_graph} for an illustration.
One critical property of Wheeler graphs is called \emph{path coherence}. This property is characterized by the fact that if you start at any consecutive range of vertices under the ordering $\pi$, and traverse the graph following edge labels matching the characters in a string $P$, then when finished processing $P$ the vertices ended on will form a consecutive range. This property is key to allowing the efficient traversal of multiple edges simultaneously, as well as achieving a compressed representation of the graph.
\begin{wrapfigure}[6]{r}{.5\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{forbidden.png}
\caption{In a proper ordering all of the above configurations cannot occur.}
\label{fig:forbidden}
\end{center}
\end{wrapfigure}
The following list of properties for a Wheeler graph can be deduced.
\begin{property}
All edges inbound to a vertex $v$ have the same edge label.
\end{property}
\begin{property}
For a given edge label $k$, the vertices which have $k$ as their inbound edge label are ordered consecutively in a proper ordering.
\end{property}
\begin{property}
It is possible for a vertex to a have multiple outbound edges with the same label. It is also possible for a vertex to have more then $\sigma$ inbound or outbound edges.
\end{property}
\begin{property}
\label{property:forbidden}
We call two edges $(u,v,k)$ and $(u',v',k)$ with the same label a rainbow if $u < u'$ and $v' < v$. No rainbows can exist in a proper ordering (see Figure \ref{fig:forbidden}).
\end{property}
\begin{property}
\label{property:block_split}
Consider a proper ordering. Let $V_k$ refer to the consecutive set of vertices with the same inbound edge label $k$. We define two subsets of $V_k$ denoted $V_k^1$ and $V_k^2$ whose union is $V_k$. The set $V_k^1$ consists of all vertices $v$ with inbound edges that come from vertices with lower orderings than $v$, and the set $V_k^2$ consists of vertices $v$ with inbound edges coming from vertices with higher orderings than $v$. Then the intersection of $V_k^1$ and $V_k^2$ contains at most one vertex $u$ (one may not exist), and all of the vertices in $V_k^1 - \{ u\}$ are ordered lower than all of the vertices in $V_k^2$. Moreover, a vertex $v \in V_k^1$ cannot send an edge with label $k$ to a vertex with lower order than $v$, and vertex $v \in V_k^2$ cannot send an edge with label $k$ to a vertex of higher order than $v$.
\end{property}
Due to Property \ref{property:block_split} and the fact that vertices with in-degree zero are placed first in a proper ordering, for $\sigma = 1$ any proper ordering is also a topological ordering (with the exception of vertices with self-loops which must be placed last).
\subsection{Problem Definitions}
\label{sec:problem_def}
The first question we wish to answer here is given a directed graph with edge labels, does such an ordering $\pi$ exist? We define this problem formally as the following.
\begin{problem}[Wheeler Graph Recognition] \label{pro:1}
Given a directed edge labeled graph $G=(V,E)$, answer `YES' if $G$ is a Wheeler graph and `NO' otherwise.
\end{problem}
Although we do not demand it here, ideally, a solution to the above problem would also return a proper ordering.
Motivated by the compression of general graphs (which are not necessarily Wheeler),
we next define two optimization versions of Problem~\ref{pro:1} where we seek to find Wheeler subgraphs.
\begin{problem}[Wheeler Graph Violation (WGV)]
Given a directed edge labeled graph $G=(V,E)$ identify the smallest $E' \subseteq E$ such that $G' = (V,E \backslash E')$ is a Wheeler graph.
\end{problem}
We also consider the dual of this problem.
\begin{problem}[Wheeler Subgraph (WS)]
Given a directed edge labeled graph $G=(V,E)$ identify the largest $E'' \subseteq E$ such that $G'' = (V,E'')$ is a Wheeler graph.
\end{problem}
\subsection{Our Contribution}
\begin{itemize}
\item We first provide a proof that the Wheeler graph recognition problem is indeed a computationally hard problem. In Section \ref{sec:NPC}, we show that the problem of recognizing whether a given graph is a Wheeler graph is NP-complete even for an edge alphabet of size $\sigma = 2$. This is based on a reduction of the Betweenness problem to Wheeler graph recognition. The result holds even when the input is a directed acyclic graph (DAG).
\item In Appendix~\ref{appendix:queue_number} we show that for $\sigma = 1$ the recognition problem can be reduced to that of determining if a DAG has queue number one. This can be solved in linear time \cite{DBLP:journals/siamcomp/HeathPT99}.
\item Section \ref{sec:d-NFA} we show Wheeler graph recognition remains NP-complete even when the number of edges leaving a vertex with the same label is at most five. This holds for DAGs as well.
This result is motivated by a recent work by Alanko, Policriti and Prezza~\cite{alanko2019prefixsorting} which identified that the recognition problem can be solved in polynomial time when the number of edges with the same label leaving a vertex is at most two.
\item Section \ref{sec:inapprox} examines the optimization version of this problem called Wheeler Graph Violation (WGV). We show via a reduction of the Minimum Feedback Arc Set problem that this problem is APX-hard, and assuming the Unique Games Conjecture, cannot be approximated within a constant factor. This also holds even when the graph is a DAG.
\item In Section \ref{sec:MWS} we look at the dual of the minimization problem, the Wheeler Subgraph problem (WS). We show this problem is in the complexity class APX for $\sigma =O(1)$. We do this by demonstrating that we can obtain solutions whose value is $\Omega(1/\sigma)$ times the optimal value.
\item In Section \ref{sec:exp_time} and Appendix \ref{appendix:exp_time} we provide an exponential time algorithm which solves the recognition problem on a graph $G = (V,E)$ in time $2^{O(n + e\log\sigma)}$ where $n = |V|$ and $e=|E|$.
It uses the idea of enumerating through all possible encodings (of bounded size) of Wheeler graphs, and the fact that we can test whether there exists an isomorphism between two undirected graphs in sub-exponential time.
This technique also gives us exact algorithms for the WGV and WS problems which run in time $2^{O(n+e\log\sigma)}$.
\item
In Appendix \ref{appendix:special_case}, using PQ-trees and ideas similar to those used in detecting if the queue number of a DAG is one, we demonstrate a class of graphs where Wheeler graph recognition can be done in linear time.
\end{itemize}
\section{NP-completeness of Wheeler Graph Recognition}
\label{sec:NPC}
\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:reduction1}
The Wheeler Graph Recognition Problem is NP-complete for any $\sigma \geq 2$.
\end{theorem}
We prove the NP-completeness of recognizing whether a graph is a Wheeler graph through a reduction of the Betweenness problem. This problem was established as NP-complete by Opatrn\'y in 1979~\cite{DBLP:journals/siamcomp/Opatrny79}. Like our problem, it deals with finding a total ordering on a set of elements subject to some constraints.
\subsection{The Betweenness Problem}
The input to the Betweenness problem is a list of distinct elements $T = t_1, \hdots, t_n $ and a collection of $k< n^3$ ordered triples of $(t_1^1, t_2^1, t_3^1), (t_1^2, t_2^2, t_3^2), \hdots (t_1^k, t_2^k, t_3^k)$ where every element in a triple is in $T$. The list $T$ should be placed into a total ordering with the property that for each of the given triples the middle item in the triple appears somewhere between the other two items. The items of each triple are not required to be consecutive in the total ordering. The decision problem is determining if such an ordering is possible.
As an example, consider the input $T = 1,2,3,4,5$ and the triples: $(3,4,5)$, $(4,1,3)$, $(1,4,5)$, $(2,4,1)$, $(5,2,3)$.
A total ordering which satisfies the given triples is the ordering $3, 1, 4, 2, 5$. The ordering $3, 1, 2, 4, 5$ does not since it violates the triple $(2,4,1)$.
\subsection{Reduction from Betweenness to Wheeler Graph Recognition}
Suppose we are given as input to the Betweenness Problem the list $t_1, t_2, \hdots, t_n$ and triples $(t_1^1, t_2^1, t_3^1), (t_1^2, t_2^2, t_3^2), \hdots, (t_1^k, t_2^k, t_3^k)$.
We construct a graph of size $O(nk)$ as follows.
Note that \emph{this graph is a DAG and all vertices are reachable from the source} vertex $v_0$.
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{0.6\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\vspace{1mm}
\includegraphics[width=.6\textwidth]{red_betweenness.png}
\caption{An example of the reduction
with the input list $1,2,3,4,5,6$ and triples $(5,2,3),(1,5,2),(4,5,6)$.
}
\vspace{-2em}
\label{fig:NPC_red}
\end{center}
\end{wrapfigure}
\begin{itemize}
\item Create a source vertex $v_0$ and vertices $v_i^j$ for $1 \leq i \leq n$ and $1\leq j \leq k$.
\item For each triple $(t_1^j, t_2^j, t_3^j)$ create a vertex for each element of the triple, we call them $w_1^j$, $w_2^j$, and $w_3^j$ respectively.
\item Create the edges $(v_0, v_i^{1},1)$ and edges $(v_i^j, v_i^{j+1},1)$ for $1 \leq i \leq n, \ 1\leq j \leq k-1$.
\item Create the following edges:
\begin{itemize}
\item $(v_i^j, w_1^j, 2)$ if $t_i = t_1^j$
\item $(v_i^j, w_2^j, 2)$ if $t_i = t_2^j$
\item $(v_i^j, w_3^j, 2)$ if $t_i = t_3^j$
\item $(v_i^j, w_2^j, 2)$ if $t_i = t_1^j$
\item $(v_i^j, w_2^j, 2)$ if $t_i = t_3^j$
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
\noindent
Theorem \ref{theorem:reduction1} follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:3}.
\\
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:3}
An instance of the Betweenness problem has an ordering satisfying all of the constraints iff the graph constructed as above is a Wheeler graph.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
(Sketch) The intuition is that the vertices with inbound edge label one represent the permutation of the elements in $T$. The edges labeled one force the permutation to be duplicated $k$ times, once for each constraint. The vertices with the inbound edge label two represent the elements in each triple. The edges with label two enforce that the only valid orderings of the vertices representing elements in $T$ are orderings that satisfy the Betweenness constraints. This is enforced by having no edges labeled two which are crossing in the figure. The detailed proof is deferred to Appendix~\ref{appendix:proof}.
\end{proof}
The fact that being a Wheeler graph implies (arched) level planarity with respect to each edge label is the key to the reduction.
The Wheeler graph recognition problem can be solved in linear time for an alphabet of size one. This follows from relating the notion of queue number to Wheeler graphs, and a previous result giving a linear time algorithm for finding a one-queue DAG~\cite{DBLP:journals/siamcomp/HeathP99, DBLP:journals/siamcomp/HeathPT99,DBLP:journals/siamcomp/HeathR92}. This also gives an upper bound on the number of edges which can be in a Wheeler graph~\cite{DBLP:journals/dmtcs/DujmovicW04}. Detailed proofs are deferred to Appendix \ref{appendix:queue_number}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:linear_sigma_1}
The Wheeler graph recognition problem can be solved in linear time for an edge alphabet of size $\sigma = 1$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:num_edges}
For $\sigma = 1$, the number of edges in a Wheeler graph is $\Theta(n)$.
\end{theorem}
\section{NP-completeness of Wheeler Graph Recognition on $d$-NFA's}
\label{sec:d-NFA}
This section concerns recognizing whether $d$-NFA is also a Wheeler graph. A $d$-NFA is defined as follows:
\begin{definition}
A $d$-NFA $G$ is an NFA where the number of edges with the same character leaving a vertex is at most $d$. We refer to the value $d$ as the non-determinism of $G$.
\end{definition}
We emphasize that here a NFA contains a single start state, from which we assume each vertex is reachable. The results in this section are in contrast to the recent work of Alanko, Policriti and Prezza who showed that it can recognized in polynomial time whether a $2$-NFA is a Wheeler graph~\cite{alanko2019prefixsorting}. Their result coupled with the observation that the reduction in Section \ref{sec:NPC} requires a $n^{\Theta(1)}$-NFA suggests an interesting question about what role non-determinism plays in the tractability of Wheeler graph recognition. To this end, we prove Theorem \ref{theorem:7_NFA}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:7_NFA}
The Wheeler Graph Recognition Problem is NP-complete for $d$-NFA's, $d \geq 5$.
\end{theorem}
The strategy of the proof is to reduce the NP-complete problem 4-NAESAT to Wheeler Graph Recognition. In 4-NAESAT each clause is of length 4, and an expression is satisfiable iff there exists a truth assignment such that each clause contains both a true literal and a false literal. Our reduction has a useful property highlighted by Lemma \ref{lem:3_NAESAT}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:3_NAESAT}
An instance $\phi$ of 4-NAESAT can reduced in poly-time to an instance $\phi'$ of 3-NAESAT where a variable occurring in the middle of a clause appears at most twice in $\phi'$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Convert the 4-NAESAT instance $\phi$ to a 3-NAESAT instance $\phi'$ by converting each clause $(a_k, b_k, c_k, d_k)$ into the clauses $(a_k, w_k, b_k)$ and $(c_k, \overline{w_k}, d_k)$. Both clauses have a satisfying not-all-equal assignment iff it is not the case that $a_k = b_k = c_k = d_k$. We note that the variable used in the middle of the clauses, $w_k$, is used only twice in $\phi'$.
\end{proof}
For convenience, we define a case of 3-NAESAT where each variable occuring in the middle occurs at most twice, we call this 3-NAESAT$^*$. We next describe the construction of a one source DAG from an instance of 3-NAESAT$^*$.
Suppose we are given an instance $\phi$ of 3-NAESAT$^*$ with variables $x_1, x_2, \hdots ,x_n$ and the clauses $(a_k, b_k, c_k)$ where we assume $a_k$, $b_k$, $c_k$ can represent either a Boolean variable or its negation.
We create a single source DAG $G$ based on $\phi$. The first step creates a \emph{menorah like}
structure which allows for the vertices representing $x_i$ and $\overline{x_i}$ to swap places in $G$, but otherwise fixes the positions of the vertices. We begin by adding the vertices which represent our variables, $x_1, \hdots, x_n, X, \overline{x_1}, \hdots, \overline{x_n}$; (the role of $X$ will become clear). Next, we add the structure to constrain their possible positions.
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{0.6\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\vspace{-.5em}
\includegraphics[width=.6\textwidth]{red_dNFA.png}
\caption{The vertices $Z_1$ and $Z_2$ could be for example for the clauses $(x_1, x_2, x_3), (x_2, \overline{x_3}, x_4)$. For each `betweenness' constraint we add a new layer and enforce the constraint as was done in Section \ref{sec:NPC}. The constraint shown is $(x_4,X,\overline{x_4})$.
}
\vspace{-5em}
\label{fig:d-NFA}
\end{center}
\end{wrapfigure}
\noindent
Add to $G$ the vertices:
\vspace{-.1em}
\begin{itemize}
\setlength\itemsep{.5em}
\item $s_1^0 \hdots, s_n^0$;
\item For $1 \leq i \leq n-1$, $1 \leq j \leq n-i$:
\begin{itemize}
\setlength\itemsep{.5em}
\item $s_i^j$ and $\overline{s_i^j}$;
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
Add to $G$ the red edges:
\begin{itemize}
\setlength\itemsep{.5em}
\item $(s_1^0, s_2^0, 1), \hdots (s_n^0, X, 1)$;
\item For $1 \leq i \leq n-1$, $1 \leq j \leq n-i$:
\begin{itemize}
\setlength\itemsep{.5em}
\item $(s_i^{j-1}, s_i^{j},1)$ and $(\overline{s_i^{j-1}}, \overline{s_i^j},1)$;
\end{itemize}
\item For $1 \leq i \leq n$:
\begin{itemize}
\item $(s_i^{n-i}, x_i, 1)$ and $(\overline{s_i^{n-i}}, \overline{x_i}, 1)$;
\end{itemize}
\end{itemize}
For clause $k$, denoted $(a_k, b_k, c_k)$, we add a vertex $Z_k$. Suppose the middle variable of the clause, $b_k$, is $x_h$ (positive or negated), then we add the vertices $z_k^j$ for $1 \leq j \leq n-h$, and red edges $(s_h^0, z_k^1, 1), (z_k^1, z_k^2, 1)$\ $\hdots (z_k^{n-h}, Z_k, 1)$.
Now we wish add a set of \emph{betweenness} type constraints on any proper ordering given of the vertices $\mathcal{L}^0 = \{x_1, \hdots, X, \overline{x_n} \hdots \overline{x_1}, Z_1, Z_2, \hdots\}$. Given a constraint $(y_1,y_2,y_3)$ we insist $y_2$ be between $y_1$ and $y_2$ in the ordering. This can be enforced by adding a layer of new vertices $\mathcal{L}^1 = \{x_1^1, \hdots, X^1, \overline{x_n^1} \hdots \overline{x_1^1}, Z_1^1, Z_2^1, \hdots\}$ with red edges labeled 1 from vertices in layer $\mathcal{L}^0$ to their corresponding vertices in $\mathcal{L}^1$. We use the same gadget that was used in Section \ref{sec:NPC}. Consider adding a betweenness on the vertices $y_1$, $y_2$, $y_3$ in $\mathcal{L}^0$. Add the vertices $w_1^1$, $w_2^1$, and $w_3^1$ and the blue edges $(y^1_1, w_1^1, 2)$, $(y^1_2, w_2^1, 2)$, $(y^1_3, w_3^1, 2)$, $(y^1_1, w_2^1, 2)$ and $(y^1_3, w_2^1, 2)$. Additional betweenness constraints can be similarly enforced by adding a new layer on top of $\mathcal{L}^1$ with a new gadget. Add the betweenness constraints $(x_i, X, \overline{x_i})$ for $1 \leq i \leq n$ fixing $X$, and betweenness constraints $(a_k, Z_k, b_k)$ and $(c_k, X, Z_k)$ for every clause $(a_k, b_k, c_k)$.
Before proving the correctness of the reduction, we make the observation that because any variable occurring in the middle of a clause occurs as most
{\color{red}\bf twice} in the whole expression, the maximum number of edges leaving a vertex $s_i^0$ is bounded by $3+ {\color{red}\bf 2} =5$. All of the other vertices have at most three edges with the same label leaving them
\begin{lemma}
The leveled graph $G$ constructed as above from an instance $\phi'$ of 3-NAESAT$^*$ is a Wheeler graph iff $\phi'$ is satisfiable.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Given a truth assignment
that satisfies
the 3-NAESAT$^*$ instance $\phi'$, put the vertices in $\mathcal{L}^0$ whose variables are assigned the value $T$ on the left side of $X$ in Figure \ref{fig:d-NFA}, and the vertices whose variables are assigned false on the right side of $X$. For example, if $x_1 = T, x_2 = F$, the two left-most vertex on level $\mathcal{L}^0$ would be $x_1$ followed by $\overline{x_2}$. Now, for clause $(a_k,b_k,c_k)$ we have the possible not-all-equal truth assignments and relative orderings of $\mathcal{L}^0$ which satisfy the Wheeler graph axioms in Table \ref{table:truth}. This shows that a Wheeler graph ordering of the vertices is possible by placing $Z_k$'s correctly given the truth assignment.
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\multicolumn{3}{c}{Possible Orderings ($a_k$ has variable $x_j$ and $c_k$ has variable $x_h$)} \\ \hline
$a_k b_k c_k$ & $j < h$ & $h < j$\\ \hline
$FFT$ & $c_k \hdots X \hdots b_k, Z_k \hdots a_k$ & $c_k \hdots X \hdots b_k, Z_k \hdots a_k$ \\
$FTF$ & $b_k, Z_k \hdots X \hdots c_k \hdots a_k$ & $ b_k, Z_k \hdots X \hdots a_k \hdots c_k$ \\
$TFF$ & $a_k \hdots \overline{b_k}, Z_k \hdots X \hdots b_k \hdots c_k$ & $a_k \hdots \overline{b_k}, Z_k \hdots X \hdots b_k \hdots c_k$ \\
$FTT$ & $c_k \hdots b_k \hdots X \hdots \overline{b_k},Z_k \hdots a_k$ & $c_k \hdots b_k \hdots X \hdots \overline{b_k}, Z_k \hdots a_k$ \\
$TFT$ & $a_k \hdots c_k \hdots X \hdots Z_k, b_k$ & $c_k \hdots a_k \hdots X \hdots Z_k, b_k$ \\
$TTF$ & $a_k \hdots Z_k, b_k \hdots X \hdots c_k$ & $a_k \hdots Z_k, b_k \hdots X \hdots c_k$
\end{tabular}
\caption{Possible relative orderings of $a_k, b_k, c_k, Z_k, X$ subject to $(a_k, Z_k, b_k)$ and $(c_k, X, Z_k)$.}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\label{table:truth}
\end{table}
In the other direction, if $G$ is a Wheeler graph then the ordering of the menorah structure is fixed with the exception of $z_i^j$ vertices and the ordering duplicated across layers $\mathcal{L}^0, \mathcal{L}^1, \hdots$. We will show the ordering given to $\mathcal{L}^0$ must have every clause getting a not-all-equal assignment. Suppose to the contrary that $\mathcal{L}^0$ was given an ordering where either $a_k, b_k, c_k$ are all on the left(true) or the right side(false) of $X$. Then we have the options in Table \ref{table:truth2}.
\begin{table}[]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c}
\multicolumn{3}{c}{({\color{red}\bf Not}) Possible Orderings ($a_k$ has variable $x_j$ and $c_k$ has variable $x_h$)} \\ \hline
$a_k b_k c_k$ & $j < h$ & $h < j$\\ \hline
$TTT$ & $a_k \hdots b_k \hdots c_k \hdots X$ & $c_k \hdots b_k \hdots a_k \hdots X$ \\
$FFF$ & $X \hdots c_k \hdots b_k \hdots a_k$ & $X \hdots a_k \hdots b_k \hdots c_k$
\end{tabular}
\caption{Orderings implied by all-equal assignment are not possible while satisfying constraints.}
\vspace{-2em}
\label{table:truth2}
\end{table}
In all cases listed in Table \ref{table:truth2}, placing $Z_k$ between $a_k$ and $b_k$ violates the constraint $(c_k, X, Z_k)$, implying we violate a Wheeler graph constraint as well, a contradiction. Hence, if $G$ is a Wheeler graph, a valid ordering for $\mathcal{L}^0$ implies a valid truth assignment for $\phi'$.
\end{proof}
\section{The Wheeler Graph Violation Problem is APX-hard}
\label{sec:inapprox}
In this section, we show that obtaining an approximate solution to the WGV problem that comes within a constant factor of the optimal solution is NP-hard. We do this through a reduction that shows that WGV is at least as hard as solving the Minimum Feedback Arc Set problem (FAS). The Minimum Feedback Arc Set problem in its original formulation is phrased in terms of a directed graph where the objective is to find the minimum number of edges which need to be removed in order to make the directed graph a DAG. A slightly different formulation proves more useful for us. Letting $F_\pi = \{(v_i,v_j) \in E \ \mid \ \pi(v_i) > \pi(v_j)\}$ we have the following:
\begin{lemma}[Younger~\cite{younger1963minimum}]
Determining a minimum feedback arc set for $G = (V,E)$ is equivalent to finding an ordering $\pi$ on $V$ for which $|F_\pi|$ is minimized.
\end{lemma}
From this, we can present the equivalent formulation of FAS.
\begin{definition}[Minimum Feedback Arc Set (FAS)]
The input is a list $T = t_1 t_2 \hdots t_n$ of $n$ numbers and a set of $k$ inequalities of the form $t_i < t_j$.
This task is to compute an ordering $\pi$ on $T$ so that the number of inequalities violated in minimized.
\end{definition}
Interestingly, we could not have used FAS for proving that the Wheeler graph recognition problem is NP-complete, as FAS is fixed-parameter tractable in terms of the size of the feedback arc set~\cite{DBLP:journals/jacm/ChenLLOR08}. This implies that if we were to set the feedback arc set to size zero (which we will see is equivalent to no Wheeler graph axiom violations in following reduction), the problem becomes solvable in polynomial time.
On the other hand, it has been shown that FAS is APX-hard, meaning that every problem in APX is reducible to it~\cite{kann1992approximability}. It also implies, assuming NP $\neq$ P, that there is a constant $C$ such that there is no polynomial time algorithm which provides a $C$-approximation. The reduction provided in this section implies:
\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:APX-hard}
The WGV problem is APX-hard.
\end{theorem}
In addition, Guruswami {\it et al.} demonstrated that assuming the Unique Games Conjecture holds, and NP $\neq$ P, there is no constant $C > 1$ such that an algorithm's approximate solution to FAS is always a factor $C$ from the optimal solution. We state this as a lemma.
\begin{lemma}[Guruswami {\it et al.}~\cite{DBLP:conf/focs/GuruswamiMR08}]
\label{lemma:C-approx_MFAS}
Conditioned on the Unique Games Conjecture, for every $C \geq 1$, it is NP-hard to
find a C-approximation to FAS.
\end{lemma}
An approximation preserving reduction from FAS to WGV combined with Lemma \ref{lemma:C-approx_MFAS} proves the other main result of this section:
\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:C-approx_Wheeler}
Conditioned on the Unique Games conjecture, for every constant $C \geq 1$, it is NP-hard to
find a $C$-approximation to WGV.
\end{theorem}
\subsection{The Reduction of FAS to WGV}
Let $T = t_1, t_2, \hdots, t_n$ and inequalities $t_1^1 < t_2^1, t_1^2 < t_2^2, \hdots, t_1^k < t_2^k$ be the input to FAS.
We define a heavy edge between the vertices $u$ and $v$ with label $\ell$ as $k+1$ subdivided edges between $u$ and $v$ each with label $\ell$. That is, a heavy edge between $u$ and $v$ with label $\ell$ consists of the edges $(u,w_i,\ell)$ and $(w_i, v, \ell)$ for $1 \leq i \leq k+1$. See Figure \ref{fig:edges} for an illustration.
Use the following steps to create a graph (which is a DAG):
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{0.5\textwidth}
\vspace{-12pt}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{edges.png}
\caption{A bold edge in Figure \ref{fig:C-approx_red} is actually $k+1$ subdivided edges.}
\label{fig:edges}
\end{center}
\vspace{-10em}
\end{wrapfigure}
\vspace{-1em}
\begin{itemize}
\item Create a vertex $v_0$ and the vertices $v_i^j$ for $1 \leq i \leq n+1$ and $1\leq j \leq k$.
\item For each inequality $t_1^j < t_2^j$ create a vertex for each element in the inequality, we call them $w_1^j$ and $w_2^j$, respectively.
\item Create the heavy edges $(v_0, v_i^1,1)$ for $1 \leq i \leq n+1$ and the heavy edges $(v_i^j, v_i^{j+1},1)$ for $1 \leq i \leq n+1, \ 1\leq j \leq k-1$.
\item Create the heavy edges $(v_0, w_1^1, 2)$, and the heavy edges $(v_{n+1}^j,w_2^j,2)$ and \\ $(v_{n+1}^j, w_1^{j+1},2)$ for $1 \leq j \leq k-1$, and the heavy edge $(v_{n+1}^k, w_2^k, 2)$.
\item Finally, add the regular (not heavy) edges $(v_i^j, w_1^j, 2)$ if $t_i = t_1^j$, and $(v_i^j, w_2^j, 2)$ if $t_i = t_2^j$ for $1\leq i \leq n$, $1 \leq j \leq k$.
\end{itemize}
\begin{wrapfigure}{r}{.5\textwidth}
\vspace{-8.6em}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.5\textwidth]{red_FAS.png}
\caption{An example of the reduction from FAS to WGV where $T = 1,2,3,4,5,6$ and the set of inequalities is $5 < 3$, $1 < 5$, and $6 < 4$.}
\label{fig:C-approx_red}
\vspace{-.8em}
\end{center}
\end{wrapfigure}
An example of the reduction is given in Figure \ref{fig:C-approx_red}. The intuition is that the vertices with an inbound heavy edge labeled one represent the permutation of the elements in $T$. The heavy edges labeled one force the permutation to be duplicated $k$ times, once for each constraint. The vertices with the inbound edge label two represent the elements in each inequality. Equivalence between a solution to an instance of FAS and the constructed instance of WGV follows from the lemmas presented next.
In the following lemma we let $E'$ be a solution to WGV and $G' = (V,E \backslash E')$. Moreover we let $\pi$ represent a proper ordering on the vertices of $G'$. The first lemma indicates that, other than permuting the ordering found on the vertices $v_i^j$ for the group defined by $1\leq i \leq n$ (with the ordering duplicated for $1\leq j \leq k$), the ordering for the vertices in Figure \ref{fig:C-approx_red} is fixed. We formalize this with the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:vertex_ordering}
Let $\phi$ represent a permutation of the set $[n+1]$. Any ordering $\pi$ which is a proper ordering of $V$ in $G'$ is of the form $$ v_0, v_{\phi(1)}^1, v_{\phi(2)}^1, \hdots v_{\phi(n+1)}^1, \hdots v_{\phi(1)}^k, v_{\phi(2)}^k, \hdots v_{\phi(n+1)}^k, w_1^1, w_2^1, w_1^2, w_2^2, \hdots w_1^k, w_2^k.$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
We consider an edge $(u,v,k)$ as violating a Wheeler graph axiom if
\begin{enumerate}
\item there exists an edge $(u',v',k')$ with $k < k'$ and $v \geq_\pi v'$, or
\item there exists an edge $(u',v',k')$ with $k = k'$ and $u <_\pi u'$ and $v' < v$, or
\item the in-degree of $u$ is zero and there exist $w\in V$ where in degree $w$ is one or greater and $w <_\pi u$.
\end{enumerate}
The ordering given in Figure \ref{fig:C-approx_red} causes at most $k$ edges to violate a Wheeler graph axiom, so we know that $|E'| \leq k$. If any of the $w$ vertices is placed before a $w$ vertex in $\pi$ that causes $k+1$ edges to violate Wheeler graph Axiom (ii), implying $|E'| \geq k+1$, a contradiction. Similarly, $v_0$ must be placed first in the ordering, otherwise $|E'| \geq k+1$.
A $v^{j}$ vertex must precede a $v^{j+1}$ vertex in $\pi$, for $j \geq 1$. Otherwise, consider the lowest ordered such $v_i^{j+1}$ that is preceding a $v^j$ vertex. If $v_t^j$ follows $v_i^{j+1}$ in the ordering, then the heavy edge $(v_i^{j},v_i^{j+1},1)$ violates Wheeler graph axiom (ii) due to the edge $(v_t^{j-1},v_t^{j},1)$ when $j \geq 2$ and $(v_0,v_t^{j},1)$ when $j = 1$. This is since $v_t^{j-1} <_\pi v_i^j$ and $v_i^{j+1} <_\pi v_t^j$. This causes $k+1$ violations, implying $|E'| \geq k+1$, a contradiction.
The same ordering that was found on the vertices $v_{1}^j, v_{2}^j, \hdots v_{n+1}^j$ must be duplicated across the vertices $v_{1}^{j+1}, v_{2}^{j+1}, \hdots v_{n+1}^{j+1}$. Otherwise, consider the lowest ordered vertex $v_{i}^{j+1}$ in the second group which violates the ordering of the first. Supposing, $v_{t}^j$ is element preceding $v_i^j$ in the ordering, then the heavy edge $(v_t^j,v_t^{j+1},1)$ violates Axiom (ii) due to edge $(v_i^j, v_i^{j+1},1)$ since $v_t^j <_\pi v_i^j$ and $v_i^{j+1} <_\pi v_t^{j+1}$. This creates $k+1$ violations, a contradiction.
The vertex $w_1^1$ must be ordered first in the $w$ block, else $(v_0,w_1^1,2)$ and $(v_{n+1}^1,w_2^1,2)$ cause $k+1$ violations.
The vertex $w_2^1$ must precede $w_1^2$, else the heavy edge $(v_{n+1}^1,w_2^1,2)$ and edge $(v_{i_1}^2, w_1^2,2)$ where $t_{i_1} = t_1^2$ cause $k+1$ violations since $v_{n+1}^1 <_\pi v_{i_1}^2$ but $w_1^2 <_\pi w_2^1$.
The vertex $v_{n+1}^1$ must proceed the vertex $v_{i_2}^1$ where $t_{i_2} = t_2^1$. Otherwise the edges $(v_{n+1}^1,w_1^2,2)$ and $(v_{i_2}^1, w_2^1,2)$ cause $k+1$ violations since $v_{n+1}^1 <_\pi v_{i_2}^1$ but $w_2^1 <_\pi w_1^2$.
We can inductively proceed to $w_1^k$ and $w_2^k$ making the same arguments.
\end{proof}
Let $f(x)$ refer to the reduction described above applied to an instance $x$ of FAS creating an instance of WGV. We also refer to the solution to either of these problems as OPT$(\cdot)$, and $val(\cdot)$ as the cost function. For FAS $val(x)$ is the number of violated inequalities and for WGV it is the number of violating edges.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:reduction_scores}
Given an instance $x$ of FAS, a solution(or sub-optimal solution) to the instance $f(x)$ of WGV that has $\ell \leq k$ axiom violating edges yields a solution(or sub-optimal solution) to $x$ with $\ell$ violated inequalities. The converse holds as well.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{lem:vertex_ordering} any two optimal ordering of the vertices in $G'$
must differ only in the ordering given to $v_1^j, \hdots, v_n^j, v_{n+1}^j$, duplicated for $1 \leq j \leq k$. Ignore the vertex $v_{n+1}^j$ and apply the remaining ordering to $T$. Each edge that has to be removed is one of the two edges $(v_{i_1}^j,w_1^j,2)$ and $(v_{i_2}^j,w_2^j,2)$, where $t_{i_1} = t_1^j$ and $t_{i_2} = t_2^j$, and where $v_{i_2}^j <_\pi v_{i_1}^j$ and $w_1^j <_\pi w_2^j$. This implies for our solution to $x$ the $j^{th}$ inequality has $t_{i_2} < t_{i_1}$, not satisfying the inequality $t_{i_1} < t_{i_2}$. On the other hand, if it holds for the edges $(v_{i_1}^j,w_1^j,2)$ and $(v_{i_2}^j,w_2^j,2)$ that $v_{i_1}^j <_\pi v_{i_2}^j$, this implies the inequality is satisfied.
Conversely, suppose we are given an ordering of the list $T$ which has $\ell$ inequalities not satisfied. Apply the same ordering to $v_1^j, \hdots, v_n^j$ for $1 \leq j \leq k$ and let $v_{n+1}^j$ be the highest ordered vertex for that group. This causes $\ell$ violations involving only pairs of light edges. We can remove one edge from each pair and obtain a (perhaps sub-optimal) solution where $\ell$ edges are removed.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:C-approx}
Given an instance $x$ of FAS, a C-approximation to the solution OPT($f(x)$) yields a C-approximation to the solution OPT($x$).
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Lemma \ref{lem:reduction_scores} any (sub-optimal) solution with objective value $C \cdot val($OPT$(f(x)))$ to $f(x)$, gives us a (sub-optimal) solution to $x$ with the same objective value, $C\cdot val($OPT$(x))$.
\end{proof}
Theorem \ref{theorem:APX-hard} follows from Lemma \ref{lem:C-approx} and
Theorem~\ref{theorem:C-approx_Wheeler} follows from
Lemma \ref{lem:C-approx} and Lemma \ref{lemma:C-approx_MFAS}.
\section{The Wheeler Subgraph Problem is in APX}
\label{sec:MWS}
\begin{wrapfigure}[17]{r}{.4\textwidth}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=.3\textwidth]{branching.png}
\caption{Arborescences have their roots aligned in level $L_0$. The relative ordering for each type of vertex can be read from top to bottom, left to right.}
\label{fig:arborescences}
\end{center}
\end{wrapfigure}
The dual problem to WGV is the problem of finding the largest subgraph of $G$ which is a Wheeler graph. This problem (defined in Section \ref{sec:problem_def}) is called Wheeler Subgraph, or WS. Unlike WGV, this problem yields a $\Theta(1)$-approximate solution for constant $\sigma$.
We first prove the result for $\sigma=1$. The proof uses a branching of a directed graph. A branching is a set of arborescence where
an arborescence is a directed, rooted tree where all edges point away from the root.
A branching is spanning in that every vertex in $V$ is included exactly one arborescence in the branching.
\begin{lemma} \label{lem:14}
There exist a linear time $\Theta(1)$-approximation algorithm for WS when the alphabet set size $\sigma$ is one.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $V_0$ be the set of sources in $G$ (vertices with in-degree zero). There are two cases:
\noindent
\textbf{Case: $|V_0| \leq n/2$:} Take a branching $\mathcal{F}$ of the input graph $G$ such that each non-source vertex than zero is included in some non-singleton arborescence whose root is a source vertex in $V_0$.
Let $|\mathcal{F}|$ denote the total number of arborescences in $\mathcal{F}$. Since $|V_0| \leq n/2$, it follows that $|\mathcal{F}| \leq n/2$ as well.
We create a planar leveling $(L_0, L_1, \hdots)$ of $\mathcal{F}$ by aligning all roots of the branching on level $L_0$ in arbitrary order. Then set $L_i$ to be the vertices which are distance $i$ from some root in $L_0$. Because these are trees, we can order the vertices in levels in such a way that the leveling is planar (and for the purpose of visualization say left to right as in Figure \ref{fig:arborescences}).
We claim that $\mathcal{F}$ is a Wheeler graph and that we can obtain a proper ordering $\pi$ for the vertices of $\mathcal{F}$ from this leveling. Starting with $V_0$, we order the vertices on each level from the bottom to top before proceeding right to the next level. One can check that the Wheeler graph axioms are satisfied.
The number of edges in $\mathcal{F}$, denoted $e(\mathcal{F})$, is equal to $n - |\mathcal{F}|$. And, since $|\mathcal{F}| \leq n/2$, we have that $e(\mathcal{F}) \geq n/2$. At the same time, by Theorem \ref{theorem:num_edges} the optimal number of edges, denoted $|E^*|$, is $\Theta(n)$. The the ratio of the optimal solution value over the branching solution value is bounded. In particular, $|E^*|/e(\mathcal{F}) \leq \Theta(n)/(n/2) = \Theta(1)$. The construction of the branching, the planar leveling, and the extracting $\pi$ can all be done in linear time.
\vspace{3mm}
\noindent
\textbf{Case $|V_0| > n/2$:} Take one outbound edge from each vertex in $V_0$.
We obtain a Wheeler graph with $|V_0| > n/2$ edges. This gives us an approximation ratio of $ |E^*|/|V_0| < \Theta(n)/(n/2) = \Theta(1)$.
\vspace{2mm}
\noindent
In either case, we have an approximate solution with $\tilde{e}$ edges where $\tilde{e} \in \Theta(|E^*|)$.
\end{proof}
\noindent
Now, we consider when $\sigma > 1$. Suppose $G^* = (V,E^*)$ is the optimal solution for $G$. Then $E^* = E_1^* \cup E_2^* \hdots E_\sigma^*$ where $E_k^* = \{(u,v,k) \in E^* \}$. Let $G_k = (V,E_k)$ where $E_k = \{(u,v,k) \in E \}$ and let $G'_k = (V, E_k')$ be the optimal solution for $G_k$. Then, since $|E_k^*| \leq |E_k'|$ we have
$$
|E^*| = \sum_{k=1}^\sigma |E_k^*| \leq \sigma \cdot \max_{k}|E_k^*| \leq \sigma \cdot \max_{k}|E_k'|. $$
Applying the result for $\sigma = 1$ (Lemma~\ref{lem:14}), we can approximate $\max_{k} |E_k'|$ with a solution having $\tilde{e} = \alpha \cdot \max_{k} |E_k'|$ edges for some constant $\alpha \leq 1$.
Therefore,
$$
\frac{\alpha}{\sigma}|E^*| \leq \alpha \max_k |E_k'| = \tilde{e} \leq \max_{k} |E_k'| \leq |E^*|.
$$
So the solution proves $\Omega(1/\sigma)$-approximation for $G$ as well.
\begin{theorem}
There exist a linear time $\Omega(1/\sigma)$-approximation algorithm for WS.
\end{theorem}
\section{An Exponential Time Algorithm}
\label{sec:exp_time}
We can apply the encoding introduced by Gagie \textit{et al.} \cite{DBLP:journals/tcs/GagieMS17} to develop exponential time algorithms to solve all the problems listed so far. The idea is to enumerate over all possible encodings of Wheeler graphs with the proper number of vertices, edges, and labels, checking whether the encoding is isomorphic with the given graph. This idea exploits that having such a space efficient encoding also implies have a limited search space of Wheeler graphs. The graph isomorphism can be checked efficiently enough to maintain the desired time complexity. The results are summarized in the following two theorems, proven in Appendix \ref{appendix:exp_time}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:exp_algorithm}
Recognizing whether $G =(V,E)$ is a Wheeler graph can be done in time
$2^{e\log\sigma+O(n+e)}$,
where $n = |V|$, $e=|E|$, and $\sigma$ is the size of the edge label alphabet.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}
\label{theorem:exp_algorithm_2}
The WGV problem and WS problem for an input $G=(V,E)$ with $n = |V|$, $e = |E|$ and $\sigma$ is the size of the edge label alphabet
can be solved in time $2^{e\log\sigma + O(n + e)}$.
\end{theorem}
\section{Open Problems}
\begin{itemize}
\item Is the Wheeler graph recognition problem NP-complete for 3-NFA and 4-NFA?
\item For which other classes of graphs can Wheeler graph recognition be done efficiently?
\item Is there a fixed parameter tractable exponential time algorithm for any of the problems given in this paper?
\end{itemize}
Constructive answers to these questions would likely contribute to our knowledge about how to find an ordering of the vertices "close" to that required by the Wheeler graph axioms. As a result, it could aid in our ability to apply BWT based indices to various structures, as well as our ability to find useful compressible subgraphs.
\vspace{1mm}
\noindent{\bf Acknowledgement:}
We thank Travis Gagie and Nicola Prezza for introducing this problem to us.
|
\section{Computing seg-agony}\label{sec:seg}
In this section we focus on \textsc{seg-agony}\xspace.
Unlike the previous problem, \textsc{seg-agony}\xspace is very hard to solve (see Appendix for the proof).
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:segnp}
Discovering whether there is a rank segmentation with a 0 score
is an \textbf{NP}-complete problem.
\end{proposition}
This result not only states that the problem is hard to solve exactly but it is
also very hard to approximate: there is no polynomial-time algorithm with a multiplicative approximation
guarantee, unless $\textbf{NP}=\textbf{P}$.
\subsection{Iterative approach}
Since we cannot solve the problem exactly, we have to consider a heuristic approach.
Note that
the rank assignment of a single vertex is characterized by 3 values: a change point, the rank
before the change point, and the rank after the change point.
This leads to the following iterative algorithm:
(\emph{i})
fix a change point for each vertex, and find the optimal ranks before and after the change point,
(\emph{ii})
fix the ranks for each vertex, and find the optimal change point.
Repeat until convergence.
More formally, we need to solve the following two sub-problems iteratively.
\begin{problem}[\textsc{change2ranks}\xspace]
Given a graph $G = (V, E)$ and
a function $\tau$ mapping a vertex to a time stamp,
find
$\funcdef{r_1}{V}{N}$ and $\funcdef{r_2}{V}{N}$
mapping a vertex to an integer,
such that the rank assignment $r$ defined as
\[
r(v; t) =
\begin{cases}
r_1(v), & t < \tau(v), \\
r_2(v), & t \geq \tau(v)
\end{cases}
\]
minimizes $\score{r; G}$.
\end{problem}
\begin{problem}[\textsc{ranks2change}\xspace]
Given a graph $G = (V, E)$ and
two functions
$\funcdef{r_1}{V}{N}$ and
$\funcdef{r_2}{V}{N}$
mapping a vertex to an integer,
find a rank segmentation $r$
minimizing $\score{r; G}$
such that there is a function $\tau$
such that
\[
r(v; t) =
\begin{cases}
r_1(v), & t < \tau(v), \\
r_2(v), & t \geq \tau(v)\quad.
\end{cases}
\]
\end{problem}
Surprisingly, we can solve both sub-problems exactly as we see in the next two
subsections. This implies that during the iteration the score will always
decrease.
We still need a starting point for our iteration. Here, we initialize the
change point of a vertex $v$ as the median time stamp of $v$.
\subsection{Solving \textsc{change2ranks}\xspace}
We begin by solving the easier of the two sub-problems.
Assume that we are given a temporal network $G = (V, E)$ and a function
$\funcdef{\tau}{V}{T}$. We will map \textsc{change2ranks}\xspace to \textsc{gen-agony}\xspace.
In order to do so, we define a graph $H = (W, A)$.
The vertex set $W$ consists of two copies of $V$; for each vertex $v \in V$, we create
two vertices $v^1$ and $v^2$, we also add vertices $\alpha$ and $\omega$ to enforce the constraint $k$.
For each edge $e = (u, v, w, t) \in E$, we introduce an
edge $(u^i, v^j, c = w, b = 1)$ to $A$, where
\[
i =
\begin{cases}
1 & \text{ if } t < \tau(u), \\
2 & \text{ if } t \geq \tau(u), \\
\end{cases}
\quad\text{and}\quad
j =
\begin{cases}
1 & \text{ if } t < \tau(v), \\
2 & \text{ if } t \geq \tau(v)\quad. \\
\end{cases}
\]
Finally, like before, we add $(\alpha, v, c = \infty, b = 0)$, $(v, \omega, c = \infty, b = 0)$
and $(\omega, \alpha, c = \infty, b = 1 - k)$ to enforce the constraint $k$.
We will denote this graph by $G(\tau)$.
\begin{example}
Consider the toy graph given in Figure~\ref{fig:toy}.
Assume $\tau(u) = 1$ and $\tau(v) = 2$. The resulting graph $G(\tau)$
is given in Figure~\ref{fig:toyc2r}.
\end{example}
The following proposition shows that optimizing agony for $H$
is equivalent of solving \textsc{change2ranks}\xspace. We omit the proof as it is trivial.
\begin{proposition}
Let $r$ be a ranking for $H$.
Define $r'$ as
\[
r'(v; t) =
\begin{cases}
r(v^1) - r(\alpha), & t < \tau(v), \\
r(v^2) - r(\alpha), & t \geq \tau(v)\quad.
\end{cases}
\]
Then $\score{r', G} = \score{r, H}$.
Reversely, given a ranking $r'$ satisfying conditions of \textsc{change2ranks}\xspace,
define a ranking $r$ for $G$ by setting $r(v^i) = r_i(v)$.
Then $\score{r', G} = \score{r, H}$.
\end{proposition}
We conclude with the running time analysis.
Assume $G$ with $n$ vertices and $m$ edges.
We have at most $2n + 2$ vertices in $W$ and
$\abs{A} \in \bigO{m}$.
Thus, solving \textsc{change2ranks}\xspace for $H$ can be done in $\bigO{m^2 \log n}$ time.
\subsection{Solving \textsc{ranks2change}\xspace}
Our next step is to solve the opposite problem, where we are given the two alternative
ranks for each vertex, and we need to find the change points. Luckily, we can solve
this problem in polynomial time. To solve the problem we map it to \textsc{gen-agony}\xspace, however unlike in previous
problems, the construction will be quite different.
Assume that we are given a graph $G = (V, E)$, and the two functions $r_1$ and
$r_2$. To simplify the following definitions, let us first define
\[
\rmin{v} = \min(r_1(v), r_2(v)) \quad\text{and}\quad \rmax{v} = \max(r_1(v), r_2(v))\quad.
\]
Assume an edge $e = (u, v, w, t) \in E$. A solution to \textsc{ranks2change}\xspace must
use ranks given by $r_1$ and $r_2$, that is
the rank of $u$ is either $\rmin{u}$ or $\rmax{u}$,
and the rank of $v$ is either $\rmin{v}$ or $\rmax{v}$,
depending where we mark the change point for $u$ and $v$.
This means that there are only 4 possible values for the penalty of $e$.
They are
\[
\begin{split}
p_{00}(e) & = w\times\max(0, \rmin{u} - \rmin{v} + 1), \\
p_{10}(e) & = w\times\max(0, \rmax{u} - \rmin{v} + 1), \\
p_{01}(e) & = w\times\max(0, \rmin{u} - \rmax{v} + 1), \\
p_{11}(e) & = w\times\max(0, \rmax{u} - \rmax{v} + 1)\quad.
\end{split}
\]
Among these penalties, $p_{01}(e)$ is the smallest, and ideally we would pay
only $p_{01}(e)$ for each edge. This is rarely possible, so we need to design a
method that takes other penalties into account.
Next we define a static graph $H = (W, A)$ that will eventually solve \textsc{ranks2change}\xspace.
For each vertex $v \in V$ and a time stamp $t \in T$
such that there is an edge adjacent to $v$ at time $t$,
add a vertex $v_t$ to $W$. Add also two additional vertices $\alpha$ and $\omega$.
We will define the edges $A$ in groups.
The first two sets of edges in $A$ essentially force $r(u_t) = 0, 1$, and that the ranking is monotonic as a function of $t$.
Consequenty, there will be at most only one time stamp for each vertex $u$, where the ranking changes.
This will be the eventual change point for $u$. The edges are:
\begin{enumerate}[label = {(\emph{\roman*})}, parsep = 1mm, leftmargin = 0pt, itemindent = 7mm]
\item Connect each vertex $u_t$ to $\omega$ with $b = 0$ and
weight $c = \infty$.
Connect $\alpha$ to each vertex $u_t$ with $b = 0$ and
weight $c = \infty$.
Connect $\omega$ to $\alpha$ with $b = -1$ and $c = \infty$.
Connect $\alpha$ to $\omega$ with $b = 1$ and $c = \infty$.
This forces $r(\alpha) \leq r(u_t) \leq r(\omega) = r(\alpha) + 1$.
\item Let $v_t, v_s \in W$ such that $s > t$ and there is no $v_o \in W$
with $t < o < s$.
If $r_2(v) \geq r_1(v)$, then connect $v_t$ to $v_s$
with $b = 0$ and $c = \infty$. This forces $r(v_s) \geq r(v_t)$.
If $r_2(v) < r_1(v)$, then connect $v_s$ to $v_t$
with $b = 0$ and $c = \infty$. This forces $r(v_s) \leq r(v_t)$.
\end{enumerate}
For notational simplicity, let us assume that $r(\alpha) = 0$.
The idea is then that once we have obtained the ranking for $H$, we can define the
ranking for $G$ as
\[
r'(v; t) = \rmin{v} + (\rmax{v} - \rmin{v})r(v_t)\quad.
\]
Our next step is to define the edges that correspond to the penalties
in the original graph. We will show later in Appendix that the agony of $r'$ is equal to
$P_1 + P_2 + P_3 + \mathit{const}$, where
\[
\begin{split}
P_1 & = \sum_{v_t \mid r(v_t) = 0} \sum_{e = (u, v, w, t) \in E} p_{00}(e) - p_{01}(e), \\
P_2 & = \sum_{u_t \mid r(u_t) = 1} \sum_{e = (u, v, w, t) \in E} p_{11}(e) - p_{01}(e), \\
P_3 & = \sum_{e = (u, v, w, t) \in E \atop r(v_t) = 0, r(u_t) = 1} p_{10}(e) - p_{00}(e) - p_{11}(e) + p_{01}(e)\quad.
\end{split}
\]
Let us first define the edges that lead to these penalties .
\begin{enumerate}[label = {(\emph{\roman*})}, parsep = 1mm, leftmargin = 0pt, itemindent = 7mm]
\item Connect $\omega$ to each vertex $v_t$ with $b = 0$ and weight
\[
c = \sum_{e = (u, v, w, t) \in E} p_{00}(e) - p_{01}(e)\quad.
\]
In the sum $v$ and $t$ are fixed, and correspond to $v_t$.
This edge penalizes vertices with $r(v_t) = 0$ with a weight of $c$.
Summing these penalties yields $P_1$.
\item Connect each vertex $u_t$ to $\alpha$ with $b = 0$ and
weight
\[
c = \sum_{e = (u, v, w, t) \in E} p_{11}(e) - p_{01}(e)\quad.
\]
In the sum $u$ and $t$ are fixed, and correspond to $u_t$.
This edge penalizes vertices with $r(u_t) = 1$ with a weight of $c$.
Summing these penalties yields $P_2$.
\item
For each edge $e = (u, v, w, t) \in E$, connect $u_t$ and $v_t$
with $b = 0$ and
\[
c = p_{10}(e) - p_{00}(e) - p_{11}(e) + p_{01}(e)\quad.
\]
This edge penalizes cases when $r(u_t) = 1$ and $r(v_t) = 0$,
and constitute $P_3$.
\end{enumerate}
We will denote the resulting $H$ by $G(r_1, r_2)$.
\begin{example}
Consider the toy graph given in Figure~\ref{fig:toy}.
Assume that the rank assignments are
$r_1(u) = 0$,
$r_1(v) = 1$,
$r_2(u) = 2$,
$r_2(v) = 3$.
The resulting graph $G(r_1, r_2)$ is given in Figure~\ref{fig:toyr2c}.
The optimal ranking for $G(r_1, r_2)$ assigns $0$ to
$\alpha$, $u_0$, $v_0$, and $v_1$; the rank for the remaining vertices is 1.
\end{example}
\begin{figure}
\hspace*{\fill}
\subcaptionbox{$G(\tau)$\label{fig:toyc2r}}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (p1) {$u^1$};
\node[exnode] at (1, 0) (n1) {$v^1$};
\node[exnode] at (2, 0) (p2) {$u^2$};
\node[exnode] at (3, 0) (n2) {$v^2$};
\draw (p1) edge[exedge, bend left = 10] node[auto, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {1, 1} (n1);
\draw (n1) edge[exedge, bend left = 10] node[auto, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {1, 1} (p2);
\draw (p2) edge[exedge, bend left = 10] node[auto, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {1, 1} (n2);
\node[exnode] at (1.5, 1) (alpha) {$\alpha$};
\node[exnode] at (1.5, -1) (omega) {$\omega$};
\draw (alpha) edge[exedge3, bend right = 20] (p1);
\draw (alpha) edge[exedge3, bend left = 20] (p2);
\draw (alpha) edge[exedge3, bend right = 20] (n1);
\draw (alpha) edge[exedge3, bend left = 20] (n2);
\draw (p1) edge[exedge3, bend right = 20] (omega);
\draw (p2) edge[exedge3, bend left = 20] (omega);
\draw (n1) edge[exedge3, bend right = 20] (omega);
\draw (n2) edge[exedge3, bend left = 20] (omega);
\end{tikzpicture}}\hfill
\subcaptionbox{$G(r_1, r_2)$\label{fig:toyr2c}}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[exnode] at (0, 1) (p1) {$u_0$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (n1) {$v_0$};
\draw (p1) edge[exedge, bend right = 10] node[auto=right, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {2, 0} (n1);
\begin{scope}[xshift = 2cm]
\node[exnode] at (-0.4, 1) (p2) {$u_1$};
\node[exnode] at (0.4, 0) (n2) {$v_1$};
\draw (n2) edge[exedge, bend left = 10] node[rotate = -45, pos = 0.7, auto=right, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 0pt] {0, 0} (p2);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 4cm]
\node[exnode] at (0, 1) (p3) {$u_2$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (n3) {$v_2$};
\draw (p3) edge[exedge, bend left = 10] node[auto, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {2, 0} (n3);
\end{scope}
\draw (p1) edge[exedge3, bend left = 10] (p2);
\draw (p2) edge[exedge3, bend left = 10] (p3);
\draw (n1) edge[exedge3, bend right = 10] (n2);
\draw (n2) edge[exedge3, bend right = 10] (n3);
\node[exnode] at (2, 2) (alpha) {$\alpha$};
\node[exnode] at (2, -1) (omega) {$\omega$};
\draw (n2) edge[exedge2, bend right = 20] node[auto=right, pos = 0.2, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 1pt] {2, 0} (alpha);
\draw (alpha) edge[exedge3, bend right = 20] (p1);
\draw (alpha) edge[exedge3, bend left = 5] (p2);
\draw (alpha) edge[exedge3, bend left = 20] (p3);
\draw (alpha) edge[exedge3, bend left = 5] (n1);
\draw (alpha) edge[exedge3, bend left = 5] (n2);
\draw (alpha) edge[exedge3, bend right = 5] (n3);
\draw (n1) edge[exedge3, bend right = 20] (omega);
\draw (n2) edge[exedge3, bend right = 5] (omega);
\draw (n3) edge[exedge3, bend left = 20] (omega);
\draw (p1) edge[exedge3, bend left = 5] (omega);
\draw (p2) edge[exedge3, bend right = 5] (omega);
\draw (p3) edge[exedge3, bend right = 5] (omega);
\draw (omega) edge[exedge2, bend left = 20] node[auto, pos = 0.8, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 1pt] {2, 0} (p2);
\end{tikzpicture}}
\hspace*{\fill}
\caption{
Graphs used for solving \textsc{seg-agony}\xspace.
In both figures, the edges with omitted parameters have $c = \infty$ and $b = 0$.
For clarity, we omit edges between $\alpha$ and $\omega$ in both figures, in addition,
in (b) we omit parameters for the edges $(x, \alpha)$ and $(\omega, x)$ with $c = 0$.
}
\end{figure}
Before we show the connection between the ranks in $G$ and $H = G(r_1, r_2)$,
we first need to show that the edge weights are non-negative. This is needed to guarantee
that we can find the optimal ranking of $H$ using \textsc{gen-agony}\xspace.
\begin{proposition}
The weights of edges in $H$ are non-negative.
\label{prop:segweightpositive}
\end{proposition}
The proof is given in Appendix.
We will state our main result: we can obtain the solution for \textsc{ranks2change}\xspace
using the optimal ranking for $H$; see Appendix for the proof.
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:segtime}
Let $r$ be the optimal ranking for $H$.
Then
\[
r'(v; t) = \rmin{v} + (\rmax{v} - \rmin{v}) (r(v_t) - r(\alpha))
\]
solves \textsc{ranks2change}\xspace.
\end{proposition}
We conclude this section with the running time analysis.
Assume $G$ with $n$ vertices and $m$ edges.
A vertex $v_t \in W$ implies that there is
an edge $(u, v, w, t) \in E$. Thus, $\abs{W} \in \bigO{m}$.
Similarly, $\abs{A} \in \bigO{m}$.
Thus, solving \textsc{ranks2change}\xspace for $H$ can be done in $\bigO{m^2 \log m}$ time.
\section{Proofs of the propositions}
\subsection{Proof of Proposition~\lowercase{\ref{prop:segweightpositive}}}
\label{sec:proofsegweight}
To prove the proposition, we need the following lemma.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:diffsubmod}
Assume that we are given three numbers $a$, $b$, and $d$ with $a, b \geq 0$.
Define
\[
h(x, y) = \max(ax - by + d, 0),
\quad\text{where}\quad x, y \in \set{0, 1}.
\]
Then $h(1, 1) - h(0, 1) \leq h(1, 0) - h(0, 0)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{IEEEproof}
Straightforward calculation leads to
\[
h(1, 1) - h(0, 1) = \min(a, h(1, 1))
\quad\text{and} \quad
h(1, 0) - h(0, 0) = \min(a, h(1, 0))
\quad.
\]
Since $b \geq 0$, it follows that $h(1, 1) \leq h(1, 0)$, making the left equality smaller.
\qed
\end{IEEEproof}
\begin{IEEEproof}[of Proposition~\lowercase{\ref{prop:segweightpositive}}]
The inequality
$\rmax{u} \geq \rmin{u}$ implies $p_{11} - p_{01} \geq 0$, and so the weights of
the edges $(u_t, \alpha)$ are non-negative. Similarly, $p_{00} - p_{01} \geq
0$, and so the weights of the edges $(\omega, u_t)$ are non-negative.
Assume edge $(u_t, v_t, c, 0)$, let
$a = \rmax{u} - \rmin{u}$,
$b = \rmax{v} - \rmin{v}$,
$d = 1 + \rmin{u} - \rmin{v}$. Since $a, b \geq 0$, Lemma~\ref{lem:diffsubmod}
states that $c = p_{10}(u, v) - p_{00}(u, v) - p_{11}(u, v) + p_{01}(u, v) \geq 0$.
\qed
\end{IEEEproof}
\subsection{Proof of Proposition~\lowercase{\ref{prop:segtime}}}
\label{sec:proofsegtime}
Define $F$, a mapping transforming a ranking for $H$ to a ranking for $G$, as
\[
F(r) = \rmin{v} + (\rmax{v} - \rmin{v}) (r(v_t) - r(\alpha))\quad.
\]
Let $R$ be the set of rankings for $H$ with $\score{r, H} < \infty$.
To prove the proposition, we show (\emph{i}) that the scores of $r \in R$
and $F(r)$ differ only by a constant, and (\emph{ii}) $\set{F(r) \mid r \in R}$
correspond to the valid rankings for \textsc{ranks2change}\xspace.
These two results will immediately prove the Proposition~\ref{prop:segtime}.
\begin{lemma}
For $r \in R$,
$\score{r, H} = \score{F(r), G} + \mathit{const}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{IEEEproof}
Let $r \in R$. We can safely assume that $r(\alpha) = 0$.
Since edges $(u, v, c, b) \in A$ with $c = \infty$ guarantee
$r(v) \leq b + r(u)$, we have $0 = r(\alpha) \leq r(v_t) \leq
r(\omega) = 1$.
Let us split edges in $E$ in four groups $E_{00}$, $E_{01}$, $E_{10}$, $E_{11}$:
an edge $e = (u, v, w, t)$ belongs to $E_{xy}$ if $r(u_t) = x$ and $r(v_t) = y$.
Define $C_{xy} = \sum_{e \in E_{xy}} p_{xy}(e)$.
Then
\[
\score{F(r), G} = C_{00} + C_{01} + C_{10} + C_{11}\quad.
\]
The cost $\score{r, H}$ consists of three parts.
The first part
is caused by the edges $(\omega, v_t)$ s.t. $r(v_t) = 0$, and it is equal to
\[
\begin{split}
P_1 & = \sum_{v_t \mid r(v_t) = 0} \sum_{e = (u, v, w, t) \in E} p_{00}(u, v) - p_{01}(u, v) \\
& = \sum_{e \in E_{00} \cup E_{10}} p_{00}(e) - p_{01}(e)\quad.
\end{split}
\]
The second part
is caused by edges $(u_t, \alpha)$ for which $r(u_t) = 1$, and it is equal to
\[
\begin{split}
P_2 & = \sum_{u_t \mid r(u_t) = 1} \sum_{e = (u, v, w, t) \in E} p_{11}(u, v) - p_{01}(u, v) \\
& = \sum_{e \in E_{11} \cup E_{10}} p_{11}(e) - p_{01}(e)\quad.
\end{split}
\]
The final part consists of edges between $u_t$ and $v_t$ for which $r(u_t) = 1$
and $r(v_t) = 0$, and it is equal to
\[
P_3 = \sum_{e \in E_{10}} p_{10}(e) - p_{00}(e) - p_{11}(e) + p_{01}(e)\quad.
\]
Write $Z = \sum_{e \in E} p_{01}(e)$.
Combining these leads us
\[
\begin{split}
P_1 + P_2 + P_3 & = C_{00} + C_{11} + C_{10} - \sum_{e \in E \setminus E_{01}} p_{01}(e) \\
& = C_{00} + C_{11} + C_{10} + C_{01} - Z \\
& = \score{F(r), G} - Z,
\end{split}
\]
where $Z$ does not depend on $r$.
\qed
\end{IEEEproof}
\begin{lemma}
$r'$ is a valid solution for \textsc{ranks2change}\xspace
if and only if there is $r \in R$ with $r' = F(r)$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{IEEEproof}
Let $r \in R$, and let $r' = F(r)$.
We can safely assume that $r(\alpha) = 0$.
Since edges $(u, v, c, b) \in A$ with $c = \infty$ guarantee
$r(v) \leq b + r(u)$, we have $0 = r(\alpha) \leq r(v_t) \leq r(\omega) = 1$.
Consequently, $r'(v; t) = r_1(v)$ or $r'(v; t) = r_2(v)$.
Assume $r_1(v) < r_2(v)$. Then $r(v_t)$ is increasing,
\[
r(v_t) =
\begin{cases}
1 & t \leq \tau \\
0 & t > \tau
\end{cases}
\]
for some $\tau$. Also, $\rmin{v} = r_1(v)$ and $\rmax{v} = r_2(v)$. So
\[
r'(v; t) =
\begin{cases}
r_1(v) & t \leq \tau \\
r_2(v) & t > \tau\quad.
\end{cases}
\]
The case $r_1(v) > r_2(v)$ is symmetric. Thus, $r'$ is a valid solution for \textsc{ranks2change}\xspace.
Assume that you are given $r'$, a valid solution for Problem.
Define $r(v_t) = 1$ if $\rmax{v} = r'(v; t)$, and $0$ otherwise.
Extend the solution by setting $r(\alpha) = 0$ and $r(\omega) = 1$.
It is easy to see that for
any edge $(u, v, c, b) \in A$ with $c = \infty$ we have
$r(v) \leq b + r(u)$. Thus, $r \in R$.
\qed
\end{IEEEproof}
\subsection{Proof of Proposition~\lowercase{\ref{prop:segnp}}}
\label{sec:proofsegnp}
\begin{IEEEproof}
The problem is clearly in \textbf{NP}. We will use \textsc{3SAT}\xspace to prove the hardness.
Assume that we are given an instance of \textsc{3SAT}\xspace with $n$ variables and $m$ clauses.
We will prove the proposition in several steps.
\emph{Step 1 (graph construction):}
The graph consists of 3 vertex groups.
The first group consists of $2n$ vertices, $p_i$ and $n_i$, where $i = 1, \ldots, n$.
The second group consists of $3m$ vertices $C$, each vertex representing an occurrence of a literal in a clause.
For notational simplicity,
we will index vertices in $C$ by $c_{j\ell}$, where $j = 1, \ldots, m$ and $\ell = 1, 2, 3$.
The third group consists of $9m$ vertices $x_{j\ell}$, $y_{j\ell}$, and $z_{j\ell}$, where $j = 1, \ldots, m$ and $\ell = 1, 2, 3$.
In total, we have 3 unique time stamps, and the edges are given in Figure~\ref{fig:npproof}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[exnode] at (0, 0.6) (p1) {$p_i$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (n1) {$n_i$};
\draw (p1) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (n1);
\begin{scope}[xshift = 2cm]
\node[exnode] at (0, 0.6) (p2) {$p_i$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (n2) {$n_i$};
\draw (n2) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (p2);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 4cm]
\node[exnode] at (0, 0.6) (p3) {$p_i$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (n3) {$n_i$};
\draw (p3) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (n3);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 11cm]
\node[anchor = east] at (0, 0.3) {for $i = 1, \ldots, n$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 0cm, yshift = -1cm]
\node[exnode] at (0, 0.6) (a) {$p_i$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (b) {$c_{j\ell}$};
\draw (a) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (b);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 2cm, yshift = -1cm]
\node[exnode] at (0, 0.6) (a) {$p_i$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (b) {$c_{j\ell}$};
\draw (b) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (a);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 11cm, yshift = -1cm]
\node[align = right, anchor = east] at (0, 0.3) {if the $\ell$th literal in the $j$th clause is\\ the positive literal of the $i$th variable.};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 0cm, yshift = -2cm]
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (a) {$n_i$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0.6) (b) {$c_{j\ell}$};
\draw (b) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (a);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 2cm, yshift = -2cm]
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (a) {$n_i$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0.6) (b) {$c_{j\ell}$};
\draw (a) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (b);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 11cm, yshift = -2cm]
\node[align = right, anchor = east] at (0, 0.3) {if the $\ell$th literal in the $j$th clause is\\the negative literal of the $i$th variable.};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 2cm, yshift = -3cm]
\node[exnode] at (-0.55, 0.6) (b1) {$x_{j1}$};
\node[exnode] at (-0.55, 0) (d1) {$c_{j2}$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0.6) (b2) {$x_{j2}$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (d2) {$c_{j3}$};
\node[exnode] at (0.55, 0.6) (b3) {$x_{j3}$};
\node[exnode] at (0.55, 0) (d3) {$c_{j1}$};
\draw (b1) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (d1);
\draw (b2) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (d2);
\draw (b3) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (d3);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 4cm, yshift = -3cm]
\node[exnode] at (-0.55, 0.6) (b1) {$x_{j1}$};
\node[exnode] at (-0.55, 0) (d1) {$c_{j1}$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0.6) (b2) {$x_{j2}$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (d2) {$c_{j2}$};
\node[exnode] at (0.55, 0.6) (b3) {$x_{j3}$};
\node[exnode] at (0.55, 0) (d3) {$c_{j3}$};
\draw (d1) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (b1);
\draw (d2) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (b2);
\draw (d3) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (b3);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 11cm, yshift = -3cm]
\node[align = right, anchor = east] at (0, 0.3) {for $j = 1, \ldots, m$\\ $\ell = 1, \ldots, 3$};
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 0cm, yshift = -4cm]
\node[exnode] at (0, 0.6) (a) {$x_{j\ell}$};
\node[exnode] at (-0.5, 0) (b) {$y_{j\ell}$};
\node[exnode] at (0.5, 0) (c) {$z_{j\ell}$};
\node[exnode] at (0, -0.5) {$t = 0$};
\draw (b) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (a);
\draw (c) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (a);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 2cm, yshift = -4cm]
\node[exnode] at (0, 0.6) (a) {$x_{j\ell}$};
\node[exnode] at (-0.5, 0) (b) {$y_{j\ell}$};
\node[exnode] at (0.5, 0) (c) {$z_{j\ell}$};
\node[exnode] at (0, -0.5) {$t = 1$};
\draw (c) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (b);
\draw (a) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (c);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 4cm, yshift = -4cm]
\node[exnode] at (0, 0.6) (a) {$x_{j\ell}$};
\node[exnode] at (-0.5, 0) (b) {$y_{j\ell}$};
\node[exnode] at (0.5, 0) (c) {$z_{j\ell}$};
\node[exnode] at (0, -0.5) {$t = 2$};
\draw (b) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (a);
\draw (a) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] (c);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 11cm, yshift = -4cm]
\node[align = right, anchor = east] at (0, 0.3) {for $j = 1, \ldots, m$\\ $\ell = 1, \ldots, 3$};
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Edges related to the proof of Proposition~\ref{prop:segnp}.}
\label{fig:npproof}
\end{figure}
\emph{Step 2 (satisfiability implies zero cost solution):}
Assume that we have a truth assignment that satisfies the formula.
To show that there is a zero-cost rank assignment, we will construct
a change point function $\tau$. Then we show that solving \textsc{change2ranks}\xspace with
this function results in a zero-cost rank assignment.
To define $\tau$, we first set
\[
\begin{split}
\tau(p_i) = 1, \quad \tau(n_i) = 2,&
\quad\text{if the $i$th variable is true, and} \\
\tau(p_i) = 2, \quad \tau(n_i) = 1,&
\quad\text{if the $i$th variable is false} \quad.
\end{split}
\]
Moreover, we set
$\tau(c_{j\ell}) = 2$ if the corresponding literal (taking possible negation into account) is true,
and $\tau(c_{j\ell}) = 1$ otherwise.
Finally, we set
\[
\tau(x_{j\ell}) = 1,\quad
\tau(y_{j\ell}) = 2,\quad
\tau(z_{j\ell}) = 2\quad.
\]
Let $H = G(\tau)$. We will show that $H$ is a DAG, which guarantees that the
rank assignment resulting from solving \textsc{change2ranks}\xspace yields a zero cost.
For every vertex in $v \in V(G)$, we will write $v^1$ and $v^2$ to refer
to the corresponding vertices in $H$, before and after the change point, respectively.
Assume there is a cycle $D$ in $H$. Assume that the $i$th variable is set to true.
Then $p_i^1$ is a source and cannot be a part of $D$. Similarly, $n_i^2$ is a
sink. Since the only outgoing edge of $p^2_i$ goes to $n_i^2$, $p^2_i \notin
D$. Any $c_{j\ell}^1$ that corresponds to the \emph{negative} $i$th literal
is also a source. These vertices and $p_i^1$ are the only parents of $n_i^1$,
so $n_i^1 \notin D$. The case when the $i$th variable is false is symmetric.
In summary, $D$ does not contain
$p_i^1$,
$n_i^1$,
$p_i^2$, nor
$n_i^2$.
Since there are no other vertices joining vertices corresponding to different
clauses, $D$ must be among vertices $x_{j\ell}$, $y_{j\ell}$, $z_{j\ell}$,
$c_{j\ell}$ for a \emph{fixed} $j$.
Fix $j = 1, \ldots, m$.
$y_{j\ell}^2$ is a source and $z_{j\ell}^2$ is a sink, so they are outside of $D$.
Vertex
$x_{j\ell}^1$ is a sink, so it is outside of $D$.
The only outgoing edge of $y_{j\ell}^1$ goes to $x_{j\ell}^1$, so $y_{j\ell}^1 \notin D$.
The only outgoing edges of $z_{j\ell}^1$ go to $x_{j\ell}^1$ and $y_{j\ell}^1$, so $z_{j\ell}^1 \notin D$.
Vertex $c_{j\ell}^1$ is a sink within the subgraph corresponding to the clause,
so $c_{j\ell}^1 \notin D$.
In summary, $D$ may contain only $c_{j\ell}^2$, and $x_{j\ell}^2$.
The only possible cycle is then a $6$-cycle containing every $x_{j\ell}^2$
and $c_{j\ell}^2$. This is only possible if $\tau(c_{j\ell}) = 1$ for $\ell = 1, 2, 3$.
But this is a contradiction, since $j$th clause must be satisfied.
Consequently, $H$ is a DAG and solving \textsc{change2ranks}\xspace for a given $\tau$ results in a rank assignment
that yields a zero cost.
\emph{Step 3 (zero cost solution implies satisfiability):}
Assume that $r$ is a rank assignment inducing a zero cost.
Let us write $\tau(v)$ to be the time stamp where the rank changes (if the rank is
constant, then set $\tau(v) = 1$). We can safely assume that $\tau(v) =1, 2$.
Define
$P = \set{i \mid \tau(p_i) = 1}$ and
$N = \set{i \mid \tau(n_i) = 1}$.
Note that $P \cap N = \emptyset$ and $P \cup N = [1, n]$,
otherwise the 1st row in Figure~\ref{fig:npproof} creates a cycle.
We set the variables whose indices are in $P$ to be true,
and the variables whose indices are in $N$ to be false.
Next, we prove that this assignment indeed solves \textsc{3SAT}\xspace.
We first claim that $\tau(x_{j\ell}) = 1$. Assume otherwise. Then
\[
\begin{split}
r(y_{j\ell}; 0) & < r(x_{j\ell}; 0) = r(x_{j\ell}; 1) < r(y_{j\ell}; 1)\quad \text{and} \\
r(z_{j\ell}; 0) & < r(x_{j\ell}; 0) = r(x_{j\ell}; 1) < r(z_{j\ell}; 1)\quad.
\end{split}
\]
Thus, $r(z_{j\ell}; 1) = r(z_{j\ell}; 2)$ and $r(y_{j\ell}; 1) = r(y_{j\ell}; 2)$.
But
\[
\begin{split}
r(y_{j\ell}; 2) & < r(x_{j\ell}; 2) < r(z_{j\ell}; 2) = r(z_{j\ell}; 1)
< r(y_{j\ell}; 1) = r(y_{j\ell}; 2),
\end{split}
\]
which is a contradiction. Consequently, $r(x_{j\ell}; 0) \neq r(x_{j\ell}; 1)$, which forces $\tau(x_{j\ell}) = 1$.
Fix $j = 1, \ldots, m$.
Since $r(x_{j\ell}; 1) = r(x_{j\ell}; 2)$, then there is at least one $c_{j\ell'}$
for which $\tau(c_{j\ell'}) = 2$,
otherwise the 4th row in Figure~\ref{fig:npproof} creates a cycle.
Assume that $c_{j\ell'}$ corresponds to the positive $i$th literal.
This immediately implies that $\tau(p_i) = 1$,
otherwise the 2nd row in Figure~\ref{fig:npproof} creates a cycle.
By definition, $i \in P$, so the $i$th variable is true and the $j$th clause is satisfied.
Similarly, if $c_{j\ell'}$ corresponds to the negative $i$th literal,
then immediately $\tau(n_i) = 1$, so
$i \in N$ and the $i$th variable is false and the clause is satisfied.
Since this holds for every clause, \textsc{3SAT}\xspace is satisfied.
\qed
\end{IEEEproof}
\section{Concluding remarks}\label{sec:conclusions}
In this paper we propose a problem of discovering a dynamic hierarchy in a
directed temporal network. To that end, we propose two different optimization
problems: \textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace and \textsc{seg-agony}\xspace. These problems vary in the
way we control the variation of the rank of single vertices. We show that
\textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace can be solved in polynomial time while \textsc{seg-agony}\xspace
is \textbf{NP}-hard. We also developed an iterative heuristic for \textsc{seg-agony}\xspace.
Our experimental validation showed that the algorithms are practical, and the
obtained rankings are sensible.
\textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace is the more flexible of the two methods as the parameter
$\lambda$ allows user to smoothly control how much rank is allowed
to vary. This comes at a price as the user is required to select an appropriate
$\lambda$. One way to select $\lambda$ is to vary the parameter and monitor
the trade-off between the agony and the fluctuation. An interesting variant of
\textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace---and potential future line of work---is to minimize agony while
requiring that the fluctuation should not increase over some given threshold.
The relation between \textsc{seg-agony}\xspace and the sub-problems \textsc{ranks2change}\xspace and \textsc{change2ranks}\xspace is
intriguing: while the joint problem \textsc{seg-agony}\xspace is \textbf{NP}-hard not only the
sub-problems are solvable in polynomial time, they are solved with the same
mechanism.
A straightforward extension for \textsc{seg-agony}\xspace is to allow more than just one change
point, that is, in such a case we are asked to partition the time line of each
vertex into $\ell$ segments. However, we can no longer apply the same iterative
algorithm. More specifically, the solver for \textsc{ranks2change}\xspace relies on the fact that
we need to make only one change. Developing a solver that can handle the
more general case is an interesting direction for future work.
\section{Solving fluc-agony}\label{sec:easy}
In this section we provide a polynomial solution for \textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace
by mapping the problem to an instance of \textsc{gen-agony}\xspace.
Assume that we are given a temporal graph $G =
(V, E)$, a parameter $\lambda$ and a(n optional) constraint on the number of levels, $k$.
We will create a static graph $H = (W, A)$ for which solving
\textsc{gen-agony}\xspace is equivalent of solving \textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace for $G$.
First we define $W$:
for each vertex $v \in V$ and a time stamp $t \in T$ such that there is an edge adjacent to $v$ at time $t$,
add a vertex $v_t$ to $W$. Add also two vertices $\alpha$ and $\omega$.
The edges $A$ consists of three groups $A_1$, $A_2$ and $A_3$:
\begin{enumerate}[label = {(\emph{\roman*})}, parsep = 1mm, nolistsep, leftmargin=0cm, itemindent = 7mm]
\item For each edge $e = (u, v, w, t) \in E$, add
an edge $(u_t, v_t, c = w, b = 1)$.
\item Let $v_t, v_s \in W$ such that $s > t$ and there is no $v_o \in W$
with $t < o < s$, that is $v_t$ and $v_s$ are 'consecutive' vertices corresponding to $v$.
Add an edge $(v_t, v_s, c = \lambda, b = 0)$, also
add an edge $(v_s, v_t, c = \lambda, b = 0)$.
\item Assume that $k$ is given.
Connect each vertex $u_t$ to $\omega$ with $b = 0$ and
weight $c = \infty$.
Connect $\alpha$ to each vertex $u_t$ with $b = 0$ and
weight $c = \infty$.
Connect $\omega$ to $\alpha$ with $b = 1 - k$ and $c = \infty$.
This essentially forces $r(\alpha) \leq r(u_t) \leq r(\omega) \leq r(\alpha) + k - 1$.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{example}
Consider a temporal graph in Figure~\ref{fig:toy}.
The corresponding graph, without $\alpha$ and $\omega$, is given
in Figure~\ref{fig:toysmooth}.
\end{example}
Let $r$ be the rank assignment for $H$ with a finite cost, and define a rank assignment for $G$,
$r'(v; t) = r(v_t)$. The penalty of edges in $A_1$ is equal to $\score{r', G}$
while the penalty of edges in $A_2$ is equal to $\lambda \sum_{v \in V}
\flux{v, r'}$.
The edges in $A_3$ force $r'$ to honor the constraint $k$, otherwise $\score{r, H} = \infty$.
This leads to the following proposition.
\begin{proposition}
Let $r$ be the solution of \textsc{gen-agony}\xspace for $H$.
Then $r'(v; t) = r(v_t) - r(\alpha)$ solves \textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace for $G$.
\end{proposition}
We conclude with the running time analysis. Assume $G$ with $n$ vertices and $m$ edges.
A vertex $v_t \in W$ implies that there is
an edge $(u, v, w, t) \in E$. Thus, $\abs{W} \in \bigO{m}$.
Similarly, $\abs{A_1} + \abs{A_2} + \abs{A_3} \in \bigO{m}$.
Thus, solving \textsc{gen-agony}\xspace for $H$ can be done in $\bigO{m^2 \log m}$ time.
\section{Experiments}\label{sec:exp}
In this section we present our experimental evaluation.
\textbf{Datasets and setup:}
\label{sec:setup}
We considered 5 datasets. The first 3 datasets, \dtname{Mention},
\dtname{Retweet}, and \dtname{Reply}, obtained from SNAP
repository~\cite{snapnets}, are the twitter interaction networks related to
Higgs boson discovery. The 4th dataset, \dtname{Enron} consists of the email interactions
between the core members of Enron.
In addition, for illustrative purposes, we used a small dataset:
\dtname{NHL}, consisting of National Hockey League teams during the 2015--2016 regular season.
We created an edge $(x, y)$ if
team $x$ has scored more goals against team $y$ in a single game during the $2014$ regular season. We assign
the weight to be the difference between the points and the time stamp to be the date the game was played.
We used hours as time stamps for Higgs
datasets, days for \dtname{Enron}.
The sizes of the graphs are given in Table~\ref{tab:basic}.
\begin{table}[htb!]
\caption{Basic characteristics of the datasets and the experiments. The third data column, $\abs{T}$,
represents the number of unique time stamps, while the last column is the number of unique $(v, t)$ pairs
such that the vertex $v$ is adjacent to an edge at time $t$, $\big| \bigcup_{(u, v, w, t) \in E } \set{(v, t), (u, t)}\big|$.}
\label{tab:basic}
\begin{tabular*}{\columnwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l rrrr}
\toprule
Name & $\abs{V}$ & $\abs{E}$ & $\abs{T}$ & $\abs{\set{(v, t)}}$ \\
\midrule
\dtname{Enron} &
146 &
105\,522 &
964 &
24\,921 \\
\dtname{Reply} &
38\,683 &
36\,395 &
168 &
54\,892 \\
\dtname{Retweet}&
256\,491 &
354\,930 &
168 &
390\,583 \\
\dtname{Mention} &
115\,684 &
164\,156 &
168 &
183\,693 \\
\dtname{NHL} &
30 &
1\,230 &
178 &
2\,460 \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular*}
\end{table}
For each dataset we applied \textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace, \textsc{seg-agony}\xspace,
and the static variant, \textsc{agony}\xspace.
For \textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace we set $\lambda = 1$ for the Higgs datasets, $\lambda = 2$ for
\dtname{NHL} and \dtname{Enron}.
We implemented the algorithms in C++, and performed experiments using a
Linux-desktop equipped with a Opteron 2220 SE processor.\!\footnote{
See \url{https://bitbucket.org/orlyanalytics/temporalagony} for the code.}
\textbf{Computational complexity:}
First, we consider the running times, reported in
Table~\ref{tab:results}. We see that even though the
theoretical running time is $\bigO{m^2 \log n}$ for \textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace
and for a single iteration of \textsc{seg-agony}\xspace, the algorithms perform well in
practice. We are able to process graphs with 300\,000 edges in 5 minutes.
Naturally, \textsc{seg-agony}\xspace is the slowest as it requires multiple iterations---in our experiments 3--5 rounds---to converge.
\begin{table*}[htb!]
\caption{Agony, running time, and number of unique ranks in the ranking.}
\label{tab:results}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{1pt}
\begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l rrr rrr rrr}
\toprule
&
\multicolumn{3}{l}{score} &
\multicolumn{3}{l}{number of ranks} &
\multicolumn{3}{l}{time}
\\
\cmidrule(r){2-4}
\cmidrule(r){5-7}
\cmidrule(r){8-10}
Name &
\textsc{agony}\xspace & \textsc{fluc}\xspace & \textsc{seg}\xspace &
\textsc{agony}\xspace & \textsc{fluc}\xspace & \textsc{seg}\xspace &
\textsc{agony}\xspace & \textsc{fluc}\xspace & \textsc{seg}\xspace
\\
\midrule
\dtname{Enron} &
57\,054 &
21\,434 &
50\,393 &
6 &
9 &
7 &
3s &
4s &
26s
\\
\dtname{Reply} &
6\,017 &
5\,401 &
4\,147 &
13 &
12 &
16 &
0.4s &
10s &
15s
\\
\dtname{Retweet} &
2\,629 &
1\,384 &
1070 &
23 &
21&
18 &
8s &
4m &
5m
\\
\dtname{Mention} &
12\,756 &
10\,082 &
8\,219 &
20 &
19 &
18 &
4s&
1m&
2m
\\
\dtname{NHL} &
2\,090 &
1\,414 &
1\,883 &
2 &
4 &
4 &
0.6s &
0.3s &
1s
\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular*}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}[htb!]
\caption{Statistics measuring fluctuation of the resulting rankings:
$\flux{}$ is equal to the fluctuation $\flux{u; r}$ averaged over $u$,
$\mathit{maxdiff}$ is the maximum difference between the ranks of a single vertex $u$, averaged over $u$,
$\mathit{change}$ is the number of times rank is changed for a single vertex $u$, averaged over $u$.
Note that $\flux{} = \mathit{maxdiff}$ for \textsc{seg-agony}\xspace as the assignment is allowed to change only once.
}
\label{tab:results2}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{1pt}
\begin{tabular*}{\textwidth}{@{\extracolsep{\fill}}l rr rr rr}
\toprule
&
\multicolumn{2}{l}{\flux{}} &
\multicolumn{2}{l}{$\mathit{maxdiff}$} &
\multicolumn{2}{l}{$\mathit{change}$}
\\
\cmidrule{2-3}
\cmidrule{4-5}
\cmidrule{6-7}
Name &
\textsc{fluc}\xspace & \textsc{seg}\xspace &
\textsc{fluc}\xspace & \textsc{seg}\xspace &
\textsc{fluc}\xspace & \textsc{seg}\xspace
\\
\midrule
\dtname{Enron} &
28.2 &
1 &
3.2 &
1 &
21.8 &
0.66 \\
\dtname{Reply} &
0.013 &
0.43 &
0.012 &
0.43 &
0.01 &
0.36
\\
\dtname{Retweet} &
0.003 &
0.17 &
0.003 &
0.17 &
0.002 &
0.13 \\
\dtname{Mention} &
0.016 &
0.3 &
0.014 &
0.3 &
0.011 &
0.2
\\
\dtname{NHL} &
2.7 &
0.73 &
1.5 &
0.73 &
2.6 &
0.5
\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular*}
\end{table*}
\textbf{Statistics of obtained rankings:}
Next, we look at the statistics of the obtained rankings, given in Table~\ref{tab:results}. We
first observe that the agony of the dynamic variants is always lower than the
static agony, as expected.
Let us compare the constraint statistics, given in Table~\ref{tab:results2}.
First, we see that \textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace yields the smallest $\flux{}$ in Higgs databases.
\textsc{seg-agony}\xspace produces smaller $\flux{}$ in the other two datasets but it also produces
a higher agony.
Interestingly enough, \textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace yields a surprisingly low
average number of change points for Higgs datasets. The low average is mainly due to most
resulting ranks being constant, and only a minority of vertices changing ranks over time.
However, this minority changes its rank more often than just once.
\textbf{Agony vs fluctuation:}
The parameter $\lambda$ of \textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace provides a flexible way of controlling
the fluctuation: smaller values of $\lambda$ leads to smaller agony but larger
fluctuation while larger values of $\lambda$ leads to larger agony but smaller
fluctuation. This can be seen in Table~\ref{tab:results}, where relatively large $\lambda$
forces small fluctuation for the Higgs datasets, while relatively small $\lambda$
allows variation and a low agony for \dtname{Enron} dataset.
This flexibility comes at a cost: we need to have a sensible way
of selecting $\lambda$. One approach to select this value is to study the joint
behavior of the agony and the fluctuation as we vary $\lambda$. This is
demonstrated in Figure~\ref{fig:lambda_enron} for \dtname{Enron} data, where we
scatter plot the agony versus the average fluctuation, and vary $\lambda$. We see that
agony decreases steeply as we allow some fluctuation over time but the obtained
benefits decrease as we allow more variation.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[xlabel={$\frac{1}{n}\sum_v \flux{v; r}$},ylabel= {$\score{G, r}$},
width = 6cm,
height = 2cm,
cycle list name=yaf,
scale only axis,
tick scale binop=\times,
x tick label style = {/pgf/number format/set thousands separator = {\,}},
y tick label style = {/pgf/number format/set thousands separator = {\,}},
scaled ticks = false,
xmax = 50,
xtick = {0, 10, 20, 30, 40, 50},
pin distance = 3mm,
no markers
]
\addplot table[x expr = {\thisrowno{2} / 146}, y index = 1, header = false] {enron_smooth_lambda.dat};
\node[black, inner sep = 0.5pt, pin={[black, font=\scriptsize]0:$\lambda = \infty$}] at (axis cs: 0, 56524) {};
\node[black, inner sep = 0.5pt, pin={[black, font=\scriptsize]90:$\lambda = 0$}] at (axis cs: 6943 / 146, 17566) {};
\pgfplotsextra{\yafdrawaxis{0}{50}{17566}{56524}}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Agony plotted against $\flux{}$ of the optimal ranking for \textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace by varying the parameter $\lambda$ (\dtname{Enron}).}
\label{fig:lambda_enron}
\end{figure}
\textbf{Use case:}
Finally, let us look on the rankings by \textsc{seg-agony}\xspace of
\dtname{NHL} given in Figure~\ref{fig:nhl}.
We limit the number of possible rank
levels to $k = 3$.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{3pt}
Ranking before the change:\\[1mm]
\begin{tabular*}{\columnwidth}{ll}
\toprule
1. &
\textsc{mtl win bos min dal flo wsh}\\
2. &
\textsc{van nyr chi sj tor col pit nsh stl tbl det nj nyi}\\
3. &
\textsc{cal lak ott buf car edm phi cbj ari ana} \\[2mm]
\bottomrule
\end{tabular*}\vspace{2mm}
Ranking after the change:\\[1mm]
\begin{tabular*}{\columnwidth}{ll}
\toprule
1. &
\textsc{nyr sj lak pit nsh stl tbl phi ana wsh} \\
2. &
\textsc{cal chi bos ott buf min dal car cbj det ari nj nyi flo} \\
3. &
\textsc{van mtl tor win col edm} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular*}\vspace{2mm}
Change points:\\[1mm]
\begin{tikzpicture}
\begin{axis}[
width = 0.95\textwidth,
height = 1cm,
cycle list name=yaf,
scale only axis,
ytick = \empty,
every node near coord/.append style = {font = {\scriptsize\sc}, text = black},
xtick = {0, 31, 61, 92, 123, 152, 183},
xticklabels = {Oct, Nov, Dec, Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr, May}
]
\addplot+[mark = *, mark size = 1pt, yafcolor5, nodes near coords, point meta = explicit symbolic, only marks]
table[x index = 0, y index = 1, meta index = 2, header = false] {nhl_change.dat};
\pgfplotsextra{\yafdrawxaxis{11}{128}}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Rank segmentations for \dtname{NHL} with $k = 3$. The bottom figure shows only the teams whose rank changed. The $y$-axis is used only to reduce the clutter.}
\label{fig:nhl}
\end{figure}
The results are sensible: the top teams are playoff teams while the
bottom teams have a significant losing record. Let us highlight some change points that reflect
significant changes in teams: for example, the collapse of \emph{Montreal Canadiens} (MTL)
from the top rank to the bottom rank coincides with the injury of their star goaltender.
Similarly, the rise of the \emph{Pittsburgh Penguins} (PIT) from the middle rank to the top rank
reflects firing of the head coach as well as retooling their strategy, \emph{Penguins} eventually won the Stanley Cup.
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
The outcome of interactions in many real-world systems can be often explained
by a hierarchy between the participants. Such rankings occur in diverse
domains, such as, hierarchies among athletes~\citep{elo1978rating},
animals~\citep{jameson:99:behaviour,roopnarine:13:reef}, social network
behaviour~\citep{DBLP:conf/cse/MaiyaB09}, and browsing
behaviour~\citep{DBLP:conf/icdm/MacchiaBGC13}.
Discovering a hierarchy in a directed network can be defined as follows: given a
directed graph $G = (V, E)$, find an integer $r(v)$, representing a rank of
$v$, for each vertex $v \in V$, such that ideally $r(u) < r(v)$ for each edge
$(u, v) \in E$. This is possible only if $G$ is a DAG, so in practice, we penalize
each edge with a penalty $q(r(u), r(v))$, and minimize the total penalty.
One practical choice for a penalty is \emph{agony}~\citep{gupte:11:agony,tatti:14:agony,tatti:15:hierarchies}, $q(r(u), r(v)) = \max(r(u) - r(v) + 1, 0)$.
If $r(u) < r(v)$, an ideal case, then the agony is 0. On the other hand, if $r(u) = r(v)$, then
we penalize the edge by 1, and the penalty increases as the edge becomes more 'backward'.
The major benefit of computing agony is that we can solve it in polynomial time~\citep{gupte:11:agony,tatti:15:hierarchies,tatti:14:agony}.
In this paper we extend the definition of agony to temporal networks:
we are given a directed network with time stamped edges\footnote{An edge
may have several time stamps.} and the idea is to allow the rank assignment to
vary over time; in such a case, the penalty of an edge with a time stamp $t$ depends only on the
ranks of the adjacent vertices at time $t$.
We need to penalize or constrain the variation of the ranks, as otherwise the
optimization problem of discovering dynamic agony
reduces to computing the ranks over individual snapshots. In order to do
so, we consider 2 variants. In our first variant, we compute the fluctuation of
the rankings over time, and this fluctuation is added directly to the
optimization function, multiplied by a parameter $\lambda$.
In our second variant we allow the rank to change at most once, essentially
dividing the time line of a single vertex into 2 segments.
We show that the first variant can be solved exactly in $\bigO{m^2\log m}$
time. On the other hand, we show that the second variant is \textbf{NP}-hard, and in
fact inapproximable. However, we develop a simple iterative method, where we
first fix the change points and optimize the ranks, and then fix the ranks and
optimize the change points, and reiterate until convergence. We show that the
resulting two subproblems can be solved exactly in $\bigO{m^2\log m}$ time.
We show empirically that, despite the pessimistic theoretical running times, the
algorithms are reasonably fast in practice: we are able to compute the rankings
for a graph with over $350\,000$ edges in 5 minutes.
The remainder of the paper is organized as follows. We introduce the notation
and formalize the problem in Section~\ref{sec:prel}. In
Section~\ref{sec:static} we review the technique for solving static agony,
and in Section~\ref{sec:easy} we will use this technique to solve the first two
variants of the dynamic agony. In Section~\ref{sec:seg}, we present the iterative
solution for the last variant. Related work is given in Section~\ref{sec:related}.
Section~\ref{sec:exp} is devoted to experimental evaluation, and we conclude the
paper with remarks in Section~\ref{sec:conclusions}. The proofs for non-trivial
theorems are given in Appendix in supplementary material.
\section*{References}}
\renewcommand{\bibnumfmt}[1]{#1.}
\bibliographystyle{splncsnat}
\newcommand{\iftrue}{\iftrue}
\newenvironment{IEEEproof}{\begin{proof}}{\end{proof}}
\hyphenation{thres-hold}
\input{defines}
\begin{document}
\title{Dynamic hierarchies in temporal directed networks}
\author{Nikolaj Tatti\inst{1,2}}
\authorrunning{N. Tatti}
\institute{F-Secure, Helsinki, Finland \and
Aalto University, Espoo, Finland
\email{<EMAIL>}}
\maketitle
\begin{abstract}
The outcome of interactions in many real-world systems can be often explained
by a hierarchy between the participants.
Discovering hierarchy from a given directed network
can be formulated as follows: partition vertices into levels
such that, ideally, there are only forward edges, that is, edges from upper levels to lower levels.
In practice, the ideal case is impossible, so instead we minimize some
penalty function on the backward edges. One practical option for such a penalty
is agony, where the penalty depends on the severity of the violation.
In this paper we extend the definition of agony to temporal networks. In this
setup we are given a directed network with time stamped edges,
and we allow the rank assignment to
vary over time.
We propose 2 strategies for controlling the variation of individual ranks. In
our first variant, we penalize the fluctuation of the rankings over time by
adding a penalty directly to the optimization function.
In our second variant we allow the rank change at most once.
We show that the first variant can be solved exactly in polynomial time
while the second variant is \textbf{NP}-hard, and in fact inapproximable. However, we
develop an iterative method, where we first fix the change point and
optimize the ranks, and then fix the ranks and optimize the change points, and
reiterate until convergence.
We show empirically that the algorithms are reasonably fast in practice, and
that the obtained rankings are sensible.
\end{abstract}
\input{intro}
\input{prel}
\input{static}
\input{easy}
\input{algorithm}
\input{related}
\input{exp}
\input{conclusions}
\section{Preliminaries and problem definition}\label{sec:prel}
We begin with establishing preliminary notation, and then continue by defining
the main problem.
The main input to our problem is a \emph{weighted temporal directed graph}
which we will denote by $G = (V, E)$, where $V$ is the set of vertices
and $E$ is a set of tuples of form $e = (u, v, w, t)$, meaning an edge $e$ from $u$ to $v$
at time $t$ with a weight $w$. We allow multiple edges to have the same time stamp,
and we also allow two vertices $u$ and $v$ to have multiple edges.
If $w$ is not provided we assume that an edge has a weight
of 1.
To simplify the notation we will often write $w(e)$ to mean
the weight of an edge $e$.
Let $T$ be the set of all time stamps.
A \emph{rank assignment} $\funcdef{r}{V \times T}{\mathbb{N}}$ is a function
mapping a vertex and a time stamp to an integer; the value $r(u; t)$ represents
the rank of a vertex $u$ at a time point $t$.
Our next step is to penalize backward edges in a ranking $r$.
In order to do so, consider an edge $e = (u, v, w, t)$. We define the penalty
as
\[
\pen{e; r} = w\times\max(0, r(u; t) - r(v; t) + 1)\quad.
\]
This penalty is equal to $0$ whenever $r(v; t) > r(u; t)$, if $r(v; t) = r(u;
t)$, then the $\pen{e; r} = w$, and the penalty increases as the difference
$r(u; t) - r(v; t)$ increases.
We are now ready to define the cost of a ranking.
\begin{definition}
Assume an input graph $G = (V, E)$ and a rank assignment $r$.
We define a score for $r$ to be
\[
\score{r, G} = \sum_{e \in E} \pen{e; r}\quad.
\]
\end{definition}
\textbf{Static ranking:}
Before defining the main optimization problems, let us first consider the
optimization problem where we do \emph{not} allow the ranking to vary over
time.
\begin{problem}[\textsc{agony}\xspace]
\label{prb:static}
Given a graph $G = (V, E)$, an integer $k$, find a ranking $r$ minimizing
$\score{r, G}$,
such that $0 \leq r(v; t) \leq k - 1$ and $r(v; t) = r(v; s)$, for every $v \in V$ and $t, s \in T$.
\end{problem}
Note that \textsc{agony}\xspace does not use any temporal information, in fact,
the exact optimization problem can be defined on a graph where we have stripped
the edges of their time stamps. This problem can be solved exactly in polynomial time,
as demonstrated by~\citet{tatti:15:hierarchies}. We should also point out that $k$ is an optional parameter,
and the optimization problem makes sense even if we set $k = \infty$.
\textbf{Dynamic ranking:} We are now ready to define our main problems.
The main idea here is to allow the rank assignment to \emph{vary}
over time. However, we should penalize or constrain the variation of a ranking.
Here, we consider 2 variants for imposing such a penalty.
In order to define the first variant, we need a concept of fluctuation,
which is the sum of differences between the consecutive ranks of a given vertex.
\begin{definition}
Let $r$ be a rank assignment. Assume that $T$, the set of all time stamps, is
ordered, $T = t_1, \ldots, t_\ell$. The \emph{fluctuation} of a rank for a single
vertex $u$ is defined as
\[
\flux{u; r} = \sum_{i = 1}^{\ell - 1} \abs{r(u, t_{i + 1}) - r(u, t_{i})}\quad.
\]
\end{definition}
Note that if $r(u, t)$ is a constant for a fixed $u$, then $\flux{u; r} = 0$.
We can now define our first optimization problem.
\begin{problem}[\textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace]
\label{prb:smooth}
Given a graph $G = (V, E)$, an integer $k$, and a penalty parameter $\lambda$,
find a rank assignment $r$ minimizing
\[
\score{r, G} + \lambda \sum_{v \in V} \flux{v; r},
\]
such that $0 \leq r(v; t) \leq k - 1$ for every $v \in V$ and $t \in T$.
\end{problem}
The parameter $\lambda$ controls how much emphasis we would like to put in
constraining $\flux{}$: If we set $\lambda = 0$, then the $\flux{}$ term is
completely ignored, and we allow the rank to vary freely as a function of time.
In fact, solving \textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace reduces to taking snapshots of $G$
at each time stamp in $T$, and applying \textsc{agony}\xspace to these snapshots individually.
On the other hand, if we set $\lambda$ to be a very large number, then this
forces $\flux{v; r} = 0$, that is the ranking is constant over time. This
reduces \textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace to the static ranking problem, \textsc{agony}\xspace.
In our second variant, we limit
how many \emph{times} we allow the rank to change. More specifically, we allow
the rank to change only once.
\begin{definition}
We say that a rank assignment $r$ is a \emph{rank segmentation} if each $u$ changes its
rank $r(u; t)$ at most once. That is, there are functions
$r_1(u)$, $r_2(u)$ and $\tau(v)$
such that
\[
r(u; t) =
\begin{cases}
r_1(u), & t < \tau(u), \\
r_2(u), & t \geq \tau(u)\quad.
\end{cases}
\]
\end{definition}
This leads to the following optimization problem.
\begin{problem}[\textsc{seg-agony}\xspace]
\label{prb:agseg}
Given a graph $G = (V, E)$ and an integer $k$,
find a \emph{rank segmentation} $r$ minimizing $\score{r; G}$
such that
$0 \leq r(v; t) \leq k - 1$
for every $v \in V$ and $t \in T$.
\end{problem}
Note that the obvious extension of this problem is to allow rank to change $\ell$
times, where $\ell > 1$. However, in this paper we focus specifically on the $\ell
= 1$ case as this problem yields an intriguing algorithmic approach, given in
Section~\ref{sec:seg}.
\section{Related work}\label{sec:related}
Perhaps the most classic way of ranking objects based on pair-wise interactions
is Elo rating proposed by~\citet{elo1978rating}, used to rank chess players. A
similar approach was proposed by~\citet{jameson:99:behaviour} to model animal
dominance.
\citet{DBLP:conf/cse/MaiyaB09} proposed discovering
directed trees from weighted graphs such that parent vertices tend
to dominate the children. A hierarchy is evaluated by a
statistical model where the probability of an edge is high between a parent and
a child. A good hierarchy is then found by a greedy heuristic.
Penalizing edges using agony was first considered by~\citet{gupte:11:agony},
and a faster algorithm was proposed by~\citet{tatti:14:agony}. The setup was
further extended to handle the weighted edges, which was not possible with the
existing methods, by~\citet{tatti:15:hierarchies}, as well to be able to limit
the number of distinct ranks (parameter $k$ in the problem definitions).
An alternative to agony is a penalty that penalizes an edge $(u, v)$ with $r(u)
\geq r(v)$ with a constant penalty. In such a case, optimizing the cost is
equal to \textsc{feedback arc set} (\textsc{FAS}\xspace), an \textbf{APX}-hard problem with a
coefficient of $c = 1.3606$~\cite{dinur:05:cover}. Moreover, there is no known
constant-ratio approximation algorithm for \textsc{FAS}\xspace, and the best known
approximation algorithm has ratio $O(\log n \log \log
n)$~\cite{even:98:feedback}. In addition, \citet{tatti:15:hierarchies}
demonstrated that minimizing agony is \textbf{NP}-hard for any concave penalties while
remains polynomial for any convex penalty function.
An interesting direction for future work is to study whether the rank obtained
from minimizing agony can be applied as a feature in role mining tasks, where
the goal is to cluster vertices based on similar
features~\citep{henderson:12:roix,mccallum:07:roles}.
\textsc{seg-agony}\xspace essentially tries to detect a change point for each vertex. Change
point detection in general is a classic problem and has been studied
extensively, see excellent survey by~\citet{gama:14:survey}. However, these
techniques cannot be applied directly for solving \textsc{seg-agony}\xspace since we would need to
have the ranks for individual time points.
The difficulty of solving \textsc{seg-agony}\xspace stems from the fact that we allow vertices
to have different change points. If we require that the change point must be the equal
for all vertices, then the problem is polynomial. Moreover, we can easily
extend such a setup for having $\ell$ segments. Discovering change points then
becomes an instance of a classic segmentation problem which can be optimized
by a dynamic program~\citep{bellman:61:on}.
\section{Generalized static agony}\label{sec:static}
In order to solve the dynamic ranking problems, we need to consider a minor
extension of the static ranking problem.
To that end, we define a \emph{static graph} $H = (W, A)$ to be the graph, where
$W$ is a set of vertices and $A$ is a collection of directed edges $(u, v, c,
b)$, where $u, v \in V$, $c$ is a positive---possibly infinite---weight, and
$b$ is an integer, negative or positive.
\begin{problem}[\textsc{gen-agony}\xspace]
Given a static graph $H = (W, A)$ find a function $\funcdef{r}{W}{\mathbb{Z}}$
minimizing
\[
\sum_{(u, v, c, b) \in A} \max (c \times (r(u) - r(v) + b), 0)\quad.
\]
\end{problem}
Note that $c$ in $(u, v, c, b)$ may be infinite. This implies that if the
solution has a finite score, then $r(u) + b \leq r(v)$.\!\footnote{Here we
adopt $0 \times \infty = 0$, when dealing with the case $r(u) - r(v) + b = 0$.}
We can formulate the static ranking problem, \textsc{agony}\xspace, as an instance of
\textsc{gen-agony}\xspace: Assume a graph $G = (V, E)$, and a(n optional) cardinality
constraint $k$. Define a graph $H = (W, A)$ as follows. The vertex set $W$
consists of the vertices $V$ and two additional vertices $\alpha$ and $\omega$.
For each edge $(u, v, w, t) \in E$, add an edge $(u, v, c = w, b = 1)$ to $A$.
If there are multiple edges from $u$ to $v$, then we can group them and combine the weights.
This guarantees that the sum in \textsc{gen-agony}\xspace corresponds exactly to the cost function in \textsc{agony}\xspace.
If $k$ is given, then add edges
$(\alpha, u, c = \infty, b = 0)$ and $(u, \omega, c = \infty, b = 0)$ for each $u \in V$.
Finally, add $(\omega, \alpha, c = \infty, b = 1 - k)$. This guarantees that
the for the optimal solution we must have $r(\alpha) \leq r(u) \leq r(\omega) \leq r(\alpha) + k - 1$,
so now the ranking defined $r(u; t) = r(u) - r(\alpha)$ satisfies the constraints by \textsc{agony}\xspace.
\begin{example}
\label{ex:toystatic}
Consider a temporal network given in Figure~\ref{fig:toy}.
The corresponding graph $H$ is given in Figure~\ref{fig:toystatic}.
\end{example}
\begin{figure}
\hspace*{\fill}
\subcaptionbox{Toy network, $G$\label{fig:toy}}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[exnode] at (0, 1) (p1) {$u$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (n1) {$v$};
\node[exnode] at (0, -0.5) {$t = 0$};
\draw (p1) edge[exedge, bend right = 10] node[auto=right, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {1} (n1);
\begin{scope}[xshift = 1.6cm]
\node[exnode] at (-0, 1) (p2) {$u$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (n2) {$v$};
\node[exnode] at (0, -0.5) {$t = 1$};
\draw (n2) edge[exedge, bend left = 10] node[auto, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt, pos = 0.4] {1} (p2);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 3.2cm]
\node[exnode] at (0, 1) (p3) {$u$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (n3) {$v$};
\node[exnode] at (0, -0.5) {$t = 2$};
\draw (p3) edge[exedge, bend left = 10] node[auto, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {1} (n3);
\end{scope}
\end{tikzpicture}}\hfill
\subcaptionbox{$H$ for \textsc{agony}\xspace\label{fig:toystatic}}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[exnode] at (-0.2, 0) (p1) {$u$};
\node[exnode] at (1.2, 0) (n1) {$v$};
\draw (p1) edge[exedge, bend left = 15] node[auto, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {2, 1} (n1);
\draw (n1) edge[exedge, bend left = 15] node[auto, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {1, 1} (p1);
\node[exnode] at (0.5, 1) (alpha) {$\alpha$};
\node[exnode] at (0.5, -1) (omega) {$\omega$};
\draw (alpha) edge[exedge2, bend right = 20] node[auto=right, pos = 0.5, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 0pt] {$\infty, 0$} (p1);
\draw (alpha) edge[exedge2, bend left = 20] node[auto, black, pos = 0.5, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 0pt] {$\infty, 0$} (n1);
\draw (p1) edge[exedge2, bend right = 20] node[auto=right, pos = 0.5, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 1pt] {$\infty, 0$} (omega);
\draw (n1) edge[exedge2, bend left = 20] node[auto, black, pos = 0.5, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 0pt] {$\infty, 0$} (omega);
\draw (omega) edge[exedge3, bend right = 100, looseness = 2] node[auto = right, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {$\infty, 1 - k$} (alpha);
\end{tikzpicture}}\hfill
\subcaptionbox{$H$ for \textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace\label{fig:toysmooth}}{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node[exnode] at (0, 1) (p1) {$u_0$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (n1) {$v_0$};
\draw (p1) edge[exedge, bend right = 10] node[rotate = 90, anchor = south, pos = 0.5, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {1, 1} (n1);
\begin{scope}[xshift = 1.5cm]
\node[exnode] at (-0, 1) (p2) {$u_1$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (n2) {$v_1$};
\draw (n2) edge[exedge, bend left = 10] node[rotate = 90, anchor = south, pos = 0.5, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {1, 1} (p2);
\end{scope}
\begin{scope}[xshift = 3.0cm]
\node[exnode] at (0, 1) (p3) {$u_2$};
\node[exnode] at (0, 0) (n3) {$v_2$};
\draw (p3) edge[exedge, bend left = 10] node[rotate = 90, anchor = south, pos = 0.5, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {1, 1} (n3);
\end{scope}
\draw (p1) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] node[auto, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {$\lambda, 0$} (p2);
\draw (p2) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] node[auto, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {$\lambda, 0$} (p3);
\draw (n1) edge[exedge2, bend right = 10] node[auto = right, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {$\lambda, 0$} (n2);
\draw (n2) edge[exedge2, bend right = 10] node[auto = right, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {$\lambda, 0$} (n3);
\draw (p3) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] node[auto, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {$\lambda, 0$} (p2);
\draw (p2) edge[exedge2, bend left = 10] node[auto, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {$\lambda, 0$} (p1);
\draw (n3) edge[exedge2, bend right = 10] node[auto = right, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {$\lambda, 0$} (n2);
\draw (n2) edge[exedge2, bend right = 10] node[auto = right, black, font = \scriptsize, inner sep = 2pt] {$\lambda, 0$} (n1);
\end{tikzpicture}}
\hspace*{\fill}
\caption{Graph $G$, and the corresponding graphs $H$ used in \textsc{agony}\xspace and \textsc{fluc-agony}\xspace.
In (b), the edges with omitted parameters have $c = \infty$ and $b = 0$.
In (c), vertices $\alpha$ and $\omega$, and the adjacent edges, are omitted.}
\end{figure}
As argued by~\citet{tatti:15:hierarchies}, \textsc{gen-agony}\xspace is a dual problem of
capacitated circulation, a classic variant of a max-flow optimization problem.
This problem can be solved using an algorithm by~\citet{orlin:93:flow} in
$\bigO{\abs{A}^2\log \abs{W}}$ time. In practice, the running time is faster.
|
\section{Introduction}
Many physical and biological processes feature particle flow in confined geometries. Examples include vehicular and pedestrian traffic \cite{Helbing2003,Appert-Rolland2010a}, filtration of particle suspensions, and the flow of macromolecules or ions through micro- or nanochannels \cite{Finkelstein1981,Kelkar20072011,daiguji2004}. In biology, an important example is flux regulation mediated by pore-forming membrane proteins. The transport of ions and water through these channels is primarily a single-file process, i.e. cations and water molecules cannot pass each other within the channel \cite{daiguji2004}. Moreover, these flux regulatory channels can be clogged by toxins or medicines, with significant consequences. Recent studies of tracer diffusion of {\it biased} (or active) particles in a crowded, narrow channel revealed a non-trivial relationship between the exerted force and the mean velocity, as well asymmetric density profiles of the environment
\cite{0953-8984-30-44-443001,Bertrand2018,Krapivsky2014,Benichou2018}.
Some information systems, such as telecommunication \cite{Senderovich2015278} and computing networks \cite{6745901,ezaki2015taming}, as well as trunked mobile radio systems and air traffic \cite{janssen2008, barcelo1996,6820567} are also amenable to the channel description.
A blockage may be caused by either `extrinsic' or `intrinsic' mechanisms. The former refers to the situation where the number of particles present somehow exceeds the channel carrying capacity, and will be the focus of this article. The latter mechanism arises from collective effects such as encountered in filtration processes. In this case, while isolated particles can pass through a mesh hole, clogging occurs when two or more particles arrive in near concurrence, causing one to impede the other. This effect, due to the delicate interplay between the spatio-temporal closeness of the particles and the confining geometry, could be seen as setting the capacity of a channel to greater than one, which establishes a connection between both types of blocking mechanisms. A model based on this phenomenology successfully accounted for experimental data \cite{Roussel2007,Redner2000a}.
Various approaches, including the Totally Asymmetric Simple Exclusion Process (TASEP)\cite{Mallick2011,Mallick2015} have been applied to model these phenomena. Gabrielli \textit{et al.} introduced a class of stochastic models in which blockages occur when the carrying capacity of a channel is exceeded \cite{Gabrielli2013,talbot2015}. For these stochastic models, the particle velocity within the channels is identical, and the mean particle density is low enough to prevent exclusion effects. The blockage is triggered when the number of particles within the channel at a given time exceeds the channel capacity. The original model considered one channel with capacity $N=2$, i.e., two particles must be simultaneously present in the channel to block the system. Particles enter at random times according to a Poisson process of intensity $\lambda$ and exit, if no blockage occurs,
after a fixed transit time $\tau$. Subsequently, several generalizations were studied, including a higher blocking threshold ($N>2$) \cite{barre2015a}, an inhomogeneous entering flux \cite{barre2015}, and multiple channels \cite{PhysRevE.92.052141,barre2016diminishing}.
When the blockage is reversible, the system is reactivated after a constant waiting time, $\tau_b$. This mechanism gives rise to
a transient regime leading to a steady state \cite{Barre2013}. In this article we associate the last two generalizations.
Queuing theory \cite{Adan2002,Medhi:1991:SMQ:113159} provides an alternative description of reversible blocking phenomena. This framework is typically used to describe customers arriving at a server, according to one given distribution, and receiving service according to another distribution. If all the elementary steps are Markov processes, the time evolution of the state probabilities can be described by systems of linear differential equations. In accordance with this approach, we recently introduced Markovian models of blockage \cite{1742-5468-2018-6-063213,0953-8984-30-30-304004} for which exact solutions can be obtained.
This paper is organized as follows:
We first consider the single channel model in Sec. \ref{sec:onechannel}, for which exact solutions are available for $N=1,2,3$, and simulation results for greater values of $N$. We also compare our results with the previously introduced Markovian models. In Sec. \ref{sec:multimodel} a channel bundle model consisting of $N_c$ identical channels each of capacity $N$ and sharing an incoming flux is presented. Exact results are obtained for $N = 1$, as well as numerical simulation results for larger values of $N$. These allow us to observe and explain some results in the limit of large $N$ or $N_c$. In Sec. \ref{sec:compare}, we compare the efficiency of different configurations of channels in conveying a particulate flux of given intensity.
Finally, in Sec. \ref{sec:discussion} we summarize our results.
\section{Single channel Model}
\label{sec:onechannel}
Particles with identical constant velocities, are injected into a channel of length $L$, according to a Poisson distribution of mean intensity $\lambda$. Given no blockage occurs, the particle transit time is $\tau=L/v$. An instantaneous blockage occurs if $N$ particles are simultaneously present, and lasts for time $\tau_b > \tau$. In the limit $\tau_b\rightarrow \infty$, there is no steady state and the exiting flux falls to zero \cite{barre2015a}. Here, we focus instead on reversible blockages, during which, the $N$ particles are retained, and no more may enter the channel. After the deblocking time, the channel instantaneously releases all $N$ particles, resetting to the empty state, thereby allowing new ones to enter. The dynamics is therefore a recurring cycle of alternating open and closed states, that ultimately leads to a stationary state.
In an average steady state recurrence cycle, the channel is open for an average time $\langle t\rangle$ and blocked for a fixed time $\tau_b$. The stationary probability that the system is open is therefore
\begin{equation}
p_{o}(\lambda)=\frac{\langle t \rangle }{\langle t \rangle+\tau_b},
\label{eq:Po}
\end{equation}
where the denominator represents the total mean time of a recurrence. The stationary output flux is then given by the ratio of the mean number of particles released during one cycle to the cycle period,
\begin{equation}
j(\lambda)=\frac{\langle m \rangle +N}{\langle t \rangle+\tau_b}.
\label{eq:j}
\end{equation}
$\langle m\rangle$ is the mean number of output particles between two successive blockages. By equating the number of entering particles in one period to those exiting we obtain the following `number balance'
\begin{equation} \label{eq:mt}
\langle m \rangle +N=\lambda \langle t\rangle.
\end{equation}
Finally from the above three equations we deduce that
\begin{equation}
j(\lambda)=\lambda p_{o}(\lambda).
\label{eq:jpo}
\end{equation}
The latter relation does not depend on the existence of a cycle, as it is the result of number conservation. The output flux is equal to the entering one minus the part that is rejected when the channel is in the closed state.
By taking the limit $\lambda\tau\ll 1$, the mean blockage time and the mean number of exiting particles between blockages behave asymptotically as $\langle t\rangle\gg \tau_b$ and $\langle m\rangle\gg N$, respectively. Therefore, for a given $\tau_b$, the probability that the channel is open is close to unity and the flux $j(\lambda)\simeq \lambda$. Blockages rarely occur at low $\lambda$. In this limit, the mean blockage time can be estimated by noting that a blockage occurs when a batch of particles enters in a finite duration $\tau$,
leading to $\langle t\rangle= \tau \frac{(N-1)!}{(\lambda\tau)^N}$ \cite{barre2015a}. Expanding $p_o(\lambda)$ to first order gives
\begin{equation}
p_{o}(\lambda)\simeq\frac{1}{1+\frac{(\lambda\tau)^N\tau_b}{(N-1!)\tau}} .
\label{eq:Pol}
\end{equation}
When $\lambda\tau\gg 1$, blockages are very frequent, and both the mean number of exiting particles between blockages, $\langle m\rangle$, and mean time between blockages, $\langle t\rangle$, approach zero. The resulting flux consists entirely of successive releases of the blocked particles, $j(\lambda)=N/\tau_b$ and $p_o(\lambda)\simeq 0$. In this limit, $\langle t \rangle$ corresponds to the time necessary for $N$ particles to enter an empty channel, $N/\lambda$.
The open probability and the flux in this high intensity limit are therefore
\begin{equation}
p_{o}(\lambda)\simeq\frac{N}{N+\lambda\tau_b},
\label{eq:Poh}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
j(\lambda)\simeq \frac{N\lambda}{N+\lambda\tau_b}.
\label{eq:j1}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Solvable models: $N\leq 3$}
\label{sec:RN1}
For small capacities, $N \in [1,2,3] $, the time evolution of the process can be expressed by analytically tractable differential or integro-differential equations \cite{Barre2013}. For larger values of $N$, the time evolution cannot be solved by any known means.
We first consider $N=1$, which corresponds to a stochastic switch. The transit time $\tau$ is an irrelevant variable because no particle can exit the channel without having already blocked it. For $N>1$, it is possible for particles to pass through the channel without causing a blockage. Let $p_o(t)$ denote the probability that the channel is open at time $t$. Its time evolution obeys
\begin{equation}\label{eq:pON1}
\frac{dp_o(t)}{dt}=-\lambda p_o(t)+\lambda p_o(t-\tau_b).
\end{equation}
The loss term corresponds to the entrance of a particle at time $t$, while the channel is open, causing the channel to block. The gain term corresponds to the exit of a particle that became blocked at time $t-\tau_b$, with the subsequent reopening of the channel at time $t$.
The mean output flux at time $t$ is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:jtN1}
j(t)=\lambda p_o(t-\tau_b),
\end{equation}
which corresponds to the release of a blocked particle that entered at $t-\tau_b$. Applying the time Laplace transform, $\tilde{f}(u)=\int_0^\infty dt e^{-ut}f(t)$, to Eqs.(\ref{eq:pON1}) and (\ref{eq:jtN1}) gives,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Pou}
\tilde{p}_o(u)=\frac{1}{\lambda+u-\lambda e^{-u\tau_b}},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:jou}
\tilde{j}(u)= \frac{\lambda e^{-u\tau_b} }{\lambda+u-\lambda e^{-u\tau_b}}.
\end{equation}
Expanding the denominator of Eq.(\ref{eq:Pou}) in terms of $\lambda e^{-u\tau_b}/(\lambda+u)$, allows one to easily invert the Laplace transform, term by term, giving,
\begin{equation}
p_o(t)=\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\frac{[\lambda(t-n\tau_b)]^n}{n!}e^{-\lambda(t-n\tau_b)}\theta(t-n\tau_b),
\end{equation}
where $\theta(t)$ is the Heaviside function. The stationary open probability, $p_o(\lambda)$, and flux, $j(\lambda)$, can be obtained from Eqs.(\ref{eq:Pou}) and (\ref{eq:jou}) by using $\tilde{f}(u)\simeq \frac{f(\lambda)}{u}$,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:Polo}
p_ {o}(\lambda)=\frac{1}{1+\lambda\tau_b},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:jolo}
j(\lambda)=\frac{\lambda}{1+\lambda\tau_b}.
\end{equation}
These results can be easily inferred from Eqs. (\ref{eq:Po}) and (\ref{eq:j}) by setting $\langle m\rangle=0$ and $\langle t\rangle=1/\lambda$.
The exiting particle flux is controlled by the incoming flux $\lambda$ and the time of blockage $\tau_b$.
We now consider the $N=2$ model, i.e. blockage occurs when two particles are simultaneously in the channel, for which exact results have already been obtained \cite{Barre2013}. Here we propose an alternative, simpler derivation using the state probabilities of the channel. Let $p_0(t)$, $p_1(t)$ denote the probability that an open channel contains zero or one particle respectively, and $p_2(t)$ be the probability that it contains two particles and is therefore blocked. The time evolution of the process is given by
\begin{align}
\frac{d p_{0}}{dt}&=-\lambda p_{0}(t) +\lambda e^{-\lambda \tau} p_{0} (t-\tau) +\lambda p_{1}(t-\tau_b), \label{eq:n2a}\\
\frac{d p_{1}}{dt}&= -\lambda e^{-\lambda \tau} p_{0} (t-\tau) -\lambda p_{1}(t)+\lambda p_{0}(t) \label{eq:n2b},\\
\frac{d p_{2}}{dt}&=-\lambda p_{1}(t-\tau_b) +\lambda p_{1}(t),\label{eq:n2c}
\end{align}
with the following initial conditions:
\begin{equation}
p_0(0) = 1, \; p_1(0) = p_2(0) = 0 . \label{eq:n2d}
\end{equation}
In Eq.(\ref{eq:n2a}), the loss term corresponds to the entrance of a particle in the empty channel at time $t$. The two gain terms $\lambda e^{-\lambda \tau} p_{0} (t-\tau)$ and $\lambda p_{1}(t-\tau_b)$ correspond to a particle exiting the channel at time $t$ and a channel release (with a blockage occurring at time $t-\tau_b$), respectively. In Eq.(\ref{eq:n2b}), the two loss terms describe either a particle exiting the occupied channel at time $t$ or a particle entering the occupied channel. The gain term corresponds to a particle entering a free channel. In Eq.(\ref{eq:n2c}), the loss term corresponds to a channel release and the gain term to a particle entering a channel with one particle already inside. Summing the three equations verifies that the total probability is conserved: $p_{0}(t)+p_{1}(t)+p_{2}(t)=1$.
Taking the Laplace transform of Eqs.(\ref{eq:n2a}-\ref{eq:n2c}) gives
\begin{align}
\left[u+\lambda(1-e^{-\tau(u+\lambda) } )\right]\tilde{p}_{0}(u)-\lambda e^{-u\tau_b} \tilde{p}_{1}(u)&=1,\\
- \lambda (1-e^{-\tau(u+\lambda)}) \tilde{p}_{0}(u)+(\lambda+u) \tilde{p}_{1}(u) &=0,\\
-\lambda(1-e^{-u\tau_b}) \tilde{p}_{1}(u)+u\tilde{p}_{2}(u)&=0.
\end{align}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{NC1exact.png}
\end{center}
\caption{ Exiting flux, $j(\lambda)$, versus $\lambda$ for $N=2$ and $\tau_b=3,4.\cdots,12$ from top to bottom. The blue curves show cases where the flux increases monotonically with $\lambda$. The green curves show cases where the flux displays a maximum at a finite value of $\lambda$. The dotted lines correspond to the asymptotic values of the flux, Eq. (\ref{eq:j1} ). }
\label{fig:NC1exact}
\end{figure}
These simultaneous equations may be solved to give
\begin{align} \label{eq:Pou1}
\tilde{p}_{0}(u)&=\frac{u+\lambda}{\Delta}, \\ \label{eq:Pou2}
\tilde{p}_{1}(u)&=\frac{\lambda}{\Delta} (1-e^{-\tau (u+\lambda)}), \\
\tilde{p}_{2}(u)&=\frac{\lambda ^2}{u\Delta}(1-e^{-u\tau_b})(1-e^{-\tau (u+\lambda)}),
\end{align}
where
\begin{equation}
\Delta= (u+\lambda)^2-\lambda(\lambda +u)e^{-\tau (u+\lambda)}-\lambda^2 e^{-u\tau_b}(1-e^{-\tau (u+\lambda)}).
\end{equation}
The mean exiting flux $j(t)$ is the sum of two contributions: the exit of a particle from an open channel and the release of of two particles from a closed channel. $j(t)$ is therefore given by
\begin{equation}
j(t)=\lambda e^{-\lambda \tau} p_0(t-\tau)+2\lambda p_1(t-\tau_b).
\end{equation}
By using Eqs.(\ref{eq:Pou1}),(\ref{eq:Pou2}), the Laplace transform of the output flux $\tilde{j}(u)$ is
\begin{equation}\label{eq:jdeu}
\tilde{j}(u)=\frac{\lambda}{\Delta}[(u+\lambda)e^{-(u+\lambda)\tau} +2\lambda e^{-u\tau_b}(1-e^{-\tau (u+\lambda)})].
\end{equation}
As expected, we recover the results of Ref.\cite{Barre2013} and the time-dependent mean flux can be obtained by a Laplace inversion of Eq.(\ref{eq:jdeu}).
We here focus on the key quantities, namely the stationary probability $p_o(\lambda)$ that the system is open and the mean flux $j(\lambda)$. $p_o(\lambda)$ is the sum of the two stationary probabilities $p_0$ and $p_1$, each obtained by evaluating
$\lim_{u\rightarrow 0}u \tilde{p}_i(u)$ with $i=0,1$:
\begin{equation}
p_o(\lambda)= \frac{2 -e^{-\lambda \tau }}{2+\lambda \tau_b -(1+\lambda \tau_b)e^{-\lambda \tau}},
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}\label{eq:jN2}
j(\lambda)=\lambda \frac{2 -e^{-\lambda \tau }}{2+\lambda \tau_b -(1+\lambda \tau_b)e^{-\lambda \tau}}.
\end{equation}
Figure \ref{fig:NC1exact} displays $j(\lambda)$ versus $\lambda\tau$ for different integer values of $\tau_b$ from $3$ to $12$. The dashed lines correspond to the asymptotic values of the exiting flux $\lim_{\lambda->\infty}j(\lambda)=\frac{2}{\tau_b}$. One first observes that the stationary flux reaches the asymptotic values more rapidly as $\tau_b$ increases. Moreover, $j(\lambda)$ displays a maximum when $\tau_b$ is larger than $7$. It is possible to obtain the exact value of $\tau_b$ for which the flux $j(\lambda)$ displays a maximum at a finite value of $\lambda$\cite{1742-5468-2018-6-063213} by solving $\frac{\partial j(\lambda)}{\partial \lambda}=0$. A real solution for $\lambda$ exists if $\tau_b>6.2$. Note that for $N=1$ the flux is always a monotonically increasing function of $\lambda$.
For $N=3$, the complete kinetic description of the model is cumbersome so we restrict our attention to the stationary quantities for which analytical expressions have been obtained \cite{barre2015a}. In particular, the mean time to blockage starting from an empty channel is given by
\begin{equation}
\lambda \langle t\rangle= \frac{2e^{\nu}\sinh(g\nu)+g e^{\lambda\tau}}{-g-2\sinh(g\nu)
e^{-\nu}+e^{\nu}\left(\sinh(g\nu)+g\cosh(g\nu)\right)}+1\label{eq:temps}
\end{equation}
for $\lambda\tau>2\ln(2)$ and
\begin{equation}
\lambda \langle t\rangle= \frac{2e^{\nu}\sin(g\nu)+g e^{\lambda\tau}}{-g-2\sin(g\nu)
e^{-\nu}+e^{\nu}\left(\sin(g\nu)+g\cos(g\nu)\right)}+1\label{eq:temps2}
\end{equation}
for $\lambda\tau<2\ln(2)$, where $g=\sqrt{|1-4e^{-\lambda\tau}|}$ and $\nu=\frac{\lambda \tau}{2}$ (note that these correct the expressions given in \cite{barre2015a}).
\begin{figure}[th]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{NC1exact2.png}
\end{center}
\caption{ Exiting flux, $j(\lambda)$ versus $\lambda$ for $N=3$ and $\tau_b=2,3,\cdots,9$ from top to bottom. The blue curves indicate cases where the flux increases monotonically with $\lambda$. The green curves indicate the cases where the fluxes display a maximum at a finite value of $\lambda$. The black crosses show simulation results for $\tau_b=3,4,6$, which match perfectly with the exact results. The dotted lines indicate the asymptotic values of the flux, Eq. (\ref{eq:j1}).
}
\label{fig:NC1exact2}
\end{figure}
The two stationary quantities $p_{o}(\lambda)$ and $j(\lambda)$ are obtained by inserting this result in Eqs.(\ref{eq:Po}) and(\ref{eq:j}).
Fig. \ref{fig:NC1exact2} displays $j(\lambda)$ as a function of $\lambda\tau$ for different values of $\tau_b$. There are several differences compared with the $N=2$ model. First, a maximum exiting flux occurs if the blockage time $\tau_b>3.6$, which is significantly smaller for $N=2$ ($\tau_b>6.2$). Second, the asymptotic values are reached at a lower value of $\lambda$, and finally, the intensity $\lambda$ at which $j(\lambda)$ is maximum is also shifted towards larger intensity.
\subsection{Simulation results: $N> 3$}
\begin{figure}[th]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{NC1.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Exiting particle flux, $j(\lambda)$, versus $\lambda$ for $N=4,6,10,20$ and $\tau_b=4$. Dotted curves correspond to the asymptotic values at low and high intensity.}
\label{fig:NC1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[th]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{taubNC1.png}
\end{center}
\caption{ (left) Critical values of $\tau_b$ as a function of $N$ above which the steady state flux of a single channel displays a maximum at finite $\lambda$. (right) The corresponding values of $\lambda\tau$. }
\label{fig:taubNC1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7cm]{NC1proba.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Open probability $p_o$ versus $\lambda\tau$ for $N=4,6,10$ and $\tau_b=4$. Dotted curves correspond to the asymptotic values at low and high intensity.}
\label{fig:NC1proba}
\end{figure}
As a result of strong time correlations between the transiting particles, it is not possible to obtain analytic solutions for $N>3$.
We therefore used numerical simulations to investigate these cases.
In order to benchmark our code, we compared the simulation results for the stationary flux for $N=3$ with the exact expressions for three different values of $\tau_b$. In Fig. \ref{fig:NC1exact2} we observe perfect agreement between the analytical expressions and the simulation results.
Figure \ref{fig:NC1} displays the stationary exiting flux as a function of the intensity for different values of $N$ and $\tau_b=4$. At low intensity, the flux increases linearly, and at high intensity the asymptotic behavior of the simulation results is well-desribed by Eq. (\ref{eq:j1}). The behavior in the intermediate region is due to complex dynamics that alternates between blockages and sequences of uninterrupted transport. For $N > 3$, the stationary flux $j(\lambda)$ may display a maximum at finite $\lambda\tau$, whose amplitude increases with $N$. The stationary flux also exhibits a minimum which is always smaller than the asymptotic value, $N/\tau_b$.
We performed a systematic study of the behavior of the exiting flux as a function of $\lambda,\tau_b$ and $N$. The flux always displays a maximum when $\tau_b$ exceeds a threshold value. Figure \ref{fig:taubNC1} shows that the critical value of $\tau_b$ decreases rapidly with $N$, showing that the feature observed in Fig. \ref{fig:NC1exact} is very general and occurs for smaller values of $\tau_b$ when $N$ increases.
For $\tau_b$ below the critical value, the stationary flux is a monotonically increasing function of $\lambda\tau$.
The right panel of Fig. \ref{fig:taubNC1} shows the values of $\lambda\tau$ corresponding to the critical values of $\tau_b$.
The behavior of the open probability $p_o(\lambda)$, shown in Fig. \ref{fig:NC1proba}, is consistent with Eq. (\ref{eq:jpo}). In particular one observes the appearance of a plateau whose length increases with $N$ (roughly as $N/2$). This corresponds to the situation where blockage events are rare and the output flux is close to $\lambda$.
\subsection{Markovian versus non-Markovian models}\label{sec:stocha}
The physical assumption of constant transit and deblocking times $\tau$ and $\tau_b$, respectively, is responsible for strong memory effects which prevent analytical solutions for general $N$ from being obtained. We therefore recently introduced Markovian models \cite{1742-5468-2018-6-063213,0953-8984-30-30-304004}, where the average transit and deblocking times are stochastic variables given by exponential distributions of intensity $\mu$ and $\mu^*$, respectively. The kinetic description of the Markovian model is given by a set of differential equations for the time evolution of the state probabilities $P(i,t)$ with $i\in[0\cdots N]$ giving the number of particles in the channel. Unlike the non-Markovian model, analytic solutions for the steady state properties can be obtained for arbitrary $N$ (some generalizations of the Markovian models for which time-dependent solutions can be obtained and could be investigated in the future \cite{Leonenko2009400,Escobar20021353}).
The channel is open for an mean time $\langle t\rangle$ and blocked for a mean time $1/\mu^*$. The stationary flux is obtained using the previously employed recurrence arguments, giving
\begin{equation}\label{eq:j1markov}
j(\lambda)=\frac{\lambda\langle t \rangle}{\langle t \rangle+1/\mu^*}.
\end{equation}
The average time for which the Markovian system is open in a recurrence cycle is \cite{1742-5468-2018-6-063213}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:tbarmarkov}
\langle t \rangle = \frac{1}{\lambda} \sum_{j=0}^{N-1}\frac{N!}{(j+1)(N-j-1)!} \left(\frac{\mu}{ \lambda}\right)^j.
\end{equation}
To compare the two models, $\mu$ and $\mu^*$ must be related to $\tau$, $\tau_b$ and $\lambda$. Eq. (\ref{eq:j1markov}) with Eq. (\ref{eq:j}) shows that $\mu^*$ must equal $1/\tau_b$. To obtain an expression for $\mu$, we consider the system's behavior at low and high intensity. When $\lambda\tau<<1$, the non-Markovian transit time is equal to $\tau$. The mean transit time is $1/\mu$ in the the Markovian model. A first approach is to therefore set $\mu=1/\tau$. When $\lambda \tau>>1$, we expect $\mu$ to decrease to zero. Figure \ref{fig:stochadeter} shows that the stationary flux of the Markovian model is always larger than that of the non-Markovian model. Even though the two models behave similarly at small and large input intensity, they increasingly deviate for intermediate intensities with increasing $N$.
To obtain an exact mapping (in the steady state) we equate the mean blocking time of the two models. For $N=2$ we equate $\langle t \rangle$ given by Eq. (\ref{eq:tbarmarkov}) with the result for the non-Markovian model \cite{Gabrielli2013}, $\langle t \rangle=(2-e^{-\lambda\tau})/(\lambda(1-e^{-\lambda\tau}))$. The expressions are identical when
\begin{equation}
\mu=\frac{\lambda}{e^{\lambda\tau}-1}.
\end{equation}
With this mapping, we recover the aforementioned expected limiting behaviour for both extremes of entering flux intensity. We emphasize that the transient regimes of the two models are different (See the Appendix \ref{sec:appendix} for a similar model where time-dependent analytic solutions are obtained).
The same procedure can be carried out for $N=3$ using Eqs. (\ref{eq:temps}) and (\ref{eq:temps2}), but the resulting expression for $\mu$ is considerably more complex. For general $N$ we therefore propose the following ansatz, taking a similar form as the mapping for $N=2$:
\begin{equation}
\mu=\frac{2\lambda/N}{e^{2\lambda\tau/N}-1}\label{eq:ansatz}
\end{equation}
which behaves as $1/\tau$ at low intensity and approaches zero exponentially at large intensity.
Substituting Eq.(\ref{eq:ansatz}) into Eq.(\ref{eq:j1markov}), produces a lower bound of the stationary flux (full curves). Furthermore, the maximum of the flux is underestimated and shifted to a smaller intensity than in the non-Markovian model. For $N=3$ and $N=4$, the curves are very close to the results of the non-Markovian model. For $N > 4$, the ansatz leads to a significant underestimation of the exiting flux for small $\lambda \tau$.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{NC1stochadeter.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Comparison of stationary exiting flux $j(\lambda)$ versus $\lambda\tau$ obtained for the non-Markovian model (dotted curves), the Markovian model by setting $\mu=1/\tau$ (dashed curves) and the Markovian model by using Eq.(\ref{eq:ansatz}) (full curves), $\tau_b = 4$.}
\label{fig:stochadeter}
\end{figure}
\section{Bundle model}
\label{sec:multimodel}
We now consider a bundle of $N_c$ identical channels. Each channel has the same properties as the single channel model above, i.e.
blockage occurs when $N$ particles are present in a channel at the same time. In the following we assume that the total intensity, $\Lambda=\lambda N_c$, is constant and is equally distributed over the open channels. Thus, after $k$ blockages the intensity on each of these open $N_c-k$ channels is
\begin{equation}
\lambda_k=\lambda \frac{N_c}{N_c-k}.
\end{equation}
Since a blocked channel releases all particles after finite time $\tau_b$, the system's mean output flux evolves towards a non-zero stationary value.
The bundle has two states: {\it open} in which at least one of the constituent channels is open and {\it closed} if all the constituent channels are blocked. If a particle arrives while the bundle is in the latter state, it is rejected.
Equations (\ref{eq:Po},\ref{eq:j},\ref{eq:mt}) cannot be applied to the channel bundle in the steady state, as it does not cycle between closed and empty states for finite intensity $\Lambda$.
In the limit of very large intensities, however, we have
\begin{equation}
P_{o}(\Lambda)\sim \frac{1}{\Lambda}
\label{eq:BPo}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\lim_{\Lambda\rightarrow\infty}\langle M \rangle =0
\end{equation}
where $\langle M\rangle$ is the mean number of exiting particles that are not the due to blockage releases, and
\begin{equation}
\lim_{\Lambda\rightarrow\infty}J(\Lambda)=\frac{NN_c}{\tau_b}.
\label{eq:BJ}
\end{equation}
In this limit the intensity is so high that all channels block instantaneously and simultaneously and the blocked particles
are released after a time $\tau_b$. The exiting flux is entirely the result of these releases.
The analogue of Eq. (\ref{eq:jpo}),
\begin{equation}
J(\Lambda)=\Lambda P_{o}(\Lambda),
\label{eq:JPo}
\end{equation}
is valid for arbitrary intensity since, as for the single channel case, it is result of the conservation of particle number.
\subsection{Exact solution: $N=1$}
\label{sec:BN1}
When $N>1$ a particle may traverse the channel in a time $\tau$ without causing a blockage. In comparison, the $N=1$ model is singular as no unimpeded transit is possible: each entering particle causes a blockage that lasts for a fixed time, $\tau_b$. The variable $\tau$ is thus absent in this model.
Despite the relative simplicity of the $N=1$ model, its dynamics cannot be written as a system of differential equations for the state probabilities $P(i,t)$, where $i$ denotes the number of blocked channels at time $t$ (in Appendix \ref{sec:appendix} the full time dependent solution for $N_c=2$ is presented).
However, in the stationary state, by applying detailed balance (known as the ``rate up - rate down" principle in queuing theory), one has
\begin{equation}
\Lambda P(i)=(i+1)\frac{P(i+1)}{\tau_b}
\end{equation}
Solving the difference equation and applying conservation of the total probability leads to
\begin{equation}
P(k)=\frac{(\Lambda\tau_b)^k}{k!\sum_{n=0}^{N_c}\frac{(\Lambda\tau_b)^n}{n!}},\;k\in [0,N_c]
\end{equation}
The stationary exiting flux is given by Eq. (\ref{eq:JPo}) with
\begin{equation}\label{eq:PoexactN1}
P_o=1-P(N_c)=1-\frac{(\Lambda\tau_b)^{N_c}}{N_c!\sum_{n=0}^{N_c}\frac{(\Lambda\tau_b)^n}{n!}}
\end{equation}
The result can be written in the form
\begin{equation}\label{eq:DJ1}
J(\Lambda)=\Lambda\left(1-\frac{(\Lambda\tau_b)^{N_c}}{e^{\Lambda\tau_b}\Gamma(1+N_c,\Lambda\tau_b)}\right),
\end{equation}
where $\Gamma(n,x)$ is the incomplete gamma function.
The asymptotic behavior at small intensity $\Lambda$ is
\begin{equation}
J=\Lambda\left[1-\frac{(\Lambda\tau_b)^{N_c}}{N_c!}+O((\Lambda\tau_b)^{N_c+1})\right],
\end{equation}
whereas at large intensity the flux behaves as,
\begin{equation}
J=\frac{N_c}{\tau_b}\left[1-\frac{1}{\Lambda\tau_b}+O\left(\frac{1}{(\Lambda\tau_b)^2}\right)\right],
\end{equation}
whose leading term is in accordance with Eq. (\ref{eq:BJ}). For all values of $N_c$, $J(\Lambda)$ is always a monotonically increasing function of $\Lambda$.
We note that the expression for $P(N_c)$ is Erlang's first formula \cite{takacs1969,Medhi:1991:SMQ:113159} for a stochastic queuing process
with $N_c$ servers with exponential entry and service time distributions under the condition that when all servers are busy an arrival is rejected. Both models are `birth-and-death' processes that have the {\it same} stationary solution. Their transient regimes, however, are significantly different. See Appendix \ref{sec:appendix}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{NC2.png}\\
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{NC10.png}
\end{center}
\caption{ $J(\Lambda)$ versus $\Lambda\tau$ for $N=2,3,4,6,10$ and $\tau_b=4$, for (top) $N_c=2$, and (bottom) $N_c=10$. The dashed lines correspond to the asymptotic values, Eq. (\ref{eq:BJ}).}
\label{fig:NCflux}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Simulation results: $N>1$}
For the multichannel models, no exact solution can be obtained for $N>1$. Therefore we have performed numerical simulations to obtain
the stationary exiting flux, $J$ and the stationary probability that at least one channel is open, $P_o$ for bundles composed of different numbers of channels with increasing capacity $N$ and for $\tau_b=4\tau$. All quantities were investigated as a function of the mean incoming flux $\Lambda$. As discussed in the previous section, the stationary flux rapidly displays a maximum at a finite value of $\lambda \tau$ when $N>1$.
Figure \ref{fig:NCflux} shows $J$ as a function of $\Lambda\tau$ for $N_c=2,10$ and for $N=2,3,4,6,10$.
When $\Lambda\tau\ll 1$, the rate of incoming particles is very small and the finite capacity of the channel is rarely reached, meaning that blockage events are scarce. The stationary exiting flux is therefore equal to the input flux, $J\simeq \Lambda$. This behavior is observed for a larger range of $\Lambda\tau$ for larger values of $N$ and $N_c$ .
\begin{figure}[th]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=7.6cm]{Nasymp.png}
\end{center}
\caption{Exiting flux of a channel bundle composed of $N_c$ channels each with $N=10$: $J/N_c$ versus $\Lambda\tau/N_c$ for different values of $N_c$ and $\tau_b=4$. The dashed curves show the asymptotic behavior.}
\label{fig:Nasymp}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:Nasymp} shows the rescaled flux $J/N_c$ versus the rescaled intensity $\Lambda/N_c$ for different values of $N_c$. In the low intensity regime $J$ is equal to $\Lambda$ and displays a finite discontinuity at $\Lambda_c$. At high intensities the curve evolves towards an asymptote and is quite well described by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:fit}
J\simeq \frac{N_c N}{\tau_b}\left(1-\frac{3N}{2\Lambda\tau_b}\right).
\end{equation}
We observe an abrupt change of kinetic behavior: Below the critical value $\Lambda_c$, almost all particles cross the bundle without triggering a significant number of blockages, whereas for larger $\Lambda$, all channels are closed and the stationary flux is essentially given by the release of blocked particles.
Fig. \ref{fig:NC10asymp} shows the rescaled flux $J/N$ versus the rescaled intensity $\Lambda/N$ for different values of $N$ for a given $N_c=10$. At a low input intensity, the exiting flux $J$ is equal to $\Lambda$ until it reaches a maximum close to a critical value that closely follows a logarithmic law, as shown in the inset of Fig. \ref{fig:NC10asymp}.
For higher values of input intensity, the rescaled exiting flux, for all values of $N$, rapidly collapses to a single curve, whose best fit is again given by Eq. (\ref{eq:fit}).
\begin{figure}[th]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{NC10asymp.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{$N_c=20$: $J/N$ versus $\Lambda\tau/N$ for different values of $N$ and $\tau_b=4$. The dashed curves correspond to the asymptotic behaviors. The inset shows the value of $\Lambda$ that maximizes the exiting flux as a function of $N$ and the red dashed line shows the logarithmic fit, of form $2.73\log(0.89N)+0.65$.}
\label{fig:NC10asymp}
\end{figure}
\section{Flux optimization}\label{sec:compare}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm]{Configuration1.pdf}
\caption{Left: A bundle composed of $N_c=4$ coupled channels, each of capacity $N=2$, sharing an incoming flux of intensity $\Lambda$. Right: Four uncoupled channels, each of capacity $N=2$, each receiving an incoming flux of intensity $\Lambda/4$.
}\label{fig:config1}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=17cm]{CoupleUncouple.pdf}
\caption{ Total exiting flux from the coupled (lines) and uncoupled (dotted) channel configurations. From Left to right, $N_c = 2,5$, $\tau_b = 4$. The insets show the difference between the two.}
\label{fig:CoupleUncouple}
\end{figure*}
Here we compare the stationary flux of a bundle of coupled channels with that of a bundle of uncoupled channels and one high capacity (HC) channel. The transport efficiency is measured by the difference in output flux, $\Delta J$. The systems are chosen so that in the limits of low and high input flux intensity, $\Delta J = 0$. In the low intensity limit, since blocking events are rare, the exiting flux is equal the input flux $\Lambda$, irrespective of the configuration. In the high intensity limit, Eqs.(\ref{eq:Poh}) and (\ref{eq:BJ}) demonstrate that the exiting fluxes of the single high capacity, bundled uncoupled or coupled channels are also be equal. Since the stationary flux of a bundle of coupled channels displays non-trivial behavior with increasing $N_c$ and $N$, we therefore expect non-trivial behavior of $\Delta J$.
\subsection{Coupled versus uncoupled channels}
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{DELTAJNc2N2DiffTaub.pdf}
\caption{Difference in the output flux between $N_c=2$ coupled and uncoupled channels, with $N=2$ as a function of intensity $\Lambda$, for different values of $\tau_b$.}
\label{fig:LCLCtaub}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=8.0cm]{Configuration2.pdf}
\caption{Left: A bundle composed of $N_c=4$ channels, each with capacity $N=2$, sharing an incoming particle flux of intensity $\Lambda$. Right: A single high capacity channel of capacity $NN_c=8$.}\label{fig:config2}
\end{figure}
We first compare a channel bundle composed of $N_c$ channels, each of capacity $N$. The entering flux, $\Lambda$, is equally distributed over the coupled open channels. In contrast, the $N_c$ independent channels, each of capacity $N$, each receive an incoming flux of intensity $\Lambda/N_c$. Fig. \ref{fig:config1} illustrates the configurations compared. The difference in the output flux of the two configurations is defined as:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:CoupUncoup}
\Delta J = J^{N_c}_{N} (\Lambda) - N_c j_{N} ( \Lambda / N_c) .
\end{equation}
Simulation results comparing the output flux of each configuration for $N_c= 2,5$, $\tau_b = 4$, are shown in Fig. \ref{fig:CoupleUncouple}. The differences are shown in the inset of the figure. At low intensity, for all configurations, the output flux is approximately equal for each setup, and linearly increases with $\Lambda$ until a critical value, which itself is a monotonically increasing function of $N$.
The behavior for $N=1$ can be understood quantitatively using the results of Sec. \ref{sec:BN1} and Eq. (\ref{eq:jolo}). At low intensity, the flux difference is
\begin{equation}
\Delta J =\frac{\Lambda^2\tau_b}{N_c}+O(\Lambda^3),
\end{equation}
and at high density we find
\begin{equation}
\Delta J \simeq\frac{N_c(N_c-1)}{\Lambda\tau_b^2}
\end{equation}
and one can confirm that $\Delta J>0$ for $0<\Lambda<\infty$. We conclude that the coupled channels are always more efficient than the uncoupled ones. The difference is maximized for a finite value of $\Lambda$.
For all $N>1$, we note the appearance of two maxima in the flux difference with an intervening minimum. The increased complexity is due to the presence of two characteristic times, the transit time $\tau$ and the blockage time $\tau_b$ (while the $N=1$ system has only the latter).
Fig. \ref{fig:LCLCtaub} shows the flux difference between the bundle configurations at $Nc=2$, $N=2$, as a function of intensity of entering flux, $\Lambda$, for different values of $\tau_b$. For $\tau_b > 2$ the behavior is more complex after the first maximum, with the appearance of a minimum followed by a second maximum before tending towards zero.
\subsection{Single HC channel verses coupled LC channels }
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{DELTAJNC2HCLCcouple.pdf}\\
\includegraphics[width=8cm]{DELTAJNC5HCLCcouple.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Single HC channel, versus coupled LC channels. From top to bottom, $N_c = 2,5$. All curves display a single maximum followed by a single minimum, before tending to zero at high intensity.
}
\label{fig:HCLCcouple}
\end{figure}
The transport efficiency of a single 'high capacity' (HC) channel, with a bundle of several coupled channels, of a proportionately reduced capacity, is now compared. The two configurations are illustrated in Fig. \ref{fig:config2}. Figure \ref{fig:HCLCcouple} shows the difference in the output stationary state flux between a single HC channel and a bundle of $N_c= 2,5$ coupled LC channels, with different capacities. The flux difference in this case is
\begin{equation}
\Delta J = j_{N_c N} (\Lambda) - J^{N_c}_{N} ( \Lambda) .
\end{equation}
For all $N$, the flux difference displays a minimum, followed by a maximum, before tending towards zero for increasing intensity. The amplitudes of the maxima are always greater than those of the minima.
\section{Discussion}\label{sec:discussion}
We have presented a model of blockage in channel bundles that may be relevant for various physical processes. The bundle consists of $N_c$ constituent channels, each with a capacity of $N$. A particle transits through an open channel in time $\tau$, but if $N$ particles are simultaneously present in a channel, it is blocked for a time $\tau_b$, before being emptied. While blocked, the entering flux is redistributed over the remaining open channels. A bundle of channels is open if at least one of its constituent channels is not blocked. If the entering stream is of constant intensity the bundle evolves to a stationary state with a steady exiting flux, or throughput, that depends on the intensity, $\tau_b$ and $N$. In the steady state the exiting flux is simply related to the probability that the bundle is open. For a single channel with capacity $N>1$ the exiting flux displays a maximum value at finite intensity if $\tau_b$ is sufficiently large. If not, the exiting flux increases monotonically with the intensity. A Markovian model with stochastic transit and blockage times, inspired by queuing theory, can be made to display the same steady state behavior with an appropriate mapping between the two models' parameters. The transient behavior is, however, quite different. This suggests that, in the steady state, the details of the transport mechanisms and the triggered releases are not important. For large $N$, the models display an abrupt change from a state with few blockages to one in which the bundle is permanently blocked and the output flux is entirely due to the release of blocked particles. This behavior raises new questions about whether more general relationships describing the abrupt transitions in dynamics may be obtained for general $N$ and $N_c$. The transport efficiency of a bundle in which the entering flux is equally distributed over the open channels was also compared with a bundle composed of independent channels. For $N=1$, the coupled channels always have a higher throughput, but for larger values of $N$ the behavior is more complex.
\acknowledgments
We thank Jacques Resing, Karim Guerouate et Valentin Wiener for useful discussions.
|
\section{Introduction}
Bitcoin has become one of the hottest buzzwords among investors and researchers. It is the first and most famous decentralized digital currency\cite{nakamoto2008bitcoin}, which is secured by cryptography (thus, we call it cryptocurrency). Unlike fiat currencies which usually issued by financial institutions, there is no centralized organization or country controlling the issue and operation of Bitcoin. Furthermore, because of decentralization, users in the Bitcoin system are anonymous. The two characteristics (i.e., decentralization and anonymity) make Bitcoin attract a lot of users since its creation in 2009. It is estimated that there are more than 10 million users in the Bitcoin system \cite{burniske2017bitcoin}.
Since the famous ``Bitcoin Pizza Day'' when a programmer bought two pizzas with 10,000 BTC on May 22, 2010, Bitcoin began to exchange with fiat currencies. Soon afterward, a Bitcoin exchange, Mt. Gox launched. By 2013 and before filing for bankruptcy protection in February 2014, Mt. Gox was the largest bitcoin intermediary and the world's leading Bitcoin exchange \cite{feder2018impact}. Nowadays, there are more than 1,700 cryptocurrencies inspired by Bitcoin and the daily transaction volume is over \$ 150 billion dollar according to coinmarketcap.com at the moment of writing this paper.
The huge fluctuation of the exchange price of cryptocurrency is an important reason to attract investors' participation. Figure \ref{fig_price} shows the Bitcoin price (i.e., the exchange rate between Bitcoin and USD dollar in this paper) from 2012/12 to 2015/6. During this period, the Bitcoin price rose sharply from about \$10/BTC to exceeding \$1,000/BTC and then fell back to below \$200/BTC. This extreme price fluctuation has also attracted a large number of researchers to find the determinant factors of the Bitcoin price. Four categories of factors are discussed, including 1) economic factors (e.g., the supply and demand of Bitcoin) \cite{buchholz2012bits}; 2) technical factors (e.g., hash rate and difficulty) \cite{kristoufek2015main}; 3) interest factors (through proxy variable such as Google trends) \cite{kristoufek2013bitcoin}; and 4) other financial assets (e.g., gold, stock). In addition, by using the principal component analysis method (analogous to SVD), the paper \cite{kondor2014inferring} indicates that the Bitcoin price has a strong correlation with the transactions on the blockchain ledger.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.48\textwidth]{price.pdf}
\caption{Bitcoin-USD exchange price at Bitstamp exchange, with the period being studied shaded.}\label{fig_price}
\end{figure}
However, these factors are discussed based on data outside the exchanges. Because of the lack of supervision, a nature conjecture is that the extreme fluctuation may be related to the market manipulation of the exchanges. This conjecture is hard to verify as it is very difficult to obtain the detailed trading data from the trading platform. Surprisingly, many transaction histories from April 2011 to November 2013 of the once famous Bitcoin exchange Mt. Gox were leaked in the form of CSV files. These data provide a perfect opportunity for answering the conjecture.
To verify whether there is market manipulation and identify possible manipulation patterns is urgent and of great importance, as plenty of investors who are dreaming of getting rich overnight are attracted to the market. The answer to this question will help investors recognize the potential risks and help to regulate legislation. Based on the leaked data, a recent paper~\cite{gandal2018price} points out that the Mt. Gox exchange manipulated the Bitcoin price by building a regression model to identify the influence of the activities of some suspicious accounts on the price. We adopt a completely different method compared with it and obtain more results including fake volume, price manipulation, and manipulation patterns.
Figure \ref{fig_frame} shows an overview of our analysis. We first verify the leaked data and remove many unreasonable records. Then, by comparing the transaction price with the disclosed Mt. Gox price in quandl.com, we find many abnormal transactions. By using these transactions, we divide the accounts into three categories: extreme high account (EHA), extreme low account (ELA), and normal account (NMA). Next, we construct the extreme high graph (EHG), extreme low graph (ELG) and normal graph (NMG) by seeing the accounts as nodes and transactions as edges. we conduct various graph structure analysis on EHG, ELG, and NMG, such as nodes and edges classification, measuring graph clusters and degree distribution. Such investigation leads to new observations and findings. For example, the abnormal accounts (i.e., EHA and ELA) might be controlled by the exchange and used to provide liquidity and fake volume for the exchange. Finally, by dividing the graphs into daily snapshots and reconstructing it in a matrix, we extract some base graphs through singular value decomposition (SVD). By doing this, we find that the abnormal accounts' transactions strongly related to the Bitcoin price. Furthermore, we find many strange transaction patterns (such as self-loop, bi-direction, triangle etc.) within abnormal accounts. These patterns are considered as evidence of market manipulation in the exchange.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.47\textwidth]{frame.png}
\caption{An overview of our analysis.}\label{fig_frame}
\end{figure}
In summary, we make the following major contributions.
\begin{itemize}
\item To the best of our knowledge, it is the first study on market manipulation of cryptocurrency via graph analysis and SVD. Besides, we prove the effectiveness of the method by applying to the leaked Mt. Gox transaction data.
\item We obtain many new observations and findings by characterizing the activities of different accounts (i.e., static network analysis) and adopting SVD on the daily snapshots of the graphs (i.e., temporal network analysis). These findings convinced us that there are many market manipulation behaviors in the exchange.
\item We detect many market manipulation patterns which have never been reported in this area. These patterns are strong evidence of market manipulation and can help investors and regulators to recognize the dark side and its severity of the market.
\end{itemize}
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. After introducing the data set in Section \ref{data}, we detail the static network analysis in Section \ref{static_analysis} and the temporal network analysis in Section \ref{sec_price_ana}. Finally, we provide some related works in Section \ref{relatedwork} and conclude the paper in Section \ref{conclusion}.
\section{Data Set}\label{data}
\begin{table*}
\caption{A segment of the leaked data.}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{ccccccccc}
\hline
Trade\_Id& Date& User\_Id& Type& Currency& Bitcoins& Money& User\_Country& User\_State\\
\hline
1380587338975940& 2013/10/1 0:28:58& 125439& buy& USD& 0.5& 71.69169& US& NC\\
1380587338975940& 2013/10/1 0:28:58& 295701& sell& USD& 0.5& 71.69169& CA& QC\\
1380739642844790& 2013/10/2 18:47:22& 609336& buy& USD& 0.26177217& 33.96631& US& PA\\
1380739642844790& 2013/10/2 18:47:22& 36865& sell& USD& 0.26177217& 33.96631& US& CA\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab_seg}
\end{table*}
In early 2014, the transaction history from April 2011 to November 2013 of Mt. Gox was leaked in the form of CSV files. Table \ref{tab_seg} reports a segment of the leaked data recorded on 2013/10/01. Two rows with the same \emph{Trade\_Id} indicating a complete transaction from the seller (\emph{Type=sell}) to the buyer (\emph{Type=buy}). The volume of the transaction is recorded in \emph{Bitcoins} and the turnover in \emph{Money}, thus the real-time price of Bitcoin at the transaction moment is \emph{Money/Bitcoins}. Each user has a unique identity (\emph{User\_Id}) with the FIPS location codes recorded in the country (\emph{User\_Country}) and state (\emph{User\_State}) fields. There are some other attributes (e.g., transaction fees) not included in the table, as they are not used in this study.
\textbf{Data Cleaning.} As there are many duplicate entries in the leaked data, we adopt a similar way for data cleaning as the previous studies\cite{gandal2018price,feder2018impact}. Specifically, we use the combination of the four key fields: date, user ID, type, and Bitcoins to remove duplicated entries (de-duplication strategy 2 in \cite{feder2018impact}). After this step, we remove all the single row transaction to make sure that each transaction has the corresponding buyer and seller (i.e., a completed transaction). Then, we remove all duplicated complete transactions. By doing this, the data narrows from approximately 18 million rows to 13.5 million rows (i.e, 6.7 million completed transactions). This method is more strict than the method in \cite{gandal2018price} as complete transactions with the same trade\_id are treated as duplicates. We adopt a more strict method in the hope of providing more reliable results.
\textbf{Advantages.} The leaked Mt. Gox data has many advantages in understanding the transaction behaviors in cryptocurrency and its influence on the price. First of all, Mt. Gox was the dominant exchange and Bitcoin has been the main cryptocurrency during the period, thus analyzing the cryptocurrency market based on this data set is more reliable and representative. Second, these data are much more finely grained than data extracted from the blockchain since most trading activity is recorded only in the exchange. Furthermore, users can be identified by their accounts in the leaked data while it is hard in blockchain to identify a user because of its anonymous mechanism.
\section{Static Network Analysis}\label{static_analysis}
\subsection{Account Classification}
Before delving deeper into the Mt. Gox leaked data, we check the Bitcoin exchange price of each transaction (i.e., Money/Bitcoin) to inspect whether it falls between the highest and lowest exchange price of the disclosed price on the same day. To this end, we first download all the Bitcoin exchange rate (BTC vs. USD) on Mt. Gox from quandl.com (we call this \emph{reference price}). Then, we compare the exchange price of each transaction with the reference price. Surprisingly, we find that there are some abnormal transactions which have a very high or low exchange price. For example, on 2013/08/30, a transaction (trade\_ID=1377875127221631) had an exchange price of \$49,338.4/BTC, and another transaction (trade\_ID=1377876535345547) had an exchange price of only \$0.81/BTC, whereas, on the same day, the highest and lowest exchange price in the download data are \$142.76/BTC and \$128.56/BTC respectively.
These transactions are abnormal, as the exchange price is clearly out of the reasonable range. In order to distinguish the transaction behavior of different accounts and its influence on the price, we divide all the accounts into three categories: extremely high account (EHA), extremely low account (ELA) and normal account (NMA). As a first step, we apply a simple approach to identify an \emph{abnormal} transaction. For this, suppose the highest and the lowest reference price on day $t$ is $H_t$ and $L_t$, we regard an transaction with real-time price larger than $1.5\times H_t$ as an extremely high price transaction (EHT) and with real-time price lower than $0.5\times L_t$ as an extremely low price transaction (ELT). Both kinds of transactions are referred to as abnormal transactions (ABTs). Please note that we use $(0.5\times L_t,1.5\times H_t)$ instead of $(L_t,H_t)$ to identify an abnormal transaction because there are many exchanges (thus many reference price) at the same time and we cannot make sure the reference price is the real price of the exchange. However, the parameter 0.5 and 1.5 is enough to exclude any normal transaction. Finally, an account is an EHA if it has at least one extremely high price transaction and an ELA if it has at least one extremely low price transaction. Both EHAs and ELAs are referred to as abnormal accounts (ABA). Please note that abnormal accounts could be both an EHA and an ELA if it involves both EHT and ELT. NMA is an account involved in no abnormal transactions, that is to say, all involved transactions are normal transactions (NMT).
Table \ref{tab_stat_account} shows the number of accounts and all kinds of transactions for each category of accounts. Four observations can be made from the table: 1) there are 14916 abnormal accounts, which account for 12.5\% (14916/119343) of all the accounts (please note that the number of ABA is not the sum of the number of EHA and ELA due to the existence of accounts contained in both categories); 2) the proportion of abnormal transactions (\#ABT) among ABAs accounts for 2.8\% ($\approx$194790/6775117); 3) the number of normal transactions among ABAs (3025992-194790=2831202) account for more than 41\% (2831202/6775117) of all transactions; and 4) the sum of the number of transactions (\#Tx) among ABAs and NMAs is far less than the number of all transactions, thus many transactions occurred between ABA and NMA.
Based on these observations, one can confirm that the abnormal transactions do not occur by accident (observation 2) and the abnormal accounts behave normally in most of their times (observation 3). Thus, the existence of the abnormal accounts must have a certain special purpose. One of the most likely purposes is for providing liquidity (observation 4, Section \ref{graph_res}). Considering the analysis on the recent cryptocurrency market of a trader and investor, which report that in some exchanges most of their disclosed trading volume are fake~\cite{fakevolume}, another possible purpose for these accounts is for fake volume. Besides, price manipulation is also a likely purpose (Section \ref{sec_price_ana}). In fact, we find that the abnormal transactions are greatly correlated with the Bitcoin exchange price and there are many abnormal patterns in the transactions.
\begin{table}
\caption{Statics of Accounts and Transactions.}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cccccc}
\hline
Category & \#accounts & \#Tx & \#ABT & \#EHT & \#ELT \\
\hline
EHA & 10702 & 1406850 & 179701 & 138743 & 40958 \\
ELA & 5835 & 2486807 & 85784 & 29737 & 56047 \\
ABA & 14916 & 3025992 & 194790 & 138743 & 56047 \\
NMA & 104427 & 812865 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
\hline
All & 119343 & 6775117 & 194790 & 138743 & 56047 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab_stat_account}
\end{table}
\subsection{Graph Construction}\label{graph_construct}
As each transaction contains a buyer and a seller, we can easily construct a directed graph from the records by considering each account as a node. Specifically, we present the definition of the constructed graph $G$ as follows.
\textbf{Graph Definition.} $G=(V,E,w)$, where $V$ is a set of nodes represent users (denoted by user ID) in the leaked data, $E$ is a set of edges with each represents an \emph{ordered} pair of nodes and $w$ is the function associating each edge to a weight. Each pair indicates that there was at least one transaction between users $u$ (seller) and $v$ (buyer) in the whole dataset. $w:E\rightarrow \mathbb{R}_+$ maps each edge with a weight, which is the total amount of Bitcoins transferred along the edge by one or more transactions.
In the remainder of this paper, we use the term \emph{account}, \emph{user} and \emph{node} interchangeably. To better compare network characteristics, we construct three graphs according to the nodes' categories as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item EHG. The graph that all nodes are EHAs.
\item ELG. The graph that all nodes are ELAs.
\item NMG. The graph that all nodes are NMAs.
\end{itemize}
To construct the graph we adopt the following steps. Since each complete transaction has both a buy and sell record (has the same transaction ID) after data validation, we first construct a set of tuples $(S,B,v,t,l)$ from every complete transaction, where $S$ and $B$ represents the seller and buyer (denoted by user ID), $v$ is the corresponding amount of the transaction in Bitcoin, $t$ is the transaction time and $l$ is a label indicating the category of the transaction (i.e., EHT, ELT or NMT). We call this set as \emph{transaction tuple}, as each tuple corresponds to a unique transaction. Based on the transaction tuple, the aforementioned graphs are easy to construct. For example, to construct the EHG, we select all the tuples in which both the seller and the buyer are EHAs and sum the $v$ entry grouped by $S$ and $B$. Then, the generated new tuples $(S,B,v)$ is the EHG. Other graphs are constructed as the same except by selecting different tuples according to the nodes' category.
{}
\subsection{Graph Analysis} \label{graph_res}
This subsection investigates the constructed graphs from various metrics in graph analysis. Figure \ref{fig_all} shows the three graphs. We can find that there are more nodes in NMG, indicating the NMG is more sparse in connection (note that we select 5,000 edges for each graph). We investigate the statistics and metrics in the following.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\subfloat[EHG]{%
\includegraphics[width=.16\textwidth]{low5000.png}}\hfill
\vspace*{1mm}
\subfloat[ELG]{%
\includegraphics[width=.16\textwidth]{normal5000.png}}\hfill
\subfloat[NMG]{%
\includegraphics[width=.16\textwidth]{high5000.png}}\
\caption{Visualization of EHG, ELG, and NMG. For the ease of illustration, we randomly select 5000 edges from each graph to draw the figure.}\label{fig_all}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.5cm}
Table \ref{tab_stat} shows all the statistics and metrics for each constructed graph. For comparison, we also constructed the abnormal graph (i.e., the graph of all abnormal accounts, ABG) and the complete graph (i.e, the graph of all accounts, CG). In the following, we first introduce the statistics or metrics and then detail the observations.
The number of nodes in each graph is the number of accounts in each category, which is in accordance with the statistics in Table \ref{tab_stat_account}. The only exception is that the number of nodes in NMG is less than the number of NMA, because some normal accounts interact with abnormal accounts, thus it is not included the NMG.
\begin{table}[htbp]
\caption{Statics of graphs.}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cccccccccc}
\hline
graph & \# nodes & \# edges & cluster & avg. degree & avg. wgt. degree\\
\hline
EHG & 10702 & 212900 & 0.30& 19.89 & 505.43 \\
ELG & 5835 & 413881& 0.42 & 70.93 & 3107.68 \\
ABG & 14916 & 612885 & 0.31& 41.09 & 1439.04 \\
NMG & 86457 & 655882& 0.03& 7.59& 76.21 \\
CG & 119343 & 2682719 & 0.28& 22.48 & 426.54 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab_stat}
\end{table}
An edge in the graph indicates a ``channel'' between two accounts for buying or selling Bitcoin. As can be seen from the table, the number of edges in each graph is far less than the number of transactions, which means that many channels are used more than one times. Another notable result is that the summation of the number of edges in ABG and NMG is greatly less than the number of edges in the CG. This result indicates that many edges are the channels between normal and abnormal accounts and is evidence that the abnormal accounts provide liquidity in the exchange. The number of edges in ABG is slightly larger than the sum of the number of edges in EHG and ELG since there are some edges connecting EHAs and ELAs.
We compute the clustering coefficient of all the graphs in column 4 of Table~\ref{tab_stat}. As can be seen, the clustering coefficients are extremely different among EHG, ELG, and NMG. The large clustering coefficients (i.e., 0.3 in EHG and 0.42 in ELG) revealing that if two abnormal accounts $A, B$ trade with abnormal account $C$, $A$ and $B$ are very likely to trade with each other. In other words, the abnormal accounts are likely to form triangles through transactions. Conversely, the clustering coefficient of NMG is very small (i.e., 0.03), which indicates a normal situation as the probability of three normal accounts forming a triangle is very small. This result indicates that the abnormal accounts behave strangely and herald the existence of market manipulation in the exchange.
The degree of a node is the number of edges connecting to the node. In our case, the degree of a node indicates the number of accounts trading with that node. Figure~\ref{fig_degree_dis} shows the degree distribution of all the three graphs, all of which approximately follows the power law distribution, meaning that there are few large-degree nodes and many small-degree nodes. We estimate the parameters by using the free statistical software R\cite{R} and the contributed package~\cite{poweRlaw} and plot the fitting line $y\sim x^{-\alpha}$ for each distribution in red. The smaller the $\alpha$, the more variable of nodes' degree. Thus, the abnormal accounts show less variable as compared with normal accounts. The result may be due to the abnormal accounts are controlled by the same organizations.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\subfloat[EHG]{%
\includegraphics[width=.16\textwidth]{high_degree.png}}\hfill
\vspace*{1mm}
\subfloat[ELG]{%
\includegraphics[width=.16\textwidth]{low_degree.png}}\hfill
\subfloat[NMG]{%
\includegraphics[width=.16\textwidth]{normal_degree.png}}
\caption{Degree distribution of EHG, ELG and NMG.}\label{fig_degree_dis}
\end{figure}
Column 5 and 6 in Table \ref{tab_stat} show the average degree and the weighted average degree of the graphs. The large average degrees of EHG and ELG indicate that the abnormal accounts are used more frequently than normal accounts. The weighted degree is computed by setting the transaction volume (i.e., Bitcoin) as the weight, thus the average weighted degree represents the average transaction volume for each edge. As can be seen, the average weighted degree of ELG is far larger than it of EHG, one possible reason that the exchange price of transactions in ELG is relatively low, thus the transaction volume is large. Whatever the reason is, an obvious fact remains that the average weighted degree of EHG and ELG are larger than that of NMG, which means the edges between abnormal accounts transfer more Bitcoin than edges between normal accounts.
Based on the results and analysis discussed above, we summarize the findings as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Finding 1.} There are some abnormal accounts (12.5\%) which trading with very high or low exchange price in some transactions. We consider these accounts abnormal and under control by the exchange for two reasons: 1) the proportion of the abnormal transactions account for 2.8\%, thus it is not occurred by accident; 2) the abnormal exchange price is impossible to appear on ordinary users.
\item \textbf{Finding 2.} Many seemingly normal transactions occurred between abnormal accounts ( $>$ 41\%). There are two possible purposes for these transactions: 1) these transactions are the fake volume that used to create an illusion of active trading; 2) to provide liquidity for the exchange.
\item \textbf{Finding 3.} The graphs of abnormal accounts have very large clustering coefficients. One possible reason is that these accounts are controlled by one organization, and thus the trade is not completely random.
\end{itemize}
These findings indicate that the exchange was likely involved in trading manipulation. As the exchange price is the key factor of trading, in the following section, we will discuss the possibility of price manipulation of the exchange.
\section{Temporal Network Analysis}\label{sec_price_ana}
As discussed above, the transaction network of abnormal accounts (i.e., EHG and ELG) show a great difference from the NMG. We want to know whether these transactions have a correlation with the Bitcoin price and what kind of users and transactions (i.e., graph structure) influence the Bitcoin price greatly. To this end, we calculate the daily snapshots of the graphs by adopting the method similar to \ref{graph_construct}. To detect important changes in the graph structure, we compare successive snapshots of the graphs using singular value decomposition (SVD). The goal is to detect a set of base networks and represents each day's snapshot as a linear combination of these base networks. Unlike in Section \ref{static_analysis}, we focused our study on transaction data after 2012/12/01 in this section. There are many reasons supporting our choice. Firstly, the recent paper which proves the price manipulation of Mt. Gox uses the same transaction history \cite{gandal2018price}. Secondly, the Bitcoin price experienced a skyrocketing during this period. Thirdly, Mt. Gox was the main Bitcoin exchange during this period. Finally, more abnormal users and transactions (more than 60\%) are found after that day.
\subsection{Extract Base Networks}
To evaluate which networks influence the price greatly, we need to construct the daily snapshots of the three graphs: EHG$_t$, ELG$_t$ and NMG$_t$. We adopt the same process to construct the graph series. First of all, we construct the \emph{aggregate} networks (i.e., EHG) based on tuples after 2012/12/01. Assume there are $n$ nodes and $L$ edges in the aggregate network, then it can be represented by a $n\times n$ weighted adjacency matrix $G$, in which there are $L$ non-zero elements. We rearrange $G$ into an $L$ long vector $g$ containing all the non-zero elements. We call this vector as \emph{edge-weight} vector. The vector describes the \emph{graph structure} of the aggregate network as each element represents a possible edge and its weight. To construct the daily snapshots of EHG$_t$ on day $t$, we recalculate the edge-weight vector $g_t$ (i.e., the graph structure on day $t$) based on transaction tuples on day $t$. Please note that we do not change the order of the vector, thus the $i$-th element of all the edge-weight vectors indicate the same edge, and it may be zero if the edge does not exist on a specific day. For $T$ snapshots, we now build the $T\times L$ graph time series matrix $X$ such that the $t$-th row of $X$ equals $g_t$. By doing this, we build a special matrix with $T$ samples and each sample represents a daily graph structure.
To account for the variation of the daily graph structure, we normalize $X$ such that the sum of each row equals 1, and then subtract the column averages from each column. As a result, both the row and column sums in the matrix will be zero. We compute the singular value decomposition of the matrix $X$:
\begin{equation}
X=U\Sigma V^T,
\end{equation}
where $U$ is a $T\times T$ unitary matrix, $\Sigma$ is a $T\times L$ diagonal matrix with non-negative values on the diagonal, and $V$ is a $L\times L$ unitary matrix. The non-negative values on the diagonal are \emph{sigular} values and is usually sorted in descending order. The left-singular vectors containing in the column of $U$ are a set of orthonormal eigenvectors of $XX^T$,
and the right-singular vectors containing in the column of $V$ are a set of orthonormal eigenvectors of $X^TX$
Since in this case $T<L$, there are only $T$ nonzero sigular values. We denote the sorted sigular values as $(\sigma_1,\cdots,\sigma_T)$, the left-sigular vectors $(\vec{u_1},\cdots,\vec{u_T})$ and the right-sigular vectors $(\vec{v_1},\cdots,\vec{v_T})$, where $\vec{u_i}$ and $\vec{v_i}$ are column vectors and subject to the following equations:
\begin{equation}
\vec{u_i}^T*\vec{u_j}=\vec{v_i}^T*\vec{v_j}=\delta_{ij}.
\end{equation}
Based on the special meaning of matrix $X$, we can interpret the singular vectors and the singular values as 1) the right-singular vectors can be seen as \emph{base networks}, and the element $v_i(l)$ (i.e., the $l$-th element of the $i$-th right-singular vector) gives the weight of the $l$-th edge in the $i$-th base network; 2) the left-singular vectors account for the temporal variation of the base networks, the $t$-th value of $\vec{u_i}$ (denotes as $u_i(t)$) provides the contribution of the $i$-th base network on day $t$; 3) the singular value $\sigma_i$, which are the square roots of the non-zero eigenvalues of both $X^TX$ and $XX^T$, indicates the overall importance of the $i$-th base network in approximating the whole matrix. Please note that the singular values are sorted in decreasing order, thus give decreasing contribution to the result.
\subsection{Detecting Graph Structural Changes}
As the (normalized) weight of the $l$-th edge in the daily graph structure on day $t$ can be written as:
\begin{equation}
x_{tl} = \sum_{i=1}^T \sigma_i u_i(t)v_i(l),
\end{equation}
to detect graph structural changes, we need to consider two terms: $\sigma_{i}$ (i.e., the importance of the $i$-th base network) and $u_i(t)$ (i.e., the contribution of the $i$-th base network on day $t$).
As a first glance, we consider the daily influence of the first and also the most important base network (i.e., $u_1(t)$). We want to know the correlation between the variation of $u_1(t)$ and the fluctuation of the Bitcoin exchange price. As the range of the price is $(12, 1207)$, we adopt a simple mathematical transform to make sure most of the transformed price falls in the interval $(0, 1)$. Specifically, we adopt the log transform $B(t)=log_{1000}P(t)$, where $P(t)$ is the close exchange price of Bitcoin on day $t$. Table \ref{tab_u1r} (left part) shows three commonly used correlation coefficients (i.e., Pearson, Spearman, and Kendall correlation coefficient) between $u_1(t)$ and the log-transformed price $B(t)$. The results show that the daily variation of the first base network in EHG and ELG have a very strong correlation with the Bitcoin exchange price. However, in NMG, there is no correlation between the two variables. The result indicates that the transactions made between abnormal accounts have a great influence on the Bitcoin exchange price.
\begin{table}
\caption{ Correlation coeffcients between the left-singular vectors of the network time series matrix and the Bitcoin exchange price.}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{c|ccc||ccc}
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Graph}& \multicolumn{3}{c||}{The 1st base network} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{The Fitted 10 base networks}\\
\cline{2-7}
& $\rho_{\rm{P}}$& $\rho_{\rm{S}}$ & $\rho_{\rm{K}}$ & $\rho_{\rm{P}}$& $\rho_{\rm{S}}$& $\rho_{\rm{K}}$ \\
\hline
EHG& 0.56& 0.60& 0.44& \textbf{0.811} & \textbf{0.807}& 0.620\\
ELG& 0.58& \textbf{0.82}& 0.64 & \textbf{0.871}& \textbf{0.834} &0.652\\
NMG& 0.05& 0.15& 0.12 &0.239& 0.398 &0.289\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\label{tab_u1r}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{sigularvalues.pdf}
\caption{Sigular values in the order of its importance.}\label{sigularvalues}
\end{figure}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\begin{figure*}[thbp]
\centering
\subfloat[EHG]{%
\includegraphics[width=.32\textwidth]{high_price.pdf}}\hfill
\vspace*{1mm}
\subfloat[ELG]{%
\includegraphics[width=.32\textwidth]{low_price.pdf}}\hfill
\subfloat[NMG]{%
\includegraphics[width=.32\textwidth]{normal_price.pdf}}\
\caption{Approximate the log-transformed Bitcoin price with the linear combination of the selected base networks of EHG, ELG, and NMG.}\label{fit_price}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[thbp]
\centering
\subfloat[EHG]{%
\includegraphics[width=.31\textwidth]{high_fit.pdf}}\hfill
\vspace*{1mm}
\subfloat[ELG]{%
\includegraphics[width=.31\textwidth]{low_fit.pdf}}\hfill
\subfloat[NMG]{%
\includegraphics[width=.31\textwidth]{normal_fit.pdf}}\
\caption{The time-varying contribution $u_i(t)$ of the first four base networks.}\label{uit}
\end{figure*}
Motivated by this result, we want to know, to what extent, the log transfered price can be estimated with the combination of the left-sigular vectors, i.e.,
\begin{equation}\label{discompose}
B(t) \sim c_0 + \sum_{i=1}^N c_iu_i(t),
\end{equation}
where $c_0$ is the mean of $B(t)$ and $c_i$ can be computed as the dot product of $B(t)$ and $u_i(t)$.
As the left-singular vectors are orthonormal and span the T-dimensional linear space, $B(t)$ can be reconstructed by $u_i(t)$ when $N=T$. However, this is not what we desire in this case. The purpose of this study is to identify some important base networks and accounts that have a great influence on the Bitcoin price. To proceed, we first try to select some important base networks in the detected base networks. We draw the scree plot of the singular values as shown in Fig. \ref{sigularvalues}. As can be seen from the graph, the curve of the singular values is clearly leveling off at the right side of the dotted line (i.e., the 10th singular value). Thus, we select the first 10 base networks for the following analysis.
Before analyzing accounts in the selected base networks, we approximate $B(t)$ with the selected networks. To evaluate the fitting effect, we calculate the correlation coefficients between the fitted price series and $B(t)$. The right part of Table \ref{tab_u1r} shows the correlation coefficients. Surprisingly, the three correlation coefficients are greatly enhanced as compared with the first left-singular vector. Especially, the Pearson correlation coefficient between ELG and $B(t)$ is 0.87, while only 0.24 between NMG and $B(t)$. The great difference indicates a strong correlation between abnormal accounts' transactions and the Bitcoin exchange price, which is a strong evidence of the price manipulation in Mt. Gox.
Figure \ref{fit_price} shows the trends of $B(t)$ and the fitted price. As can be seen from the graph, though the shape of the peak in April of 2013 is missed, the trends of $B(t)$ has been grasped by the selected base networks of EHG and ELG, whereas the base networks in the NMG have no effect in grasping the trend.
To show the structure variation of the networks, we draw the time-varying contribution $u_i(t)$ of the first four base networks in Fig. \ref{uit}.
In most cases, $u_i(t)$ exhibit a few abrupt changes, partitioning the history of the transaction into separate time periods. The most notable abrupt changes are in December of 2012 when the Bitcoin exchange price is very smooth and the November of 2013 when the price skyrocketing. During the two periods, the effects of the first four base networks of EHG and ELG are both significant, however, the base networks in NMG have no distinct effect during the smooth period and show effect only a few days during the skyrocketing period.
\begin{figure*}[htbp]
\centering
\subfloat[Self-Loop]{%
\label{Self-Loop}
\includegraphics[width=.26\textwidth,height=.26\textwidth]{20130207sample.png}}\hfill
\vspace*{1mm}
\subfloat[Unidirection]{%
\label{Unidirection}
\includegraphics[width=.26\textwidth,height=.26\textwidth]{20130815sample.png}}\hfill
\subfloat[Bidirection]{%
\label{Bi-direction}
\includegraphics[width=.26\textwidth,height=.26\textwidth]{20130414sample.png}}\
\subfloat[Triangle]{%
\label{Triangle}
\includegraphics[width=.26\textwidth,height=.26\textwidth]{20131025sample.png}}\hfill
\subfloat[Polygon]{%
\label{Polygon}
\includegraphics[width=.26\textwidth,height=.26\textwidth]{20130919sample.png}}\hfill
\subfloat[Star]{%
\label{Star}
\includegraphics[width=.26\textwidth,height=.26\textwidth]{20130912sample.png}}\
\caption{Some typical abnormal transaction patterns}\label{tran_pattern}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Abnormal transaction patterns}
As discussed above, the transactions between abnormal users have a great correlation with the Bitcoin exchange price. A natural question is which edges (i.e, transactions) and thus accounts are the most influential and whether the transactions show certain patterns during the period. To this end, based on the extracted 10 base networks, we further extract the top-10 ranking edges (by the absolute value of weights) in each base networks. We find only 44 distinct edges instead of the 100 maximally possible, which including a total of 28 accounts in EHG. In ELG, 57 edges and 46 accounts were found. We call these \emph{core abnormal accounts}.
To identify special transaction patterns, we draw the daily subgraph of the core abnormal accounts. We find that there are many abnormal transaction patterns (i.e., market manipulation patterns) in the networks. In order to save space, we show only 6 typical patterns in Fig.~\ref{tran_pattern}. These subgraphs are all extracted from ELG on different days. In order to illustrate more clearly, we fix the layout of the graph (i.e., the position of the accounts in each graph is fixed) and denote the special patterns in red. The size of the line denotes the number of transactions between the two accounts. The number at the right-hand side of the directed edge represents the number of transactions between the two accounts. We simply explain the 6 patterns as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Self-Loop.} A pattern that an account made transactions with itself. Figure \ref{Self-Loop} shows subgraph on 2013/02/07, the account 231 made 749 transactions with itself. Self-Loop is restricted for normal accounts in any exchanges, as it makes no sense. Thus, a reasonable explanation for the self-loop pattern is that the account may belong to the exchange and may be used to increase daily transaction volume or price manipulation.
\item \textbf{Unidirection.} The unidirectional pattern indicates more than one transaction from account \emph{A} to \emph{B}. Figure~\ref{Unidirection} shows a unidirectional pattern on 2013/08/15, where account 527332 made 322 sell transactions to account 231. It is possible for an account to sell Bitcoin to another account for more than one times, however, it is almost impossible for two normal accounts to interact with such a large number of times on the same day.
\item \textbf{Bi-direction.} The bi-directional pattern is a typical market manipulation behavior, especially when the two accounts are controlled by the same user, that two accounts interact with each other many times. Figure \ref{Bi-direction} shows the bi-direction pattern on 2013/04/14 where account 144834 interact with account 231 for more than 150 times.
\item \textbf{Triangle.} The triangle pattern indicates a triangle-like structure between three accounts. It may contain various forms when considering the direction of the edge. Figure \ref{Triangle} shows a special form of triangle pattern on 2013/10/25. It is special because the accounts form a loop through transactions (account 282004 $\rightarrow $71885 $\rightarrow $490089 $\rightarrow $282004).
\item \textbf{Polygon.} Polygon pattern is a more complicated transaction pattern where many accounts form a polygon-like \emph{group} with each edge has more than one transactions. Figure \ref{Polygon} shows a quadrangle pattern on 2013/09/19, it seems that account 282004 sends Bitcoin to account 527332 through the ``bridge accounts'' 488195 and 231 for more than two hundred transactions.
\item \textbf{Star.} A star pattern has a core account that buys or sells Bitcoin to many accounts. Figure~\ref{Star} shows a typical star, where the account 282004 sell Bitcoin to accounts 488195, 490089, 527332 and 231.
\end{itemize}
Generally speaking, it is not surprising for a transaction network to form a special structure, as transactions are random. However, in our case, it is impossible as each edge represents far more than one transaction in a single day.
Thus, it seems quite possible that these accounts are controlled by a certain group and these transactions have special purposes
Based on the results, we summarize the findings as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{Finding 4.} The daily fluctuations of the selected base networks of EHG and ELG have a strong correlation with the Bitcoin exchange price. On the contrary, the daily fluctuation of the base networks of NMG has no correlation with the Bitcoin exchange price. This finding indicates that the behavior of the abnormal accounts' transaction affects the fluctuation of Bitcoin exchange price.
\item \textbf{Finding 5.} The trend of the Bitcoin exchange price can be captured by the selected base networks of EHG and ELG. It means that the trend of the price can be predicted by transactions between abnormal accounts.
\item \textbf{Finding 6.} There are many unusual transaction patterns (e.g., self-loop, bi-direction, star) between abnormal accounts. These patterns imply that these accounts are controlled by the same group and are strong evidence of price manipulation.
\end{itemize}
\section{Related Work}\label{relatedwork}
Blockchain technology is a new technology, which has many research directions and attracts the interest of researchers from various fields\cite{shaoan,zheng2017overview}. Our research is related to previous work in two areas. The first related area is the study of understanding the big fluctuation of Bitcoin price. As aforementioned, many driving factors of the price are found. Due to all the related data are time series, the most used method in the analysis is time series based model such as vector space model \cite{georgoulausing}, vector error-correction model \cite{ciaian2016economics}, ARDL bounds testing method \cite{bouoiyour2015does}, wavelet analysis \cite{kristoufek2015main}, and vector autoregressive \cite{ciaian2016economics}.
Another related area is the study of the blockchain data (i.e., the transaction ledger)
for different topics. Due to the publicly accessible of the blockchain data and users are anonymous in the system, a common topic is to mine the blockchain data to reveal users' privacy \cite{Reidanalysisanonymitybitcoin2013, AndroulakiEvaluatinguserprivacy2013, AtheyBitcoinpricingadoption2016}. Because of the relatively lawless, blockchain has become an area full of various scams. Thus, mining the blockchain data to detect scams is also a critical topic. Recently, there are many studies on this topic, such as Bitcoin-based scams \cite{VasekTherenofree2015}, the smart contract
based Ponzi schemes \cite{bartoletti2017dissecting, chen2018detecting}, money laundry \cite{moser2013inquiry}, attacks \cite{Chen2018under}. See \cite{weilisurvey} for a full survey of this topic.
\section{Conclusion and Future Work}\label{conclusion}
We conduct a systematic study to analyze the leaked Mt. Gox transaction data through graph analysis. By comparing the transaction price of the transaction data with the disclosed daily price, many abnormal transactions were identified and were used to divide the accounts into three categories. Based on this classification, we construct three graphs (i.e., EHG, ELG, and NMG) and obtain many findings by analyzing these graphs through various metrics. These findings convinced us that there are many
market manipulation behaviors in the exchange. In order to reveal the relationship between these behaviors and the Bitcoin price, the graphs are reconstructed into daily graph series and reshaped into matrices. Through adopting SVD to the matrices, some very important base networks are identified. By inspecting the base networks, we find that the daily variation of the abnormal base networks closely related to the Bitcoin price and many market manipulation patterns. Based on these findings and considering Bitcoin is dominant in the market, we propose to strengthen supervision in this market. In the future, we will conduct a more thorough study of the data to reveal the extent to which the market is affected and to discuss the changes in the behavior of investors under the extreme fluctuation price.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The work described in this paper was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program (2016YFB1000101),the National Natural Science Foundation of China (61722214,11801595), the Pearl River S\&T Nova Program of Guangzhou (201710010046) and the Program for Guangdong Introducing Innovative and Entrepreneurial Teams (2016ZT06D211).
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
The Casimir effect which is a physical manifestation of changes in the quantum vacuum fluctuations for different configurations, was discovered by H. B. G. Casimir in 1948 \cite{casimir1948influence}. He showed the existence of this effect as an attractive force between two infinite parallel uncharged perfectly conducting plates in vacuum (for a general review on the Casimir effect, see Refs. \cite{bordag2001new,milton2001casimir}). Sparnaay \cite{sparnaay1958measurements} and Arnold et al \cite{arnold1979influence} experimentally observed the Casimir force for such a configuration. Also, the other measurements, with greatly improved precisions, have been done for various geometries \cite{garcia2012casimir,kim2010surface,lamoreaux2010reanalysis}.
In addition to the leading Casimir energy, the next to leading order (NLO) radiative corrections to this effect is an exciting subject of discussion. The first endeavors to calculate the leading radiative corrections to the Casimir energy were reported in \cite{bordag1983quantum}. Also, many works on the radiative corrections to the Casimir energy for various cases exist in the literature (see for instance \cite{bordag1998radiative,moazzemi2007dirichlet}). In the case of a real massive scalar field, NLO correction to the Casimir energy has been computed in \cite{bordag2001new,barone2004radiative}. We have also calculated one loop radiative corrections to the Casimir energy in \cite{moazzemi2016one}.
In original quantum field theory (QFT), the Lorentz symmetry is preserved. However, there are some theories which present models with Lorentz symmetry violation (for example\cite{ferrari2013hovrava,ulion2015casimir}). Naturally, Lorentz symmetry violation arises from, for example, existence of space-time anisotropy \cite{colladay1997cpt,colladay1998lorentz} or non-commutativity \cite{carroll2001noncommutative,bertolami2003noncommutative} or a spacetime varying coupling constant \cite{kostelecky2003spacetime,bertolami1997lorentz}. Investigations of Casimir effect with Lorentz-breaking symmetry for QED theory have been done (see please \cite{frank2006casimir,martin2016casimir,martin2017local}). It has also been studied recently for a real massive scalar field in \cite{cruz2017casimir}.
In this paper we calculate the NLO correction to the Casimir energy in an interacting scalar field theory, $\lambda \phi^4$, with a Lorentz violating term. Our configuration is two perfectly conducting parallel plates. We work within the renormalized perturbation theory, therefore we need to reconsider the renormalization for this theory. Naturally, the counterterms needed for renormalization, are modified due to the existence of new Lorentz violating terms in the Lagrangian.
To take the physical result and resolve infinities problem, we use a well-known approach called \textit{Boyer method}\cite{boyer1968quantum}; also is known as \textit{Box Renormalization Scheme} (BRS). This method uses a completely physical approach by enclosing the whole system in a box of volume $V=L^3$ which finally may tend to infinity in such a way that difference between the zero point energies of two different configurations is calculated. It removes all ambiguities associated with appearance of the infinities without resorting to any other schemes such as analytic continuation approach. It is notable that, in BRS the substraction precedure in calculation of Casimir energy takes place in two physical configuration with similar nature, which is another advantage of BRS.
We organized our paper as follows:
We introduce our model for Lorentz-breaking symmetry of the theory in section \ref{2} . We shall see that energy-momentum tensor and Klein-Gordon (KG) equation is modified. In section \ref{3}, we survey renormalization of the related theory within a Lorentz-braeking case. In section \ref{4} we calculate the NLO radiative correction to the Casimir energy for $\phi^4$ theory with Lorentz-breaking symmetry. We note that at this stage we consider the existence of Lorentz-symmetry parameter in two cases: 1. time-like (TL), and 2. space-like (SL). Finally, in last section we state our conclusions.
\section{The Lorentz-Breaking $\phi^4$ theory}\label{2}
\subsection{The Model}
In this section, we present the Lorentz symmetry breaking for a scalar field theory due to an anisotropy of space-time. We do this by insertion an additional term in the KG Lagrangian density
\begin{equation}\label{phi}
{\cal L}(x)
=\frac{1}{2}[\partial_{\mu}\phi]^{2}+\frac{1}{2} c(u.\partial\phi)^2 -\frac{1}{2}m_0^{2}\phi^{2},
\end{equation}
where $m_{0}$ is the bare mass and the dimensionless parameter $c$, which is much smaller than one, manifests the Lorentz symmetry breaking of the system by a coupling between the derivative of the scalar field $\phi$ and a constant four-vector $u^\mu$. Adding a self-interaction term to Eq. \eqref{phi} we get
\begin{equation}\label{phi2}
{\cal L}(x)
=\frac{1}{2}(\partial_{\mu}\phi)^{2}+\frac{1}{2} c(u.\partial\phi)^2 -\frac{1}{2}m_0^{2}\phi^{2}-\frac{\lambda_0}{4!}\phi^4,
\end{equation}
where $\lambda_0$ is our bare coupling. The equation of motion for Lagrangian \eqref{phi} reads as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{MKG}
\left[\square+c (u\cdot\partial)^2-m_0^2\right]\phi(x)=0.
\end{eqnarray}
It is obvious that this modified KG equation, for $c= 0$ reverts to the original KG equation of motion with the following dispersion relation:
\begin{equation}\label{DR}
\omega_n ^2=\left \vert\mathbf{k}^{\bot}\right \vert ^2+k_n^2+m_0^2.
\end{equation}
The violation of Lorentz symmetry has vital consequences such as modification of dispersion relation which directly affects the propagator of the field. We consider this effect in three different cases. In the first case we assume that the Lorentz violation is in the time direction. The second and third are the SL Lorentz violations in the directions parallel (pl-SL) and perpendicular (pr-SL) to the plates.
\subsection{Propagator in Bounded Space}
To calculate radiative corrections to any physical quantity, including Casimir energy, we need to know the exact form of propagator. In this subsection we first derive the propagator, suitable for Casimir effect problem, in the context of standard quantum field theory (without any Lorentz-violating term). Our configuration is two parallel plates located at $z=\pm a/2$ perpendicular to $z$-axis with a separation $a$. We suppose the fields satisfy Dirichlet boundary conditions (DBCs) on the plates,
\begin{equation}
\phi \left(x\right)
\bigg|_{z=\pm a/2}=0.
\end{equation}
Being $d$ the dimension of space-time, the field $\phi$ is defined with quantized modes as
\begin{eqnarray}
\phi(x)&=&\int\frac{d^{d-2}\mathbf{k}^{\bot}}{(2\pi)^{d-1}}
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}\left(\frac{1}{a\omega_{n}}\right)^{1/2}
\nonumber\\
&&\hspace{-.2cm} \times\Bigg\{e^{-i(\omega_{n}t-\mathbf{k^{\bot}}\textbf{.}
\mathbf{x}^{\bot})}\sin\left[k_{n}(z+\frac{a}{2})\right]\textbf{a}_{n} +e^{i(\omega_{n}t-\mathbf{k^{\bot}}\textbf{.}
\mathbf{x}^{\bot})}\sin\left[k_{n}(z+\frac{a}{2})\right]
\textbf{a}_{n}^{\dag}\Bigg\},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathbf{k}^{\bot}$ and $k_{n}=\frac{n\pi}{a}$ denote the momenta parallel and perpendicular to the plates, respectively.
Here,
$\textbf{a}_{n}^{\dag}$ and $\textbf{a}_{n}$ are creation and annihilation operators, respectively, with the following commutation relations:
\[[\textbf{a}_{n},\textbf{a}^{\dag}
_{n^{_\prime}}]=\delta_{n,n^{_\prime}},\quad
[\textbf{a}_{n},\textbf{a}_{n^{_\prime}}]=[\textbf{a}^{\dag}_{n},
\textbf{a}^{\dag}_{n^{_\prime}}]=0,\]
and $\textbf{a}|0\rangle=0$
defines the vacuum state in the presence of boundary conditions.
One may easily find Feynman Green's function of the KG equation as
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\hspace{-.7cm}G_F(x,x')=i\frac{2}a\int\frac{d\omega}{2\pi}\int\frac{d^{d-2} {\bf
k^{\bot}}}{(2\pi)^{d-2}} \sum_n
\frac{e^{-i\omega(t-t')}e^{-i{\bf
k^{\bot}}.({\bf{x}}^{\bot}-{\bf{x'}}^{\bot})}
\sin\left[k_{n}(z+\frac{a}{2})\right]
\sin\left[k_{n}(z'+\frac{a}{2})\right]}{\omega^2 -{
k^{\bot^2}}-k_{n}^2-m_0^2+i\epsilon}.\nonumber\\
\end{eqnarray}
We then find Euclidean Green's function by the following definitions:
\[\omega_E=-i\omega \hspace{.5cm}; \hspace{1cm} {\bf
k^{\bot}_E}={\mathbf{ k}^{\bot}}, \]
which finally leads to (we need only $G_F(x,x)$ in our calculations)
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Green}
\hspace{-.7cm}G_F(x,x)=\frac{2}a\int\frac{d\omega_E}{2\pi}\int\frac{d^{d-2} \mathbf{k}^{\bot}_E}{(2\pi)^{d-2}} \sum_n
\frac{
\sin^2\left[k_{n}(z+\frac{a}{2})\right]
}{\omega^2_E +{{k}^{\bot}_E}^2+k_{n}^2+m_0^2+i\epsilon}.
\end{eqnarray}
\subsubsection{TL vector case}
Choosing the four-vector to be TL, $u^\mu=(1,0,0,0)$, the second term in Eq. \eqref{MKG} becomes $c\, \partial_0^2$. Hence, the dispersion relation \eqref{DR} takes the form
\begin{eqnarray}
(1+c)\omega^{2}_{n}={
k^{\bot}}^2+k_{n}^2+m_0^2.
\end{eqnarray}
Therefore, we can find the propagator for this case by replacing
$\omega^2\to(1+c)\omega^2$ in Eq. (\ref{Green})
\begin{eqnarray}
G_F(x,x)=\frac{2}a\int\frac{d\omega_E}{2\pi}\int\frac{d^{d-2} \mathbf{k}^{\bot}_E}{(2\pi)^{d-2}} \sum_n
\frac{
\sin^2\left[k_{n}(z+\frac{a}{2})\right]
}{(1+c)\omega^2_E +{{k}^{\bot}_E}^2+k_{n}^2+m_0^2+i\epsilon}
\end{eqnarray}
Changing variable $\omega'=\sqrt{1+c} \hspace{.1cm}\omega_E$ , we obtain
\begin{eqnarray}
\hspace{-.7cm}G_F(x,x)=\frac{2}{a(1+c)^{1/2}}\int\frac{d^{d-1} {
k}}{(2\pi)^{d-1}} \sum_n
\frac{
\sin^2\left[k_{n}(z+\frac{a}{2})\right]
}{k^2+k_{n}^2+m_0^2+i\epsilon}.
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathbf{k}=(\omega',{\mathbf k}^\bot_E)$ . Performing the angular integration, finally we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Gtime}
G_F(x,x)&=&\frac{2}{a(1+c)^{1/2}}\Omega_{d-1}\int \frac{dk k^{d-2}}{(2\pi)^{d-1}} \sum_n
\frac{
\sin^2\left[k_{n}(z+\frac{a}{2})\right]
}{{k^2+k_n^2+m_0^2+i\epsilon}}.\nonumber\\&=&\frac{4}{a(1+c)^{1/2}(4\pi)^{\frac{d-1}{2}}\Gamma(\frac{d-1}{2})}\int dk k^{d-2} \sum_n
\frac{
\sin^2\left[k_{n}(z+\frac{a}{2})\right]
}{{k^2+k_n^2+m_0^2+i\epsilon}}
\end{eqnarray}
where the solid angle $\Omega_d=\dfrac{2\pi^{d/2}}{\Gamma(d/2)}$, with $\Gamma(x)$ being the Gamma function, corresponds to the area of a unit sphere in $d$ dimensions.
\subsubsection{SL vector case}
In SL case we choose three distinct directions for four-vector $u^\mu$; $u^\mu=(0,1,0,0)$, $u^\mu=(0,0,1,0)$ and $u^\mu=(0,0,0,1)$. In this case the Lorentz-breaking term in \eqref{MKG} is $-c\partial_i^2$ with $i=x,y$ or $z$. There is no difference between the physics of the first two vectors (pl-SL case), which are parallel to the plates, and the dispersion relations for both cases are also the same. Choosing $u^\mu=(0,0,1,0)$ for instance, Eq. \eqref{DR} becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega^{2}_{n}=k_x^2+(1-c)
k_y^2+k_{n}^2+m_0^2.
\end{eqnarray}
Changing the variables $\mathbf{k}=(\omega,{\mathbf k'}^\bot_E)$ with $k'_y=\sqrt{1-c} \ k_y$, in a similar manner to the TL case, the Green's function is derived as:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{SL}
\hspace{-.7cm}G_F(x,x)=\frac{4}{(1-c)^{1/2} a (4\pi)^{\frac{d-1}{2}}\Gamma(\frac{d-1}{2})}\int dk k^{d-2} \sum_n
\frac{
\sin^2\left[k_{n}(z+\frac{a}{2})\right]
}{{k^2+k_n^2+m_0^2+i\epsilon}}.
\end{eqnarray}
Now, for the last case (pl-SL), $u^\mu=(0,0,0,1)$ is normal to the plates and Eq. \eqref{DR} becomes
\begin{equation}
\omega^{2}_{n}={
k^{\bot}}^2+(1-c)k_{n}^2+m_0^2.
\end{equation}
In this case, the Euclidean Feynman propagator is derived as
\begin{eqnarray}
G_F(x,x)&=&\frac{4}{a (4\pi)^{\frac{d-1}{2}}\Gamma(\frac{d-1}{2})}\int dk k^{d-2} \sum_n
\frac{
\sin^2\left[k_{n}(z+\frac{a}{2})\right]
}{{k^2+(1-c) k_n^2+m_0^2+i\epsilon}}.\nonumber\\
&=&\frac{4}{a (4\pi)^{\frac{d-1}{2}}\Gamma(\frac{d-1}{2})}\int dk k^{d-2} \sum_n
\frac{
\sin^2\left[k_{n}(z+\frac{a}{2})\right]
}{{k^2+ {k'}_n^2+m_0^2+i\epsilon}}.\label{Glike}
\end{eqnarray}
where $k'_n=n \pi/a'$ with $a'=a/\sqrt{1-c}$.
For the future use, in the case of free space without plates, we note that the propagator for a Lorentz symmetry breaking theory becomes
\begin{eqnarray}\label{fgf}
G_F(x,x)
&=&\frac{1}{(1\pm c)^{\frac{1}{2}}}\int\frac{d^dk}{(2\pi)^d}\frac{i}{k^2-m_0^2}
\\\nonumber&=&\frac{1}{(1\pm c)^{\frac{1}{2}}(4\pi)^\frac{d}{2}}\frac{\Gamma(1-\frac{d}{2})}{(m_0^2)^{1-\frac{d}{2}}}.
\end{eqnarray}
where $+$ ($-$) is used for TL (SL) vector case.
\section{Renormalization up to order $\lambda$}\label{3}
At the level of quantum corrections, all unphysical quantities such as $m_0$ and $\lambda_0$ need to be renormalized. Therefore, we need to do a renormalization procedure to extract the physical $m$ and $\lambda$ from the bare parameters $m_0$ and $\lambda_0$ (see \cite{peskin1995introduction}). Here, we work within the standard renormalized perturbation theory. In the Lagrangian \eqref{phi2}, after rescaling the fields by a field strength renormalization $Z$, namely $\phi=Z^{\frac{1}{2}} \phi_r$ we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Ren}
&&{\cal L}=\frac{1}{2}(\partial_{\mu}\phi_{r})^{2}+\frac{1}{2} c(u.\partial\phi_r)^2-\frac{1}{2}m^{2}
\phi_{r}^{2}-\frac{\lambda}{4!}\phi_{r}^{4}\qquad\nonumber\\&&\hspace{2cm}+
\frac{1}{2}\delta_{Z}(\partial_{\mu}\phi_{r})^{2}
-\frac{1}{2}\delta_{m}\phi_{r}^{2}-\frac{\delta_{\lambda}}{4!}\phi_{r}^{4},
\end{eqnarray}
where $\delta_m=m_0^2 Z-m^2$, $\delta_\lambda=\lambda_0 Z^2-\lambda$ and $\delta_Z=Z-1$ are the counterterms. Then, we have
two new Feynman rules from the above Lagrangian
\begin{eqnarray}
\raisebox{-3mm}{\includegraphics[scale=.3]{4}}&=&-i\delta_{\lambda}\nonumber
\\
\raisebox{-1mm}{\includegraphics[scale=.3]{5}}&=&i[\left(c\pm 1\right)p^\mu p_\mu\delta_{Z}-\delta_{m}],
\end{eqnarray}
where $+$ ($-$) along with $\mu=0$ ($\mu=i$) are used for TL (SL) vector case (for more details see \cite{ferrero2011renormalization}). The counterterms are totally fixed by two renormalization conditions:
\begin{eqnarray}
\raisebox{-5mm}{\includegraphics[scale=.15]{cc}}&=&-i\lambda \qquad (s=4m^2, t=u=0) \\\nonumber
\raisebox{-3.1mm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.15]{bb}}&=&\frac{i}{p^2-m^2}+(\text{terms regular at $p^2=m^2$}).
\end{eqnarray}
From the first renormalization condition it is obvious that $\delta_\lambda=O(\lambda^2)$. The second renormalization condition which gives the physical mass $m$, up to order $\lambda$, can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{delta}
0&=&\raisebox{-.5mm}{\includegraphics[scale=.2]{33}}+
\raisebox{-1.3mm}{\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{5}}\nonumber\\
&=&-\frac{1}{2}\dfrac{i\lambda}{(1\pm c)^{1/2}(4\pi)^\frac{d}{2}}\dfrac{\Gamma(1-\frac{d}{2})}{(m^2)^{1-\frac{d}{2}}}+i[ (c\pm1)p^\mu p_\mu\delta_{Z}-\delta_{m}]
\end{eqnarray}
where we have used Eq. \eqref{fgf}. Therefore, $\delta_Z$ up to order $\cal O (\lambda)$ is zero, and
\begin{equation}\label{deltam}
\delta_m=-\frac{\lambda}{2(1\pm c)^{1/2}(4\pi)^\frac{d}{2}}\frac{\Gamma(1-\frac{d}{2})}{(m^2)^{1-\frac{d}{2}}}.
\end{equation}
\section{Radiative correction to the Casimir energy }\label{4}
In order to calculate the radiative correction to the Casimir energy we use box renormalization scheme (BRS) \cite{boyer1968quantum}. In this approach, we first compare the energies in two various configurations: when the plates are at $\pm a/2$ as compared to $\pm b/2$. We confine each configuration in a box with edges are located at $\pm L/2$ in all directions (see figure \ref{geometry}).
\begin{figure}[th]
\begin{center} \includegraphics[width=7cm]{aa}\caption{\label{fig.1} {\small The labels a1, {\em etc.} denote the appropriate sections in each configuration separated by the plates.}}
\label{geometry}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
Now, the Casimir energy is defined as
\begin{equation}\label{Cas1}
E_{\mbox{\tiny \mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}=\lim_{b/a\rightarrow\infty}\left[\lim_{L/b\rightarrow\infty}
\left(E_{a}-E_{b}\right)\right],
\end{equation}
where,
\begin{equation}\label{e3}
E_{a}=E_{a1}+2E_{a2},\quad
E_{b}=E_{b1}+2E_{b2}.
\end{equation}
The radiative corrections to the zero point energy in the (for example) a1 part, i.e. $z \in [\frac{-a}{2},\frac{a}{2}]$, are
\begin{eqnarray}\label{e21:vacc-pol}
\Delta E_{a1}= E^{(1)}_{a1}+ E^{(2)}_{a1}+\dots= \int_{V}
d^3{\bf x}\langle\Omega|{\cal H}_{_I}|\Omega\rangle\qquad\nonumber\\=i\int_{V} d^3{\bf x}\left(\ \frac{1}{2}
\raisebox{-1mm}{\includegraphics[scale=.3]{2}}+\frac{1}{8}
\raisebox{-7mm}{\includegraphics[scale=.3]{1}} \ +\frac{1}{8}\raisebox{-7mm}{\includegraphics[scale=.3]{3}}+\dots
\right),
\end{eqnarray}
where $|\Omega\rangle$ is the vacuum state in the presence of interaction. Up to order ${}\lambda$
we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Rcas}
E^{(1)}_{a_1}&=& i\int_{V} d^3{\bf x}\left(\ \frac{1}{2}
\raisebox{-1mm}{\includegraphics[scale=.3]{2}}+\frac{1}{8}
\raisebox{-7mm}{\includegraphics[scale=.3]{1}} \ \right)\hspace{3cm}\nonumber\\&=&i\int_{V}
d^3{\bf x}\left[-\frac{i}{2}
\delta_{m}G_{a1}(x,x)-\frac{i\lambda}{8}G^{2}_{a1}(x,x)\right]
,
\end{eqnarray}
where $G_{a_1}(x,x)$ is the propagator of the real scalar field in region a1 (we drop the subscript `F' for simplicity).
\subsection{TL \& pl-SL vector cases}
To calculate the first term in Eq. (\ref{Rcas}), $E^{(1),F}_{a_1}$, using Eqs. (\ref{Gtime}) and \eqref{deltam} and carrying out the spatial integration, one obtains the correction to the vacuum energy in region a1, up to ${\cal O}(\lambda)$, as:
\begin{eqnarray}
E^{(1),F}_{a_1}=\frac{1}{2}\int_{V}
\delta_{m}G_{a1}(x,x)d^3{\bf x}=-\frac{\lambda \sqrt{\pi} \Gamma(1-\frac{d}{2})L^{d-2}}{2 (1\pm c) (4\pi)^d (m^2)^{1-\frac{d}{2}} \Gamma(\frac{d-1}{2})}\int_0^\infty dk k^{d-2} \sum_n \frac{1}{k^2+k_{a1,n}^2+m^2},
\end{eqnarray}
where $k_{a1,n}=\frac{n \pi}{a}$. Integrating over momentum $k$ yields
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Cas2}
\frac{1}{2}\int_{V}
\delta_{m}G_{a_1}(x,x)d^3{\bf x}=\frac{\lambda \pi^{\frac{3}{2}} \Gamma(1-\frac{d}{2}) \sec(\frac{d \pi}{2})L^{d-2}}{4(1 \pm c) (4\pi)^d (m^2)^{1-\frac{d}{2}} \Gamma(\frac{d-1}{2})}\sum_n {\omega}_{a_1,n}^{d-3},
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\omega}_{a_1,n}=(m^{2}+k_{a_1,n}^{2})^{1/2}$. This is one of the four terms (related to the $a1$ region) that contribute to the NLO radiative correction for Casimir energy Eq. (\ref{Cas1}). To derive the Casimir energy from Eq. \eqref{Cas2}, we apply Abel-Plana summation formula \cite{saharian2007generalized},
\begin{equation}\label{Abel}
\sum_{n=1}^{\infty}g(n)=-\frac{g(0)}{2}+\int_{0}^{\infty}g(x)dx
+i\int_{0}^{\infty}\frac{g(it)-g(-it)}{e^{2\pi t}-1}dt,
\end{equation}
with,
\begin{eqnarray}
g(n)={\omega}_{a1,n}^{d-3}+{\omega}_{a2,n}^{d-3}-{\omega}_{b1,n}^{d-3}-{\omega}_{b2,n}^{d-3}.
\end{eqnarray}
We note that the $g(0)$ term vanishes. Also the second term on the right hand side of Eq. \eqref{Abel}, with respect to suitable changing of variables in the four integrals below, vanishes:
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \frac{a}
{\pi}\int^{\infty}_0dk'\left(m^2+k'^2\right)^{(d-3)/2}+2\frac{L-a}{2\pi}
\int^{\infty}_0dk'\left(m^2+k'^2\right)^{(d-3)/2}\nonumber\\
&&\quad-\frac{b}{\pi}\int^{\infty}_0dk'
\left(m^2+k'^2\right)^{(d-3)/2}-2\frac{L-b}{2\pi}\int^{\infty}_0dk'
\left(m^2+k'^2\right)^{(d-3)/2}=0.
\end{eqnarray}
Finally, we calculate branch-cut terms in Eq. \eqref{Abel}. Assuming $f(x)=[x^2-(\frac{am}{\pi})^2]^{(d-3)/2}$ we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Branch}
B(a)=i \int_0^\infty\frac{f(it)-f(-it)}{e^{2\pi t}-1} dt&=&-2\left(\frac{\pi}{a}\right)^{d-3} \int_{\frac{am}{\pi}}^\infty\nonumber \frac{[t^2-(\frac{am}{\pi})^2]^{(d-3)/2}}{e^{2\pi t}-1}\\
&=&-\sum_{j=1}^\infty\frac{2 K_{\frac{d-2}{2}}(2amj)\Gamma(\frac{d-1}{2})}{a^{d-3}\pi^{3/2}(\frac{am}{j})^{\frac{2-d}{2}}},
\end{eqnarray}
where $K_n(x)$ is the modified Bessel function of order $n$. To calculate the integral, we have used the identity
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{e^{2 \pi t}-1}=\sum_{j=1}^\infty e^{- 2 \pi j t}.
\end{equation}
Therefore, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{Ea}
E^{(1),F}_{a_1}=-\frac{\lambda \pi^{\frac{3}{2}} \Gamma(1-\frac{d}{2}) \sec(\frac{d \pi}{2})L^{2}}{4(1 \pm c) a^3 (4\pi)^d (\tilde{m}^2)^{1-\frac{d}{2}} \Gamma(\frac{d-1}{2})}\sum_{j=1}^\infty\frac{2 K_{\frac{d-2}{2}}(2\tilde{m}j)\Gamma(\frac{d-1}{2})}{\pi^{3/2}(\frac{\tilde{m}}{j})^{\frac{2-d}{2}}},
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{m}=ma$ is a dimensionless parameter. Then, according to Eq. \eqref{Cas1} the contribution of
the Eq. \eqref{Cas2} to Casimir energy is
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Cas3}
E^{(1),F}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}=\lim_{b/a\rightarrow\infty}\left[\lim_{L/b\rightarrow\infty}
\left( E^{(1),F}_{a_1}- E^{(1),F}_{b_1}+ E^{(1),F}_{a_2}- E^{(1),F}_{b_2}\right)\right].
\end{eqnarray}
Taking the limits, only the first term survives. Finally, we take the limit $d\to4$,
\begin{eqnarray}\label{RCAS2}
E^{(1),F}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}=-\sum_{j=1}^\infty\frac{\lambda \tilde{m}^3 L^2}{512 (1 \pm c) a^3 \pi^4} \frac{1}{j}\left[K_1(2\tilde{m}j)\left(\ln(\frac{\tilde{m}^3}{16\pi^2j})+\gamma-1\right)+K_1^{'}(2\tilde{m}j)\right],
\end{eqnarray}
where $K'_q(x)=\frac{\partial}{\partial q}K_q(x)$ and $\gamma$ is the Euler-Mascheroni number.
The contribution of the second term in Eq. (\ref{Rcas}) to the Casimir energy, $ E^{(1),S}_{a_1}$, without Lorentz violating terms, have been calculated in Ref. \cite{moazzemi2007dirichlet} using BRS:
\begin{eqnarray}
E^{(1),S}_{a_1}&=&\frac{\lambda}{8}\int_{V}
G^{2}_{a1}(x,x)d^3{\bf x}\nonumber
\\\label{Branch2}
&&\to E^{(1),S}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}={-\lambda L^2}
\frac{B(a)}{128\pi^2}\left[\frac{B(a)}{a}
-\frac{m}{a}+\frac{m^2}{\pi}(\ln2+1/2)
\right]\label{Rcas.}\qquad\mbox{(no Lorentz violation)}
\\
&&\hspace{1.5cm}={-\lambda L^2}
\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\frac{m}{128\pi^3}\frac{K_{1}(2amj)}{j}\left[\frac{m}{\pi a}
\sum_{j'=1}^{\infty}\frac{K_{1}(2amj')}{j'}+\frac{m}{a}-\frac{m^2}{\pi}(\ln2+1/2)
\right].\label{Rcas..}
\end{eqnarray}
But, when we have a TL (pl-SL) Lorentz breaking term, an extra factor $\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+c}}$ ($\frac{1}{\sqrt{1-c}}$), as we see in Eq. \eqref{Gtime} (Eq. \eqref{SL}), is multiplied to the propagator. Therefore to derive the Casimir energy contribution we only need to multiply the factor $\frac{1}{1+c}$ ($\frac{1}{1-c}$) to Eq. \eqref{Rcas..}.
Accordingly, using Eqs. \eqref{Rcas..} and \eqref{RCAS2}, we can write NLO radiative correction to the Casimir enegy as
\begin{eqnarray}\label{final2}
\hspace{-.7cm}E^{(1)}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}=E^{(1),F}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}+E^{(1),S}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}=\frac{-\lambda L^2}{(1\pm c)}
\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\bigg\{\frac{m}{128\pi^3}\frac{K_{1}(2amj)}{j}\bigg[\frac{m}{\pi a}
\sum_{j'=1}^{\infty}\frac{K_{1}(2amj')}{j'}+\frac{m}{a}-\frac{m^2}{\pi}(\ln2+1/2)
\bigg]\\\nonumber
-\frac{m^3 }{512 \pi^4} \frac{1}{j}\bigg[K_1(2amj)\left(\ln(\frac{a^3m^3}{16\pi^2j})+\gamma-1\right)+K_1^{'}(2amj)\bigg]\bigg\}.
\end{eqnarray}
From this result it is obvious that the influence of the Lorentz-symmetry breaking parameter appears only in a factor.
Two special limits are interesting to calculate; the large mass $ma\gg1$, and small mass $m\to0$ limits:
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
E^{(1)}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}\quad{\buildrel {am\gg1 } \over
\longrightarrow }\quad
\displaystyle\frac{ 3 \
L^2 }{1024 \pi^{7/2}}\frac{\lambda}{(1 \pm c) a^3} (am)^{5/2}
\ \ln(am) \ e^{-2am},
& \\
\raisebox{-9mm}{$E^{(1)}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}
\quad {\buildrel {m\to0 } \over
\longrightarrow }\quad \displaystyle -\frac{L^2\lambda }{512\pi^4 (1\pm c)a^3}
\left(\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{j^2}\right)^2=-\frac{L^2\lambda }{18432 (1\pm c) a^3},$}
&
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
with $+$ ($-$) for TL (pl-SL) case.
\subsection{pr-SL vector case}
For the pr-SL vector case, $u^\mu=(0,0,0,1)$, we do not need to do new calculation. In this case, applying Eq. \eqref{Glike} leads us to the following expression for Eq. \eqref{Cas2}:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{Cas2p}
\frac{1}{2}\int_{V}
\delta_{m}G_{a_1}(x,x)d^3{\bf x}=\frac{\lambda \pi^{\frac{3}{2}} \Gamma(1-\frac{d}{2}) \sec(\frac{d \pi}{2})L^{d-2}}{4(1-c)^{1/2} (4\pi)^d (m^2)^{1-\frac{d}{2}} \Gamma(\frac{d-1}{2})}\sum_n {\omega'}_{a_1,n}^{d-3}
\end{eqnarray}
where ${\omega'}_{a_1,n}=(m^{2}+{k'}_{a_1,n}^{2})^{1/2}$. Therefore, the Eq. \eqref{Branch} becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
B(a')&=&-\sum_{j=1}^\infty\frac{2 K_{\frac{d-2}{2}}(2a'mj)\Gamma(\frac{d-1}{2})}{a'^{d-3}\pi^{3/2}(\frac{a'm}{j})^{\frac{2-d}{2}}}\\
&=&-\sum_{j=1}^\infty\frac{2 K_{\frac{d-2}{2}}\left(\frac{2amj}{\sqrt{1-c}}\right)\Gamma(\frac{d-1}{2})}{(1-c)^{\frac{3-d}2}a^{d-3} \pi^{3/2}\left(\frac{am}{j\sqrt{1-c}}\right)^{\frac{2-d}{2}}},
\end{eqnarray}
and hence, we get
\begin{equation}
E^{(1),F}_{a_1}=-\frac{\lambda \pi^{\frac{3}{2}} \Gamma(1-\frac{d}{2}) \sec(\frac{d \pi}{2})L^{2}}{4(1-c)^{\frac{6-d}{4}} {a}^3 (4\pi)^d (\tilde{m}^2)^{1-\frac{d}{2}} \Gamma(\frac{d-1}{2})}\sum_{j=1}^\infty\frac{2 K_{\frac{d-2}{2}}\left(\frac{2\tilde{m}j}{\sqrt{1-c}}\right)\Gamma(\frac{d-1}{2})}{\pi^{3/2}\left(\frac{\tilde{m}}{j}\right)^{\frac{2-d}{2}}}.
\end{equation}
Now, we use the above equation to compute Eq. \eqref{Cas3}, and take the limit $d\to4$, to get
\begin{eqnarray}\label{final22}
\hspace{-.7cm}E^{(1),F}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}=\frac{\lambda L^2 m^3}{(1-c)^{1/2}512 \pi^4} \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{j}\bigg[K_1(\frac{2amj}{\sqrt{1-c}})\left(\ln(\frac{a^3m^3}{16\pi^2j})+\ln(1-c)+\gamma-1\right)+K_1^{'}(\frac{2amj}{\sqrt{1-c}})\bigg].
\end{eqnarray}
Similary, for the second term in Eq. \eqref{Rcas}, now the Eq. \eqref{Rcas.} becomes
\begin{eqnarray}
E^{(1),S}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}&=&-\frac{\lambda L^2}{(1-c)^{1/2}}
\frac{B(a')}{128\pi^2}\left[\frac{B(a')}{a}
-\frac{m}{a}+\frac{m^2}{\pi}(\ln2+1/2)
\right]\nonumber\\
&{\buildrel {d\to4 } \over
= }&-\frac{\lambda L^2}{(1-c)^{1/2}}
\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\bigg\{\frac{m}{128\pi^3}\frac{1}{j}K_{1}(\frac{2amj}{\sqrt{1-c}})\bigg[\frac{m}{\pi a}
\sum_{j'=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{j'}K_{1}(\frac{2amj'}{\sqrt{1-c}})+\frac{m}{a}-\frac{m^2}{\pi}(\ln2+1/2)
\bigg]
\end{eqnarray}
Therefore the result for the radiative correction of Casimir energy for the pr-SL vector case can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
\hspace{-.7cm}E^{(1)}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}&=&E^{(1),F}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}+E^{(1),S}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}\nonumber\\
&=&-\frac{\lambda L^2}{(1-c)^{1/2}} \sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\bigg\{\frac{m^3}{512 \pi^4}\frac{1}{j}\bigg[K_1(\frac{2amj}{\sqrt{1-c}})\left(\ln(\frac{a^3m^3}{16\pi^2j})+\ln(1-c)+\gamma-1\right)+K_1^{'}(\frac{2amj}{\sqrt{1-c}})\bigg]\nonumber\\
&&+\frac{m}{128\pi^3}\frac{1}{j}K_{1}(\frac{2amj}{\sqrt{1-c}})\bigg[\frac{m}{\pi a}
\sum_{j'=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{j'}K_{1}(\frac{2amj'}{\sqrt{1-c}})+\frac{m}{a}-\frac{m^2}{\pi}(\ln2+1/2)
\bigg]\bigg\}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center} \includegraphics[width=16cm]{11.pdf} \caption{ {\small The ratio between the first order radiative corrections and leading terms, $E^{(1)}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}/E^{(0)}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}$, in terms of plates separation $a$, for $c=0.1$, $\lambda=0.1$ and $ m=1$; $\lambda_m$ is the Compton wavelength of the scalar field.}}
\label{fig1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h]
\begin{center} \includegraphics[width=16cm]{12.pdf}\caption{\label{fig.3} {\small The variation of the ratio between first order radiative correction and leading term, $E^{(1)}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}/E^{(0)}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}$, in terms of the Lorentz violating parameter $c$, with $\lambda=0.1$, $ m=1$ and $a=10 (\lambda_m)$. }}
\label{fig2}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
We can also compute the large mass and massless limits:
\begin{equation}
\left\{
\begin{array}{ll}
E^{(1)}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}\quad{\buildrel {am\gg1 } \over
\longrightarrow }\quad
\displaystyle\frac{ 3 \
L^2 }{1024 \pi^{7/2}}\frac{\lambda}{(1-c)^{1/2} a^3} \ (am)^{5/2} \ln(am)
\ e^{\frac{-2am}{\sqrt{1-c}},} \\
\raisebox{-9mm}{$E^{(1)}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}
\quad {\buildrel {m\to0 } \over
\longrightarrow }\quad \displaystyle -\frac{L^2\lambda (1-c)^{1/2} }{512\pi^4 a^3}
\left(\sum_{j=1}^{\infty}\frac{1}{j^2}\right)^2=-\frac{L^2\lambda (1-c)^{1/2}}{18432 a^3},$}
\end{array}\right.
\end{equation}
In figure \ref{fig1}, we have illustrated the variation of the ratio between the first order radiative corrections and leading terms, $E^{(1)}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}/E^{(0)}_{_{\mbox{\tiny Cas.}}}$, in terms of plates separation, for three distinct cases TL, pl-SL and pr-SL. We have also plotted this ratio in terms of Lorentz violating parameter $c$ in figure \ref{fig2}.
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper we have calculated the next to leading order radiative correction to the Casimir energy for $\phi^4$ theory with Lorentz-breaking symmetry in the context of renormalized perturbation theory. Our approach to calculate this energy is box renormalization method introduced firstly by Boyer \cite{boyer1968quantum} and used for example in \cite{moazzemi2007dirichlet,Gousheh2009,Valuyan2008,Moazzemi2008}. The violation of symmetry breaking can be appeared in the Lagrangian by insertion of a term which couples the derivative of a field to a constant vector $u^\mu$. This additional term in the Lagrangian modifies the dispersion relation and accordingly propagators of the fields. Therefore, in addition to the leading terms of physical quantities, all their sub-leading corrections are also affected. In three separate cases of the Lorentz violation, violation in the time direction (TL), in the directions parallel (pl-SL) and perpendicular (pr-SL) to the plates, the leading terms of Casimir energy for $\phi^4$ theory have been recently calculated in \cite{cruz2017casimir}. Here, we have investigated NLO corrections. We have plotted our results in figures \ref{fig1} and \ref{fig2}.
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:introduction}
Face alignment algorithms precisely locate a set of points of interest in the images of faces taken in unrestricted conditions. It has received much attention from the research community~\citep{Jin17} since it is a preliminary step for estimating 3D facial structure~\citep{Zhao16} and many other face image analysis problems such as verification and recognition~\citep{Soltanpour17}, attributes estimation~\citep{Bekios14} or facial expression recognition~\citep{Martinez12}, to name a few. Present approaches typically fail or lose precision in the presence of occlusions, strong deformations produced by facial expressions, large pose variations and ambiguous configurations caused, for example, by strong make-up or the existence of other nearby faces.
Top performers in the most popular benchmarks are based on Convolutional Neural Networks (CNNs) and Ensemble of Regression Trees (ERT), see \textit{e}.\textit{g}., Tables~\ref{table:300w_public},~\ref{table:300w_private},~\ref{table:cofw},~\ref{table:aflw} and~\ref{table:wflw}. The large effective receptive field of deep models~\citep{Kowalski17,Lv17,Xiao16,Yang17,Wu18} enable them to model context better and produce robust landmark estimations.
However, in these models it is not easy to enforce facial shape consistency, something that limits their accuracy in the presence of occlusions and ambiguous facial configurations. ERT-based models~\citep{Burgos13,Cao14,Kazemi14,Lee15b,Ren16}, on the other hand, are difficult to initialize, but may implicitly impose face shape consistency in their estimations~\citep{Cao14}. This increases their performance in occluded and ambiguous situations. They are also much more efficient than deep models and, as we demonstrate in our experiments, with a good initialization they are also very accurate.
In this paper we present the 3DDE (3D Deeply-initialized Ensemble) regressor, a robust and efficient face alignment algorithm based on a coarse-to-fine cascade of ERTs. It is a hybrid approach that inherits good properties of ERT,
such as the ability to impose a face shape prior, and the robustness of deep models. It is initialized by robustly fitting a 3D face model to the probability maps produced by a CNN. With this initialization we tackle one of the main drawbacks of ERT, namely the difficulty in initializing the regressor in the presence of occlusions and large face rotations. On the other hand, the ERT implicitly imposes a prior face shape on the solution, addressing the shortcomings of deep models when occlusions and ambiguous face configurations are present. Finally, its coarse-to-fine structure tackles the combinatorial explosion of parts deformation, which is also a key limitation of approaches using shape constraints~\citep{Cao14}.
A preliminary version of our work appeared in~\cite{Valle18}. Here we refine and extend it in several ways. First we improve the initialization by using a RANSAC-like procedure that increases its robustness in the presence of occlusions. We have also introduced early stopping and better data augmentation techniques for increasing the regularization when training both the ERT and the CNN. We also extend the evaluation including the newly released WFLW data base and a detailed ablation study. Finally, 3DDE may also be trained in presence of missing and occluded landmarks in the training set. This has enabled us to perform cross-dataset experiments that reveal the existence of significant data set bias that may limit the generalization capabilities of regressors trained on present data bases. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time such a problem has been raised in the field.
\section{Related Work}\label{sec:related_work}
Face alignment has been a topic of intense research for more than twenty years. Initial successful results were based on 2D and 3D generative approaches such as the Active Appearance Models (AAM)~\citep{Cootes98} or the 3D Morphable Models (3DMM)~\citep{Blanz03}. Recent approaches are based on a cascaded combination of discriminative regressors.
In the earliest case these regressors are Random Ferns~\citep{Dollar10}, Ensembles of Regression Trees~\citep{Cao12} or linear models~\citep{Xiong13,Xiong15}. Key ideas in this approach are indexing image description relative to the current shape estimate~\citep{Dollar10}, and the use of a regressor whose predictions lie on the subspace spanned by the training face shapes~\citep{Cao14}, this is the so-called Cascade Shape Regressor (CSR) framework. \cite{Kazemi14} improved the original cascade framework by proposing a real-time ensemble of regression trees. \cite{Ren16} used locally binary features to boost the performance up to 3000 FPS. \cite{Burgos13} included occlusion estimation and decreased the influence of occluded landmarks. \cite{Shen14} refine the initial location of face landmarks using a random forest and SIFT features. \cite{Xiong13,Xiong15} also use SIFT features and learn the linear regressor dividing the search space into individual regions with similar gradient directions. Overall, this set of approaches are very sensitive to the starting point of the regression process. For this reason an important part of recent work revolves around how to find good initializations~\citep{Zhu15,Zhu16a}. However, they are extremely efficient and may take advantage of implicit shape constraints~\citep{Cao12,Cao14}.
The recent development of deep learning techniques has also impacted the face alignment field with the widespread use of CNN-based regressors. \cite{Sun13} were pioneers to apply a three-level CNN for locating landmarks. \cite{Zhang14b} proposed a multi-task solution to deal with face alignment and attributes classification. \cite{Lv17} use global and local face parts regressors for fine-grained facial deformation estimation. \cite{Yu16} transform the landmarks rather than the input image for the refinement cascade. \cite{Trigeorgis16} and \cite{Xiao16} are the first approaches that fuse the feature extraction and regression steps of CSR into a recurrent neural network trained end-to-end. \cite{Kowalski17} and \cite{Yang17} use a global similarity transform to normalize landmark locations followed by a VGG-based and a Stacked Hourglass network respectively to regress the final shape. \cite{Wu18} derive face landmarks from boundary lines, which helps to remove the ambiguities in the landmark definition. Deep CNN models have large effective receptive fields that let them model context better and convey these approaches with a high degree of robustness to face rotation, scale, deformation and initialization. However, when used in a cascaded framework they may notably increase the computational requirements. Moreover, it is not clear how to impose facial shape consistency on the estimated set of landmarks. Hence, the regressor accuracy may be harmed in the presence of occlusions or ambiguities.
There is also an increasing number of works based on 3D face models. In the simplest case, they fit a mean model to the estimated image landmarks positions~\citep{Kowalski16} or jointly regress the pose and shape of the face~\citep{Jourabloo17,Xiao17}. \cite{Zhu17} and \cite{Kumar18a} fit a 3DMM in a cascaded way. These approaches provide 3D pose information that may be used to estimate landmark self-occlusions or to train simpler regressors specialized in a given head orientation. However, building and fitting a 3D face model is a difficult task and the results of the full 3D approaches in current benchmarks are not as good as those described above.
Our proposal tries to leverage on the good properties of the three approaches described above. Using a CNN-based initialization we inherit the robustness of deep learning models. Like the simple 3D approaches we fit a rigid 3D face model to initialize the regressor and estimate the initial face orientation to address self-occlusions and ambiguities. Finally, we use a cascaded ERT within a coarse-to-fine framework to achieve accuracy and efficiency while avoiding the combinatorial explosion of independent parts deformations.
\section{3D deeply-initialized Ensemble}\label{sec:algorithm}
In this section we present 3DDE. It consists of two main steps: CNN-based rigid face pose computation and ERT-based non-rigid face deformation estimation, both shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:3dde}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{images/3dde.eps}
\caption{3DDE framework diagram. GS, Max and RANSAC+POSIT represent the Gaussian smoothing filter, the maximum of each probability map and the robust 3D pose estimation respectively.}
\label{fig:3dde}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Rigid pose computation}
\label{sec:rigid}
ERT-based regressors require a good initialization to converge. We propose the use of face landmarks location probability maps~\citep{Belhumeur11,Dantone12,Xiao16} to generate plausible shape initialization candidates. We define a UNet-like architecture~\citep{Ronneberger15,Honari16}, with a loss function that handles missing landmarks. We train this CNN to obtain a set of probability maps, $\mathcal{P}({\mat I})$, that model the position of each landmark in the input image (see Fig.~\ref{fig:3dde}). The maximum of each smoothed probability map determines our initial landmark positions. Note in Fig.~\ref{fig:3dde} that these predictions are sensitive to occlusions, ambiguities and may not be a valid face shape. Compared to typical CNN-based approaches, \textit{e}.\textit{g}., ~\cite{Yang17}, our CNN is much simpler, since we only require a rough estimation of landmark locations.
To start the ERT with a plausible face, we compute the initial shape by fitting a rigid 3D head model to the estimated 2D landmarks locations. To this end we use the softPOSIT algorithm proposed by \cite{David04} within a robust scheme. Unlike~\cite{Valle18}, here we use a set of the distinct landmarks to establish the correspondences between the CNN predictions and the 3D face model. This avoids problems related to ambiguous landmarks around the jaw that do not correspond always to the same 3D points and produce wrong initializations, mainly in profile faces. Moreover, we have also implemented a RANSAC-like procedure, that runs softPOSIT several times with subsets of correspondences, to obtain a robust estimation (see Algorithm~\ref{alg:initial}).
\begin{algorithm}
\footnotesize
\caption{Initialization algorithm ($g_0$)}
\label{alg:initial}
\begin{algorithmic}
\renewcommand{\algorithmicrequire}{\textbf{Input:}}
\renewcommand{\algorithmicensure}{\textbf{Output:}}
\REQUIRE {$\mathcal{P}({\mat I})$, ${\vect X}$ }
\STATE{// Select coordinates of maximum probability}
\STATE{$\{{\vect x}(l)$ = $\arg\max(\mathcal{P}^l({\mat I}))\}_{l=1}^L$}
\STATE { $p^* = 0$}
\FOR{z=1 \TO $Z$}
\STATE {// Select subset from distinct landmarks}
\STATE {${\vect x}_s, {\vect X}_s$ = chooseLandmarksSubset(${\vect x}$, ${\vect X}$)}
\vskip 2ex
\STATE {// Compute projection matrix between ${\vect x}_s, {\vect X}_s$}
\STATE {${\mat R}, {\vect t}$ = softPOSIT(${\vect x}_s$, ${\vect X}_s$)}
\vskip 2ex
\STATE {// Project 3D face model using previous matrix}
\STATE {${\vect x}_z,{\vect v}_z$ = projectPoints(${\vect X}$, ${\mat R}$, ${\vect t}$)}
\vskip 2ex
\STATE {// Evaluate the goodness of the initialization}
\STATE {$p({\vect x}_z) = \sum_{l=1}^L \mathcal{P}^l({\mat I})[{\vect x}_z(l)]$}
\IF{$p({\vect x}_z) > p^*$}
\STATE{$p^* = p({\vect x}_z)$, ${\mat R}^* = {\mat R}$, ${\vect t}^* = {\vect t}$}
\ENDIF
\ENDFOR
\STATE {${\vect x}^0,{\vect v}^0$ = projectPoints(${\vect X}$, ${\mat R}^*$, ${\vect t}^*$)}
\ENSURE ${\vect x}^0,{\vect v}^0$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Let ${\vect X}\in\mathbb{R}^{L\times 3}$ be the 3D coordinates of the $L$ landmarks on the 3D face model, ${\vect x}\in\mathbb{R}^{L\times 2}$ their 2D projections onto the image plane and ${\vect v}\in\{0,1\}^{L}$ their visibilities.
We produce subsets of correspondences $({\vect x}_s,{\vect X}_s)$ from the distinct landmarks shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:cross:a}, estimate the 3D face model pose $({\mat R},{\vect t})$ with softPOSIT and evaluate the goodness of each estimation as the sum of landmarks probabilities,
\[
p({\vect x}_z) = \sum_{l=1}^L \mathcal{P}^l({\mat I})[{\vect x}_z(l)],
\]
where ${\vect x}_z(l)$ are the 2D coordinates of the $l$-th landmark and $\mathcal{P}^l({\mat I})$ is the probability map for landmark $l$. Finally, we select the rigid transformation $({\mat R}, {\vect t})$ with highest $p({\vect x}_z)$. As a result, we project the 3D model onto the image using the most likely estimated rigid transformation. This provides the ERT with a rough estimation of the scale, translation and 3D pose of the target face (see Fig.~\ref{fig:3dde}), and the visibility estimation of the self-occluded parts of the face.
Let ${\vect x}^0=g_0(\mathcal{P}({\mat I}), {\mat X})$ be the \emph{initial shape}, the output of the initialization function $g_0$ after processing the input image ${\mat I}$. With our initialization we enforce two key requirements for the convergence of the ERT. First, that ${\vect x}^0$ lies on the face with an approximately correct 3D face pose. Second, that ${\vect x}^0$ is a valid face shape. The latter guarantees that the predictions in the next step of the algorithm will also be valid face shapes~\citep{Cao14}.
\subsection{ERT-based non-rigid shape estimation}
\label{sec:non_rigid}
Let $\mathcal{S}=\{s_i\}_{i=1}^N$ be the set of training face shapes, where $s_i=({\mat I}_i,{\vect x}^g_i, {\vect v}_i^g, {\vect w}_i^g,{\vect x}_i^0,{\vect v}_i^0)$. Each shape $s_i$ has its own training image, ${\mat I}_i$, ground truth shape, ${\vect x}_i^g$, ground truth visibility label, ${\vect v}_i^g$, annotated landmark label, ${\vect w}_i^g\in\{0,1\}^L$, initial shape, ${\vect x}_i^0$, and visibilities, ${\vect v}_i^0$, for training the ERT regressor.
In our implementation we use shape-indexed features~\citep{Lee15b}, $\phi(\mathcal{P}({\mat I}_i), {\vect x}_i^t, {\vect w}_i^g)$, that depend on the current shape ${\vect x}_i^t$ of the landmarks in image ${\mat I}_i$ and whether they are annotated or not, ${\vect w}_i^g$.
We divide the regression process into a maximum of $T$ stages. We learn an ensemble of $K$ regression trees for the $t$-th stage, $\mathcal{C}_t(f_i) = {\vect x}_i^{t-1} + \sum_{k=1}^K g_k(f_i)$, where $f_i=\phi(\mathcal{P}({\mat I}_i), {\vect x}_i^{t-1}, {\vect w}_i^g)$ and ${\vect x}^j$ are the coordinates of the landmarks estimated in $j$-th stage. To train the ERT we use the $N$ training shapes in $\mathcal{S}$ to generate an augmented training set of samples, $\mathcal{S}_A$, and a validation set, $\mathcal{S}_V$, with cardinality $N_A=|\mathcal{S}_A|$ and $N_V=|\mathcal{S}_V|$ respectively. The total number of samples is $N_T=N_A+N_V$. Instead of using a fixed number of stages, like~\cite{Valle18}, we stop training when the validation error stops improving. In this way the regressor has a variable number of stages. We compute the initialization for each sample using the 3D projections produced by $g_0$ (see generated initializations in Fig.~\ref{fig:initials}). We also improve the data augmentation used in~\cite{Valle18}.
To this end we add random noise to the yaw, pitch and roll angles, of
the rotation matrix ${\mat R}^*$ estimated with $g_0$, to generate new training initializations for each sample in $\mathcal{S}_A$.
Following \textit{et al}.~\cite{Burgos13} and \cite{Kazemi14}, we attach to each landmark in $\mathcal{S}$ the binary labels $\{{\vect v},{\vect w}\}\in\{0,1\}$ that model respectively whether it is visible and annotated. We learn these labels in the ERT together with the landmark location. Each initial shape is progressively refined by estimating a shape and visibility increments $\mathcal{C}^{{\vect v}}_t(\phi(\mathcal{P}({\mat I}_i), {\vect x}^{t-1}_i, {\vect w}^g_i))$ where ${\vect x}^{t-1}_i$ represents the current shape of the $i$-th sample (see Algorithm~\ref{alg:ert}). $\mathcal{C}^{{\vect v}}_t$ is trained to minimize only the landmark position errors but on each tree leaf, in addition to the mean shape, we also output the mean of all training shapes visibilities, ${\vect v}^g_i$, that belong to that node. We define $\mathcal{A}_{t-1} = \{ ({\vect x}_i^{t-1}, {\vect v}_i^{t-1} )\}_{i=1}^{N_A}$ and $\mathcal{V}_{t-1} = \{ ({\vect x}_i^{t-1}, {\vect v}_i^{t-1} )\}_{i=1}^{N_V}$ as the set of all current shapes and corresponding visibility vectors for all training and validation data, respectively.
\begin{algorithm}
\footnotesize
\caption{Training an Ensemble of Regression Trees}
\label{alg:ert}
\begin{algorithmic}
\renewcommand{\algorithmicrequire}{\textbf{Input:}}
\renewcommand{\algorithmicensure}{\textbf{Output:}}
\REQUIRE { $\mathcal{S}$, $T$}
\STATE {// Generate an augmented training set of samples}
\STATE {$\mathcal{S}_A, \mathcal{S}_V$ = dataAugmentation($\mathcal{S}$)}
\REPEAT
\STATE {// Extract training ($\mathcal{F}_A$) and validation ($\mathcal{F}_V$) features}
\STATE {$\mathcal{F}_A \cup \mathcal{F}_V = \{f_i\}_{i=1}^{N_T} = \{\phi(\mathcal{P}({\mat I}_i), {\vect x}^{t-1}_i, {\vect w}_i^g)\}_{i=1}^{N_T}$}
\vskip 2ex
\STATE {// Apply Algorithm~\ref{alg:p_parts_regressors} using training samples}
\STATE {$\mathcal{C}^{{\vect v}}_t$ = learnCoarseToFineRegressor($\mathcal{S}_A$, $\mathcal{F}_A$, $\mathcal{A}_{t-1}$, $K$, $P$)}
\vskip 2ex
\STATE {// Update validation samples}
\STATE {$\mathcal{V}_{t}= \mathcal{V}_{t-1} + \{\mathcal{C}^{{\vect v}}_t(f_i)\}_{i=1}^{N_V}$}
\vskip 2ex
\STATE {// Increase P when $NME(\{{\vect x}^{t}_i,{\vect x}^{g}_i\}_{i=1}^{N_A}) < NME(\{{\vect x}^{t}_i,{\vect x}^{g}_i\}_{i=1}^{N_V})$}
\STATE {// Compute validation error improvement}
\STATE {$\Delta\varepsilon = NME(\{{\vect x}^{t-1}_i,{\vect x}^{g}_i\}_{i=1}^{N_V}) - NME(\{{\vect x}^{t}_i,{\vect x}^{g}_i\}_{i=1}^{N_V})$}
\UNTIL{t $>$ $T$ \textbf{or} $\Delta\varepsilon < 1\%$}
\ENSURE $\{\mathcal{C}^{{\vect v}}_t\}_{t=1}^{T^*}$ // ${T^*}$ is the last trained stage
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
Compared with conventional ERT approaches, our ensemble is simpler. It will require fewer trees because we only have to estimate the non-rigid face deformation, since the 3D rigid component has already been estimated in the previous step. In the following we describe the details.
\subsubsection{Initial shapes for regression}
The selection of the starting point in the ERT is fundamental to reach a good solution. The simplest choice is the mean of the ground truth training shapes, $\bar{{\vect x}}^0 = \sum_{i=1}^N{{\vect x}_i^g}/N$. However, such a poor initialization leads to wrong alignment results in test images with large pose variations. Alternative strategies run the ERT several times with different initializations~\citep{Burgos13}, initialize with other ground truth shapes ${\vect x}^0_i \leftarrow {\vect x}_j^g$ where $i \neq j$~\citep{Kazemi14}, or randomly deform the initial shape~\citep{Kowalski17}.
In our approach we initialize the ERT using the algorithm described in section~\ref{sec:rigid}, that provides a robust pose and a valid shape for initialization (see Fig.~\ref{fig:initials}). Hence, the ERT only needs to estimate the non-rigid deformation component of the face.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/init_1.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/init_2.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/init_3.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/init_4.eps}\\
\vspace{0.1cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/init_5.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/init_6.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/init_7.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/init_8.eps}
\caption{The 8 worst initial shapes for the 300W private test set produced by $g_0$ (CNN+3D).}
\label{fig:initials}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Feature Extraction}
ERT efficiency depends on the feature extraction step. In general, descriptor features such as SIFT used by~\cite{Xiong13} and~\cite{Zhu15} improve face alignment results, but have higher computational cost compared to simpler features such as plain pixel value differences~\citep{Cao14,Burgos13,Kazemi14,Ren16}. In our case, a simple feature suffices, since shape landmarks are close to their ground truth location.
We use the probability maps $\mathcal{P}({\mat I})$ to extract features for the cascade. To this end, we select a landmark $l$ and its associated probability map $\mathcal{P}^l({\mat I})$. The feature is computed as the difference between two pixels values in $\mathcal{P}^l({\mat I})$ from a FREAK descriptor pattern~\citep{Alahi12} around $l$, similar to those in \cite{Lee15b}. However, ours are defined on the probability maps, $\mathcal{P}({\mat I})$, instead of the image, ${\mat I}$. We let the training algorithm select the most informative landmark and pair of pixels in each iteration.
\subsubsection{Learn a coarse-to-fine regressor}
To train the $t$-th stage regressor, $\mathcal{C}^{{\vect v}}_t$, we fit an ERT. Thus, the goal is to sequentially learn a series of weak learners to greedily minimize the regression loss function:
\begin{equation}
\footnotesize
\label{eq:loss_regression}
\mathcal{L}_t(\mathcal{S}_A, \mathcal{F}_A, \mathcal{A}_{t-1}) = \sum_{i=1}^{N_A}
|| {\vect w}_i^g\odot ({\vect x}_i^g - {\vect x}_i^{t-1} - \sum_{k=1}^{K} g_k(f_i)) ||^2
\end{equation}
where $\odot$ is the Hadamard product. There are different ways of minimizing Equation~\ref{eq:loss_regression}. \cite{Kazemi14} present a general framework based on Gradient Boosting for learning an ensemble of regression trees. \cite{Lee15b} establish an optimization method based on Gaussian Processes also learning an ensemble of regression trees but outperforming previous literature by reducing the overfitting. In our approach we adopt a Gradient Boosting scheme (see Algorithm~\ref{alg:p_parts_regressors}).
A crucial problem when training a global face landmark regressor is the lack of examples showing all possible combinations of face parts deformations. Hence, these regressors quickly overfit and generalize poorly to combinations of part deformations not present in the training set.
To address this problem we introduce the coarse-to-fine ERT architecture.
The goal is to be able to cope with combinations of face part deformations not seen during training. A single monolithic regressor is not able to estimate these local deformations (see the difference between monolithic and coarse-to-fine NME curves in Fig.~\ref{fig:learning:a}). Our algorithm is agnostic in the number of parts and stages of the coarse-to-fine estimation. Algorithm~\ref{alg:p_parts_regressors} details the training of $P$ face parts regressors (each one with a subset of the landmarks) to build a coarse-to-fine regressor. Note that $\mathcal{A}_{k-1}$ in this context is the shape and visibility vectors from the last regressor output (\textit{e}.\textit{g}., the previous part regressor or a previous full stage regressor). In our implementation the coarse-to-fine scheme has two stages. The coarse stage has one part, $P=1$, that involves all landmarks and $K_1$ trees. The fine stage has ten parts, $P=10$, left/right eyebrow, left/right eye, nose, top/bottom mouth, left/right ear and chin (see Fig.~\ref{fig:parts_configuration}), with $K_2$ trees.
\begin{algorithm}
\footnotesize
\caption{Training $P$ parts regressors}
\label{alg:p_parts_regressors}
\begin{algorithmic}
\renewcommand{\algorithmicrequire}{\textbf{Input:}}
\renewcommand{\algorithmicensure}{\textbf{Output:}}
\REQUIRE $\mathcal{S}_A$, $\mathcal{F}_A, \mathcal{A}_{t-1}, \nu, K, P$
\FOR{k=1 \TO $K$}
\FOR{p=1 \TO $P$}
\STATE {// Compute residuals: }
\STATE {// $\odot$ is the Hadamard product}
\STATE {// $(p)$ selects elements of vectors in that part}
\STATE {$\{{\vect r}^k_i(p) = {\vect w}_i^g(p) \odot ({\vect x}_i^g(p) - {\vect x}^{k-1}_i(p))\}_{i=1}^{N_A}$}
\vskip 2ex
\STATE {$g_k^p$ = fitRegressionTree($\{{\vect r}^k_i(p)\}_{i=1}^{N_A}$,$\mathcal{F}_A(p)$)}
\vskip 2ex
\STATE {// Update samples with the regression tree estimation,}
\STATE {// $\nu$, shrinkage factor to scale each tree contribution}
\STATE {$\mathcal{A}_{k}(p)= \mathcal{A}_{k-1}(p) + \nu \cdot \{g_k^p(f_i(p))\}_{i=1}^{N_A}$}
\ENDFOR
\ENDFOR
\ENSURE $\{\mathcal{C}^p\}_{p=1}^P$, being $\mathcal{C}^p=\{g_k^p\}_{k=1}^K$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/parts_300w.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/parts_cofw.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/parts_aflw.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/parts_wflw.eps}
\caption{The $P=10$ face parts of 300W, COFW, AFLW and WFLW data bases in the fine stage of our coarse-to-fine ERT.}
\label{fig:parts_configuration}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Fit a regression tree}
The training objective for the $k$-th regression tree is to minimize the sum of squared residuals, taking into account the annotated landmark labels:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:loss_tree}
\mathcal{E}_k = \sum_{i=1}^{N_A} ||{\vect r}^k_i||^2 = \sum_{i=1}^{N_A} ||{\vect w}_i^g \odot ({\vect x}_i^g - {\vect x}^{k-1}_i)||^2
\end{equation}
We learn each regression binary tree by recursively splitting the training set into the left (l) and right (r) child nodes. The tree node split function is designed to minimize $\mathcal{E}_k$ from Equation~\ref{eq:loss_tree} in the selected landmark. To train a regression tree node we randomly generate a set of candidate split functions, each of them involving four parameters $\theta = (\tau, {\vect p}_1, {\vect p}_2, l)$, where ${\vect p}_1$ and ${\vect p}_2$ are pixels coordinates on a fixed FREAK structure around the $l$-th landmark coordinates in ${\vect x}_i^{k-1}$. The feature value corresponding to $\theta$ for the $i$-th training sample is $f_i(\theta) = \mathcal{P}^l({\mat I}_i)[{\vect p}_1] - \mathcal{P}^l({\mat I}_i)[{\vect p}_2]$, the difference of probability values in the maps for the given landmark.
Finally, we compute the split function thresholding the feature value, $f_i(\theta) > \tau$.
Given $\mathcal{N} \subset \mathcal{S}_A$ the set of training samples at a node, fitting a tree node for the $k$-th tree, consists of finding the parameter $\theta$ that minimizes $E_k(\mathcal{N},\theta)$
\begin{equation}
\footnotesize
\arg\min_{\theta} E_k(\mathcal{N},\theta) = \arg\min_{\theta} \sum_{b\in{\{l,r\}}}{\sum_{s\in{\mathcal{N}_{\theta,b}}}{ ||{\vect r}_s^k-{\vect\mu}_{\theta,b}||^2}}
\label{eq:entropy}
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{N}_{\theta,l}$ and $\mathcal{N}_{\theta,r}$ are, respectively, the samples sent to the left and right child nodes due to the decision induced by $\theta$. The mean residual ${\vect\mu}_{\theta,b}$ for a candidate split function and a subset of training data is given by
\begin{equation}
{\vect\mu}_{\theta,b} = \frac{1}{|\mathcal{N}_{\theta,b}|}\sum_{s\in{\mathcal{N}_{\theta,b}}} {\vect r}_s^k
\label{eq:mean}
\end{equation}
Once we know the optimal split each leaf node stores the mean residual, ${\vect\mu}_{\theta,b}$, as the output of the regression for any example reaching that leaf. We also output the mean visibility of the samples reaching the tree leaf.
\section{Experiments}\label{sec:experiments}
To train and evaluate our proposal, we perform experiments with 300W, COFW, AFLW and WFLW that are considered the most challenging public data sets:
\begin{itemize}
\item \textbf{300W}. It provides 68 manually annotated landmarks, \cite{Sagonas16}. We follow the most established approach and divide the 300W annotations into 3148 training and 689 testing images (public competition). Evaluation is also performed on the 300W private competition using the previous 3837 images as training and 600 newly updated images as testing set.
\item \textbf{COFW}. This benchmark, presented in \cite{Burgos13} focuses on occlusion. Commonly, there are 1345 training faces in total. The testing set is made of 507 images. The annotations include the landmark positions and the binary occlusion labels for 29 points.
\item \textbf{AFLW}. It provides a collection of 25993 in-the-wild faces, with 21 facial landmarks annotated depending on their visibility, \cite{Koestinger11}. We have found several annotations errors and, consequently, removed these faces from our experiments. From the remaining faces we randomly choose 19312 images for training/validation and 4828 instances for testing.
\item \textbf{WFLW}. It consists of 7500 extremely challenging training and 2500 testing faces divided into six subgroups, pose, expression, illumination, make-up, occlusion and blur,
with 98 fully manual annotated landmarks, \cite{Wu18}.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Evaluation}
We use the Normalized Mean Error (NME) as a metric to measure the shape estimation error
\begin{equation}
\footnotesize
NME = \frac{100}{N} \sum\limits_{i=1}^{N} \left( \frac{1}{||{\vect w}_i^g||_1} \sum\limits_{l=1}^{L} \left( \frac{{\vect w}_i^g(l)\cdot{} \left\|{{\vect x}_i(l)-{\vect x}_i^g(l)}\right\|}{d_i} \right) \right)
\label{eq:nme}
\end{equation}
It computes the mean euclidean distance between the ground-truth and estimated landmark positions normalized by $d_i$. We report our results using different values of $d_i$: the ground truth distance between the eye centers (\emph{pupils}), the ground truth distance between the outer eye corners (\emph{corners}) and the ground truth bounding box size (\emph{height}).
In addition, we also compare our results using Cumulative Error Distribution (CED) curves. We calculate $AUC_\varepsilon$ as the area under the CED curve for images with an NME smaller than $\varepsilon$ and $FR_\varepsilon$ as the failure rate representing the percentage of testing faces with NME greater than $\varepsilon$. We use precision/recall percentages to compare occlusion prediction.
To train our algorithm we shuffle the training set of each data base and split it into 90\% train-set and 10\% validation-set.
\subsection{Implementation}
All experiments have been carried out with the settings described in this section. For each data set, we train from scratch the CNN selecting the model parameters with lowest validation error. We crop faces using the ground truth bounding boxes annotations enlarged by 30\%. We generate different training samples in each epoch by applying random in plane rotations between $\pm45^\circ$, scale changes by $\pm15\%$ and translations by $\pm5\%$ of bounding box size, randomly mirroring images horizontally and generating random rectangular occlusions. We use Adam stochastic optimization with $\beta_1=0.9$, $\beta_2=0.999$ and $\epsilon=1e^{-8}$ parameters. We train until convergence with an initial learning rate $\alpha=0.001$. When validation error levels out for 10 epochs, we multiply the learning rate by $decay=0.05$. In the CNN the cropped input face is reduced from 160$\times$160 to 1$\times$1 pixels gradually dividing by half their size across $B=8$ branches applying a stride 2 convolution with kernel size 2$\times$2\footnote{5$\times$5 images are reduced to 2$\times$2 pixels applying a kernel size of 3$\times$3}. We apply batch normalization after each convolution. All layers contain 68 filters to describe the required landmark features. We apply a Gaussian filter with $\sigma=33$ to the output probability maps to stabilize the initialization, $g_0$.
We train the coarse-to-fine ERT with the Gradient Boosting algorithm~\citep{Hastie09}. It requires a maximum of $T=20$ stages of $K=50$ regression trees per stage. The depth of trees is set to 4. The number of tests to choose the best split parameters, $\theta$, is set to 200. We resize each image to set the face size to 160$\times$160 pixels. For feature extraction, the FREAK pattern diameter is reduced gradually in each stage (\textit{i}.\textit{e}., in the last stages the pixel pairs for each feature are closer). We generate $Z=25$ initializations in the robust softPOSIT scheme of $g_0$. We augment the shapes of each face training image to create a set, $\mathcal{S}_A$, of at least $N_A=60000$ samples to train the cascade. To avoid overfitting we use a shrinkage factor $\nu=0.1$ and subsampling factor $\eta=0.5$ in the ERT. Our regressor triggers the coarse-to-fine strategy once the training error is below the validation error, \textit{e}.\textit{g}., $t=5$ in Fig.~\ref{fig:learning:a}.
Training the CNN and the coarse-to-fine ensemble of trees takes 48 hours using a NVidia GeForce GTX 1080Ti (11GB) GPU and an dual Intel Xeon Silver 4114 CPU at 2.20GHz (2$\times{}$10 cores/20 threads, 128 GB of RAM) with a batch size of 32 images. At runtime our method process test images on average at a rate of 12.5 FPS, where the CNN takes 75 ms and the ERT 5 ms per face image using C++, Tensorflow and OpenCV libraries.
\subsection{Experiments using public code}
Published results in the literature are sometimes not fully comparable. In this section we use publicly available code to ensure a fair comparison between 3DDE and DCFE~\citep{Valle18}, LAB~\citep{Wu18}, DAN~\citep{Kowalski17}, RCN~\citep{Honari16}, cGPRT~\citep{Lee15b}, RCPR~\citep{Burgos13} and ERT~\citep{Kazemi14} with the same settings (including same training, validation and bounding boxes), in different benchmarks: 300W public, 300W private, COFW and WFLW. Note that LAB~\citep{Wu18} only provides a trained model for the WFLW data set. In addition, DAN~\citep{Kowalski17} provides code using 68 landmarks, for this reason we only report results in 300W. In Fig.~\ref{fig:auc} we plot the CED curves for all data bases. In the legend we provide the $AUC$ and $FR$ values for each algorithm.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{images/auc_300w_public.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{images/auc_300w_private.eps}\\
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{images/auc_cofw.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{images/auc_wflw.eps}
\caption{Cumulative error distribution curves sorted by AUC.}
\label{fig:auc}
\end{figure*}
The selected algorithms are representative of the three main families of solutions: a) ensembles of regression trees (cGPRT, RCPR, ERT), b) CNN-based approaches (LAB, DAN, RCN) and c) mixed approaches with deep nets and ensembles of regression trees (3DDE, DCFE). Overall, 3DDE is better than any other providing a public implementation in the literature. We improve over our preliminary algorithm, DCFE~\cite{Valle18}, because of the better 3D initialization and regularization (see a complete analysis in section~\ref{sec:ablation}). In general we are able to improve by a large margin other ERT methods as RCPR, ERT or cGPRT because of the better initialization and the robust features provided by the CNN. We also outperform RCN (without any denoising model), a CNN architecture like the one used in 3DDE. Even DAN and LAB, that implement a cascade of CNN regressors, can not compete with the regularization obtained by using the cascade of ERT in 3DDE (see Fig.~\ref{fig:auc}). The fact that the largest margin is in COFW reflects the importance of the implicit shape model in our cascade to address occlusions.
\subsection{Experiments using published results}
In this section we compare 3DDE with other methods in the literature by using their published results. Since our method is able to train with unannotated landmarks and visibilities, we are able to train and evaluate all data sets in the literature.
First we test our method against the 300W benchmark. Our approach obtains the best overall performance in the indoor and outdoor subsets of the private competition (see Table~\ref{table:300w_private}) and in the full subset of the 300W public test set (see Table~\ref{table:300w_public}). This is due to the excellent accuracy achieved by the coarse-to-fine ERT scheme enforcing valid face shapes and the deep robust features extracted from the CNN. In the challenging subset of the 300W public competition, SHN~\citep{Yang17} gets better results than 3DDE. This is due to 3DDE failing to estimate good landmark probability maps for images with large scale variations. Our method exhibits superior capability in handling typical cases in the data base, since we achieve the best NME full set results in 300W public, 4.39, and in 300W private, 3.73.
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\footnotesize
\setlength\tabcolsep{0.25pt}
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c|c|c|c|ccc}
\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{Method} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Common} & \multicolumn{2}{c|}{Challenging} & \multicolumn{4}{c}{Full}\\
& pupils & corners & pupils & corners & pupils & \multicolumn{3}{c}{corners}\\
& $NME$ & $NME$ & $NME$ & $NME$ & $NME$ & $NME$ & $AUC_8$ & $FR_8$\\
\hline
RCPR \citep{Burgos13} & 6.18 & - & 17.26 & - & 8.35 & - & - & -\\
ESR \citep{Cao12} & 5.28 & - & 17.00 & - & 7.58 & - & 43.12 & 10.45\\
SDM \citep{Xiong13} & 5.60 & - & 15.40 & - & 7.52 & - & 42.94 & 10.89\\
ECSAN \citep{Zhang18b} & 5.42 & - & 11.80 & - & 6.67 & - & - & -\\
ERT \citep{Kazemi14} & - & - & - & - & 6.40 & - & - & -\\
LBF \citep{Ren16} & 4.95 & - & 11.98 & - & 6.32 & - & - & -\\
cGPRT \citep{Lee15b} & - & - & - & - & 5.71 & - & - & -\\
CFSS \citep{Zhu15} & 4.73 & - & 9.98 & - & 5.76 & - & 49.87 & 5.08\\
DDN \citep{Yu16} & - & - & - & - & 5.65 & - & - & -\\
TCDCN \citep{Zhang14b} & 4.80 & - & 8.60 & - & 5.54 & - & - & -\\
MDM \citep{Trigeorgis16} & - & - & - & - & - & - & 52.12 & 4.21\\
3DDFA \citep{Zhu17} & 5.09 & - & 8.07 & - & 5.63 & - & - & -\\
RCN \citep{Honari16} & 4.67 & - & 8.44 & - & 5.41 & - & - & -\\
DAN \citep{Kowalski17} & 4.42 & 3.19 & 7.57 & 5.24 & 5.03 & 3.59 & 55.33 & \textbf{1.16}\\
TSR \citep{Lv17} & 4.36 & - & 7.56 & - & 4.99 & - & - & -\\
RAR \citep{Xiao16} & 4.12 & - & 8.35 & - & 4.94 & - & - & -\\
SHN \citep{Yang17} & 4.12 & - & \textbf{7.00} & \textbf{4.90} & 4.68 & - & - & -\\
DCFE \citep{Valle18} & 3.83 & 2.76 & 7.54 & 5.22 & 4.55 & 3.24 & 60.13 & 1.59\\
PCD-CNN \citep{Kumar18a} & \textbf{3.67} & - & 7.62 & - & 4.44 & - & - & -\\
\hline
3DDE & 3.73 & \textbf{2.69} & 7.10 & 4.92 & \textbf{4.39} & \textbf{3.13} & \textbf{61.24} & 1.30\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Error of face alignment methods on the 300W public test set.}
\label{table:300w_public}
\end{table*}
We may assess the improvement achieved by the 3D initialization and the coarse-to-fine ERT by comparing the results of 3DDE in the full subset of 300W, 4.39, with Honari's RCN using the denoising model~\citep{Honari16}, 5.41. It roughly represents a 19\% improvement in the inter-pupils NME.
\begin{table*}
\footnotesize
\begin{center}
\setlength\tabcolsep{0.25pt}
\begin{tabular}{l|ccc|ccc|ccc}
\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{Method} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Indoor} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Outdoor} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Full}\\
& \multicolumn{3}{c|}{corners} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{corners} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{corners}\\
& $NME$ & $AUC_8$ & $FR_8$ & $NME$ & $AUC_8$ & $FR_8$ & $NME$ & $AUC_8$ & $FR_8$ \\
\hline
ESR~\citep{Cao12} & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & 32.35 & 17.00 \\
cGPRT~\citep{Lee15b} & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & 41.32 & 12.83 \\
CFSS~\citep{Zhu15} & - & - & - & - & - & - & - & 39.81 & 12.30 \\
MDM~\citep{Trigeorgis16} & - & - & - & - & - & - & 5.05 & 45.32 & 6.80 \\
DAN~\citep{Kowalski17} & - & - & - & - & - & - & 4.30 & 47.00 & 2.67 \\
SHN~\citep{Yang17} & 4.10 & - & - & 4.00 & - & - & 4.05 & - & - \\
DCFE~\citep{Valle18} & 3.96 & 52.28 & 2.33 & 3.81 & 52.56 & \textbf{1.33} & 3.88 & 52.42 & \textbf{1.83} \\
\hline
3DDE & \textbf{3.74} & \textbf{53.93} & \textbf{2.00}& \textbf{3.71} & \textbf{53.95} & 2.66 & \textbf{3.73} & \textbf{53.94} & 2.33\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Error of face alignment methods on the 300W private test set.}
\label{table:300w_private}
\end{table*}
Table~\ref{table:cofw} compares the performance of our model using the COFW data set. This is the standard to evaluate occlusions. 3DDE obtains the best results, NME 5.11, establishing a new state-of-the-art. This shows the importance of the face shape model implicit in the cascade of ERT to cope with severe occlusions. In terms of landmark visibility estimation, we have obtained better precision with an overall better recall than the best previous approach, DCFE. Again, the regularization together with the new initialization contributes to improve DCFE.
In Table~\ref{table:aflw} we show the results of our evaluation with AFLW. This is a challenging data set not only because of its size and the large variability of face poses, but also because of the large number of samples with occluded landmarks, that are unannotated.
Although the results in Table~\ref{table:aflw} are not strictly comparable, because each paper uses its own train and test subsets, we get an NME of 2.06 with the full 21 landmarks set. Again, it is a new state-of-the-art, since most competing approaches do not use the two most difficult landmarks, each located in one earlobe (see 19 landmarks results in Table~\ref{table:aflw}). We have also evaluated 3DDE without the two earlobe landmarks. In this case we get an NME of 2.01, the best reported result.
\begin{table*}
\footnotesize
\begin{center}
\setlength\tabcolsep{1.25pt}
\begin{tabular}{l|ccc|c}
\hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Method} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{pupils} & occlusion\\
& $NME$ & $AUC_8$ & $FR_8$ & precision/recall\\
\hline
RCPR~\citep{Burgos13} & 8.50 & - & - & 80/40\\
TCDCN~\citep{Zhang14b} & 8.05 & - & - & -\\
RAR~\citep{Xiao16} & 6.03 & - & - & -\\
DAC-CSR~\citep{Feng17} & 6.03 & - & - & -\\
Wu \textit{et al}.~\citep{Wu15} & 5.93 & - & - & 80/49.11\\
SHN~\citep{Yang17} & 5.6 & - & - & -\\
PCD-CNN~\citep{Kumar18a} & 5.77 & - & - & -\\
DCFE~\citep{Valle18} & 5.27 & 35.86 & 7.29 & 81.59/49.57\\
\hline
3DDE & \textbf{5.11} & \textbf{38.18} & \textbf{6.50} & \textbf{85.92/51.04}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Error of face alignment methods on COFW.}
\label{table:cofw}
\end{table*}
\begin{table*}
\footnotesize
\begin{center}
\setlength\tabcolsep{1.25pt}
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c}
\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{Method} & 19 landmarks & 21 landmarks\\
& height & height\\
& $NME$ & $NME$\\
\hline
PIFAS~\citep{Jourabloo17} & - & 4.45\\
CFSS~\citep{Zhu15} & 3.92 & -\\
CCL~\citep{Zhu16a} & 2.72 & -\\
DAC-CSR~\citep{Feng17} & 2.27 & -\\
Binary-CNN~\citep{Bulat17} & - & 2.85\\
PCD-CNN~\citep{Kumar18a} & - & 2.40\\
TSR~\citep{Lv17} & 2.17 & -\\
DCFE~\citep{Valle18} & 2.12 & 2.17\\
\hline
3DDE & \textbf{2.01} & \textbf{2.06}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Error of face alignment methods on AFLW.}
\label{table:aflw}
\end{table*}
Finally, we have also evaluated 3DDE with the newly released WFLW data set~\citep{Wu18}. In enables us to evaluate different sources of variability (\textit{i}.\textit{e}., expressions, illumination, make-up, occlusions and blur). In Table~\ref{table:wflw} we provide the results of various competing methods~\citep{Wu18}, normalized by the eye corners distance. 3DDE outperforms its competitors in all the WFLW subsets by a large margin. We hypothesize that the reason for this is that the hybrid approach in 3DDE can be trained with less samples that some of its most prominent competitors and at the same time provide a very accurate face shape (see Fig.~\ref{fig:lab_errors}). Moreover, we achieve the best $AUC$ in all subsets, which determines that 3DDE is the best approach under all capture conditions (easy/frontal and difficult/profile) including all subsets that contain several types of difficulties.
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\tiny
\setlength\tabcolsep{0.25pt}
\begin{tabular}{l|ccc|ccc|ccc|ccc|ccc|ccc|ccc}
\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{Method} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Full} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Pose} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Expression} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Illumination} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Make-up} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Occlusion} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Blur}\\
& \multicolumn{3}{c|}{corners} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{corners} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{corners} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{corners} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{corners} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{corners} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{corners}\\
& $NME$ & $AUC_{10}$ & $FR_{10}$ & $NME$ & $AUC_{10}$ & $FR_{10}$ & $NME$ & $AUC_{10}$ & $FR_{10}$ & $NME$ & $AUC_{10}$ & $FR_{10}$ & $NME$ & $AUC_{10}$ & $FR_{10}$ & $NME$ & $AUC_{10}$ & $FR_{10}$ & $NME$ & $AUC_{10}$ & $FR_{10}$\\
\hline
ESR~\citep{Cao12} & 11.13 & 27.74 & 35.24 & 25.88 & 1.77 & 90.18 & 11.47 & 19.81 & 42.04 & 10.49 & 29.53 & 30.80 & 11.05 & 24.85 & 38.84 & 13.75 & 19.46 & 47.28 & 12.20 & 22.04 & 41.40\\
SDM~(Xiong \textit{et al}.) & 10.29 & 30.02 & 29.40 & 24.10 & 2.26 & 84.36 & 11.45 & 22.93 & 33.44 & 9.32 & 32.37 & 26.22 & 9.38 & 31.25 & 27.67 & 13.03 & 20.60 & 41.85 & 11.28 & 23.98 & 35.32\\
CFSS~\citep{Zhu15} & 9.07 & 36.59 & 20.56 & 21.36 & 6.32 & 66.26 & 10.09 & 31.57 & 23.25 & 8.30 & 38.54 & 17.34 & 8.74 & 36.91 & 21.84 & 11.76 & 26.88 & 32.88 & 9.96 & 30.37 & 23.67\\
LAB~\citep{Wu18} & 5.27 & 53.23 & 7.56 & 10.24 & 23.45 & 28.83 & 5.51 & 49.51 & 6.37 & 5.23 & 54.33 & 6.73 & 5.15 & 53.94 & 7.77 & 6.79 & 44.90 & 13.72 & 6.32 & 46.30 & 10.74\\
\hline
3DDE & \textbf{4.68} & \textbf{55.44} & \textbf{5.04} & \textbf{8.62} & \textbf{26.40} & \textbf{22.39} & \textbf{5.21} & \textbf{51.75} & \textbf{5.41} & \textbf{4.65} & \textbf{56.02} & \textbf{3.86} & \textbf{4.60} & \textbf{55.36} & \textbf{6.79} & \textbf{5.77} & \textbf{46.92} & \textbf{9.37} & \textbf{5.41} & \textbf{49.57} & \textbf{6.72}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Error of face alignment methods on WFLW.}
\label{table:wflw}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\stackunder[5pt]{\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/lab_1.eps}}{6.407}
\stackunder[5pt]{\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/lab_2.eps}}{20.798}
\stackunder[5pt]{\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/lab_3.eps}}{24.565}
\stackunder[5pt]{\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/lab_4.eps}}{16.859}\\
\vspace{0.1cm}
\stackunder[5pt]{\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/3dde_1.eps}}{3.829}
\stackunder[5pt]{\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/3dde_2.eps}}{13.105}
\stackunder[5pt]{\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/3dde_3.eps}}{6.719}
\stackunder[5pt]{\includegraphics[width=0.11\textwidth]{images/3dde_4.eps}}{8.168}
\caption{First row shows LAB~\citep{Wu18} results, second row 3DDE results. We report the corresponding NME normalized by the eye corners distance. Blue and green colours represent ground truth and predictions respectively.}
\label{fig:lab_errors}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Ablation study}\label{sec:ablation}
3DDE is based on three key ideas: 3D initialization, a cascaded ERT regressor operating on probabilistic CNN features and a coarse-to-fine scheme.
In this section we analyze the contribution of each one to the overall performance of our algorithm.
In Table~\ref{table:ablation} we show the results obtained by different configurations of our framework when evaluated on WFLW. We have chosen WFLW in our study because it allows the analysis of results stratified by different types of difficulties (\textit{i}.\textit{e}., facial expressions, large poses, illumination changes, etc.). In this case, since there are many profile faces, we use the height as normalization for the NME. So, the numerical values are not directly comparable to those in Table~\ref{table:wflw}. \verb$MS$ stands for ``mean shape initialization'' of the ERT. \verb$3D$ means to initialize the ERT with the procedure in section~\ref{sec:rigid}. \verb$SE$ denotes using plain gray level features for the ERT whereas \verb$DE$ denotes using probability maps produced by the CNN to train the ERT. Finally \verb$CF$ stands for using the coarse-to-fine scheme.
When combined with the cascaded ERT, the 3D initialization is key to achieve top overall performance, see \verb$CNN+MS+DE$ vs \verb$CNN+3D+DE$ in the \emph{full} subset. The reason for this is that, in the 3D case, the initialization takes care of the rigid component of face pose so that the ERT cascade only models non-rigid deformations. Moreover, the projection of the 3D face model is a correct 2D shape, a requirement for the ERT to converge to a valid face shape~\citep{Cao14}. Of course, the 3D initialization is fundamental to achieve good performance in presence of large face rotations. So, it provides the largest improvement in the \emph{pose} subset.
The use of CNN probability maps improves the NME in the \emph{full} data set in about 20\% (see \verb$CNN+3D+SE$ vs \verb$CNN+3D+DE$). The large receptive fields of CNNs are specially helpful in challenging situations, specifically those in the \emph{pose} and \emph{occlusion} subsets.
The coarse-to-fine strategy in our cascaded ERT provides significative local improvements in difficult cases, with rare facial part combinations (see Fig.~\ref{fig:learning:a}). For this reason, the largest gain of \verb$CNN+3D+DE+CF$ vs \verb$CNN+3D+DE$ occurs in the \emph{expressions} subset. Although this strategy provides improvements in all the data base subsets, the actual NME differences are washed out when averaged over the number of landmarks in the face and the number of images in the subset. They may be appreciated by looking into specific data subsets or samples (see Fig.~\ref{fig:learning:a}), such as the left eyebrow/eye location improvement in Fig.~\ref{fig:learning:b} and~\ref{fig:learning:c} (best viewed after zoom-in).
\begin{table*}
\tiny
\begin{center}
\setlength\tabcolsep{0.25pt}
\begin{tabular}{l|ccc|ccc|ccc|ccc|ccc|ccc|ccc}
\hline
\multirow{3}{*}{Method} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Full} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Pose} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Expression} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Illumination} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Make-up} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{Occlusion} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{Blur}\\
& \multicolumn{3}{c|}{height} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{height} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{height} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{height} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{height} & \multicolumn{3}{c|}{height} & \multicolumn{3}{c}{height}\\
& $NME$ & $AUC_4$ & $FR_4$ & $NME$ & $AUC_4$ & $FR_4$ & $NME$ & $AUC_4$ & $FR_4$ & $NME$ & $AUC_4$ & $FR_4$ & $NME$ & $AUC_4$ & $FR_4$ & $NME$ & $AUC_4$ & $FR_4$ & $NME$ & $AUC_4$ & $FR_4$\\
\hline
CNN+3D+SE & 2.52 & 41.10 & 11.56 & 3.53 & 24.08 & 28.83 & 2.90 & 33.22 & 15.92 & 2.53 & 41.85 & 10.45 & 2.59 & 39.08 & 15.53 & 3.06 & 31.10 & 22.14 & 2.91 & 33.98 & 15.78\\
CNN+MS+DE & 2.23 & 49.77 & 7.04 & 3.33 & 35.13 & 17.79 & 2.56 & 45.15 & 8.91 & 2.17 & 49.29 & 5.87 & 2.33 & 46.85 & 9.70 & 2.69 & 40.33 & 12.90 & 2.53 & 42.71 & 9.57\\
CNN+3D+DE & 2.03 & 51.14 & 5.47 & 2.68 & 39.55 & 11.96 & 2.21 & 46.66 & 7.96 & 2.11 & 50.09 & 5.01 & 2.13 & 48.57 & 7.28 & 2.56 & 40.83 & 12.36 & 2.40 & 43.84 & 8.27\\
\hline
CNN+3D+DE+CF & 2.01 & 51.67 & 5.20 & 2.63 & 39.90 & 10.73 & 2.15 & 48.19 & 5.73 & 2.06 & 50.79 & 4.87 & 2.12 & 49.05 & 7.28 & 2.54 & 40.94 & 12.22 & 2.39 & 43.93 & 8.02\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Ablation study. MS and 3D represent the 2D mean shape and 2D projections of the 3D mean face respectively. SE and DE represent the type of features used in the cascade being simple grayscale features and deep probability maps features respectively. The CNN+3D+DE+CF row represents the full 3DDE approach results.}
\label{table:ablation}
\end{table*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfloat[Evolution of the NME through the different stages in the cascade]{
\label{fig:learning:a}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{images/coarse_learning_subset.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{images/coarse_learning_image.eps}}\\
\subfloat[Monolithic]{
\label{fig:learning:b}
\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{images/coarse_image_no.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{images/coarse_image_no_zoom.eps}}
\subfloat[Coarse-to-fine]{
\label{fig:learning:c}
\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{images/coarse_image_yes.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.22\textwidth]{images/coarse_image_yes_zoom.eps}}
\caption{Example of a monolithic ERT regressor vs. our coarse-to-fine approach. (a) NME evolution through the stages in the cascade (left plot, 8 mouth landmarks for all test images in the expression subset; right plot, all 98 landmarks in one image). (b) predicted shape and zoom-in with a monolithic regressor. (c) predicted shape and zoom-in with our coarse-to-fine approach.}
\label{fig:learning}
\end{figure*}
Finally, we analyze the NME distribution produced by the rigid initialization and the final 3DDE model (see Fig.~\ref{fig:improvement}). Using the model trained for the WFLW experiment, we align the 2500 test samples of WFLW and plot the distribution of NMEs, produced both with the \verb$CNN+3D$ regressor (softPOSIT result) and the full \verb$CNN+3D+DE+CF$ regressor (3DDE result). The values of percentiles 10 and 90 of the NME distribution are 3.71 and 6.87 for the \verb$CNN+3D$ regressor and 1.03 and 3.32 for the \verb$CNN+3D+DE+CF$ one. So, on average, the full regressor reduces in about 60\% the NME achieved by the rigid initialization.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{images/wflw_improvement.pdf}
\caption{Sample distribution of NMEs produced by the CNN+3D and 3DDE regressors. We use the height as normalization for the NME.}
\label{fig:improvement}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Cross-dataset evaluation}
\label{sec:semi-supervised}
In this section we perform cross-dataset experiments to evaluate the quality of present benchmarks and the generalization of the regressors trained on them. Here we benefit from the fact that 3DDE may be trained in a semi-supervised way, \textit{i}.\textit{e}., using data sets with missing or unlabeled landmarks. To this end we select 24 distinct facial landmarks (see Fig.~\ref{fig:cross:a}). We consider them distinct because they may be accurately located by a human annotator. We train and evaluate 3DDE respectively with the training and test sets of each data base. We have also performed one more experiment training 3DDE with the training sets of all data bases and evaluating it successively with the tests sets of each of them, we denote this experiment with label \verb$All$.
In Table~\ref{table:cross} we show the results of our evaluation. The smallest data base, COFW, has the worst cross-dataset results. On the other hand, the data set with greatest diversity, WFLW, has the best results. Moreover, the model \verb$All$, trained with the training sets of all data bases, is able to improve, in all cross-dataset experiments, the models trained in a single data set. However, the most prominent outcome of this experiment is that we always achieve the best result when training with the train subset of the same data base. This holds even when compared against the model trained with all data sets, confirming the existence of the so-called ``data set bias" in current benchmarks~\citep{Torralba11}.
In a final experiment we use model \verb$All$ to evaluate the NME of each landmark using the test sets of all data sets (see Fig.~\ref{fig:cross:b}). The landmarks with highest NME are those related to the ears, the bottom of the mouth and the chin.
\begin{table}
\footnotesize
\begin{center}
\setlength\tabcolsep{2.5pt}
\begin{tabular}{l|c|c|c|c|c}
\hline
\diagbox{Train}{Test} & 300W & COFW & AFLW & WFLW & All\\
\hline
300W & \textbf{2.00} & 3.11 & 4.90 & 3.44 & 4.15\\
COFW & 3.68 & \textbf{2.09} & 4.56 & 4.03 & 4.19\\
AFLW & 4.19 & 2.51 & \textbf{2.15} & 3.29 & 2.65\\
WFLW & 2.57 & 2.53 & 3.28 & \textbf{1.70} & 2.71\\
All & 2.34 & 2.23 & 2.41 & 1.96 & \textbf{2.26}\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\caption{Cross-dataset experiment using only distinct landmarks to compute NME normalized by height.}
\label{table:cross}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\subfloat[Distinct landmarks]{
\label{fig:cross:a}
\includegraphics[width=0.16\textwidth]{images/cross_frontal.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/cross_profile.eps}}\\
\subfloat[NME per landmark]{
\label{fig:cross:b}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{images/cross_landmarks_all.eps}}
\caption{Location of distinct face landmarks and the NME related to each landmark.}
\label{fig:cross}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}\label{sec:conclusions}
We have introduced 3DDE, a robust face alignment method that leverages on good properties of CNNs, cascade of ERT and 3D face models. The CNN provides robust landmark estimations with weak face shape enforcement. The ERT is able to enforce the face shape and achieve better accuracy in landmark detection, but it only converges with a good initialization. Finally, 3D models exploit face orientation information to improve self-occlusion estimation.
3DDE is initialized by robustly fitting a 3D face model to the probability maps produced by the CNN. The 3D model enables 3DDE to handle self-occlusions and successfully deal with both frontal and profile faces. Once initialized, the cascade of ERT only models the non-rigid component of face motion. It provides various benefits, namely, it enforces shape consistency, may be trained with unlabeled landmarks, estimate landmark visibility and efficiently parallelize the execution of the regression trees within each stage. We have additionally introduced a coarse-to-fine scheme within the cascade of ERT that is able to deal with the combinatorial explosion of local parts deformation. In this case, the usual monolithic ERT will perform poorly when fitting faces with combinations of facial part deformations not present in the training set. This is a fundamental limitation of implicit shape models addressed by 3DDE.
In the experiments we have shown that 3DDE improves, as far as we know, the state-of-the-art performance in 300W, COFW, AFLW and WFLW data sets. In our ablation analysis we have shown that all the components of the system critically contribute to the final result.
The availability of large annotated data sets has encouraged research in this area with important performance improvements in recent years. However, as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:results}, this problem is still far from being completely solved. A critical question here is whether the models trained with present data sets will generalize to the situations present in real-life operation. The cross-dataset experiments performed reveal the existence of a significant data set bias in present benchmarks that limit the generalization of models trained with them. So, further work in this direction is required to improve the performance of present face alignment algorithms.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfloat[300W public]{
\label{fig:results:a}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/300w_public_1.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/300w_public_2.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/300w_public_3.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/300w_public_4.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/300w_public_5.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/300w_public_6.eps}}
\hfill
\subfloat[300W private]{
\label{fig:results:b}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/300w_private_1.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/300w_private_2.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/300w_private_3.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/300w_private_4.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/300w_private_5.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/300w_private_6.eps}}
\hfill
\subfloat[COFW]{
\label{fig:results:c}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/cofw_1.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/cofw_2.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/cofw_3.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/cofw_4.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/cofw_5.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/cofw_6.eps}}
\hfill
\subfloat[AFLW]{
\label{fig:results:d}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/aflw_1.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/aflw_3.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/aflw_2.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/aflw_4.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/aflw_5.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/aflw_6.eps}}
\hfill
\subfloat[WFLW]{
\label{fig:results:e}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/wflw_1.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/wflw_2.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/wflw_3.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/wflw_4.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/wflw_5.eps}
\includegraphics[width=0.15\textwidth]{images/wflw_6.eps}}
\caption{Representative results considered errors using 3DDE in 300W, COFW, AFLW and WFLW testing subsets. Blue colour represents ground truth, green and red colours point out visible and non-visible shape predictions respectively.}
\label{fig:results}
\end{figure*}
\ \\
\noindent{\bf Acknowledgments:} The authors gratefully acknowledge funding from the Spanish Ministry of Economy and Competitiveness, project TIN2016-75982-C2-2-R. They also thank the anonymous reviewers for their comments.
\bibliographystyle{model2-names}
|
\section{Introduction}
Deep neural networks have been remarkably successful in many real world
machine learning applications. In
critical applications, distilled understanding of the systems can be as
important as achieving the state-of-the-art performance.
One important question is on interpreting and
explaining the decision function of trained networks.
It is closely related to another important topic on
networks' generalization and robustness under
drifting or even adversarially perturbed data distribution. In this paper, we
study how individual layers coordinate the computation in trained
neural network models, and relate the empirical results to generalization and
robustness properties.
Theoretical research of the functions computed by neural networks dates back
to the '80s. It is known that a neural network
with a single (sufficiently wide) hidden layer is a universal approximator for
continuous functions over compact
domains~\citep{gybenko1989approximation,hornik1991approximation,anthony2009neural}.
More recent research further examines whether \emph{deep} networks can have
superior representation power than \emph{shallow} ones with the same number
of units or edges~\citep{Pinkus:1999gk, Delalleau:2011vh, montufar2014number,
pmlr-v49-telgarsky16, Shaham:2015uf, Eldan:2015uc,
DBLP:journals/corr/MhaskarP16, rolnick2017power}. The capacity to represent
arbitrary functions on finite samples is also extensively discussed
\citep{hardt2016identity, zhang2016understanding,
nguyen2018optimization, yun2018finite}. However, the constructions used in
the aforementioned work for building networks approximating particular
functions are typically ``artificial'' and are unlikely to be obtained by
gradient-based learning algorithms.
We focus instead on empirically studying the role different layers
take in representing a learned function {\em post} gradient-based training.
Generalization is a fundamental theoretical question in machine learning. The recent observation that big neural networks can fit random labels on the training set \citep{zhang2016understanding} makes it difficult
to apply classical learning theoretic results based on uniform convergence
over the hypothesis space. One approach to get around this issue is to show
that, while the space of neural networks of a given architecture is huge,
gradient-based learning on ``well behaved'' tasks leads to relatively
``simple'' models. More recent research focuses on the analysis of
the post-training complexity metrics such as
\emph{norm}, \emph{margin}, \emph{robustness},
\emph{flatness}, or \emph{compressibility} of the learned model in contrast to
the pre-training \emph{capacity} of the entire hypothesis space. This line of work
resulted in improved generalization bounds for deep neural networks
\citep[e.g.][]{Dziugaite2016-bi,kawaguchi2017generalization, bartlett2017spectrally,
Neyshabur2018-zn, neyshabur2017exploring, liang2017fisher,Arora2018-ou,Zhou2019-ii}.
This work provides further empirical evidence and alludes to more fine-grained analysis.
We show that the layers in a deep network are not
homogeneous in the role they play at representing a predictor. Some
layers are \critical to forming good predictions while others are \robust
as they are fairly insensitive to the assignment of their weights
during training.
Thus, depending on the capacity of the network and the complexity of
the target function, gradient-based trained networks conserve the complexity by
not using excess capacity.
Before proceeding, we would like to further mention a few
related papers. Modern neural networks are typically overparameterized and
thus redundant in their representations. Previous
work exploited overparameterization to compress \citep{han2015deep} or distill
\citep{hinton2015distilling} a trained network. It is also shown
that one can achieve comparable performance by training only a small fraction
of network parameters such as a subset of the channels in each convolutional
layer~\cite{Rosenfeld:2018wf}. As a tool for
interpreting residual networks as ensemble of shallow networks,
\citet{veit2016residual} found that residual blocks in a trained network can
be deleted or permuted to some extent without degrading the performance too
much. Another line of research showed that under extreme overparameterization,
such as when the network width is polynomial in the training set size and input
dimension \citep{Allen-Zhu2018-eq, Du2018-xp, Du2018-kc, Zou2018-lp}, or even
in the asymptotic regime of infinite width \citep{jacot2018neural,lechao2019},
the network weights move slowly during training. We make similar observations
in this paper. However, we find that in more pragmatic settings,
different layers exhibit different behaviors and the network cannot
be treated in a monolithic way.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Our experimental framework and
notions of robustness to modifications of layers are introduced in
Sec.~\ref{sec:setting}. Sec.~\ref{sec:layer-wise-analysis} presents the
results and analysis of whole-layer robustness for a wide range of neural
network models. Sec.~\ref{sec:theoretical-implication} discusses the
theoretical implications on generalization. Experiments with joint robustness
and connections to other notions of robustness are presented in
Sec.~\ref{sec:joint-robustness} and Sec.~\ref{sec:other-robustness},
respectively. Finally, the paper ends with a conclusion that summarize our
main contributions.
\section{Setting}
\label{sec:setting}
Feed forward networks naturally consist of multiple \emph{layers} where each
unit in a layer takes inputs from units in the previous layer.
Let $\mathcal{F}^D=\{f_{\theta}: \theta=(\theta_1, \ldots, \theta_D)\}$ be the
space of a particular neural network architecture with $D$ (parametric) layers.
We are interested in analyzing the \emph{post-training} behavior of whole layers of
common deep networks. Such networks are typically trained using stochastic
gradient methods which initialize the parameters by sampling from a pre-defined
distribution $\theta_d^{0}\sim\mathcal{P}_d$. The choice of $\mathcal{P}_d$
depends on the type, fan-in, and fan-out of each layer. After training for
$T$ epochs, the parameters of the last epoch $\theta^{T}$ are used as the
final trained model. We save the model parameters at each epoch
during training as \emph{checkpoints}. Checkpoint-$0$ contains random weights
initialized \emph{before} seeing the training data, and checkpoint-$T$ contains
the weights for the final model.
A deep network builds up the \emph{representation} of its inputs by
incrementally applying nonlinear transformations defined by each layer. As a
result, the representation at a particular layer recursively depends on all the
layers beneath it. This complex dependency makes it challenging to isolate and
inspect each layer independently in theoretical studies. In this paper, we
introduce and use the following two empirical probes to inspect the individual
layers in a trained neural network.
\paragraph{Re-initialization} After training concludes, for a given layer $d=1,\ldots,D$,
we \emph{re-initialize} the parameters through assignment
$\theta_d^{T}\leftarrow \theta_d^{0}$, while keeping the parameters for the
other layers intact. The model with the parameters
$(\theta_1^{T},\ldots, \theta_{d-1}^{T}, \theta_d^{0}, \theta_{d+1}^{T},
\ldots, \theta_D^{T})$
is then evaluated. Unless noted otherwise, we use the term \emph{performance} to
designate the test performance measured by the 0-1 classification loss. The performance of a
network in which layer $d$ was re-initialized is referred to as the
\emph{re-initialization robustness} of layer $d$. Note that here $\theta_d^{0}$
denotes the random values loaded from checkpoint-$0$. More
generally, for $k$ epochs $\tau_1,\ldots,\tau_k\in[0,T]$,
we can \emph{re-initialize} the $d$-th layer by setting
$\theta_d^{T}\leftarrow \theta_d^{\tau}$, and obtain the
\emph{re-initialization robustness} of layer $d$ for checkpoint-$\tau$.
\paragraph{Re-randomization} To go one step further, \emph{re-randomization} of
a layer $d$ means re-sampling random values $\tilde{\theta}_d\sim
\mathcal{P}_d$ and evaluating the model's performance for
$(\theta_1^{T},\ldots,\theta_{d-1}^{T},\tilde{\theta}_d,\theta_{d+1}^{T},
\ldots, \theta_D^{T})$. Analogously, we refer to the evaluated performance as
the \emph{re-randomization robustness} of layer $d$.
Note that \emph{no} re-training or fine-tuning after re-initialization or
re-randomization is conducted and the network is evaluated directly with mixed
post-trained and re-initialized/re-randomized weights. When a network
exhibits negligible decrease\footnote{There is no universal threshold to
quantify how much is ``negligible'' across all models and tasks. But as we will
see from the empirical results, there is no ambiguity in identifying the layer
types, due to the sharp performance contrast between the \robust
and \critical layers.} in performance after re-initializing or
re-randomizing of a layer, we say that the layer is \emph{\robust}, and
otherwise the layer is called \emph{\critical}.
\section{Robustness of individual layers} \label{sec:layer-wise-analysis}
The datasets we use in the robustness studies are standard image classification benchmarks: \mnist,
\cifar{}, and \imagenet. All the networks are trained using SGD with momentum,
and piecewise constant learning rate schedule, see
Appendix~\ref{app:exp-details} for further details.
\subsection{Fully connected networks} \label{sec:mnist-mlp}
\begin{figure*}
\begin{subfigure}{.32\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/mnist-hm-with-fullmodel/mlp3x256-tt-error}
\caption{Test error}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.32\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/mnist-hm-with-fullmodel/mlp3x256-normalized_l2}
\caption{$\|\theta_d^{\tau}-\theta_d^{0}\|$}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.32\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/mnist-hm-with-fullmodel/mlp3x256-l_inf}
\caption{$\|\theta_d^{\tau}-\theta_d^{0}\|_\infty$}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{
\textbf{Robustness results for \fcn{$3\times 256$} on \mnist.} (a) Test
error rate: each row corresponds to one layer in the network. The last row
shows full model's performance (i.e. model parameters are loaded from that
checkpoint) for the corresponding epoch as reference. The first column
designates robustness of each layer w.r.t re-randomization and the rest of
the columns designate re-initialization robustness at different
checkpoints. The last column shows the final performance (at the last
checkpoint during training) for reference. (b-c) Weights distances: each
cell in the heatmaps depict the normalized $2$-norm (b) or $\infty$-norm
(c) distance of trained parameters to their initial weights.
}
\label{fig:mnist-mlp-3x256}
\end{figure*}
We start by examining the robustness of fully-connected networks (\fcn). A
\fcn{$D\times H$} consists of $D$ fully connected layers each of output
dimension $H$ followed by the ReLU activation function. The additional final
layer is a linear multiclass predictor with one output per class.
As a starter, we train an \fcn{ $3\times 256$} on \mnist{}, and apply
the re-initialization and re-randomization analysis on the trained model. The
results are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:mnist-mlp-3x256}(a). As expected, due to
the intricate dependency of the classification function on each of the layers,
re-randomizing any of the layers completely disintegrates the representation
and classification accuracy drops to the level of random guessing. However,
for re-initialization, while the first layer is very sensitive, the rest of the
layers are robust to re-initialization to their (pre-training) random weights.
A plausible explanation for this could be attributed to that the gradient
norms increase during back-propagation such that the bottom layers are
being updated more aggressively than the top ones. However, if this were the
case, we would expect a smoother transition instead of a sharp contrast at the
first layer. Furthermore, we measured how distant the weights of each layer are
from their initialization, ``checkpoint-0'', using both
the $2$-norm (normalized by $1/\sqrt{\text{num params}}$) and the $\infty$-norm.
The results are shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:mnist-mlp-3x256}(b) and (c),
respectively. As we can see, the robustness to re-initialization does not
obviously correlate with either of the distances.
This suggests that there
might be something more intricate going on than simple gradient expansion.
We informally summarize the observations as follows,
\begin{quote}
\emph{Over-capacitated deep networks trained with stochastic gradient have
low-complexity due to self-restriction of the number of \critical layers.}
\end{quote}
Intuitively, if a subset of parameters can be re-initialized to the random
values at checkpoint-$0$ (which are independent of the training data), then the
effective number of parameters, and as a result, the complexity of the model,
can be reduced.
We apply the same analysis framework to a large number of different configurations to
assess the influence of the network capacity and the task complexity on the layer
robustness.
In Fig.~\ref{fig:mlp-width-comparison}(a), we compare the average
re-initialization robustness for all layers but the first with respect \fcn{s}
of varying hidden dimensions on \mnist. It is clear that the top layers
become more robust as the hidden dimension increases. We believe that it
reflects the fact that the wider \fcn{s} have higher model capacity. When the
capacity is small, all layers are vigil participants in representing the
prediction function. As the capacity increases, it suffices to use the bottom
layer while the rest act as random projections with non-linearities.
Similarly, Fig.~\ref{fig:mlp-width-comparison}(b) shows experiments on
\cifar{}, which has the same number of classes and comparable number of
training examples as \mnist, but is more difficult to classify.
We observe similar traits as the hidden dimensions
increase, though not as pronounced as in \mnist. Informally put, the difficulty of the learning
task seem to necessitate more diligence of the layers in forming accurate predictors.
\begin{figure*}\centering
\begin{subfigure}{.43\linewidth}
\begin{overpic}[width=\linewidth]{figs/adabars/mnist}
\put(-6,2){\rotatebox{90}{\scriptsize\textsf{Avg Robustness (test err)}}}
\end{overpic}
\caption{MNIST}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.43\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/adabars/cifar-mlp}
\caption{CIFAR10}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{\textbf{Average re-initialization robustness to checkpoint-0 of
all layers but the first for \fcn{s}.}
Each bar designates the difference in classification error between a model
with one layer re-initialized (top of bar) and the same model without weight modification
(bottom of bar). The error-bars designate one standard deviation obtained
by running five experiments with different random initializations.}
\label{fig:mlp-width-comparison}
\end{figure*}
In summary, the empirical results of this section provide some evidence that
deep networks \emph{automatically} adjust their de-facto capacity. When a big
network is trained on an easy task, only a few layers seem to be playing
critical roles.
\subsection{Large convolutional networks}
\begin{figure}\centering
\begin{subfigure}{.31\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/vgg-hm-with-fullmodel/vgg11-tt-error}
\caption{\vgg{11}}
\end{subfigure}\hspace{15pt}
\begin{subfigure}{.55\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/vgg-hm-with-fullmodel/vgg19-tt-error}
\caption{\vgg{19}}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.38\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/vgg-hm-with-fullmodel/vgg13-tt-error}
\caption{\vgg{13}}
\end{subfigure}\hspace{15pt}
\begin{subfigure}{.47\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/vgg-hm-with-fullmodel/vgg16-tt-error}
\caption{\vgg{16}}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{\textbf{Whole-layer robustness for \vgg{} networks on \cifar.} Heatmaps use the same layout as in Fig.~\ref{fig:mnist-mlp-3x256} after
being transposed to visualize the deeper architecture more effectively.}
\label{fig:cifar10-vgg}
\end{figure}
In typical computer vision tasks beyond \mnist, densely connected \fcn{s} are
outperformed significantly by convolutional neural networks. \vgg{s} and
\resnet{s} are among the most widely benchmarked convolutional network
architectures. Fig.~\ref{fig:cifar10-vgg} and Fig.~\ref{fig:cifar10-resnet}
show the robustness results on \cifar{} for the two architectures, respectively.
Since the networks are much deeper than \fcn{s}, we transpose the
heatmaps to show the layers as columns. For \vgg{s}, more layers
are sensitive to re-initialization, yet the patterns are similar to the
observations from the simple \fcn{s} on \mnist: the bottom layers are
sensitive while the top layers are robust to re-initialization.
\begin{figure}\centering
\begin{subfigure}{.31\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/resnet-hm-with-fullmodel/cifar-small-18-tt-error}
\caption{\resnet{18}}
\end{subfigure}\hspace{10pt}
\begin{subfigure}{.55\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/resnet-hm-with-fullmodel/cifar-small-50-tt-error}
\caption{\resnet{50}}
\end{subfigure}\\
\begin{subfigure}{.89\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/resnet-hm-with-fullmodel/cifar-small-101-tt-error}
\caption{\resnet{101}}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.88\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/resnet-hm-with-fullmodel/cifar-small-152-tt-error}
\caption{\resnet{152}}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{\textbf{Whole-layer robustness for residual blocks of
\resnet{s} trained on \cifar.}}
\label{fig:cifar10-resnet}
\end{figure}
The results for \resnet{s} in Fig.~\ref{fig:cifar10-resnet} are to be considered
together with results on \imagenet{} in Fig.~\ref{fig:imagenet-resnet}. We
found the robustness patterns for \resnet{s} more interesting for the
following reasons.
\paragraph{\resnet{s} re-distribute \critical layers.} Unlike the \fcn{s} and
\vgg{s} which place the \critical layers at the bottom of the network,
\resnet{s} distribute them across the network. To better understand the
patterns, let us briefly recap the \resnet{} architecture commonly used in practice.
Morally, a \resnet{} is divided into ``stages''. At the bottom, there is
a pre-processing stage (\texttt{stage0}) with vanilla convolutional layers. It
is followed by a few (typically 4) residual stages consisting of multiple residual
blocks, and finally a global average pooling and a densely connected linear
classifier (\texttt{final\_linear}). The image size halves and the number of
convolution channels doubles from each residual stage to the next
one\footnote{There are more subtle details especially at \texttt{stage1}
depending on factors like the input size, whether residual blocks contain
a bottleneck, etc.}. As a result, while most of the residual blocks have real
\emph{identity} skip connections, the first block of each stage
(\texttt{stage*.resblk1}), which is connected to the last block of the previous
stage, has a \emph{non-identity} skip connection due to different input-output
shapes. Fig.~\ref{fig:resblk-illustration} in the Appendix illustrates the two types of
residual blocks. In our robustness analysis, we can interpret each stage of a \resnet{} as a sub-network,
with characteristics of whole-layer robustness \emph{within} each stage
similar to \vgg{s} or \fcn{s}.
\paragraph{Residual blocks can be robust to re-randomization.} Among the layers
that are robust to re-initialization, if the layer is a residual block, it is
also robust to re-randomization, which stands in contrast to the
\texttt{final\_linear} layer. This could be potentially attributed to the fact
that the identity skip connection dominates the residual branches in those
blocks. It is known from previous research~\citep{veit2016residual} that
residual blocks in a \resnet{} can be removed without substantially hurting
accuracy. Our experiments have a different focus as they study robustness in
the light of the interplay between model capacity and difficulty of the
learning task. In particular, comparing the results on the two different datasets,
especially on smaller \resnet{s} (e.g. \resnet{18}), many residual blocks with
real identity skip connection also become sensitive on the more challenging
\imagenet{} task.
\begin{figure}\centering
\begin{subfigure}{.28\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/resnet-hm-with-fullmodel/imagenet-18-tt-error}
\caption{\resnet{18}}
\end{subfigure}\hspace{10pt}
\begin{subfigure}{.52\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/resnet-hm-with-fullmodel/imagenet-50-tt-error}
\caption{\resnet{50}}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.86\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/resnet-hm-with-fullmodel/imagenet-101-tt-error}
\caption{\resnet{101}}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.85\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/resnet-hm-with-fullmodel/imagenet-152-tt-error}
\caption{\resnet{152}}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{\textbf{Whole-layer robustness analysis on residual blocks of \resnet{s} trained on \imagenet.}}
\label{fig:imagenet-resnet}
\end{figure}
\section{Implications on generalization}
\label{sec:theoretical-implication}
As mentioned above, if some parameters can be re-assigned their
initial values without hurting model's performance, then the effective
number of parameters is reduced as the random weights are dissociated from
the training data. The benefits on improving generalization can be naively
demonstrated using parameter counting in standard generalization bounds. For example,
if we have a generalization bound of the form
\[
R\left(\hat{f}_n^m\right) \leq \hat{R}_n\left(\hat{f}_n^m\right) + \sB(m, n) ~,
\]
where $\hat{f}_n^m$ represents a model with $m$ parameters trained on $n$ i.i.d.
samples, and $\sB$ is a generalization bound based on parameter counting. For
example, \citet{anthony2009neural} provided various bounds on VC-dimension based
on the number of weights of a neural network. This bound can be further used in
standard VC-based generalization bounds for
classification~\citep{Vapnik1998-rk}. Now, if we know \emph{a-priori} that a
fraction $\rho\in (0,1)$ of the network's weights will be robust to
re-initialization after training with degradation of empirical risk by at most
$\varepsilon$, we then get
\[
R\left(\hat{f}_n^{(1-\rho)m}\right) \leq \hat{R}_n\left(\hat{f}_n^m\right) + \varepsilon + \sB((1-\rho)m,n)
~.
\]
Here $\hat{f}_n^{(1-\rho)m}$ is a model obtained by re-initializing $\rho$
fraction of parameters of the trained model $\hat{f}_n^m$. Note that
generalization bounds based on parameter counting are typically not meaningful
in the context of deep learning. Due to heavy overparameterization, the
resulting bounds are usually vacuous. However, as noted in
\citet{Arora2018-ou}, most of the alternative generalization bounds proposed
recently for deep networks are actually worse than naive parameter counting.
Moreover, by tweaking existing analyses with additional whole-layer robustness
condition, some PAC-Bayes based bounds can also be potentially improved
\citep{Wang:2018vd, Arora2018-ou, Zhou2019-ii}.
The bounds are applicable when we know which layers are \robust \emph{prior} to
obtaining the training data. We observed strong patterns of the distribution
of \robust layers, thus we can usually identify \robust layers purely from the
network architectures. Furthermore, we can also propose $K$ different guesses
of \robust layers, and the best generalization bound out of the $K$ cases can
be obtained via elementary union bound, incurring a factor of $\sO(\log(K))$ on the bound.
As the results in \citet{Arora2018-ou, Zhou2019-ii}, the bounds provided by
re-initialization robustness are for a different model, in our case the
re-initialized one. Alternative approaches in the literature involve modifying
the training algorithms to explicitly optimize the robustness or some derived
generalization bounds \citep{Neyshabur:2015:PPO:2969442.2969510,
Dziugaite2016-bi}.
\iffalse
The above arguments provide generalization guarantees for the reduced model
$\hat{f}_n^{(1-\rho)m}$ obtained from $\hat{f}_n^{m}$. When training
\emph{directly} the reduced model there no guarantees of the empirical risk of
the large model $\hat{f}_n^{m}$.
\fi
\section{Joint robustness}
\label{sec:joint-robustness}
The empirical results we presented thus far focus on \emph{whole-layer}
robustness. We next explore \emph{joint robustness} of multiple layers through
\emph{simultaneous} re-initialization or re-randomization .
\begin{figure}\centering
\begin{subfigure}{.85\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/bulk-cifar-with-fullmodel/resnet-152-resblk1-tt-error}\vskip-5pt
\caption{\scriptsize\resnet{152}: \textrm{resblk2, 3, }\ldots}
\end{subfigure}
\begin{subfigure}{.85\linewidth}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figs/bulk-cifar-with-fullmodel/resnet-152-every2-tt-error}
\caption{\scriptsize\resnet{152}: every second \textrm{resblk}}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{\textbf{Joint robustness of \resnet{152} on \cifar}.
Jointly re-initialized/re-randomized layer groupings are indicated with the
\texttt{*} over the layer names (also colored as \textcolor{blue}{blue} for easier identification).}
\label{fig:bulk-resnet-body}
\end{figure}
We divide the layers into two groups and perform robustness experiments with
each group. Fig.~\ref{fig:bulk-resnet-body}(a) demonstrate that naively
grouping all the \robust layers into one group does not yield good performance.
However, an alternative grouping scheme shown in
Fig.~\ref{fig:bulk-resnet-body}(b) demonstrates that robustness can be
significantly improved when jointly resetting about half of the layers for
this \resnet{}. See Appendix~\ref{app:joint-robustness} for more details.
Note SGD fits the model with the aforementioned joint robustness structure without explicit constraints. We
next examine how explicit constraints could improve robustness. Concretely, we
experiment with two approaches: i. Refrain from training layers and leave their
parameters at the randomly initialized values. ~ ii. Remove layers from
the network.
\begin{table}\small
\caption{\normalsize \textbf{Error rates (\%) on \cifar{} (top) and
\imagenet{} (bottom).} Each row reports the performance of a full model,
whole-layer robustness to re-initialization (mean$\pm$std), partially trained
models with a subset of the layers stranded to their initial values,
partially train model after removing a subset of the layers. Whole-layer
robustness is averaged over all the residual blocks except for the first at
each stage. Layer-freezing and layer-removal are jointly applied to
those residual blocks.}
\label{tab:freeze-n-remove}
\centering\vskip4pt
\begin{tabular}{p{.1em}lcccc}
\toprule
& \multirow{1}{*}{Arch} & Full Model & Whole-layer Robustness & Layers Frozen & Layers Removed \\
\midrule
\parbox[t]{2mm}{\multirow{3}{*}{\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{\scriptsize\cifar}}}
& \resnet{50} & 8.40 & 9.77$\pm$1.38 & 11.74 & 9.23 \\ & \resnet{101} & 8.53 & 8.87$\pm$0.50 & 9.21 & 9.23 \\ & \resnet{152} & 8.54 & 8.74$\pm$0.39 & 9.17 & 9.23 \\ \midrule
\parbox[t]{2mm}{\multirow{3}{*}{\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{\scriptsize\imagenet}}}
& \resnet{50} & 34.74 & 38.54$\pm$5.36 & 44.36 & 41.50 \\ & \resnet{101} & 32.78 & 33.84$\pm$2.10 & 36.03 & 41.50 \\ & \resnet{152} & 31.74 & 32.42$\pm$1.55 & 35.75 & 41.50 \\ \bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
The results are given in Table~\ref{tab:freeze-n-remove}. When we freeze some
layers, the test error is higher than the average whole-layer robustness
measured in a normally trained model. However, the gap is much smaller than
directly measuring the joint robustness. Moreover, on \cifar{}, we find that
similar performance can be achieved even if we remove entirely those layers
from the network. In contrast, for \imagenet{} layer removal results in
a significant performance gap. In this case, random projections followed by
non-linear activations conducted by frozen layers deem necessary to maintain
the accuracy.
\section{Connections to other notions of robustness}
\label{sec:other-robustness}
The notion of whole-layer and joint robustness to re-initialization and
re-randomization can be related to other notions of robustness in deep
learning. For example, \emph{flatness} refers to robustness to \emph{local}
perturbations of the network's parameters at convergence, and is extensively
discussed in the context of generalization \citep{hochreiter1997flat,
chaudhari2016entropy, keskar2016large, smith2018bayesian, 3694}. For a fixed
layer, our notion of robustness to re-initialization is restricted to be on
the optimization trajectory, which could potentially take the form of
\emph{non-local} perturbations. Robustness to re-randomization allows for
further large variances of perturbations to the trained parameters. As our study shows, robustness seems
to be layer dependent, thus analyzing layers individually for
specific network architectures allows us to obtain further insights to the
robustness behaviors.
In contrast, \emph{adversarial} robustness~\citep{szegedy2013intriguing}
focuses on robustness to perturbations of the input. In particular, it was
found that trained deep networks are sensitive to small adversarial
perturbations which yield prediction shifts to to arbitrary classes. A large
number of defense and attack algorithms have been proposed in recent years
along this line. Here we briefly discuss the connection to adversarial
robustness. Take a normally trained \resnet{} with $S$ stages with
$(B_1,\ldots,B_S)$ residual blocks in each stage. At test time, we turn it into
a stochastic classifier by randomly selecting a subset of $s\in[0, S]$ stages,
and randomly replacing a residual block from each of the selected stage with one of
the $r$ pre-initialized weights of its layer. We keep $r$ pre-allocated
weights for each residual block instead of re-sampling at random on each
evaluation call, primarily to reduce the computation burden during the test
phase.
From the robustness analysis in the previous sections, we expect the stochastic classifier to
get only a small \emph{average} performance drop. However, at individual
example level, the randomness of the network outputs will make it harder for
the attacker to generate adversarial examples. We evaluate the adversarial
robustness against a weak FGSM \citep{goodfellow6572explaining} attack and a
strong PGD \citep{madry2017towards} attack. The results in
Table~\ref{tab:adversarial} show that, compared to the baseline (the exact same
trained model without stochastic evaluation), the randomness significantly
increases the adversarial robustness against weak attacks. The performances
under strong PGD attack drop to very low, but still with a non-trivial gap
between the baseline.
In summary, whole-layer robustness could improve the adversarial robustness of
a trained model through injected stochasticity. However, it is does not
constitute sufficient defence against strong attackers. More sophisticated
attacks that explicitly deal with stochastic classifiers might completely
break this model.
\begin{table}\small
\caption{\normalsize \textbf{Accuracy (\%) of various model configurations
on clean \cifar{} test set, under weak (FGSM), and strong (PGD)
adversarial attack.} Adversarial attacks are evaluated on a
subset of 1000 test examples. Every experiment is repeated 5 times and the
average performance is reported. The hyperparameters $r$ and $s$ in model
configurations correspond to the number of random weights pre-set for
each residual block, and the number of stages that are re-randomized
during each inference. Here $4^2$ designates a \resnet{} architecture with
two stages, each stage of four residual blocks, Similarly, $4^4$ network
has four stages each with four residual blocks.}
\label{tab:adversarial}
\centering\vskip4pt
\begin{tabular}{llcccc}\toprule
\multicolumn{2}{c}{Model Configuration} & Clean & FGSM & PGD \\
\midrule
\multirow{3}{*}{$4^2$}
& baseline & $91.05\pm0.00$ & $12.75\pm0.04$ & $0.33\pm0.16$\\
& r=4,s=1 & $89.45\pm0.13$ & $69.85\pm1.60$ & $6.71\pm0.37$\\
& r=4,s=2 & $87.70\pm0.25$ & $71.18\pm0.49$ & $9.65\pm0.27$\\
\midrule
\multirow{4}{*}{$4^4$}
& baseline & $90.08\pm0.00$ & $8.45\pm0.00$ & $0.00\pm0.00$\\
& r=4,s=1 & $89.64\pm0.12$ & $62.76\pm1.09$ & $2.60\pm0.26$\\
& r=4,s=2 & $89.13\pm0.13$ & $67.20\pm0.63$ & $3.56\pm0.48$\\
& r=4,s=4 & $88.24\pm0.18$ & $69.09\pm1.59$ & $5.60\pm0.53$\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Conclusions}
We investigated the functional structure on a layer-by-layer basis of
overparameterized deep models, on a wide variety of popular models for
image classification. We introduced the notions of re-initialization and
re-randomization robustness. Using these notions we provided evidence for the
heterogeneous characteristic of layers, which can be categorized into either
\robust or \critical. Resetting the \robust layers to their initial
value has negligible consequence on the model's performance. Our empirical
results give further evidence that mere parameter counting or norm accounting
is too coarse in studying generalization of deep models. Moreover,
optimization landscape based analysis is better performed respecting the
network architectures due to the heterogeneous behaviors of different layers.
For future work, we are interested in devising a new algorithm which learns
the interleaving trained and partially random subnetworks within one large
network.
\paragraph{Acknowledgments} The authors would like to thank
David Grangier, Lechao Xiao, Kunal Talwar and Hanie Sedghi for helpful discussions and comments.
|
\section{Introduction}
As a consequence of the universal approximation theorems, sufficiently wide single layer neural networks are expressive enough to accurately represent a broad class of functions~\cite{cybenko_approximation_1989, barron_universal_1993,park_universal_1991}.
The existence of a neural network function arbitrarily close to a given target function, however, is not a guarantee that any particular optimization procedure can identify the optimal parameters.
Recently, using mathematical tools from optimal transport theory and interacting particle systems, it was shown that gradient descent~\cite{rotskoff_neural_2018, mei_mean_2018, sirignano_mean_2018, chizat_global_2018} and stochastic gradient descent converge asymptotically to the target function in the large data limit.
This analysis relies on taking a ``mean-field'' limit in which the number of parameters $n$ tends to infinity.
In this setting, gradient descent optimization dynamics is described by a partial differential equation (PDE), corresponding to a Wasserstein gradient flow on a convex energy functional.
While this PDE provides a powerful conceptual framework for analyzing the properties of neural networks evolving under gradient descent dynamics, the formula confers few immediate practical advantages.
Nevertheless, analysis of this Wasserstein gradient flow motivates the interesting possibility of altering the dynamics to accelerate convergence.
In this work, we propose a dynamical scheme involving a parameter birth/death process.
It can be defined on systems of interacting (e.g., neural network optimization) or non-interacting particles.
We prove that the resulting modified transport equation converges to the global minimum of the loss in both interacting and non-interacting regimes (under appropriate assumptions), and we provide an explicit rate of convergence in the latter case for the mean-field limit.
Interestingly---and unlike the gradient flow---the \emph{only} fixed point of the dynamics is the global minimum of the loss function.
We study the fluctuations of finite particle dynamics
around this mean-field convergent solution, showing that they are of the same order throughout the dynamics and therefore providing algorithmic guarantees directly applicable to finite single-layer neural network optimization.
Finally, we derive algorithms that converge to the birth-death PDEs and verify numerically that these schemes accelerate convergence even for finite numbers of parameters.
Summarily, we describe:
{\bf Global convergence and monotonicity of the energy with birth-death dynamics ---}
We propose in Section \ref{sec:setup} two distinct modifications of the original gradient flow that can be interpreted as birth-death processes.
In this sense, the processes we describe amount to non-local mass transport in the equation governing the parameter distribution.
We prove that the schemes we introduce guarantee global convergence and increase the rate of contraction of the energy compared to gradient descent and stochastic gradient descent for fixed $\mu$. We also derive asymptotic rates of convergence (Section \ref{sec:convergence}).
{\bf Analysis of fluctuations and self-quenching ---} The birth-death dynamics introduces additional fluctuations that are not present in gradient descent dynamics. In Section \ref{sec:fluctu} we calculate these fluctuations using tools from the theory of measure-valued Markov processes. We show that these fluctuations, for $n$ sufficiently large, are of order $O(n^{-1/2})$ and ``self-quenching'' in the sense that they diminish in magnitude as the quality as the optimization dynamics approaches the optimum.
{\bf Algorithms for realizing the birth-death schemes ---}
In Section \ref{sec:algo} we detail numerical schemes (and provide implementations in $\texttt{PyTorch}$) of the birth-death schemes described below.
In the particular case of neural networks, the computational cost of implementing our procedure is minimal because no additional gradient computations are required.
We demonstrate the efficacy of these algorithms on simple, illustrative examples in Section \ref{sec:experiments}.
\section{Related Works}
Non-local update rules appear in various areas of machine learning and optimization.
Derivative-free optimization \cite{rios2013derivative} offers a general framework for optimizing complex non-convex functions using non-local search heuristics. Some notable examples include Particle Swarm Optimization \cite{kennedy2011particle} and Evolutionary Strategies, such as the Covariance Matrix Adaptation method \cite{hansen2006cma}. These approaches have found some renewed interest in the optimization of neural networks in the context of Reinforcement Learning \cite{salimans2017evolution,such2017deep} and hyperparameter optimization \cite{jaderberg2017population}.
Our setup of non-interacting potentials is closely related to the so-called Estimation of Distribution Algorithms \cite{baluja1995removing, larranaga2001estimation}, which define update rules for a probability distribution over a search space by querying the values of a given function to be optimized. In particular, Information Geometric Optimization Algorithms \cite{ollivier2017information} study the dynamics of parametric densities using ordinary differential equations, focusing on invariance properties. In contrast, our focus in on the combination of transport (gradient-based) and birth/death dynamics.
Dropout \cite{srivastava2014dropout} is a regularization technique popularized by the AlexNet CNN \cite{krizhevsky2012imagenet} reminiscent of a birth/death process, but we note that its mechanism is very different: rather than killing a neuron and replacing it by a new one with some rate, Dropout momentarily masks neurons, which become active again at the same position; in other words, Dropout implements a purely local transport scheme, as opposed to our non-local dynamics.
Finally, closest to our motivation is \cite{wei_margin_2018}, who, building on the recent body of works that leverage optimal transport techniques to study optimization in the large parameter limit \cite{rotskoff_neural_2018,chizat_global_2018,mei_mean_2018,sirignano_mean_2018}, proposed a modification of the dynamics that replaced traditional stochastic noise by a resampling of a fraction of neurons from a base, fixed measure. Our model has significant differences to this scheme, namely we show that the dynamics preserves the same global minimizers and accelerates the rate of convergence. Finally, our interpretation of the modified dynamics in terms of a generalized gradient flow is related to the unbalanced optional transport setups of \cite{kondratyev2016,Liero:2018bz,CHIZAT20183090}.
\section{Mean-field PDE and Birth-death Dynamics}
\label{sec:setup}
\subsection{Mean-Field Limit and Liouville dynamics}
Gradient descent propagates the parameters locally in proportion to the gradient of the objective function.
In some cases, an optimization algorithm can benefit from nonlocal dynamics, for example, by allowing new parameters to appear at favorable values and existing parameters to be removed if they diminish the quality of the representation.
In order to exploit a nonlocal dynamical scheme, it is useful to interpret the parameters as a system of $n$ particles, $\boldsymbol{\theta}_i\in D$, a $k$-dimensional differentiable manifold, which for $i=1,\ldots,n$ evolve on a landscape determined by the objective function $ \ell(\boldsymbol{\theta}_1, \dots, \boldsymbol{\theta}_n)$. Here we will focus on situations where the objective function may involve interactions between pairs of parameters:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:interactell}
\ell(\boldsymbol{\theta}_1,\dots,\boldsymbol{\theta}_n) = \sum_{i=1}^n F(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i)
+ \frac{1}{2n}\sum_{i,j=1}^n K(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i, \boldsymbol{\theta}_j)
\end{equation}
where $F:D\to \mathbb{R}} \def\NN{\mathbb{N}} \def\ZZ{\mathbb{Z}$ is a single particle energy function and $K:D\times D \to \mathbb{R}} \def\NN{\mathbb{N}} \def\ZZ{\mathbb{Z}$ is a symmetric semi-positive definite interaction kernel.
Interestingly, optimizing neural networks with the mean-squared loss function fits precisely this framework \cite{rotskoff_neural_2018, mei_mean_2018, chizat_global_2018}.
Consider a supervised learning problem using a neural network with nonlinearity $\varphi$.
If we write the neural network as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:NN}
f_n(\boldsymbol{x};\boldsymbol{\theta}_1,\dots,\boldsymbol{\theta}_n) = \frac1n\sum_{i=1}^n \varphi(\boldsymbol{x}, \boldsymbol{\theta}_i)
\end{equation}
and expand the loss function,
\begin{equation}
\ell(\boldsymbol{\theta}_1,\dots,\boldsymbol{\theta}_n) = \tfrac12 \mathbb{E}}\def\PP{\mathbb{P}}\def\TT{\mathbb{T}_{y,\boldsymbol{x}} \left|y - f_n(\boldsymbol{x}; \boldsymbol{\theta}_1,\dots,\boldsymbol{\theta}_n)\right|^2,
\end{equation}
we see that, up to an irrelevant constant depending only on the data distribution, we arrive at \eqref{eq:interactell} with
\begin{equation}
\label{fefe}
F(\boldsymbol{\theta}) = -\mathbb{E}}\def\PP{\mathbb{P}}\def\TT{\mathbb{T}_{y,\boldsymbol{x}} \bigl[ y \varphi(\boldsymbol{x}, \boldsymbol{\theta}) \bigr],
\end{equation}
and,
\begin{equation}
\label{keke}
K(\boldsymbol{\theta}, \boldsymbol{\theta}') =
\mathbb{E}}\def\PP{\mathbb{P}}\def\TT{\mathbb{T}_{\boldsymbol{x}} \bigl[\varphi(\boldsymbol{x}, \boldsymbol{\theta}) \varphi(\boldsymbol{x}, \boldsymbol{\theta}')\bigr].
\end{equation}
We also consider \emph{non-interacting} objective functions in which $K=0$ in~\eqref{eq:interactell}.
Optimization problems that fit this framework include resource allocation tasks in which, e.g., weak performers are eliminated, Evolution Strategies, and Information Geometric Optimization \cite{ollivier2017information}.
In the case of gradient descent dynamics, the evolution of the particles $\boldsymbol{\theta}_i$ is governed for $i=1,\ldots,n$ by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:GD}
\dot{\boldsymbol{\theta}_i} = - \nabla_{\boldsymbol{\theta}_i} \ell(\boldsymbol{\theta}_1, \dots, \boldsymbol{\theta}_n).
\end{equation}
To analyze the dynamics of this particle system, we consider the ``mean-field'' limit $n\to \infty$.
As the number of particles becomes large, the empirical distribution of particles
\begin{equation}
\mu^{(n)}_t(d\boldsymbol{\theta}) =\frac1n\sum_{j=1}^n \delta_{\boldsymbol{\theta}_j(t)}(d\boldsymbol{\theta})
\label{eq:rhon}
\end{equation}
leads to a deterministic partial differential equation at first order~\cite{rotskoff_neural_2018, mei_mean_2018, chizat_global_2018, sirignano_mean_2018},
\begin{equation}
\partial_t \mu_t = \div \left( \mu_t \nabla V \right),
\label{eq:pde}
\end{equation}
where $\mu_t$ is the weak limit of $\mu^n_t$ and $\mu_0$ is some distribution from which the initial particle positions $\boldsymbol{\theta}_i(0)$ are drawn independently.
The potential $V:D \to \mathbb{R}} \def\NN{\mathbb{N}} \def\ZZ{\mathbb{Z}$ is specified by the objective function $ \ell$ as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:potential}
V(\boldsymbol{\theta}, [\mu]) = F(\boldsymbol{\theta}) + \int_D K(\boldsymbol{\theta},\boldsymbol{\theta}') \mu(d\boldsymbol{\theta}').
\end{equation}
and \eqref{eq:pde} should be interpreted in the weak sense in general:
\begin{equation}
\forall \phi \in C^\infty_c(D) \ : \qquad \partial_t \int_D \phi(\boldsymbol{\theta}) \mu_t(d\boldsymbol{\theta}) = - \int_D \nabla \phi(\boldsymbol{\theta})\cdot \nabla V (\boldsymbol{\theta}, [\mu_t]) \mu_t(d\boldsymbol{\theta}),
\label{eq:pdeweak}
\end{equation}
where $C^\infty_c(D)$ denotes the space of smooth functions with compact support on $D$.
Interestingly, $V$ is the gradient with respect to $\mu$ of an energy functional $\mathcal{E}[\mu]$,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:energy}
\mathcal{E}[\mu] = \int_D F(\boldsymbol{\theta}) \mu(d\boldsymbol{\theta})+ \tfrac12 \int_{D\times D} K(\boldsymbol{\theta},\boldsymbol{\theta}') \mu(d\boldsymbol{\theta})\mu(d\boldsymbol{\theta}').
\end{equation}
As a result,
the nonlinear Liouville equation~\eqref{eq:pde} is the Wasserstein gradient flow with respect to the energy functional $\mathcal{E}[\mu]$.
Local minima of $V$ (where $\nabla V=0$) are clearly fixed points of this gradient flow, but these fixed points may not always be minimizers of the energy when $\supp \mu \subset D$.
When the initial distribution of parameters has full support, neural networks evolving with gradient descent avoid these spurious fixed points under appropriate assumptions about their nonlinearity~\cite{chizat_global_2018, rotskoff_neural_2018,mei_mean_2018}.
\subsection{Birth-Death augmented Dynamics}
Here we consider a more general dynamical scheme that involves nonlocal transport of particle mass. As we shall see in Section \ref{sec:convergence}, this dynamics avoids spurious fixed points and local minima, and converges asymptotically to the global minimum.
Consider the following modification of the Wasserstein gradient flow above:
\begin{equation}
\partial_t \mu_t = \div \left( \mu_t \nabla V \right) - \alpha V \mu_t \qquad (\alpha>0).
\label{eq:pde_bd}
\end{equation}
The additional term $- \alpha V \mu_t$ is a birth/death term that
modifies the mass of $\mu$. If $V$ is positive, this mass will
decrease, corresponding to the removal or ``death'' of parameters. If
$V$ is negative, this mass will increase, which can be implemented as
duplication or ``cloning'' of parameters. For a finite number of
parameters, this dynamics could lead to changes in the architecture of
the network. In many applications it is preferable to fix the total
population, achieved by simply adding a conservation term to the
dynamics,
\begin{equation}
\partial_t \mu_t = \div \left( \mu_t \nabla V \right) - \alpha V \mu_t + \alpha \bar V \mu_t,
\label{eq:pde_control}
\end{equation}
where $\bar V\equiv \int_D V d\mu_t$. This equation (like~\eqref{eq:pde_bd}) should in general be interpreted in the weak sense. Here we will focus on solutions of \eqref{eq:pde_control} for the initial condition $\mu_0 \in \mathcal{M}(D)$, the space of probability measures on~$D$, that satisfy
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:15}
\int_D \phi(\boldsymbol{\theta}) \mu_t(d\boldsymbol{\theta}) = C^{-1}(t) \int_D
\phi(\boldsymbol{\Theta}(t,\boldsymbol{\theta})) e^{-\alpha\int_0^t V(\boldsymbol{\Theta}(s,\boldsymbol{\theta}),\mu_s]) ds} \mu_0(d\boldsymbol{\theta})
\end{equation}
where $\phi:D\to\mathbb{R}} \def\NN{\mathbb{N}} \def\ZZ{\mathbb{Z}$ is any bounded differentiable function with bounded gradient, $C(t)$ is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:18}
C(t) = e^{-\alpha \int_0^t \bar V[\mu_s] ds} \equiv \int_D e^{-\alpha \int_0^t V(\boldsymbol{\Theta}(s,\boldsymbol{\theta}),[\mu_s]) ds} \mu_0(d\boldsymbol{\theta}),
\end{equation}
and $\boldsymbol{\Theta}(t,\boldsymbol{\theta})$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:16}
\dot \boldsymbol{\Theta}(t,\boldsymbol{\theta}) = - \nabla V(\boldsymbol{\Theta}(t,\boldsymbol{\theta}),[\mu_t]), \qquad
\boldsymbol{\Theta}(0,\boldsymbol{\theta}) = \boldsymbol{\theta}.
\end{equation}
Formula~\eqref{eq:15} can be formally established by solving~\eqref{eq:pde_control} by the method of characteristics. In the non-interacting case, since $V(\boldsymbol{\theta},[\mu_t]) = F(\boldsymbol{\theta})$, \eqref{eq:15} is explicit and well-posed under appropriate assumptions on $F$ (see Assumption~\ref{as:noninter} below). In the interacting case, \eqref{eq:15} is implicit since the right hand side depends on $\mu_t$. Following Chizat \& Bach~\cite{chizat_global_2018}, we know that under appropriate assumptions on $F$ and $K$ (see Assumption~\ref{as:interacting-case} below), solutions to \eqref{eq:15} exist for all $t>0$ for appropriate initial $\mu_0$ that are compactly supported in $D$. Here we will assume global existence of solutions to this equation for $\mu_0$ such that $\supp \mu_0 = D$ with $D$ open: if $\mu_0$ decays sufficiently fast at infinity, this assumption is supported by the alternative derivation of~\eqref{eq:pde_bd} based on a proximal gradient formulation given in Sec.~\ref{sec:proxi}.
Note that solutions of \eqref{eq:pde_bd} that satisfy \eqref{eq:15} are probability measures since they are positive by definition and we can set $\phi=1$ in~\eqref{eq:15} to deduce that $\mu_t(D)=1$. We can also show that the birth-death terms improve the rate of energy decay, as stated in the following proposition:
\begin{proposition}
\label{prop:consis1}
Let $\mu_t$ be a solution of (\ref{eq:pde_control}) for the initial condition $\mu_0 \in \mathcal{M}(D)$ that satisfies \eqref{eq:15} for all $t\ge0$.
Then, $\mu_t(D)=1$ for all $t\ge0$, and
$E(t)=\mathcal{E}[\mu(t)]$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:Edecay}
\dot E(t) = - \int_D | \nabla V(\boldsymbol{\theta},[\mu_t])|^2 \mu_t(d\boldsymbol{\theta})
- \alpha\int_D \left(V(\boldsymbol{\theta},[\mu_t])-\bar V[\mu_t] \right)^2 \mu_t(d\boldsymbol{\theta}) \le 0.
\end{equation}
\end{proposition}
\noindent
\textit{Proof:} \eqref{eq:Edecay} can be formally obtained by testing (\ref{eq:pde_control}) against $V(\boldsymbol{\theta},[\mu_t])$ and using the chain rule to deduce that $d\mathcal{E}[\mu_t]/dt = \int_D V(\boldsymbol{\theta},[\mu_t]) \partial_t \mu_t(d\boldsymbol{\theta})$. To complete the proof, we need to show that this testing is legitimate and the terms at the right hand side of \eqref{eq:Edecay} are well-defined; this is done in Appendix~\ref{app:proof_global_convergence} by differentiating $C(t)$. \hfill $\square$
The birth-death term thus contributes to increase the rate of decay of the energy at all times. A natural question is whether such improved energy decay can lead to global convergence of the dynamics to the global minimum of the energy.
As it turns out, the answer is yes: the fixed points of the
birth-death PDEs~\eqref{eq:pde_bd} and~\eqref{eq:pde_control} are the
global minimizers of the energy $\mathcal{E}[\mu]$, as we prove in
Section \ref{sec:convergence}. How to implement a particle dynamics
consistent with~\eqref{eq:pde_control} is discussed in Sections
\ref{sec:fluctu} and \ref{sec:algo}.
We also note that there are several ways in which we can
modify~(\ref{eq:pde_control}) to certain advantages: this is discussed
in Appendix~\ref{sec:modify}.
\subsection{Proximal formulation of birth-death dynamics}
\label{sec:proxi}
Following the frame of Ref.~\cite{jordan1998variational}, we can give an alternative interpretation to the
birth-death PDE~\eqref{eq:pde_control}.
First, we recall that the
PDE~\eqref{eq:pde} can be obtained as the time-continuous limit
$(\tau \to0)$ of the proximal optimization scheme (also known as minimizing movement scheme~\cite{Santambrogio:2017jr}) in which a sequence
of distributions $\{\mu_k\}_{k\in \NN_0}$ is constructed via the
iteration: given an initial $\mu_0$ such that $\mathcal{E}[\mu_0]<\infty$, set
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:proxi1}
\mu_{k+1} \in \argmin \left(\mathcal{E}[\mu] + \tfrac12\tau^{-1} W_2^2(\mu,\mu_k)\right), \qquad k=0,1,2,\ldots,
\end{equation}
where $W_2(\mu,\mu_k)$ denotes the $2$-Wasserstein distance between
the probability measures $\mu$ and $\mu_k$.
Interestingly, the birth-death PDE relies on a different measure of ``distance'': the PDE
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:proxi1a}
\partial_t \mu_t = - \alpha V\mu_t+\alpha \bar V \mu_t,
\end{equation}
can be obtained as the time-continuous limit of the proximal
optimization scheme: given an initial $\mu_0$ such that $\mathcal{E}[\mu_0]<\infty$, set
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:proxi2}
\mu_{k+1} \in \argmin \left(\mathcal{E}[\mu] + (\alpha\tau)^{-1} D_{\text{KL}}(\mu
|| \mu_k)\right), \qquad k=0,1,2,\ldots,
\end{equation}
where the minimum is taken over all probability measures
$\mu \in \mathcal{M}(D)$ and $D_{\text{KL}}(\mu || \mu_k)$ is the
Kullback-Leibler divergence
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:proxi3}
D_{\text{KL}}(\mu
|| \mu_k) = \int_D \log\left( \frac{d\mu}{d\mu_k}\right) d\mu~.
\end{equation}
We verify this claim formally; notice that the Euler-Lagrange equation
for the minimizer $\mu_{k+1}$, obtained by zeroing the first variation
of the objective function in~\eqref{eq:proxi2}, reads
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:proxi4}
V(\boldsymbol{\theta},[\mu_{k+1}]) + (\alpha\tau)^{-1} \log\left(
\frac{d\mu_{k+1}}{d\mu_k}\right) + \lambda= 0
\end{equation}
where $\lambda$ is a Lagrange multiplier added to enforce $\int_D
d\mu_{k+1}=1$. \eqref{eq:proxi4} can be reorganized into
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:proxi5}
\mu_{k+1} = C^{-1} \mu_k \exp\left(-\alpha\tau V(\boldsymbol{\theta},[\mu_{k+1}]) \right)
\end{equation}
where $C$ is adjusted so that $\int_D
d\mu_{k+1}=1$. \eqref{eq:proxi5} is the discrete equivalent of~\eqref{eq:15} If $\tau$ is small, we can expand the exponential to
arrive at
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:proxi6}
\mu_{k+1} = C^{-1} \left( \mu_k -\alpha\tau V(\boldsymbol{\theta},[\mu_{k+1}])\mu_k + O(\tau^2)\right)
\end{equation}
Setting $\mu_{k+1} = \mu_{k} + O(\tau)$ in $V$ and expanding again
gives
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:proxi7}
\mu_{k+1} = \mu_k -\alpha\tau V(\boldsymbol{\theta},[\mu_{k}]) \mu_k + \alpha\tau
\left(\int_D V(\boldsymbol{\theta},[\mu_{k}]) d\mu_k \right) \mu_k +O(\tau^2)
\end{equation}
where we have also expanded $C$ and solved for it explicitly at
leading order in $\tau$. Subtracting $\mu_k$ for both sides, dividing
by $\tau$, and letting $\tau\to0$ gives~\eqref{eq:proxi1a}. The full
PDE~(\ref{eq:pde_control}) can be obtained by
alternating~(\ref{eq:proxi1}) and~(\ref{eq:proxi2}).
Note that, under Assumption~\ref{as:interacting-case} below, the energy $\mathcal{E}[\mu]$ is convex and bounded below. As a result the augmented functionals to minimize in both~\eqref{eq:proxi1} and \eqref{eq:proxi2} are strictly convex, which means that they admit a unique minimizer. This shows that the measures in the sequence $\{\mu_k\}_{k\in\NN_0}$ are well-defined and such that $\mathcal{E}[\mu_{k+1}]\le \mathcal{E}[\mu_{k}]$ whether we use~\eqref{eq:proxi1}, \eqref{eq:proxi2}, or alternate between both. Because we discretize time in practice, solutions of~\eqref{eq:pde_control} satisfying \eqref{eq:15} for all $t>0$ can be interpreted as implementations of the proximal scheme.
Taking the limit $\tau \to 0$ with $k\tau$ large, however, requires ensuring well-definedness of the terms on the right hand side of~\eqref{eq:pde_control}.
This proximal interpretation also enables the design of distinct algorithms for implementing
this PDE at particle level.
\section{Convergence of Transport Dynamics with Birth-death}
\label{sec:convergence}
Here, we compare the solutions of the original PDE~\eqref{eq:pde} with
those of the PDE~\eqref{eq:pde_control} with birth-death. We restrict
ourselves to situations where $F$ and $K$ in~\eqref{eq:energy} are
such that $\mathcal{E}[\mu]$ is bounded from below. Our main
technical contributions are results about convergence towards global
energy minimizer as well as convergence rates as the
dynamics approaches these minimizers.
We consider separately the non-interacting and the interacting cases.
Under gradient descent dynamics, global convergence can be established
with appropriate assumptions on the initialization and architecture of
the neural network. \cite{mei_mean_2018} establishes global
convergence and provides a rate for neural networks with bounded
activation functions evolving under stochastic gradient descent.
Similar results were obtained
in~\cite{chizat_global_2018,rotskoff_neural_2018}, in which it is
proven that gradient descent converges to the globally optimal
solution for neural networks with particular homogeneity conditions on
the activation functions and regularizers. Closely related to the
present work, \cite{wei_margin_2018} provides a convergence rate for a
``perturbed'' gradient flow in which uniform noise is added to the
PDE~\eqref{eq:pde}. It should be emphasized that, unlike our
formulation, the addition of uniform noise changes the fixed point of
the PDE and convergence to only an approximate global solution can be
obtained in that setting.
\subsection{Non-interacting Case}
\label{sec:noninteracting}
We consider first the non-interacting case with $V=F$ and $D=\mathbb{R}} \def\NN{\mathbb{N}} \def\ZZ{\mathbb{Z}^k$,
under
\begin{assumption}
\label{as:noninter}
$F\in C^2(\mathbb{R}} \def\NN{\mathbb{N}} \def\ZZ{\mathbb{Z}^k)$ is a Morse function, coercive, and with a single
global minimum located at~$\boldsymbol{\theta}^*$.
\end{assumption}
With no loss of generality we set $F(\boldsymbol{\theta}^*) =0$ since adding an
offset to $F$ in (\ref{eq:pde_control}) does not affect the dynamics.
We also denote by $H^*=\nabla\nabla F(\boldsymbol{\theta}^*)$ the Hessian of $F$
at $\boldsymbol{\theta}^*$: recall that a Morse function is such that its Hessian
is nondegenerate at all its critical points (where $\nabla F = 0$) and
it is coercive if $\lim_{\boldsymbol{\theta}\to\infty} F(\boldsymbol{\theta}) = \infty$. Our
main result is
\begin{theorem}[Global Convergence and Rate: Non-interacting Case]
\label{th:local-non-rate}
Assume that the initial condition $\mu_0$ of the PDE~\eqref{eq:pde_bd}
has a density $\rho_0$ positive everywhere in $\mathbb{R}} \def\NN{\mathbb{N}} \def\ZZ{\mathbb{Z}^k$ and is such that
$\mathcal{E}[\mu_0] < \infty$. Then under Assumption~\ref{as:noninter}
the solution of~\eqref{eq:pde_bd} satisfies
\begin{equation}
\mu_t \rightharpoonup \delta_{\boldsymbol{\theta}^*} \qquad \text{as \ \ $t\to \infty$.}
\end{equation}
In addition we can quantify the convergence rate: if
$\bar F(t) = \int_{\mathbb{R}} \def\NN{\mathbb{N}} \def\ZZ{\mathbb{Z}^k} F(\boldsymbol{\theta})\mu_t(\boldsymbol{\theta})$, then
$\exists C>0$ such that $\forall\epsilon>0$, the time $t_\epsilon$
needed to reach $\mathcal{E}[\mu_{t_\epsilon}] \leq \epsilon$
satisfies
\begin{equation}
\label{lu00}
t_\epsilon \leq C \epsilon^{-(d+2)/2}.
\end{equation}
Furthermore the rate of convergence becomes exponential in time
asymptotically: for all $\delta >0$, $\exists t_\delta$ such that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:expdecay}
\bar F(t)\le \alpha^{-1} \tr \left(H^* e^{-2 H^* (t-\delta)}\right)
\quad
\text{if \ \ $t\ge t_\delta$}.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
In fact we show that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:liminonint}
\lim_{t\to\infty} \frac{\alpha \bar F(t) }{\tr \left(H^* e^{-2 H^*
t}\right) } =1.
\end{equation}
The theorem is proven in Appendix~\ref{sec:convergence-noninteracting}
This proof shows that the additional birth-death terms in the
PDE~\eqref{eq:pde_bd} allow the measure to concentrate rapidly in the
vicinity of~$\boldsymbol{\theta}^*$; subsequently, the transport term takes over
and leads to the exponential rate of energy decay
in~\eqref{eq:expdecay}. The proof also shows that, if we remove the
transportation term $\div \left( \mu_t \nabla V \right)$ in the
PDE~\eqref{eq:pde_bd}, the energy only decreases linearly in time
asymptotically. This means that the combination of the transportation
and the birth-death terms accelerates convergence. A similar theorem
can be proven for the PDE~\eqref{eq:pde_prior}.
\subsection{Interacting Case}
Let us now consider the interacting case, when $V$ is given
by~\eqref{eq:potential} with $K\not=0$. We make
\begin{assumption}
\label{as:D}
The set $D$ is a $k$-dimensional differentiable manifold which is
either closed (i.e. compact, with no boundaries), or open (i.e. with
no closed subset), or the Cartesian product of a closed and an open
manifold.
\end{assumption}
\begin{assumption}
\label{as:interacting-case}
The kernel $K$ is symmetric, positive semi-definite, and twice
differentiable in its arguments, $K\in C^2(D\times D)$;
$F\in C^2(D)$; and $F$ and $K$ are such that the energy is bounded
from below, i.e. $\exists m\in \mathbb{R}} \def\NN{\mathbb{N}} \def\ZZ{\mathbb{Z}$ such that $\forall \mu \in
\mathcal{M}(D)$ : $\mathcal{E}[\mu]\ge m$.
\end{assumption}
This technical assumption typically holds for neural networks.
Assumption~\ref{as:interacting-case} guarantees that the quadratic
energy $\mathcal{E}[\mu]$ in~\eqref{eq:energy} has a (unique) minimum
value. While we cannot guarantee in general that this minimum is
reached only by minimizers, below we will work under the assumption
that minimizers exist. These are solutions in~$\mathcal{M}(D)$ of
following Euler-Lagrange equations:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:euler_lagrange}
\left\{
\begin{aligned}
V(\boldsymbol{\theta}, [\mu_*]) &= \bar V[\mu_*] \qquad &&\forall \boldsymbol{\theta} \in \supp \mu_*\\
V(\boldsymbol{\theta}, [\mu_*]) &\ge \bar V[\mu_*] \qquad &&\forall \boldsymbol{\theta}
\in D.
\end{aligned}\right.
\end{equation}
where $\bar V[\mu] \equiv \int_D V(\boldsymbol{\theta},[\mu])
\mu(d\boldsymbol{\theta})$. These equations are
well-known~\cite{serfaty_coulomb_2015}: for the reader's convenience we
recall their derivation in Appendix~\ref{sec:euler-lagrange}.
Minimizers of the energy should not be confused with fixed points of
the dynamics. In particular, a well-known issue with the
PDE~\eqref{eq:pde} is that it potentially has many more fixed points
than $\mathcal{E}[\mu]$ has minimizers: Indeed, rather
than~(\ref{eq:euler_lagrange}), these fixed points only need to
satisfy
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:statiopoints}
\nabla V(\boldsymbol{\theta},[\mu]) = 0 \qquad \forall \boldsymbol{\theta} \in \supp \mu.
\end{equation}
It is therefore remarkable that, if we pick an initial condition
$\mu_0$ for the birth-death PDE~\eqref{eq:pde_control} that has full
support, the solution to this equation converges to a global minimizer
of $\mathcal{E}[\mu]$:
\begin{theorem}[Global Convergence to Global Minimizers: Interacting Case]
\label{th:global}
Let $\mu_t$ denote the solution of~\eqref{eq:pde_control} that satisfies~\eqref{eq:15} for the
initial condition $\mu_0$ with $\supp \mu_0 = D$. If
$\mu_t\rightharpoonup \mu_*$ as $t\to\infty$ for some probability
measure $\mu_*\in \mathcal{M}(D)$, then under Assumptions~\ref{as:D}
and \ref{as:interacting-case} $\mu_*$ is a global minimizer of
$\mathcal{E}[\mu]$.
\end{theorem}
This theorem is proven in
Appendix~\ref{app:proof_global_convergence}. Note that the theorem
holds under the assumption that $\mu_t$ converges to a fixed point
$\mu_*$, which we cannot guarantee \textit{a~priori} but should be
true for a wide class of $F$ and $K$ and initial conditions $\mu_0$
satisfying properties like $\mathcal{E}[\mu_0],\infty$---for more
details on these conditions see the proof in
Appendix~\ref{app:proof_global_convergence}. One aspect of this proof
is based on the evolution equation~\eqref{eq:Edecay} for
$\mathcal{E}[\mu_t]$. Since $d \mathcal{E}[\mu_t]/dt \le0$ and since
$\mathcal{E}[\mu_t]$ is bounded from below by
Assumption~\ref{as:interacting-case}, by the bounded convergence
theorem, the evolution must stop eventually. By assumption, this
involves $\mu_t$ converging weakly towards some $\mu_*$. This happens
when both integrals in~\eqref{eq:Edecay} are zero, i.e. $\mu_*$ must
satisfy the first equation in~\eqref{eq:euler_lagrange} as well
as~\eqref{eq:statiopoints}. What remains to be shown is that $\mu_*$
must also satisfy the second equation in~\eqref{eq:euler_lagrange},
which we check in Appendix~\ref{app:proof_global_convergence}.
Regarding the rate of convergence, we have the following result:
\begin{theorem}[Asymptotic Convergence Rate: Interacting Case]
\label{th:local-int-rate} Under the same conditions as in
Theorem~\ref{th:global}, $\exists C>0$ and $t_C>0$ such that
$E(t) = \mathcal{E}[\mu_t] -\mathcal{E}[\mu_*]\ge 0$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
E(t) \le C t^{-1}
\quad \text{if \ \ $t\ge t_C$}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
The proof of this theorem is given in
Appendix~\ref{sec:convergence-interacting} where we show that
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:27}
\lim_{t\to\infty} t E(t) \le C \in (0,\infty].
\end{equation}
\section{From Mean-field to Particle Dynamics with Birth-Death }
\label{sec:fluctu}
In practice the number of parameters $n$ is finite, so we must verify
that we can implement dynamics at finite particle numbers that is
consistent with the PDEs with birth-death terms introduced in
Sec.~\ref{sec:setup} in the mean-field limit $n\to \infty$. We must
also ensure that the fluctuations arising from the discrete particles
do not pose a problem for the optimization dynamics. In this section,
we carry out this program in the context of the
PDE~\eqref{eq:pde_control}. Analogous calculations can be performed in
the case of~\eqref{eq:pde_prior}. These results rely on the theory of
measure-valued Markov processes~\cite{dawson2006measure}, and are
detailed in Appendix~\ref{app:flucts}.
The dynamics of the particles $\{\boldsymbol{\theta}_i(t)\}_{i=1}^n$ is specified
by a Markov process defined as follows: the birth-death part of the
evolution is realized by equipping each particle $\boldsymbol{\theta}_i$ with an
independent exponential clock with (signed) rate
\begin{equation}
\tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i) = F(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i)+\frac1n
\sum_{j=1}^nK(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i,\boldsymbol{\theta}_j) -\frac1n \sum_{j=1}^n \left(F(\boldsymbol{\theta}_j) +\frac1n
\sum_{k=1}^nK(\boldsymbol{\theta}_j,\boldsymbol{\theta}_k)\right)
\label{eq:centeredrateinteract}
\end{equation}
such that:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If $\tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i(t)) >0$, the particle $\boldsymbol{\theta}_i$ is
duplicated with instantaneous rate $\alpha \tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i(t))$,
and a particle $\boldsymbol{\theta}_j$ chosen at random in the stack is killed
to preserve the population size.
\item If $\tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i(t)) < 0$, the particle $\boldsymbol{\theta}_i$ is
killed with instantaneous rate $ \alpha |\tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i(t))|$,
and a particle $\boldsymbol{\theta}_j$ chosen at random in the stack is
duplicated to preserve the population size.
\end{enumerate}
Between these birth events the particles evolve by the GD flow
\eqref{eq:GD}.
Due to the interchangeability of the particles, the evolution of their
empirical distribution $\mu^{(n)}_t$ defined in~\eqref{eq:rhon} is
also Markovian: it is referred to in the probability literature as a
\textit{measured-valued Markov process}~\cite{dawson2006measure}. We
can write down the generator of this process, which specifies the
evolution of the expectation of functionals of $\mu^{(n)}_t$, and
analyze its behavior as $n\to\infty$. These calculations are performed
in Appendix~\ref{app:flucts}, and they lead to:
\begin{proposition}[Law of Large Numbers]
\label{th:lln}
Let the empirical distribution of the initial position of the
particles be $\mu_0^{(n)}= n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^n \delta_{\boldsymbol{\theta}_i(0)}$
and assume that $\mu^{(n)}_0 \rightharpoonup \mu_0$ as $n\to\infty$.
Then, for all for $t\in [0,\infty)$,
$\mu_t^{(n)}= n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^n \delta_{\boldsymbol{\theta}_i(t)}
\rightharpoonup \mu_t$ in law as $n\to\infty$, where $\mu_t$
satisfies \eqref{eq:pde_control} with the initial condition $\mu_{t=0} = \mu_0$.
\end{proposition}
This statement verifies that, to leading order, the large particle
limit recovers the mean-field PDE~\eqref{eq:pde_control}.
While the limit gives rise to the birth-death term of the PDE as
expected, we can also quantify the scale and asymptotic behavior of
the higher order fluctuations at finite $n$. This computation ensures
that finite $n$ fluctuations do not overcome the convergence expected
from the mean-field analysis. To do so, we we introduce the
discrepancy distribution defined by the difference, scaled by
$\sqrt{n}$, between the empirical distribution and its mean-field
limit
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:discrepencydistribution}
\omega^{(n)}_t \equiv \sqrt{n} \left(\mu^{(n)}_t - \mu_t \right)
\end{equation}
where $\mu^{(n)}_t$ is the empirical distribution defined
in~(\ref{eq:rhon}) and $\mu_t$ is limit
satisfying~\eqref{eq:pde_control2}. We can then analyze the generator
of the joint process $(\mu_t, \omega^{(n)}_t )$ and deduce the
following proposition:
\begin{proposition}[Central Limit Theorem]
\label{th:clt}
In the limit as $n\to\infty$, we have
\begin{equation}
\omega^{(n)}_t
\rightharpoonup \omega_t \qquad \textrm{in law}
\end{equation}
where $\omega_t$ is Gaussian random distribution with zero mean and
whose covariance satisfies a linear equation with a source term
proportional to $\alpha|\tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta},[\mu_t])|\mu_t$, see
\eqref{eq:covarianceinter} in Appendix~\ref{app:flucts}.
\end{proposition}
The key consequence of this proposition is that it specifies the scale
of the fluctuations of $\mu^{(n)}_t$ above its mean field limit
$\mu_t$. First it shows that these fluctuations are on a scale
$O(\sqrt{\alpha/n})$. This is why $\alpha$ should be kept $O(1)$
relative to $n$. While it may appear that increasing $\alpha$
accelerates the rate of convergence at mean-field level, the
fluctuations would grow and the $n\to \infty$ and $\alpha \to \infty$
limit do not commute. Second, the relation between the scale of the noise
and the magnitude of $|\tilde{V}|\mu_t$ has an important consequence
for the convergence of the dynamics: because $|\tilde{V}|\mu_t\to 0$
as $t\to\infty$, the fluctuations are ``self-quenching'' in the sense
that their amplitude diminishes and eventually vanishes as
$\mu_t \to \mu_*$. In particular, for both the interacting and
non-interacting cases, the only stable fixed point of the equation for
the covariance of $\omega_t$ is zero.
We should emphasize that these conclusions rely on $n$ being large
enough that both the LLN and the CLT apply. In practical situations,
it may be difficult to determine the threshold value of $n$ to reach
this regime---it may grow with the dimension of $D$. At finite~$n$, we
also cannot rule out the possibility of some distinct dynamical regime
in which the fluctuations grow with time---our results simply indicate
that, in the regime where the LLN and CLT apply, the timescale for
such a phenomenon would be diverging with $n$. These concerns are
partially placated by the fact that our experiments show no signs of
any such distinct dynamical regime and clearly indicate that
birth-death helps accelerating convergence at moderate values of~$n$.
Finally we want to stress that, while the calculations above indicate
convergence with the birth-death dynamics alone when $n$ is large
enough, the gradient flow probably plays a crucial part in
accelerating the underlying optimization procedure, especially at
moderate values of $n$. Without the transport term, the birth-death
dynamics can only adjust the weight of existing neurons, which is
clearly inefficient in some cases. That is, we do not advocate the use of
birth-death dynamics alone, but rather to combine it with GD.
\section{Algorithms}
\label{sec:algo}
Numerical schemes that converge to the PDEs presented in
Sec.~\ref{sec:setup} are both straightforward to design and easy to
implement. In absence of the GD part of the dynamics, we could use
Kinetic Monte Carlo (also called the Gillespie algorithm) to simulate
birth-death without time-discretization error. However, in the large parameter regime,
this would be computationally expensive: every particle has its own exponential clock,
and the time between successive birth-death events scales like
$1/n$.
Because we must time-discretize the GD flow, we carry out the birth-death dynamics using the
same time-discretization.
Denote by $\{ \boldsymbol{\theta}_i \}_{i=1}^n$ the current configuration of $n$
particles in the interacting potential $\ell$
in~\eqref{eq:interactell}. To update the state of these particles, we
first consider the effect of the GD flow alone, using a
time-discretized approximation of this flow with step of size $\Delta t>0$. With
the forward Euler scheme, this amounts to updating the particle
positions as
\begin{equation}
\boldsymbol{\theta}_i \leftarrow \boldsymbol{\theta}_i - \nabla
F(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i) \Delta t
-\frac1n \sum_{j=1}^n \nabla K(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i,
\boldsymbol{\theta}_j) \Delta t
\end{equation}
While this type of update is standard in machine learning, more accurate integration schemes could be used.
To implement the birth-death part of the dynamics, we calculate
the probability of survival of the particles assuming that their
position was fixed at the current values $\{ \boldsymbol{\theta}_i \}_{i=1}^n$
using the empirical value $\tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i)$ given in
\eqref{eq:centeredrateinteract} for the rate $V-\bar V$. If $\tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i)>0$
the probability that particle $\boldsymbol{\theta}_i$ be killed in the time
interval of size $\Delta t$ is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:probkilled}
1 - \exp(\tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i) \Delta t)
\end{equation}
Similarly, the probability that it is duplicated in that time interval
if $\tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i)<0$ is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:probdupli}
1 - \exp(|\tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i) |\Delta t)
\end{equation}
Particles are killed and duplicated in a loop according to this
rule. Since $\sum_{i=1}^n \tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i) = 0$ by construction,
this operation preserves the number of particles on average. To
enforce strict population control, we add an additional loop that
guarantees the total population remains fixed after the dynamics above.
The details are given in Algorithm~\ref{alg:scheme1}.
The corresponding particle system is a discretized version, both in
particle number and time, of the PDE~\eqref{eq:pde_control} and it
converges to this equation as $n\to\infty$ and $\Delta t \to0$. The
error we make at finite $n$ is analyzed in Sec.~\ref{sec:fluctu}; the
error we make at finite $\Delta t$ can be deduced from standard
results about time discretization of differential equations: with the
Euler scheme used above, this error scales as $O(\Delta t)$.
\begin{algorithm}
\caption{Parameter birth-death dynamics consistent with~\eqref{eq:pde_control} }\label{alg:scheme1}
\begin{algorithmic}
\State $\Delta t$, initial $\{ \boldsymbol{\theta}_i \}_{i=1}^n$ given
\State $\epsilon = \epsilon_{\rm tol}$, the tolerance \While
{$\epsilon\geq \epsilon_{\rm tol}$} \For{$i=1:n$} \State set
$\boldsymbol{\theta}_i \leftarrow \boldsymbol{\theta}_i - \nabla F(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i) \Delta t
-\frac1n \sum_{j=1}^n \nabla K(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i, \boldsymbol{\theta}_j) \Delta t$
\State calculate $\tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i) = F(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i) +
n^{-1}\sum_{j=1}^n K(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i,\boldsymbol{\theta}_j)- n^{-1} \sum_{j=1}^n \left( F(\boldsymbol{\theta}_j) + n^{-1}\sum_{k=1}^n K(\boldsymbol{\theta}_j,\boldsymbol{\theta}_k)\right)$
\If { $\tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i) > 0$ } \State { kill $\boldsymbol{\theta}_i$ w/ prob $1-\exp(-\alpha \tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i) \Delta t )$ }
\Else {\ \textbf{if} \ $\tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i) < 0$ } \State {
duplicate $\boldsymbol{\theta}_i$ w/ prob $1-\exp(-\alpha |\tilde V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i)| \Delta t )$ }
\EndIf
\EndFor
\State $N_1$: total number of particles after the loop
\If {$N_1>N$} \State{kill $N_1 - N$ randomly selected particles}
\Else {\ \textbf{if} \ $N_1<N$ } \State { duplicate $N-N_1$ randomly selected particles}
\EndIf
\EndWhile
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
In the case of neural network parameter optimization, the birth-death
algorithm does not incur any significant computational cost beyond
regular stochastic gradient descent. Denoting the parameters
$\boldsymbol{\theta}_i=(c_i, \boldsymbol{y}_i).$ and writing the neural network function as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:nnwithc}
f_n(\boldsymbol{x}; c_1, \boldsymbol{y}_1, \dots, c_n, \boldsymbol{y}_n) = \frac1n \sum_{i=1}^n c_i
\phi(\boldsymbol{x}, \boldsymbol{y}_i),
\end{equation}
the potential $V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i) = F(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i) + n^{-1} \sum_{j=1}^n
K(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i, \boldsymbol{\theta}_j)$ is given by
\begin{equation}
V(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i) = c_i \hat{V}(\boldsymbol{y}_i) \quad \text{with} \quad
\hat{V}(\boldsymbol{y}_i) = \int_{\Omega} \phi(\boldsymbol{x},\boldsymbol{y}_i)\left(
f_n(\boldsymbol{x}; c_1, \boldsymbol{y}_1, \dots, c_n, \boldsymbol{y}_n)- f(\boldsymbol{x})\right) \nu(d\boldsymbol{x})
\end{equation}
Note that $\hat
V$ is the gradient of the loss with respect to the linear coefficient
vector $\partial_{c_i} V =
\hat{V}(\boldsymbol{y}_i).$
Because we do not typically have access to the exact loss
function, the integrals required to compute
$\hat V$ are estimated using a finite number of data points. Using a batch
of $P$ points in an update leads to an estimate $\hat V_P$ of
$\hat V$, which is used to determine the rate of killing/duplication. In
this particular case, the only change to Algorithm~\ref{alg:scheme1}
is that the computation of $\tilde{V}$ is replaced with $c_i \hat
V_P(\boldsymbol{y}_i) - n^{-1}\sum_{j=1}^nc_j \hat V_P(\boldsymbol{y}_j)$ with
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:empiricalpotential}
\hat V_P(\boldsymbol{y}_i) = \frac1P \sum_{p=1}^P \phi(\boldsymbol{x}_p,\boldsymbol{y}_i)\left(
f_n(\boldsymbol{x}_p; c_1, \boldsymbol{y}_1, \dots, c_n, \boldsymbol{y}_n)- f(\boldsymbol{x}_p)\right) \qquad
\{\boldsymbol{x}_p\}_{p=1}^P = \text{batch}.
\end{equation}
Since this quantity is computed in the SGD update, the only additional
computation is the sum of $V_P$ over the
$n$ particles.
The cost of the algorithm is $O(nP)$ at every
iteration.
For neural networks of the form given in Eq.~\eqref{eq:nnwithc} a
particularly simple modification of Algorithm~\ref{alg:scheme1}
enables particle creation from a prior distribution. The algorithm
proceeds through the initial birth-death loop as in
Algorithm~\ref{alg:scheme1}. At the end of the initial loop, if the
total population has decreased, then additional particle are sampled
with configurations $(c,\boldsymbol{y})$ distributed according to the prior
distribution
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:prior}
\mu_{\textrm b} (dc, d\boldsymbol{y}) = \delta_0(dc) \bar \rho(\boldsymbol{y})d\boldsymbol{y}
\end{equation}
so that a reinjected particle has zero contribution to the total
energy.
\medskip
\paragraph{Proximal Optimization: }
Finally, let us note that it is possible to design algorithms for the
particles that mimic the proximal optimization scheme introduced in
\eqref{eq:proxi2}. For concreteness we focus on the cases of neural
networks---the ideas below can be easily adapted to the others
situations treated in this paper. Assume that the neural
representation at iterate $k$ is
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:proxi8}
f^{(n)}_k(\boldsymbol{x}) = \frac1n \sum_{i=1}^n w_i^k \varphi(\boldsymbol{x},\boldsymbol{\theta}_i^k)
\end{equation}
where $\boldsymbol{\theta}_i^k$ denotes the parameter in the network and
$w_i^k\ge 0$ are extra weights satisfying $n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^n w^k_i =1$---we
will define a dynamics for these weights in a moment.
Notice that~\eqref{eq:proxi8} can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:proxi8m}
f^{(n)}_k (\boldsymbol{x}) = \int_D \phi(\boldsymbol{x},\boldsymbol{\theta}) d\mu^{(n)}_k(\boldsymbol{\theta}), \qquad
d\mu^{(n)}_k(\boldsymbol{\theta}) = \frac1n \sum_{i=1}^n w_i^k \delta_{\boldsymbol{\theta}_i^k}(d\boldsymbol{\theta})
\end{equation}
and the loss is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:proxi10}
\begin{aligned}
\ell(\boldsymbol{\theta}_1^k,\ldots,\boldsymbol{\theta}_n^k;w_1^k,\ldots, w_n^k) &=
\tfrac12 \mathbb{E}}\def\PP{\mathbb{P}}\def\TT{\mathbb{T}_{y,\boldsymbol{x}} |y - f^{(n)}_k(\boldsymbol{x}) |^2 \\
& = C_f + \frac1n\sum_{i=1}^n w_i^k F(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i^k) + \frac1{2n^2}
\sum_{i,j=1}^n w_i^kw_j^k K(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i^k,\boldsymbol{\theta}_j^k)
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where $C_f = \tfrac12 \mathbb{E}}\def\PP{\mathbb{P}}\def\TT{\mathbb{T}_{y} y^2$ and $F(\boldsymbol{\theta})$ and
$K(\boldsymbol{\theta},\boldsymbol{\theta}')$ given in~\eqref{fefe} and~\eqref{keke}, respectively.
The scheme we propose will update the $\boldsymbol{\theta}_i^k$ and the $w_i^k$
separately, the first by usual gradient descent over the loss, the
second by proximal gradient. That is, given $\{\boldsymbol{\theta}_i^k\}_{i=1}^n$
and $\{w_i^k\}_{i=1}^n$:
\smallskip
1. \textit{Gradient step.} Evolve the parameters $\boldsymbol{\theta}_i^k$ by GD (or SGD if we
need to use the empirical loss) with the weights~$w_i^k$ kept
fixed. Do this for $m$ steps of size $\Delta t$ to obtain a new set of
$\{\boldsymbol{\theta}_i^{k+1}\}_{i=1}^n$.
\smallskip
2. \textit{Proximal step.} Evolve the weights $w_i^k$ with the
parameter $\boldsymbol{\theta}_i^{k+1}$ fixed using a proximal step based on the
particle equivalent of~\eqref{eq:proxi2}, i.e.
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:proxi12}
\{w_i^{k+1}\}_{i=1}^n \in \argmin \left(
\ell(\boldsymbol{\theta}_1^{k+1},\ldots,\boldsymbol{\theta}_n^{k+1};w_1,\ldots, w_n)+
\frac1{\tau n} \sum_{i=1}^n w_i \log(w_i/w_i^k) \right)
\end{equation}
where the minimization is done under the constraint that $n^{-1} \sum_{i=1}^n
w_i = 1$. The equation for the minimizer $w_i^{k+1}$ is the discrete
equivalent of~\eqref{eq:proxi6}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:proxi13}
w_i^{k+1} = C^{-1} w_i^k \exp\left( -\tau \tilde V_i^{k+1}\right)
\end{equation}
where $C$ is a constant to be adjusted so that $n^{-1}\sum_{i=1}^n
w^{k+1}_i = 1$ and
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:proxi14}
\tilde V_i^{k+1} = F(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i^{k+1} ) + \frac1n \sum_{j=1}^n
w_j^{k+1} K(\boldsymbol{\theta}_i^{k+1},\boldsymbol{\theta}_j^{k+1})
\end{equation}
\eqref{eq:proxi13} is implicit in $w_i^{k+1}$ and should be solved by
iteration. Note that this proximal step is guaranteed to decrease the
loss. In practice, this step could eventually lead to big variations
of the weights. Should this happen, we add the additional step:
\smallskip
3. \textit{Resampling step.} Resample the weights
$\{w_i^{k+1}\}_{i=1}^n $ so as to keep them roughly equal to $1$
each, that is: eliminate the ones that are too small and transfer their
weights to the others: split the remaining (large) weights into bits
of size roughly $1$. There are standard ways to do this resampling
step that are unbiased and preserve the population size exactly. This
resampling step may increase the loss, though not to leading
order. This step is the actual birth-death step in the scheme (and it
is also the only random component of it if the exact loss is used).
\medskip
If we set $\tau= \alpha m \Delta t$ and set $\Delta t\to0$ and
$n\to\infty$, the scheme above is formally consistent with the PDE
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:proxi15}
\partial_t \mu_t = \nabla \cdot\left( \nabla V \mu_t \right) -
\alpha V \mu_t + \alpha \bar V \mu_t .
\end{equation}
However, it is obviously not necessary to take either of these limits
explicitly in practice, and, as explained above, the proximal step is
guaranteed to decrease the loss. With a strict version of the the resampling
step performed at
every iteration, in which the weights are taken to be in $\{0,1\}$
the scheme above recovers the one
described in Algorithm~\ref{alg:scheme1}. The main difference is that
in Algorithm~\ref{alg:scheme1} the proximal step~(\ref{eq:proxi13}) is
solved in one iteration, by substituting $w^{k+1}_i$ by $w_i^k$ at the
right hand side of~(\ref{eq:proxi13}).
Finally notice that if we were to implement the proximal step only and
skip both the gradient and the resampling steps, the scheme above is a
naive implementation of the lazy training scheme discussed
in~\cite{chizat:hal-01945578}. This highlights again why using
birth-death alone is not an efficient way to perform network
optimization, and it should be combined with standard GD.
\section{Numerical Experiments}
\label{sec:experiments}
\subsection{Mixture of Gaussians}
We take as an illustrative example a mixture of Gaussians in dimension $d$,
\begin{equation}
f(\boldsymbol{x}) = \frac1m\sum_{i=1}^m \frac{\bar c_i}{(2\pi \sigma_i^2)^{d/2}} e^{ -|\boldsymbol{x}-\bar \boldsymbol{y}_i|^2/(2 \sigma_i^2)},
\end{equation}
which we approximate as a neural network with Gaussian nonlinearities with fixed standard deviation $\sigma<\min_i\sigma_i$,
\begin{equation}
f_n(\boldsymbol{x}; ; c_1, \boldsymbol{y}_1, \dots, c_n, \boldsymbol{y}_n) = \frac1n \sum_{i=1}^n
\frac{c_i}{(2\pi \sigma^2)^{d/2}n} e^{-|\boldsymbol{x} - \boldsymbol{y}_i|^2/(2\sigma^2)},
\end{equation}
denoting the parameters $\boldsymbol{\theta}_i = (c_i, \boldsymbol{y}_i).$
This is a useful test of our results because we can do exact gradient descent dynamics on the mean-squared loss function:
\begin{equation}
\ell(c_1, \boldsymbol{y}_1, \dots, c_n, \boldsymbol{y}_n)
= \frac12 \int_{\mathbb{R}} \def\NN{\mathbb{N}} \def\ZZ{\mathbb{Z}^d} \left|f(\boldsymbol{x})-
f_n(\boldsymbol{x}; c_1, \boldsymbol{y}_1, \dots, c_n, \boldsymbol{y}_n)\right|^2 d\boldsymbol{x}
\end{equation}
Because all the integrals are Gaussian, this loss can be computed analytically, and so can $\tilde V$ and its gradient.
In Fig. 1, we show convergence to the energy minimizer for a mixture of three Gaussians (details and source code are provided in the SM).
The non-local mass transport dynamics dramatically accelerates convergence towards the minimizer.
While gradient descent eventually converges in this setting---there is no metastability---the dynamics are particularly slow as the mass concentrates near the minimum and maxima of the target function.
However, with the birth-death dynamics, this mass readily appears at those locations.
The advantage of the birth-death dynamics with a reinjection distribution $\mu_{\textrm{b}}$ is highlighted by choosing an unfavorable initialization in which the particle mass is concentrated around $y=-2.$
In this case, both GD and GD with birth-death~\eqref{eq:pde_bd} do not converge on the timescale of the dynamics.
With the reinjection distribution, new mass is created near $y=2$ and convergence is achieved.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{gaussian_convergence_full_supp.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{gaussian_bad_init.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Top left: Convergence of the gradient descent dynamics without birth-death, with birth-death, and using a reinjection distribution. Top right: For appropriate initialization, the three dynamical schemes all converge to the target function. Bottom left: For bad initialization (narrow Gaussian distributed around y=-2), GD and GD+birth-death do not converge on this timescale. Interestingly, with the reinjection via distribution $\mu_\textrm{b}$, convergence to the global minimum is rapidly achieved. Bottom right: The configuration of the particles in $\boldsymbol{\theta}=(y,c)$. Only with the reinjection distribution does mass exist near $y=2$.}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Student-Teacher ReLU Network}\label{sec:stnet}
In many optimization problems, it is not possible to evaluate $\tilde V$ exactly.
Instead, typically $\tilde V$ is estimated as a sample mean over a batch of data.
We consider a student-teacher set-up similar to \cite{chizat:hal-01945578} in which we use single hidden layer ReLU networks to approximate a network of the same type with fewer neurons.
We use as the target function a ReLU network with 50-$d$ input and 10 hidden units.
We approximate the teacher with neural networks with $n=50$ neurons (see SM).
The networks are trained with stochastic gradient descent (SGD) and the mini-batch estimate of the gradient of output layer, which is computed at each step of SGD, is used to compute $\tilde V,$ which determines the rate of birth-death.
In experiments with the reinjection distribution, we use \eqref{eq:prior} with Gaussian $\bar \rho.$
As shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:nn}, we find that the birth-death dynamics accelerates convergence to the teacher network.
We emphasize that because the birth-death dynamics is stochastic at finite particle numbers, the fluctuations associated with the process could be unfavorable in some cases.
In such situations, it is useful to reduce $\alpha$ as a function of time.
On the other hand, in some cases we have observed much more dramatic accelerations from the birth-death dynamics.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{planted_nn_loss_with_prior}
\end{center}
\caption{The batch loss as a function of training time for the student-teacher ReLU network described in Sec.~\ref{sec:stnet}. The birth-death dynamics accelerates convergence, both with and without the reinjection distribution.}
\label{fig:nn}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
The success of an optimization algorithm based on gradient descent requires good coverage of the parameter space so that local updates can reach the minima of the loss function quickly.
Our approach liberates the parameters from a purely local dynamics and allows rapid reallocation to values at which they can best reduce the approximation error.
Importantly, we have constructed the non-local birth-death dynamics so that it converges to the minimizers of the loss function.
For a very general class of minimization problems---both interacting and non-interacting potentials---we have established convergence to energy minimizers under the dynamics described by the mean-field PDE with birth-death.
Remarkably, for interacting systems with we can guarantee global convergence for sufficiently regular initial conditions.
We have also computed the asymptotic rate of convergence with birth-death dynamics.
These theoretical results translate to dramatic reductions in convergence time for our illustrative examples.
It is worth emphasizing that the schemes we have described are straightforward to implement and come with little computational overhead.
Extending this type of dynamics to deep neural network architectures could accelerate the slow dynamics at the initial layers often observed in practice.
Hyperparameter selection strategies based on evolutionary algorithms~\cite{such2017deep} provide another interesting potential application of our approach.
While we have characterized the basic behavior of optimization under the birth-death dynamics, many theoretical questions remain. First, we did not address generalization; understanding the role of the extra birth/death term in controlling the generalization gap is an important future question, in particular relating it to the lazy-training regime of \cite{chizat:hal-01945578}. Next, we need to assume the existence of weak solutions through (\ref{eq:15}) with an initial measure $\mu_0$ that has full support, yet it may be possible to certify that the dynamics exist for all times if $\mu_0$ decays sufficiently fast.
Besides, more explicit calculations of global convergence rates for the interacting case and tighter rates for the non-interacting case would be exciting additions.
The proper choice of $\mu_{\textrm{b}}$ is another question worth exploring because, as highlighted in our simple example, favorable reinjection distributions can rapidly overcome slow dynamics.
Finally, a mean-field perspective on deep neural networks would enable us to translate some of the guarantees here to deep architectures.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We would like to acknowledge the useful and detailed comments by Sylvia Serfaty and Yann Ollivier on previous versions of this manuscript.
|
\chapter{Abstractly Planar Graphs}
Beginning courses in graph theory prove many wonderful theorems about planar graphs. An even more wonderful theory arises when we put planar graphs (which we'll henceforth refer to as \defn{abstractly planar} graphs) into 3-dimensional space. One way of doing this is to choose an embedding of an abstractly planar graph $G$ in the sphere $S^2$ and then include $S^2$ into the 3-sphere $S^3 = {\mathbb R}^3 \cup \{\infty\}$ (tamely). As an abstractly planar graph may have several planar embeddings, we may wonder if we can end up with different embeddings in $S^3$. It turns out that in $S^3$ all planar embeddings give rise to \defn{equivalent} (that is, ambient isotopic) spatial graphs \cite{Mason}. Such spatial graphs are called \defn{trivial}. A nontrivial spatial graph is \defn{knotted}. Are there knotted embeddings? Yes there are!
\begin{figure}
\labellist
\small\hair 2pt
\pinlabel $\centerdot \centerdot \centerdot$ at 596 129
\pinlabel \rotatebox{45}{$\centerdot \centerdot \centerdot$} at 711 142
\endlabellist
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{short-figs/ElemGraphs}
\caption{From left to right, we have the abstract graph type of $\theta$-graphs, handcuff graphs, the tetrahedral graph, $\theta_n$-graphs, and bouquets.}
\label{fig:elem}
\end{figure}
Some of the most important spatial graphs have very few vertices and edges, and are thus abstractly planar. Important classes include spatial $\theta$-graphs, handcuff graphs, the tetrahedral graph, $\theta_n$-graphs, and bouquets. We depict the abstract graph type for these graphs in Figure \ref{fig:elem}. Of these families, spatial $\theta$ and $\theta_n$ graphs have received the most attention in the literature. One reason spatial $\theta$-graphs are so prevalent is that we can create one by attaching an arc to a knot so that the endpoints of the arc are distinct points on the knot. This construction arises naturally in knot theory, where the arc may record some information about the knot $K$. Typical examples include knot tunnels or an arc recording the location of some crossing change, as in the first two diagrams of Figure \ref{fig:thetagraphs}. The knot $K$ becomes a cycle, or \defn{constituent knot}, in the resulting spatial $\theta$-graph. What can we say about the other constituent knots? Perhaps suprisingly, Kinoshita \cite{Kinoshita87} showed that, given three knots, there is a spatial $\theta$-graph whose three constituent knots are precisely the three given knots. An example of a $\theta$-graph whose three constituent knots are all the Figure 8 knot is shown in Figure \ref{fig:thetagraphs}. Kinoshita's construction can be applied recursively to construct $\theta_n$-graphs whose constituent knots are specified beforehand.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{short-figs/ThetaGraphs}
\caption{Four examples of spatial $\theta$-graphs. From left to right: a trefoil knot with tunnel (in red); a knot with an arc (in red) marking the location of a crossing change; a $\theta$-graph whose every constituent knot is a figure 8 knot; the Kinoshita graph.}
\label{fig:thetagraphs}
\end{figure}
The trivial $\theta$-graph has every cycle an unknot. Are there other $\theta$-graphs with this property? A spatial graph having the property that no collection of disjoint cycles is a nontrivial link is a \defn{ravel}. Similarly, a spatial graph that has the property that every proper subgraph is trivial has the \defn{Brunnian property}. A knotted graph with the Brunnian property is \defn{Brunnian}, \defn{almost unknotted}, or \defn{minimally knotted}. A $\theta$-graph is Brunnian if and only if it is a ravel; but the same is not necessarily true for other graphs.
Kinoshita \cite{Kinoshita1} also provided the first example of a Brunnian $\theta$-graph, now named after him. It is the rightmost diagram in Figure \ref{fig:thetagraphs}. Wolcott \cite{Wolcott} later generalized this construction to a family now known as the Kinoshita-Wolcott graphs. More examples of Brunnian $\theta$-graphs are given in \cite{Livingston} and \cite{JKLMTZ}. Suzuki \cite{Suzuki} generalized Kinoshita's construction to $\theta_n$ graphs. Every abstractly planar graph without degree zero and degree one vertices has a Brunnian spatial embedding \cite{Kawauchi, Wu93}. Ravels are of interest to chemists \cite{Hyde}; Flapan and Miller \cite{FlapanMiller} have constructed many examples.
How can we be sure that Kinoshita's graph really is knotted, or indeed that any given spatial embedding of an abstractly planar graph really is knotted?
An equivalence between spatial graphs takes the constituent knots of one to the constituent knots of the other (see \cite{Kauffman}). Thus, if one spatial graph has a constituent knot $K$ and another has no constituent knot of the same knot type, the graphs can't be equivalent. This doesn't help us show minimally knotted spatial graphs are knotted, though; we need other tools. As always in knot theory, we might ask for an invariant and there are some very nice invariants available. In general, Brunnian graphs and ravels provide good tests for the strength of invariants of spatial graphs. The three most popular are the Yamada polynomial \cite{Yamada}, Litherland's version of the Alexander polynomial \cite{Litherland}, and Thompson's polynomial invariant \cite{Thompson}. This last polynomial is defined recursively, but is zero if and only if the graph is trivial. It is based on an earlier algorithm of Scharlemann and Thompson \cite{ST-detecting} for determining if a spatial graph is unknotted. Their results were also adapted by Wu \cite{Wu92}, who showed that a spatial graph is unknotted if and only if each cycle bounds a disc disjoint from the rest of the graph.
We can also turn to other tools from topology and algebra. How accessible these are, depends, of course, on one's background and interests. Kinoshita and Suzuki used Alexander ideals to prove the nontriviality of their Brunnian graphs. However, McAtee, Silver, and Williams \cite{McAtee} point out that Suzuki's proof contains an error. The first complete proof of their nontriviality is likely given by Scharlemann \cite{Scharlemann}, using topological techniques stemming from the braid groups. In \cite[Example 22]{Ozawa}, the topology of surfaces containing the spatial graph is used to prove the Kinoshita graph is knotted, and in \cite{McAtee}, quandle colorings are used. Perhaps the simplest proofs that the Kinoshita graph is knotted rely on classical knot invariants. The article \cite{OT} provides two. In \cite{JKLMTZ}, a combination of handlebody theory and rational tangles are applied to an infinite family of $\theta$-graphs. One popular and beautifully simple approach for $\theta_n$-graphs is to use branched covers. Livingston \cite{Livingston} uses these to prove Suzuki's graphs are nontrivial and Calcut and Metcalf-Burton \cite{Calcut} use them to show Kinoshita's graph is prime, in a sense which we now explore.
Whenever mathematicians are introduced to some new mathematical object, we want to be able to create more of them and to understand how the object fits into the larger context of known mathematics. For the remainder, we take up the question of creating new spatial graphs from old ones and understanding how spatial graphs are related to knot theory and 3-manifold theory.
Throughout the study of manifolds, the connected sum is one of the most important methods of combining two manifolds. Recall that if $M_1$ and $M_2$ are manifolds of the same dimension, we form their connected sum $M_1 \# M_2$ by removing an open ball from each of them and gluing the resulting manifolds with boundary together along the new spherical boundary components. The centers of the balls are called the \defn{summing points}. Classical results show that if the summands are connected and we pay attention to orientations, the sum is unique up to homeomorphism. In particular $S^3 \# S^3$ is homeomorphic to $S^3$. When we consider 3-manifolds containing spatial graphs, on the other hand, there are potentially many more options. For starters, we have a choice of where to perform the sum. Given two spatial graphs $G_1$ and $G_2$ in distinct copies $M_1$ and $M_2$ of $S^3$, we make the choice by picking summing points $p_1 \in M_1$ and $p_2 \in M_2$. We can pick the points to be both disjoint from the graphs, or we can pick them to be contained in the interiors of edges in the graphs, or we can pick them both to be vertices of the graphs having the same degree. We'll denote the result by $G_1 \#_k G_2$ where $k = 0$ if the points are disjoint from the graphs; $k=2$ if the points are interior to edges; and, otherwise, $k$ is the degree of the vertices\footnote{This creates conflicting notation when $k=2$, but we will ignore this.}. Figure \ref{fig:summing} depicts the the case when $k = 0$ (the \defn{distant sum}), $k=2$ (the \defn{connected sum}), and $k = 3$ (\defn{the trivalent vertex sum}). Even for a fixed $k$, in general, $G_1 \#_k G_2$ is not uniquely defined. Summing operations are associative. If $G$ is equivalent to $G_1 \#_k G_2$ and neither is a trivial $\theta_k$-graph, then we say that $G$ is \defn{$k$-composite}. If $G$ is neither trivial nor $k$-composite, it is \defn{$k$-prime}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{short-figs/summing}
\caption{From top to bottom we have the distant sum, the connected sum, and the trivalent vertex sum of two spatial $\theta$-graphs. In each case, the large circles and ellipses denote distinct copies of $S^3$ and the gray dots indicate the points where the summing occurs.}
\label{fig:summing}
\end{figure}
For simplicity, let's consider only spatial $\theta$-graphs. We also assume our $\theta$-graphs are oriented. To orient a $\theta$-graph, choose one vertex as source, one vertex as sink, and color the edges red, blue, and green. We then restrict $\#_3$ so that, when forming $M_1 \#_3 M_2$, the summing point $p_1$ is the sink vertex of $G_1$, the summing point $p_2$ is the source vertex of $G_2$, and the gluing map takes red, blue, and green endpoints to red, blue and green endpoints respectively. Under the operation $\#_3$, the set $\mathbb{G}$ of oriented $\theta$-graphs in $S^3$ is particularly rich. The operation $\#_3$ is well-defined \cite{Wolcott} and it makes the set $\mathbb{G}$ into a semigroup with the trivial graph as the identity. In other words, the operation $\#_3$ is associative and if $G \in \mathbb{G}$ and if $T$ is the trivial $\theta$-graph, then $G \#_3 T = T \#_3 G = G$. In general, elements of $\mathbb{G}$ do not have inverses. If they did, our semigroup would be a group. The center of the semigroup is the subset of elements commuting with all other elements. In our case, it consists of the $\theta$-graphs that are a connected sum of a trivial $\theta$-graph and a knot. Elements of $\mathbb{G}$ have 3-prime factorizations. This means that for each nontrivial $G \in \mathbb{G}$, there are 3-prime elements $G_1, \hdots, G_n$ such that $G = G_1 \#_3 \cdots \#_3 G_n$. Furthermore, except for the fact that elements of the center commute with all other elements, this factorization is unique \cite{MT}. Conjecturally, (3-manifold, graph) pairs more generally have unique prime factorizations \cite{HAM}.
For $\theta$-graphs, the property of being Brunnian also persists under $\#_k$. Indeed, for $G_1, G_2 \in \mathbb{G}$, the sum, $G_1 \#_3 G_2$ is Brunnian if and only if $G_1$ and $G_2$ are both Brunnian. (Exercise!) For general spatial graphs, the property of being Brunnian may not persist under trivalent vertex sum. (Another exercise!) The property of being a ravel does persist under trivalent vertex sum. However, for $k \geq 4$, the property of being a ravel need not persist under $\#_k$. (Briefly: there exist knots with essential tangle decompositions and such knots result from summing bouquets.) Even for $\theta_k$ graphs, if we choose the gluing map for the connected sum to be very complicated, we may end up with knotted cycles after performing the sum.
How can we construct infinitely many \emph{3-prime} Brunnian $\theta$-graphs? The Kinoshita and Kinoshita-Wolcott graphs are 3-prime \cite{Litherland, Calcut}, as are the Brunnian $\theta$-graphs found in \cite{JKLMTZ} (see \cite{TT} for an indication of how this might be proved). Here is a very general method (essentially found in \cite{SimonWolcott}) that likely produces arbitrarily complicated Brunnian $\theta$-graphs, most of which are probably 3-prime. For a spatial graph $G \subset S^3$, a new spatial graph $G(B)$, called a \defn{buckling} of $G$, is determined by a choice of oriented annulus $B = S^1 \times [0,1]$, called a \defn{belt}, intersecting $G$ in intervals of the form $\{\text{point}\} \times [0,1]$. We create $G(B)$ as follows. At each intersection arc $\alpha$ between $B$ and $G$ we replace a neighborhood of $\alpha$ in $S^3$ with a \defn{belt buckle} as on the left of Figure \ref{fig:buckle} and include the remaining portions of $\partial B$ as part of $G(B)$. The right of Figure \ref{fig:buckle} shows how a certain buckling of the trivial $\theta$-graph produces the trivalent vertex sum of the Kinoshita graph with its mirror image.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\labellist
\small\hair 2pt
\pinlabel $e$ [l] at 72 183
\pinlabel $B$ [b] at 18 160
\pinlabel $B$ [br] at 453 196
\pinlabel $G$ [t] at 536 40
\pinlabel $\alpha$ [l] at 71 140
\endlabellist
\includegraphics[scale=0.3]{short-figs/TrivialBuckling}
\caption{The left side shows how to form $G(B)$. We take the union of the graph$G$ and the buckle $\partial B$, but wherever an edge $e$ of $G$ intersects $B$ as on the left, we replace it with either of the pictured two ``belt buckles.'' On the right, we see that using the indicated belt $B$ to buckle the trivial theta-graph $G$ produces the trivalent vertex sum of the Kinoshita graph with its mirror image.}
\label{fig:buckle}
\end{figure}
Not very much is known about how buckling affects a spatial graph. It is not difficult to see, however, that $G$ and $G(B)$ are abstractly isomorphic and that if $e$ is an edge of $G$ intersecting the band $B$, then the subgraphs $G(B) - e$ and $G - e$ are equivalent. In particular, if $G$ has the Brunnian property, and if $B$ intersects every edge of $G$, then $G(B)$ also has the Brunnian property. It seems difficult to determine whether or not $G(B)$ is trivial. Nevertheless, we conjecture:
\begin{conjecture}\label{conj:buckling nontrivial}
There is no $\theta$-graph $G$ in $S^3$ such that there is a belt $B$ intersecting all the edges of $G$ with $G(B)$ either the trivial $\theta$-graph or the Kinoshita graph.
\end{conjecture}
The exteriors of $G \in \mathbb{G}$ provide fertile ground for exploring topological and geometric questions. By work of Thurston (see Colin Adam's article in this encyclopedia), most knot complements admit a geometric structure based on 3-dimensional hyperbolic space. Likewise, the exteriors of most spatial graphs similarly admit hyperbolic structures. If our spatial graph is hyperbolic, we have access to a number of useful invariants. In particular, we may consider the \emph{volume} of the exterior. The simplest type of hyperbolicity for a spatial graph is \defn{hyperbolicity with parabolic meridians} \cite{Heard}. It follows from work of Thurston (see \cite[Corollary 2.5]{Heard}) that $G \in \mathbb{G}$ is hyperbolic with parabolic meridians if and only if it is $2$-prime and the exterior of $G$ does not contain an essential torus. In particular, if $G \subset S^3$ is a Brunnian $\theta$-graph, then $G$ is hyperbolic with parabolic meridians whenever its exterior does not contain an essential torus. In \cite{JKLMTZ}, there is an example of a buckling producing a Brunnian $\theta$-graph having an essential torus in its exterior. That graph is, therefore, non-hyperbolic. Thurston's work can also be used to show that if $G = G_1 \#_3 G_2$ is some trivalent vertex sum of nontrivial elements of $\mathbb{G}$, then $G$ is hyperbolic with parabolic meridians if and only if both $G_1$ and $G_2$ are. This suggests that volume $\operatorname{vol}(G)$ is a particularly interesting invariant for $G \in \mathbb{G}$. We ask (based on \cite{Adams}):
\begin{question}
Suppose that $G_i \in \mathbb{G}$ for $i = 1,2$ are both hyperbolic with parabolic meridians. How different can $\operatorname{vol}(G_1 \#_3 G_2)$ and $\operatorname{vol}(G_1) + \operatorname{vol}(G_2)$ be?
\end{question}
Finally, returning to topology, we consider the uniqueness up to homeomorphism of the exterior of connected spatial graphs. The relevant issues are illuminated by considering not just a spatial graph $G$ but also a regular neighborhood of it $N(G)$. The neighborhood $N(G)$ is a 3-manifold with boundary. It is called a \defn{handlebody} and the graph $G$ is called a \defn{spine} for the handlebody. The boundary of $N(G)$ is a connected, orientable surface. Its genus is called the \defn{genus} of the handlebody $N(G)$. Handlebodies may have many different spines. That is, if $N(G)$ is a handlebody with a spine $G$, there may exist many other graphs $G' \subset N(G)$ such that $N(G) = N(G')$. Indeed, if the genus of the handlebody is at least 2, it will have infinitely many spines. Figure \ref{fig:handlebody} depicts four different spines for a genus 2 handlebody. We say that two spatial graphs $G$ and $G'$ are \defn{neighborhood-equivalent} if $N(G)$ and $N(G')$ are ambient isotopic. Equivalently, $G$ and $G'$ are neighborhood-equivalent if there exists a handlebody in $S^3$ having two spines, one of which is equivalent to $G$ and the other to $G'$. If two graphs are equivalent then they are neighborhood-equivalent, but the converse is not necessarily true. Since the exterior of a spatial graph $G$ is identical to the exterior of $N(G)$, neighborhood-equivalent spatial graphs have homeomorphic exteriors. In particular, spatial graphs are not determined by their complements, unlike knots in $S^3$ \cite{GordonLuecke}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{short-figs/handlebody}
\caption{Four different spines for a genus 2 handlebody}
\label{fig:handlebody}
\end{figure}
If two spatial graphs are neighborhood-equivalent, we can also ask how their constituent knots are related. For $\theta$-graphs, this question was studied extensively in \cite{Taylor1, Taylor2}, where it was connected to an operation on knots and 2-component links called \defn{boring}. Many operations in knot theory, such as rational tangle replacement on knots (an important operation in studying DNA, see e.g. \cite{ErnstSumners}), are examples of boring. One result (see \cite[Theorem 6.5]{Taylor2}) arising from that work is that two Brunnian $\theta$-graphs are equivalent if and only if they are neighborhood-equivalent. This suggests that Brunnian $\theta$-graphs may be determined by their complements.
\begin{conjecture}
If two Brunnian $\theta$-graphs have homeomorphic exteriors, then they are equivalent.
\end{conjecture}
In general, the topology of Brunnian graphs (not necessarily, $\theta$-graphs) is an area ripe for further study.
\section*{Acknowledgments} I would like to thank the referee and my students Tara Brownson and Qidong He for helpful comments. This research was partially supported by a research grant from Colby College.
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Exact solutions of nonequilibrium statistical mechanical models have served as useful testbeds for potential theories of nonequilibrium
statistical mechanics. The most prominent example of this phenomenon in recent times is the totally asymmetric simple exclusion process (TASEP) on a finite one-dimensional lattice, whose steady state was obtained by Derrida, Evans, Hakim and Pasquier~\cite{dehp}. The exact solution via the matrix ansatz also enabled the computation of the large deviations of density~\cite{derrida-lebowitz-speer-1997} and the current~\cite{lazarescu-mallick-2011}. These computations were the first nontrivial test of two key ideas: the {\em additivity principle}~\cite{bodineau-derrida-2004} and the {\em macroscopic fluctuation theory}~\cite{BDJGL-2005}.
Exclusion processes with multiple species of particles are natural candidates for the modelling of systems where there are several subpopulations in a large population~\cite{simpson-et-al-2009,bruna-chapman-2012}.
Prominent examples of these include movements of (human or animal) crowds, traffic flow and heterogeneous ion transport.
The steady state of the TASEP with two species (and vacancies) with periodic boundaries was determined exactly by the matrix ansatz~\cite{djls}, but the two-species process with open boundaries and arbitrary rates is not believed to have a simple solution. With special kinds of boundary rates, the steady states have been determined exactly using the matrix ansatz in several cases~\cite{evans-et-al-1995, arita-2006, als-2009, als-2012, CMRV-2015, CEMRV-2016, afr-2018}.
In this work, we consider a variant of the semipermeable TASEP~\cite{arita-2006, als-2009}. Recall that this is a TASEP with two species of particles: $1$ (first-class particles), $2$ (second-class particles) and vacancies labelled $0$, where both $1$'s and $2$'s hop right, and $1$'s preferentially hop over the $2$'s. First-class particles enter from the left with rate $\alpha$ and exit to the right with rate $\beta$. The semipermeability comes from the fact that $2$'s cannot leave the system.
In our model, we have particles labelled $\{1,0,\bar{1},*\}$ on a one-dimensional lattice of length $n$. We dub this the {\em $D^*$-TASEP{}} because of its relation with Lam's random walk~\cite{lam-2015} for the affine Weyl group of type D.
For more on this, see Section~\ref{sec:discuss}.
It will be convenient for us to think of particles $1$ and $\bar 1$ being charged positively and negatively respectively. Particles of type $0$ are vacancies, and those of type $*$ are neutral. However, there are some important differences.
Each site in positions $2,\dots,n-1$ can be occupied by one of $\bar 1, 0$ and $1$. The sites at the boundaries can only be occupied by either $0$ or $*$.
The dynamics of the $D^*$-TASEP{} can be thought of as the action of a rightward-pointing electric field, and is as follows.
In the bulk,
\begin{equation}
\label{bulkrates}
\begin{split}
1\bar{1} & \to \bar{1}1 \quad \text{with rate $1$}, \\
10 & \to 01 \quad \text{with rate $1$}, \\
0\bar{1} &\to \bar{1}0 \quad \text{with rate $1$}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
At the left boundary, the transitions are
\begin{equation}
\label{leftrates}
\begin{split}
*\bar{1} & \to *1 \quad \text{with rate $\alpha$}, \\
*0 & \to 01 \quad \text{with rate $\alpha_*$}, \\
0\bar{1} & \to *0 \quad \text{with rate 1}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Finally, at the right boundary, the transitions are
\begin{equation}
\label{rightrates}
\begin{split}
1* &\to \bar{1}* \quad \text{with rate $\beta$}, \\
0* &\to \bar{1}0 \quad \text{with rate $\beta_*$}, \\
10 &\to 0* \quad \text{with rate $1$}
\end{split}
\end{equation}
At the left boundary, either a $1$ enters the second site, or a $\bar{1}$ leaves from the second site, or both, and conversely at the right boundary. This is consistent with the action of the electric field.
It is clear that the total number of $0$'s is fixed by the dynamics and we set it to be $n_0$.
The $D^*$-TASEP{} exhibits {\em charge-conjugation symmetry}: if we simultaneously interchange $1$'s and $\bar{1}$'s, $\alpha$ and $\beta$,
$\alpha_*$ and $\beta_*$, as well as left and right directions, the $D^*$-TASEP{} is invariant. This fact will be useful in the analysis.
Let the state space be given by
\begin{equation}
\Omega_{n,n_0} = \left\{ \tau \in \{\bar{1},0,1,*\}^n \; \left| \;
\substack{\displaystyle n_0(\tau) = n_0, \; \tau_1, \tau_n \in \{0,* \}, \\[0.15cm]
\displaystyle \tau_i \in \{\bar{1},0,1\} \text{ for } 2 \leq i \leq n-1 } \right.
\right\},
\end{equation}
where $n_0(\tau)$ is the number of $0$'s in $\tau$.
A little thought shows that if $\alpha,\alpha_*,\beta,\beta_*>0$ the $D^*$-TASEP{} is ergodic, i.e., it is possible to get from any configuration in $\Omega_{n,n_0}$ to any other.
If any of the parameters is zero the model will not be ergodic.
For example, in the case when $\alpha_* = \beta_* = 0$,
the first and last sites will eventually be occupied by $*$, and the resulting model is equivalent to the semipermeable TASEP on sites $2,\dots,n-1$.
The plan of the article is as follows. In Section~\ref{sec:matrix}, we show that the matrix ansatz can be used to construct the steady state probabilities. We also construct an explicit representation. In Section~\ref{sec:partfn}, we give an exact formula for the nonequilibrium partition function. We compute the current and densities exactly in Section~\ref{sec:curr-dens}. Using these results we derive the phase diagram in the thermodynamic limit in Section~\ref{sec:phase}.
The computations of the thermodynamic limit are not mathematically rigorous, but we believe the resulting limits are correct.
Our computations follow the same strategy as that of Arita~\cite[Section~5]{arita-2006}.
We have also performed extensive numerical checks to convince ourselves that the result is true.
The asymptotic computations that we need for the phase diagram are relegated to Appendix~\ref{sec:asymp}. We end with some discussion on the relationship of the $D^*$-TASEP{} to other TASEPs in Section~\ref{sec:discuss}.
\section{Matrix Ansatz}
\label{sec:matrix}
We will now determine the steady state using the matrix ansatz.
Since the $D^*$-TASEP{} is ergodic, the steady state is uniquely determined. It therefore suffices to verify the master equation.
This is done using the matrix ansatz~\cite{dehp}.
For each species $j$, we will associate a matrix $X_j$. The steady state probability $\pi(\tau)$ of a configuration
$\tau \in \Omega_{n,n_0}$ is then given by
\begin{equation}
\label{statprob}
\pi(\tau) = \frac{w(\tau)}{Z_{n,n_0}},
\end{equation}
where the {\em weight} of $\tau$ is given by
\begin{equation}
w(\tau) = \bra W X_{\tau_1} \cdots X_{\tau_n} \ket V,
\end{equation}
and the nonequilibrium partition function $Z_{n,n_0}$ is then given by
\begin{equation}
\label{pf-dstar-matrix ansatz}
Z_{n,n_0} = \sum_{\tau \in \Omega_{n,n_0}}
\bra W X_{\tau_1} \cdots X_{\tau_n} \ket V.
\end{equation}
We claim that the matrices $X_+,X_-,X_0,X_*$ and boundary vectors $\bra W, \ket V$ satisfy a particular algebra, which we now state.
The bulk relations are the same as the usual two-species TASEP on a ring~\cite{djls} and the semipermeable TASEP~\cite{arita-2006, als-2009}, namely
\begin{equation}
\label{bulkansatz}
\begin{split}
X_+ X_- &= X_+ + X_-, \\
X_+ X_0 &= X_0, \\
X_0 X_- &= X_0.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The boundary relations are more complicated than that of the semipermeable TASEP.
On the left boundary, they are given by
\begin{equation}
\label{leftansatz}
\begin{split}
\bra W X_* X_0 &= \frac{1}{\alpha_*} \bra W X_0, \\
\bra W X_* X_- &= \frac{1}{\alpha} \bra W X_*.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
On the right boundary, the relations are similarly
\begin{equation}
\label{rightansatz}
\begin{split}
X_0 X_* \ket V &= \frac{1}{\beta_*} X_0 \ket V, \\
X_+ X_* \ket V &= \frac{1}{\beta} X_* \ket V.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
The proof that the matrix ansatz equations \eqref{bulkansatz}\eqref{leftansatz} and \eqref{rightansatz} give the correct stationary probabilities using \eqref{statprob} are now standard and can be seen in \cite[Section 3.1]{blythe-evans-2007}. Both the domain-based proof and the algebraic proof work exactly the same way as for the semipermeable TASEP~\cite{arita-2006}. What is new here is that the boundary relations are also quadratic, but this presents no additional difficulty, as we now show.
Recall that the master equation for configuration $\tau$ can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{mastereq}
\sum_{\tau' \in \Omega_{n,n_0}} \left( \rate(\tau\to \tau') \;
\pi(\tau) - \rate(\tau' \to \tau) \; \pi(\tau') \right) = 0.
\end{equation}
We rewrite \eqref{mastereq} as $\sum _{i=1}^{n-1} T_i (\tau) = 0$,
where $T_i$ only considers transitions involving sites $i$ and $i+1$. In other words,
\begin{equation}
\label{Ti-def}
T_i(\tau) = \rate(\tau_i\tau_{i+1} \to \tau_{i+1} \tau_i) \; \pi(\dots, \tau_i, \tau_{i+1}, \dots )
- \rate(\tau_{i+1}\tau_i \to \tau_i\tau_{i+1}) \;
\pi(\dots, \tau_{i+1}, \tau_i, \dots),
\end{equation}
for $2 \leq i \leq n-2$.
Similarly, $T_1(\tau), T_{n-1}(\tau)$ are defined by the boundary transitions \eqref{leftrates} and \eqref{rightrates} respectively.
We now claim that the matrix algebra in \eqref{bulkansatz}, \eqref{leftansatz} and \eqref{rightansatz}
allows us to show that
\begin{equation}
\label{Ti-equations}
\begin{split}
T_1 &= -a_{\tau_2} \; \pi(\tau_1, \hat{\tau}_2, \dots, \tau_n), \\
T_i &= a_{\tau_i} \; \pi(\tau_1, \dots, \hat{\tau}_i, \dots, \tau_n) -
a_{\tau_{i+1}} \; \pi(\tau_1, \dots, \hat{\tau}_{i+1}, \dots, \tau_n ) \quad
\text{for $2 \leq i \leq n-2$}, \\
T_{n-1} &= a_{\tau_{n-1}} \;
\pi(\tau_1, \dots, \hat{\tau}_{n-1}, \tau_n),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
with $a_1 = 1, a_0 = 0, a_{\bar{1}} = -1$, where a hatted element in a tuple means that it is omitted.
Once we verify \eqref{Ti-equations}, the master equation \eqref{mastereq} holds because $\sum_i T_i(\tau)$ telescopes to zero.
We now verify the equations in \eqref{Ti-equations} one at a time. We will start with the bulk equation for $T_i$ in \eqref{Ti-def} and use \eqref{bulkansatz} for all nine possibilities for $(\tau_i, \tau_{i+1})$.
If $\tau_i = \tau_{i+1}$, there is nothing to check.
The other cases are verified in the following table.
\[
\begin{array}{c|c}
(\tau_i, \tau_{i+1}) & T_i(\tau) \\
\hline
(1,0) & \pi(\dots, 1,0, \dots) = \pi(\dots, 0, \dots) \\
(1, \bar{1}) & \pi(\dots, 1,\bar{1}, \dots) = \pi(\dots, \bar{1}, \dots) + \pi(\dots, 1, \dots) \\
(0, 1) & - \pi(\dots, 1,0, \dots) = - \pi(\dots, 0, \dots) \\
(0, \bar{1}) & \pi(\dots, 0,\bar{1}, \dots) = \pi(\dots, 0, \dots) \\
(\bar{1}, 1) & -\pi(\dots, 1,\bar{1}, \dots) = -\pi(\dots, 1, \dots) - \pi(\dots, \bar{1}, \dots) \\
(\bar{1}, 0) & -\pi(\dots, 0,\bar{1}, \dots) = -\pi(\dots, 0, \dots) \\
\hline
\end{array}
\]
For the $T_1$ equation, the nontrivial cases are analyzed using \eqref{leftansatz} and \eqref{bulkansatz}.
\[
\begin{array}{c|c}
(\tau_1, \tau_{2}) & T_1(\tau) \\
\hline
(*,1) & -\alpha \; \pi(*,\bar{1}, \dots) = -\pi(*, \dots) \\
(*,0) & \alpha_* \; \pi(*,0,\dots) - \pi(0,\bar{1},\dots) = 0 \\
(*,\bar{1}) & \alpha \; \pi(*,\bar{1}, \dots) = \pi(*,\dots) \\
(0,1) & -\alpha_* \; \pi(*,0, \dots) = - \pi(0,\dots) \\
(0,\bar{1}) & \pi(0,\bar{1},\dots) = \pi(0,\dots) \\
\hline
\end{array}
\]
Lastly, we consider the equation for $T_{n-1}$, which we analyze using \eqref{rightansatz} and \eqref{bulkansatz}. This can be justified using the charge-conjugation symmetry mentioned earlier,
but it might be illustrative to write out all the details.
\[
\begin{array}{c|c}
(\tau_{n-1}, \tau_{n}) & T_{n-1}(\tau) \\
\hline
(1,*) & \beta \; \pi(\dots, 1,*) = \pi(\dots, *)\\
(1,0) & \pi(\dots, 1,0) = \pi(\dots, 0)\\
(0,*) & \beta_* \; \pi(\dots, 0,*) - \pi(\dots 1,0) = 0\\
(\bar{1},*) & -\beta \; \pi(\dots, 1,*) = -\pi(\dots, *)\\
(\bar{1},0) & -\beta_* \; \pi(\dots, 0,*) = - \pi(\dots, 0)\\
\hline
\end{array}
\]
In each case, we have shown that \eqref{Ti-equations} are satisfied, completing the proof of the matrix algebra.
To show that the algebra given by \eqref{bulkansatz}, \eqref{leftansatz} and
\eqref{rightansatz} is consistent, we give an explicit representation.
We first choose the operators $X_+$ and $X_-$ as
\begin{equation}
\label{repn x+-}
X_+ = \begin{pmatrix}
1 & 1 & 0 & \dots \\
0 & 1 & 1 & \ddots \\
0 & 0 & 1 & \ddots \\
\vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots
\end{pmatrix},
\quad
X_- = \begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0 & 0 & \dots \\
1 & 1 & 0 & \ddots \\
0 & 1 & 1 & \ddots \\
\vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots
\end{pmatrix}.
\end{equation}
To build the representation, we recall the vectors $\bra{\widetilde{W}_\alpha}$
and $\ket{\widetilde{V}_\beta}$
\begin{equation}
\bra{\widetilde{W}_\alpha} = \left(1, \frac{1-\alpha}{\alpha}, \left( \frac{1-\alpha}{\alpha} \right)^2,\dots\right),
\quad
\ket{\widetilde{V}_\beta} = \begin{pmatrix}
1 \\
\displaystyle \frac{1-\beta}{\beta} \\
\displaystyle \left(\frac{1-\beta}{\beta} \right)^2\\
\vdots
\end{pmatrix},
\end{equation}
which satisfy $\bra{\widetilde{W}_\alpha} X_- = 1/\alpha \bra{\widetilde{W}_\alpha} $
and $X_+ \ket{\widetilde{V}_\beta} = 1/\beta \ket{\widetilde{V}_\beta}$. Using these vectors,
we write
\begin{equation}
\label{repn x0*}
X_0 = \begin{pmatrix}
1 & 0 & 0 & \dots \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \ddots \\
0 & 0 & 0 & \ddots \\
\vdots & \ddots & \ddots & \ddots
\end{pmatrix} = \ket{\widetilde{V}_1} \bra{\widetilde{W}_1}
\quad
\text{and}
\quad
X_* = \frac{1}{\alpha_* + \beta_*} \ket{\widetilde{V}_\beta} \bra{\widetilde{W}_\alpha}.
\end{equation}
Since $X_+, X_-$ and $X_0$ are written in the form of one of the standard representations,
the bulk algebra \eqref{bulkansatz} is satisfied.
Notice that $X_0$ satisfies
\begin{equation}
\label{x0 identities}
X_0^2 = X_0 = [X_+, X_-] = \ket{\widetilde{V}_1} \bra{\widetilde{W}_1}
\end{equation}
in this representation.
Finally, we set the vectors
\begin{equation}
\label{repn wv}
\begin{split}
\bra{W} &= \left(\alpha_*, \beta_* \frac{\beta}{2(1-\beta)}, \beta_* \left( \frac{\beta}{2(1-\beta)} \right)^2, \dots \right), \\
\ket{V} &= \begin{pmatrix}
\beta_* \\
\displaystyle \alpha_* \frac{\alpha}{2(1-\alpha)} \\
\displaystyle \alpha_* \left(\frac{\alpha}{2(1-\alpha)} \right)^2\\
\vdots
\end{pmatrix},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
so that $\bra{W} X_* = \bra{\widetilde{W}_\alpha}$ and $X_* \ket{V} = \ket{\widetilde{V}_\beta}$.
One can use the above identities to verify that the
boundary relations \eqref{leftansatz} and \eqref{rightansatz}
are satisfied.
\begin{example}
Consider the $D^*$-TASEP{} with $n = 3$ and $n_0 = 1$. The configurations are
\[
\Omega_{3,1} = \{ (0, \bar{1}, *), (0, 1, *), (*, \bar{1}, 0), (*, 1, 0), (*, 0, *) \}.
\]
The column-stochastic generator of the $D^*$-TASEP{} in the ordered basis of $\Omega_{3,1}$ is then given by
\[
\left(
\begin{array}{ccccc}
-1 & \beta & 0 & 0 & 0 \\
0 & -\beta & 0 & \alpha_* & 0 \\
0 & 0 & -\alpha & \beta_* & 0 \\
1 & 0 & 0 & -\alpha_*-\beta_* & 1 \\
0 & 0 & \alpha & 0 & -1 \\
\end{array}
\right).
\]
The stationary distribution is the column eigenvector of the matrix above with eigenvalue zero, and is given in the same basis by
\begin{equation}
\label{eg:ss31}
\frac{1}{Z_{3,1}} \left( \frac{1}{ \beta_*} , \frac{1}{\beta \beta_*},
\frac{1}{\alpha \alpha_* }, \frac{1}{ \alpha_* }, \frac{1}{\alpha_* \beta_*} \right),
\end{equation}
where the nonequilibrium partition function is
\[
Z_{3,1} = \frac{1}{ \alpha_* } +
\frac{1}{\alpha \alpha_* } +
\frac{1}{\alpha_* \beta_*} +
\frac{1}{\beta \beta_*} +
\frac{1}{ \beta_*} .
\]
One can easily check that the stationary probabilities computed by the matrix ansatz are given by \eqref{eg:ss31}.
\end{example}
\section{The Partition function}
\label{sec:partfn}
In this section, we will derive an explicit formula for the partition function $Z_{n,n_0}$. To do so, we will need to recall some notation.
The $n$'th {\em Catalan number} is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{catalan-numbers}
\catalan{n} = \frac{1}{n+1} \binom {2n}n, \quad n \in \mathbb{N}.
\end{equation}
The Catalan numbers form an important sequence in enumerative combinatorics.
For example, the number of up-right paths
from $(0,0)$ to $(n,n)$ which stay on or below the diagonal $x=y$ are all counted by the
Catalan numbers.
See \cite[Sequence A000108]{oeis} for more details on the sequence.
Among the many refinements of the Catalan numbers, an important one is the sequence of
{\em ballot numbers}, $\ballot{n}{k}$ given by
\begin{equation}
\label{ballot-numbers}
\ballot{n}{k} = \frac{n-k+1}{n+1} \binom {n+k}k, \quad 0 \leq k \leq n.
\end{equation}
The ballot numbers $\ballot{n}{k}$ \cite[Sequence A009766]{oeis} count the number of up-right paths
from $(0,0)$ to $(n,n)$ which stay on or below the diagonal $x=y$ and which touch the diagonal exactly $n-k+1$ times (counting both endpoints).
We will now show that the partition function is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{pf-dstar}
\begin{split}
Z_{n,n_0} = \ballot{n+n_0-3}{n-n_0} + \sum_{k=0}^{n-n_0-1} \ballot{n+n_0-3}k & \left(
\frac{1}{\alpha^{n-n_0-1-k} \alpha_*} + \frac{1}{\beta_* \beta^{n-n_0-1-k}}
\right. \\
&+ \sum_{j=0}^{n-n_0-2-k}
\left. \frac{1}{\alpha_* \beta_* \alpha^{j} \beta^{n-n_0-2-k-j}} \right).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
As a step towards the proof of \eqref{pf-dstar}, we consider the set
of configurations for the semipermeable TASEP,
\[
\hat{\Omega}_{n,n_0} = \{ \tau \in \{\bar{1},0,1\}^n \; | \; n_0(\tau) = n_0 \},
\]
and let
\begin{equation}
\label{defF}
\hat{F}_{n,n_0} = \sum_{\tau \in \hat{\Omega}_{n,n_0}} X_{\tau_1} \dots
X_{\tau_n}.
\end{equation}
It has been shown by Arita (see \cite[Appendix A]{arita-2006}) that
\begin{equation}
\label{pf-typeC}
\hat{F}_{n,n_0} = \sum_{k=0}^{n-n_0} \ballot{n+n_0-1}{n-n_0-k} \sum_{j=0}^k X_-^j X_0^{n_0}
X_+^{k-j}.
\end{equation}
Let us consider the sum we want to compute,
\begin{equation}
\label{defF*}
F_{n,n_0} = \sum_{\tau \in \Omega_{n,n_0}} X_{\tau_1} \dots
X_{\tau_n}.
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{defF}, we see that
\begin{align}
\label{F*expand}
F_{n,n_0} = X_* \hat{F}_{n-2,n_0} X_* + X_* \hat{F}_{n-2,n_0-1} X_0 + X_0 \hat{F}_{n-2,n_0-1} X_* + X_0 \hat{F}_{n-2,n_0-2} X_0.
\end{align}
Substitute $\hat{F}_{n,n_0}$ from \eqref{pf-typeC} in the above expression. The first term in \eqref{F*expand} becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{pf-1st term}
\sum_{k=0}^{n-n_0-2} \ballot{n+n_0-3}{n-n_0-2-k} \sum_{j=0}^k
X_* X_-^j X_0^{n_0} X_+^{k-j} X_*.
\end{equation}
The second term in \eqref{F*expand} simplifies to
\begin{equation}
\label{pf-2nd term}
\begin{split}
\sum_{k=0}^{n-n_0-1} \ballot{n+n_0-4}{n-n_0-1-k} \sum_{j=0}^k
X_* X_-^j X_0^{n_0-1} X_+^{k-j} X_0
= & \sum_{k=0}^{n-n_0-1} \ballot{n+n_0-4}{n-n_0-1-k} \sum_{j=0}^k
X_* X_-^j X_0^{n_0} \\
= & \sum_{j=0}^{n-n_0-1} X_* X_-^j X_0^{n_0}
\sum_{k=j}^{n-n_0-1} \ballot{n+n_0-4}{n-n_0-1-k} \\
=& \sum_{j=0}^{n-n_0-1} \ballot{n+n_0-3}{n-n_0-1-j} X_* X_-^j X_0^{n_0},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we have used the standard identity,
\begin{equation}
\label{cattri-id1}
\sum_{a=0}^b \ballot ma = \ballot{m+1}b,
\end{equation}
in the last equality.
The third term in \eqref{F*expand} simplifies in a similar manner to
\begin{equation}
\label{pf-3rd term}
\sum_{j=0}^{n-n_0-1} \ballot{n+n_0-3}{n-n_0-1-j} X_0^{n_0} X_+^j X_*.
\end{equation}
Finally, the fourth term in \eqref{F*expand} yields
\begin{equation}
\label{pf-4th term}
\begin{split}
\sum_{k=0}^{n-n_0} \ballot{n+n_0-5}{n-n_0-k} \sum_{j=0}^k
X_0 X_-^j X_0^{n_0-2} X_+^{k-j} X_0
= \sum_{k=0}^{n-n_0} (k+1) \ballot{n+n_0-5}{n-n_0-k} X_0^{n_0}
= \ballot{n+n_0-3}{n-n_0} X_0^{n_0},
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where we have used the identity
\begin{equation}
\label{cattri-id2}
\sum_{k=0}^b (k+1) \ballot m{b-k} = \ballot{m+2}b,
\end{equation}
in the last equality.
To summarise, we have now shown
\begin{align*}
F_{n,n_0} = & \sum_{k=0}^{n-n_0-2} \ballot{n+n_0-3}{n-n_0-2-k} \sum_{j=0}^k X_* X_-^j X_0^{n_0} X_+^{k-j} X_* \\
& + \sum_{j=0}^{n-n_0-1} \ballot{n+n_0-3}{n-n_0-1-j} ( X_* X_-^j X_0^{n_0} + X_0^{n_0} X_+^j X_*) + \ballot{n+n_0-3}{n-n_0} X_0^{n_0}.
\end{align*}
Using the boundary algebra \eqref{leftansatz} and \eqref{rightansatz} and properties of the representation \eqref{repn x+-}, \eqref{repn x0*} and \eqref{repn wv} completes the proof of \eqref{pf-dstar}.
In the special case when $\alpha = \alpha_* = \beta = \beta_* = 1$, it can be shown that the partition function in \eqref{pf-dstar} reduces to
$Z_{n,n_0} = \ballot{n+n_0-1}{n-n_0}$ when $n_0 > 0$, and $Z_{n,0} = \catalan{n-1}$.
\section{Current and Density}
\label{sec:curr-dens}
As the number of $0$'s is conserved, their current is zero. The current of $1$'s to the right is the same as that of $\bar{1}$'s to the left. Since all species of particles are conserved in the bulk, the current is independent of the site. We denote the current of $1$'s by $J$.
By the matrix ansatz description of stationary probabilities in \eqref{statprob}, the rate at which a $1$ hops across the $(i,i+1)$'th bond is given by
\begin{equation}
\begin{split}
\label{current-matrixansatz}
J =& \frac{1}{Z_{n,n_0}} \left( \sum'_{\tau \in \Omega_{n,n_0}} \bra W X_{\tau_1} \dots X_{\tau_{i-1}} X_+ X_0 X_{\tau_{i+2}} \dots X_{\tau_n} \ket V \right. \\
&+ \left. \sum''_{\tau \in \Omega_{n,n_0}} \bra W X_{\tau_1} \dots X_{\tau_{i-1}} X_+ X_- X_{\tau_{i+2}} \dots X_{\tau_n} \ket V \right),
\end{split}
\end{equation}
where the sums $\sum'$ (resp. $\sum''$) runs over all configurations $\tau$ with $\tau_i = 1$, $\tau_{i+1} = 0$ (resp. $\tau_{i+1} = \bar{1}$), and $n_0$ (resp. $n_0-1$) $0$'s among sites in $\{1,\dots,i-1,i+2,\dots,n\}$. Using the matrix algebra in \eqref{bulkansatz}, we simplify \eqref{current-matrixansatz} to
\[
\begin{split}
J =& \frac{1}{Z_{n,n_0}} \left( \sum'_{\tau \in \Omega_{n,n_0}} \bra W X_{\tau_1} \dots X_{\tau_{i-1}} X_0 X_{\tau_{i+2}} \dots X_{\tau_n} \ket V \right. \\
&+ \left. \sum''_{\tau \in \Omega_{n,n_0}} \bra W X_{\tau_1} \dots X_{\tau_{i-1}} (X_+ + X_-) X_{\tau_{i+2}} \dots X_{\tau_n} \ket V \right),
\end{split}
\]
and it is easy to see that this simplifies to
\begin{equation}
\label{current-formula}
J = \frac{Z_{n-1,n_0}}{Z_{n,n_0}}.
\end{equation}
We now give a formula for the density. It will suffice to give a formula for the density of $1$'s for the following reason: By the charge-conjugation symmetry mentioned in Section~\ref{sec:intro}, we will obtain a formula for the density of $\bar{1}$'s and since the total density at any site is $1$, we will obtain the density of $0$'s.
Let $\rho^+_i$ denote the density of $1$'s at the $i$'th site in the steady state, i.e., the probability that there is a $1$ at site $i$ in the stationary distribution. Similarly, let $\rho^-_i$ and $\rho^0_i$ denote the densities of $\bar 1$'s and $0$'s at site $i$ respectively.
Let $G_\mathsf{y} = X_+ + \mathsf{y} X_0 + X_-$, where $\mathsf{y}$ is a formal parameter.
By the matrix ansatz \eqref{statprob},
\begin{equation}
\label{dens-matrix ansatz}
\rho^+_i = \frac{1}{Z_{n,n_0}} [\mathsf{y}^{n_0}]
\bra W (X_* + \mathsf{y} X_0) G_\mathsf{y}^{i-2} X_+ G_\mathsf{y}^{n-i-1} (X_* + \mathsf{y} X_0)
\ket V,
\end{equation}
where the expression $[x^a] P(x)$ denotes the coefficient of $x^a$ in $P(x)$.
We first give a formula for $\rho^+_i$ when $2 \leq i \leq n-3$.
Arita has shown \cite[Eq. (33)]{arita-2006} that, for $j \geq 1$,
\[
X_+ G_\mathsf{y}^j = \sum_{k=0}^{j-1} \catalan{k} G_\mathsf{y}^{j-k}
+ \sum_{k=1}^j \ballot{j-1}{j-k} X_+^{k+1},
\]
where we recall the Catalan numbers and ballot numbers defined in \eqref{catalan-numbers} and \eqref{ballot-numbers} respectively. Using the above equation, \eqref{dens-matrix ansatz} splits into two terms. The first one
is similar to the first sum in the density formula for the semipermeable TASEP~\cite[Eq. (38)]{arita-2006}
and becomes
\[
\frac{1}{Z_{n,n_0}} [\mathsf{y}^{n_0}] \sum_{k=0}^{n-i-2} \catalan{k}
\bra W (X_* + \mathsf{y} X_0) G_\mathsf{y}^{n-k-3} (X_* + \mathsf{y} X_0)
\ket V,
\]
which immediately simplifies using \eqref{pf-dstar-matrix ansatz} to
\[
\sum_{k=0}^{n-i-2} \catalan{k} \frac{Z_{n-k-1,n_0}}{Z_{n,n_0}}.
\]
The second term in \eqref{dens-matrix ansatz} has to be treated more carefully. Using \eqref{rightansatz} for $X_+$, it becomes
\begin{equation}
\label{dens-second}
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{Z_{n,n_0}} [\mathsf{y}^{n_0}] \sum_{k=1}^{n-i-1} & \ballot{n-i-2}{n-i-1-k} \Bigg( \frac{1}{\beta^{k+1}}
\bra W (X_* + \mathsf{y} X_0) G_\mathsf{y}^{i-2} X_* \ket V \\
&+ \mathsf{y} \bra W (X_* + \mathsf{y} X_0) G_\mathsf{y}^{i-2} X_0 \ket V \Bigg).
\end{split}
\end{equation}
To evaluate this, it will be convenient to define
\begin{align*}
F^*_{n,n_0} &= X_* \hat{F}_{n-2,n_0} X_* + X_0 \hat{F}_{n-2,n_0-1} X_* , &\quad
Z^*_{n,n_0} = \bra W F^*_{n,n_0} \ket V, \\
F^0_{n,n_0} &= X_* \hat{F}_{n-2,n_0-1} X_0 + X_0 \hat{F}_{n-2,n_0-2} X_0, & \quad
Z^0_{n,n_0} = \bra W F^0_{n,n_0} \ket V,
\end{align*}
where the superscripts denote the particle on the last site.
It is then clear that $F_{n,n_0} = F^*_{n,n_0} + F^0_{n,n_0}$.
We then obtain $F^*_{n,n_0}$ by adding \eqref{pf-1st term} and \eqref{pf-3rd term}, and $F^0_{n,n_0}$ by adding \eqref{pf-2nd term} and \eqref{pf-4th term}.
Using these expressions, \eqref{dens-second} becomes
\begin{align*}
\frac{1}{Z_{n,n_0}} \sum_{k=1}^{n-i-1} \ballot{n-i-2}{n-i-1-k}
& \bra W \Bigg( \frac{1}{\beta^{k+1}} F^*_{i,n_0} + F^0_{i,n_0}
\Bigg) \ket V .
\end{align*}
Now, from the definitions,
\begin{equation}
\label{pf-sum-1}
Z^*_{n,n_0} = \sum_{k=0}^{n-n_0-1} \left( \ballot{n+n_0-3}{n-n_0-2-k} \sum_{j=0}^{n-n_0-2-k} \frac{1}{\alpha_* \beta_* \alpha^{j} \beta^{k-j}}
+ \ballot{n+n_0-3}{n-n_0-1-k} \frac{1}{\beta_* \beta^{k}} \right),
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\label{pf-sum-2}
Z^0_{n,n_0} = \sum_{k=0}^{n-n_0-1} \ballot{n+n_0-3}{n-n_0-1-k}
\frac{1}{\alpha_* \alpha^{k}} + \ballot{n+n_0-3}{n-n_0},
\end{equation}
using which \eqref{dens-second} can be evaluated immediately.
To summarise, we have shown that the density at site $i$, for $2 \leq i \leq n-2$, is given by
\begin{equation}
\label{dens-formula-generic}
\begin{split}
\rho^+_i = \sum_{k=0}^{n-i-2} \catalan{k} \frac{Z_{n-k-1,n_0}}{Z_{n,n_0}}
+ \frac{Z^*_{i,n_0}}{Z_{n,n_0}} \sum_{k=1}^{n-i-1} \ballot{n-i-2}{n-i-1-k}
\frac{1}{\beta^{k+1}} + \catalan{n-i-1} \frac{Z^0_{i,n_0}}{Z_{n,n_0}}.
\end{split}
\end{equation}
Notice that when $i < n_0$, the first sum in \eqref{dens-formula-generic} becomes independent of $i$ and the last two sums drop out. Therefore, the densities at all sites between $2$ and $n_0-1$ are identical. A similar result holds for the semipermeable TASEP~\cite{als-2009}. See Section~\ref{sec:discuss} for a discussion of this phenomenon.
There's a slightly different formula for the density at the penultimate site. Plugging in $i=n-1$ in \eqref{dens-matrix ansatz}, we obtain
\begin{align*}
\rho^+_{n-1} =& \frac{1}{Z_{n,n_0}} [\mathsf{y}^{n_0}]
\bra W (X_* + \mathsf{y} X_0) G_\mathsf{y}^{n-3} X_+ (X_* + \mathsf{y} X_0)
\ket V \\
=& \frac{1}{Z_{n,n_0}} [\mathsf{y}^{n_0}]
\bra W (X_* + \mathsf{y} X_0) G_\mathsf{y}^{n-3} (\frac{1}{\beta} X_* + \mathsf{y} X_0)
\ket V,
\end{align*}
and simplifying using \eqref{pf-sum-1} and \eqref{pf-sum-2}, we find
\begin{equation}
\label{dens-formula-last}
\rho^+_{n-1} = \frac{1}{Z_{n,n_0}} \left(
\frac{1}{\beta} Z^*_{n-1,n_0} + Z^0_{n-1,n_0} \right).
\end{equation}
\section{Phase diagram}
\label{sec:phase}
The steady state phase diagram of the $D^*$-TASEP{} in the thermodynamic limit depends on three parameters, $\alpha, \beta$ and the density of $0$'s. We take $n, n_0 \to \infty$ so that there is a limiting density of $0$'s, i.e. $n_0/n \to \zeta$, where $0 \leq \zeta \leq 1$.
Therefore, our phase diagram is three-dimensional and will depend on three parameters, $\alpha, \beta$ and $\zeta$, each of which lies between $0$ and $1$. It will be convenient for us to consider the $(\alpha, \beta)$-plane at a fixed value of $\zeta$.
Note that unlike the rest of the paper, some computations in this section are mathematically non-rigorous.
We will now determine the phase diagram using the current as the order parameter.
Recall that the current is given by \eqref{current-formula} in the steady state. Therefore, we need leading order asymptotics for the partition function $Z_{n,\zeta n}$. These have been computed in Appendix~\ref{sec:asymp} following a similar strategy as in \cite{arita-2006}.
Using the results in \eqref{pf-asymp-1}--\eqref{pf-asymp-5}, we find that
\[
J = \frac{1- \zeta^2}{4} \quad \text{when } \alpha, \beta \geq
\frac{1-\zeta}{2}.
\]
We will call this region of the phase diagram {\em Phase I}.
Similarly, \eqref{pf-asymp-6} shows that
\[
J = \alpha(1-\alpha) \quad \text{when } \alpha < \beta, \alpha < (1-\zeta)/2.
\]
This region is denoted {\em Phase II}.
Lastly, \eqref{pf-asymp-7}--\eqref{pf-asymp-8} show that
\[
J = \beta(1-\beta) \quad \text{when } \beta \leq \alpha, \beta < (1-\zeta)/2.
\]
This region is denoted {\em Phase III}.
The phase diagram is identical to that of the semipermeable TASEP~\cite{arita-2006,als-2009} and is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:phase-diag}.
All transitions are of second order, since the current is continuous, but not differentiable across all phase boundaries.
\begin{figure}[htbp!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.5]
\draw[black,thick] (0,0)--(3,3);
\draw[black,thick] (0,0) rectangle (10,10);
\draw[black,thick] (3,10)--(3,3);
\draw[black,thick] (10,3)--(3,3);
\node at (6.5,6.5) {I};
\node at (1.5,6.5) {II};
\node at (6.5,1.5) {III};
\node at (-0.65,0) {$0$};
\node at (-0.65,10) {$1$};
\draw (0,3) -- (0.2,3);
\node at (-0.75,3) {$\frac{1-\zeta}{2}$};
\node at (-1,5) {$\beta$};
\node at (0,-0.65) {$0$};
\node at (10,-0.65) {$1$};
\draw (3,0) -- (3,0.2);
\node at (3,-0.75) {$\frac{1-\zeta}{2}$};
\node at (5,-1) {$\alpha$};
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{The phase diagram for the $D^*$-TASEP{}.}
\label{fig:phase-diag}
\end{figure}
We now compute the density of $1$'s far from the boundaries in the large volume limit. We fix a position $i = xn$ for $x \in (0,1)$ and $n_0 = \zeta n$, and take the limit as $n \to \infty$ in \eqref{dens-formula-generic}.
For the first sum, write $Z_{n,\zeta n} = C \lambda^n \, \mu^{\zeta n} \, n^z$, where $C, \lambda, \mu, z$ depend on the phases as shown in \eqref{pf-asymp-1}--\eqref{pf-asymp-8}. Then we get
\[
\sum_{k=0}^{n(1-x)-2} C_k \frac1{\lambda^{k+1}}
\approx \frac{1 - \sqrt{1-4 /\lambda}}{2}
= \begin{cases}
\displaystyle \frac{1-\zeta}{2} & \text{Phase I}, \\[0.2cm]
\alpha & \text{Phase II}, \\
\beta & \text{Phase III}. \\
\end{cases}
\]
This is a place where the computation is mathematically non-rigorous and we leave it as a challenge for the interested reader to make it rigorous.
We now consider the second term in \eqref{dens-formula-generic}.
Note that it is nonzero only when $x \geq \zeta$. Again, write $Z^*_{n,\zeta n} = C_1 \lambda_1^n \, \mu_1^{\zeta n} \, n^{z_1}$ where $C_1, \lambda_1, \mu_1, z$ depend on the phases as shown in \eqref{pf1-asymp-1}--\eqref{pf1-asymp-8}.
Moreover, we have
\[
\sum_{k=1}^{n-i-1} \ballot{n-i-2}{n-i-1-k} \frac{1}{\beta^{k+1}}
= R_{n(1-x)-1,0}(\beta).
\]
The asymptotics of $R_{n,0}(\beta)$ have been computed in \cite[Eqs. (48)--(50)]{dehp} to be
\begin{equation}
\label{Rn0-asymp}
R_{n,0}(\beta) \approx
\begin{cases}
\displaystyle \frac{1}{(2\beta-1)^2 \sqrt{\pi}} \frac{4^n}{n^{3/2}}
& \beta > \frac{1}{2}, \\[0.4cm]
\displaystyle \frac{2}{\sqrt{\pi}} \frac{4^n}{n^{1/2}}
& \beta = \frac{1}{2}, \\[0.4cm]
\displaystyle (1-2\beta) \left( \beta(1-\beta) \right)^{-n-1}
& \beta < \frac{1}{2}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Therefore, the asymptotics of the second term are given by
\[
\frac{C_1}{C} \frac{\lambda_1^{x n}}{\lambda^n} \frac{(x n)^z}{n^z}
\frac{\mu_1^{\zeta n}}{\mu^{\zeta n}} R_{n-i-1,0}(\beta)
= \frac{C_1}{C} \frac{\lambda_1^{x n}}{\lambda^n} x^z R_{n(1-x)-1,0}(\beta).
\]
The only regions in which this term does not go to zero is when the exponential terms in $R$ match those of the prefactor. This can only happen if both $Z_{n,\zeta n}$ and $Z^*_{n,\zeta n}$ lie in either phase III or the II-III boundary. Therefore, we must have $\beta \leq \alpha$ and $\beta \leq \frac{1-\zeta/x}{2}$.
First, suppose $\beta < \alpha$.
In case $\beta < \frac{1-\zeta/x}{2}$, using \eqref{pf-asymp-7} and \eqref{pf1-asymp-7}, we find that $C_1 = C$, $z=z_1 = 0$, $\lambda_1 = \lambda = 1/(\beta(1-\beta))$
and $\mu_1 = \mu = \beta/(1-\beta)$. Further, using \eqref{Rn0-asymp}, we find that the second term becomes $1-2\beta$.
On the other hand, if $\beta = \frac{1-\zeta/x}{2}$, $C_1 = C/2$ and the rest is as before, so that the second term is $(1-2\beta)/2$.
Now, if $\beta = \alpha$, we must have $\beta < \frac{1-\zeta/x}{2}$ for a nontrivial contribution. In that case, using \eqref{pf-asymp-8} and \eqref{pf1-asymp-8}, we find that $z=z_1 = 1$, $\lambda_1 = \lambda = 1/(\beta(1-\beta))$, $\mu_1 = \mu = \beta/(1-\beta)$ and
\[
\frac{C_1}{C} = \frac{1 - \zeta/x - 2 \beta}{1 - \zeta - 2\beta}.
\]
Taking into account the asymptotics from \eqref{Rn0-asymp}, we find that the second term becomes
\[
(1-2\beta) \frac{x(1 - \zeta/x - 2 \beta)}{1 - \zeta - 2\beta}
= \frac{(1-2\beta)^2}{1 - \zeta - 2\beta}
\left(x - \frac{\zeta}{1-2\beta} \right).
\]
Lastly, we consider the third term in \eqref{dens-formula-generic}.
Write $Z^0_{n,\zeta n} = C_2 \lambda_2^n \mu_2^{\zeta n} n^{z_2}$ where $C_2, \lambda_2, \mu_2, \allowbreak z$ depend on the phases as shown in \eqref{pf2-asymp-1}--\eqref{pf2-asymp-3}. Similar to the second term, we need to consider the ratio of $Z^0_{x n,\zeta n}$ and $Z^*_{n,\zeta n}$ in various phases. It is clearly nonzero only if $x \geq \zeta$. The prefactor of the Catalan number has asymptotics given by
\[
\catalan{n-i-1} \approx \frac{4^{n(1-x)-1}}{\sqrt{\pi}\, (n(1-x))^{3/2}}.
\]
A little thought shows that in all regions of the phase diagram the third term goes to zero exponentially in $n$, and thus does not contribute to the density in the thermodynamic limit. Therefore, the density is given by the contribution of the first and second terms in \eqref{dens-formula-generic}.
We now summarise the asymptotics of the density formulas using the charge conjugation symmetry explained in Section~\ref{sec:intro}. Let $x_1 = \frac{\zeta}{1-2\alpha}$ and $x_2 = \frac{\zeta}{1-2\beta}$. Let $\rho^+(x), \rho^0(x), \allowbreak \rho^-(x)$ denote the densities of $1$'s, $0$'s and $\bar{1}$'s respectively at position $\lfloor x n \rfloor$ for $x \in [0,1]$ as $n \to \infty$.
The densities in various regions are given in Table~\ref{tab:dens-asymp}.
\begin{table}[htb!]
\begin{tabular}{|l|c|c|c|}
\hline
&&&\\[-0.3cm]
Phase & $\rho^+(x)$ & $\rho^0(x)$ & $\rho^-(x)$ \\
\hline
&&&\\[-0.1cm]
I & $\displaystyle \frac{1-\zeta}{2}$ & $\zeta$ & $\displaystyle \frac{1-\zeta}{2}$ \\[0.3cm]
\hline
&&&\\[-0.1cm]
\multirow{3}{*}{II} & \multirow{3}{*}{$\alpha$}
& $0$ for $x < 1-x_1$, & $1-\alpha$ for $x < 1-x_1$, \\[0.3cm]
&& $\displaystyle \frac{1}2$ for $x = 1-x_1$,
& $\displaystyle \frac{1-2\alpha}2$ for $x = 1-x_1$, \\[0.3cm]
&& $1-2\alpha$ for $x > 1-x_1$. & $\alpha$ for $x > 1-x_1$. \\
\hline
&&&\\[-0.1cm]
\multirow{3}{*}{III} & $\beta$ for $x < x_2$, &
$1-2\beta$ for $x < x_2$, &\multirow{3}{*}{$\beta$} \\[0.3cm]
& $\displaystyle\frac{1}2$ for $x = x_2$,
& $\displaystyle\frac{1-2\beta}2$ for $x = x_2$, & \\[0.3cm]
& $1-\beta$ for $x > x_2$.
& $0$ for $x > x_2$. & \\
\hline
&&&\\[-0.1cm]
II-III & $\alpha$ for $x \leq x_1$,
& linear for $x < x_1, x> 1-x_1$, & linear for $x < 1-x_1$,\\[0.3cm]
boundary & linear for $x > x_1$. & $1-2\alpha$ for $x_1 \leq x \leq 1-x_1$.
& $\alpha$ for $x \geq 1-x_1$. \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\caption{Densities of all three species in the bulk in different phases in the thermodynamic limit.
The precise formulas for the linear profiles on the II-III boundary are the same as in~\cite{arita-2006} and can be seen from the discussion in Section~\ref{sec:phase}.}
\label{tab:dens-asymp}
\end{table}
\section{Discussion}
\label{sec:discuss}
The motivation for this work comes from Lam's study on random walks for affine Weyl groups~\cite{lam-2015}. The random walk for the affine Weyl group of type A is directly related to the multispecies TASEP on the ring. The matrix ansatz for the latter was determined in \cite{evans-ferrari-mallick-2009} and the steady state was determined exactly using multiline queues in \cite{FM07}. In both these studies, the understanding of the two-species case (\cite{djls} for the matrix ansatz and \cite{angel-2006} for the queueing picture) was essential in building the general theory. In this work, we have considered the two-species TASEP whose study is crucial for the understanding of the random walk on the affine Weyl group of type D. In future work~\cite{AALP-2019},
we plan to study the multispecies version of this TASEP.
We also remark that we have chosen the rates so that we can study the random walks for types B and C as special cases.
The physics of the $D^*$-TASEP{} is very similar to that of the semipermeable TASEP discussed in \cite{als-2009}. In particular, the asymptotics strongly suggests that the phase diagram can be explained in terms of the {\em fat shock} defined in \cite{als-2009}. Recall that the fat shock is a bound state of all the $0$'s in the system. This fat shock gets pinned to the right boundary in Phase II, to the left boundary in Phase III, and pervades the system in Phase I. On the II-III boundary, the two fronts of the fat shock perform a correlated unbiased random walk, leading to piecewise linear density profiles for all species.
We also expect other phenomena for the semipermeable TASEP to continue to hold. For example, in the finite semipermeable TASEP, the joint correlation of $1$'s at sites $i_1 <\cdots < i_k <n_0$ only depended on $k$ and not the positions themselves. We have only proven a similar result for the $D^*$-TASEP{} for $k=1$ here, but exact computations for small sizes suggests that a similar result should be true for all $k < n_0-1$ here. If so, then the property of exchangeability of the limiting measure as seen from the left boundary should also continue to hold.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
AA was partially supported by the UGC Centre for Advanced Studies and by Department of Science and Technology grants DST/INT/SWD/VR/P-01/2014 and EMR/2016/ 006624.
SL and SP were supported by the Swedish Research Council grant 621-2014-4780.
\newcommand{\etalchar}[1]{$^{#1}$}
\providecommand{\bysame}{\leavevmode\hbox to3em{\hrulefill}\thinspace}
\providecommand{\MR}{\relax\ifhmode\unskip\space\fi MR }
\providecommand{\MRhref}[2]{%
\href{http://www.ams.org/mathscinet-getitem?mr=#1}{#2}
}
\providecommand{\href}[2]{#2}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{Introduction}
The standard cosmological paradigm relies on the assumption that General Relativity applies accurately to all astronomical systems. On Solar System and galaxy scales, it can be well approximated by Newtonian gravity due to the non-relativistic speeds \citep{Rowland_2015, Almeida_2016}. Newtonian gravity was originally designed to explain motions inside the Solar System. However, it appears to break down when extrapolated to galaxies, where the gravitational field can often be estimated from rotation curves \citep[e.g.][]{Babcock_1939, Rubin_Ford_1970, Rogstad_1972}. These acceleration discrepancies are thought to be caused by halos of cold dark matter (CDM) surrounding each galaxy \citep{Ostriker_Peebles_1973}.
Unfortunately, the nature of this CDM remains elusive. Gravitational microlensing experiments indicate that the Galactic CDM can't be made of compact objects like stellar remnants \citep{MACHO_2000, EROS_2007}. The microlensing timescale would become longer than the survey duration if the CDM was made of heavier objects like primordial black holes \citep[e.g.][]{Carr_2016, Clesse_2018}. However, this idea runs into difficulties when confronted with data on gravitational lensing of quasars \citep{Mediavilla_2017} and supernovae \citep{Zumalacarregui_2018}.
Thus, CDM is generally considered to be an undiscovered weakly interacting particle beyond the well-tested standard model of particle physics \citep[][and references therein]{Peebles_2017_DM_review}. Despite extensive searches for such particles, none have so far been detected, ruling out a large part of the available parameter space \citep{Liu_2017}. Searches for the effects of dynamical friction on the extensive CDM halos have also turned up empty-handed \citep{Angus_2011, Kroupa_2015, Oehm_2017, Oehm_2018}. Major tensions between observations and theory also indicate that a revision of CDM-based models may be needed \citep{Kroupa_2012}, in particular due to the anisotropic distribution of Local Group satellite galaxies \citep{Pawlowski_2018}.
Given these results, it is prudent to question the underlying assumption of Newtonian gravity \citep{Zwicky_1937} and its general relativistic extension. This has proved very successful in a wide variety of tests, most famously when it correctly predicted how much light would be deflected by the Solar gravitational field \citep{Eddington_1919}. More recently, it has passed tests based on the gravitational redshift of objects near the Galactic Centre black hole \citep{Gravity_2018, Gravity_2019}
However, these successes do not prove that the theory can be extrapolated to the much larger scale of galaxies, where accelerations are typically much less than in the Solar System. In fact, a failure of this extrapolation can naturally explain the remarkably tight correlation between the internal accelerations within galaxies and the predictions of Newtonian gravity applied to their luminous matter distributions \citep[e.g.][and references therein]{Famaey_McGaugh_2012}. This `radial acceleration relation' (RAR) has recently been tightened significantly with near-infrared photometry from the Spitzer Space Telescope \citep{SPARC}, considering only the most reliable rotation curves (see their section 3.2.2) and exploiting reduced variability in stellar mass-to-light ratios at near-infrared wavelengths \citep{Bell_de_Jong_2001, Norris_2016}. These improvements show that the RAR holds with very little scatter over ${\approx 5}$ orders of magnitude in luminosity and a similar range in surface brightness \citep{McGaugh_Lelli_2016}. Fits to individual rotation curves show that the intrinsic scatter in the RAR must be ${<13\%}$ and is consistent with 0 \citep{Li_2018}. Although \citet{Rodrigues_2018} claimed that some rotation curves do not satisfy the RAR, it was later shown that these cases mostly arise when the distance is particularly uncertain \citep{Kroupa_2018}. For galaxies where this is known well, discrepancies with the RAR are rather mild and may be caused by small yet unmodelled effects like disk warping and gradients in the stellar mass-to-light ratio.
These recent observations were predicted several decades earlier by the theory called Modified Newtonian Dynamics \citep[MOND,][]{Milgrom_1983}. In MOND, the dynamical effects usually attributed to CDM are instead provided by an acceleration-dependent modification to gravity, similar to the behaviour which arises in the mimetic model \citep{Vagnozzi_2017}. The basic idea is that the gravitational acceleration $g$ at distance $r$ from an isolated point mass $M$ transitions from the Newtonian $\frac{GM}{r^2}$ law at short range to
\begin{eqnarray}
g ~=~ \frac{\sqrt{GMa_{_0}}}{r} ~~~\text{for } ~ r \gg \overbrace{\sqrt{\frac{GM}{a_{_0}}}}^{r_{_M}} \, .
\label{Deep_MOND_limit}
\end{eqnarray}
MOND (or Milgromian dynamics) introduces $a_{_0}$ as a fundamental acceleration scale of nature below which the deviation from Newtonian dynamics becomes significant and the equations of motion become spacetime scale invariant \citep{Milgrom_2009_DML}. Empirically, $a_{_0} \approx 1.2 \times {10}^{-10}$ m/s$^2$ to match galaxy rotation curves \citep{McGaugh_2011}. Remarkably, this is within an order of magnitude of the acceleration at which the classical energy density in a gravitational field \citep[][equation 9]{Peters_1981} becomes comparable to the dark energy density $u_{_\Lambda} \equiv \rho_{_\Lambda} c^2$ that conventionally explains the accelerating expansion of the Universe \citep{Ostriker_Steinhardt_1995, Riess_1998, Perlmutter_1999}.
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{g^2}{8\mathrm{\pi}G} ~<~ u_{_\Lambda} ~~\Leftrightarrow~~ g ~\la~ 2\mathrm{\pi}a_{_0} \, .
\label{MOND_quantum_link}
\end{eqnarray}
MOND could thus be a result of poorly understood quantum gravity effects \citep[e.g.][]{Milgrom_1999, Pazy_2013, Verlinde_2016, Smolin_2017}. Regardless of its underlying microphysical explanation, it can accurately match the rotation curves of a wide variety of both spiral and elliptical galaxies across a vast range in mass, surface brightness and gas fraction \citep[][and references therein]{Lelli_2017}. MOND does all this based solely on the distribution of luminous matter. Given that most of these rotation curves were obtained in the decades after the MOND field equation was first published \citep{Bekenstein_Milgrom_1984}, these achievements are successful a priori predictions. These predictions work due to regularities in rotation curves that are difficult to reconcile with collisionless halos of CDM whose nature is very different to baryons \citep{Salucci_2017, Desmond_2016, Desmond_2017}.
Because MOND is an acceleration-dependent theory, its effects could become apparent in a rather small system if this has a sufficiently low mass. In fact, the MOND radius $r_{_M}$ is only 7000 astronomical units (7 kAU) for a system with $M = M_\odot$ (Equation \ref{Deep_MOND_limit}). This suggests that the orbits of distant Solar System objects might be affected by MOND \citep{Pauco_2016}, possibly accounting for certain correlations in their properties \citep{Pauco_2017}. However, it is difficult to accurately constrain the dynamics of objects at such large distances.
Such constraints could be obtained more easily around other stars if they have distant binary companions. As first suggested by \citet{Hernandez_2012}, the orbital motions of these wide binaries (WBs) should be faster in MOND than in Newtonian gravity. Moreover, it is likely that many such systems would form \citep{Kouwenhoven_2010, Tokovinin_2017}, paving the way for the wide binary test (WBT) of gravity that I discuss in this contribution.
WBs are likely to comprise at least a few percent of stellar systems given that the nearest star to the Sun is in a WB. Proxima Centauri orbits the close (18 AU) binary $\alpha$ Centauri A and B at a distance of 13 kAU \citep{Kervella_2017}. The Proxima Centauri orbit would thus be significantly affected by MOND \citep{Beech_2009, Beech_2011}, a prediction that might be directly testable with next-generation astrometry \citep{Banik_2019_Proxima}. Given the billions of stars in our Galaxy, it almost certainly contains a vast number of systems well suited to the WBT. This is especially true given the high (74\%) likelihood that our nearest WB was stable over the last 5 Gyr despite the effects of Galactic tides and stellar encounters \citep{Feng_2018}. This system was probably also stable in MOND \citep[][section 9]{Banik_2018_Centauri}.
Proxima Centauri is far from the only WB within reach of existing observations. Data from the Gaia mission \citep{Perryman_2001} strongly suggests the presence of several thousand WBs within $\approx 150$ pc \citep{Andrews_2017}. The candidate systems they identified are mostly genuine, with a contamination rate of ${\approx 6\%}$ \citep{Andrews_2018} estimated using the second data release of the Gaia mission \citep[Gaia DR2,][]{GAIA_2018}.
The WBT was considered in more detail by \citet{Pittordis_2018}, who set up simulations of WBs in Newtonian gravity and several theories of modified gravity, including MOND. These calculations were revisited by \citet{Banik_2018_Centauri} using self-consistent MOND simulations that include the external field from the rest of the Galaxy (Section \ref{No_EFE}) and use an interpolating function consistent with the RAR. Their main result was that MOND enhances the orbital velocities of Solar neighbourhood WBs by ${\approx 20\%}$ above Newtonian expectations, consistent with their analytic estimate (see their section 2.2). Using statistical methods they developed, they showed that $\approx 500$ WB systems would be required to detect this effect if measurement errors are neglected but only the more accurately known sky-projected quantities are used. They also considered various systematic errors which could hamper the WBT, in particular the presence of a low mass undetected companion to one of the stars in a WB (see their section 8.2).
The WBT was first attempted by \citet{Hernandez_2012} using the WB catalogue of \citet{Shaya_2011}, who analyzed Hipparcos data with Bayesian methods to identify WBs within 100 pc \citep{Leeuwen_2007}. Typical relative velocities $\bm{v}_{rel}$ between WB stars seemed to remain constant with increasing separation instead of following the expected Keplerian decline \citep[][figure 1]{Hernandez_2012}. However, it was later shown that their typical velocity uncertainty of 800 m/s was too large to draw strong conclusions about the underlying law of gravity \citep[][section 1]{Scarpa_2017}. This is because the typical velocity scale of the WBT is $\sqrt[4]{GM_\odot a_{_0}} = 360$ m/s (Equation \ref{Deep_MOND_limit} at $r = r_{_M}$).
Recently, \citet{HERNANDEZ_2018} revisited their earlier WB sample using Gaia DR2, focusing on only sky-projected relative velocities due to the time required to obtain follow-up spectroscopic redshift measurements and difficulties in correcting these for stellar convective blueshifts \citep[][section 2.2]{Kervella_2017}. Unfortunately, the \citet{HERNANDEZ_2018} analysis suffers from a deficiency related to incorrect visualisation of how spherical co-ordinate systems work \citep{Badry_2019}. These perspective effects were discussed in more detail by \citet[][section 3.2]{Shaya_2011} and \citet[][section 2.4]{Pittordis_2018}.
Such effects can broadly be understood by considering a WB composed of stars $A$ and $B$ in sky directions $\widehat{\bm{n}}_A$ and $\widehat{\bm{n}}_B$, respectively. If we are interested in their sky-projected relative velocity $\bm{v}_{sky}$ and define this as that part of $\bm{v}_{rel}$ within the plane orthogonal to $\widehat{\bm{n}}_A$, then only the proper motion of star $A$ is required. However, for star $B$, we also need to know its radial velocity because $\widehat{\bm{n}}_B \neq \widehat{\bm{n}}_A$, causing $\widehat{\bm{n}}_B$ to partly lie within the plane orthogonal to $\widehat{\bm{n}}_A$. In general, knowledge of both stars' radial velocities is required under other definitions of the sky plane e.g. Equation \ref{n_hat_sys}. However, the analysis of \citet{HERNANDEZ_2018} did not consider radial velocity information, implicitly assuming that $\widehat{\bm{n}}_B = \widehat{\bm{n}}_A$ \citep{Badry_2019}.\footnote{While this article was under review, \citet{HERNANDEZ_2018} corrected this deficiency in a subsequent reanalysis. Their overall conclusions remain very similar.}
As well as correcting this deficiency, I consider how to reduce the uncertainty in $\bm{v}_{rel}$. Part of this is due to uncertainty in the relative heliocentric distances to the stars in a WB, which can be difficult to constrain (Section \ref{Discussion_tangential_velocity}). To quantify the effect this has, suppose that the typical heliocentric tangential velocity of the system is 30 km/s \citep{GAIA_2018}. With a 1\% distance uncertainty, even a perfectly measured proper motion implies a velocity uncertainty of ${\approx 300}$ m/s. This is nearly the same as WB relative velocities of $\sim 300$ m/s \citep[][figure 7]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. Thus, if $\bm{v}_{rel}$ is parallel to the WB systemic proper motion, even rather small distance uncertainties would make it very challenging to accurately infer $\bm{v}_{rel}$. This is a serious limitation on the WBT because distances are expected to be less accurately known than proper motions (Section \ref{Discussion_tangential_velocity}). For example, Gaia DR2 parallaxes have a zero-point offset which probably varies with magnitude and colour \citep{GAIA_2018, Riess_2018}. This might seriously complicate the WBT or weaken its statistical significance by restricting it to only those WBs that consist of similar stars.
To a large extent, the distance issue can be avoided if $\bm{v}_{rel}$ is orthogonal to the WB systemic proper motion (Equation \ref{v_tan_determination}). I consider the feasibility of exploiting this using the `line velocity method' for the WBT. The idea is to use only one component of $\bm{v}_{rel}$, namely that within the sky plane and orthogonal to the systemic proper motion of the WB \citep[][section 3.2]{Shaya_2011}. Because the WBT is statistical in any case, it is possible using line velocities in a similar way to if using both components of the sky-projected velocity. In the following, when discussing use of the sky-projected velocity, I mean both components thereof.
Line velocities minimize the impact of uncertainty in the relative distance. However, it is also possible to better constrain this using the accurately known projected separation of a WB (Section \ref{rp_trick}). This technique has the advantage of using two components of $\bm{v}_{rel}$, which could significantly improve the statistical power of the WBT.
After explaining these methods more precisely in Section \ref{Line_velocity_method}, I apply them to the \citet{HERNANDEZ_2018} dataset to confirm that both significantly reduce uncertainties compared to the use of conventional sky-plane velocities (Section \ref{Application_to_Hernandez}). With line velocities, the main disadvantage is that the use of essentially half as much data from each WB roughly doubles the number of systems required for the WBT if measurement uncertainties are neglected (Section \ref{Effect_on_P_detection}). I discuss future prospects for the WBT in Section \ref{Discussion}, where I explain why the line velocity method is likely to prove very fruitful in the long run. My conclusions are given in Section \ref{Conclusions}.
\section{Quantifying the relative velocity}
\label{Line_velocity_method}
The basic idea behind the line velocity method is to focus on the directions rather than the magnitudes of the proper motion vectors of the stars in a WB. This is because converting a difference in proper motion directions into a relative velocity only requires the distance to the WB system as a whole. However, a difference in proper motion magnitudes can only be converted into a relative velocity if observers also know the \emph{relative} distances to its stars. Because distances are likely to be less accurately known than proper motions (Section \ref{Discussion_tangential_velocity}), the line velocity method uses only the most reliably known component of $\bm{v}_{rel}$. In this section, I explain how to apply this method and a related method involving additional assumptions on the relative distance (Section \ref{rp_trick}).
\subsection{The sky-projected separation}
\label{Sky_projected_separation}
The WBT is ideally performed using accurate 3-dimensional (3D) positions and velocities. Unfortunately, Gaia DR2 distance uncertainties are ${\approx 80}$ kAU for a system 100 pc from the observatory \citep[][section 6.2]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. This is much larger than the $3-20$ kAU range of separations recommended by that work for the WBT. Even if a slightly larger range is used, it is clear that observers do not reliably know the true 3D separation $r_{rel}$ for the vast majority of WBs. An exception arises for very nearby systems like $\alpha$ Centauri \citep{Kervella_2016}, but I expect there will be too few such systems to enable the WBT. Somehow, more distant systems must also be considered.
Fortunately, these systems can be utilized in a statistical sense if one uses their accurately known sky-projected separation $r_{sky}$ \citep{Pittordis_2018}. Thus, the WBT in the short term will be based on $r_{sky}$ and $\bm{v}_{rel}$. It is possible that not all components of $\bm{v}_{rel}$ will be used as they are not all equally well measured. This is the main issue I consider in this contribution.
To understand how $\bm{v}_{rel}$ can be obtained from the observables of a WB, I define unit vectors $\widehat{\bm{n}}_1$ and $\widehat{\bm{n}}_2$ towards each of its stars. I use the convention that any vector $\bm{v}$ has length $v \equiv \left| \bm{v} \right|$ such that the unit vector parallel to $\bm{v}$ is $\widehat{\bm{v}} \equiv \bm{v} \div v$. Given the observed heliocentric distance $d_i$ of star $i$, its position is thus
\begin{eqnarray}
\bm{r}_{i} ~\equiv~ d_i \widehat{\bm{n}}_i ~~ \left(i = 1, \, 2 \right) \, .
\end{eqnarray}
The separation vector between the stars is $\bm{r}_{rel} \equiv \bm{r}_2 - \bm{r}_1$ and their relative velocity is $\bm{v}_{rel} \equiv \bm{v}_2 - \bm{v}_1$. The velocity $\bm{v}_{i}$ is found for each star individually from its radial velocity, proper motion, distance and sky position.
To define $r_{sky}$, I need to estimate the line of sight $\widehat{\bm{n}}_{sys}$ towards the system as a whole. Given the small angular separation of a WB, I assume $\widehat{\bm{n}}_{sys}$ is directed towards the mid-point of its stars.
\begin{eqnarray}
\widehat{\bm{n}}_{sys} ~\propto~ \frac{d_1 \widehat{\bm{n}}_1 + d_2 \widehat{\bm{n}}_2}{2} \, .
\label{n_hat_sys}
\end{eqnarray}
Their sky-projected separation is thus
\begin{eqnarray}
r_{sky} ~\equiv~ \left| \bm{r}_{rel} - \left( \bm{r}_{rel} \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}}_{sys} \right) \widehat{\bm{n}}_{sys} \right| \, .
\label{r_p_determination}
\end{eqnarray}
\subsection{The relative velocity}
\label{Relative_velocity}
I calculate the sky-projected relative velocity $v_{sky}$ analogously to Equation \ref{r_p_determination}.
\begin{eqnarray}
v_{sky} ~\equiv~ \left| \bm{v}_{rel} - \left( \bm{v}_{rel} \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}}_{sys} \right) \widehat{\bm{n}}_{sys} \right| \, .
\label{v_p_determination}
\end{eqnarray}
To apply the line velocity method, I need to estimate the systemic motion $\bm{v}_{sys}$ of the WB. Given that this is typically much larger than $\bm{v}_{rel}$, I determine $\bm{v}_{sys}$ under the simplifying assumption of an equal mass WB.
\begin{eqnarray}
\bm{v}_{sys} ~=~ \frac{\bm{v}_1 + \bm{v}_2}{2} \, .
\label{v_sys}
\end{eqnarray}
The line velocity method involves finding the component of $\bm{v}_{rel}$ along the direction $\widehat{\bm{v}}_{_{line}}$, the line within the sky plane orthogonal to $\bm{v}_{sys}$.
\begin{eqnarray}
\widehat{\bm{v}}_{_{line}} ~\propto~ \widehat{\bm{n}}_{sys} \times \widehat{\bm{v}}_{sys} \, .
\label{v_line_direction}
\end{eqnarray}
It is also possible to think of $\widehat{\bm{v}}_{_{line}}$ as the direction within the sky plane orthogonal to the systemic tangential velocity $\bm{v}_{tan}$ of the WB, where
\begin{eqnarray}
\bm{v}_{tan} ~\equiv~ \bm{v}_{sys} - \left( \bm{v}_{sys} \cdot \widehat{\bm{n}}_{sys} \right) \widehat{\bm{n}}_{sys} \, .
\label{v_tan_determination}
\end{eqnarray}
Having determined $\widehat{\bm{v}}_{_{line}}$, it is simple to determine the relative velocity of the stars along this line.
\begin{eqnarray}
v_{_{line}} ~\equiv~ \left| \bm{v}_{rel} \cdot \widehat{\bm{v}}_{_{line}} \right| \, .
\label{v_line}
\end{eqnarray}
In the rest of this work, I use three different measures of relative velocity corresponding to using 1, 2 or 3 of its components in the co-ordinate system defined by the orthogonal vectors $\widehat{\bm{v}}_{_{line}}$ and $\widehat{\bm{n}}_{sys}$. The simplest case is when using the full $\bm{v}_{rel}$. The 2D case corresponds to using $v_{sky}$ while the 1D case involves $v_{_{line}}$ alone.
\subsection{Estimating relative distances from sky positions}
\label{rp_trick}
For reasons I discuss in Section \ref{Discussion_tangential_velocity}, $v_{sky}$ can suffer from considerable uncertainty due to that in the relative distances to the stars in a WB. If this is estimated directly from Gaia DR2, the uncertainty is likely to be ${\approx 80 \sqrt{2}}$ kAU at a typical distance of 100 pc \citep[][section 6.2]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. This vastly exceeds the maximum $r_{sky}$ of systems used for the WBT (e.g. that work suggested using a maximum of 20 kAU).
Statistically, one expects that $r_{sky}$ is comparable to the line of sight separation $r_{rel, LOS} \equiv d_2 - d_1$. Thus, the uncertainty in $r_{rel, LOS}$ should not be much larger than $r_{sky}$ itself. To exploit this, I apply Bayes' Theorem to infer the total 3D separation $r_{rel}$ from the accurately known $r_{sky}$.
For a given $r_{rel}$, the conditional probability of observing a particular $r_{sky}$ can be found using basic spherical geometry. Defining a temporary variable $R_{sky}$, I get that
\begin{eqnarray}
P \left( r_{sky} \left| r_{rel} \right. \right) ~\equiv~ \frac{\partial}{\partial r_{sky}} \left[ P \left( R_{sky} \leq r_{sky} \left| r_{rel} \right. \right)\right] \, .
\end{eqnarray}
This can be simplified by defining an angle $\theta = \sin^{-1} \left( r_{sky}/r_{rel} \right)$ between the line of sight and 3D separation vectors.
\begin{eqnarray}
P \left( r_{sky} \left| r_{rel} \right. \right) &=& \frac{\partial}{\partial r_{sky}} \left( 1 - \cos \theta \right) \\
&=& \frac{\sin \theta}{r_{rel} \cos \theta} \\
&=& \frac{r_{sky}}{r_{rel} \sqrt{{r_{rel}}^2 - {r_{sky}}^2}} \\
&=& \frac{1}{r_{sky} \, x \sqrt{x^2 - 1}} \, \text{, where} \\
x &\equiv& \frac{r_{rel}}{r_{sky}} \geq 1 \, .
\end{eqnarray}
Bayes' Theorem also requires a prior on $r_{rel}$, or equivalently on $x$. For this, I use the WB results of \citet{Andrews_2017}, who found that $r_{sky}$ follows a power law with slope $-\alpha = -1.6$. The WB semi-major axes can be expected to follow a similar distribution, suggesting that the same is true for $r_{rel}$ \citep[][section 3.2]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. A more refined prior could be used for the WBT. For the moment, I simply assume a prior on $x$ of
\begin{eqnarray}
P_{prior} \left( x \right) ~\propto~ x^{-\alpha} \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
implying a posterior of
\begin{eqnarray}
P \left( x \right) ~\propto~ \frac{x^{-\left( \alpha + 1 \right)}}{\sqrt{x^2 - 1}} \, , \, x \geq 1.
\label{x_posterior}
\end{eqnarray}
I obtain the total normalisation by numerically integrating this, though I use analytic approximations when $x \approx 1$ and $x \gg 1$ to avoid numerical issues. I then obtain the cumulative distribution function of $x$ by numerically integrating its distribution $P \left( x \right)$, again reverting to analytic approaches for $x \approx 1$ and $x \gg 1$. This allows $x$ to be sampled from its distribution (Section \ref{Measurement_uncertainties}).
\section{Application to the \citet{HERNANDEZ_2018} sample}
\label{Application_to_Hernandez}
To see how the methods outlined in Section \ref{Line_velocity_method} work with real data, I apply them to the WB sample of \citet[][table 2]{HERNANDEZ_2018}, taking only their sky positions, radial velocities, distances and proper motions since I calculate all derived quantities myself.\footnote{Machine-readable versions are available in \textsc{excel}$^\text{\textregistered}$ and text formats upon request to the author. Note that the $\widehat{\bm{n}}_{i}$ are given in the International Celestial Reference System \citep{Ma_1998}.} Their work is based on using Gaia DR2 \citep{GAIA_2018} to update the astrometry of the carefully selected WB sample in \citet{Shaya_2011}, who used data from the Hipparcos mission \citep{Perryman_1997}.
\subsection{Quality cuts}
\label{Quality_cuts}
As might be expected, not all systems in the \citet{HERNANDEZ_2018} catalogue are usable in my analysis. Its table 2 has a column labelled `Exclusion Test' specifically for the purpose of flagging systems with a serious observational inconsistency or a large change in velocity between the Hipparcos and Gaia epochs, suggestive of another component in the system \citep[][section 8.2]{ Banik_2018_Centauri}. In this work, I only consider systems where the `Exclusion Test' column has a blank entry for both stars, indicating that \citet{HERNANDEZ_2018} found no good reason to reject the WB from their analysis.
As explained in Section \ref{Introduction} and pointed out by \citet{Badry_2019}, determining even just the sky-projected relative velocity requires radial velocity measurements. Thus, I reject systems where these are not available for either star. If it is known for one star, then I assume the same value and uncertainty for the other star and use the system in my analysis. This is because the difference in radial velocity is one component of $\bm{v}_{rel}$ and thus likely to be ${\approx 300}$ m/s for a genuine WB \citep[][figure 7]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. The contribution of this to $v_{sky}$ is smaller by at least a factor of the sky angle between the WB's components. Even a WB with $r_{sky} = 50$ kAU located 20 pc away subtends an angle of only 0.012 radians on our sky, implying that radial velocities affect $v_{sky}$ by ${\la 5}$ m/s. Thus, the small sky angles involved mean that my results should not be much affected by ignoring the \emph{difference} in radial velocities. Moreover, my main objective in this work is to quantify the typical uncertainty on $v_{sky}$ and $v_{_{line}}$ (Section \ref{Measurement_uncertainties}). The radial velocity should play only a small part in this, as long as that of the system is known reasonably well. In Section \ref{Discussion_radial_velocity}, I discuss some possible approaches in case this is not known.
\begin{table}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{cccc}
\hline
& & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Number of systems} \\
Bin & Range in $r_{sky}$, kAU & before & after \\
& & \multicolumn{2}{c}{rejection of outliers} \\
\hline
1 & 0.69 $-$ 3.27 & 21 & 20 \\
2 & 3.27 $-$ 16.38 & 24 & 22 \\
3 & 16.38 $-$ 82.12 & 17 & 9 \\
4 & 82.12 $-$ 411.55 & 7 & 5 \\
5 & 411.55 $-$ 1766.29 & 10 & 9 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{How I bin the data of \citet{HERNANDEZ_2018} in $r_{sky}$ (Equation \ref{r_p_determination}). Each bin is $\approx 0.7$ dex wide, similar to the bins they used. The numbers in the last two columns indicate how many systems remain in each bin before and after 2$\sigma$ outlier rejection (Section \ref{Quality_cuts}).}
\label{r_sky_edges}
\end{table}
Upon examination of the systems which pass my selection criteria, it is evident that systems 822 and 823 in the \citet{Shaya_2011} catalogue share a star, making this a triple system.\footnote{I was advised of this by R. A. M. Cort{\'e}s.} Although this is a rather hierarchical system, I reject it from my analysis due to the additional complications which might nonetheless arise in a non-linear gravity theory (Section \ref{No_EFE}) and in three-body systems more generally.
For my analysis, I bin the remaining 79 systems in $r_{sky}$. The bins correspond as closely as possible to those used by \citet{HERNANDEZ_2018}, who used bins of width 0.7 dex. The bins used in this work are listed in Table \ref{r_sky_edges}.
I then apply my line velocity method to determine the root mean square (rms) $v_{_{line}}$ of the systems in each bin. My results in Section \ref{Effect_on_P_detection} show that their line velocities should follow a roughly Gaussian distribution. Thus, I apply a basic outlier rejection system to remove WBs whose $v_{_{line}}$ exceeds twice the rms value for systems in the same $r_{sky}$ bin. This reduces the estimated one-dimensional velocity dispersion $\sigma_{_{1D}}$, so the process is continued iteratively until it converges and no more WBs are rejected. In this way, I am left with 65 systems for the rest of my analysis. Their $r_{sky}$ distribution is shown in the final column of Table \ref{r_sky_edges}.
\subsection{Measurement uncertainties}
\label{Measurement_uncertainties}
To better estimate the uncertainty on $\sigma_{_{1D}}$, I conduct a control analysis in which I set $\bm{v} = \bm{v}_{sys}$ (Equation \ref{v_sys}) for both stars in a WB. The idea is to determine the rms relative velocity in different $r_{sky}$ bins \emph{if no actual velocity dispersion exists}. Non-zero values arise entirely from uncertainties in distances, radial velocities and proper motions. To account for these uncertainties, I perform $10^6$ Monte Carlo (MC) trials where I vary these quantities randomly according to their measurement errors, which I take to follow independent Gaussian distributions.\footnote{Because the distances to the stars I analyze are generally known to within 1\%, a Gaussian error on the parallax very nearly translates into a Gaussian distance distribution \citep{Luri_2018}.} Each time, I recompute $v_{rel}$, $v_{sky}$ and $v_{_{line}}$. To speed up the computations, I make use of the fact that changes in the distance or proper motion have a linear effect on the velocity. I include the cross-term that arises because in general both the distance and proper motion differ from their observed values and these must be multiplied to obtain a velocity.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 8.5cm] {Bin_2_v_line_sky_rptrick}
\caption{The distribution of the rms $v_{_{line}}$ (red) in my control Monte Carlo analysis of the WBs in bin 2 (Table \ref{r_sky_edges}). As the WBs are assumed to have zero relative velocity, non-zero values arise entirely from measurement uncertainties. I also show results obtained using $v_{sky}$, calculated both conventionally (black; Equation \ref{v_p_determination}) and using the method of Section \ref{rp_trick} where this is likely to yield better results (blue; see text). The observed values are shown using non-solid vertical lines with the same colour. Simulated and observed velocities based on $v_{sky}$ are scaled down by $\sqrt{2}$ to allow a fair comparison. Notice how the observed rms $v_{sky}$ is consistent with zero relative velocity in all 22 systems if it is calculated conventionally. This is not true for $v_{_{line}}$ or for $v_{sky}$ if the latter is calculated using the method of Section \ref{rp_trick}.}
\label{Bin_2_v_line_sky}
\end{figure}
Measurement uncertainties influence the stellar velocities and thus the systemic velocity (Equation \ref{v_sys}), slightly affecting the direction of $\widehat{\bm{v}}_{_{line}}$ (Equation \ref{v_line_direction}). Because $v_{rel} \ll v_{sys}$, I use a small angle approximation to estimate how much $\widehat{\bm{v}}_{_{line}}$ should be rotated within the plane orthogonal to $\widehat{\bm{n}}_{sys}$, which I assume is unaffected by changes in the individual $d_i$ (Equation \ref{n_hat_sys}).
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 8.5cm] {Hernandez_v_control}
\caption{Similar to Figure \ref{Bin_2_v_line_sky}, but now showing results for all $r_{sky}$ bins (Table \ref{r_sky_edges}) and for the case where the full 3D relative velocity is considered (red points). The method of Section \ref{rp_trick} is not applied here. All velocities shown are scaled down by the square root of the number of dimensions to allow a fair comparison. Each probability distribution is summarised by its mode and 68.3\% confidence interval (see text). For systems where only one star has a measured radial velocity, I assume the same value and uncertainty for the other star before averaging the resulting 3D velocities and assigning the mean to both stars.}
\label{Hernandez_v_control}
\end{figure}
When applying the method outlined in Section \ref{rp_trick}, I use a similar procedure but with some important differences. Since this technique constrains $r_{rel, LOS}$ to within ${\approx r_{sky}}$, I first check whether the quadrature sum of the Gaia distance uncertainties is below ${r_{sky}}$. If so, I calculate $v_{sky}$ conventionally (Equation \ref{v_p_determination}). Otherwise, directly using Gaia data would likely be less accurate than using the method of Section \ref{rp_trick}, so my analysis tries it out. To do so, the distances to both stars are first set to their mean i.e.
\begin{eqnarray}
d_{1,2} \to \frac{d_1 + d_2}{2} \, .
\end{eqnarray}
I then use $r_{sky}$ to obtain a probability distribution for the 3D separation $r_{rel}$ (Equation \ref{x_posterior}). This is sampled using a MC scheme, thereby obtaining the line of sight separation
\begin{eqnarray}
r_{rel, LOS} \equiv \sqrt{{r_{rel}}^2 - {r_{sky}}^2} \, .
\end{eqnarray}
I then use another random number to decide which star should be further from us. If this is $< 0.5$, star 1 is further away, requiring me to set
\begin{eqnarray}
d_1 &\to& d_1 \, + \, \frac{r_{rel, LOS}}{2} \, , \\
d_2 &\to& d_2 \, - \, \frac{r_{rel, LOS}}{2} \, .
\end{eqnarray}
The signs are switched if star 2 needs to be further away than star 1.
I initially focus my analysis on bin 2 (Table \ref{r_sky_edges}), the most relevant for the WBT. The control distribution of the rms $v_{_{line}}$ is shown in Figure \ref{Bin_2_v_line_sky} along with the rms $v_{_{line}}$ of the original data. For comparison, I also show the corresponding quantities if $v_{sky}$ is used instead, including for the case labelled `using $r_{sky}$' where I apply the technique described in Section \ref{rp_trick}. In these cases, the results are divided by $\sqrt{2}$ to allow a fair comparison with the rms $v_{_{line}}$.
Figure \ref{Bin_2_v_line_sky} shows that the observed rms $v_{sky}$ can be adequately explained if $v_{rel} = 0$ for the 22 WBs analysed therein. Consequently, the WBT is likely to prove very difficult using $v_{sky}$. The prospects look much better if using $v_{_{line}}$ because its observed rms value clearly requires $\sigma_{_{1D}}$ to have a non-zero latent value. The WBT also appears feasible if $v_{sky}$ is calculated using the method discussed in Section \ref{rp_trick}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 8.5cm] {Hernandez_v_control_rptrick}
\caption{Similar to Figure \ref{Hernandez_v_control}, but now showing the conventional line (red) and sky-projected (black) velocities slightly to the left of my result for $v_{sky}$ calculated using the method of Section \ref{rp_trick}, shown here in blue. The latter method works well for $r_{sky}$ bins 1 and 2, which are the critical bins for the WBT.}
\label{Hernandez_v_control_rptrick}
\end{figure}
To summarise probability distributions like those shown in Figure \ref{Bin_2_v_line_sky}, I extract the most likely value and 68.3\% confidence interval, equivalent to the central standard deviation of a Gaussian. The most likely value of any quantity $x$ is simply the mode of its probability distribution $P \left( x \right)$, normalised such that $\int P \left( x \right) dx = 1$. To get the confidence interval, I find the value $\alpha$ such that $\int P \left( x \right) dx = 0.683$ if the integral is taken over only that range of $x$ for which $P \left( x \right) > \alpha$. This range is easily determined for unimodal distributions of the sort which arise in this work. Once the appropriate value of $\alpha$ is found, the corresponding range of $x$ defines the 68.3\% confidence interval
I use Figure \ref{Hernandez_v_control} to show these summary statistics for my control analyses of all $r_{sky}$ bins. As anticipated by \citet{Banik_2018_Centauri}, use of full 3D relative velocities leads to rather large uncertainties. In reality, these may be even larger because I assume that any star with a missing radial velocity has a valid measurement with the same accuracy as for its WB companion.
The use of sky-projected velocities reduces uncertainties somewhat, but Figure \ref{Bin_2_v_line_sky} shows that these are probably still too large in one of the most important $r_{sky}$ bins for the WBT. Uncertainties can be reduced by another factor of ${\approx 4}$ using the line velocity method. In this case, the rms $v_{_{line}}$ would typically be $\la 40$ m/s if its latent value is always 0. Given that $\sigma_{_{1D}}$ must be $\approx 200$ m/s \citep[][figure 7]{Banik_2018_Centauri}, it can be accurately measured using line velocities.
The prospects lie somewhere between these cases if $v_{sky}$ is calculated using the method of Section \ref{rp_trick}. This technique is able to constrain $r_{rel, LOS}$ to within an uncertainty of ${\approx r_{sky}}$. However, $r_{rel, LOS}$ would in any case be known to ${\approx 110}$ kAU if Gaia data are used directly \citep[][section 6.2]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. Thus, my analysis is very likely to switch to a conventional $v_{sky}$ calculation for $r_{sky}$ bins 4 and 5, meaning that no benefits are derived from the method of Section \ref{rp_trick}. It offers modest benefits in bin 3 and substantial benefits in bins 1 and 2 (Figure \ref{Hernandez_v_control_rptrick}). These are the critical bins for the WBT \citep{Pittordis_2018, Banik_2018_Centauri}. Although the uncertainties in these bins are slightly larger than with $v_{line}$ alone, using $v_{sky}$ has the advantage of utilizing two components of $\bm{v}_{rel}$ instead of just one. This could significantly improve the statistical power of the WBT (Section \ref{Effect_on_P_detection}).
\subsection{Inferred velocity dispersions}
My results in Section \ref{Effect_on_P_detection} show that line velocities are expected to follow a roughly Gaussian distribution. Therefore, I repeat my MC trials with an extra Gaussian dispersion of $\sigma_{_{1D}}$ added to each component of $\bm{v}_{rel}$. I then find the proportion of MC trials in which the rms $v_{_{line}}$ of this mock dataset falls within a narrow range around the observed value. This is the relative probability of the particular $\sigma_{_{1D}}$ value used.
As discussed in Section \ref{Measurement_uncertainties}, the result is very small for $\sigma_{_{1D}} = 0$. As $\sigma_{_{1D}}$ is increased, the probability rises up to some maximum before decreasing again. This is because adding a very high $\sigma_{_{1D}}$ causes the rms $v_{_{line}}$ to exceed the observed value in nearly all MC trials.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 8.5cm] {Hernandez_sigma_inference}
\caption{The inferred $\sigma_{_{1D}}$ of WBs in each $r_{sky}$ bin (Table \ref{r_sky_edges}) and their uncertainties (solid circles and error bars). I also show the results of my control analyses where WBs have no relative velocity (solid squares with dashed error bars that are sometimes smaller than the marker). The rms velocity dispersion of the WBs in each bin (* markers) are shown for comparison $-$ these do not require a MC analysis. Results are shown using line velocities (black), sky-projected velocities (blue) and 3D velocities (red). Within each bin, the $x$ co-ordinate is staggered by $\pm \frac{1}{4}$ for clarity. The 3D results are illustrative only as some stars lack radial velocity data (Section \ref{Quality_cuts}).}
\label{Hernandez_sigma_inference}
\end{figure}
Having obtained an inference on $\sigma_{_{1D}}$, I determine its 68.3\% confidence interval (Section \ref{Measurement_uncertainties}) and show the results in Figure \ref{Hernandez_sigma_inference}. This allows a comparison with the observed rms $v_{_{line}}$ and the results of my control analysis (Section \ref{Measurement_uncertainties}). For bins 2 and 3 which are most relevant to the WBT (Table \ref{r_sky_edges}), $\sigma_{_{1D}}$ is clearly detected. For comparison, I repeat my analyses using the sky-projected and 3D relative velocities, though the results need to be scaled down by factors of $\sqrt{2}$ and $\sqrt{3}$, respectively. Because radial velocities are missing for some stars, the 3D results should be considered illustrative only.
Figure \ref{Hernandez_sigma_inference} shows that using $v_{_{line}}$ and $v_{sky}$ yield rather similar errors. This will change over time because uncertainties in distances are expected to drop slower than those in proper motions (Section \ref{Discussion_tangential_velocity}). Moreover, the small sample size imposes a rather high floor on the uncertainties, even if perfect data were available. It will be interesting to apply the line and sky velocity methods to a larger sample of WBs.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 8.5cm] {Hernandez_v_rp_comparison}
\caption{My inferred $\sigma_{_{1D}}$ using line velocities, shown against the mean and dispersion of $r_{sky}$ for the stars in each bin (red points with error bars). The numbers to the top right of each point give the number of systems in that bin after outlier rejection (Section \ref{Quality_cuts}). The lower blue line is the prediction of Newtonian gravity while the upper black line is the asymptotic prediction of MOND, assuming all WBs have a total mass of ${1.5 M_\odot}$ (see text). The pink vertical line is the MOND radius for this mass (Equation \ref{Deep_MOND_limit}). The MOND expectation with the EFE is roughly given by the lower blue line out to the MOND radius and the upper black line beyond it, thus following the solid parts of both lines. The form of the transition is not shown here. Some MOND models lack the EFE, in which case $\sigma_{_{1D}}$ should flatten off at the level indicated by the horizontal dark red line. The predictions shown here are based on \citet[][figure 7]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. As the nearest star to the Sun is 268 kAU away \citep{Kervella_2016}, WBs in bins 4 and 5 are likely to be affected by other stars and are thus unsuitable for the WBT.}
\label{Hernandez_v_rp_comparison}
\end{figure}
The results in Figure \ref{Hernandez_sigma_inference} allow for a preliminary comparison with theory. For this purpose, I plot my $\sigma_{_{1D}}$ inferences against the mean $r_{sky}$ for the WBs in each $r_{sky}$ bin (Figure \ref{Hernandez_v_rp_comparison}).\footnote{Due to the use of logarithmic axes, I determine the mean and dispersion in $\ln r_{sky}$ and then exponentiate.} Theoretical expectations require knowledge of the WB masses, which I hope to estimate and use in a future analysis. For now, I simply assume that all WBs have a total mass of ${1.5 M_\odot}$, the same assumption made in \citet[][figure 7]{Banik_2018_Centauri} because ${1.5 M_\odot}$ is nearly the mode of the expected Gaia WB mass distribution (see their figure 2). Based on their figure 7, I assume that the Newtonian expectation is 155.7 m/s for $r_{sky} = 20$ kAU while the MOND expectation is 195.9 m/s for conventional versions of it that include the external field effect (EFE). As these are predictions for sky-projected velocities, I scale them down by $\sqrt{2}$ and assume a Keplerian ${r_{sky}}^{-1/2}$ law to obtain results for other $r_{sky}$. This is valid in Newtonian gravity and also in MOND for systems wider than their MOND radius of 8.6 kAU (Equation \ref{Deep_MOND_limit}), since in the Solar neighbourhood such systems are dominated by the EFE such that MOND boosts the Newtonian forces by a fixed factor of ${\approx 1.4}$ \citep[][figure 1]{Banik_2018_Centauri}.
Thus, local WBs within their MOND radius should follow a Keplerian law with the Newtonian normalisation. In Newtonian gravity, the same normalisation should of course remain valid for larger radii. However, in MOND models with the EFE, the normalisation would asymptotically be $\approx 1.2 \times$ higher. Without the EFE (as discussed in their section 7.4), the Keplerian law would no longer apply beyond the MOND radius. Instead, $\sigma_{_{1D}}$ should become independent of $r_{sky}$, reminiscent of flat galactic rotation curves. Based on \citet[][figure 7]{Banik_2018_Centauri}, the asymptotic value should be $\approx 300/\sqrt{2}$ m/s.
These predictions are valid for WBs unaffected by tides from other stars. Given that the nearest star to the Sun is 268 kAU away \citep{Kervella_2016}, systems with $r_{sky} \ga 100$ kAU (bins 4 and 5) are unsuitable for the WBT. Even if such systems are isolated now, it is quite likely they have been disrupted by tides from other stars at some time in the past. The lower orbital velocity and wider separation of such systems makes them particularly vulnerable to tides. As an example, two Sun-like stars orbiting each other in the Solar neighbourhood have a Newtonian Jacobi/tidal radius of 350 kAU \citep[][equation 43]{Jiang_2010}. Considering systems with such wide separations also makes it much more likely for my sample to include ionized systems which have not yet dispersed \citep[][section 8.1]{Banik_2018_Centauri}.
Bearing these expectations in mind, my results in Figure \ref{Hernandez_v_rp_comparison} show that the uncertainties are likely still too large to allow the WBT, at least with the \citet{HERNANDEZ_2018} sample of WBs. Nonetheless, the expected Keplerian decline is clearly evident out to the MOND radius and are suggestive of a further decline beyond it. This implies a mild amount of tension with MOND models that lack an EFE. However, the small sample size and lack of system masses means that one should not draw strong conclusions at this stage.
\section{Testing gravity with line velocities}
\label{Effect_on_P_detection}
In the short term, the WBT will involve $r_{sky}$ rather than the true 3D separation $r_{rel}$ (Section \ref{Sky_projected_separation}). Thus, I follow \citet{Pittordis_2018} and \citet{Banik_2018_Centauri} in defining the scaled relative velocity
\begin{eqnarray}
\widetilde{v} ~\equiv ~ v_{rel} \div \overbrace{\sqrt{\frac{GM}{r_{sky}}}}^{\text{Newtonian }v_c} .
\label{v_tilde}
\end{eqnarray}
The sky-projected component of this is $\widetilde{v}_{sky}$ while the line-projected component is $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$.
Because $r_{sky}$ measures only part of the 3D $\bm{r}_{rel}$, $\widetilde{v}$ is smaller than what it would be if the full $\bm{r}_{rel}$ were used to calculate it. Thus, $\widetilde{v} < \sqrt{2}$ in Newtonian gravity. The same limit applies to $\widetilde{v}_{sky}$ and $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$, though projection effects imply smaller typical values.
\citet[][section 2.2]{Banik_2018_Centauri} derived an analytic estimate for the corresponding upper limit in MOND, which they confirmed using numerical simulations (see their section 5).
\begin{eqnarray}
\widetilde{v} ~\leq~ \sqrt{2 \, \nu_{_{MW}} \left( 1 + \frac{1}{3} \frac{\partial \, Ln \, \nu_{_{MW}}}{\partial \, Ln \, g_{_{N, MW}}}\right)} ~ .
\label{v_tilde_limit}
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $\nu_{_{MW}}$ is the MOND enhancement to $g_{_{N, MW}}$, the Newtonian gravity exerted by the rest of the Galaxy on the Solar neighbourhood. Although the Galaxy is a disk, the Sun is sufficiently close to its mid-plane and sufficiently far from its centre that the spherically symmetric MOND interpolating function $\nu$ can be used with negligible loss of accuracy \citep[][section 9.3.1]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. Thus, $g_{_{N, MW}}$ can be inferred from the amplitude of the Galactic rotation curve near the Sun.\footnote{Note that this constrains the product $\nu_{_{MW}} g_{_{N, MW}}$, so analytic or numerical root-finding procedures are required to obtain $\nu_{_{MW}}$.} By combining the latest measurements of the Galactic rotation curve with an interpolating function consistent with the RAR, \citet{Banik_2018_Centauri} showed that the upper limit on $\widetilde{v}$ is expected to be 1.68 in MOND, ${\approx 20\%}$ higher than the Newtonian value.
To quantify the distribution of $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$, it is necessary to consider WBs with a range of properties. The semi-major axis probability distribution is carefully chosen such that the distribution of $r_{sky}$ matches observations \citep[][section 3.2]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. Similarly to that work, I assume that observational difficulties will prevent the WBT from using systems with $r_{sky} > 20$ kAU. This is likely conservative as the WB catalogue of \citet{Andrews_2018} maintains a low contamination rate out to 40 kAU. Increasing the upper limit on $r_{sky}$ somewhat improves prospects for the WBT \citep[][figure 5]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. However, the improvement is not dramatic because the frequency of WBs declines $\propto {r_{sky}}^{-1.6}$ \citep{Lepine_2007, Andrews_2017} and the MOND enhancement to gravity is nearly flat beyond 20 kAU \citep[][figure 1]{Banik_2018_Centauri}.
In addition to a range of WB orbit sizes, it is also important to consider a variety of shapes. These are parameterized by the orbital eccentricity $e$ and its generalisation to non-Newtonian gravity theories \citep[][section 4.1]{Pittordis_2018}.\footnote{For the general case that the mutual gravity is not parallel to $\bm{r}_{rel}$, I use the definition in \citet[][section 2.3.1]{Banik_2018_Centauri}.} I assume a linear distribution in $e$.
\begin{eqnarray}
P \left( e \right) ~=~ 1 \, + \,\gamma \left( e - \frac{1}{2} \right) \, .
\label{P_e}
\end{eqnarray}
I use $\gamma_{_N}$ to denote the value of $\gamma$ used for Newtonian WB models while $\gamma_{_M}$ is used for MOND models. If the context makes clear which gravity theory is being discussed, then I just use $\gamma$. In both cases, the allowed range of values is between $-2$ and 2.
The distribution of system masses is explained in \citet[][section 3.3]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. Due to the EFE, I also consider systems covering all possible angles between the orbital pole and the direction towards the Galactic Centre (see their section 3.4). The parameter space is explored using a full grid method, making the procedure deterministic.
Motivated by difficulties in correcting observed redshifts for stellar convective motions \citep[][section 2.2]{Kervella_2017}, I previously considered the case where only the sky-projected components of $\bm{v}_{rel}$ are used in the WBT \citep[][section 5]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. Observed redshifts still provide a consistency check on whether a system really is a WB, but the accuracies were assumed to be insufficient for direct use in the WBT. Restricting the WBT in this way roughly doubles the required number of systems to $\approx 300$ \citep[][figure 5]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. This is much less than the $\approx 2000$ WBs identified by \citet{Andrews_2018}, suggesting there is significant scope for prioritising data quality over quantity.
To see how my line velocity method further inflates the number of systems needed for the WBT, I begin by obtaining the $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$ distribution $P \left( \widetilde{v}_{_{line}} \right)$ in the different models. In general, a WB system has $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}} = \widetilde{v}_{sky} \left| \sin \phi \right|$ for some angle $\phi$ between its sky-projected relative velocity and systemic proper motion. Thus, a particular value of $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$ can arise from any situation where $\widetilde{v}_{sky} \geq \widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$. The probability of doing so depends on $P \left( \widetilde{v}_{sky} \right)$ and the likelihood that $\left| \sin \phi \right| = \widetilde{v}_{_{line}}/\widetilde{v}_{sky}$, which is needed to achieve the correct projection effect. As the distribution of $\phi$ is expected to be uniform, I only need to consider the range $\left(0 - \frac{\rm{\pi}}{2} \right)$. Using standard trigonometric results, I get that
\begin{eqnarray}
P \left(\widetilde{v}_{_{line}} \right) = \int_{\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}}^\infty \frac{P \left( \widetilde{v}_{sky} \right)}{\sqrt{1 - \left(\frac{\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}}{\widetilde{v}_{sky}}\right)^2}} \, d\widetilde{v}_{sky}
\label{Convolution_trick}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 8.5cm] {v_line_comparison_gamma}
\caption{The distribution of $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$ for different eccentricity distributions parameterized by $\gamma$ (Equation \ref{P_e}) in Newtonian (red) and Milgromian (blue) dynamics. The results shown here are obtained by applying Equation \ref{Convolution_trick} to $\widetilde{v}_{sky}$ distributions calculated using the methods described in \citet{Banik_2018_Centauri}. Different model parameters are marginalized over using a full grid method, as discussed in their section 3.}
\label{v_line_comparison_gamma}
\end{figure}
This allows me to take advantage of the $P \left( \widetilde{v}_{sky} \right)$ distributions calculated in \citet{Banik_2018_Centauri}. Some representative examples of $P \left(\widetilde{v}_{_{line}} \right)$ are shown in Figure \ref{v_line_comparison_gamma} for different model assumptions. Within the context of either gravity theory, changing $\gamma$ affects $P \left(\widetilde{v}_{_{line}} \right)$ to a much smaller extent than the difference in $P \left(\widetilde{v}_{_{line}} \right)$ between the different theories. These differences are especially pronounced in the high-velocity tail of the distribution.
Having obtained $P \left(\widetilde{v}_{_{line}} \right)$ for Newtonian and MOND gravity, I use a publicly available method of comparing probability distributions to estimate the probability $P_{detection}$ that these models can be distinguished with accurate data from $N$ systems \citep[][section 4]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. By repeating these `detection probability' calculations for different $N$, I estimate how many systems are required for the WBT and the optimal range in $\left(r_{sky}, \widetilde{v}_{_{line}} \right)$ that astronomers should focus on. For a fixed value of $\gamma_{_M}$, I consider all possible values of $\gamma_{_N}$ in order to find that which minimizes $P_{detection}$. Roughly speaking, this makes the Newtonian $P \left(\widetilde{v}_{_{line}} \right)$ as similar as possible to the MOND $P \left(\widetilde{v}_{_{line}} \right)$. This mimics how future astronomers might try to fit observations of intrinsically Milgromian systems using Newtonian dynamics by adjusting its model parameters.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 8.5cm] {P_detection_v_line}
\caption{The probability of detecting a significant departure from Newtonian expectations if WB dynamics are governed by MOND and $\gamma_{_M} = 1.2$ (solid lines) or 2 (non-solid lines). Results are shown using line velocities (red) and sky-projected velocities (blue) for different numbers of systems with projected separations of $1-20$ kAU. The values shown here are the minimum attained over all values of $\gamma_{_N}$ \citep[][section 4]{Banik_2018_Centauri}.}
\label{P_detection_v_line}
\end{figure}
Having obtained $P_{detection}$ in this way, I compare it with similar results based on using $\widetilde{v}_{sky}$ in the WBT (Figure \ref{P_detection_v_line}). As these calculations assume no measurement errors, the line velocity method roughly doubles the $N$ required to reach a fixed $P_{detection}$. This is unsurprising given that $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$ is based on only one component of $\bm{v}_{rel}$ whereas $\widetilde{v}_{sky}$ is based on two components.
My calculations yield an a priori estimate of the optimal parameter range for the WBT based on the proportion of systems expected to be in this range under the different gravity models. For my nominal assumption that $\gamma_{_M} = 1.2$, the best $r_{sky}$ range is $3-20$ kAU while the optimal $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$ range starts at $0.94 \pm 0.02$ and ends at 1.68, the expected analytic limit (Equation \ref{v_tilde_limit}) and also the maximum value which arises in my MOND models. Out of all WBs with $r_{sky} = 1-20$ kAU, the MOND model predicts that ${3.4 \pm 0.3 \%}$ should fall within this $\left( r_{sky}, \widetilde{v}_{_{line}} \right)$ range. This is nearly triple the Newtonian expectation of ${1.1 \pm 0.2 \%}$ for the `best-fitting' $\gamma_{_N}$ of $\approx -0.5$, the value which minimizes $P_{detection}$. These results are unchanged for $\gamma_{_M} = 2$ apart from the fact that the best $\gamma_{_N}$ rises to $\approx 0.1$. Physically motivated constraints on $\gamma_{_N}$ could improve the prospects for the WBT somewhat, for example if it becomes clear that negative values should not arise
These results are rather similar to those obtained using $\widetilde{v}_{sky}$ \citep[][section 5]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. The main difference with line velocities is that projection effects significantly reduce the proportion of systems in the optimal parameter range. This makes it more difficult to conduct the WBT, though my results in Figure \ref{P_detection_v_line} indicate that it should still be feasible with ${\approx 1000}$ well-measured systems.
\subsection{MOND without the external field effect}
\label{No_EFE}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 8.5cm] {v_line_comparison_no_EFE}
\caption{Similar to Figure \ref{v_line_comparison_gamma} for the case $\gamma = 1.2$ \citep{Tokovinin_2016}. In addition to Newtonian dynamics (dotted blue) and conventional MOND (solid red), I also show the case of MOND without the EFE using a dot-dashed red line \citep[][section 7.4]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. In this unconventional scenario, $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$ can reach up to 3.2, though it is rarely $\ga 2$.}
\label{v_line_comparison_no_EFE}
\end{figure}
The EFE is a non-linear effect in MOND which arises directly from its governing equations \citep[][section 2g]{Milgrom_1986}. If a WB system orbits a galaxy with acceleration $\gg a_{_0}$, then the internal dynamics of the WB will be governed by Newtonian gravity regardless of how low its internal accelerations are. This is because the total acceleration enters the governing equations. Therefore, the EFE is not tidal in nature $-$ it arises even if the galaxy exerts a uniform gravitational field across the WB.
So far, the EFE has been directly included in my models \citep[][section 2.1]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. Its section 7.4 discussed the possibility of MOND models without an EFE, as arises in some modified inertia interpretations of MOND \citep{Milgrom_2011}. Despite lacking a self-consistent theory of this type, it is straightforward to repeat my calculations without the EFE as neglecting it greatly simplifies the problem \citep[][equation 13]{Banik_2018_Centauri}.
In Figure \ref{v_line_comparison_no_EFE}, I compare the $P \left(\widetilde{v}_{_{line}} \right)$ distribution in Newtonian gravity against MOND models with and without the EFE. MOND models without the EFE extend out to $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}} = 3.2$ because some systems are much larger than their MOND radius, leading to a large difference compared to more conventional MOND models with the EFE. However, the differences are limited by the rapidly declining $r_{sky}$ distribution of WBs as this implies a similar decline in the distribution of semi-major axes \citep{Andrews_2017}.
Using my $\widetilde{v}_{sky}$ and $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$ distributions for MOND without the EFE, I repeat my $P_{detection}$ calculations and show them in Figure \ref{P_detection_no_EFE_v_line}. These models are much more easily distinguished from Newtonian dynamics (compare with Figure \ref{P_detection_v_line}). Thus, MOND models lacking the EFE will be the first ones to become directly testable using the WBT.
Neglecting the EFE slightly changes the optimal parameter range for the WBT. The best $r_{sky}$ range now becomes $4-20$ kAU while the best $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$ range starts at ${0.96 \pm 0.02}$ and extends up to the maximum value of 3.2 reached in my simulations. The best-fitting Newtonian model (${\gamma_{_N} \approx 1.7}$) predicts that ${0.8 \pm 0.2 \%}$ of WBs will fall in this parameter range, much smaller than the ${5.5 \pm 0.2 \%}$ expected in MOND without the EFE. The model predictions would differ even more if accurate data is available for systems with $r_{sky} > 20$ kAU because the lack of an EFE allows MOND to enhance Newtonian accelerations by an unlimited factor.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 8.5cm] {P_detection_no_EFE_v_line}
\caption{Similar to Figure \ref{P_detection_v_line}, but now showing the distinguishability of Newtonian gravity from MOND without the EFE. These unconventional MOND models predict a more extended $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$ distribution (Figure \ref{v_line_comparison_no_EFE}). The larger deviation from Newtonian expectations reduces the number of systems required for the WBT.}
\label{P_detection_no_EFE_v_line}
\end{figure}
\section{Discussion}
\label{Discussion}
\subsection{Velocity uncertainties}
My results in Figure \ref{Hernandez_v_control} show that the line velocity technique yields relative velocities with an accuracy of $\approx 30$ m/s. This is very small compared to the expected 1D velocity dispersion of $\approx 150$ m/s in my $r_{sky}$ bin 3 (Figure \ref{Hernandez_v_rp_comparison}). As $v_{_{line}}$ should broadly follow a Gaussian distribution (Figure \ref{v_line_comparison_no_EFE}), measurement errors would increase the width of this distribution by only $\approx \frac{1}{2} \left( \frac{30}{150} \right)^2 = 2\%$, much less than the $\approx 20\%$ difference between orbital velocities in Newtonian and Milgromian dynamics \citep{Banik_2018_Centauri}.\footnote{Similar results would be obtained for bin 2.} Future releases of Gaia data will improve the situation further.
\subsubsection{Tangential velocity}
\label{Discussion_tangential_velocity}
The line velocity method yields such precise results due to its significantly reduced sensitivity to distance uncertainties, which are expected to be larger and decline slower than uncertainties in proper motions. This is because proper motions arise due to the true motion of stars relative to the Sun, which is typically $\sim 30$ km/s \citep{GAIA_2018}. This is about the same as the orbital velocity of Earth around the Sun \citep{Hornsby_1771}, which underlies distance measurements via trigonometric parallax.\footnote{For my discussion, it is sufficient to know the value of 1 AU to within a few percent, which was reliably accomplished in the 1760s using the transits of Venus. More recent determinations confirm the earlier result and further refine it using, amongst other things, spacecraft tracking data and radar reflections off other planets \citep[e.g.][and references therein]{Pitjeva_2009}.} Therefore, the annual parallax of a Solar neighbourhood star is similar to its proper motion over a year. For a fixed astrometric precision, the uncertainty in $v_{rel}$ thus receives similar contributions from distance and proper motion errors after ${\approx 1}$ year of observations.
As observatories such as Gaia \citep{Perryman_2001} collect data over a longer mission duration $T$, proper motion uncertainties are expected to fall as $T^{-3/2}$ because the signal (change in $\widehat{\bm{n}}$) grows linearly with $T$ while measurement errors fall as $\sqrt{T}$ if the frequency of astrometric observations is maintained. However, distances must be inferred from the annual parallax, a cyclical change in $\widehat{\bm{n}}$. Because parallax alone does not cause a long term drift in $\widehat{\bm{n}}$, the distance uncertainty should decrease only as $T^{-1/2}$. Thus, in the long term, the WBT is probably best achieved using line velocities.
If observers achieve better astrometric precision, this would not change the argument because it would improve both distance and proper motion measurements. The only exception is if distance uncertainties somehow `catch up' to those in proper motions, which can be achieved to some extent if $d_{rel}$ is inferred from the rather accurately known $r_{sky}$ (Section \ref{rp_trick}). In the $r_{sky}$ bins most relevant for the WBT, this appears to yield promising results (Figure \ref{Hernandez_v_control_rptrick}), mainly because the method reduces uncertainty in $d_{rel}$ down to ${\approx r_{sky}}$. However, $d_{rel}$ is still rather important to the calculation of $\bm{v}_{rel}$, meaning that its uncertainty would reach a minimum once $d_{rel}$ becomes the dominant source of uncertainty. By contrast, the fractional uncertainty in $v_{line}$ can in principle decrease to the fractional uncertainty in the $d_i$, which is already very small.
The smaller uncertainties resulting from either method suggest that they can be applied to more distant WBs, where a larger uncertainty in the conventional $v_{sky}$ (Equation \ref{v_p_determination}) might make the WB unusable. Similarly, reducing uncertainties might allow the WBT to utilize systems with fainter stars. Assuming such WBs have a lower mass, their reduced MOND radius (Equation \ref{Deep_MOND_limit}) would cause their velocity distribution to differ more significantly between Newtonian and Milgromian dynamics. The statistics are also improved by the use of fainter stars.
These considerations must be set against the simple fact that the line velocity method uses less data per WB, thus inflating the number of WBs needed to distinguish these theories (Section \ref{Effect_on_P_detection}). This deficiency is not present with sky-projected velocities, whose accuracy can be improved substantially if the observed $r_{sky}$ provides a prior on $r_{rel, LOS}$ (Section \ref{rp_trick}). Although the errors are slightly larger than when using line velocities (Figure \ref{Hernandez_v_control_rptrick}), the statistical power of the WBT can be greatly enhanced if it is based on two components of $\bm{v}_{rel}$ rather than just one (Section \ref{Effect_on_P_detection}). Which method will prove more fruitful is unclear at present as this partly depends on the level of contamination, which would affect line velocities more severely (Section \ref{Contamination}). The best option is to try all of them and check if they give consistent results.
\subsubsection{Radial velocity}
\label{Discussion_radial_velocity}
Distance and proper motion uncertainties are undoubtedly the main sources of error when using sky or line velocities. However, the radial velocity does have some impact due to projection effects \citep{Badry_2019}. This can be reduced by revisiting our definition of the direction towards a WB (Equation \ref{n_hat_sys}). This equation is symmetric with respect to its stars. In reality, one of the stars (e.g. star 1) could have a much less well known radial velocity. The line velocity could be made insensitive to this by setting $\widehat{\bm{n}}_{sys} = \widehat{\bm{n}}_1$. In general, instead of using the centre of mass or simply the geometric centre of the stars, one could use the `centre of uncertainty' whereby each star is weighted by the uncertainty in its heliocentric radial velocity. This would yield only modest benefits if the radial velocities are both known to within ${\approx 1}$ km/s as WB angular separations rarely exceed 0.01 radians. If the radial velocity is known for one star but not the other, then it is safe to assume that their radial velocities differ by ${\la 1}$ km/s if the system is a genuine WB. If not, then it would be handled using whatever techniques are used for dealing with contamination, for instance the outlier rejection system used here. Nonetheless, the above-mentioned centre of uncertainty trick is worth trying because it can be used in conjunction with the line velocity method. It is undeniable that the WBT would benefit at least somewhat from exploiting the limited freedom one has in choosing exactly how one defines the direction towards a WB.
In case radial velocities are unavailable for either star, it is still possible to assign each star a value based on its Galactic position and an uncertainty based on the local stellar velocity dispersion. For systems with a small angular separation, this would have only a small effect on the results. However, it is probably not an ideal strategy because the velocity distribution is not Gaussian and the requirement of a small angular separation can severely limit the statistics. Thus, a better method could be to find the relative velocity along the direction $\widehat{\bm{n}}_1 \times \widehat{\bm{n}}_2$, which is completely independent of the stars' radial velocities. Because this is also a measure of relative velocity along a particular line, my results in Section \ref{Effect_on_P_detection} can be used to quantify how much the resulting loss of information inflates the number of systems required for the WBT.
Choosing this statistic comes with the drawback that the relative distance now affects the results, just like with conventional sky-projected velocities. There are two possible solutions to this. Firstly, one can statistically infer the 3D separation from its accurately known sky-projected component (Section \ref{rp_trick}). The resulting uncertainty should be manageable if the angular separation is not too large (Figure \ref{Hernandez_v_control_rptrick}). Alternatively, one could restrict attention to systems where $\widehat{\bm{n}}_1 \times \widehat{\bm{n}}_2$ is nearly parallel to the direction defined by Equation \ref{v_line_direction}, which minimizes the effect of uncertainty in $d_{rel}$. In such systems, it is possible to constrain one component of $\bm{v}_{rel}$ in a way that is almost insensitive to both $d_{rel}$ and the radial velocity of either star.
While my preceding discussion may suggest that only some WBs are suitable for the WBT, one must bear in mind that a lot of the uncertainties scale with the angular separation of the WB. This is smaller for more distant systems, implying that the above-mentioned methods can face difficulties with nearby systems. However, all measured quantities would generally be known more accurately for a WB closer to us, minimizing issues related to uncertainty in $d_{rel}$. The special techniques I discuss for dealing with this uncertainty are both more accurate and more necessary for more distant WBs.
\subsection{Contamination}
\label{Contamination}
In addition to errors in velocity measurements, various other uncertainties would also affect the WBT. Some of these have previously been considered, in particular whether one of the stars in a WB has a close undetected companion as well as its more distant known companion \citep[][section 8.2]{Banik_2018_Centauri}. That work also looked into WBs that were previously ionized by interaction(s) with other stars (see their section 8.1).
If a WB is only marginally ionized, then it will take a long time to disperse. This is quite possible if the ionization is caused by a series of rather weak encounters, as might arise in a star cluster. The end result might be somewhat similar to a moving group of stars \citep{Wielen_1977}. This could add to a background of non-genuine WBs that makes the WBT more difficult. For the particular case of moving groups, the issue could be alleviated somewhat by focusing on systems older than e.g. 1 Gyr. The required stellar age estimates could perhaps be provided by gyrochronology, taking advantage of the increase in stellar rotation periods with age \citep{Barnes_2003}. Very precise ages would not be necessary for this purpose.
By definition, such contamination involves systems whose $\widetilde{v}$ exceeds the limit for bound systems. Due to projection effects, it is possible that $\widetilde{v}_{sky}$ or $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$ does not exceed this limit. Statistically, however, it very often will. Thus, observers can estimate the prevalence of contaminating systems by looking at how many WBs have $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}} > 2$, a value almost never exceeded even in versions of MOND without the EFE (Figure \ref{v_line_comparison_no_EFE}).
Nonetheless, contamination would still make the WBT more difficult for the same reason that the brightness of the sky makes it harder to identify a faint astronomical object. To get a feel for how this works, suppose accurate information is available for ${N = 1000}$ systems. My results show that, in the absence of contamination, the WBT will simply be a matter of focusing on a particular range of $\left(r_{sky}, \widetilde{v}_{_{line}}\right)$ and distinguishing between theories which predict 11 vs 34 WBs in this range. Because both numbers are $\ll N$, it is reasonable to assume Poisson statistics. The feasibility of the WBT in this case is just the feasibility of distinguishing Poisson distributions with rates of 11 or 34. Whether these distributions are widely separated can be judged by adding their variances and comparing it to the difference in modes, which correspond to mean values for Poisson distributions. In this case, the means differ by 23 while the difference between random variables following these distributions has an error of $\sqrt{11 + 34} = 6.7$, suggesting a statistically significant exclusion of one or other theory should be possible in the vast majority of cases. This is indeed what my results show (Figure \ref{P_detection_v_line}).
Now suppose that contamination from e.g. moving groups adds an extra 1\% of WBs to this parameter range and that this fact is known based on the distribution of $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$ above 2. The gravity theories now predict 21 vs 44 systems in the same parameter range. The difference remains the same but is harder to distinguish, with the uncertainty increasing by a factor of $\sqrt{65/45} \approx 1.2$. To maintain the same statistical significance, ${\approx 1.5 \times}$ as many WBs would therefore be required. Clearly, the WBT would be very challenging if ${\gg 1\%}$ of the systems it is based on fall in the relevant parameter range while not being genuine WBs.
Fortunately, the vast majority of contaminating systems would fall outside this range. For example, if the contamination is uniform in $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$ over the range $0-5$ (corresponding to a maximum of 2.1 km/s for two Sun-like stars separated by 10 kAU), then only 14\% of all contaminants would enter the $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$ range relevant for the WBT. Thus, the contaminants could comprise up to 7\% of all catalogued WBs with $r_{sky} = \left( 1 - 20 \right)$ kAU.
In reality, an even larger fraction would be tolerable because the contamination can be significantly reduced by using a narrower `aperture' on $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$. Figure \ref{v_line_comparison_gamma} shows that MOND predicts almost no systems with $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}} > 1.35$, even though the distribution extends up to 1.68. Thus, the $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$ aperture could be narrowed to a width of only 0.4 rather than the 0.7 assumed so far, with only a negligible loss of genuine WBs. Once the prevalence and properties of contaminants are better known, calculations including this information will further optimise the best parameter range to focus on.\footnote{At that stage, it will be difficult to consider these a priori predictions.}
In this context, it should be mentioned that the WB catalogue of \citet{Andrews_2018} has a contamination rate of $\approx 6\%$ while extending out to double the $r_{sky}$ limit of 20 kAU that I assume is observationally accessible. Moreover, the number of WBs they identified greatly exceeds my estimate of how many are required for the WBT (Figure \ref{P_detection_v_line}). This remains true even if my estimate is doubled to account for other sources of uncertainty like contamination.
It must also be borne in mind that the preceding discussion focused on the feasibility of the WBT using only one component of $\bm{v}_{rel}$. At least some information is available regarding the other components, further aiding the WBT.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{Conclusions}
If the anomalous rotation curves of galaxies are caused by a low-acceleration departure from the standard laws of gravity, this will have significant effects on WB systems with separations ${\ga 3}$ kAU. To conclusively perform this WBT and thereby detect or rule out such effects, accurate data is required for systems with separations up to ${\approx 20}$ kAU \citep{Hernandez_2012, Scarpa_2017, Pittordis_2018, Banik_2018_Centauri}. This may already be within reach given that the WB catalogue of \citet{Andrews_2018} extends out to 40 kAU while maintaining a low contamination rate.
At its heart, the WBT requires relative velocities $\bm{v}_{rel}$. Since the test is statistical in nature, it could benefit from considering only the most accurately known component(s) of $\bm{v}_{rel}$. In particular, \citet{Banik_2018_Centauri} considered using only its sky-projected part to minimize the effect of radial velocity uncertainties. \citet[][section 3.2]{Shaya_2011} went a step further by suggesting that only one of the sky-projected velocity components be used. This involves projecting $\bm{v}_{rel}$ onto the direction given by Equation \ref{v_line_direction} and using only this projected quantity in the WBT. The basic principle is to focus on the relative velocity along the direction within the sky plane orthogonal to the systemic proper motion of the WB, thereby minimizing the effect of distance uncertainties. This is because the technique mainly considers the direction of the proper motion vectors rather than their magnitudes.
To demonstrate this line velocity method, I applied it to the WB catalogue of \citet[][table 2]{HERNANDEZ_2018} by conducting MC simulations where measurement errors are included but the stars in each WB have identical latent velocities equal to the mean for the stars in each system. In these control simulations, ${\sigma_{_{1D}} \approx 100}$ m/s when using sky-projected relative velocities but only ${\approx 30}$ m/s using line velocities (Figure \ref{Hernandez_v_control}).
I then performed a preliminary MC analysis of the original \citet{HERNANDEZ_2018} data, finding no evidence of a clear departure from Newtonian expectations at the MOND radii of the systems. My analysis assumed all WBs have a total mass of ${1.5 M_\odot}$ and suffered from a small sample. Even so, the error bars are comparable to the size of the difference between Newtonian and Milgromian expectations. Thus, the WBT should soon become feasible.
To check this, I estimated how many WBs are required to distinguish these theories using the line velocity method. The use of only one component of $\bm{v}_{rel}$ roughly doubles the required number of systems compared to the case where the WBT fully utilizes sky-projected relative velocities. Even so, the WBT should still be feasible with $\approx 1000$ systems (Figure \ref{P_detection_v_line}).
With a longer observing duration $T$, the line velocity method becomes more compelling because it is almost immune to distance uncertainties, which are expected to decrease as $T^{-1/2}$. The method is mainly reliant on proper motions, which should exhibit a more rapid improvement as $T^{-3/2}$. Because distance and proper motion uncertainties should be similar after ${\approx 1}$ year of observations (Section \ref{Discussion_tangential_velocity}), the line velocity technique should be much better after a few years. Its higher accuracy increases the number of usable systems, at least partially offsetting the reduction in how much information is used from each system.
I also discuss how the WBT might be hampered by contamination from unbound systems like moving groups (Section \ref{Contamination}). The effect can be minimized by defining a narrow theoretically motivated range in $\widetilde{v}_{_{line}}$ (Equation \ref{v_tilde_limit}) such that the WBT is best performed by quantifying the proportion of systems in this range \citep{Banik_2018_Centauri}. Using this method, it is likely that the WBT is feasible with the number of WBs reported by \citet{Andrews_2018} if their estimated level of contamination is correct.
Moreover, the WBT will benefit at least somewhat from considering other components of $\bm{v}_{rel}$, even if they do have larger uncertainties. In particular, sky-projected velocities can be made much more accurate if the relative line of sight separation is statistically inferred from the accurately known sky-projected separation (Section \ref{rp_trick}). This technique yields two components of $\bm{v}_{rel}$, one of which could be sacrificed to make the results completely independent of line of sight velocity measurements (Section \ref{Discussion_radial_velocity}). This loss can be avoided if radial velocities are known to within a few km/s, which is not a particularly challenging goal for existing technology but would essentially double the amount of usable data.
Therefore, the next few years promise to bring strong constraints on the behaviour of gravity at the low accelerations typical of galactic outskirts. This will cast a much-needed light on what fundamental new assumptions are required to explain their anomalous behaviour.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
IB is supported by an Alexander von Humboldt postdoctoral fellowship. He wishes to thank the anonymous referee for several very useful suggestions, in particular the use of projected separations to statistically infer true separations. He is grateful to X. Hernandez and R. A. M. Cort{\'e}s for sharing the raw data of their wide binary sample and authorising its distribution. He also thanks H. Zhao for suggesting how to minimize the impact of radial velocity uncertainties, including when these are not known at all. The algorithms were set up using \textsc{matlab}$^\text{\textregistered}$.
\bibliographystyle{mnras}
|
\section*{Nomenclature}
\noindent
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
5G & The 5th Generation Mobile Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
AI & Artificial Intelligent \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
AMC & Automatic Modulation Classification \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
ANN & Artificial Neural Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
AP & Access Point \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
AWGN & Additive White Gaussian Noise \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
BBU & BaseBand processing Unit \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
BS & Base Station \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
CDF & Cumulative Distribution Function \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
CNN & Convolutional Neural Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
CogNet & Cognitive Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
CoMP & Coordinated Multiple Points \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
CR & Cognitive Radio \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
C-RAN & Cloud Radio Access Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
CRN & Cognitive Radio Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
CSI & Channel State Information \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
CSMA/CA & Carrier-Sense Multiple Access with Collision Avoidance \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
CSMA/CD & Carrier-Sense Multiple Access with Collision Detection \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
C-S Mode & Client-Server Mode \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
D2D & Device to Device \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
DBN &Deep Belief Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
DNN &Deep Neural Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
DQN &Deep Q-Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
EA & Energy Awareness \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
EE & Energy Efficiency \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
EH & Energy Harvesting \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
ELP & Exponentially-weighted algorithm with Linear Programming \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
EM & Expectation Maximization \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
eMBB & enhanced Mobile Broad Band \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
ERM & Empirical Risk Minimization \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
EXP3 & EXPonential weights for EXPloration and EXPloitation \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
FANET & Flying Ad Hoc Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
FDA & Fisher Discriminant Analysis \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
FDI & False Data Injection \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
FSMC & Finite State Markov Channel \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
GMM & Gaussian Mixture Model \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
HetNet & Heterogeneous Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
HMM & Hidden Markov Model \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
ICA & Independent Component Analysis \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
IEEE & Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
IoT & Internet of Things \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
ITS & Intelligent Transportation System \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
KNN & K-Nearest Neighbors \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
LED & Light Emitting Diode \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
LOS & Line of Sight \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
LS & Least Square \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
LSTM & Long Short Term Memory \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
LTE & Long Term Evolution \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
M2M & Machine to Machine \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
MANET & Mobile Ad Hoc Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
MAP & Maximum a Posteriori \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
MDP & Markov Decision Process \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
MIMO & Multiple-Input and Multiple-Output \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
MLE & Maximum Likelihood Estimation \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
mMTC & massive Machine Type of Communication \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
NB-IoT & NarrowBand Internet of Things \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
NB-M2M & NarrowBand Machine to Machine \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
NFV & Network Function Virtualization \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
NLOS & Non-Line of Sight \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
NGWN & Next-Generation Wireless Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
NOMA & Non-Orthogonal Multiple Access \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
OFDM & Orthogonal Frequency Division Multiplexing \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
OSPF & Open Shortest Path First \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
P2P & Peer to Peer \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
PCA & Principal Component Analysis \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
POMDP & Partially Observable Markov Decision Process \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
PU & Primary User \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
QoE & Quality of Experience \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
QoS & Quality of Service \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
RAT & Radio Access Technology \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
RBM & Restricted Boltzmann Machine \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
RBF & Radial Basis Function \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
RFID & Radio Frequency IDentification \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
RNN & Recurrent Neural Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
RRU & Remote Radio Unit \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
SDA & Stacked Denoising Auto-encoder \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
SDN & Software Defined Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
SDR & Software Defined Radio \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
SE & Spectrum Efficiency \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
SG & Stochastic Geometry \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
SRM & Structural Risk Minimization \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
STBC & Space Time Block Code \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
SU & Secondary User \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
SVM & Support Vector Machine \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
TAS & Transmit Antenna Selection \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
TCP & Transmission Control Protocol \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
TD & Temporal Difference \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
TOA & Time of Arrival \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
UAV & Unmanned Aerial Vehicle \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
UDN & Ultra Dense Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
uRLLC & ultra-Reliable Low-Latency Communication \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
V2I & Vehicle to Infrastructure \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
V2V & Vehicle to Vehicle \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
V2X & Vehicle to Everything \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
VANET & Vehicular Ad Hoc Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
VLC & Visible Light Communication \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
VR & Virtual Reality \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
WANET & Wireless Ad Hoc Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
WBAN & Wireless Body Area Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
WLAN & Wireless Local Area Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
WiMAX & Worldwide Interoperability for Microwave Access \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
Wi-Fi & Wireless Fidelity \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
WMAN & Wireless Metropolitan Area Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
WPAN & Wireless Personal Area Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
WSN & Wireless Sensor Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\begin{tabular}{>{\raggedright}p{1.5cm}>{\raggedright}p{7cm}}
WWAN & Wireless Wide Area Network \tabularnewline
\end{tabular}
\section{Introduction}
\label{Introduction}
\IEEEPARstart{W}{ireless} networks have supported a variety of military services, intelligent transportation, healthcare, etc. To elaborate briefly, next-generation mobile networks are expected to support high date rate communication~\cite{agiwal2016next}. As a complement, wireless sensor networks (WSN) support sustained monitoring in unmanned or hostile environments relying on widely dispersed operating sensors~\cite{rawat2014wireless}. Furthermore, the popular Wi-Fi network provides convenient Internet access for various devices in indoor scenarios~\cite{deng2017ieee}. With the rapid proliferation of portable mobile devices and the demand for a high quality of service (QoS) and quality of experience (QoE), next-generation wireless networks (NGWN) will continue to support a broad range of compelling applications, where the users benefit from high-rate, low-latency, low-cost and reliable information services.
\subsection{Motivation}
In contrast to the operational wireless networks, NGWNs have the following evolutionary tendency~\cite{larsson2014massive,kalil2017framework}:
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Network Scale}: The NGWN is associated with a tremendous network size including all kinds of entities, each of which has different service capabilities as well as requirements. Furthermore, interactions among these entities result in a diverse variety of traffic, such as text, voice, audio, images, video, etc.
\item \emph{Network Structure}: On one hand, the NGWN tends to have a self-configuring element, where each entity cooperatively completes tasks. This characteristic is termed as ``being as hoc''. On the other hand, the NGWN is heterogeneous and hierarchical, having different network slices\footnote{In our paper, network slices are multiple logical networks running on the top of a shared physical network infrastructure and operated by a control center.}. Furthermore, the mobility of entities results in a complex time-variant network structure, which requires dynamic time-space association.
\item \emph{Network Control}: NGWNs facilitate convenient reconfiguration by software-based network management, hence improving network flexibility and efficiency.
\end{itemize}
Machine learning was first introduced as a popular technique of realizing artificial intelligence in the late 1950's~\cite{samuel1959some}. Machine learning algorithms can learn from training data without being explicitly programmed. It is beneficial for classification/regression, prediction, clustering and decision making~\cite{alpaydin2014introduction,michalski2013machine,jordan2015machine}, whilst relying on the following three basic elements~\cite{vapnik1999overview}:
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Model}: Mathematical or signal models are constructed from training data and expert knowledge, in order to statistically describe the characteristics of the given data set. Then again, relying on these trained models, machine learning can be used for classification, prediction and decision making. In case the appropriate models are not available, techniques on the feature extraction or knowledge discovery can be developed to achieve the same goal.
\item \emph{Strategy}: The criteria used for training mathematical models are called strategies. How to select an appropriate strategy is closely associated with training data. Empirical risk minimization~\cite{vapnik1992principles} and structural risk minimization~\cite{guyon1992structural} constitute a pair of fundamental strategies, where the latter can beneficially avoid the notorious ``over-fitting'' phenomenon.
\item \emph{Algorithm}: Algorithms are constructed to find solutions based on predetermined model and strategy selected, which can be viewed as an optimization process. A powerful algorithm can find a globally optimal solution with high probability at a low computational complexity and storage.
\end{itemize}
In the last thirty years, machine learning has been successfully applied to the field of computer vision~\cite{sebe2005machine}, automatic control~\cite{fu1971learning}, bioinformatics~\cite{baldi2001bioinformatics}, etc.
Considering the aforementioned characteristics of the NGWN, data-driven machine learning can also become a powerful technique of network association for substantially improving the network performance. This is achieved by accurately learning the physical reality compared to traditional model-driven optimization algorithms based on the assumptions detailed in~\cite{jiang2017machine}. More specifically,
\begin{itemize}
\item The wireless traffic data torrance may be conveniently managed by the \emph{big data processing capability} of machine learning~\cite{qiu2016survey}. For example, in 5G system, the traffic volume generated by on-demand information and entertainment is predicted to substantially increase over the next decade, and an average smart phone may generate 4.4 GB data per month by the year 2020~\cite{osseiran2014scenarios,index2015cisco,cao2017towards}. The massive amount of data constitutes a large training set, which can be statistically exploited for extracting the internal correlations and for conducting classification and prediction with the aid of machine leaning algorithms.
\item \emph{Modeling and parameter estimation} play an important role in NGWNs. For instance, in massive multiple-input and multiple-output (MIMO) systems, an accurate estimate of the channel state information (CSI) may critically improve the whole system's capacity. Traditional mathematical models may not be able to accurately describe system in typical time-varying scenarios. Machine learning provides an alternative technique of adaptive modeling and parameter estimation relying on learning from history.
\item NGWNs require both individual node intelligence and swarm intelligence~\cite{kennedy2011particle}. Moreover, as for resource allocation and management, we tend to strike a trade-off among numerous factors, such as the capacity, power consumption, latency, interference, etc. rather than only considering a single aspect. Thanks to learning from trial and error, machine learning is conducive to supporting \emph{intelligent multi-objective decision making} in the context of multi-agent collaborative network management. NGWN can have further potential to enable more effective multi-agent artificial intelligent systems.
\item NGWNs have the tendency to take into account the \emph{human behaviors}, for example by taking into account the geographic deployment of access points (AP) in an ultra dense network (UDN), where user-centric designs have been conceived for reducing the cluster-edge effects. By mimicking human intelligence, machine learning may be deemed to be the most appropriate tool for adapting the network's structure and function to the human behaviors observed~\cite{pantic2007human,pentland1999modeling}.
\end{itemize}
In recent years, a range of surveys have been conceived on machine learning paradigms. Some of them focused their scope on a specific wireless scenario, such as WSNs~\cite{alsheikh2014machine,kulkarni2011computational}, cognitive radio networks (CRN)~\cite{bkassiny2013survey,gavrilovska2013learning,he2010survey}, Internet of Things (IoT)~\cite{park2016learning}, wireless ad hoc networks (WANET)~\cite{forster2007machine}, self-organizing cellular networks~\cite{klaine2017survey}, etc. Specifically, Alsheikh \textit{et al.}~\cite{alsheikh2014machine} provided an extensive overview of machine learning methods applied to WSNs which improved the resource exploitation and prolonged the lifespan of the network.
Kulkarni \textit{et al.}~\cite{kulkarni2011computational} surveyed some common issues of WSNs solved by computational intelligence algorithms, such as data fusion, routing, task scheduling, localization, etc. Moreover, Bkassiny \textit{et al.}~\cite{bkassiny2013survey} investigated decision-making and feature classification problems solved by both centralized
and decentralized learning algorithms in CRN in a non-Markovian environment. Gavrilovska \textit{et al.}~\cite{gavrilovska2013learning} studied the nature of the CRN's capability of reasoning and learning.
Park \textit{et al.}~\cite{park2016learning} reviewed a range of learning aided frameworks designed for adapting to the heterogeneous resource-constrained IoT environment. Forster~\cite{forster2007machine} portrayed the advantages of using machine learning for the data routing problem of WANETs. Furthermore, a detailed literature review of the past fifteen years of machine learning techniques applied
to self-configuration, self-optimization and self-healing, was provided by Klaine \textit{et al.}~\cite{klaine2017survey}.
Some of the literature was restricted to a specific application~\cite{al2015application,fadlullah2017state,nguyen2008survey,buczak2016survey}, whilst others considered a single learning technique~\cite{usama2017unsupervised,yau2012reinforcement,alsheikh2016mobile,ota2017deep}. To elaborate, Al-Rawi \textit{et al.}~\cite{al2015application} presented an overview of the features, methods and performance enhancement of learning-assisted routing schemes in the context of distributed wireless networks.
Additionally, Fadlullah \textit{et al.}~\cite{fadlullah2017state} provided an overview of the state-of-the-art in learning aided network traffic control schemes as well as in deep learning aided intelligent routing strategies, while Nguyen \textit{et al.}~\cite{nguyen2008survey} focused their attention on the machine learning techniques conceived for Internet traffic classification. Machine learning and data mining assisted cyber intrusion detection were surveyed in~\cite{buczak2016survey}, including the complexity comparison of each algorithm and a set of recommendations concerning the best methods applied to different cyber intrusion detection problems.
As for exploring learning techniques, Usama \textit{et al.}~\cite{usama2017unsupervised} provided an overview
of the recent advances of unsupervised learning in the context of networking, such as traffic classification, anomaly detection, network optimization, etc. Yau \textit{et al.}~\cite{yau2012reinforcement} investigated the employment of reinforcement learning invoked for achieving context awareness and intelligence in a variety of wireless network applications such as data routing, resource allocation and dynamic channel selection.
The authors of~\cite{alsheikh2016mobile} and~\cite{ota2017deep} focused their attention on the benefit of deep learning in wireless multimedia network applications, including ambient sensing, cyber-security, resource optimization, etc. The main contributions of the existing machine learning aided wireless networks survey and tutorial papers are contrasted in Fig.~\ref{timeline} to this survey.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{timeline.pdf}\\
\caption{The timeline of survey papers about different learning paradigms in wireless networks.}\label{timeline}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Contributions}
Hence, our focus is on the comprehensive survey of machine learning aided NGWNs. Inspired by above-mentioned challenges, in this article we review the development of machine learning aided wireless networks. We commence by investigating a series of popular learning algorithms and their compelling applications in NGWN and then provide some specific examples based on some recent research results, followed by a range of promising open issues in the design of future networks.
Our original contributions are summarized as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item We critically review the thirty-year history of machine learning. Depending on how we use training data, we classify machine learning algorithms into three categories, i.e. supervised learning~\cite{suthaharan2016supervised}, unsupervised learning~\cite{barlow1989unsupervised} and reinforcement learning~\cite{sutton1998reinforcement}. In addition, we highlight the family of deep learning algorithms, given their success in the field of signal processing.
\item The development of wireless networks is reviewed from their birth to NGWNs. Moreover, we summarize the evolution of wireless networking techniques, and characterize a variety of representative scenarios for the NGWN.
\item We appraise a range of typical supervised, unsupervised, reinforcement learning as well as deep learning algorithms. Moreover, their compelling applications in wireless networks are surveyed for assisting the readers in refining the motivation of machine learning in NGWN, all the way from the physical layer to the application layer.
\item Relying on recent research results, we highlight a pair of examples conceived for wireless networks, which can help the readers to gain the insight into hitherto unexplored scenarios and into their applications in NGWNs.
\end{itemize}
\subsection{Organization}
The remainder of this article is outlined as follows. In Section~\ref{A Brief Overview of Machine Learning and Wireless Networks}, we provide a brief overview of the history of machine learning and of the development of wireless networks. In Section~\ref{Supervised Learning in NGWN}, we introduce a range of typical supervised learning algorithms and highlight their compelling applications in wireless networks. In Section~\ref{Unsupervised Learning in NGWN}, we investigate the family of unsupervised leaning algorithms and their related applications. Some popular reinforcement learning algorithms are elaborated on in Section~\ref{Reinforcement Learning in NGWN}. Moreover, we present two examples of how these reinforcement learning algorithms can improve the performance of wireless networks. In Section~\ref{Deep Learning in NGWN}, we introduce some typical deep learning algorithms and their applications in NGWNs.
Some future research ideas and our conclusions are provided in Section~\ref{Future Research and Conclusions}. The structure of this treatise is summarized at a glance in Fig.~\ref{skeleton}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.47\textwidth]{skeleton.pdf}\\
\caption{The structure of this treatise.}\label{skeleton}
\end{figure}
\section{A Brief Overview of Machine Learning and Wireless Networks}
\label{A Brief Overview of Machine Learning and Wireless Networks}
\subsection{The Thirty-Year Development of Machine Learning}
The term ``machine learning'' was first proposed by Arthur Samuel in 1959~\cite{samuel1959some}, which referred to computer systems having the capability of learning from their large amounts of previous tasks and data, as well as of self-optimizing computer algorithms. Hard-programmed algorithms are difficult to adapt to dynamically fluctuating demands and constantly renewed system states. By contrast, relying on learning from previous experiences, machine learning aided algorithms are beneficial for scientific decision making and task prediction, which is achieved by constructing a self-adaption model from sample inputs. To elaborate a little further, as for the concept of ``learning'', Tom M. Mitchell~\cite{mitchell1997does} provided the widely quoted description: ``\emph{A computer program is said to learn from experience $E$ with respect to some class of tasks $T$ and performance measure $P$, if its performance at tasks in $T$, as measured by $P$, improves with experience $E$}.''
Machine learning began to flourish in the 1990s~\cite{michalski2013machine}. Before this era, logic- and knowledge-based schemes, such as inductive logic programming, expert systems, etc. dominated the artificial intelligence scene relying on high-level human-readable symbolic representations of tasks and logic. Thanks to the development of statistics theory and stochastic approximation, machine learning schemes regained researchers' attention leading to a range of beneficial probabilistic models. Researchers embarked on creating date-driven programs for analyzing a large amount of data and tried to draw conclusions or to learn from the data. During this era, machine learning algorithms such as neural networks as well as kernel methods became mature. During the 2000s, researchers gradually renewed their interest in deep learning with the aid of the advances in hardware-based computational capability, which made machine learning indispensable for supporting a wide range of services and applications.
Given the development of progressive learning techniques~\cite{su2003relevance}, at present, the research focus of machine learning has shifted from ``learning being the purpose'' to ``learning being the method''. Specifically, machine learning algorithms no longer blindly pursue to imitate the learning capability of human beings, instead they focus more on the task-oriented intelligent data-driven analysis. Nowadays, thanks to the abundance of raw data and to the frequent interaction between exploration and exploitation, machine learning algorithms have prospered in the fields of computer vision, data mining, intelligent control, etc. NGWNs aim for providing ubiquitous information services for users in a variety of scenarios. However, the rapid growth in the number of users and the resulted explosive growth of tele-traffic data pushes the limits of network-capacity. As a remedy, machine learning aided network management and control can be viewed as a corner stone of NGWNs in view of their limited power, spectrum and cost.
\subsection{Classifying Machine Learning Techniques}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{machinelearning.pdf}\\
\caption{The categories, characteristics and applications of machine learning algorithms.}\label{machine learning}
\end{figure*}
Again, depending on how training data is used, machine learning algorithms can be grouped into three categories, i.e. supervised learning, unsupervised learning and reinforcement learning~\cite{mohri2012foundations,christopher2016pattern}.
In the following, we will provide a brief description of the three types of algorithms.
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Supervised Learning}: The algorithms are trained on a certain amount of labeled data~\cite{suthaharan2016supervised}. Both the input data and its desired label are known to the computer, resulting in a data-label pair. Their goal is to infer a function that maps the input data to the output label relying on the training of sample data-label pairs. Specifically, considering a set of $N$ sample data-label pairs in the form of $\{(x_1, y_1), (x_2, y_2),\dots (x_N, y_N)\}$, where $x_n$ is the $n$-th sample input data and $y_n$ represents its label. Let $\mathbb{X}=\{x_1, x_2, \dots, x_N\}$ denote the input data set and $\mathbb{Y}=\{y_1, y_2, \dots, y_N\}$ represent the output label set. Usually, these sample pairs are independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.). The learning algorithms aim for seeking a function $g(x)$ that yields the highest value of the score function $f(x,y)$, hence we have $g(x)=\argmax\limits_{y} f(x,y)$. As a special case, if only part of the sample data-label pairs are known to the computer and some of the desired output labels of input data are missing, the corresponding learning algorithms are termed as semi-supervised learning\footnote{In this paper, semi-supervised learning algorithms are viewed as a specific category of supervised learning algorithms. However, in some of the literature, semi-supervised learning is listed as a separate member of the machine learning family}. These supervised learning algorithms can be widely used in the context of classification, regression and prediction.
\item \emph{Unsupervised Learning}: Relying on unlabeled input data, unsupervised learning algorithms try to explore the hidden features or structure of the data~\cite{barlow1989unsupervised,hastie2009unsupervised}. Given the lack of sample data-label pairs, there is no standard accuracy evaluation for the output of unsupervised learning algorithms, which is the main difference compared to its supervised learning aided counterpart. By analyzing $N$ input data $\mathbb{X}=\{x_1, x_2, \dots, x_N\}$, a pair of popular methods has been conceived for revealing the underlying unknown features of $N$ input data, namely density estimation~\cite{silverman2018density} as well as feature extraction~\cite{guyon2006introduction}. To elaborate, density estimation aided methods are characterized by explicitly building statistical models of how the underlying features might create the input. By contrast, feature extraction based techniques aim for directly extracting statistical regularities or even sometimes irregularities from the input data set.
\item \emph{Reinforcement Learning}: In contrast to the aforementioned two learning techniques, reinforcement learning algorithms are conceived for decision making by learning from interaction with the environment, which are trained by the data on the basis of trial and error~\cite{sutton1998reinforcement,kaelbling1996reinforcement}. They neither try to identify a category as supervised learning algorithms do, nor do they aim for finding hidden structures as unsupervised learning algorithms do. Specifically, at each time step, the system or environment is in some state $S$, and the agent selects a legitimate action $A$. The system responds at the next time step by moving into a new state $S'$ with a certain probability influenced both by the specific action chosen as well as by the system's inherent transitions. Meanwhile, the agent receives a corresponding reward $r(S,A)$ from the system, as time evolves. Reinforcement learning algorithms aim for learning how to map situations $S$ into actions $A$ in order to attain the maximal cumulative weighted reward within the horizon in such a closed-loop fashion.
\end{itemize}
As an important member of the machine learning family, \emph{deep learning} has been booming since 2010, because it was found to be capable of handling the soaring growth of training data volume facilitated by the rapid development of computing hardware~\cite{lecun2015deep,schmidhuber2015deep}. Deep learning algorithms rely on
a multiple-layer ``network'' consisting of inter-connected nodes for feature extraction and transformation, which is inspired by the biological nervous system, namely the neural network. Each layer utilizes the output of the previous layer as its input. The term ``deep'' refers to having multiple layers in the network.
Generally, relying on the way the training data is exploited, deep learning algorithms can also be classified into deep supervised learning, deep unsupervised learning as well as deep reinforcement learning~\cite{lecun2015deep}. Moreover, some deep learning network architectures, such as deep neural networks (DNN)~\cite{mnih2015human}, deep belief networks (DBN)~\cite{hinton2009deep}, recurrent neural networks (RNN)~\cite{pascanu2013construct} and convolutional neural networks (CNN)~\cite{krizhevsky2012imagenet}, have had success in a range of fields including computer vision, speech recognition, etc. They have also been invoked in compelling applications of wireless networks.
Fig.~\ref{machine learning} shows the involvement of machine learning in NGWNs based on the aforementioned four categories. Below we list a variety of popular learning algorithms and highlight their applications in NGWNs.
\subsection{Development of Wireless Networks}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{develwireless.pdf}\\
\caption{The development of wireless networks interspersed with ever-accelerated milestone techniques.}\label{wireless develop}
\end{figure*}
Just as the terminology implies, wireless networks connect various network nodes via electromagnetic waves.
Relying on their coverage, wireless networks can be roughly classified into four categories, such as wireless personal area networks (WPAN)~\cite{gutierrez2004low}, wireless local area networks (WLAN)~\cite{crow1997ieee}, wireless metropolitan area networks (WMAN)~\cite{eklund2006wirelessman} and wireless wide area networks (WWAN)~\cite{hansen2008wide}. Correspondingly, a family of networking standards and their variants that cover most of the physical layer specifications have been established by the IEEE 802 Working groups, including the IEEE 802.15 for WPAN, IEEE 802.11 for WLAN, IEEE 802.16 for WMAN and IEEE 802.20 for WWAN standards. Furthermore, when considering the network's functions, some popular representatives of wireless networks include cellular networks~\cite{gupta2015survey}, WSNs~\cite{baronti2007wireless}, WANETs~\cite{ilyas2017handbook}, wireless body area networks (WBAN)~\cite{movassaghi2014wireless}, etc.
The first wireless network, namely ALOHANET, was developed at the University of Hawaii in 1969 and came into operation in 1971, which for the first time transmitted wireless data packets over a network~\cite{abramson1985development}. The first commercial wireless network was the WaveLAN product family designed by the NCR Corporation in 1986. In 1997, the first IEEE 802.11 protocol was released for WLAN~\cite{crow1997ieee}. Afterwards, the emergence and progress of reliable and low-cost Wi-Fi marked the maturity of wireless networking technologies at the end of the 20th century, which facilitated Internet access for a range of Wi-Fi compatible devices including personal computers, smart phones, etc. NGWNs aim for providing high-rate, low-latency, full-coverage and low-cost yet reliable information services. Compared to traditional wireless networks connecting humans and their devices, NGWNs are expected to interconnect everything under the umbrella of the `Internet of Everything'. Fig.~\ref{wireless develop} demonstrates the development of wireless networks in terms of their milestone techniques.
Wireless networks have evolved from the simple client-server (C-S) mode to the distributed dense multi-layer C-S mode, and finally to the ad hoc peer-to-peer (P2P) mode.
The decentralization of network architectures grant more freedom both for the network nodes and their protocols, which requires more sophisticated techniques for supporting efficient and reliable implementations. Furthermore, the soaring growth of both the type and the amount of data provides a promising field of applications for machine learning algorithms, which are beneficial for self-organized and self-adaptive network architectures.
\subsection{Representative Techniques in NGWNs}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{wirelessnetwork.pdf}\\
\caption{The representative application scenarios and related techniques of NGWNs.}\label{wireless network}
\end{figure*}
As shown in Fig.~\ref{wireless network}, we first of all portray the representative application scenarios and techniques of NGWNs.
In the following, we will briefly introduce a range of compelling techniques and their development trends in NGWNs, which is summarized in Fig.~\ref{development tendency}.
\subsubsection{From MIMO to Massive MIMO}
The MIMO technology relying on multiple antennas in both the transmitter and receiver can be viewed as a breakthrough in terms of multiplying the capacity of a radio link compared to the single-transmit single-receive antenna aided wireless system having a variety of cost, technology and regulatory constraints~\cite{pan2013capacity}. Both single-user MIMO (SU-MIMO) and Multi-user MIMO (MU-MIMO) schemes have been proposed. To elaborate, multiple data streams of the same source are sent to a single user in SU-MIMO, while a transmitter simultaneously serves multiple users on the same channel resource in MU-MIMO~\cite{liu2012downlink,wang2014pair}.
Generally, invoking more antennas is beneficial in terms of improving the data rate and/or link reliability~\cite{larsson2014massive,rusek2013scaling,pan2018many,wang2015design}.
However, the performance degradation caused by inaccurate CSI and the high computational complexity of channel estimation constitute substantial challenges~\cite{goldsmith2003capacity}.
\subsubsection{From D2D, M2M to IoT}
In the spirit of direct communication between nearby mobile devices without traversing base stations (BS) or core networks, device-to-device (D2D) communication networks have been widely investigated in recent years, which can be deemed to be important milestones on the road towards self-organization and P2P collaboration. In D2D networks, the same resource slots can be reused both by the D2D links as well as the cellular links, which is capable of substantially improving the network capacity. Moreover, it is potentially beneficial in terms of enhancing the energy efficiency (EE), also reducing the transmission delay and improving the network's fairness to users~\cite{wang2016mobile,feng2013device}, which is also closely related to
machine-to-machine (M2M) communications. The corresponding massive machine type of communication (mMTC)~\cite{lien2011toward} mode of the 5G network\footnote{In 2015, International Telecommunication Union (ITU) officially defined three application scenarios of 5G network, i.e. enhanced mobile broad band (eMBB), massive machine type communication (mMTC) and ultra reliable low latency communication (uRLLC).} is capable of supporting sensing, transmitting, fusion and processing sensory data. Furthermore, M2M is also capable of supporting the smart home~\cite{zhang2011home}, smart grid~\cite{niyato2011machine}, etc.
Aiming for ``connecting everything'', IoT was first defined for enabling objects to connect and exchange data in 1999~\cite{al2015internet}. Furthermore, the IoT allows objects to be sensed and controlled remotely, creating opportunities for direct interaction between the physical world and computer-based virtual systems, which is beneficial in terms of improving operational efficiency and of reducing human intervention.
Both WSNs and M2M communications can be viewed as a part of the IoT. Although the IoT faces a range of reliability, robustness and security challenges, there is no doubt that it will make our world ever smarter~\cite{chiang2016fog,kaur2018edge}.
\subsubsection{From UDN to HetNet}
In order to meet the demand of supporting massive data traffic, the so-called UDN architecture has been defined where the density of BSs or APs potentially reaches or even exceeds the density of users~\cite{zhang2017energy,zhang2015resource}. The UDN architecture is conducive to increasing the network capacity as well as simultaneously improving the user experience. However, the interference encountered in UDNs tends to be more severe and of higher volatility than that in traditional cellular networks because of the dense deployment of BSs and APs. Hence, the joint consideration of resource allocation, interference management and traffic routing are essential for UDNs~\cite{gupta2015survey,andrews2016we}.
Considering a wide area network scenario, heterogeneous networks (HetNet) are characterized by the employment of multiple types of radio access technologies (RAT)~\cite{hoadley2012enabling}. Upon combining macrocells, microcells, picocells~\cite{zhang2015practical} and femtocells~\cite{zhang2014resource,jiang2014optimal}, HetNets are capable of providing a seamless wireless coverage ranging from outdoor environments to office buildings and even to underground areas by selecting another RAT when a RAT fails, and HetNets can also provide load-balancing in the face of non-uniform spatial distribution of users~\cite{zhang2016self}.
\subsubsection{From DBS to C-RAN}
Compared to the traditional BS, which integrates baseband processing units (BBU) and remote radio units (RRU)\footnote{In some works, RRU is also called remote radio head (RRH)} in a single cabinet, distributed base station (DBS) aided systems separate the BBU as well as the RRU and connects them with optical fiber.
The DBS system allows more flexibility in network planning and deployment, where RRUs can be placed a few hundred meters or a few kilometres away for enhancing network's edge-coverage.
Cloud-radio access networks (C-RAN) can be viewed as an evolution of the aforementioned DBS system, which is a centralized processing and cloud computing aided radio access network architecture~\cite{wu2015cloud}. The principle of C-RAN relies on gathering the BBUs from several BSs into a centralized BBU pool, whilst allowing hundreds of RRUs to connect to the centralized BBU pool~\cite{checko2015cloud}. Hence, resources can be allocated to each user based on joint dynamic scheduling. By exploiting coordination and virtualization, the spectral efficiency (SE), the system's flexibility and the load balancing capability are substantially improved. Moreover, the centralized management of resources reduces the cost of the system's operation and maintenance.
\subsubsection{From SDN to NFV}
Software-defined networking (SDN) is employed as a programmable network architecture in order to achieve cost-effective dynamic network configuration and monitoring~\cite{xia2015survey,liang2015wireless}.
The SDN philosophy suggests to centralize network intelligence in a single network component by
decoupling the control plane and the data plane, which disassociates network control and its forwarding functions. The two planes can communicate with the aid of the OpenFlow protocol\footnote{The OpenFlow protocol is a communication protocol that gives access to the forwarding plane of a switcher or router over the network.}, and the network resources can be managed logically and efficiently. A SDN connects decentralized users to cloud computing through a ``network pipeline''~\cite{kim2013improving}~\cite{jain2013network}.
Relying on IT virtualization techniques, network function virtualization (NFV) transforms the entire set of network node functions into different building blocks, which separates the networking functions from specific hardware blocks~\cite{han2015network}. Hence, NFV is eminently suitable for service diversification and promotes the standardization of networking equipment~\cite{li2015software}. Explicitly, NFV can be viewed as a beneficial hardware-agnostic design in the application layer of SDN architectures.
\subsubsection{From EH to EA}
Energy harvesting (EH) is an environmentally friendly process, which captures and stores ambient energy, such as solar power, thermal energy, wind energy, etc. for low-power wireless devices~\cite{sudevalayam2011energy}, especially in WSNs and WBANs, for example.
In NGWNs, energy optimization is a significant concern motivated by mitigating climate change. However, energy consumption is related to both the network's throughput and to its entire lifetime with a trade-off between them.
As a remedy, instead of only focusing on EH, energy awareness (EA) at every stage of the network's design and management is the most promising approach to striking a trade-off amongst the conflicting objectives of reducing energy consumption, improving the system's throughput as well as prolonging its lifetime, especially in energy-constrained networks~\cite{raghunathan2002energy,saleh2014survey}.
\subsubsection{From CR to CogNet}
Cognitive radio (CR) constitutes a technique that allows us to dynamically and efficiently exploit the wireless spectral resources~\cite{haykin2005cognitive,jiang2014dynamic,yucek2009survey,jiang2013joint}. By relying on spectrum sensing, CR is capable of achieving dynamic spectrum access and spectrum sharing. Specifically, in the process of spectrum sensing, the secondary user (SU) detects an empty slicer of spectrum, for example, based on energy detection schemes. Then, in the process of spectrum access, power control is invoked by the SU for maximizing its capacity, whilst observing the interference power constraint in order to protect the primary user (PU). As a benefit, CR dynamically and flexibly exploits the scarce wireless spectral resources, hence substantially improving the spectrum efficiency~\cite{jiang2014jsac}.
In contrast to CR techniques, which only deal with the issues of physical-layer spectrum sensing and data link-layer access, cognitive networks (CogNet) are characterized by a cognitive cross-layer process according to their end-to-end goals, where the overall network conditions are monitored, and then decisions are made based on the perceived conditions as well as on the feedback and experience gleaned from previous actions~\cite{thomas2006cognitive}. The network's cognitive capability relies on a range of advanced techniques, such as knowledge representation and machine learning, which exploit a wealth of information generated within the network improving both the network management, the resource efficiency~\cite{manoj2008cognet} and the energy efficiency~\cite{jiang2014energy}.
\subsubsection{Interference Management}
{\color{black}
Interference constitutes the fundamental limiting factor of the overall wireless system performance, hence it is a key challenge faced by designers. Therefore susbtantial efforts have been dedicated to exploiting the communication channel's state information (CSI) either at the transmitter (CSIT) or at the receiver (CSIR) for mitigating the effects of interference. Hence diverse time/frequency/space division multiple access based resource allocation schemes have been conceived for avoiding interference by creating orthogonal resource units~\cite{turkboylari1998efficient,ma2010interference,kountouris2012downlink}. Creative efforts have also been dedicated to the conception of non-orthogonal access systems, as exemplified by a large variety of cognitive radio~\cite{zhang2016interference} and non-orthogonal multiple access (NOMA) schemes~\cite{liu2017nonorthogonal} relying on sophisticated transceiver designs. Additionally, multi-antenna based techniques, such as joint/partial pre/postcoding and antenna selection, have also been proposed for ameliorataing the effects of interference by exploiting the benefits of spatial diversity~\cite{paulraj2004overview}.
A closely related issue in NGWNs is interference management, which is a particularly critical task in ultra-dense networks in the face of their stringent throughput, delay and reliability specifications. Hence sophisticated resource allocation and interference management schemes are required. Therefore a range of machine learning algorithms have also been invoked for interference management relying on their environmental awareness and learning capability~\cite{attar2011interference,deb2015learning,bernardo2011intercell}.
}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{tendency.pdf}\\
\caption{The development trends of NGWNs.}\label{development tendency}
\end{figure*}
{\color{black}
\subsection{Multi-Objective Metrics of NGWNs}
The challenging real-world optimization problems encountered in NGWNs usually have to meet multiple objectives in order to arrive at an attractive solution~\cite{fei2017survey}. In contrast to conventional single-objective optimization where we find the global optimum relying on a single metric, multi-objective optimization aims for finding the globally optimal solution relying on the notion of Pareto optimality~\cite{censor1977pareto}. The aim of multi-objective optimization in NGWNs is that of generating a diverse set of Pareto-optimal solutions, where by definition it is only possible to improve any of the metrics considered at the cost of degrading at least one of the others. The collection of Pareto-optimal points is referred to as the Pareto front.
In terms of metrics, the wireless community has invested decades of research efforts into making near-capacity single-user operation a reality~\cite{gupta2000capacity}, which is however only possible at the cost of an ever-increasing delay, complexity and power consumption. However, in the context of next-generation wireless communication networks, we would like to be more ambitious than 'only' optimize the network's capacity - for delay-sensitive services we would like to reduce the latency and/or reduce the total energy consumption, as well as to improve the system's reliability and the user's QoS. By contrast, in wireless sensor networks we may concentrate on optimizing both the connectivity and the network's life time, just to name a few. In this context the family of machine-learning techniques may be viewed as an attractive set of optimization tools for finding Pareto-optimumal solutions of multi-objective optimization problems in NGWNs, which tend to have a large search-space. To expound a little further, it is plausible that every time we incorporate an additional parameter into the objective function, the search-space is expanded and the surface of optimal solutions may exhibit numerous locally optimal solutions. Hence traditional gradient-based techniques routinely fail to find the global optimum. In this context Fig.~\ref{metrics} portrays some popular metrics commonly used in constructing multi-objective optimization problems in NGWNs.
}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{metrics.pdf}\\
\caption{Useful metrics commonly used in constructing multi-objective optimization problems.}\label{metrics}
\end{figure*}
\section{Supervised Learning in NGWN}
\label{Supervised Learning in NGWN}
Having covered the networking basics, in this section, we will introduce some rudimentary supervised learning algorithms, such as regression, K-nearest neighbors (KNN), support vector machines (SVM) and Bayes classification including their applications in NGWN.
Table~\ref{tbsup} summarizes some of the typical applications of the above-mentioned four supervised learning algorithms in NGWN.
\subsection{Regression and Its Applications}
\subsubsection{Methods}
Regression analysis is capable of estimating the relationships among variables. Relying on modeling the functional relationship between a dependent variable (objective) and one or more independent variables (predictors), regression constitutes a powerful statistical tool of predicting and forecasting a continuous-valued objective given a set of predictors.
In regression analysis, there are three variables, namely the
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{Independent variables} (predictors): $X$
\item \emph{Dependent variable} (objective): $Y$
\item \emph{Other unknown parameters} that affect the estimated value of the dependent variable: $\varepsilon$
\end{itemize}
The regression function $f$ models the functional $Y$ vs $X$ relationship perturbed by $\varepsilon$, which can be formulated as: $Y=f(X, \varepsilon)$. Usually, we characterize this relationship in terms of a specific regression function with the aid of its probability distribution. Moreover, the approximation is often modeled as $E=[Y\mid X]=f(X, \varepsilon)$.
When conducting regression analysis, first of all we have to determine the specific form of the regression function $f$, which relies on both the common knowledge about the dependent vs independent variables as well as on its convenient evaluation.
Based on the specific form of regression function, regression analysis methods can be classified as ordinary linear regression~\cite{seber2012linear}, logistic regression~\cite{hosmer2013applied}, polynomial regression~\cite{max1976segmented}, etc.
In linear regression, the dependent variable is a linear combination of the independent variables or unknown parameters. Let us assume having $N$ random training samples and $M$ independent variables, formulated as $\{y_n, x_{n1}, x_{n2},\dots, x_{nM}\}, n=1,2,\dots,N$. Then the linear regression function can be formulated as:
\begin{equation}\label{1inear}
y_n=\varepsilon_0+\varepsilon_1x_{n1}+\varepsilon_2x_{n2}+\dots+\varepsilon_Mx_{nM}+e_n,
\end{equation}
where $\varepsilon_0$ is termed as the regression intercept, while $e_{n}$ is the error term and $n=1,2,\dots,N$. Hence, Eq.~(\ref{1inear}) can be rewritten in the form of a matrix as $\pmb y=\pmb X\pmb\varepsilon+\pmb e$, where $\pmb y=[y_1,y_2,\dots,y_N]^{T}$ is an observation vector of the dependent variable and $\pmb e=[e_1,e_2,\dots,e_N]^{T}$, while $\pmb \varepsilon=[\varepsilon_0,\varepsilon_2,\dots,\varepsilon_M]^{T}$ and $\pmb X$ represents the observation matrix of independent variables, given by:
\begin{equation*}
\pmb X =\left[ \begin{matrix}
1 & {{x}_{11}} & \cdots & {{x}_{1M}} \\
1 & {{x}_{21}} & \cdots & {{x}_{2M}} \\
\vdots & \vdots & \ddots & \vdots \\
1 & {{x}_{N1}} & \cdots & {{x}_{NM}} \\
\end{matrix} \right].
\end{equation*}
Linear regression analysis~\cite{seber2012linear} aims for estimating the unknown parameter ${\widehat{\pmb \varepsilon}}$ relying on the least squares (LS) criterion. The corresponding solution can be expressed as:
\begin{equation}\label{linear solution}
{\widehat{\pmb \varepsilon}}=({\pmb X}^{T}\pmb X)^{-1}{\pmb X}^{T}\pmb y.
\end{equation}
By contrast, in logistic regression~\cite{hosmer2013applied}, the dependent variable is binary. In order to facilitate our analysis, in the following we consider the case of a binary dependent variable, for example. The goal of the binary logistic regression is to model the probability of the dependent variable having the value of $0$ or $1$, given the training samples. To elaborate a little further, let the binary dependent variable $y$ depend on $M$ independent variables $\pmb x=[x_{1}, x_{2},\dots, x_{M}]$. The conditional distribution of $y$ under the condition of $\pmb x$ obeys a Bernoulli distribution. Hence, the probability of $\Pr(y=1 \mid \pmb x)$ can be expressed in the form of a standard logistic function\footnote{The logistic function is a common ``S'' shape function, which is the cumulative distribution function (CDF) of the logistic distribution.}, also termed as a sigmoid function:
\begin{equation}\label{logistic}
P\triangleq \Pr(y=1 \mid \pmb x)=\frac{1}{1+e^{-g({\pmb x})}},
\end{equation}
where $g({\pmb x})=w_0+w_1x_{1}+w_2x_{2}+\dots+w_Mx_{M}$ and $\pmb w=[w_{0}, w_{1},\dots, w_{M}]$ represents the regression coefficient vector. Similarly, we have:
\begin{equation}\label{logistic2}
\Pr(y=0 \mid \pmb x)=1-P=\frac{1}{1+e^{g({\pmb x})}}.
\end{equation}
Relying on the aforementioned definitions, we have $g({\pmb x})=\ln (\frac{P}{1-P})$.
Hence, for a given dependent variable, the probability of its value being $y_{n}$ can be expressed by $P(y_{n})=P^{y_n}(1-P)^{1-y_n}$.
Given a set of training samples $\{y_n, x_{n1}, x_{n2},\dots, x_{nM}\}, n=1,2,\dots,N$, we are capable of estimating the regression coefficient vector $\pmb w=[w_{0}, w_{1},\dots, w_{M}]$ with the aid of the maximum likelihood estimation (MLE) method. Explicitly, logistic regression can be deemed to form a special case of the generalized linear regression family using kernel model.
Furthermore, there exist numerous other useful regression models~\cite{max1976segmented,hoerl1970ridge,tibshirani1996regression,zou2005regularization}. When the dependent variable is a polynomial function of the independent variables, we refer to it as polynomial regression~\cite{max1976segmented}, where the best-fit line is a curve. Moreover, ridge regression~\cite{hoerl1970ridge}, least absolute shrinkage and selection operator (LASSO) regression~\cite{tibshirani1996regression} and ElasticNet regression~\cite{zou2005regularization} are widely applied, when independent variables are of multi-collinear nature and highly correlated.
Fig.~\ref{regression fig} demonstrates the basic flow of a regression model.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{regression.pdf}\\
\caption{The basic flow of a regression model.}\label{regression fig}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Applications}
The regression models can be used for estimating, detecting and predicting physical layer radio parameters related to wireless network scenarios. Specifically, Chang \textit{et al}.~\cite{chang2016accuracy} proposed a novel regression-aided interference model, which characterized the relationship between the SINR and the packet reception ratio, and evaluated its accuracy relying on the statistics.
Based on this model, they constructed an analytic framework for striking a trade-off between the overhead imposed and the accuracy of interference measurement attained. In~\cite{umebayashi2018efficient}, Umebayashi \textit{et al}. used regression analysis for formulating a deterministic-stochastic hybrid model for detecting the spectrum usage by PUs, which had a reduced number of parameters and yet maintained a high detection accuracy. In~\cite{al2017estimating}, Al Kalaa \textit{et al}. used logistic regression for estimating the likelihood of Wi-Fi and ZigBee wireless coexistence in the context of medical devices. Furthermore, Xiao \textit{et al}.~\cite{xiao2018phy} constructed a logistic regression-aided physical layer authentication model for detecting spoofing attacks in wireless networks without relying on a known channel model, which exhibited a high detection accuracy, despite its low computational complexity.
The regression models can also be employed for solving both estimation and detection problems in the upper layers of the seven-layer OSI model. For example, Chang \textit{et al}. derived a regression-based analytical model for the sake of estimating the contention success probability considering heterogeneous sensor-traffic demands, which beneficially improved the channel's exploitation in IoT~\cite{chang2018traffic}.
Moreover, in~\cite{chen2017learning}, Chen \textit{et al}. employed a regression model for reconstructing the radio map with the aid of signal strength models for the path planning and UAV-location design in UAV-assisted wireless networks.
As a further advance, Lei \textit{et al}.~\cite{lei2018fingerprint} employed a logistic regression classifier for device-free localization relying on fingerprint signals, which yielded a low localization error.
\subsection{KNN and Its Applications}
\subsubsection{Methods}
KNN constitutes a non-parametric instance-based learning method, which can be used both for classification and regression. Proposed by Cover and Hart in 1968, the KNN algorithm is one of the simplest of all machine learning algorithms. By relying on the distance between the object and training samples in a feature space, the KNN algorithm determines which class of the object belongs to. Specifically, in a classification scenario,
an object is categorized into a specific class by a majority vote of its $K$ nearest neighbors. If $K=1$, the category of the object is the same as that of its nearest neighbor. In this case, it is termed as the one nearest neighbour classifier. By contrast, in a regression scenario, the output value of the object is calculated by the average of the value of its $K$ nearest neighbors. Fig.~\ref{knnmodel} shows the illustration of the unweighted KNN mechanism associated with $K=4$.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{knnmodel.pdf}\\
\caption{The illustration of the unweighted KNN mechanism with $K=4$, for example.}\label{knnmodel}
\end{figure*}
Let us assume that there are $N$ training sample pairs of $\{(\pmb x_1,y_1),(\pmb x_2,y_2),\dots,(\pmb x_N,y_N)\}$, where $y_n$ is the property value or class label of the sample $\pmb x_n$, $n=1,2,\dots,N$. Typically, we use the Euclidean distance or the Manhattan distance~\cite{sherwood2002automatically} for calculating the similarity between the object $\overline{\pmb x}$ and the training samples. Let ${\pmb x_n}=[x_{n1},x_{n2},\dots,x_{nM}]$ contain $M$ different features. Hence, the Euclidean distance between $\overline{\pmb x}$ and $\pmb x_n$ can be expressed by:
\begin{equation}\label{knn1}
d_e=\sqrt {\sum \limits_{m=1}^{M}{(\overline{x}_m-x_{nm})^2}},
\end{equation}
while their Manhattan distance is calculated as~\cite{sherwood2002automatically}:
\begin{equation}\label{knn2}
d_m=\sum\limits_{m=1}^{M}{|\overline{x}_m-x_{nm}|}.
\end{equation}
Relying on the associated similarity, the class label or property value of $\overline{\pmb x}$ can be voted on or first weighted and then voted on by its $K$ nearest neighbors, which is formulated:
\begin{equation}\label{knn3}
\overline{y}\leftarrow\textrm{VOTE}\ \{K\ \textrm{nearest}\ (\pmb x_k,y_k)\}.
\end{equation}
The performance of the KNN algorithm critically depends on the value of $K$, whilst
the best choice of $K$ hinges upon the training samples. In general, a large $K$ is conducive to resisting the harmful influence of noise, but it fuzzifies the class boundary between different categories. Fortunately, an appropriate value of $K$ can be determined by a variety of heuristic techniques based on the true characteristics of the training data set.
\subsubsection{Applications}
In KNN, an object can be classified into a specific category by a majority vote of the object's neighbours, with the object being assigned to the class that is the most common one among its $K$ nearest neighbors. Hence, as a kind of simple and efficient classification algorithms, KNN is beneficial in terms of, for example, traffic prediction~\cite{feng2017proactive}, anomaly detection~\cite{xie2013scalable,onireti2016cell}, missing data estimation~\cite{pan2010k}, modulation classification~\cite{aslam2012automatic}, interference elimination~\cite{yu20145}, etc.
To elaborate, for the sake of capturing the dynamic characteristics of wireless resource demands, Feng \textit{et al}. constructed a weighted KNN model by learning from a large-scale historical data set generated by cellular operators' networks, which was used for exploring both the temporal and spatial characteristics of radio resources~\cite{feng2017proactive}. In~\cite{xie2013scalable}, Xie \textit{et al}. proposed a novel KNN aided online anomaly detection scheme based on hypergrid intuition in the context of WSN applications for overcoming the `lazy-learning' problem~\cite{bontempi1999lazy} especially when the computational resource and the communication cost quantified in terms of bandwidth and energy were constrained.
Moreover, in~\cite{onireti2016cell}, Onireti \textit{et al}. proposed a KNN based anomaly detection algorithms for improving the outage detection accuracy in dense heterogeneous networks.
As for missing data estimation, a KNN assisted missing data estimation algorithm was conceived on the basis of the temporal and spatial correlation feature of sensor data, which jointly utilized the sensor data from multiple neighbor nodes~\cite{pan2010k}. Furthermore, Aslam \textit{et al}.~\cite{aslam2012automatic} combined genetic programming and the KNN in order to improve the modulation classification accuracy, which can be viewed as a reliable modulation classification scheme for the SU in cognitive radio networks. In~\cite{yu20145}, the KNN algorithm was used both for extracting the environmental interference imposed by 5G Wi-Fi signals and for reducing the computational complexity and yet improving the performance of indoor localization.
\subsection{SVM and Its Applications}
\subsubsection{Methods}
Being constructed purely by mathematical theory, SVM is another supervised learning model conceived for classification and regression relying on constructing a hyperplane or a set of hyperplanes in a high-dimensional space.
The best hyperplane is the one that results in the largest margin amongst the classes. However, the training data set may often be linearly non-separable in a finite dimensional space. To address this issue, SVM is capable of mapping the original space into a higher dimensional space, where the training data set can be more easily discriminated.
Considering a linear binary SVM, for example, there are $N$ training samples in the form of $\{(\pmb x_1,y_1),(\pmb x_2,y_2),\dots,(\pmb x_N,y_N)\}$, where $y_n=\pm 1$ indicates the class label of the point $\pmb x_n$. SVM aims for searching for a hyperplane having the maximum possible separation from the training samples, which best discriminates the two classes of $\pmb x_n$ associated with $y_n=1$ and $y_n=-1$. Here, the maximum separation implies having the maximum possible distance between the nearest point and the hyperplane. The hyperplane is represented by:
\begin{equation}\label{svm1}
\pmb \omega^{T} \pmb x + b=0.
\end{equation}
Hence, we can quantify the separation of the training sample $(\pmb x_n,y_n)$ as:
\begin{equation}\label{svm2}
\gamma_{n}=y_n(\pmb \omega^{T} \pmb x_n + b).
\end{equation}
Moreover, we assume having the correct classification if $\pmb \omega^{T} \pmb x_n + b\geq 0$ when $y_n=1$, while $\pmb \omega^{T} \pmb x_n + b\leq 0$ when $y_n=-1$.
Because we have $y_n(\pmb \omega^{T} \pmb x_n + b)\geq 0$, a higher separation implies a more reliable classification. Again, the SVM tries to find the optimal hyperplane that maximizes the minimum separation between the training samples and the hyperplane considered. Given a set of linearly separable training samples, after the operation of normalization, the SVM based classification can be formulated as the following optimization problem:
\begin{equation}\label{svm3}
\begin{aligned}
\max_{\pmb \omega,b} \ &\min_{n=1,\dots,N} y_n\left(\left(\frac{\pmb \omega}{\|\pmb \omega \|}\right)^{T} \pmb x_n + \frac{b}{\| \pmb \omega \|}\right) \\
\mathrm{s.t.} \ &y_n(\pmb \omega^{T} \pmb x_n + b)\geq \gamma, n=1,2,\dots,N, \\
&\| \pmb \omega \|=1,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where we have $\gamma=\min\limits_{n=1,\dots,N} y_n\left(\left(\frac{\pmb \omega}{\|\pmb \omega \|}\right)^{T} \pmb x_n + \frac{b}{\| \pmb \omega \|}\right)$. After some further mathematical manipulations, the problem in (\ref{svm3}) can be reduced to an optimization problem having a convex quadratic objective function and linear constraints, which can be expressed by:
\begin{equation}\label{svm4}
\begin{aligned}
\min_{\pmb \omega,b} \ &\frac{1}{2} (\| \pmb \omega \|)^2 \\
\mathrm{s.t.} \ &y_n(\pmb \omega^{T} \pmb x_n + b)\geq 1, n=1,2,\dots,N.\\
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Problem~(\ref{svm4}) is a typical convex optimization problem. Taking advantage of Lagrange duality~\cite{boyd2004convex}, we can obtain the optimal $\pmb \omega$ and $b$.
Again, if the training samples are linearly non-separable, SVM is capable of mapping data to a high dimensional feature space with a high probability of being linearly separable. This may result in a non-linear classification or regression in the original space. Fortunately, kernel functions play a critical role in avoiding the ``curse of dimensionality'' in the above-mentioned dimensionality ascending procedure~\cite{bergman1950kernel,scholkopf2001learning}. To elaborate a little further, given the original input samples $\pmb x$, we may be interested in learning some features $\phi(\pmb x)$. Let us assume $\pmb x_m, \pmb x_n \in \mathbb{R}^n$, hence the corresponding kernel function $K(\pmb x_m, \pmb x_n)$ is defined as:
\begin{equation}\label{kernel}
K(\pmb x_m, \pmb x_n)=\phi(\pmb x_m)^{T} \phi(\pmb x_n).
\end{equation}
Fortunately, even though the high dimensional feature mapping $\phi(\pmb x_n)$ may be expensive to calculate, the kernel function calculated relying on their inner product can be easy obtained after some further mathematics manipulations.
There are a variety of alternative kernel functions, such as linear kernel function, polynomial kernel function, radial basis kernel function, neural network kernel function, etc. Furthermore, some regularization methods haven been conceived in order to make SVM be less sensitive to outlier points.
The specific choice of the kernel function plays a key role in machine learning~\cite{hofmann2008kernel}, hence we have to beneficially design the kernel function. The construction of kernels can be generally developed by the inner product operations of feature mappings $\phi(\pmb x_n)$ between the input samples over the Hilbert space, whose infinite number of dimensions allow the appropriate representation of big data to exploit their geometric properties. Such a Hilbert space associated with a kernel invoked for producing functions by calculating the inner product of the feature mappings is known as the reproducing kernel Hilbert space (RKHS)~\cite{parzen1962extraction}, and has been applied in diverse learning contents~\cite{fukumizu2004dimensionality,kivinen2004online}. The RKHS therefore serves a critical foundation in statistical learning theory. Fig.~\ref{kernel} provides a graphical illustration of the kernel-based method.
On the other hand, we may rely on statistical learning theory for appropriately constructing the signal space in order to identify sufficient statistics for reliable signal detection and estimation in statistical communication theory~\cite{chhabra2006principles}. Inspired by Parzen~\cite{parzen1962extraction}, Kailath observed that RKHS may also be beneficially invoked both for detection and estimation~\cite{kailath1971rkhs} by exploiting the one-to-one relationship between RKHS and finite-variance linear functionals of a random process. Corresponding to the simplest setup of signal detection in additive white Gaussian noise (AWGN) using the Karhunen-Loeve expansion~\cite{fukunaga1970application}, the RKHS representation associated with the noise covariance function is capable of providing an equivalent theoretical framework of statistical communication theory. After a series of efforts inverted into different areas of signal detection and estimation, Kailath and Poor~\cite{kailath1998detection} conceived the RKHS approach for the detection of stochastic signals.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.6\textwidth]{kernel.pdf}\\
\caption{An illustration of the kernel-based methods.}
\label{kernel}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Applications}
As mentioned before, SVM hinges on a mapping that can transform the original training data into a higher dimension, where the events to be classified do become linearly separable. Then it searches for the optimal separating hyperplane
for delineating one class from another in this higher dimension considered.
As highlighted in Fig.~\ref{svmmodel}, in the spirit of this, SVM aided learning models can be used for detecting and estimating network parameters, for learning and classifying environmental signals and the user's behavior, as well as for guiding decision making concerning channel selection and anomaly detection, for example~\cite{feng2012determination,tran2008localization,sun2005robust,donohoo2014context,joseph2011cross,pianegiani2008energy,thilina2016dccc,yang2013detection,rajasegarar2008anomaly}.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{svm.pdf}\\
\caption{The applications of SVM aided learning models for NGWNs.}\label{svmmodel}
\end{figure*}
As for detecting and estimating the network parameters, Feng and Chang~\cite{feng2012determination} constructed a hierarchical SVM (H-SVM) structure for multi-class data estimation. The H-SVM was constructed by a number of levels and each level was composed by a finite number of SVM classifiers. Feng and Chang used their H-SVM model both for estimating the physical locations of nodes in an indoor wireless network and the Gaussian channel's noise level in a MIMO-aided wireless network. Thanks to its hierarchical structure, the H-SVM was capable of providing an efficient distributed estimation procedure. Furthermore, Tran \textit{et al}. proposed an SVM model for estimating the geographic location of sensor nodes in WSNs whilst only relying on their connectivity information, more precisely the hop counts~\cite{tran2008localization}. It yielded fast convergence in a distributed manner. The final estimation error can be upper bounded by any small threshold upon relying on a sufficiently large training dataset. Moreover, Sun and Guo~\cite{sun2005robust} conceived a least square-SVM (LS-SVM) algorithm for estimating the user's position by correlating the time-of-arrival (TOA) of radio frequency signals at the BSs without any detailed knowledge about the base station's location as well as about the propagation characteristics.
SVM can also be used for learning a user's behavior and for classifying environmental signals considering the complex spatio-temporal context and the diverse selection of devices.
In~\cite{donohoo2014context}, Donohoo \textit{et al.} studied the context-aware energy-efficiency improvement options for smart devices.
These solutions may become beneficial in terms of configuring their location-specific interface for heterogeneous networks (HetNets) constituted by diverse cells.
In~\cite{joseph2011cross}, by combining the SVM and Fisher discriminant analysis (FDA) Joseph \textit{et al.} learned the malicious sinking behavior in wireless ad hoc networks for finding the security vulnerabilities and for designing novel intrusion detection scheme. Moreover, features such as delay between data and acknowledgement, number of re-transmits, etc. gleaned from the MAC layer were jointly considered with those from other layers, which constituted a correlated feature set.
Furthermore, Pianegiani \textit{et al.}~\cite{pianegiani2008energy} proposed an SVM-based binary classification solution for classifying acoustic signals emitted by vehicles relying on spectral analysis aided feature extraction, which was beneficial in terms of improving the classification accuracy, despite reducing the implementation complexity.
As for the SVM's benefit in assisting decision making, in~\cite{thilina2016dccc}, a common control channel selection mechanism was conceived for SUs during a given frame relying on an SVM-based learning technique proposed for a cognitive radio network, which was capable of implicitly and cooperatively learning the surrounding environment cooperatively in an online way.
Moreover, Yang \textit{et al.}~\cite{yang2013detection} investigated the spoofing attack detection problem based on the spatial correlation of received signal strength gleaned from network nodes, where a cluster-based SVM mechanism was
developed for determining the number of attackers. Relying on carefully designed certain training data, the SVM algorithm employed further improved the accuracy of determining the number of attackers.
Rajasegarar \textit{et al.}~\cite{rajasegarar2008anomaly} also investigated the malicious
activity detection issues of WSNs invoking a variety of SVM based algorithms.
\subsection{Bayes Classification and Its Applications}
\subsubsection{Methods}
The Bayes classifier, a popular member of the probabilistic classifier family relying on Bayes' theorem, operates by computing the \textit{posteriori} probability distribution of the objective function values given a set of training samples. As a widely-used classification method, the naive Bayes classifier can be trained for example conditioned on a simple but strong independence assumption in features. Furthermore, the complexity of training a naive Bayes model is linearly proportional to the training set size.
To elaborate a little further, let the vector $\pmb x=[x_1, x_2,\dots, x_M]$ represent $M$ independent features for a total of $K$ classes $\{y_1,y_2,\dots,y_K\}$. For each of the $K$ possible class labels $y_k$, we have the conditional probability of $p=(y_k | x_1,\dots, x_M)$.
Relying on Bayes' theorem, we decompose the conditional probability to yield the form of:
\begin{equation}\label{nb1}
p=(y_k | x_1,\dots, x_M)=\frac{p(y_k)p(x_1,\dots, x_M | y_k )}{p(x_1,\dots, x_M)},
\end{equation}
where $p=(y_k | x_1,\dots, x_M)$ is the \textit{posteriori} probability, whilst $p(y_k)$ is the \textit{priori} probability of $y_k$.
Given that $x_i$ is conditionally independent of $x_j$ for $i\neq j$, we have:
\begin{equation}\label{nb2}
p=(y_k | x_1,\dots, x_M)=\frac{p(y_k)}{p(x_1,\dots, x_M)}\prod\limits_{m=1}^{M}{ p(x_m | y_k )},
\end{equation}
where $p(x_1,\dots, x_M)$ only depends on $M$ independent features, which can be viewed as a constant.
The maximum a \textit{posteriori} probability (MAP) is used as the decision making rule for the naive Bayes classifier. Given a feature vector $\overline{\pmb x}=(\overline{x}_1, \overline{x}_2,\dots, \overline{x}_M)$, its label $\overline{y}$ can be determined according to:
\begin{equation}\label{nb3}
\overline{y}= \argmax\limits_{y_k \in \{y_1,\dots,y_K\}} \ p(y_k)\prod\limits_{m=1}^{M}{ p(\overline{x}_m | y_k )}.
\end{equation}
Despite idealized simplifying assumptions, naive Bayes classifiers have enjoyed popularity in numerous complex real-world situations, such as outlier detection~\cite{agrawal2015survey}, spam filtering~\cite{feng2016support}, etc.
\subsubsection{Applications}
Based on the Bayes' theorem, Bayes classifier techniques are particularly applicable to the context where the dimensionality of the input is high. Despite their simplicity, they can often outperform other sophisticated classification methods. As for their applications in wireless networks, in the following, we will elaborate on some typical examples in different wireless scenarios, such as antenna selection, network association, anomaly detection, indoor location and QoE prediction.
Specifically, in~\cite{he2018transmit}, He \textit{et al.} modeled the transmit antenna selection (TAS) problem of MIMO wiretap channels as a multi-class classification problem. Then, they used the naive Bayes-based classification scheme to select the optimal antenna for enhancing the physical layer security of the system considered. In contrast to conventional TAS schemes, simulation results showed that the proposed scheme resulted in a reduced feedback overhead at a given secrecy performance.
In~\cite{abouzar2011action}, Abouzar \textit{et al.} proposed an action-based network association technique for wireless body area networks (WBANs).
Relying on the level of received signal strength indicator of the on-body link, the naive Bayes algorithm was employed to recognize the ongoing action, which was beneficial in terms of scheduling the time slot assignment in the context of fixed power allocation on various links by the sink node under a specific data rate constraint.
Moreover, Klassen \textit{et al.}~\cite{klassen2012anomaly} used the naive Bayes classifier for detecting
anomaly in \textit{ad hoc} wireless network involving the black hole attack, the denial of service (DoS) attack and the selective forwarding attack.
Bayes classifier can also be applied to the indoor location estimation. For example, in~\cite{ouyang2012indoor}, a probabilistic model was conceived for characterizing the relationship between the received signal strength and location with the aid of the naive Bayes generative learning method, which was used for learning the parameters of an initial probabilistic model, given a limited number of labeled samples. The proposed indoor location estimation method was capable of both reducing the off-line calibration efforts required, whilst maintaining a high location estimation accuracy.
Furthermore, as for QoE prediction, in order to evaluate the impact of different networking and channel conditions on the QoE attained in the context of different network services, Charonyktakis \textit{et al.}~\cite{charonyktakis2016user} proposed a modular algorithm for user-centric QoE prediction. They integrated multiple machine learning algorithms, including the Gaussian naive Bayes classifier and conceived a nested cross validation protocol for selecting the optimal classifier and its corresponding optimal hyper-parameter value for the sake of accurate QoE prediction.
\begin{table*}[t!]
\begin{center}
\scriptsize
\caption{Compelling Applications of Supervised Learning in NGWN}
\label{tbsup}
\begin{tabular}{ | c | l | c | r |}
\hline
Paper & Application & Method & Description \\ \hline
\cite{chang2016accuracy} & interference estimate & regression & strike a trade-off between the overhead and accuracy of interference measurement \\ \hline
\cite{umebayashi2018efficient} & spectrum sensing & regression & reduce the number of parameters and maintain a high detection accuracy\\ \hline
\cite{al2017estimating} & wireless coexistence & regression & estimate the likelihood of the wireless coexistence of Wi-Fi and ZigBee\\ \hline
\cite{xiao2018phy} & PHY authentication & regression & do not need the assumption on the accurate known channel model\\ \hline
\cite{chang2018traffic} & traffic estimation & regression & estimate the contention success probability considering sensors' heterogeneous traffic demands\\ \hline
\cite{chen2017learning} & map reconstruction & regression & reconstruct the wireless radio map for UAV path planning and location design\\ \hline
\cite{lei2018fingerprint} & wireless localization & regression & logistic regression classifier for counteracting the negative influence relying on fingerprint signals\\ \hline
\cite{feng2017proactive} & traffic prediction & KNN & explore both the temporal and spatial characteristics of radio resources\\ \hline
\cite{xie2013scalable} & anomaly detection & KNN & rely on the hypergrid intuition in the context of WSN applications \\ \hline
\cite{pan2010k} & missing data estimation & KNN & rely on the temporal and spatial correlation feature of sensor data \\ \hline
\cite{aslam2012automatic} & modulation classification & KNN & combine the genetic programming and KNN for improving the modulation classification accuracy \\ \hline
\cite{yu20145} & interference elimination & KNN & extract environmental interference from Wi-Fi signal and reduce computational complexity \\ \hline
\cite{feng2012determination} & data estimation & SVM & provide an efficient estimation procedure in a distributed manner \\ \hline
\cite{tran2008localization} & localization estimation & SVM & yield fast convergence performance and efficiently use the communication resources\\ \hline
\cite{sun2005robust} & user location & SVM & without knowledge about base station location and environmental propagation characteristics \\ \hline
\cite{donohoo2014context} & data prediction & SVM & provide location-specific interface configuration for HetNets\\ \hline
\cite{joseph2011cross} & behavior learning & SVM & combine both the superior accuracy of SVM and fast convergence speed of FDA \\ \hline
\cite{pianegiani2008energy} & signal classification & SVM & classify acoustic signals emitted by vehicles rely on feature extraction \\ \hline
\cite{thilina2016dccc} & channel selection & SVM & propose a control channel selection mechanism for a cognitive radio network \\ \hline
\cite{yang2013detection} & attacker counting & SVM & develop a cluster-based SVM mechanism for determining the number of attackers \\ \hline
\cite{he2018transmit} & antenna selection & Bayes & enhance the physical layer security relying on Bayes-based optimal antenna selection \\ \hline
\cite{abouzar2011action} & network association & Bayes & schedule time slot assignment and fixed power allocation under data rate constraint \\ \hline
\cite{klassen2012anomaly} & anomaly detection & Bayes & detect
anomaly involving black hole attack, DoS attack and selective forwarding attack\\ \hline
\cite{ouyang2012indoor} & indoor location & Bayes & characterize the relationship between the received signal strength and location\\ \hline
\cite{charonyktakis2016user} & QoE prediction & Bayes & accurate QoE prediction by selecting optimal classifier and optimal hyper-parameter values\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\section{Unsupervised Learning in NGWN}
\label{Unsupervised Learning in NGWN}
In this section, we will highlight some typical unsupervised learning algorithms, such as $K$-means clustering~\cite{hartigan1979algorithm}, expectation-maximization (EM)~\cite{moon1996expectation}, principal component analysis (PCA)~\cite{wold1987principal} and independent component analysis (ICA)~\cite{comon1994independent} in terms of their methodology and their applications in NGWN.
Table~\ref{tbunsup} summarizes some typical applications of the above-mentioned unsupervised learning algorithms in NGWN.
\subsection{$K$-Means Clustering and Its Applications}
\subsubsection{Methods}
$K$-means clustering is a distance based clustering method that aims for partitioning $N$ unlabeled training samples into $K$ different cohesive clusters, where each sample belongs to one cluster. To elaborate a little further, $K$-means clustering measures the similarity between two samples in terms of their distance and it has two main steps, namely assigning each training sample to one of $K$ clusters in terms of the closest distance between the sample and the cluster centroids, and then updating each cluster centroid according to the mean of the samples assigned to it. The whole algorithm is hence implemented by repeatedly carrying out the above-mentioned pair of steps until convergence is achieved.
To elaborate a little further, given a set of samples $\{\pmb x_1, \pmb x_2,\dots,\pmb x_N\}$, where $\pmb x_n=[x_{n1},x_{n2},\dots,x_{nM}]$ is a $M$-dimensional vector, let $\mathbb{S}=\{s_1, s_2,\dots,s_K\}$ represent the above-mentioned cluster set, and $\pmb \mu_k$ the mean of the samples in $s_k$.
$K$-means clustering intends to find an optimal cluster-based segmentation, which solves the following optimization problem:
\begin{equation}\label{kc1}
\mathbb{S}^{\ast}= \argmin\limits_{\{s_1, s_2,\dots,s_K\}}\ \sum_{k=1}^{K}{\sum_{\pmb x\in s_k} {{\|\pmb x -\pmb \mu_k\|}^2}}.
\end{equation}
However, problem (\ref{kc1}) is a non-deterministic polynomial-time hardness (NP-hard) problem~\cite{paz1981non}. Fortunately, there are a range of efficient heuristic algorithms, which converge quickly to a local optimum.
One of the popular low-complexity iterative refinement algorithms suitable for $K$-means clustering is Lloyd's algorithm~\cite{kanungo2002efficient}, which often yields satisfactory performance after a low number of iterations. Specifically, given $K$ initial cluster centroid $\pmb \mu_k, k=1,\dots,K$, Lloyd's algorithm arrives at the final cluster segmentation result by alternating between the following two steps,
\begin{itemize}
\item Step~1: In the iterative round $r$, assign each sample to a cluster.
For $n=1,2 \dots, N$ and $i,k=1,2 \dots, K$, if we have:
\begin{equation}\label{kc2}
s_i^{(r)}=\{\pmb x_n:\ {\|\pmb x_n- \pmb \mu_i^{(r)}\|}^2 \leq {\|\pmb x_n- \pmb \mu_k^{(r)}\|}^2, \forall k\},
\end{equation}
then we assign the sample $\pmb x_n$ to the cluster $s_i$, even if it could potentially be assigned to more than one cluster.
\item Step~2: Update the new centroids of the new clusters formulated in the iterative round $r$ relying on:
\begin{equation}\label{kc3}
\pmb \mu_i^{(r+1)}=\frac{1}{|s_i^{(r)}|}\sum\limits_{\pmb x_j \in s_i^{(r)}}{\pmb x_j},
\end{equation}
where $|s_i^{(r)}|$ denotes the number of samples in cluster $s_i$ in iterative round $r$.
\end{itemize}
Convergence is deemed to be obtained when the assignment in Step~1 is stable. Explicitly, reaching convergence means that the clusters formulated in the current round are the same as those formed in the last round.
Since this is a heuristic algorithm, there is no guarantee that it can converge to the global optimum. Hence, the result of clustering largely relies on specific choice of the initial clusters and on their centroids.
\subsubsection{Applications}
$K$-means clustering aims for partitioning $N$ samples into $K$ clusters. Each sample belongs to the closest cluster. The clustering algorithm proceeds in an iterative manner, where the in-cluster differences are minimized by iteratively updating the cluster centroid, until convergence is achieved.
Clustering functioning under uncertainty or incomplete information is a common problem in wireless networks, especially in the scenarios associated with numerous small traffic cells, heterogeneous large and small cell structures relying on diverse carrier frequencies, diverse time-varying tele-traffic, etc.
First of all, the small cells have to be carefully clustered for avoiding excessive interference using coordinated multi-point transmission. Moreover, the devices and users should be beneficially clustered for the sake of achieving a high energy efficiency, maintaining an optimal access point association, obeying an efficient offloading policy, and of guaranteeing a high network security.
In~\cite{xia2012optical}, a mixed integer programming problem was formulated for jointly optimizing both the gateway deployment and the virtual-channel allocation for optical/wireless hybrid networks, where Xia \textit{et al.} designed an efficient $K$-means clustering based solution for iteratively solving this problem, which beneficially reduced the delay, as well as improved the network throughput. Moreover, in~\cite{hajjar2017hybrid}, Hajjar \textit{et al.} proposed a $K$-means based relay selection algorithm for creating small cells under the umbrella of an oversailing LTE macro cell within a multi-cell scenario under the constraint of low power clusters. Relying on the proposed relay selection algorithm, the total capacity was increased by reusing the frequency in each low power cluster, which had the benefit of supporting high data rate services.
Additionally, Cabria and Gondra~\cite{cabria2017potential} proposed a so-called potential-$K$-means scheme for partitioning data collection sensors into clusters and then for assigning each cluster to a storage center.
The proposed $K$-means solution had the advantage of both balancing the storage center loads and minimizing the total network cost (optimizing the total number of sensors).
Parwez \textit{et al.}~\cite{parwez2017big} invoked both $K$-means clustering and hierarchical clustering algorithms for their user-activity analysis and user-anomaly detection in a mobile wireless network, which verified genuine identity of users in the face of their dynamic spatio-temporal activities. Furthermore, El-Khatib~\cite{el2010impact} designed a $K$-means classifier for selecting the optimal set of features of the MAC layer bearing in mind the specific relevance of each feature, which beneficially improved the accuracy of intrusion detection, despite reducing the learning complexity.
Clustering can also be used in signal detection for the sake of both reducing the detection complexity and for improving the energy efficiency attained.
In~\cite{liang2016coding}, the $K$-means clustering algorithm was invoked in a blind transceiver, where the training process was completely dispensed within the transmitter for reducing its energy dissipation, since no pilot power was required. Furthermore, Zhao \textit{et al.}~\cite{zhao2006k} conceived an efficient $K$-means clustering algorithm for optical signal detection in the context of burst-mode data transmission.
\subsection{EM and Its Applications}
\subsubsection{Methods}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.80\textwidth]{emmodel.pdf}\\
\caption{The operation process of the EM model.}\label{emmodel}
\end{figure*}
The EM algorithm is an iterative method conceived for searching for the maximum likelihood estimate of parameters in a statistical model. Typically, in addition to unknown parameters whose existence has been ascertained, the statistical model also has some latent variables. In this scenario it is an open challenge to derive a closed-form solution, because we are unable to find the derivatives of the likelihood function with respect to all the unknown parameters and latent variables.
The iterative EM algorithm consists of two steps, as shown in Fig.~\ref{emmodel}. During the expectation step (E-step), it calculates the expected value of the log likelihood function conditioned on the given parameters and latent variables, while in the maximization step (M-step), it updates the parameters by maximizing the specific log-likelihood expectation function considered.
More explicitly, upon considering a statistical model with observable variables $\pmb X$ and latent variables $\pmb Z$, the unknown parameters are represented by $\pmb \theta$. The log-likelihood function of the unknown parameters is given by:
\begin{equation}\label{em1}
l(\pmb \theta;\pmb X, \pmb Z)=\log p(\pmb X, \pmb Z; \pmb \theta).
\end{equation}
Hence, the EM algorithm can be described as follows~\cite{moon1996expectation}:
\begin{itemize}
\item E-step: Calculate the expected value of the log likelihood function under the current estimate of $\overline{\pmb \theta}$, i.e.
\begin{equation}\label{em2}
Q(\pmb \theta | \overline{\pmb \theta})=E_{\pmb Z |\pmb X, \overline{\pmb \theta}}[\log p(\pmb X, \pmb Z; \pmb \theta)].
\end{equation}
\item M-step: Maximize Eq.~(\ref{em2}) with respect to $\pmb \theta$ for generating an updated estimate of $\overline{\pmb \theta}$, which can be formulated as:
\begin{equation}\label{em3}
\overline{\pmb \theta}'= \argmax_{\pmb \theta} Q(\pmb \theta | \overline{\pmb \theta}).
\end{equation}
\end{itemize}
The EM algorithm plays a critical role in parameter estimation based on many of the popular statistical models, such as the Gaussian mixture model (GMM), hidden Markov model (HMM), etc. which are beneficial both for clustering and prediction.
\subsubsection{Applications}
The EM model can be readily invoked for a variety of parameter
learning and estimation problems routinely encountered in wireless networks. Specifically, Wen \textit{et al}.~\cite{wen2015channel} estimated both the channel parameters of the desired links in a target cell and those of the interfering links in the adjacent cells relying on constructing a GMM, which was estimated with the aid of
the EM algorithm. Choi \textit{et al}.~\cite{choi2013estimation} modeled the cognitive radio system as a HMM, where the secondary users (SUs) estimated the channel parameters such as the primary user's (PU) sojourn time, signal strength, etc. based on the standard EM algorithm.
Moreover, Assra \textit{et al}.~\cite{assra2016approach} also adopted the EM algorithm to jointly estimate the channel unknown frequency domain responses as well as the noise variance and detected the PU's signal in a cooperative wide-band cognitive system, which was shown to converge to the upper bound solution based on maximum likelihood estimation under the idealized assumption of having perfect channel parameter estimation. Additionally, Zhang \textit{et al}.~\cite{zhang2008joint} proposed an EM aided joint symbol detection and channel estimation algorithm for MIMO-OFDM systems in the presence of frequency selective fading, which provided a distribution-estimate for both the hidden symbol and unknown channel parameters in an iterative manner. Li and Nehorai~\cite{li2015joint} built an asynchronous state-space model for connecting asynchronous observations with the most likely target state transition in the context of multi-sensor WSNs. Then, they adopted the EM algorithm for jointly estimating the sequential target state as well as the network's synchronization state under the assumption of knowing the temporal order of sensor clocks.
Furthermore, Zhang \textit{et al}.~\cite{zhang2017novel} used a variational EM iterative algorithm to recover the transmitted signals and to identify the active users in a low-activity code division multiple access based M2M communications without the knowledge of the user activity factor. The EM algorithm can also be invoked for target or source localization, which can be viewed as a joint sparse signal recovery and parameter estimation problem~\cite{meng2011efficient}~\cite{sun2017multiple}.
\subsection{PCA \& ICA and Their Applications}
\subsubsection{Methods}
PCA and ICA constitute sophisticated dimensionality reduction methods in machine learning, which are capable of reducing both the computational complexity and the storage requirements.
PCA utilizes an orthogonal transformation for converting a set of potentially correlated features of the training samples into a set of uncorrelated features, which are termed as the ``principal components''. The number of principal components is expected to be lower than the number of the original features of the training samples, which hence provide a more compact representation of the original samples. More explicitly, less principle components can be used for representing the original samples in the transformed domain. In PCA, the first principal component tends to have the largest variance, which indicates that it encapsulates the most information of the original features provided that these features were correlated. Similarly, each succeeding component tends to have the next highest variance. These principal components can be generated by invoking the eigenvectors of the normalized covariance matrix.
Specifically, let us consider $N$ training samples of $\{\pmb x_1, \pmb x_2,\dots,\pmb x_N\}$, where $\pmb x_n=[x_{n1},x_{n2},\dots,x_{nM}]^{T}$ is composed of $M$ different features. Let us first pre-process the samples by normalizing their mean and variance. Given a unit vector $\pmb u$, $\pmb x_n^{T} \pmb u$ can be interpreted as the length of the projection of $\pmb x_n$ onto the direction $\pmb u$. The PCA attempts to maximize the variance of the projections, which is formulated as:
\begin{equation}\label{pca1}
\max_{\pmb u} \frac{1}{N}\sum\limits_{n=1}^{N}{(\pmb x_n^{T} \pmb u)^2}=\max_{\pmb u} \pmb u^T \left(\frac{1}{N}\sum\limits_{n=1}^{N}{(\pmb x_n \pmb x_n^{T})} \right)\pmb u.
\end{equation}
Given the covariance matrix $\pmb \Lambda=\frac{1}{N}\sum\limits_{n=1}^{N}{(\pmb x_n \pmb x_n^{T})}$, the solution of problem (\ref{pca1}) is given by the eigenvector of the covariance matrix $\pmb \Lambda$. If we denote the top $K$ eigenvectors of $\pmb \Lambda$ by $\pmb u_1, \pmb u_2,\dots,\pmb u_K$ and $K<M$, a dimensionality reduction expression of $\pmb x_n$ can be formulated as:
\begin{equation}\label{pca2}
\pmb y_n=[\pmb u_1, \pmb u_2, \dots, \pmb u_K]^{T} \pmb x_n,
\end{equation}
where $\pmb u_1, \pmb u_2,\dots,\pmb u_K$ are the first $K$ principle components of the training samples.
By contrast, the ICA attempts to find a new basis for representing original samples that are assumed to be a linear weighted superposition of some unknown latent variables. It aims for decomposing multivariate variables into a set of additive subcomponents, which are non-Gaussian variables and are statistically independent from each other. As for the independent components, also termed as the latent variables, they exhibit the maximum possible ``statistical independence'', which can be commonly characterized by either the minimization of their mutual information quantified in terms of the Kullback-Leibler divergence metric and the maximum entropy criterion, or by the maximization of what is termed in parlance as the non-Gaussianity relying on kurtosis and negentropy, for example.
Let us consider the linear noiseless ICA model in a simple example, where the multivariate training variables are denoted by $\pmb x=[x_1, x_2,\dots, x_N]^{T}$. Its latent independent component vector is represented by $\pmb s=[s_1, s_2,\dots, s_M]^{T}$. Each component of $\pmb x$ can be generated by a linearly weighted sum of independent components, i.e. we have $x_n=a_{n1}s_1+a_{n2}s_2+\dots+a_{nM}s_M$, where $a_{nm}$ is the weighting coefficient. The vectorial form of $\pmb x$ can be expressed as:
\begin{equation}\label{ica1}
\pmb x=\sum\limits_{m=1}^{M}s_m \pmb a_{m},
\end{equation}
where $\pmb a_{m}=[a_{1m}, a_{2m},\dots, a_{Nm}]^{T}$. Furthermore, let $\pmb A=(\pmb a_{1},\dots,\pmb a_{M})$. Then the original multivariate training variables can be rewritten as:
\begin{equation}\label{ica2}
\pmb x=\pmb A \pmb s,
\end{equation}
where the unknown matrix $\pmb A$ is referred to as the mixing matrix. ICA algorithms attempt to estimate both the mixing matrix $\pmb A$ and the independent component vector $\pmb s$ relying on setting up a cost function, which again, either maximizes the non-Gaussianity or minimizes the mutual information. Thus, we can recover the independent component vector by computing $\pmb s=\pmb A^{-1} \pmb x$, where $\pmb A^{-1}$ is termed as the `unmixing' matrix. Usually, we assume that $N=M$ and that the mixing matrix $\pmb A$ is a square-shaped matrix. Moreover, the \textit{apriori} knowledge of the probability distribution of $\pmb s$ is beneficial in terms of formulating the cost function.
\subsubsection{Applications}
As for the application of PCA and ICA in wireless networks, Shi \textit{et al.}~\cite{shi2018accurate} utilized PCA to extract the most relevant feature vectors from fine-grained subchannel measurements for improving the localization and tracking accuracy in an indoor location tracking system.
Moreover, Morell \textit{et al.}~\cite{morell2016data} designed an efficient data aggregation method for WSNs based on PCA amalgamated with a non-eigenvector projection basis, while keeping the reconstruction error below a pre-defined threshold. Quer \textit{et al.}~\cite{quer2012sensing}
exploited PCA for inferring the spatial and temporal features of a range of signals monitored by a WSN. Based on this they recovered the large original data set from a small observation set.
Additionally, Qiu~\cite{qiu2011cognitive} combined ICA with PCA in a smart grid scenario for recovering smart meter data, which were jointly capable of enhancing the transmission efficiency both by avoiding the channel estimation in each frame and by eliminating wide-band interference or jamming signals. A semi-blind received signal detection method based on ICA was proposed by Lei \textit{et al.}~\cite{shen2017ica}, which additionally estimated the channel information of a multicell multiuser massive MIMO system. Moreover, Sarperi \textit{et al.}~\cite{sarperi2007blind} proposed an ICA based blind receiver structure for MIMO OFDM systems, which approached the performance of its idealized counterpart relying on perfect CSI. ICA was also used for digital self-interference cancellation in a full duplex system~\cite{li2017digital}, which relied on a reference signal used for estimating the leakage into the receiver. More explicitly, in full duplex systems the high-power transmit signal leaks into the receiver through a nonlinear leakage path and drowns out the low-power received signal. Hence its cancellation requires at least $120$~dB interference rejection. Furthermore, in~\cite{nguyen2013binary},
the Boolean ICA concept was proposed based on the integration of Boolean functions of binary signals for inferring the activities of the underlying latent signal sources. Specifically, it was shown that given $m$ SUs, the activities of up to $(2m-1)$ PUs can be determined.
\begin{table*}[t!]
\begin{center}
\scriptsize
\caption{Compelling Applications of Unsupervised Learning in NGWN}
\label{tbunsup}
\begin{tabular}{ | c | l | c | r |}
\hline
Paper & Application & Method & Description \\ \hline
\cite{xia2012optical} & gateway deployment & $K$-means & reduce delay and improve network throughput for optical/wireless hybrid networks \\ \hline
\cite{hajjar2017hybrid} & relay selection & $K$-means & create small cells in an LTE macro cell with low power cluster constraint\\ \hline
\cite{cabria2017potential} & sensor partitioning& $K$-means & balance the load of storage centers and minimize the total network cost\\ \hline
\cite{parwez2017big} & anomaly detection & $K$-means & verify spatio-temporal varying users' genuineness relying on ground truth information\\ \hline
\cite{el2010impact} & intrusion detection & $K$-means & improve intrusion detection accuracy and reduce the learning complexity\\ \hline
\cite{liang2016coding} & blind transceiver & $K$-means & not require pilot duration and pilot power for saving energy consumption\\ \hline
\cite{zhao2006k} & signal detection & $K$-means & burst-mode data transmission with an unbalanced ratio of bits zero and bits one\\ \hline
\cite{wen2015channel} & channel estimation & EM algorithm & construct a GMM to estimate channel parameters in both target cell and adjacent cells\\ \hline
\cite{choi2013estimation} & PU detection & EM algorithm & SUs estimate PU's sojourn time and signal strength relying on a HMM model \\ \hline
\cite{assra2016approach} & channel state detection & EM algorithm & jointly estimate channel frequency responses, noise variance and PU's signal \\ \hline
\cite{zhang2008joint} & symbol detection & EM algorithm & joint symbol detection and channel estimation for MIMO-OFDM systems \\ \hline
\cite{li2015joint} & network state detection & EM algorithm & joint estimate the sequential target state and network synchronization state \\ \hline
\cite{zhang2017novel} & active user detection & EM algorithm & detect active user for the low-activity CDMA based M2M communications \\ \hline
\cite{meng2011efficient} & source localization & EM algorithm & formulate localization as a joint sparse signal recovery and parameter estimation problem\\ \hline
\cite{shi2018accurate} & indoor location & PCA & extract relevant feature vectors from fine-grained subchannel measurements \\ \hline
\cite{morell2016data} & data aggregation & PCA & limit the reconstruction error based on a non-eigenvector projection basis\\ \hline
\cite{quer2012sensing} & data recovery & PCA & exploit PCA to extract spatial and temporal features of real signals\\ \hline
\cite{qiu2011cognitive} & data recovery & ICA \& PCA & enhance transmission efficiency by avoiding channel estimation and eliminating jamming signals\\ \hline
\cite{shen2017ica} & channel estimation & ICA & differentiate and decode the received signal, and estimate the channel information \\ \hline
\cite{sarperi2007blind} & blind receiver & ICA & yield an ideal performance close to that with perfect CSI \\ \hline
\cite{li2017digital} & interference cancellation & ICA & digital interference cancellation based on the reference signal from transmitter power amplifier \\ \hline
\cite{nguyen2013binary} & signal detection & ICA & infer the activities of latent signal sources based on the Boolean functions\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\section{Reinforcement Learning in NGWN}
\label{Reinforcement Learning in NGWN}
Reinforcement learning deals with an agent interacting with the environment. Three specific aspects of reinforcement learning,
multi-arm bandit problem, Markov decision process (MDP) and temporal-difference (TD) learning can be very useful for NGMN. Then, we explore further on these
algorithms of reinforcement learning to NGMN.
\subsection{Multi-Armed Bandit and Its Applications}
\subsubsection{Methods}
The multi-armed bandit technique, also called $K$-armed bandit, models a decision making problem, where an agent is faced with a dilemma of $K$ different actions. After each choice, the agent receives a reward relying on a stationary probability distribution that is associated with its decision. The agent attempts to maximize its expected total reward over a series of decision making rounds relying on a balance striking a trade-off between consulting existing knowledge and acquiring new knowledge when optimizing its decisions. The action of referring to existing knowledge to make decisions is termed as ``exploitation'', while the trial of acquiring new knowledge is referred to as ``exploration''. Striking a trade-off between exploration and exploitation is also sought by other reinforcement learning algorithms, where exploitation is the plausible action for maximizing the expected reward within the current round, while exploration may produce a greater reward in the long run.
In a $K$-armed bandit model, $K$ possible actions, $a_1, a_2,\dots, a_K$, yield different rewards associated with the $K$ unknowns of the problem at hand, which may have different distributions with $K$ mean values of $\mu_1, \mu_2,\dots,\mu_K$, respectively. The agent iteratively chooses an action $A_i$ at the round $i$ and receives the corresponding reward of $R_i$. Up to the round $i$, the expected reward of an action $a$ can be expressed as $Q_i(a)=E[R_i | A_i=a ]$. Upon striking a balance between the exploration and the exploitation, we may arrive at a simple bandit algorithm as follows, for example. In each decision-making round, we greedily opt for the action $A= \argmax\limits_{a} Q(a)$ relying on the probability of $(1-\varepsilon)$, whilst riskily embarking on a random action selection based on the probability of $\varepsilon$, where $\varepsilon$ is the probability of a brave attempt for exploring new knowledge.
In contrast to the above-mentioned $\varepsilon$-greedy bandit algorithm, there are also more complex bandit algorithms, such as the gradient aided bandit algorithm, associative-search bandit, non-stationary bandit, etc~\cite{sutton1998reinforcement}. Moreover, the multi-armed bandit problem can be extended into a multi-play and multi-armed bandit problem~\cite{zhou2017budget}, where the reward of each agent depends on others' actions, and each agent tries to find its optimal decision by predicting the future actions of the other agents relying on previous decision making strategies.
\subsubsection{Applications}
As mentioned before, multi-armed bandit based techniques are capable of dealing with uncertainties in the context of NGWNs because of limited prior knowledge and the associated resource-thirsty feedback. Moreover, it is beneficial to model the selfishness and the decision conflicts of/among the users during the decision making process. Hence, the multi-armed bandit based algorithms have become powerful tools for rational decision making in wireless networks both for distributed users and APs as well as for the central control center.
Specifically, Maghsudi \textit{et al}.~\cite{maghsudi2016multi} proposed a small cell activation scheme relying on the multi-armed bandit philosophy
given only limited information about the available energy of the small cell BS as well as the number of users to be served. The overall heterogeneous network's throughput was improved with the aid of an energy-efficient small cell on-off switching regime controlled by the macro BS, while the inter-interference level was reduced.
Another compelling application of the multi-armed bandit regime in the heterogeneous network is constituted by the dynamic network selection in the context of uncertain heterogeneous network state information. Wu \textit{et al}.~\cite{wu2016traffic} formulated the optimal network selection problem as a continuous-time multi-armed bandit problem considering diverse traffic types. Moreover, the network access cost function and the QoE reward were defined as the metrics of evaluating the proposed network selection schemes.
In~\cite{si2008distributed}, given the time-varying and user-dependent fading channels of wireless peer-to-peer (P2P) networks, a multi-armed bandit aided optimal distributed transmitter scheduling policy was conceived for multi-source multimedia transmission, which was beneficial of maximizing the data transmission rate and reducing the related power consumption in the light in terms of the realistic energy constraints of wireless mobile devices.
In addition to transmitter scheduling, Maghsudi and Sta\'{n}czak applied the covariate multi-armed bandit regime~\cite{maghsudi2013dynamic} for solving the relay selection problem in the wireless network, where the
geographical location of relay nodes was assumed to be known by the source node, but no knowledge was assumed about the corresponding
fading gains. The proposed covariate multi-armed bandit model is capable of dealing with the exploitation-exploration dilemma of the relay selection process. Lee \textit{et al}.~\cite{lee2015frequency} proposed a $K\epsilon$-greedy multi-armed bandit based framework for exploiting the gains provided by
frequency diversity in Wi-Fi channels. They struck a trade-off between the achievable gain stemming from frequency diversity and the resource consumption imposed by channel estimation and coordination.
Given the open broadcast nature of the wireless channel environment and the access contention mechanism among multi-priority users, multi-armed bandit based techniques have played a special role in cognitive networks~\cite{zhao2008myopic,gwon2013optimizing,li2014almost,li2015adaptive,avner2016multi,zhou2016toward}.
For example, Zhao \textit{et al}.~\cite{zhao2008myopic} formulated a multi-armed restless bandit model for opportunistic multi-channel access, which approached the maximum attainable throughput by accurately predicting which is next idle channel likely to become. In~\cite{li2015adaptive}, a channel selection scheme was investigated which was capable of adapting to the link quality and hence finding the optimal channel for avoiding interferences and deep fading.
Moreover, Gwon \textit{et al}.~\cite{gwon2013optimizing} and Zhou \textit{et al}.~\cite{zhou2016toward} further considered the choice of access strategy in the presence of both legitimate desired users and jamming cognitive radio nodes, which was resilient to adaptive jamming attacks with different strengths spanning from near no-attack to the full-attack across the entire spectrum. In contrast to only sensing and accessing a single channel, considering the correlated rewards of different arms, a sequential multi-armed bandit regime was conceived by Li \textit{et al}.~\cite{li2014almost} for identifying multiple channels to be sensed in a carefully coordinated order. Furthermore, Avner and Mannor~\cite{avner2016multi} studied multi-user coordination in cognitive networks, where each user's successful channel selection relies on both the channel state as well as on the decisions of the other users.
\subsubsection{An Example}
Visible light communication (VLC) systems have the compelling benefit of a wide unlicensed communication bandwidth as well as innate security in downlink (DL) transmission scenarios, hence they may find their way into the construction of NGWNs. However, considering the limited coverage and dense deployment of light-emitting diodes (LED), traditional network association strategies are not readily applicable to VLC networks. Hence by exploiting the power of online learning algorithms, in~\cite{wang2017learning}, the authors focused their attention on sophisticated multi-LED access point selection strategies conceived for hybrid indoor LiFi-WiFi communication systems with the aid of a multi-armed bandit model. Explicitly, since light-fidelity (LiFi) VLC transmissions are less suitable for uplink (UL) transmissions, a classic WiFi UL was used in this study.
To elaborate, in the indoor VLC system, the communication between the devices and the backbone network relies on the VLC DL as well as on the RF WiFi UL, which hence can be viewed as a hybrid LiFi-WiFi network. In the system model, it is assumed that there are $M$ low-energy LED lamps in the indoor space considered. Moreover, regardless of their positions, the $N$ mobile devices are capable of accessing any of the $M$ indoor LED lamps and of downloading packets from the Internet via VLC. When a decision round is due, the access control strategy obeys the decision probability distribution of $P=\{p_{1}, p_{2}, ..., p_{M}\}$. And it has $\sum\limits_{m=1}^{M}{{{p}_{m}}=1}$, where $p_{m}$ denotes the probability of accessing the $m$th LED lamp. Furthermore, the service time of each LED lamp obeys the negative exponential distribution with a departure rate $\varsigma$, while the interval between system access requests, in the same way, obeys the negative exponential distribution with an arrival rate $\lambda$.
The VLC DL channel is characterized by a diffuse link, where the light beam is radiated within a certain angle. Thus, the indoor VLC channel can be modelled by combining the line of sight (LOS) path (Fig.~\ref{vlcmodel} (a)) as well as a single one-hop reflected path (Fig.~\ref{vlcmodel} (b)).
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.48\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{los.pdf}
\centerline{\footnotesize{(a) LOS path}}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[t]{0.48\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.9\textwidth]{vlc.pdf}
\centerline{\footnotesize{(b) Reflected and LOS path}}
\end{minipage} \\
\caption{The model of the indoor VLC link including both the LOS path and the one-hop reflected path, where FOV represents the field of view, while $\sigma^2_{\mathrm{slot}}$ and $\sigma^2_{\mathrm{sthermal}}$ denote the variance of the shot noise as well as the thermal noise, respectively~\cite{wang2017learning}~\copyright IEEE.}\label{vlcmodel}
\end{figure}
The expectation of the accumulated reward gap function is defined as the
metric for characterizing the performance of our AP selection
scheme, which represents the difference between the maximum
theoretical reward and the actually acquired reward after sequential
decision making experiments relying on the system's decision
probability distribution, which is formulated as.
\begin{equation}\label{15-1}
R_{P}(K)=\underset{{{i}_{1}},{{i}_{2}},...,{{i}_{K}}}{\mathop{\max }}\, E\left[\sum\limits_{k=1}^{K}{Q(i_{k},{{t}_{k}})}\right]-E\left[\sum\limits_{k=1}^{K}{Q({{a}_{k}},{{t}_{k}})}\right],
\end{equation}
where $Q({{i}_{k}},{{t}_{k}})$ denotes the user rate associated with the $k$th decision round in terms of the access decision ${i}_{k}$ at the instant ${t}_{k}$, with ${a}_{k}$ being the actual access decision.
Furthermore, in~\cite{wang2017learning} a pair of multi-armed bandit learning techniques, i.e. the `exponential weights for exploration and exploitation' (EXP3) as well as the `exponentially-weighted algorithm with linear programming' (ELP), were advocated for updating the AP-assignment decision probability distribution of each AP at each time instant for the sake of improving the link throughput based on the probability distribution $R_{P}(K)$ of~(\ref{15-1}). More explicitly, in contrast to the trial-and-error EXP3 algorithm, the ELP based AP selection algorithm was constructed for taking into account both the partially observed conditions of the APs as well as the network topology.
The theoretical upper bound of the expected value of the accumulated
reward gap function of the EXP3- and ELP-based multi-armed bandit learning algorithms was also derived in~\cite{wang2017learning}. In Fig.~\ref{figure3a} and Fig.~\ref{figure3b}, the normalized throughput of the selected VLC links and of the whole system relying on the EXP3-based, ELP-based as well as on random LED AP selection schemes was compared. By contrast, the random selection scheme granted an identical decision probability of accessing any of the $M$ LEDs, namely $1/M$, for each lamp at each decision-making time instant. It was assumed that the negative exponential departure probability of each downloading service was $\varsigma=0.2$. Moreover, the initial state of the number of downloading services supported by each lamp was randomly chosen between $[1, 30]$. Upon increasing the number of decision rounds $K$, the EXP3- and ELP-based selection schemes had a higher accumulated normalized throughput than random selection. Furthermore, relying on more neighbor observation information as well as by exploiting the connection of the LED lamps, the ELP-based AP-selection scheme was shown to outperform that based on EXP3.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{figure3a.pdf}\\
\caption{The normalized throughput of the selected VLC link versus $K$ for different LED AP selection schemes.~\copyright IEEE}
\label{figure3a}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{figure3b.pdf}\\
\caption{The system's normalized throughput versus $K$ for different LED AP selection schemes.~\copyright IEEE}
\label{figure3b}
\end{figure}
\subsection{MDP \& POMDP and Their Applications}
\subsubsection{Methods}
The classic Markov decision process (MDP)~\cite{Puterman1994Markov} constitutes a framework of making decisions in the context of a discrete-time stochastic environment of Markov state transitions, which provides the decision maker with the optimal actions to opt for at each state. It has been used in a wide range of disciplines, especially in automatic control~\cite{Cao2008Event}.
The goal of the decision maker, generally speaking, is to maximize the cumulative reward received over a long run and to find the corresponding optimal policy $\pi^{\ast}$ which represents a mapping from each state to the specific probabilities of choosing each legitimate action.
In an MDP model, the system's state transition follows the Markovian property, where the system's response at time epoch $(t+1)$ depends exclusively on the current state and on the agent's action at time epoch $t$.
Mathematically, at time epoch $t$, the system is in a certain state $S$, where the agent selects a legitimate action $A$ that is available in the state $S$. As a result, the system then acts at the next time epoch $(t+1)$ by moving into a new state $S'$ relying on the system's state transition probability of $p(S'|S,A)$. At the same time, the decision maker receives the corresponding reward $r(S,A)$.
The associated value function is then defined for quantifying how well the agent carries our its action over a long run commencing from the initial state $S_0$, which can be formulated as:
\begin{equation}\label{mdp1}
v_{\pi}=E_{\pi}\left[\sum\limits_{t=0}^{\infty}{\gamma^t r_{t+1} | S_t}\right],
\end{equation}
where $\gamma$ represents the discount factor and the mapping $\pi (A |S )$ represents the probability
of opting for action $A$ in the state $S$. Hence, the optimal policy $\pi^{\ast}$ can be formulated by maximizing the value function considered, i.e. we have $\pi^{\ast}=\argmin\limits_{\pi} v_{\pi}$.
The maximization of the value function can reformulated as an iterative equation with the aid of Bellman's optimality theorem~\cite{Crespo2003Stochastic}, which is given by:
\begin{equation}\label{mdp2}
\begin{aligned}
\pi^\ast(A \mid S)&=\argmax_{A} v^\ast(S)\\&=\argmax_{A}\sum_{S'} p(S' \mid S, A)\left[r(S, A)+\gamma v^\ast(S')\right].
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
By contrast, as an extension of MDP, the partially observable Markov decision process (POMDP) only relies on partial knowledge about the hidden Markov system which is eminently suitable for scenarios, where the agent cannot directly observe the underlying system's state transitions. Hence, the agent has to constitute belief states and the associated belief transition function by relying on a set of observations instead of the real system states.
In a nutshell, the POMDP framework can be formulated as a quintuple of $\langle S, b, A, B, r \rangle$, i.e.
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{System's State $S$:} The system's state $S$ represents the system's legitimate state;
\item \emph{Belief State $b$:} The belief state $b$ benchmarks the degree of the similarity
between each of the system's legitimate state $S$ and the state estimated by the agent;
\item \emph{Action $A$:} The action $A$ denotes the specific action that can be selected in the given state;
\item \emph{Belief Transition Function $B$:} The belief transition function $B(b'\mid b, A)$ represents the probability of the belief state traversing from $b$ to $b'$ conditioned on selecting action $A$;
\item \emph{Reward Function $r$:} The reward function $r(b,A)$ quantifies the immediate reward received by performing the selected action.
\end{itemize}
Similarly, the optimal policy $\pi^{\ast}$ can be obtained by solving the optimization problem of:
\begin{equation}\label{mdp3}
\begin{aligned}
\pi^\ast(A \mid b)&=\argmax_{A} v^\ast(b)\\&=\argmax_{A}\sum_{b'} B(b' \mid b, A)\left[r(b, A)+\gamma v^\ast(b')\right].
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Applications}
As another important decision-making tools, which is different from the multi-armed bandit solutions, MDP/POMDP should firstly model the environment relying on either fully or partially observed knowledge.
To elaborate a little further, Massey \textit{et al}.~\cite{massey2004scheduling} proposed an MDP based downlink service scheduling policy for wireless service providers. Considering the time-sensitive nature of wireless tele-traffic patterns, their proposed scheduling policy was capable of maximizing the expected reward for the wireless service provider in the context of a multiplicity of services.
In~\cite{tang2013selfish}, Tang \textit{et al}. resorted to the MDP approach for enhancing a basic node-misconduct detection method, where a novel reward-penalty function was defined as a function of both correct and wrong decisions. The resultant adaptive node-misconduct detector maximized this reward-penalty function in diverse network states.
Moreover, Kong \textit{et al}. conceived a discrete-time MDP (DTMDP) aided mechanism~\cite{kong2014optimal} for dynamically activating and deactivating certain resources of the BS in the context of time-varying network traffic. More explicitly, at each decision round, the DTMDP had the option of activating a new resource module, deactivating the currently active resource module and no operation. The proposed switching mechanism reduced the power consumption, i.e. improved the energy efficiency at the BS.
As a further development, relying on the POMDP paradigm, Tseng \textit{et al}.~\cite{tseng2014pomdp} designed a cell selection scheme for improving the network's capacity, where the full cell loading status was not observable. Hence, it predicted the unavailable cell loading information from set of non-serving base stations and then took actions for improving the various performance metrics, including the system's capacity, the handover time as well as the mobility management as a whole.
Moreover, the belief state was defined for representing the
state uncertainty in terms of the statistical probability of a cell's specific loading state. The simulation results of Tseng \textit{et al}.~\cite{tseng2014pomdp} showed that their solution outperformed the conventional signal-strength aided and load-balancing based methods.
In order to save the energy of sensors, Fei \textit{et al}.~\cite{fei2010pomdp} proposed a POMDP aided K-sensor scheduling policy, which guaranteed the sensors' high-quality coverage and reduced the total energy consumption. Similarly, by striking a trade-off between the detection performance and energy consumption, Zois \textit{et al}.~\cite{zois2012pomdp} designed a POMDP aided sensor node selection scheme for WBANs by maximizing the system's lifetime as well as optimizing the physical state detection accuracy.
The main goal of the sensor node selection was to devise a schedule under which the sensors alternated between the active state and the dormant state relying on the specific network activity.
Upon relying on the decentralized POMDP (DEC-POMDP), Pajarinen \textit{et al}.~\cite{pajarinen2014optimizing} proposed a MAC solution, which promptly adapted both to the spatial and temporal opportunities facilitated by the wireless network dynamics, which yielded an increased throughput and reduced latency compared to the traditional carrier-sense multiple access relying on conventional collision avoidance (CSMA/CA) methods. Here, the POMDP tackled the uncertainty both in the environment's evolution and in the associated inaccurate observations.
Thanks to the cross layer optimization employed, more information can be gleaned
from the lower layers for enhanced network condition estimation. Then, Xie \textit{et al}.~\cite{xie2012novel} used the POMDP model for solving the frame size selection problem of the ubiquitous transmission control protocol (TCP) with the objective of improving the total estimated throughput by striking a tradeoff between the contention
probability and back-off time based on the current network condition.
Furthermore, Michelusi and Mitra~\cite{michelusi2015cross} conceived a cross-layer framework for jointly
optimizing the spectrum-sensing and access processes of cognitive wireless networks with the objective of
maximizing the throughput of the SU under a strict constraint on the maximal performance degradation imposed on the PU. Furthermore, the high complexity of the POMDP formulation
was mitigated by a low-dimensional belief representation, which was achieved by
minimizing the Kullback-Leibler divergence defined in~\cite{Kullback1951On}.
\subsubsection{An Example}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{superwifi.pdf}\\
\caption{The scenario of the `super-WiFi' network~\cite{WangJSAC1}.~\copyright IEEE}
\label{superwifi}
\end{figure}
As shown in Fig.~\ref{superwifi}, the `super-WiFi' network concept has been originally proposed for nationwide Internet access in the USA. However, the traditional mains power supply is not necessarily ubiquitous in this large-scale wireless network. Furthermore, the non-uniform geographic distribution of both the BSs and of the tele-traffic requires carefully
considered user-association. Relying on the rapidly developing energy harvesting techniques, in~\cite{WangJSAC1}, a POMDP-based access point selection strategies was conceived for an energy harvesting aided super-WiFi network.
It was assumed that both the battery states as well
as the user access states were completely observable. However, in practice the solar radiation intensity changes over time in a year, as influenced by the weather conditions. Furthermore, the radiation sensors have a limited sampling rate, which makes it hard to simultaneously record the solar radiation intensity and to accurately
estimate the system's battery state. Fortunately, relying on historical solar radiation observation data provided by the University of Queensland, Australia~\cite{solar}, in a short period of time, say, within an hour, the real-time harvested solar power can be modeled as $P_{H}=\theta+\kappa$, where $\theta$ is constant for an hour, while $\kappa$ is a small perturbation. Moreover, multiple factors, such as the effective irradiation area, the clouds' distribution, the sensors' operating status, etc. may independently affect the harvested power. Relying on the central-limit theorem, the perturbation $\kappa$ can be regarded as being Gaussian distributed. Hence, the distribution of $P_{H}$ can be written as $P_{H}\thicksim\mathcal{N}(\theta,\sigma^{2})$, where $\theta$ and $\sigma^{2}$ can be learned from the harvested data set.
Moreover, a queue-based user-association state model as well as a dynamic battery state model was established. Hence, the system's state having $K$ APs is constituted by both the user-association states as well as by the battery states. Let $U=({{U}_{1}},{{U}_{2}},...,{{U}_{K}})$ denote the user-association states, while $B=({{B}_{1}},{{B}_{2}},...,{{B}_{K}})$ represent the AP battery states, where ${U}_{k}\leq{U}_{M}$ and ${B}_{k}\!\leq\!{B}_{M}-1$. Furthermore, the super-WiFi system state can be written as a $2K$-element vector $S=(U_{1},B_{1},U_{2},B_{2},...,U_{K},B_{K})$, which includes both the $K$ APs' user-association states and the $K$ APs' battery states. Assuming the independence of each AP's two sub-states, the system's state transition probability can be expressed as:
\begin{equation}
P({{S}^{'}}|S)=\prod\limits_{k=1}^{K}{{{\Phi }_{k}}(U_{k}^{'}|{{U}_{k}},A)}{{\Psi }_{k}}(B_{k}^{'}|{{B}_{k}},A),
\end{equation}
where $A$ represents the users' actions in terms of which available APs they request association with.
Since the requesting users only have partial knowledge of the entire super-WiFi system's state, relying on the above definitions and hypotheses, we construct the POMDP decision-making model in terms of a quintuple of $\langle S, b, A, B, r \rangle$ as mentioned above.
The POMDP formulation can be reduced to a belief MDP with the aid of the belief state vector.
Therefore, the expected reward of the system relying on strategy $\Pi$ after an infinite number of time slots can be written as:
\begin{equation}\label{31}
{{V}^{\Pi }}(S\text{ }\!\!|\!\!\text{ }{{S}^{0}})=E[\sum\limits_{t=0}^{\infty }{{{\gamma }^{t}}{{r}^{t}}({{S}^{t}},\Pi ({{S}^{t}}))b(S^{t})}|{{S}^{0}}],
\end{equation}
where $S^{0}$ is the initial system state, while $b(S)$ is the belief state vector reflecting the grade of similarity between the current estimated state and the legitimate system state $S$. Moreover, $r$ is the immediate reward of the system and $\gamma$ represents the discount rate.
Then, the optimal strategy can be constructed by invoking dynamic programming aided iterative algorithms for maximizing the expected reward function.
Bearing in mind the large values of $K$, $U_{M}$ and $B_{M}$, as well as the users' rapidly fluctuating arrival rate $\lambda$ and departure rate $\mu$, obtaining the optimal POMDP solution may face the curse of dimension disaster. In order to reduce the computational complexity, a suboptimal algorithm was proposed in~\cite{WangJSAC1}. Explicitly, Algorithm 2 of~\cite{WangJSAC1} aimed for maximizing the expectation of the system's energy function, which was defined as:
\begin{equation}\label{a22}
H[b(S)] = \sum\limits_{S \in \mathbb{S}} b(S)\sum\limits_{i=1}^{K}\underset{\Pi }{\mathop{\min}}\,\{E_{iR}+E_{iH}-E_{iC}, E_{max}\},
\end{equation}
where $E_{iR}$ represents the residual energy of AP $i$, while $E_{iH}$ is its energy harvested under the assumption that the harvested power level remains quasi-static during the information transmission interval and $E_{iC}$ denotes the energy consumption. Finally, $E_{max}$ is the capacity of the AP's battery.
The efficiency of the AP selection algorithms proposed in~\cite{WangJSAC1} was compared in terms of the system's access efficiency defined as $\xi=N_{S}/T_{S}$, where $N_{S}$ is the total number of successful access attempts during the entire simulation time $T_{S}$.
In Fig.~\ref{333a} and Fig.~\ref{333b}, multiple APs ($K=2$) are considered with the maximum number of admitted users being $U_{M}=1$, while having a maximum number of battery states given by $B_{M}=3$. Moreover, the departure rate is $\mu = 0.05$. We may conclude from Fig.~\ref{333a} that a highly loaded system makes the carrier-sense multiple access with collision detection (CSMA/CD) method almost useless, when the users' arrival rate reaches a certain value. As shown in Fig.~\ref{333b}, where $\lambda=0.4$, the system's access efficiency recorded for all the AP selection algorithms only increases with the solar radiation intensity in a relatively small range. However, the performance of the CSMA/CD, CSMA/CA\footnote{Strictly speaking, the CSMA/CD and CSMA/CA in this paper are different from the Ethernet's data link layer protocols. Here, both of them represent the access control mechanisms. We use the same acronym CSMA/CD and CSMA/CA for convenience.}, as well as of the random selection algorithm remains unchanged, regardless of the increase in solar radiation intensity. Moreover, the suboptimal Algorithm 2 of~\cite{WangJSAC1} is capable of outperforming the POMDP method at a strong solar radiation intensity, which may be deemed to be the result of the approximations and hypotheses inherent in the POMDP model.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{b_2.pdf}\\
\caption{The system access efficiency versus users' arrival rate for different access schemes ($K=2$, $U_{M}=1$, $B_{M}=3$).~\copyright IEEE}
\label{333a}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{b_22.pdf}\\
\caption{The system access efficiency versus solar radiation intensity for different access schemes ($K=2$, $U_{M}=1$, $B_{M}=3$).~\copyright IEEE}
\label{333b}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Temporal Difference Learning and Its Applications}
\subsubsection{Methods}
Temporal-difference (TD) learning is a model-free reinforcement learning method, which is capable of directly gleaning knowledge from raw experience without a model of the environment or receiving delayed reward, which can be typically viewed as a combination of Monte Carlo methods and of dynamic programming. More specifically, it samples the environment like the Monte Carlo methods, and then updates the corresponding parameters relying on current estimates like dynamic programming does. By contrast, TD learning operates in an on-line fashion by relying on the result of a single time step, rather than waiting for the final outcome until the end of an episode of the Monte Carlo method.
Moreover, it has an advantage over the dynamic programming methods since it does not require a model of the state transition probabilities as shown in Fig.~\ref{reinforcementmodel}. TD learning can be readily invoked for finding an optimal action policy for any finite MDP associated with an unknown system model.
Fig.~\ref{reinforcementmodel} shows the difference between the MDP, POMDP and TD learning.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{reinforcement.pdf}\\
\caption{The comparison between the MDP, POMDP and TD leaning.}\label{reinforcementmodel}
\end{figure*}
A pair of popular representatives of the TD learning family are constituted by the Q-learning and by the ``state-action-reward-state-action'' (SARSA) technique, which interacts with the environment and updates the state-action value function, namely the Q-function, based on the action it takes. In contrast to SARSA, Q-learning updates the Q-function relying on the \textit{maximum reward} provided by one of its available actions.
Specifically, the update of the Q-function in SARSA can be formulated as~\cite{kaelbling1996reinforcement}:
\begin{equation}\label{td1}
Q(S, A)\leftarrow (1-\alpha)Q(S, A)+\alpha \left[r+ \gamma Q(S', A')\right],
\end{equation}
while in Q-learning, the update of the Q-function can be cast as~\cite{watkins1992q}:
\begin{equation}\label{td2}
Q(S, A)\leftarrow (1-\alpha)Q(S, A)+\alpha \left[r+ \gamma \max_{A \in \mathbb{A}} Q(S', A)\right],
\end{equation}
where $S$ represents the system's state and $A$ is the action selected by the agent, whilst $\mathbb{A}$ represents the available set of actions. Moreover, $\alpha$ is the update weighting coefficient and $\gamma$ denotes the discount factor.
As for the convergence analysis, SARSA is capable of converging with probability $1$ to an optimal policy as well as to an optimal state-action value function, provided that all the state-action pairs are visited a sufficiently high number of times. However, because of the independence of making an action and that of updating the Q-function, Q-learning has no delayed reward as TD-learning, which tends to facilitate an earlier convergence than SARSA~\cite{sutton1998reinforcement}.
\subsubsection{Applications}
As a benefit of being free from modeling the environment, TD learning is capable of providing competent decisions even in unknown environments. Table~\ref{tbqlearning} summarizes a variety of compelling applications found in wireless networks for both SARSA and Q-learning along with their brief description.
\begin{table*}[t!]
\begin{center}
\scriptsize
\caption{Compelling Applications of the SARSA Algorithm and Q-learning in NGWN}
\label{tbqlearning}
\begin{tabular}{ | c | l | c | r |}
\hline
Paper & Method & Scenario & Application \& Description \\ \hline
\cite{lilith2004dynamic} & reduced-state SARSA & cellular network & dynamic channel allocation considering both mobile traffic and call handoffs.\\
\hline
\cite{lunden2011reinforcement} & on-policy SARSA & CR network & distributed multiagent sensing policy relying on local interactions among SU\\ \hline
\cite{chettibi2012adaptive} & on-policy SARSA & MANET & energy-aware reactive routing protocol for maximizing network lifetime\\ \hline
\cite{suga2013joint} & on-policy SARSA & HetNet & resource management for maximizing resource utilization and guaranteeing QoS\\ \hline
\cite{ortiz2016reinforcement} & approximate SARSA & P2P network & energy harvesting aided power allocation policy for maximizing the throughput\\ \hline
\cite{kazemi2011dynamic} & Q-learning & WBAN & power control scheme to mitigate interference and to improve throughput\\ \hline
\cite{leite2012flexible} & Q-learning & OFDM system & adaptive modulation and coding not relying on off-line training from PHY\\ \hline
\cite{jung2012relay} & Q-learning & cooperative network & efficient relay selection scheme meeting the symbol error rate requirement\\ \hline
\cite{galindo2010distributed} & decentralized Q-learning & CR network& aggregated interference control without introducing signaling overhead\\\hline
\cite{prashanth2014two} & convergent Q-learning & WSN & sensors' sleep scheduling scheme for minimizing the tracking error\\\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\section{Deep Learning in NGWN}
\label{Deep Learning in NGWN}
\subsection{Deep Artificial Neural Networks and Their Applications}
\subsubsection{Methods}
Artificial neural networks~\cite{zurada1992introduction} constitute a set of algorithms conceived by imitating the interaction between neurons in human brain, which are designed to extract features for clustering and classification tasks.
In a common artificial neural network (ANN) model~\cite{haykin1994neural}, the input of each artificial neuron is a real-valued signal, and the output of each artificial neuron is calculated by a non-linear function of the sum of its inputs. Artificial neurons and their connections typically use a weighting factor for adjusting the ``speed'' of the learning process. Moreover, artificial neurons are organized in the form of layers. Different layers perform different kinds of transformations of their inputs. Basically, input signals travel from the first layer to the last layer, possibly via multiple hidden layers.
The deep neural network (DNN) is characterized by multiple hidden layers between the input and output layers as shown in Fig.~\ref{deep learning}~(a), which is capable of modeling complex relationships of the processed data with the aid of multiple non-linear transformations. In a DNN, the provision of extra layers facilitates the composition of features from lower layers, which is beneficial in terms of more accurately modeling complex data than a `shallow' network having a single hidden layer. Furthermore, DNN may be viewed as a type of feed-forward network, where the processed data flows in the direction from the input layer to the output layer without looping back. Given recent impressive applications of DNN, the convergence behavior of DNN emerges an important subject in machine learning.
By contrast, in a recurrent neural network (RNN) a neuron in one layer is capable of connecting to the neurons in previous layers. Therefore, a RNN is capable of exploiting the dynamic temporal information hidden in a time sequence and it exploits its ``memory'' inherited from previous layers for processing the future inputs as shown in Fig.~\ref{deep learning}~(b). Popular algorithms used for training the RNN include the real time recurrent learning technique of~\cite{williams1989experimental}, the causal recursive backpropagation algorithm of~\cite{campolucci1999line}, the backpropagation through time algorithm of~\cite{werbos1990backpropagation}, etc.
The convolutional neural network (CNN) is a class of feed-forward deep artificial neural networks relying on the so-called weight-shared architecture and translation invariance characteristics, which hence only requires modest preprocessing. As seen in Fig.~\ref{deep learning}~(c), a basic CNN architecture is composed of an input layer, an output layer as well as multiple hidden layers, which are often referred to as convolutional layers, pooling layers and fully connected layers. More particularly, the convolutional layers invoke a convolution operation, also termed as the cross-correlation operation, which generate a multi-dimensional feature map relying on a number of so-called filters. The CNN has been successfully used in both image and video recognition~\cite{simonyan2014very}, natural language processing~\cite{young2018recent}, recommender systems~\cite{wang2015collaborative}, etc. Fig.~\ref{deep learning} contrasts the basic architecture of DNN, RNN and CNN, respectively.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.90\textwidth]{dnn.pdf}\\
\caption{The basic architecture of DNN, RNN and CNN.}\label{deep learning}
\end{figure*}
\subsubsection{Applications}
In this subsection, we will consider the benefits of deep artificial neural network algorithms in a variety of wireless networking scenarios. As mentioned before, deep artificial neural networks are capable of capturing the non-linear and often dynamically varying relationship between the inputs and outputs. Hence they have a powerful prediction, inference and data analysis capability by exploiting the vast amount of data generated both by the environment and by the users. As for \emph{learning from the environment}, we are able to harness DNNs trained by the data gleaned over the air for the sake of channel estimation~\cite{ye2018power}, interference identification~\cite{schmidt2017wireless}, localization~\cite{wang2015phasefi,wang2016csi,wang2017csi,wang2017device,zhang2016deep}, etc. By contrast, with regard to \emph{learning from the users or devices}, DNN algorithms can also be used for predicting the users' behaviors, such as their content interests~\cite{chang2018learn}, mobility patterns~\cite{ouyang2016deepspace}, etc. in order to beneficially design the dynamic content caching of BSs and to efficiently allocate wireless resources, for example.
Traditional signal processing approaches supported by statistics and information theory in communication systems substantially rely on accurate and tractable mathematical models. Unfortunately, however, practical communication systems may have a range of imperfections and non-linear factors, which are difficult to model mathematically. Given that DNN algorithms do not require a tractable model, they are capable of \emph{remedying the imperfections in the physical layer} by learning both from the environment and from previous inputs relying on a specific hardware configuration. To elaborate, Ye \textit{et al}.~\cite{ye2018power} proposed a DNN aided channel estimation method for learning the wireless channel characteristics, such as the nonlinear distortion, interference and frequency selectivity. The DNN aided channel estimation method was shown to be more robust than traditional methods, especially in the context of having fewer training pilots, in the absence of cyclic prefix, as well as in the face of nonlinear clipping noise.
Apart from estimating the channel characteristics, DNNs can also be used for classifying modulated signals in the physical layer. Rajendran \textit{et al}.~\cite{rajendran2017distributed} conceived a date-driven automatic modulation classification (AMC) scheme hinging on the long short term memory (LSTM) aided RNN, which captured the time domain (TD) amplitude
and phase information of modulation schemes carried in the training data without expert knowledge. Their simulations showed that the novel AMC
had an average classification accuracy of about $90\%$ in the context of time-varying SNR ranging from 0dB to 20dB.
As for signal detection, Farsad and Goldsmith~\cite{farsad2017detection} developed a deep learning aided signal detector, where the transmitted signal can be efficiently estimated from its corrupted version observed at the receiver. The detector was trained relying on known transmitted signals, but without any knowledge of the underlying wireless channel model and estimated the likelihood of each symbol, which was beneficial for carrying out soft decision error correction afterwards.
In the application of interference identification, Schmidt \textit{et al}.~\cite{schmidt2017wireless} proposed a $64$-feature-map assisted CNN based wireless interference identification scheme. The CNN model learned the relevant features through self-optimization during the GPU based training process, which was first designed in~\cite{o2016convolutional}. By carefully considering the realistic capability of wireless sensors, the model relied on the time- and frequency-limited sensing snapshots having the duration of 12.8 $\mu\mathrm{s}$ as well as the bandwidth
of 10MHz. The proposed CNN based wireless interference identifier was shown to have a higher identification accuracy than the state-of-the-art schemes in the context of low SNRs, such as $-5$dB, for example.
Furthermore, we can use DNNs for \emph{modelling the entire physical layer of a communication system} without any classic components such as source coding, channel coding, modulation, equalization, etc.
In~\cite{o2017introduction}, O'Shea \textit{et al}. used a DNN to represent a simple communication system with one transmitter and one receiver that can be trained as a so-called auto-encoder without knowing the accurate channel model. Moreover, a CNN algorithm was conceived for modulation classification based on both sampled radio frequency time-series data and expert knowledge integrated by radio transformer networks (RTN). Additionally, O'Shea \textit{et al}.~\cite{o2017deep} extended the DNN aided auto-encoder to a single user MIMO communication scenario, where the physical layer encoding and decoding processes were jointly optimized as a single end-to-end self-learning task. Their simulation results showed that the auto-encoder based system outperformed the classic space time block code (STBC) at 15dB SNR. Furthermore, D{\"o}rner \textit{et al}.~\cite{dorner2018deep} also developed a DNN based prototype system solely composed of two unsynchronized off-the-shelf software-defined radios (SDR). This prototype system was capable of mitigating the current restriction on short block lengths.
DNNs also play a critical role in supporting a variety of compelling upper layer applications, such as traffic prediction~\cite{wang2017spatiotemporal}, packet routing~\cite{kato2017deep} and control~\cite{tang2018removing}, traffic offloading~\cite{li2018learning}, resource allocation~\cite{sun2017learning}, attack detection~\cite{he2017real}, just to name a few. For instance, Wang \textit{et al.}~\cite{wang2017spatiotemporal} presented a hybrid deep learning aided structure for spatio-temporal traffic modeling and prediction in cellular networks by mining information from the China Mobile dataset. It used a novel deep learning aided auto-encoder for modeling the spatial features of wireless traffic, while using LSTM units for temporal modeling. Additionally, Kato \textit{et al.}~\cite{kato2017deep} proposed a supervised DNN aided traffic routing scheme, which outperformed the classic open shortest path first (OSPF) scheme in terms of requiring a lower overhead, whilst maintaining a higher throughput and lower delay.
By contrast, a real-time deep CNN based traffic control mechanism learning from previous network anomalies was conceived by Tang \textit{et al.}~\cite{tang2018removing}, which substantially reduced the average delay and packet loss rate. Hence, deep learning aided traffic control may indeed constitute a potential candidate for gradually replacing traditionally routing protocols in future wireless networks. Furthermore, Li \textit{et al.}~\cite{li2018learning}
integrated both the DNN structure and the edge computing technique into the multimedia IoT, which was able to improve the efficiency of multimedia processing.
Sun \textit{et al.}~\cite{sun2017learning} treated the power control problem in interference-limited wireless networks as a `black box'. They proposed an `almost-real-time' power control algorithm relying on a DNN structure trained by simulated data. In comparison to traditional mathematical tools, the approximation error of the DNN aided algorithm is closely related to the depth of the DNN considered. As for network security issues, for example, He \textit{et al.}~\cite{he2017real} constructed a conditional deep belief network (CDBN) for the real-time detection of malicious false data injection (FDI) attacks in the smart grid, which was trained by historical measurement data.
The simulations conducted using the IEEE 118-bus test system and the IEEE 300-bus test system showed that the CDBN aided FDI detection scheme was resilient to the environmental noise and had a higher detection accuracy than its SVM aided counterparts.
As a successful example of learning from the environment, DNNs are beneficial in terms of extracting electromagnetic fingerprint information from the wireless channel for \emph{indoor localization}. In~\cite{wang2015phasefi,wang2016csi,wang2017csi}, Wang \textit{et al.} proposed a DNN having three hidden-layer for training the calibrated CSI phase data, where the fingerprint information was represented by the DNN's weights. Their experimental results showed that the DNN aided localization scheme performed well in different propagation environments, including an empty living room, and a laboratory in the presence of mobile users.
In~\cite{wang2017device}, Wang \textit{et al.} proposed a deep learning
method for supporting device-free wireless localization and activity recognition relying on learning from the wireless signals around the target, where a sparse auto-encoder network was used for automatically learning the discriminative features of wireless signals. Furthermore, a softmax-regression-based framework~\cite{heckerman1997models} was formulated for the location and activity recognition based on merged features. Moreover, in~\cite{zhang2016deep}, Zhang \textit{et al.} constructed a four-layer DNN for extracting reliable high level features from massive Wi-Fi data, which was pre-trained by the stacked denoising auto-encoder. Additionally, an HMM aided high-accuracy localization algorithm was proposed for smoothening the estimate variation. Their experimental results showed a substantial localization accuracy improvement in the context of a widely fluctuating wireless signal strength.
With regard to learning from users or devices, Ouyang \textit{et al.}~\cite{ouyang2016deepspace} conceived a CNN-aided online learning architecture for understanding human mobility patterns relying on analyzing continuous mobile data streams. Al-Molegi \textit{et al.}~\cite{al2016stf} integrated both the spatial features gleaned from GPS data and the temporal features extracted from the associated time stamps for predicting human mobility based on a RNN. Moreover, Song \textit{et al.}~\cite{song2016deeptransport} proposed an intelligent deep LSTM RNN based system for predicting both human mobility and the specific transportation mode in a large-scale transportation network, which was beneficial in terms of providing accurate traffic control for intelligent transportation systems (ITS). Additionally, a mobility prediction technique relying on a complex extreme learning machine (CELM) was developed by Ghouti \textit{et al.}~\cite{ghouti2014mobility} in order to jointly optimize both the bandwidth and the power MANETs. In~\cite{agarwal2016learning}, both the multi-layer perception and RNN models were employed by Agarwal \textit{et al.} for characterizing the activity of primary users in CR networks, where three different traffic distributions, namely Poisson traffic, interrupted Poisson traffic and self-similar traffic were used for training the related models.
Table~\ref{tbdeep} lists a range of typical applications of DNNs along with a brief description.
\begin{table*}[t!]
\begin{center}
\scriptsize
\caption{Compelling Applications of Deep Artificial Neural Networks in NGWN}
\label{tbdeep}
\begin{tabular}{ | c | l | c | r |}
\hline
Paper & Application & Method & Description \\ \hline
\cite{ye2018power} & channel estimation & DNN & learn nonlinear distortion, interference and frequency selectivity of wireless channels\\ \hline
\cite{rajendran2017distributed} & modulation classification & RNN & capture amplitude and phase information without expert knowledge\\ \hline
\cite{farsad2017detection} & signal detection & DNN & transmit signal detection from noisy and corrupted signals without underlying CSI\\ \hline
\cite{schmidt2017wireless} & interference identification & CNN & learn features through self-optimization during the GPU based training process\\ \hline
\cite{o2017introduction} & PHY representation & DNN & represent simple system having one transmitter and receiver without accurate CSI\\ \hline
\cite{o2017deep} & PHY representation & DNN & represent single user MIMO system relying on DNN aided auto-encoder\\ \hline
\cite{dorner2018deep} & software-defined radio & DNN & be capable of easing the current restriction on short block lengths\\ \hline
\cite{wang2017spatiotemporal} & traffic prediction & DNN & deep auto-encoder and LSTM for modeling spatial and temporal features\\ \hline
\cite{kato2017deep} & packet routing & DNN & traffic routing scheme with little signal overhead, large throughput and small delay\\ \hline
\cite{tang2018removing} & traffic control & CNN & consider previous network abnormalities, lower average delay and packet loss rate\\ \hline
\cite{li2018learning} & traffic offloading & DNN & integrate both DNN structure and edge computing technique into multimedia IoT\\ \hline
\cite{sun2017learning} & power control & DNN & an almost-real-time power control algorithm in interference-limited wireless networks\\ \hline
\cite{he2017real} & network security & DBN & a real-time detection of malicious false data injection attack in smart grid\\ \hline\
\cite{wang2015phasefi,wang2016csi,wang2017csi,wang2017device,zhang2016deep} & indoor localization & DNN & device-free wireless localization and recognition by learning from ambient wireless signals\\ \hline
\cite{ouyang2016deepspace} & mobility prediction & CNN & learn human mobility pattern relying on analyzing continuous mobile data stream\\ \hline
\cite{al2016stf} & mobility prediction & RNN & integrate spatial feature from GPS and temporal feature from associated time stamps \\ \hline
\cite{song2016deeptransport} & transportation mode & RNN & predict both human mobility and transportation mode for large-scale transport networks \\ \hline
\cite{agarwal2016learning} & activity prediction & RNN & characterize primary users' activity in CR with different traffic distribution \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Deep Reinforcement Learning and Its Applications}
\subsubsection{Methods}
The deep reinforcement learning technique is constituted by the integration of the aforementioned DNNs and reinforcement learning. Explicitly, in deep reinforcement learning methods, DNNs are used for approximating certain components of reinforcement learning, including the state transition function, reward function, value function and the policy.
These components can be viewed as a function of the weights in these DNNs, which can be updated with the aid of the classic stochastic gradient descent.
In particular, the deep Q-Network (DQN) constitutes the first deep reinforcement learning solution, which was proposed by Mnih \textit{et al.} in 2015~\cite{mnih2015human}, which avoids the instability of the reinforcement learning algorithm, which may even become divergent when its action-value function is approximated relying on a non-linear function.
To elaborate a little further, DQN stabilizes the training process of the action-value function approximation by relying on experience replay. Furthermore, DQN only requires modest domain knowledge. The deep Q-learning algorithm in DQN is a variant of the classical Q-learning algorithms, which is integrated with the deep CNN model, where the convolutional filters seen in Fig.~\ref{deep learning}~(c) are used for representing the effects of receptive fields. One of the outputs of the deep CNN involved yields the specific value of the Q-function for a possible action.
Beyond the DQN, substantial efforts have also been invested in improving the performance and stability, as exemplified by the double DQN~\cite{van2016deep} and the dueling DQN~\cite{wang2015dueling}.
Thanks to the powerful feature representation capability of DNNs and of the reinforcement learning algorithms, DQN performs well in a range of compelling applications as exemplified by the AlphaGo, which is the first super-human program to defeat a professional human chess-player.
\subsubsection{Applications}
Deep reinforcement learning is eminently suitable for supporting the interaction in autonomous systems in terms of a higher level understanding of the visual world, which can be readily applied to a diverse analytically intractable problems in NGWNs.
Given the intrinsic advantages of the reinforcement learning in environment in interactive decision making, it may play a significant role in the field of control decision~\cite{zhang2017learning,zhu2017communication}. Specifically, Zhang \textit{et al.}~\cite{zhang2017learning} proposed a model-free UAV trajectory control scheme relying on deep reinforcement learning for data collection in smart cities, where a powerful deep CNN was used for extracting the necessary features, while a DQN model was used for decision making.
Given the sensing region and the related tasks, this algorithm supported efficient route planning for both the UAVs and mobile charging stations involved.
In~\cite{zhu2017communication}, a deep reinforcement learning aided communication-based train control system was conceived by Zhu \textit{et al.} which jointly optimized the communication handoff strategy and the control functions, while reducing the energy consumption. Real channel measurements and real-time train position information were used for training the DQN model, which resulted in optimal communication and control decisions.
Furthermore, the resource allocation problems of wireless networks, such as energy scheduling, traffic scheduling, caching decisions, user association, etc. can be efficiently solved by deep reinforcement learning at a low computational complexity~\cite{zhang2017energy,xu2017deep,zhu2017new,he2018green,he2017deep,he2017optimization,he2018integrated}.
For example, Zhang \textit{et al.}~\cite{zhang2017energy} proposed a deep Q-learning model for system's dynamic energy scheduling, which relied on the amalgamated stacked auto-encoder and Q-learning model. More specifically, the stacked auto-encoder was used for learning the state-action value function of each strategy in any of the available system states. Moreover, Xu \textit{et al.}~\cite{xu2017deep} proposed a deep reinforcement learning framework for power-efficient resource allocation in CRANs, which optimized the expected and cumulative long term power consumption, including the transmit power consumption, the sleep/active transition power consumption as well as the RRU's power consumption. A two-step deep reinforcement learning aided decision making scheme was conceived, where the learning agent first decides on activating/deactivating the sleeping mode of each RRU, and then determines the optimal beamformer's power allocation.
As for traffic scheduling, Zhu \textit{et al.}~\cite{zhu2017new} designed a stacked auto-encoder assisted deep learning model for packet transmission planning in the face of multiple contending channels in cognitive IoT networks, which aimed for maximizing the system's throughput. In this architecture, MDP was used for modelling the system states. Given the large state-action space of the system, the stacked auto-encoder was used for constructing the mapping between the state and the action for accelerating the process of optimization.
Furthermore, a deep Q-learning algorithm was conceived for designing both the cache allocation and the transmission rate in content-centric IoT networks for the sake of maximizing the long-term QoE~\cite{he2018green}, where He \textit{et al.} considered both the networking cost as well as the users' mean opinion score. In~\cite{he2017deep} and~\cite{he2017optimization}, He \textit{et al.} proposed a DQN based user scheduling scheme for a cache-enabled opportunistic interference alignment (IA) assisted wireless network in the context of realistic time-varying channels formulated as a finite-state Markov model. More specifically, the DQN was constructed by relying on a sophisticated action-value function for the sake of reducing the computational complexity. Their simulation results demonstrated that the DQN aided IA assisted user scheduling was beneficial in terms of substantially improving the network's throughput vs energy efficiency trade-off.
To elaborate a little further, He \textit{et al.}~\cite{he2018integrated} utilized deep reinforcement learning for constructing their resource allocation policy relying on a joint optimization problem, which considered the programmable networking, information-centric caching as well as mobile edge computing in the context of connected vehicular scenarios. Moreover, the $\varepsilon$-greedy policy was utilized for striking an attractive trade-off between exploration and exploitation.
In order to curb the potentially excessive computational complexity resulting from having a large state space and to deal with its partial observability in cognitive radio networks, Naparstek and Cohen developed a distributed dynamic spectrum access scheme relying on deep multi-user reinforcement leaning, where each user maps his/her current state to spectrum access actions with the aid of a DQN for the sake of maximizing the network's utility which was achieved without any message exchanges~\cite{naparstek2017deep}. Additionally, Wang \textit{et al.}~\cite{wang2018deep} proposed an adaptive DQN algorithm for dynamic multichannel access, which was capable of achieving a near-optimal performance outperforming the Myopic policy~\cite{ccetinkaya1998optimal}\footnote{The Myopic policy is one that simply optimizes the average immediate reward. It is called `myopic' in the sense that it merely considers the single criterion, while it has the advantage of being easy to implement.} and the Whittle's Index-based heuristic algorithms~\cite{ansell2003whittle}\footnote{The Whittle's Index-based algorithm is one of index heuristic algorithms which is designed to solve a problem in a more efficient way than traditional methods often used for solving NP-hard problems. More explicitly, the Whittle's Index policy is a low-complexity heuristic policy.} in complex scenarios.
Table~\ref{tbdeeprl} lists some typical applications of deep reinforcement learning in NGWN.
\begin{table*}[t!]
\begin{center}
\scriptsize
\caption{Compelling Applications of Deep Reinforcement Learning in NGWN}
\label{tbdeeprl}
\begin{tabular}{ | c | l | c | r |}
\hline
Paper & Scenario & Application & Description \\ \hline
\cite{zhang2017learning} & UAV network & trajectory control & a model-free UAV trajectory control scheme in smart cities relying on DQN\\ \hline
\cite{zhu2017communication} & ITS & train control & jointly optimize the communication handoff strategy and control performances\\ \hline
\cite{zhang2017energy} & energy-aware network &energy scheduling & associate the stacked auto-encoder and the deep Q-learning model\\ \hline
\cite{xu2017deep} & CRAN & power allocation & decide RRU's sleeping mode and the optimal beamformer's power allocation\\ \hline
\cite{zhu2017new} & cognitive IoT & traffic scheduling& construct the mapping between states and actions relying on stacked auto-encoder\\ \hline
\cite{he2018green} & content-centric IoT & cache allocation & jointly design cache allocation and transmission rate for maximizing long-term QoE\\ \hline
\cite{he2017optimization} & IA network & user scheduling & obtain the action-value function relying on DQN for lowering complexity\\ \hline
\cite{he2018integrated} & vehicular network & resource allocation & consider programmable SDN, information-centric caching and mobile edge computing\\ \hline
\cite{naparstek2017deep} & CR network & spectrum access & distributed spectrum access for maximizing network utility without message exchanges\\ \hline
\cite{wang2018deep} & CR network & multichannel access & adaptive DQN aided multichannel access yielding a near-optimal performance \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\section{Future Research and Conclusions}
\label{Future Research and Conclusions}
In the following, we will list a range of future research ideas on promising applications of machine learning in NGWNs.
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{UAV-aided networking}: Given the agility of UAV nodes as well as the bursty and often unpredictable nature of terrestrial wireless traffic, machine learning models can be used both for predicting the traffic demand and for adaptively adjusting the UAVs' location.
\item {\color{black}\emph{mMTC and uRLLC network}: While wireless networks have primarily served communications among individuals, in the era of the IoT, wireless networking also support myriads of machines and intelligent devices. In this era a pair of 5G operational modes - namely mMTC and uRLLC - are expected to play key roles~\cite{soldani20185g}. Machine learning is capable of enhancing conventional networks designed for mMTC, for example by invoking reinforcement learning to appropriately select the access points of MTC~\cite{liu2017enb}. The uRLLC mode of operation constitutes a rather young technological territory, which can be jointly designed with mMTC~\cite{lien2017efficient}. To reduce the network's latency from hundreds of milliseconds as experienced in state-of-the-art mobile communications to the desirable range of just a few milliseconds, machine learning is capable of supporting so-called anticipatory mobility management, which integrates the naive Bayesian classification of the previously used APs and geographical regression for the predictive analysis of data. Another example of disruptive technical trend is to investigate how wireless networking impacts on the smart agents operated by machine learning.}
\item \emph{Narrow band IoT (NB-IoT)}: NB-IoT allows a large number of low-power devices to connect to the cellular network, where the devices require long-term Internet access and dense wireless coverage. Machine learning algorithms are capable of supporting intelligent resource allocation, optimal AP deployment and efficient access.
\item \emph{Socially-aware wireless networking}: The operation of socially-aware wireless networks relies on a variety of social attributes, where machine learning schemes are beneficial in terms of facilitating feature extraction, social group-of-interest formation, classification and prediction of these social attributes, such as human mobility, social relations, behavior preference, etc.
\item \emph{Wireless Virtual reality (VR) networks}: VR networks facilitate for the users to experience and interact with immersive environments, which requires flawless audio and video data processing capability. Machine learning algorithms have the potential of circumventing the conception of complex joint source- and channel-coding schemes by further developing the auto-encoder principles.
\item \emph{Network integration, representation and design}: Machine learning may provide an alternative for network representation, where we can integrate each classic communication-theoretic blocks including source- and channel-encoding, modulation, demodulation, decoding, etc. into a ``black box''. By Simply learning from and processing previous input and output signals, the receivers become capable of adaptively understanding the operational mechanism of the ``black box'' considered.
\item \emph{Wireless network tomography}: State-of-the-art wireless networks support a vast number of nodes, such as those of the IoT, where the provision of global information is practically impossible for each node. Hence a new class of problems arises in the context of distributed wireless networks, which is related to the acquisition of network-related information. Classic network tomography~\cite{castro2004network} defines the problem as: ${\bf Y} = {\bf AX}$, where $\bf X$ is a $J$-dimensional vector of the network's dynamically fluctuating parameters, such as the link delay or traffic activity, $\bf Y$ is the $I$-dimensional vector of measurements and $\bf A$ is known as the routing matrix that is likely to define a rank-deficient scenario in network tomography. Such inverse matrix problems of inference may be solved by EM or Markov Chain Monte Carlo methods, and they are mathematically similar to the regression problems of machine learning. Network tomography can be applied to the inference of a wireless network's status and the subsequent optimization of the network's operation~\cite{sagduyu2017wireless}. Further generalization using statistical inference and singular value decomposition for statistically characterizing and enhancing the radio resource utilization relies on accurate spectrum sensing in cognitive radio networks~\cite{yu2010cognitive}. Another interesting application is to infer activities beyond sight (i.e. see-through walls) by applying variance-based radio tomography, Tikhonov least-squares regularization, and Kalman tracking~\cite{wilson2011see}.
\item {\color{black}\emph{Large-scale Pareto-optimization}: In the above-mentioned optimization problems the designer is routinely faced by having to strike a trade-off amongst conflicting factors, as exemplified by the ubiquitous bandwidth- vs. power-efficiency trade-off in wireless communications. However, these are numerous other trade-offs to be taken into account, such as for example the data-security vs. integrity trade-off or the BER vs. delay trade-off, as well as the BER vs. complexity trade-off, just to mention a few. Hence it is desirable to find all the Pareto-optimal operating points of future wireless systems, which jointly constitute the optimal Pareto-front of multi-component optimization problems~\cite{fei2017survey}. Again, none of the solutions on the optimal Pareto-front may be improved without degrading at least one of the parameters. Naturally, as we mentioned, the optimization search-space is extended every time, when a new parameter is incorporated. Hence machine learning constitutes a promising tool for the fertile ground of multi-component Pareto-optimization of a plethora of systems.}
\end{itemize}
In summary, we have reviewed the thirty-year history of machine learning. We surveyed a range of typical algorithms and models conceived for supervised learning, unsupervised learning, reinforcement learning as well as deep learning, respectively. Furthermore, we have highlighted the development tendency of wireless network techniques and a variety of representative scenarios for NGWNs as seen in Fig.~\ref{wireless develop} and Fig.~\ref{wireless network}. We also have provided a case-by-case description of numerous compelling applications relying on machine learning algorithms in wireless networks, followed by a pair of detailed application examples relying on our recent research results. In comparison with state-of-the-art survey papers seen in Fig.~\ref{timeline}, our paper overviews all the four popular kinds of learning schemes and their applications in NGWNs, which has a full scope of how machine learning algorithms bear fruits in the past decades in NGWNS.
Indeed, powerful machine learning methods are poised to occupy an important position in tackling intractable and hitherto uncharted scenarios and applications in NGWNs.
\ifCLASSOPTIONcaptionsoff
\newpage
\fi
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
Deep Neural Networks (DNN) have achieved remarkable success across different domains. One of the factors that led to the spread of these technologies in industry is the emergence of cloud service providers. It lowered the entry cost to the usage of DNN by offering different payment schemes. However, some sectors like the medical, financial or governmental can have constraints that prevent them from using these services due to the sensitivity of their data. The risk of exposing a patient's data to a third party due to loss or theft has serious ethical implications and could have serious legal or ethical ramifications.\\
A potential solution that can allow these sectors to utilize cloud services is offered by \textit{Leveled (Fully) Homomorphic Encryption (LHE)}. LHE is a class of encryption schemes that enables computations directly on the ciphertexts without decrypting them first. It can be used to apply DNN models on encrypted data. In this scenario the data owner, e.g. a clinic, would deploy its trained model on the cloud and send the encrypted patient's data as input to the model. Then it will receive the predictions back which are still encrypted. The data owner can then minimize the risk of losing or exposing the data to any other party including the service provider.\\
Unfortunately, LHE has several limitations that prevents direct porting of DNN models used in the literature and the industry to usage with private data. The two main obstacles are:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Mathematical operations are restricted to addition and multiplication. Consequently, it is impossible to use the nonlinear functions that are commonly used like ReLU \cite{Nair2010}.
\item With each mathematical operation, the noise level in the ciphertext grows and can silently corrupt the message if it grows beyond a certain threshold. This limits the possible depth of a neural network.
\end{enumerate}
In literature (see \autoref{sec:related_work}), two general approaches have been proposed to solve this limitation:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Train and infer with polynomial approximations of the nonlinear functions.
\item Train with the original function then replace it with the polynomial approximation at inference time.
\end{enumerate}
The first approach is difficult to train due to problems like exploding gradient. The second suffers from considerable loss in predictions accuracy as the network gets deeper due to the accumulation of approximations errors (see \autoref{sec:related_work}).\\
In the following, we propose an improvement to the second approach. We identify the validity range of polynomial approximations as a major driver of inaccuracies, and introduce a novel Min-Max normalization scheme that restricts function inputs to ranges with low approximation error. Empirical results suggest that this scheme results in a significant reduction of prediction accuracy loss, especially as the network gets deeper, and even when low-degree polynomial approximations are employed.
\section{Preliminaries}
In this section, we revisit a few aspects of LHE that are relevant to this work. We give an overview of the most common components used in DNN, focusing on the contrast between commonly employed DNN functions and approximations supported by LHE schemes.
\subsection{Homomorphic Encryption}\label{sec:homomorphic_enc}
The first \textit{fully homomorphic encryption} (FHE) scheme was devised by Gentry in his dissertation \cite{Gentry2009}. To allow the computation of an arbitrary number of operations, he proposed a procedure called \textit{bootstrapping} that resets the noise to its initial level after each operation. However, it was computationally too expensive for industrial use cases. Building on his work, several other schemes were developed that skipped the usage of bootstrapping and thus allowed faster computation, but only up to a certain depth, after which the ciphertext gets corrupted. This branch of schemes is usually called LHE.
Among LHE schemes, there have been different developments, each with their own advantages and limitations, like BGV \cite{Brakerski2014}, BFV \cite{Fan2012} and HEAAN \cite{Cheon2017}. We briefly introduce those schemes with focus on relevant properties to this work.
\paragraph{Supported operations}
LHE schemes support only the basic mathematical functions \textit{addition} and \textit{multiplication}. The operands could be a combination of ciphertexts and plaintexts. LHE implementations (e.g. SEAL \cite{seal23}) offer optimizations for operations based on those two functions, like exponentiation by a non-private constant. From here on out, any other function has to be replaced or approximated using the two aforementioned functions. Additionally, BGV, BFV and HEAAN support vectorization by offering the ability to pack several messages into a single ciphertext and exploit the Single Instruction Multiple Data (SIMD) paradigm \cite{Gentry2012}.
\paragraph{Noise growth and depth of mathematical circuits}\label{para:noise_growth}
Noise is an inherent part of a ciphertext in LHE. Even a newly encrypted ciphertext will have some noise, which is responsible of the probabilistic property of LHE. With each application of a mathematical function, the noise increases. When the noise level exceeds a certain threshold, the ciphertext is corrupted and the encrypted message becomes irretrievable. This noise threshold is controlled with different hyper-parameters at the initialization time of the crypto-system. However, attempts at increasing this threshold will result in more expensive memory and computation costs, hence, it is beneficial to keep the depth of the mathematical circuit as low as possible. In particular, the noise generated by multiplication of two ciphertexts is a lot greater than multiplication of a ciphertext with a plaintext or additions with any combination, hence, it is common in literature to associate the noise growth directly with the private multiplicative depth of a circuit.
\paragraph{Integers and rational numbers}
In most applications and especially in DNN, the values of inputs are real numbers, however, most LHE schemes including BGV and BFV do not support floating point numbers. Most users resort to two approaches of fixed-point representation of values in a given message.
The first approach is to scale the numbers by a $10^k$ factor to take into account $k$ digits after the decimal point and neglect the remainder, then encode the outcome as integers. The advantage of this approach is the simplicity of implementation, however, it requires the user to keep track of the factoring along the arithmetic circuit, which needs to be undone after decryption to get the correct result. Additionally, since division is not supported, the encrypted numbers will keep growing, which requires an initialization of a crypto-system with higher memory and computational costs.
The second approach is to preserve part of the ciphertext to the integral part and another to the fractional part of the original message. This approach has the advantage that division is possible through the multiplication by a fraction. However, vectorization is not possible anymore as it is only supported with integers. We refer the user to section 3 in \cite{Dowlin2017} for further details.
\subsection{Key Functions in Neural Networks}\label{sec:neural_networks}
The focus on this work is on artificial feed-forward neural networks. They are built by cascading several layers of operations in sequence, hence, they can be thought of as a mathematical circuit, where each layer increases the depth. Usually, these networks are visualized as a stack with the input to the network as the bottom layer. Below, we list commonly used neural network layers, with an emphasis on the operations that they use. In terms of nomenclature, nonlinear layers are sometimes called activation layers in literature. For clarity, in the remainder of this paper, we will refer to the output of a layer as the activations of that layer, and to the nonlinear layers as such.
\paragraph{Fully connected and/or convolutional layers} The function applied in these components is a \textit{weighted sum}, i.e. the input vector is multiplied by a weights vector, added to a bias vector and then the results are summed. Since these layers constitutes only addition and multiplication, they are fully supported by LHE.
\paragraph{Nonlinear activation layers} These layers are usually applied directly after fully connected or convolutional layers, giving the network the needed nonlinear flexibility to model complex functions. Some of the most common are the logistic function, hyperbolic tangent and the ReLU. LHE cannot support the first two due the existence of exponentiation (and division when integer encoding is used), and it cannot support ReLU due to the conditional branching. Hence, these functions need to be approximated or replaced by others that only employ addition and multiplication.
\paragraph{Pooling layers} In DNNs, pooling layers are periodically incorporated to increase the receptive field, to reduce the spatial size of the data, to minimize the amount of parameters and consequently limit the possibility of overfitting, as well as to reduce the memory and computational cost. Two of the most commonly used pooling layers are maximum pooling and average pooling. LHE does not support the maximum function, whereas averaging can be employed if fractional encoding is used as explained in \autoref{sec:homomorphic_enc}.
\section{Related Work}\label{sec:related_work}
\subsection*{Neural Networks with Homomorphic Encryption}
The problem of applying deep neural networks with LHE is gaining momentum in the research community. Related literature in this field covers multiple aspects, like prediction accuracy or computational efficiency. To keep the paper concise, we focus only on the work that directly relates to ours i.e. the work on nonlinear functions.\\
CryptoNets \cite{Dowlin2016} first demonstrated the application of neural networks on homomorphically encrypted data. The network was based on integers, prohibiting the usage of the division operation. Instead, authors proposed to use sum pooling (called scaled average pooling in the paper) instead of max or average pooling. The network had two nonlinear layers, which utilized the square function as the nonlinearity. It was applied on MNIST dataset \cite{LeCunYann1998} and achieved an accuracy of 99\%. However, as the authors noted, the square function is not a good nonlinear function because it causes an explosion of the gradient as the network gets deeper.\\
Hesamifard \textit{et al}. built on CryptoNets in \cite{Hesamifard2016} and \cite{Hesamifard2017} and proposed an alternative to the square function. Their solution was to generate approximations of the nonlinear functions. To keep errors low, the authors optimized the approximation function precisely within the range of expected inputs to the nonlinearity, which required a sampling of the distribution of input values. The authors focused on the sigmoid function. Even though they reported good performance, their solution is challenging to implement and train, as the network architect has to progressively build the network to accommodate those distributions, and generate new approximations for each new layer and for each new dataset or architecture.\\
Chabanne \textit{et al}. \cite{Chabanne2017} propose adding \textit{batch normalization} \cite{Ioffe2015a} before each nonlinear layer, which removes the mean of the distribution of activations. They then suggest to generate approximation functions with low error around the origin. They experimented with MNIST dataset on a network with 6 nonlinear ReLU functions. Similar to our approach, they train with the original ReLU nonlinearity, and replace it with the polynomial approximation at inference time. However, since batch normalization does not constrain a distribution to lie within a certain range, some inputs to the nonlinearity could lie in areas with very high approximation error and deviate the network from the correct prediction. To mitigate this problem, the authors propose an extra training phase after replacing the nonlinear functions with the approximations, treating the coefficients of the polynomial as learnable parameters. However, reported performances still had deficiencies, especially when the more desirable low-degree approximations were applied.
\subsection*{Robustness of Neural Networks}
The topic of neural network robustness to perturbations or lost precision in the activation values is an active field of research. It has direct implications on topics like resiliency against adversarial examples \cite{Yuan2017} or training and inference with limited resources \cite{Gupta:2015}. Even though those works do not directly tackle the challenges faced when utilizing homomorphic encryption, their findings are applicable to those challenges.\\
Cheney \textit{et al}. \cite{CheneySK17} developed three methods to evaluate the robustness of a neural network. One of which is the addition of random \textit{weight perturbations} which has the same effect on the signal in the network as the perturbations generated from the nonlinear function approximations in our work. Empirical results suggest that the last layers in the network are relatively resilient to perturbations, whereas the early layers were much more fragile.\\
Boura \textit{et al}. \cite{BouraGG18} added some random error to the output of each activation in each nonlinear layer. The authors report that the experiments on all networks that were tested proved resilient to at least 10\% error, with little impact on the global accuracy.
\section{Methods}
In this section, we present i) the methodology of generating the polynomial approximations of the nonlinear functions and ii) we describe our proposed method for constraining the range of inputs to those approximations, with the aim of keeping approximation errors as low as possible.
\subsection{Approximation of nonlinear functions} \label{sec:act_fn}
Since LHE supports addition and multiplication, polynomial functions are good candidates for approximation of the nonlinear functions. As stated by the Stone\textendash Weierstrass theorem \cite{hunter2001} \cite{stone1948}, given a sufficient polynomial degree, any continuous function defined on a closed interval can be approximated as a polynomial. However, when polynomials are used in the context of DNN with LHE, the generation of the approximations has to balance between:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Low approximation errors, to minimize the propagation of errors and preserve the prediction accuracy.
\item Low polynomial degrees, to minimize the noise generation in the ciphertext.
\end{enumerate}
In our experiments, we utilize Chebyshev polynomials as an orthogonal basis for approximation, while keeping the degree as low as possible between 2 and 6.\\
We experiment with ReLU due to its widespread usage in modern DNN. However, low degree approximations of ReLU suffer from relatively high approximation errors around the discontinuity at the 0 origin. Consequently, we also experiment with the Exponential Linear Unit (ELU) \cite{Clevert2015}, which is smooth and can be approximated with lower errors. A comparison between the absolute error of the two functions is visualized in \autoref{fig:act_fn_abs_err}. To generate the approximation, we fit the Chebyshev series of the desired degree in a least-squares manner to points drawn from a uniform distribution centered at 0, in order to preserve the nonlinearity of the original functions. Notably, outside the approximation range, the polynomial tends to deviate greatly from the ground truth nonlinearities. See \autoref{fig:fn_approximations}.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/act_fn_abs_err.pdf}
\caption{The absolute approximation error of the original nonlinear functions with their corresponding polynomial approximation of degree 3 and approximation range $[-3, 3]$. The high approximation error around the origin in ReLU is noticeable.}
\label{fig:act_fn_abs_err}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{figures/relu_appr.pdf}}
\subfloat[]{\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{figures/elu_appr.pdf}}
\caption{Ground truths of the nonlinear functions and their polynomial approximations of different degrees approximated in the range $[-1, 1]$. (a) ReLU and (b) ELU.}%
\label{fig:fn_approximations}%
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Min-Max Normalization Layer}\label{sec:minmax}
We propose a \textit{Min-Max normalization layer} that aims at strictly keeping the inputs to the polynomial functions within the approximation range. It transforms the inputs to the \textit{target scaling range}, by normalizing the inputs into values within the range $[0,1]$, and then scaling it to the approximation range. More formally:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:minmax}
x_{norm}= \underbrace{(r_{max} - r_{min})}_\text{scaling} * \underbrace{\frac{x - x_{min}}{x_{max} - x_{min}}}_\text{[0,1] norm} + \underbrace{r_{min}}_\text{shifting}
\end{equation}
where $x$ is the input, $x_{min}$ and $x_{max}$ are the minimum and maximum values in the input respectively. $r_{min}$ and $r_{max}$ are the target range boundaries, which are definable by the network architect and can be intuitively set to the same range used to approximate the original nonlinear functions.\\
Ideally, the minima and maxima would be computed on the whole input at each layer, however, this is not possible when mini-batches are used in stochastic gradient training. Since parameter updates are applied after each training step, this would turn the previous extrema irrelevant. Consequently, each mini-batch is normalized using minima and maxima in the current mini-batch as can be seen in \autoref{alg:minmax}. For convolutional neural networks, the normalization is applied with respect to feature maps, in order to preserve the convolutional property.\\
At inference, the moving mean of minima and maxima computed during the training steps is used. This leads to a deterministic model where the prediction of a single sample depends only on its own features and is independent from other unseen samples that are inferred at the same time. This means that at inference time, this layer becomes simply a linear transformation with addition, multiplication and division, which makes it compatible with the LHE implementation that support division through fractional encoding (ex. SEAL\cite{seal23}).\\
\begin{algorithm}
\KwIn{Mini-batch of size $m$: $\BATCH=\{x_1...x_m\}$; target range: $r_{min}$ and $r_{max}$}
\KwOut{Normalized and scaled $\BATCH$}
$x_{\BATCH, min} \gets \min(\BATCH)$\\
$x_{\BATCH, max} \gets \max(\BATCH)$\\
$\BATCH_{norm} \gets \frac{\BATCH - x_{\BATCH, min}}{x_{\BATCH, max} - x_{\BATCH, min}}$\\
$\BATCH_{scaled} \gets (r_{max} - r_{min})*\BATCH_{norm} + r_{min}$
\caption{{\bf Min-Max normalization during training} \label{alg:minmax}}
\end{algorithm}
To make this layer compatible with other LHE implementations that do not support division, the linear transformation can be easily absorbed into the weights of the preceding convolutional/dense layer. For the convolutional layers, after training the model, the weights are updated as follows:
\begin{equation*}
w\prime = \frac{(r_{max}-r_{min})w}{\EXMEAN(x_{max}) - \EXMEAN(x_{min})}
\end{equation*}
\begin{equation*}
b\prime = \frac{(r_{max}-r_{min})(b-\EXMEAN(x_{min}))}{\EXMEAN(x_{max}) - \EXMEAN(x_{min})}
\end{equation*}
where $w$ and $b$ are the original weights and bias. $\EXMEAN(x_{min})$, $\EXMEAN(x_{max})$ are the moving mean of minima and maxima.
Similar to batch normalization \cite{Ioffe2015a}, this layer has a regularization effect since each training example's features are seen in conjunction and in relative values to the other examples in the same mini-batch. Hence, the model does not produce deterministic values for a single training example (only for identical batches), which was found to improve generalization by Ioffe and Szegedy \cite{Ioffe2015a}.
\section{Experiments}\label{sec:experiments}
The Min-Max normalization layer is tested with two different baseline networks with different complexities:
\paragraph{LeNet-5-like and MNIST}
A LeNet-like architecture \cite{LeCun1998} is applied on the MNIST dataset \cite{LeCunYann1998}. To reduce the number of parameters, and accordingly the number of the computationally and memory expensive homomorphic evaluations, we follow the Network in Network \cite{Lin2013} approach and replace the fully connected layers with convolutional layers. The output layer has 10 feature maps, corresponding to 10 target classes, followed by a global average pooling layer or global sum pooling layer to obtain a division free network. Altogether, the network has five hidden convolutional layers.
\paragraph{SqueezeNet and CIFAR-10}
To the best of our knowledge, a scaled down version of SqueezeNet \cite{Iandola2016, Dathathri2018} is the deepest homomorphically evaluated network in the literature as of the writing of this paper. That version was optimized for the CIFAR-10 dataset \cite{Krizhevsky2009} with a total of 10 nonlinear functions. In this work, we use the original SqueezeNet with a total of 18 nonlinear functions. Importantly, a homomorphical evaluation of this configuration is so far not possible, since other limitations like noise growth are still active fields of research. Parallel research is tackling such limitations, e.g by Chen \textit{et al}. \cite{chen2018}, who investigate a novel encryption scheme that enables the usage of mathematical circuits up to depth 9, with the same initialization that would only allow a circuit of depth 2 with BFV. In parallel, we consider our work as an important effort to improve nonlinear function approximations in very deep LHE networks, and demonstrate for the first time the feasibility of using up to 18 nonlinear functions without a significant loss in accuracy.
In both networks, LHE-incompatible max pooling was replaced with average pooling as the subsampling layer. We use Keras \cite{Chollet2015a} to train the model with a Tensorflow framework \cite{TensorFlow2017} backend. For all experiments, Adadelta \cite{Zeiler2012} is used as the optimizer and categorical crossentropy as the loss function.\\
Each network has two baseline models:
\paragraph*{Baseline 1} is the network with the original nonlinear function, trained without the Min-Max layer, i.e. a configuration that would be used if no LHE scheme was applied.
\paragraph*{Baseline 2} is the network with the original nonlinear function, trained with the Min-Max layer. This is the model where the nonlinear approximations will be plugged in place of the original nonlinear functions for LHE inference, and it is used to measure the impact of adding Min-Max layers to the model, compared to Baseline 1.
It is important to note that our main concern during the experiments was the robustness of the network to the perturbations created by the approximated functions as the number of those functions increase. Hence, our attention was directed towards the loss in accuracy in comparison to the baseline networks and not to the absolute accuracy.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfloat[]{{\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{figures/tsem_concat5.png} }}%
\subfloat[]{{\includegraphics[width=0.45\linewidth]{figures/tsem_mm9.png} }}%
\caption{The output values of block 5 in SqueezeNet during training, (a) without deploying the Min-Max layer in the network and (b), with Min-Max normalization layer in range $[-3, 3]$. Notice the stability of the activations which are passed to the nonlinear function within the desired range, when Min-Max is used in contrast to the widening distribution of activations when it is not used. Plots were generated by TensorBoard\cite{TensorBoard2017}.}%
\label{fig:activations_dists}%
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/error_dist.pdf}
\caption{Activations in block 5 in SqueezeNet during a forward pass on an unseen example, right before applying the nonlinear function (in blue) and the approximation error magnitude of approximations of ELU with different approximation ranges (dashed lines in red, green and orange).}
\label{fig:error_dist}
\end{figure}
After evaluating the baselines, each network was initialized with different values of the hyperparameters of the proposed method:
\begin{itemize}
\item the \textit{target scaling range} in the Min-Max layer was set to one of the ranges $[-1,1]$, $[-2, 2]$ or $[-3, 3]$.
\item the \textit{approximation polynomial degree} was varied from 2 to 6 for ELU, and to 2, 4 or 6 for ReLU.
\item the \textit{approximation range} was varied from $[-1, 1]$ up to the target scaling range.
\end{itemize}
Using the moving mean of extrema on the training batches showed close accuracy in estimating the extrema of the whole training set and results in normalization of the unseen examples within the desired range as can be seen in \autoref{fig:error_dist}. The blue histogram visualizes the distribution of an unseen example's activation values of the same layer visualized in \autoref{fig:activations_dists}.
The behaviour of the hyperparameters was consistent across the two architectures, independent of the network complexity. The target scaling range did not have a significant impact on the performance, as can be seen in the performance of baseline~2 in contrast to the vanilla baseline~1 in \autoref{table:results}. An exception is marked by ELU when the target scaling range is between $[-1, 1]$. The LeNet-like architecture's accuracy decreased by 1.23 percentage points from baseline 1, and by 1.39 and 1.61 points using target scaling ranges of $[-2, 2]$ and $[-3, 3]$ respectively. With SqueezeNet, the accuracy dropped by 0.99 points compared to baseline~1, and by 8.02 and 5.59 from target scaling ranges of $[-2, 2]$ and $[-3, 3]$ respectively (see rows 1-4 in \autoref{table:results}).
For low values of polynomial degrees, low values of approximation range performed best. This behaviour was consistent even when the employed approximation range did not match and was smaller than the target scaling range. For example, when a target scaling layer of range $[-3, 3]$ was employed, a polynomial approximation of \nth{2} degree and approximation range of $[-2, 2]$ performed better than a matching degree and approximation range of $[-3, 3]$. However, as the polynomial degree increased, the polynomial function with the approximation range that matched the target scaling range performed best. Additionally, with the exception when the target scaling range was $[-1, 1]$, ELU's approximations constantly achieved or exceeded the performance of ReLU's approximations with a lower polynomial degree. For example, for SqueezeNet with a target scaling range $[-3, 3]$, ELU's approximation achieved a loss of 0.34 points with degree 3, whereas ReLU's approximation with degree 4 achieved a loss of 1.75 points (see rows 5 and 6 in \autoref{table:results}).
\begin{table}
\centering
\caption{The accuracy of each of the baseline activation functions and their corresponding approximations in the networks with Min-Max scaling layer. $n$ is the polynomial degree and $r$ is the approximation range. The missing values indicate that the best approximation of the given degree is the same as the approximation of the lower degree, e.g. the best approximations for ReLU with maximum \nth{4} degree are still of \nth{3} degree. Numbers in bold signify the best performing range for a given polynomial degree. Thick lines separate between polynomial degrees.}
\aboverulesep = 0mm \belowrulesep = 0mm
\begin{tabular}{clccccc}
\cmidrule{1-6}\
~ & ~ & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{LeNet-5-like} & \multicolumn{2}{c}{SqueezeNet} \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & Nonlinearity & ReLU & ELU & ReLU & ELU \\ \cmidrule{1-6}\morecmidrules\cmidrule{1-6}
Vanilla & Baseline 1 & 99.28\% & 99.01\%
& 76.35\% & 73.50\% & 1 \\ \cmidrule{1-6}\morecmidrules\cmidrule{1-6}
\multirow{6}{*}{\shortstack[c]{Min-Max\\([-1, 1])}} & Baseline 2 & 99.55\% & 97.78\% & 81.87\% & 72.51\% & 2 \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=2 r=[-1, 1] & 96.65\% & 95.1\% & 72.65\% & 64.66\% \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=3 r=[-1, 1] & - & 97.45\% & - & 70.73\% \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=4 r=[-1, 1] & 99.33\% & 97.53\% & 80.35\% & 71.24\% \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=5 r=[-1, 1] & - & 97.74\% & - & 72.19\% \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=6 r=[-1, 1] & 99.47\% & 97.76 & 81.23\% & 72.23 \\ \cmidrule{1-6}
\morecmidrules\cmidrule{1-6}
\multirow{11}{*}{\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{Min-Max (range=[-2, 2])}} & Baseline 2 & 98.75\% & 99.17\% & 80.79\% & 80.53\% & 3 \\ \cmidrule[1.5pt]{2-6}
~ & n=2 r=[-1, 1] & \textbf{96.69\%} & \textbf{98.51\%} & 58.68\% & \textbf{74.33\%} \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=2 r=[-2, 2] & 91.03\% & 98.47\% & \textbf{68.27\%} & 71.42\% \\ \cmidrule[1.5pt]{2-6}
~ & n=3 r=[-1, 1] & - & \textbf{99.03\%} & - & 77.59\% \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=3 r=[-2, 2] & - & 98.88\% & - & \textbf{77.86\%} \\ \cmidrule[1.5pt]{2-6}
~ & n=4 r=[-1, 1] & 7.96\% & \textbf{99.18\%} & 11.17\% & 77.2\% \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=4 r=[-2, 2] & \textbf{98.41\%} & 98.97\% & \textbf{78.66\%} & \textbf{79.43\%} \\ \cmidrule[1.5pt]{2-6}
~ & n=5 r=[-1, 1] & - & 93.49\% & - & 18.54\% \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=5 r=[-2, 2] & - & \textbf{99.13\%} & - & \textbf{80.11\%} \\ \cmidrule[1.5pt]{2-6}
~ & n=6 r=[-1, 1] & 19.4\% & 94.84\% & 9.87\% & 19.14\% \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=6 r=[-2, 2] & \textbf{98.71\%} & \textbf{99.11\%} & \textbf{79.97\%} & \textbf{80.17\%} \\ \cmidrule{1-6}
\morecmidrules\cmidrule{1-6}
\multirow{16}{*}{\rotatebox[origin=c]{90}{Min-Max (range=[-3,3])}} & Baseline 2 & 99.49\% & 99.39\% & 82.04\% & 78.10\% & 4 \\ \cmidrule[1.5pt]{2-6}
~ & n=2 r=[-1, 1] & 96.12\% & \textbf{98.96\%} & 33.12\% & \textbf{73.30\%} \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=2 r=[-2, 2] & \textbf{99.18\%}& 98.91\% & \textbf{75.75\%} & 71.37\% \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=2 r=[-3, 3] & 97.11\% & 98.68\% & 71.36\% & 68.42\% \\ \cmidrule[1.5pt]{2-6}
~ & n=3 r=[-1, 1] & - & 98.36\% & - & 28.17\% \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=3 r=[-2, 2] & - & \textbf{99.29\%} & - & \textbf{77.76\%} & 5 \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=3 r=[-3, 3] & - & 98.95\% & - & 74.98\% \\ \cmidrule[1.5pt]{2-6}
~ & n=4 r=[-1, 1] & 6.10\% & 95.02\% & 10.08\% & 21.22\% \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=4 r=[-2, 2] & 99.18\% & \textbf{99.34\%} & 64.65\% & \textbf{77.70\%} \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=4 r=[-3, 3] & \textbf{99.33\%}& 99.22\% & \textbf{80.29\%} & 77.11\% & 6 \\ \cmidrule[1.5pt]{2-6}
~ & n=5 r=[-1, 1] & - & 9.33\% & - & 9.99\% \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=5 r=[-2, 2] & - & 99.14\% & - & 67.82\% \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=5 r=[-3, 3] & - & \textbf{99.30\%} & - & \textbf{77.79\%} \\ \cmidrule[1.5pt]{2-6}
~ & n=6 r=[-1, 1] & 16\% & 20.57\% & 10.09\% & 10.56\% \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=6 r=[-2, 2] & 93\% & 99.22\% & 18.94\% & 68.36\% \\ \cmidrule{2-6}
~ & n=6 r=[-3, 3] & \textbf{99.44\%}& \textbf{99.32\%} & \textbf{81.46\%} & \textbf{77.88\%} \\ \cmidrule{1-6}\
\end{tabular}
\aboverulesep = 0.605mm \belowrulesep = 0.984mm
\label{table:results}
\end{table}
\section{Discussion}\label{sec:discussion}
The results of the experiments show that the proposed method can be used reliably for inference on homomorphically encrypted data. Here, we provide further interpretation of these results and give recommendations regarding the usage of our proposed method.
\subsection{Min-Max normalization}\label{disc:minmax}
The Min-Max normalization layer offered an intuitive method to control the range of activations in the network by setting a single hyperparameter which explicitly defines the desired range. Its performance was consistently high, with different nonlinear functions and different approximations, using different polynomial degrees and approximation ranges. We attribute this to the Min-Max layer's ability to utilize the whole range of low polynomial approximation error, by scaling activations with a high absolute value to the target range. This is desirable, if we consider that the approximation error in different activations can have different signs (see absolute errors in Fig. \ref{fig:act_fn_abs_err}). Boura \textit{et al}. \cite{BouraGG18} showed that using average instead of sum pooling layers yields more stability to perturbations in the network. Hence, average pooling in combination with opposite-signed error values leads to a higher chance of approximation errors to be canceled out. The shape of the approximated nonlinearity and the parameterization of the Min-Max layer plays an important role as well, as shown by significant performance drops if ELU is scaled to the range of $[-1, 1]$. In \autoref{fig:linear_elu_relu}, we show that constraining inputs to ELU to the range $[-1, 1]$ yields an almost linear function for most of the target range (approximately $[-0.25, 1]$), with the actual non-linearity lying only between $[-1, -0.25]$. This behavior greatly hinders the capacity of the network by turning it into a mostly linear function.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\linewidth]{figures/linear_elu_relu.pdf}
\caption{ELU and ReLU compared to the identity function in the range $[-1, 1]$. The vertical line at $-0.25$ marks the linear part of the ELU function. Notice that within the range $[-1, 1]$, most of the ELU function appears as linear.}
\label{fig:linear_elu_relu}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Nonlinear approximations} \label{disc: nonlinear_approx}
As noted in \autoref{sec:experiments}, polynomial approximation functions with a matching polynomial degree and approximation range performed well in most cases, independent of the networks' depths. However, our results also show that the best performance is not necessarily achieved by approximation ranges that exactly match the target scaling range.
We explain this by the fact that for a given polynomial degree, the polynomial approximation of the nonlinearity gets more accurate if a smaller approximation range is considered. Since the activation values have a Gaussian-like distribution roughly centered at 0 after the Min-Max layer (\autoref{fig:activations_dists}), most of the activations benefit from a very low approximation error. However, as the polynomial degree increases, activations that lie outside of the permitted range lead to a polynomially high approximation error. The consequence is a noticeable drop of network performance. This is visualized in \autoref{fig:error_dist}: among the three approximation ranges shown, the approximation function over the range $[-1, 1]$ has the lowest error in this interval, which covers approximately $63\%$ of input activation samples. In comparison, the approximation over the range $[-2, 2]$ has a slightly higher approximation error in the interval $[-1, 1]$. However, up until the range $[-2, 2]$, the errors are smaller, yielding relatively low approximation errors for approximately $97\%$ of input activation samples.
Empirical results show that ELU can preserve the prediction accuracies with a lower degree polynomial approximations. We attribute this property to two factors:
\begin{enumerate}
\item The region with highest density of activations lies around 0. It can be approximated in ELU with a lower degree than in ReLU, because of the lack of a discontinuity at the origin. Hence, less approximation capacity is needed, and part of that capacity can be used to approximate a bigger range (cf. \autoref{fig:act_fn_abs_err} for the approximation errors of polynomial of the same degree).
\item The polynomial approximation of ELU does not deviate too much away from the ground truth outside the approximated range in contrast to ReLU. This is visualized in \autoref{fig:fn_approximations}.
\end{enumerate}
As expected, the performances of both ReLU and ELU approximations get closer to the baseline~2, as the approximation degree increases. We stop at degree 6, as higher degrees will not be practical in the context of LHE due to the magnitude of the noise that will be generated because of the depth of the multiplicative circuit.
\subsection{Design recommendations for architects}
To utilize the full potential of the Min-Max layer, we highlight several factors that a network architect has to consider at design time, and we offer several guidelines on how to set hyperparameters of the Min-Max layers and of the approximations of the nonlinear functions accordingly.
\begin{itemize}
\item \textit{The original nonlinear function:} the function's shape puts a hard constraint on the target scaling range of the Min-Max layer. The designer needs to take care that the range is big enough to preserve the nonlinearity property of that function. For example, as discussed, approximating ELU with the target scaling range of $[-1, 1]$ is suboptimal since the resulting function is linear in a majority of the input range (cf. \autoref{disc:minmax}).
\item \textit{Depth of the network:} As the network gets deeper, the architect has to choose a polynomial of lower degree to minimize the noise generation in the LHE ciphertexts. Additionally, to maintain the highest possible fidelity to the baseline~2 performance, the approximation range has to decrease, to match the approximation capacity of that degree (cf. discussion in \autoref{disc: nonlinear_approx}).
\item \textit{Hybrid polynomial degrees:} Cheney \textit{et al}. \cite{CheneySK17} showed that the last layers of a network are relatively resilient to approximation errors, compared to earlier layers. The architect can employ a polynomial approximation of high degree at the early layers, and a lower degree in the subsequent layers in order to increase the performance with minimal increase in noise generation in the ciphertexts. We demonstrate this with SqueezeNet with a target scaling range of $[-2, 2]$ by employing a polynomial of \nth{5} degree in the first three blocks then a polynomial of \nth{2} degree in the remaining six blocks, The prediction accuracy increased 6.2 percentage points compared to a network with only polynomials of degree 2.
\end{itemize}
\section{Conclusion}
Min-Max normalization has been one of the preprocessing methods used in the literature and the industry. In this work, a novel use within the hidden layers was presented to facilitate DNN inference on homomorphically encrypted data. The proposed method is characterized by
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textit{Ease of initialization and trivial setting of hyperparameters:} the proposed method only has a single hyperparameter that explicitly defines the desired input range to the nonlinear functions.
\item \textit{Simplicity of the training process:} No additional training steps are required other than the traditional training process with plain data.
\item \textit{Compatibility:} Min-max normalization requires little change to current common architectures.
\end{enumerate}
In the context of DNN with LHE, this work proposes a solution to the nonlinearity problem by allowing the network architect to use try-and-tested nonlinear functions during training, and to use polynomial function approximations at inference time, with minimum loss in performance.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
The study was supported in parts by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) in connection with the foundation of the German Center for Vertigo and Balance Disorders (DSGZ) (grant number 01 EO 0901).
\ifCLASSOPTIONcaptionsoff
\newpage
\fi
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Appendix}
We begin with the following standard lemma.
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:laplace}[Laplace Approximation of integrals]
Consider an integral of the form
\[I = \int_{a}^{b} h(y)e^{-ng(y)} dy,\]
where $g(y)$ is a smooth function which has a local minimum at $y^* \in (a,b)$ and $h(y)$ is a smooth function. Then
\[I \sim h(y^*) e^{-n g(y^*)} \sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{n g''(y^*)}} \text{ as $n \to \infty$} . \]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Readers are directed to \cite[Chapter-2]{WONG198955} for the proof.
\end{proof}
Now we prove a technical lemma that bounds the differential entropy of the good sequence.
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:entropy}
For a good sequence $\bar q_n(\theta)$, there exist an $n_M\geq 1$ and $\bar M >0 $, such that for all $n \geq n_M$
\[ - \int \bar{q}_n(\mu) \log \bar{q}_n(\mu) \leq \frac{1}{2}\log \left(2\pi \bar e \frac{\bar M}{n} \right), \]
where $\bar e$ is the Euler's constant.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Recall from Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence} that the $\bar q_n(\theta)$ converges weakly to $\delta_{\theta_0}$ at the rate of $\sqrt{n}$. It follows from the Definition~\ref{def:roc} for rate of convergence that,
\[E_{\bar q_n(\theta)}[|\theta - \hat \theta_n|^2] = O\left (\frac{1}{n} \right). \]
There exist an $n_M\geq 1$ and $\bar M > 0 $, such that for all $n \geq n_M$
\[ \bbE_{\bar q_n(\theta)} [( \theta - \hat{\theta}_n)^2 ] \leq \frac{\bar M}{n}. \]
Using the fact that, the differential entropy of random variable with a given variance is bounded by the differential entropy of the Gausian distribution of the same variance \cite[Theorem 9.6.5]{CoverTM2006}),
it follows that the differential entropy of $\bar{q}_{n}(\mu)$ is bounded by $\frac{1}{2}\log(2\pi \bar e \frac{\bar M}{n}) $, where $\bar e$ is the Euler's constant.
\end{proof}
Next, we prove the following result on the prior distributions. This result will be useful in proving Lemma~\ref{lem:norm} and~\ref{lem:ndegen}.
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:prior}
Given a prior distribution $\pi(\theta)$ with $\bbE_{ \pi(\theta)}[|\theta|]< \infty$, for any $\beta>0$, there exists a sequence of compact sets $\{K_n\} \subset \Theta$ such that
\[\int_{\Theta \backslash K_n } \pi(\gamma) d\gamma = O(n^{-\beta}). \]
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Fix $\theta_1 \in \Theta$. Define a sequence of compact sets $$K_n = \{\theta \in \Theta : |\theta -
\theta_1| \leq n^{{\beta}} \} \forall \beta>0.$$ Clearly, as $n$ increases $K_n$ approaches $\Theta$. Now, using the Markov's inequality followed by the triangular inequality,
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\int_{\Theta \backslash K_n } \pi(\gamma) d\gamma = \int_{\{\gamma \in \Theta : |\gamma -
\theta_1| > n^{{\beta}} \} } \pi(\gamma) d\gamma &\leq n^{-\beta} \bbE_{ \pi(\theta)}[|\gamma -
\theta_1|]
\\ & \leq n^{-\beta} \left( \bbE_{ \pi(\theta)}[|\gamma|] + |\theta_1| \right).
\end{align}
Since, $ \bbE_{ \pi(\gamma)}[|\gamma|] < \infty$, it follows that $\forall \beta>0 $,
\(\int_{\Theta \backslash K_n } \pi(\gamma) d\gamma = O(n^{-\beta}) .\)
\end{proof}
The next result approximates the normalizing sequence of the posterior distribution using the lemma above and the LAN condition.
\vspace{1em}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:norm}
There exists a sequence of compact balls $\{K_n \subset \Theta\}$, such that $\theta_0 \in K_n$ and under Assumptions~\ref{assume:prior} and~\ref{assume:lan}, the normalizing sequence of the posterior distribution
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\int_{\Theta} & \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma
\\
=& \sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{nI(\theta_0)}} e^{\left( \frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left( (\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0 )^2 \right) \right)} \bigg( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \bigg).
\label{eq:eqp6a}
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $\{K_n \subset \Theta\}$ be a sequence of compact balls such that $\theta_0 \in K_n$, where $\theta_0$ is any point in $\Theta$ where prior distribution $\pi(\theta)$ places positive density. Using Lemma~\ref{lem:prior}, we can always find a sequence of sets $\{K_n\}$ for a prior distribution, such that $\theta_0 \in K_n$ and for any positive constant $\beta>\frac{1}{2}$,
\begin{align}
\int_{\Theta \backslash K_n } \pi(\gamma) d\gamma = O(n^{-\beta}) .\label{eq:eqp1}
\end{align}
Observe that
\begin{align}
\int_{\Theta} \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma &= \left( \int_{K_n} \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma + \int_{\Theta \backslash K_n } \pi(\gamma) \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} d\gamma \right).
\label{eq:eqp2}
\end{align}
Consider the first term in~\eqref{eq:eqp2}; following similar steps as in~\eqref{eq:eq11b} and~\eqref{eq:eq13} and using Assumption~\ref{assume:lan}, we have
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\int_{K_n} & \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma
\\
\nonumber
&= e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \exp \left( \frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left((\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0 )^2 \right) \right) \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \exp \left( -\frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left((\gamma - \hat{\theta}_n)^2 \right) \right) d\gamma
\\
& = e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \exp \left( \frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left((\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0 )^2 \right) \right) \sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{nI(\theta_0)}} \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma,
\label{eq:eqp3}
\end{align}
where the last equality follows from the definition of Gaussian density, $\mathcal{N}(\cdot;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1})$.
Substituting~\eqref{eq:eqp3} into~\eqref{eq:eqp2}, we obtain
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\int_{\Theta} & \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma
\\
\nonumber
=& \exp \left( \frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left( (\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0 )^2 \right) \right) \sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{nI(\theta_0)}} \bigg( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma
\\
&+ \exp \left( -\frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left( (\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0 )^2 \right) \right) \sqrt{\frac{nI(\theta_0)}{2\pi}} \int_{\Theta \backslash K_n } \pi(\gamma) \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} d\gamma \bigg).
\label{eq:eqp4}
\end{align}
Next, using the Markov's inequality and then Fubini's Theorem, for arbitrary $\delta>0$, we have
\begin{align}
\nonumber
P_{\theta_0} \left( \sqrt{ \frac{n I(\theta_0)}{2 \pi } } \int_{\Theta \backslash K_n } \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma > \delta \right) &\leq \sqrt{ \frac{ n I(\theta_0)}{ \delta^2 2 \pi } } \bbE_{P_{\theta_0}} \left[ \int_{\Theta \backslash K_n } \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma \right]
\\
\nonumber
&= \sqrt{ \frac{ n I(\theta_0)}{ \delta^2 2 \pi } } \int_{\Theta \backslash K_n } \bbE_{P_{\theta_0}} \left[ \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \right] \pi(\gamma) d\gamma
\\
&= \sqrt{ \frac{ n I(\theta_0)}{ \delta^2 2 \pi } } \int_{\Theta \backslash K_n } \pi(\gamma) d\gamma,
\end{align}
since \(\bbE_{P_{\theta_0}} \left[ \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \right] = 1.\)
Hence, using~\eqref{eq:eqp1} and taking limits it is straightforward to observe that
\[ \lim_{n \to \infty} P_{\theta_0} \left( \sqrt{ \frac{n I(\theta_0)}{2 \pi } } \int_{\Theta \backslash K_n } \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma > \delta \right) = 0. \]
Therefore,
\begin{align} \sqrt{ \frac{n I(\theta_0)}{2 \pi } } \int_{\Theta \backslash K_n } \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma = o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1).
\label{eq:eqp5}
\end{align}
Since, $\exp \left( -\frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left( (\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0 )^2 \right) \right) \leq 1 $, it follows from substituting~\eqref{eq:eqp5} into~\eqref{eq:eqp4} that
\begin{align*}
\int_{\Theta} & \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma
\\
=& \exp \left( \frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left( (\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0 )^2 \right) \right) \sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{nI(\theta_0)}} \bigg( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \bigg).
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
Next we prove Lemma~\ref{lem:ndegen}, showing that the $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence between the posterior and any non-degenerate distribution diverges in the large sample limit.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:ndegen}]
Let $K_n \subset \Theta$ be a sequence of compact sets such that $\theta_0 \in K_n$, where $\theta_0$ is any point in $\Theta$ where prior distribution $\pi(\theta)$ places positive density. Using Lemma~\ref{lem:prior}, we can always find a sequence of sets $\{K_n\}$ for a prior distribution, such that $\theta_0 \in K_n$ and for any positive constant $\beta>\frac{1}{2}$,
\begin{align}
\int_{\Theta \backslash K_n } \pi(\gamma) d\gamma = O(n^{-\beta}) .\label{eq:eq1a}
\end{align}
Now, observe that
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\frac{\alpha-1}{\a}&D_\a(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| q_n(\theta))
\\
\nonumber
&= \frac{1}{\alpha} \log \left ( \int_{K_n} q_n(\theta) \left ( \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{q_n(\theta)} \right)^{\alpha} d \theta + \int_{\Theta \backslash K_n} q_n(\theta) \left ( \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{q_n(\theta)} \right)^{\alpha} d \theta \right)
\\
&\geq \frac{1}{\alpha} \log \left ( \int_{K_n} q_n(\theta) \left ( \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{q_n(\theta)} \right)^{\alpha} d \theta \right),
\label{eq:eq11}
\end{align}
where the last inequality follows from the fact that the integrand is always positive.
Next, we approximate the ratio in the integrand on the right hand side of the above equation using the LAN condition in Assumption~\ref{assume:lan}. Let
$\Delta_{n,\theta_0} := \sqrt{n}(\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0)$, such that $\hat{\theta}_n \to \theta_0$, $P_{\theta_0} -a.s.$ and $\Delta_{n,\theta_0}$ converges in distribution to $\mathcal{N}(0,I(\theta_0)^{-1})$. Re-parameterizing the expression with $\theta =
\theta_0 + n^{-1/2} h$, we have
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\int_{K_n} & q_n(\theta) \left ( \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{q_n(\theta)} \right)^{\alpha} d \theta = n^{-1/2} \int_{K_n} q_n(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2}
h) \left( \frac {\pi(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2}
h) \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2} h) )}{p(X_i|\theta_0)}}{ q_n(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2}
h) \int_{\Theta} \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma} \right)^{\a} dh \\
&= n^{-1/2} \int_{K_n} q_n(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2}
h) \left( \frac {\pi(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2}
h) \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2} h) )}{p(X_i|\theta_0)}}{ q_n(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2}
h) \int_{\Theta} \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma} \right)^{\a} dh \\
&= n^{-1/2} \int_{K_n} q_n(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2} h)
\bigg ( \pi(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2} h) \frac{ \exp (h
I(\theta_0)\Delta_{n,\theta_0} - \frac{1}{2}h^2I(\theta_0)+
o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) )}{ q_n(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2}
h) \int_{\Theta} \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma} \bigg)^{\a} dh.
\end{align}
{Resubstituting $h = \sqrt{ n}(\theta - \theta_0)$ in the expression above and reverting to the previous parametrization,}
\begin{align}
\nonumber
&= \int_{K_n} q_n(\theta) \left ( \pi(\theta) \frac{ \exp \left(
\sqrt{n}(\theta - \theta_0) I(\theta_0)\Delta_{n,\theta_0} -
\frac{1}{2} n (\theta - \theta_0)^2 I(\theta_0) + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right) }{ q_n(\theta)\int_{\Theta} \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma} \right)^{\alpha} d\theta
\\
\nonumber
&= \int_{K_n} q_n(\theta) \left ( \pi(\theta) \frac{ e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \exp \left( -\frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left((\theta - \theta_0)^2 - 2(\theta - \theta_0)(\hat{\theta}_n- \theta_0)\right) \right) }{ q_n(\theta) \int_{\Theta} \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma } \right)^{\a} d\theta.
\\
\intertext{Now completing the square by dividing and multiplying the numerator by $\exp \left( \frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left((\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0 )^2 \right) \right)$ we obtain}
\nonumber
&= \int_{K_n} q_n(\theta) \left ( \pi(\theta) \frac{ e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \exp \left( \frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left((\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0 )^2 \right) \right) \exp \left( -\frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left((\theta - \hat{\theta}_n)^2 \right) \right) }{ q_n(\theta) \int_{\Theta} \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma } \right)^{\a} d\theta
\\
&= \int_{K_n} q_n(\theta) \left ( \pi(\theta) \frac{ e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \exp \left( \frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left((\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0 )^2 \right) \right) \sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{nI(\theta_0)}} \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) }{ q_n(\theta) \int_{\Theta} \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma } \right)^{\a} d\theta,
\label{eq:eq12}
\end{align}
where, in the last equality we used the definition of Gaussian density, $\mathcal{N}(\cdot;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1})$.
Next, we approximate the integral in the denominator of~\eqref{eq:eq13}. Using Lemma~\ref{lem:norm} it follows that, there exist a sequence of compact balls $\{K_n \subset \Theta\}$, such that $\theta_0 \in K_n$ and
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\int_{\Theta} & \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma
\\
=& \sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{nI(\theta_0)}} e^{\left( \frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left( (\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0 )^2 \right) \right)} \bigg( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \bigg).
\label{eq:eqp6b}
\end{align}
Substituting~\eqref{eq:eqp6b} into~\eqref{eq:eq12} and simplifying, we obtain
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\int_{K_n}& q_n(\theta) \left ( \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{q_n(\theta)} \right)^{\alpha} d \theta
\\
&= \int_{K_n} q_n(\theta)^{1-\a} \left ( \frac{ e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \pi(\theta) \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) }{ \bigg( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \bigg) } \right)^{\a} d\theta.
\label{eq:eq6c}
\end{align}
Observe that:
\[ \left( \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) \right)^{\a} = \left( \sqrt{ \frac{n I(\theta_0)}{2 \pi } } \right)^{\alpha} \left( \sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{n \alpha I(\theta_0)}} \right) \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n \alpha I(\theta_0))^{-1}). \]
Substituting this into the right hand side of \eqref{eq:eq6c}
\begin{align}
\nonumber
& \frac{1}{\alpha} \log \int_{K_n} q_n(\theta)^{1-\a} \left ( \frac{ \pi(\theta) \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) }{ \left( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right) } \right)^{\a} d\theta
\\
\nonumber
= & - \log \left( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right) + \frac{\a-1}{2 \a} \log n - \frac{\log \a}{2\a}
\\
& +\frac{\a-1}{2 \a} \log \frac{I(\theta_0)}{2 \pi }
+ \frac{1}{\alpha} \log \int_{K_n} q_n(\theta)^{1-\a} \pi(\theta)^{\a} \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n \alpha I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\theta.
\label{eq:eq31}
\end{align}
From the Laplace approximation (Lemma~\ref{lem:laplace}) and the continuity of the logarithm, we have
\[- \log \left( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right) \sim - \log \left( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \pi(\hat{\theta}_n) + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right).\] Next, using the Laplace approximation on the last term in~\eqref{eq:eq31}
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\frac{1}{\alpha} \log \int_{K_n} q_n(\theta)^{1-\a} \pi(\theta)^{\a} \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n \alpha I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\theta
\sim \frac{\alpha -1}{\alpha} \log \frac{1}{q_n(\hat{\theta}_n)} + \log \pi(\hat{\theta}_n) .
\end{align}
Substituting the above two approximations into~\eqref{eq:eq31}, we have
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\frac{1}{\alpha} &\log \int_{K_n} q_n(\theta)^{1-\a} \left ( \frac{ \pi(\theta) \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) }{ \left( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right) } \right)^{\a} d\theta
\\
\nonumber
\sim & - \log \left( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \pi(\hat{\theta}_n) + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right) - \frac{\log \a}{2\a} +\frac{\a-1}{2 \a} \log \frac{I(\theta_0)}{2 \pi }
\\
\nonumber
& +
\frac{\alpha -1}{2\alpha} \log {n} -
\frac{\alpha -1}{\alpha} \log q_n(\hat{\theta}_n) + \log \pi(\hat{\theta}_n)
\\
\nonumber
\sim & - \log \left( \pi(\hat{\theta}_n) \right) - \frac{\log \a}{2\a} +\frac{\a-1}{2 \a} \log \frac{I(\theta_0)}{2 \pi } +
\frac{\alpha -1}{2\alpha} \log {n} -
\frac{\alpha -1}{\alpha} \log q(\hat{\theta}_n) + \log \pi(\hat{\theta}_n)
\\
= & - \frac{\log \a}{2\a} +\frac{\a-1}{2 \a} \log \frac{I(\theta_0)}{2 \pi } +
\frac{\alpha -1}{2\alpha} \log {n} -
\frac{\alpha -1}{\alpha} \log q(\hat{\theta}_n),
\label{eq:eq29a}
\end{align}
where the penultimate approximation follows from the fact that \[ \log \left( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \pi(\hat{\theta}_n) + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right) \sim \log \pi(\hat{\theta}_n) \text{ and } q_n(\hat{\theta}_n) \sim q(\hat{\theta}_n). \]
Note that $\hat{\theta}_n \to \theta_0 ,~ P_{\theta_0}- a.s $. Therefore, if $q(\theta_0) = 0$, then the right hand side in~\eqref{eq:eq29a} will diverge as $n \to \infty$ because $\frac{\a-1}{2 \a} \log n $ also diverges as $n \to \infty$. Also observe that, for any $q(\theta)$ that places finite mass on $\theta_0$, the $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence diverges as $n \to \infty$. Hence, $\alpha-$R\'enyi approximate posterior must converge weakly to a distribution that has a Dirac delta distribution at the true parameter $\theta_0$.
\end{proof}
Next, we show that the $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence between the true posterior and the sequence $\{q'_n(\theta)\}\in \mathcal{Q}$ as defined in~\eqref{eq:eq14i} is bounded below by a positive number.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:subopt1}]
\cite[Theorem 19]{TErvan2012} shows that, for any $\alpha>0$, the $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence $D_\alpha(p(\theta)\| q(\theta))$ is a lower semi-continuous function of the pair $(p(\theta),q(\theta))$ in the weak topology on the space of probability measures. Recall from~\eqref{eq:4} that the true posterior distribution $\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)$ converges weakly to $\delta_{\theta_0}$~$P_{\theta_0}-a.s$. Using this fact it follows that
\begin{align*} \liminf_{n \to \infty} D_\alpha(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) \| q'_n(\theta)) \geq D_\alpha \left(\delta_{\theta_0} \bigg\| w^j\delta_{\theta_0} + \sum_{i=1, i\neq j}^{\infty} w^i q_i(\theta) \right)\quad P_{\theta_0}-a.s.
\end{align*}
Next, using Pinsker's inequality\cite{CoverTM2006} for $\alpha > 1$, we have
\begin{align*}
D_\alpha\left(\delta_{\theta_0} \bigg\| w^j\delta_{\theta_0} + \sum_{i=1, i\neq j}^{\infty} w^i q_i(\theta) \right) &\geq \frac{1}{2} \left( \int_{\Theta} \left | \delta_{\theta_0} - w^j\delta_{\theta_0} - \sum_{i=1, i\neq j}^{\infty} w^i q_i(\theta) \right| d\theta \right)^2
\\
&= \frac{1}{2} \left( \int_{\Theta} \left |(1-w^j) \delta_{\theta_0} - \sum_{i=1 , i \neq j}^{\infty} w^i q_i(\theta) \right | d\theta \right)^2.
\end{align*}
Now dividing the integral over ball of radius $\epsilon$ centered at $\theta_0$, $B(\theta_0,\epsilon)$ and its complement, we obtain
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\liminf_{n \to \infty}& D_\alpha(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| q'_n(\theta))
\\
\nonumber
&\geq \frac{1}{2} \left( \int_{B(\theta_0,\epsilon)} \left |(1-w^j) \delta_{\theta_0} - \sum_{i=1 , i \neq j}^{\infty} w^i q_i(\theta) \right| d\theta + \int_{B(\theta_0,\epsilon)^C} \left|(1-w^j) \delta_{\theta_0} - \sum_{i=1 , i \neq j}^{\infty} w^i q_i(\theta) \right | d\theta \right)^2
\\
\nonumber
&\geq \frac{1}{2} \left( \int_{B(\theta_0,\epsilon)^C} \left |(1-w^j) \delta_{\theta_0} - \sum_{i=1 , i \neq j}^{\infty} w^i q_i(\theta) \right | d\theta \right)^2
\\
&= \frac{1}{2} \left( \int_{B(\theta_0,\epsilon)^C} \left | - \sum_{i=1 , i \neq j}^{\infty} w^i q_i(\theta) \right | d\theta \right)^2 \quad P_{\theta_0}-a.s.
\end{align}
Since, $w^i \in (0,1)$, observe that for any $\epsilon>0$, there exists $\eta(\epsilon)>0$, such that
\[\frac{1}{2} \left( \int_{B(\theta_0,\epsilon)^C} \left | - \sum_{i=1 , i \neq j}^{\infty} w^i q_i(\theta) \right | d\theta \right)^2 \geq \eta(\epsilon). \]
Therefore, it follows that
\begin{align*}
\liminf_{n \to \infty}\ & D_\alpha(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| q'_n(\theta)) \geq \eta(\epsilon) >0 \quad P_{\theta_0}-a.s.
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
In the following result, we show that if $q_i(\theta), i \in \{1,2,\ldots \}$ in the definition of $\{q'_n(\theta)\}$ in~\eqref{eq:eq14i} are Dirac delta distributions then \[ \liminf_{n \to \infty} D_\alpha(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| q'_n(\theta)) \geq 2 (1-w^j)^2 >0 \quad P_{\theta_0}-a.s, \]
where $w^j$ is the weight of $\delta_{\theta_0}$. Consider a sequence $\{q_n(\theta)\}$, that converges weakly to a convex combination of $\delta_{\theta_i}, i\in \{1,2,\ldots \}$ such that for weights $\{w^i \in (0,1) : \sum_{i=1}^{\infty} w^i=1\},$
\begin{align}
q_n(\theta) \Rightarrow \sum_{i=1}^{\infty} w^i \delta_{\theta_i} ,
\label{eq:eq14}
\end{align}
where for any $j\in \{1,2,\ldots \}$ , $\theta_j = \theta_0$ and for all $i\in \{1,2,\ldots\} \backslash \{j\}$, $\theta_j \neq \theta_0$.
\vspace{1em}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:subopt}
The $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence between the true posterior and sequence $\{q_n(\theta)\}$ is bounded below by a positive number $2(1-w^j)^2$; that is,
\[ \liminf_{n \to \infty} D_\alpha(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| q_n(\theta)) \geq 2(1-w^j)^2 >0 \quad P_{\theta_0}-a.s, \]
where $w^j$ is the weight of $\delta_{\theta_0}$ in the definition of sequence $\{q_n(\theta)\}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
\cite[Theorem 19]{TErvan2012} shows that, for any $\alpha>0$, the $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence $D_\alpha(p(\theta)\| q(\theta))$ is a lower semi-continuous function of the pair $(p(\theta),q(\theta))$ in the weak topology on the space of probability measures. Recall from~\eqref{eq:4} that the true posterior distribution $\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)$ converges weakly to $\delta_{\theta_0}$, $P_{\theta_0}-a.s$. Using this fact it follows that
\begin{align*} \liminf_{n \to \infty} D_\alpha(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| q_n(\theta)) \geq D_\alpha \left (\delta_{\theta_0} \bigg\| \sum_{i=1}^{\infty} w_i \delta_{\theta_i} \right )\quad P_{\theta_0}-a.s.
\end{align*}
Next, using Pinsker's inequality\cite{CoverTM2006} for $\alpha > 1$, we have
\begin{align}
\nonumber
D_\alpha \left(\delta_{\theta_0} \bigg\| \sum_{i=1}^{\infty} w^i \delta_{\theta_i} \right ) &\geq \frac{1}{2} \left( \int_{\Theta} \left | \delta_{\theta_0} - \sum_{i=1}^{\infty} w^i \delta_{\theta_i} \right | d\theta \right)^2
\\
\nonumber
&= \frac{1}{2} \left( \int_{\Theta} \left|(1-w^j) \delta_{\theta_0} - \sum_{i=1 , i \neq j}^{\infty} w^i \delta_{\theta_i} \right| d\theta \right)^2
\\
\nonumber
&= \frac{1}{2} \left( \int_{B(\theta_0,\epsilon)} (1-w^j) |\delta_{\theta_0}| d\theta + \sum_{i=1 , i \neq j}^{\infty} w^i \int_{B(\theta_i,\epsilon)}|- \delta_{\theta_i} | d\theta \right)^2
\\
&= \frac{1}{2} \left( (1-w^j) + \sum_{i=1 , i \neq j}^{\infty} w^i \right)^2 = 2 (1-w^j)^2 ,
\end{align}
where $B(\theta_i,\epsilon)$ is the ball of radius $\epsilon$ centered at $\theta_i$. Note that, there always exist an $\epsilon>0$, such that $\bigcap_{i=1}^{\infty} B(\theta_i,\epsilon) = \phi$. Since, by the definition of sequence $\{q_n(\theta)\}$, $w^j\in(0,1)$, therefore $2(1-w^j)^2>0$ and the lemma follows.
\end{proof}
Now we show that any sequence of distributions $\{s_n(\theta)\} \subset \mathcal{Q}$ that converges weakly to a distribution $s(\theta) \in \mathcal{Q}$, that has positive density at any point other than the true parameter $\theta_0$, cannot achieve zero \textsc{KL}\ divergence in the limit.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:subopt1ep}]
\cite[Theorem 1]{PosnerE.1975Rcsf} shows that, the \textsc{KL}\ divergence $\textsc{KL}(p(\theta)\| s(\theta))$ is a lower semi-continuous function of the pair $(p(\theta),s(\theta))$ in the weak topology on the space of probability measures. Recall from~\eqref{eq:4} that the true posterior distribution $\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)$ converges weakly to $\delta_{\theta_0}$, $P_{\theta_0}-a.s$. Using this fact it follows that
\begin{align*} \liminf_{n \to \infty} \textsc{KL}(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) \| s_n(\theta)) \geq \textsc{KL} \left(\delta_{\theta_0} \| s(\theta) \right)\quad P_{\theta_0}-a.s.
\end{align*}
Next, using Pinsker's inequality~\cite{CoverTM2006} for $\alpha > 1$, we have
\begin{align*}
\textsc{KL} \left(\delta_{\theta_0} \| s(\theta) \right) &\geq \frac{1}{2} \left( \int_{\Theta} \left | \delta_{\theta_0} - s(\theta) \right| d\theta \right)^2.
\end{align*}
Now, fixing $\epsilon > 0$ such that $s(\theta)$ has positive density in the complement of the ball of radius $\epsilon$ centered at $\theta_0$, $B(\theta_0,\epsilon)^C$, we have
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\liminf_{n \to \infty} \textsc{KL}(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) \| s_n(\theta))
&\geq \frac{1}{2} \left( \int_{B(\theta_0,\epsilon)} \left | \delta_{\theta_0} - s(\theta) \right| d\theta + \int_{B(\theta_0,\epsilon)^C} \left | \delta_{\theta_0} - s(\theta) \right | d\theta \right)^2
\\
\nonumber
&\geq \frac{1}{2} \left( \int_{B(\theta_0,\epsilon)^C} \left | \delta_{\theta_0} - s(\theta) \right | d\theta \right)^2
\\
&= \frac{1}{2} \left( \int_{B(\theta_0,\epsilon)^C} \left | - s(\theta) \right | d\theta \right)^2 \quad P_{\theta_0}-a.s.
\end{align}
Since $s(\theta)$ has positive density in the set $B(\theta_0,\epsilon)^C$, there exists $\eta(\epsilon)>0$, such that
\[\frac{1}{2} \left( \int_{B(\theta_0,\epsilon)^C} \left | - s(\theta) \right | d\theta \right)^2 \geq \eta(\epsilon), \]
completing the proof.
\end{proof}
Next, we state an important inequality, that is a direct consequence of H\"older's inequality. We use the following result in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:degen}.
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:hold}
For any set $K \subset \Theta$ and $\alpha>1$ and any sequence of distributions $\{q_n(\theta)\} \subset \mathcal{Q}$, the following inequality holds true
\begin{align}
\int_{\Theta} q_n(\theta) \left( \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{q_n(\theta)} \right)^{\alpha} d\theta \geq \frac{ \left( \int_{K} \pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) d\theta \right) ^{\alpha} }{ \left( \int_{K} q_n(\theta) d\theta \right) ^{\alpha-1} }.
\label{eq:eqa12b}
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Fix a set $K \subset \Theta$. Since $\alpha>1$, using H\"older's inequality for $f(\theta) = \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{q_n(\theta)^{1- \frac{1}{\alpha}}}$ and $g(\theta) = q_n(\theta)^{1- \frac{1}{\alpha}}$,
\begin{align*}
\int_{K} \pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) d\theta &= \int_{K} f(\theta) g(\theta) d\theta \\
&\leq \left( \int_{K} \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)^{\alpha}}{q_n(\theta)^{\alpha-1}} d\theta \right) ^{\frac{1}{\alpha}} \left( \int_{K} q_n(\theta) d\theta \right) ^{1 - \frac{1}{\alpha}}.
\end{align*}
It is straightforward to observe from the above equation that,
\begin{align*}
\int_{K} \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)^{\alpha}}{q_n(\theta)^{\alpha-1}} d\theta \geq \frac{ \left( \int_{K} \pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) d\theta \right) ^{\alpha} }{ \left( \int_{K} q_n(\theta) d\theta \right) ^{\alpha-1} }.
\end{align*}
Also note that, for any set $K$, the following inequality holds true,
\begin{align}
\int_{\Theta} q_n(\theta) \left( \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{q_n(\theta)} \right)^{\alpha} d\theta \geq \int_{K} \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)^{\alpha}}{q_n(\theta)^{\alpha-1}} d\theta \geq \frac{ \left( \int_{K} \pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) d\theta \right) ^{\alpha} }{ \left( \int_{K} q_n(\theta) d\theta \right) ^{\alpha-1} },
\label{eq:eqa12}
\end{align}
and the result follows immediately.
\end{proof}
\section{Consistency of $\alpha-$R\'enyi Approximate Posterior}~\label{sec:asymptote}
Recall that the $\alpha-$R\'enyi-approximate posterior $q^*_n$ is defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
q^*_n(\theta) := \text{argmin}_{\tilde{q} \in \mathcal{Q}}
\left\{D_{\alpha} \left( \pi(\theta| \mathbf X_n)\| \tilde{q}(\theta) \right):= \frac{1}{\alpha-1} \log \int_{\Theta} \tilde{q}(\theta) \left(\frac{\pi(\theta| \mathbf X_n)}{\tilde{q}(\theta) } \right)^{\alpha} d\theta \right\} . \label{eq:ep_opt1}
\end{eqnarray}
We now show that under the assumptions in the previous section, the $\alpha-$R\'enyi approximators are asymptotically consistent as the sample size increases in the sense that \(q_n^* \Rightarrow \delta_{\theta_0} \ P_{\theta_0}-a.s. \) as $n \to \infty$. To illustrate the ideas clearly, we present our analysis assuming a univariate parameter space, and that the model $P_{\theta}$ is twice differentiable in parameter $\theta$, and therefore satisfies the LAN condition with $r_n = \sqrt{n}$ \cite{vdV00}. The LAN condition together with the existence of a sequence of test functions \cite[Theorem 10.1]{vdV00} also implies that the posterior distribution converges weakly to $\delta_{\theta_0}$ at the rate of $\sqrt{n}$. The analysis can be easily adapted to multivariate parameter spaces.
We will first establish some structural properties of the minimizing sequence of distributions. We show that for any sequence of distributions converging weakly to a non-singular distribution the $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence is unbounded in the limit.
\vspace{1em}
\begin{lemma}\label{lem:ndegen}
The $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence between the true posterior and the sequence of distribution $\{q_n(\theta)\} \subset \mathcal{Q}$ can only be finite in the limit if $q_n(\theta)$ converges weakly to a singular distribution $q(\theta)$, with a Dirac delta distribution at the true parameter $\theta_0$.
\end{lemma}
\vspace{0em}
The result above implies that the $\alpha-$R\'enyi approximate posterior must have a Dirac delta distribution component at $\theta_0$ in the limit; that is, it should converge in distribution to $\delta_{\theta_0}$ or a convex combination of $\delta_{\theta_0}$ with singular or non-singular distributions as $n \to \infty$. Next, we consider a sequence $\{q'_n(\theta)\} \subset \mathcal{Q}$ that converges weakly to a convex combination of $\delta_{\theta_0}$ and singular or non-singular distributions $q_i(\theta),~i \in \{1,2,\ldots \}$ such that for weights $\{w^i \in (0,1) : \sum_{i=1}^{\infty} w^i=1\},$
\begin{align}
q'_n(\theta) \Rightarrow w^j\delta_{\theta_0} + \sum_{i=1, i\neq j}^{\infty} w^i q_i(\theta).
\label{eq:eq14i}
\end{align}
In the following result, we show that the $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence between the true posterior and the sequence $\{q'_n(\theta)\}$ is bounded below by a positive number.
\vspace{1em}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:subopt1}
The $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence between the true posterior and sequence $\{q'_n(\theta) \in \mathcal{Q}\}$ is bounded away from zero; that is
\[ \liminf_{n \to \infty} D_\alpha(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| q'_n(\theta)) \geq \eta > 0\quad P_{\theta_0}-a.s. \]
\end{lemma}
We also show in Lemma~\ref{lem:subopt} in the appendix that if in~\eqref{eq:eq14i} the components $\{q_i(\theta) ~i \in \{1,2,\ldots \}\}$ are singular then \[ \liminf_{n \to \infty} D_\alpha(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| q'_n(\theta)) \geq 2 (1-w^j)^2 >0 \quad P_{\theta_0}-a.s, \]
where $w^j$ is the weight of $\delta_{\theta_0}$.
A consistent sequence asymptotically achieves zero $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence. To show its existence, we first provide an asymptotic upper-bound on the minimal $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence in the next proposition. This, coupled with the previous two structural results, will allow us to prove the consistency of the minimizing sequence.
\vspace{.5em}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:UBfin}
For a given $\a>1$ and under Assumptions~\ref{assume:prior},~\ref{assume:lan},~\ref{assume:var}, and~\ref{def:gsequence},
\noindent 1. For any~good sequence~there exist $n_0\geq 1$, $n_M \geq 1$, and $\bar M > 0$ such that $\bbE_{\bar q_n(\theta)}[|\theta - \hat \theta_n|^2] \leq \frac{\bar M}{n}$ for all $n \geq n_M$ and $\bar M I(\theta_0) \geq \frac{ \alpha^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}}{\bar e}$ for all $n \geq n_0$, where $\bar e$ is the Euler's constant.
\noindent 2. The minimal $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence satisfies
\begin{align}
\limsup_{n \to \infty} \min_{q \in \mathcal Q} D_{\alpha}(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) \|q(\theta)) \leq B = \frac{1}{2}\log\left(\frac{\bar e \bar M I(\theta_0)}{\alpha^{\frac{1}{\alpha-1}}}\right) ~P_{\theta_0}-\text{a.s.}
\end{align}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Observe that for any good sequence $\{\bar q_n(\theta)\}$
\[\min_{q \in \mathcal Q} D_{\alpha}(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) \|q(\theta)) \leq D_{\alpha}(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\|\bar{q}_n(\theta)). \]
Therefore, for the second part, it suffices to show that \[\limsup_{n \to \infty} D_{\alpha}(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\|\bar{q}_n(\theta)) < B, ~P_{\theta_0}-\text{a.s.}\]
The subsequent arguments in the proof are for any $n \geq \max(n_1,n_2,n_3,n_M)$, where $n_1,n_2$, and $n_3$ are defined in Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence}. First
observe that, for any compact ball $K$ containing the true parameter $\theta_0$,
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\frac{\alpha-1}{\a}&D_\a(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| \bar q_n(\theta))
\\
&= \frac{1}{\alpha} \log \left ( \int_{K} \bar q_n(\theta) \left ( \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{\bar q_n(\theta)} \right)^{\alpha} d \theta + \int_{\Theta \backslash K} \bar q_n(\theta) \left ( \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{ \bar q_n(\theta)} \right)^{\alpha} d \theta \right).
\label{eq:eq11a}
\end{align}
First, we approximate the first integral on the right hand side using the LAN condition in Assumption~\ref{assume:lan}. Let
$\Delta_{n,\theta_0} := \sqrt{n}(\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0)$, where $\hat{\theta}_n \to \theta_0$, $P_{\theta_0} -a.s.$ and $\Delta_{n,\theta_0}$ converges in distribution to $\mathcal{N}(0,I(\theta_0)^{-1})$. Re-parameterizing the expression with $\theta =
\theta_0 + n^{-1/2} h$, we have
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\int_{K} & \bar q_n(\theta) \left ( \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{ \bar q_n(\theta)} \right)^{\alpha} d \theta = n^{-1/2} \int_{K} \bar q_n(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2}
h) \left( \frac {\pi(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2}
h) \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2} h) )}{p(X_i|\theta_0)}}{ \bar q_n(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2}
h) \int_{\Theta} \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma} \right)^{\a} dh \\
\nonumber
&= n^{-1/2} \int_{K} \bar q_n(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2}
h) \left( \frac {\pi(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2}
h) \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2} h) )}{p(X_i|\theta_0)}}{ \bar q_n(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2}
h) \int_{\Theta} \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma} \right)^{\a} dh \\
&= n^{-1/2} \int_{K} \bar q_n(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2} h)
\bigg ( \pi(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2} h) \frac{ \exp (h
I(\theta_0)\Delta_{n,\theta_0} - \frac{1}{2}h^2I(\theta_0)+
o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) )}{ \bar q_n(\theta_0 + n^{-1/2}
h) \int_{\Theta} \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma} \bigg)^{\a} dh.
\label{eq:eq11b}
\end{align}
{Resubstituting $h = \sqrt{ n}(\theta - \theta_0)$ in the expression above and reverting to the previous parametrization,}
\begin{align}
\nonumber
&= \int_{K} \bar q_n(\theta) \left ( \pi(\theta) \frac{ \exp \left(
\sqrt{n}(\theta - \theta_0) I(\theta_0)\Delta_{n,\theta_0} -
\frac{1}{2} n (\theta - \theta_0)^2 I(\theta_0) + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right) }{ \bar q_n(\theta)\int_{\Theta} \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma} \right)^{\alpha} d\theta
\\
\nonumber
&= \int_{K} \bar q_n(\theta) \left ( \pi(\theta) \frac{ e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \exp \left( -\frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left((\theta - \theta_0)^2 - 2(\theta - \theta_0)(\hat{\theta}_n- \theta_0)\right) \right) }{ \bar q_n(\theta) \int_{\Theta} \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma } \right)^{\a} d\theta.
\\
\intertext{Now completing the square by dividing and multiplying the numerator by $\exp \left( \frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left((\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0 )^2 \right) \right)$ we obtain}
\nonumber
&= \int_{K} \bar q_n(\theta) \left ( \pi(\theta) \frac{ e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \exp \left( \frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left((\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0 )^2 \right) \right) \exp \left( -\frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left((\theta - \hat{\theta}_n)^2 \right) \right) }{ \bar q_n(\theta) \int_{\Theta} \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma } \right)^{\a} d\theta
\\
&= \int_{K} \bar q_n(\theta) \left ( \pi(\theta) \frac{ e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \exp \left( \frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left((\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0 )^2 \right) \right) \sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{nI(\theta_0)}} \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) }{ \bar q_n(\theta) \int_{\Theta} \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma } \right)^{\a} d\theta,
\label{eq:eq13}
\end{align}
where, in the last equality we used the definition of Gaussian density, $\mathcal{N}(\cdot;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1})$.
Next, we approximate the integral in the denominator of~\eqref{eq:eq13}. Using Lemma~\ref{lem:norm} (in the appendix) it follows that, there exist a sequence of compact balls $\{K_n \subset \Theta\}$, such that $\theta_0 \in K_n$ and
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\int_{\Theta} & \prod_{i=1}^n \frac{p(X_i|\gamma)}{p(X_i|\theta_0)} \pi(\gamma) d\gamma
\\
=& \sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{nI(\theta_0)}} e^{\left( \frac{1}{2} n I(\theta_0) \left( (\hat{\theta}_n - \theta_0 )^2 \right) \right)} \bigg( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \bigg).
\label{eq:eqp6}
\end{align}
Now, substituting~\eqref{eq:eqp6} into~\eqref{eq:eq13}, we obtain
\begin{align}
\hspace{-.2in}\int_{K} & \bar q_n(\theta) \left ( \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{ \bar q_n(\theta)} \right)^{\alpha} d \theta
= \int_{K} \bar q_n(\theta)^{1-\a} \left ( \frac{ e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \pi(\theta) \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) }{ \bigg( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \bigg) } \right)^{\a} d\theta .
\label{eq:eq14a}
\end{align}
Now, recall the definition of compact ball $K$, $n_1$ and $n_2$ from Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence} and fix $n \geq n'_0$, where $n'_0=\max(n_1,n_2)$. Note that $n_2$ is chosen, such that for all $n \geq n_2$, the bound in Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence}(3) holds on the set $\Theta \backslash K$. Next, consider the second term inside the logarithm function on the right hand side of~\eqref{eq:eq11a}. Using Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence}(3), we obtain
\begin{align}
\int_{\Theta \backslash K} \bar q_n(\theta) \left ( \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{ \bar q_n(\theta)} \right)^{\alpha} d\theta \leq M_r^{\alpha} \int_{\Theta \backslash K} \bar q_n(\theta) d\theta \quad~P_{\theta_0}-a.s.
\label{eq:eq13a}
\end{align}
Recall that the good sequence\ $\{ \bar q_n(\cdot)\}$ exists $P_{\theta_0}-a.s$ with mean $\hat{\theta}_n$, for all $n\geq n_1$ and therefore it converges weakly to $\delta_{\theta_0}$ (as assumed in Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence}(2)). Combined with the fact that compact set $K$ contains the true parameter $\theta_0$, it follows that the second term in~\eqref{eq:eq11a} is of $o(1)$, $P_{\theta_0}-a.s$.
Therefore, the second term inside the logarithm function on the right hand side of~\eqref{eq:eq11a} is $o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)$:
\begin{align}
\int_{\Theta \backslash K} \bar q_n(\theta) \left ( \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{ \bar q_n(\theta)} \right)^{\alpha} d\theta = o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1).
\label{eq:eq14b}
\end{align}
Substituting~\eqref{eq:eq14a} and~\eqref{eq:eq14b} into~\eqref{eq:eq11a}, we have
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\frac{\alpha-1}{\a}&D_\a(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| \bar q_n(\theta))
\\
\nonumber
&= \frac{1}{\alpha} \log \left ( \int_{K} \bar q_n(\theta)^{1-\a} \left ( \frac{ e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \pi(\theta) \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) }{ \bigg( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \bigg) } \right)^{\a} d\theta + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right)
\\
\nonumber
&= \frac{1}{\alpha} \log \left ( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \int_{K} \bar q_n(\theta)^{1-\a} \left ( \frac{ \pi(\theta) \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) }{ \bigg( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \bigg) } \right)^{\a} d\theta + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right). \tag{$\star\star$}
\intertext{Now observe that,}
\nonumber
(\star\star)&\sim \frac{1}{\alpha} \log \left ( \int_{K} \bar q_n(\theta)^{1-\a} \left ( \frac{ \pi(\theta) \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) }{ \bigg( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \bigg) } \right)^{\a} d\theta \right)
\\
\nonumber
&= \frac{1}{\alpha} \log \left ( \int_{K} \bar q_n(\theta)^{1-\a} \pi(\theta)^{\a} \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1})^{\a} d\theta \right)
\\
\nonumber
& \quad - \log \bigg( e^{o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1)} \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \bigg)
\nonumber
\\
\nonumber
&\sim \frac{1}{\alpha} \log \left ( \int_{K} \bar q_n(\theta)^{1-\a} \pi(\theta)^{\a} \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1})^{\a} d\theta \right)
\\
& \quad - \log \bigg( \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma \bigg).
\label{eq:eq15a}
\end{align}
Note that:
$ \left( \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) \right)^{\a} = \left( \sqrt{ \frac{n I(\theta_0)}{2 \pi } } \right)^{\alpha} \left( \sqrt{\frac{2\pi}{n \alpha I(\theta_0)}} \right) \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n \alpha I(\theta_0))^{-1}). $
Substituting this into \eqref{eq:eq15a}, for large enough $n$, we have
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\frac{\alpha-1}{\a}&D_\a(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| \bar q_n(\theta))
\\
\nonumber
\sim & \frac{\a-1}{2 \a} \log n - \frac{\log \a}{2\a} +\frac{\a-1}{2 \a} \log \frac{I(\theta_0)}{2 \pi } + \frac{1}{\alpha} \log \int_{K} \bar q_n(\theta)^{1-\a} \pi(\theta)^{\a} \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n \alpha I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\theta
\\
&
- \log \left( \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma \right) .
\label{eq:eq16a}
\end{align}
From the Laplace approximation (Lemma~\ref{lem:laplace}) and the continuity of the logarithm, we have
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\frac{1}{\alpha} \log \int_{K} \bar q_n(\theta)^{1-\a} \pi(\theta)^{\a} \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat{\theta}_n,(n \alpha I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\theta
\sim \frac{1-\alpha}{\alpha} \log {\bar q_n(\hat{\theta}_n)} + \log \pi(\hat{\theta}_n) .
\end{align}
Next, using the Laplace approximation on the last term in~\eqref{eq:eq16a}
\[- \log \left( \int_{K_n} \pi(\gamma) \mathcal{N}(\gamma;\hat{\theta}_n,(n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\gamma \right) \sim - \log \left( \pi(\hat{\theta}_n) \right).\]
Substituting the above two approximations into~\eqref{eq:eq16a}, for large enough $n$, we obtain
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\frac{\alpha-1}{\a}&D_\a(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| \bar q_n(\theta))
\\
\nonumber
\sim &
\frac{1 - \alpha}{\alpha} \log \bar q_n(\hat{\theta}_n) + \log \pi(\hat{\theta}_n) - \frac{\log \a}{2\a} +\frac{\a-1}{2 \a} \log \frac{I(\theta_0)}{2 \pi } +
\frac{\alpha -1}{2\alpha} \log {n} - \log \pi(\hat{\theta}_n)
\\
= & \frac{1 - \alpha}{\alpha} \log \bar q_n(\hat{\theta}_n) - \frac{\log \a}{2\a} +\frac{\a-1}{2 \a} \log \frac{I(\theta_0)}{2 \pi } +
\frac{\alpha -1}{2\alpha} \log {n}.
\label{eq:eq17a}
\end{align}
Now, recall Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence}(4) which, combined with the monotonicity of logarithm function, implies that $\log \bar q_n(\cdot)$ is concave for all $n\geq n_3$. Using Jensen's inequality, \[ \log \bar q_n(\hat{\theta}_n) = \log \bar q_n \left( \int \theta \bar q_n(\theta) d\theta \right) \geq \int \bar q_n(\theta) \log \bar q_n(\theta) d\theta. \]
Since $\a>1$,
\[\frac{1 - \alpha}{\alpha} \log \bar q_n(\hat{\theta}_n) \leq - \frac{\a-1}{\a} \int \bar q_n(\theta) \log \bar q_n(\theta) d\theta. \]
Now using Lemma~\ref{lem:entropy}~ (in the appendix), there exists $n_M\geq 1$ and $0 < \bar M <\infty$, such that for all $n\geq n_M$
\begin{align} - \frac{\a-1}{\a} \int \bar q_n(\theta) \log \bar q_n(\theta) d\theta \leq \frac{\a-1}{2\a} \log \left( 2\pi \bar e \frac{\bar M}{n} \right) = \frac{\a-1}{2\a} \log (2\pi \bar e {\bar M} ) - \frac{\a-1}{2\a} \log n,
\label{eq:eq18}
\end{align}
where $\bar e$ is the Euler's constant.
Substituting~\eqref{eq:eq18} into the right hand side of~\eqref{eq:eq17a}, we have for all $n \geq n_0$, where $n_0=\max(n_0',n_3,n_M)$,
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\frac{1 - \alpha}{\alpha}& \log \bar q_n(\hat{\theta}_n) - \frac{\log \a}{2\a} +\frac{\a-1}{2 \a} \log \frac{I(\theta_0)}{2 \pi } +
\frac{\alpha -1}{2\alpha} \log {n}.
\\
\nonumber
\leq & \frac{\a-1}{2\a} \log (2\pi \bar e {\bar M} ) - \frac{\a-1}{2\a} \log n - \frac{\log \a}{2\a} +\frac{\a-1}{2 \a} \log \frac{I(\theta_0)}{2 \pi } +
\frac{\alpha -1}{2\alpha} \log {n}
\nonumber
\\
\nonumber
=& \frac{\a-1}{2\a} \log (2\pi \bar e {\bar M} ) - \frac{\log \a}{2\a} +\frac{\a-1}{2 \a} \log \frac{I(\theta_0)}{2 \pi }
\\
=& \frac{\alpha-1}{\a} \frac{1}{2} \log \frac{\bar e \bar M I(\theta_0) }{\alpha^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}}.
\label{eq:eq19a}
\end{align}
Observe that the left hand side in~\eqref{eq:eq17a} is always non-negative, implying the right hand side must be too for large $n$. Therefore,
the following inequality must hold for all $n\geq n_0$:
\[ \frac{\bar e \bar M I(\theta_0)} {\alpha^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}} \geq 1. \]
Consequently, substituting~\eqref{eq:eq19a} into~\eqref{eq:eq17a}, we have
\begin{align}
D_\a(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| \bar q_n(\theta)) &\lesssim \frac{1}{2} \log \frac{\bar e \bar M I(\theta_0) }{\alpha^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}} \ \forall n\geq n_0.
\label{eq:eq20a}
\end{align}
Finally, taking limit supremum on either sides of the above equation and using continuity of logarithm function, it follows from the above equation that
\begin{align}
\limsup_{n \to \infty} \ D_\a(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| \bar q_n(\theta)) &\leq \frac{1}{2} \log \frac{\bar e \bar M I(\theta_0) }{\alpha^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}} < \infty,
\label{eq:eq18a}
\end{align}
and the result follows.
\end{proof}
Now Proposition~\ref{prop:UBfin}, Lemma~\ref{lem:ndegen} and Lemma~\ref{lem:subopt1} allow us to prove our main result that the $\alpha-$R\'enyi approximate posterior converges weakly to $\delta_{\theta_0}$.
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:consistency}
Under the conditions of Proposition~\ref{prop:UBfin}, Lemma\ref{lem:ndegen} and Lemma~\ref{lem:subopt1}, the $\alpha-$R\'enyi approximate posterior $q^*_n(\theta)$ converges weakly to a Dirac delta distribution at the true parameter $\theta_0$; that is,
\[q^*_n \Rightarrow \delta_{\theta_0}\ P_{\theta_0}-a.s \text{ as $n \to \infty$.} \]
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
First, we argue that there always exists a sequence $\{\tilde{q}_n(\theta)\} \subset \mathcal{Q}$ such that for any $\eta>0$
\[ \limsup_{n \to \infty} D_\alpha(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| \tilde{q}_n(\theta)) < \eta \quad P_{\theta_0}-a.s. \]
We demonstrate the existence of $\tilde{q}_n(\theta)$ by construction. Recall from Proposition~\ref{prop:UBfin}(2) that there exist $ 0 < \bar M < \infty$ and $n_0\geq 1$, such that for all $n \geq n_0$
\begin{align*}
D_{\alpha}(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) \|\bar q_n(\theta)) &\lesssim \frac{1}{2} \log \frac{\bar e \bar M I(\theta_0)}{ \a^{\frac{1}{\a-1}} },
\end{align*}
where $\bar q_n(\theta)$ is the good sequence\ as defined in Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence} and $\bar e$ is the Euler's constant. Also recall that the term on the right hand side above is non-negative for all $n\geq n_0$, implying that \( \bar M \geq \frac{\a^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}}{\bar e I(\theta_0)} \) for all $n \geq n_0$.\
Therefore, a specific good sequence can be chosen by fixing \( \tilde M = \frac{\a^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}}{\bar e I(\theta_0)} \), implying that
\(
D_{\alpha}(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) \|\tilde q_n(\theta)) = 0 ~ \forall n \geq n_0;
\)
that is,
\begin{align}
\limsup_{n \to \infty} D_{\alpha}(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) \|\tilde q_n(\theta)) = 0 \ P_{\theta_0}-a.s.
\label{eq:eqthm1}
\end{align}
Next, we will show that the minimizing sequence must converge to a Dirac delta distribution. The previous result shows that the minimizing sequence must have zero $\alpha$-R\'enyi divergence in the limit. Lemma~\ref{lem:ndegen} shows that the minimizing sequence must have a delta at $\theta_0$, since otherwise the $\alpha$-R\'enyi divergence is unbounded. Similarly, Lemma~\ref{lem:subopt1} shows that it cannot be a mixture of such a delta with other components, since otherwise the $\alpha$-R\'enyi divergence is bounded away from zero.
Therefore, it follows that the $\alpha-$R\'enyi approximate posterior $q^*_n(\theta)$ must converge weakly to a Dirac delta distribution at the true parameter $\theta_0,$ $P_{\theta_0}-a.s$, thereby completing the proof.
\end{proof}
Note that the choice of $\bar M$ in the proof essentially determines the variance of the good sequence. As noted before, the asymptotic log-concavity of the good sequence implies that it is eventually an entropy maximizing sequence of distributions~\cite{grechuk2009maximum}. It does not necessarily follow that the sequence is Gaussian, however. If such a choice can be made (i.e., the variational family contains Gaussian distributions) then the choice of good sequence amounts to matching the entropy of a Gaussian distribution with variance $\frac{\alpha^{\frac{1}{\alpha-1}}}{\bar e I(\theta_0)}$.
We further characterize the rate of convergence of the $\alpha-$R\'enyi approximate posterior under additional regularity conditions. In particular, we establish an upper bound on the rate of convergence of the possible candidate $\alpha-$R\'enyi approximators. First, we assume that the posterior distribution satisfies the Bernstein-von Mises Theorem\cite{vdV00}. The LAN condition with the existence of test functions \cite[Theorem 10.1]{vdV00} guarantees that the Bernstein-von Mises Theorem holds for the posterior distribution. A further modeling assumption is to choose a variational family $\mathcal{Q}$ that limits the variance. Therefore, we assume that the sequence of distributions $\{q_n(\theta)\} \subset \mathcal{Q}$ is sub-Gaussian, that is for some positive constant $B$ and any $t\in \mathbb{R}$,
\[ \bbE_{ q_n(\theta)} [e^{t\theta}] \leq e^{\tilde{\theta}_n t + \frac{B}{2\gamma_n^2} t^2 },\]
where $\tilde\theta_n$ is the mean of $q_n(\theta)$ and $\gamma_n$ is the rate at which $q_n(\theta)$ converges weakly to a Dirac delta distribution as $n \to \infty$.
\vspace{1em}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:degen}
Consider a sequence of sub-Gaussian distributions $\{q_n(\theta)\} \subset \mathcal{Q}$, with parameters $B$ and $t$, that converges weakly to some Dirac delta distribution faster than the posterior converges weakly to $\delta_{\theta_0}$ (that is, $\gamma_n> \sqrt{n}$),
and suppose the true posterior distribution satisfies the Bernstein-von Mises Theorem. Then, there exists an $n_0 \geq 1$ such that the $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence
$D_{\a}(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| q_n(\theta)) $
is infinite for all $n > n_0$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
First, we fix $n \geq 1$ and let $M_r$ be a sequence such that $M_r \to \infty $ as $r \to \infty.$ Recall that $\hat\theta_n$ is the maximum likelihood estimate and denote $\tilde{\theta}_n = \bbE_{q_n(\theta)}[\theta]$. Define a set
\[K_r := \{\theta \in \Theta : |\theta-\hat{\theta}_n| > M_r \} \bigcup \{\theta \in \Theta : |\theta-\tilde{\theta}_n| > M_r \}. \]
Now, using Lemma~\ref{lem:hold} with $K = K_r$, we have
\begin{align}
\int_{\Theta} q_n(\theta) \left( \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{q_n(\theta)} \right)^{\alpha} d\theta \geq \frac{ \left( \int_{K_r} \pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) d\theta \right) ^{\alpha} }{ \left( \int_{K_r} q_n(\theta) d\theta \right) ^{\alpha-1} }.
\label{eq:eq1}
\end{align}
Note that the left hand side in the above equation does not depend on $r$ and when $r \to \infty$ both the numerator and denominator on the right hand side converges to zero individually. For the ratio to diverge, however, we require the denominator to converge much faster than the numerator. To be more precise, observe that for a given $n$,
since $\alpha-1 < \alpha$ the tails of $q_n(\theta)$ must decay significantly faster than the tails of the true posterior for the right hand side in~\eqref{eq:eq1} to diverge as $r \to \infty$.
We next show that there exists an $n_0\geq 1$ such that for all $n \geq n_0$, the right hand side in~\eqref{eq:eq1} diverges as $r \to \infty$.
Since the posterior distribution satisfies the Bernstein-von Mises Theorem \cite{vdV00}, we have
%
\[ \int_{K_r} \pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) d\theta = \int_{K_r} \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat \theta_n, (n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\theta + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1). \]
Observe that the numerator on the right hand side of~\eqref{eq:eq1} satisfies,
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\bigg( \int_{K_r} & \pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) d\theta \bigg) ^{\alpha}
\nonumber
= \left( \int_{K_r} \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat\theta_n, (n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\theta + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right) ^{\alpha}
\\
\nonumber
&\geq \left( \int_{ \{ |\theta-\hat{\theta}_n| > M_r\}} \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat\theta_n, (n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\theta + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right) ^{\alpha}
\\
\nonumber
&= \left( \int_{ \{ \theta-\hat{\theta}_n > M_r \} } \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat\theta_n, (n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\theta + \int_{ \{\theta-\hat{\theta}_n \leq - M_r \} } \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat\theta_n, (n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\theta + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right) ^{\alpha}
\\
& \geq \left( \int_{ \{ \theta-\hat{\theta}_n > M_r \}} \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat\theta_n, (n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\theta + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right) ^{\alpha}.
\end{align}
Now, using the lower bound on the Gaussian tail distributions from~\cite{feller1968}
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\left( \int_{K_r} \pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) d\theta \right) ^{\alpha} &= \left( \int_{K_r} \mathcal{N}(\theta;\hat\theta_n, (n I(\theta_0))^{-1}) d\theta + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right) ^{\alpha}
\\
\nonumber
& \geq \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}}\left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{n I(\theta_0)} M_r } - \frac{1}{(\sqrt{n I(\theta_0)} M_r)^3} \right) e^{-\frac{n I(\theta_0)}{2} M_r^2 } + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right) ^{\alpha}
\\
&\sim \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \frac{1}{\sqrt{n I(\theta_0)} M_r } e^{-\frac{n I(\theta_0)}{2} M_r^2 } + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) \right) ^{\alpha},
\label{eq:eq2}
\end{align}
where the last approximation follows from the fact that, for large $r$, \[ \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{n I(\theta_0)} M_r } - \frac{1}{(\sqrt{n I(\theta_0)} M_r)^3} \right) \sim \frac{1}{\sqrt{n I(\theta_0)} M_r }. \]
Next, consider the denominator on the right hand side of~\eqref{eq:eq1}. Using the union bound
\begin{align}
\left( \int_{K_r} q_n(\theta) d\theta \right) ^{\alpha-1} \leq \left( \int_{ \{|\theta-\tilde{\theta}_n| > M_r \}} q_n(\theta) d\theta + \int_{ \{|\theta-\hat{\theta}_n| > M_r \} } q_n(\theta) d\theta \right) ^{\alpha-1}.
\label{eq:eq5}
\end{align}
Since, $\tilde{\theta}_n$ and $\hat{\theta}_n$ are finite for all $n\geq 1$, there exists an $\e>0$ such that for large $n$,
\( |\tilde\theta_n - \hat\theta_n| \leq \e. \) Applying the triangle inequality,
\[ |\theta - \hat\theta_n| \leq | \theta - \tilde\theta_n| + | \tilde\theta_n - \hat\theta_n| \leq | \theta - \tilde\theta_n| + \e. \]
Therefore, $\{|\theta-\hat{\theta}_n| > M_r \} \subseteq \{|\theta-\tilde{\theta}_n| > M_r - \e \} $ and it follows from~\eqref{eq:eq5} that
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\left( \int_{K_r} q_n(\theta) d\theta \right) ^{\alpha-1}
& \leq \left( \int_{ \{|\theta-\tilde{\theta}_n| > M_r \}} q_n(\theta) d\theta + \int_{ \{|\theta-\tilde{\theta}_n| > M_r - \e \} } q_n(\theta) d\theta \right) ^{\alpha-1}.
\end{align}
Next, using the sub-Gaussian tail distribution bound from \cite[Theorem 2.1]{BoLuMa2013}, we have
\begin{align}
\left( \int_{ \{|\theta-\tilde{\theta}_n| > M_r \}} q_n(\theta) d\theta + \int_{ \{|\theta-\tilde{\theta}_n| > M_r - \e \} } q_n(\theta) d\theta \right) ^{\alpha-1} \leq \left( 2 e^{-\frac{\gamma^2_n M_r^2}{2B}} + 2 e^{-\frac{\gamma^2_n (M_r-\e)^2}{2B}} \right) ^{\alpha-1}.
\label{eq:eq6}
\end{align}
For large $r$, \(M_r \sim M_r-\e \), and it follows that
\begin{align}
\left( \int_{ \{|\theta-\tilde{\theta}_n| > M_r \}} q_n(\theta) d\theta + \int_{ \{|\theta-\tilde{\theta}_n| > M_r - \e \} } q_n(\theta) d\theta \right) ^{\alpha-1} \lesssim \left( 4 e^{-\frac{\gamma^2_n M_r^2}{2B}} \right) ^{\alpha-1}.
\label{eq:eq3}
\end{align}
Substituting~\eqref{eq:eq2} and~\eqref{eq:eq3} into~\eqref{eq:eq1}, we obtain
\begin{align*}
\int_{\Theta} q_n(\theta) \left( \frac{\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{q_n(\theta)} \right)^{\alpha} d\theta \gtrsim \left( \frac{ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \frac{1}{\sqrt{n I(\theta_0)} M_r } e^{-\frac{n I(\theta_0)}{2} M_r^2 } + o_{P_{\theta_0}}(1) } {\left( 4 e^{-\frac{\gamma^2_n M_r^2}{2B}} \right) ^\frac{\alpha-1}{\alpha}} \right) ^{\alpha},
\label{eq:eq4}
\end{align*}
for large $r$. Observe that
\begin{align}
\frac{ \frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi}} \frac{1}{\sqrt{n I(\theta_0)} M_r } e^{-\frac{n I(\theta_0)}{2} M_r^2 } } {\left( 4 e^{-\frac{\gamma^2_n M_r^2}{2B}} \right) ^\frac{\alpha-1}{\alpha}} &= \frac{1}{4^\frac{\alpha-1}{\alpha} \sqrt{2\pi}} \frac{1}{ M_r } \left( \frac{1}{\sqrt{n I(\theta_0)} }e^{M_r^2\left( \frac{\alpha-1}{\alpha}\frac{\gamma^2_n }{2B} - \frac{n I(\theta_0)}{2} \right) } \right).
\end{align}
Since $\gamma_n^2 > n$, choosing $n_0 = \min \left\{n : \left( \frac{\alpha-1}{\alpha}\frac{\gamma^2_n }{2B} - \frac{n I(\theta_0)}{2} \right) > 0 \right\}$ implies that for all $n \geq n_0$, as $r \to \infty$, the left hand side in~\eqref{eq:eq4} diverges and the result follows.
\end{proof}
\section{Consistency of Idealized EP-Approximate Posterior}~\label{sec:asymptoteEP}
Our results on the consistency of $\alpha$-R\'enyi variational approximators in Section~\ref{sec:asymptote} imply the consistency of posterior approximations obtained using expectation propogation (EP) \cite{Mi2001a,Mi2001b}. Observe that for any $n\geq1$, as $\alpha \to 1$,
\begin{eqnarray}
{D_{\alpha}} \left( \pi(\theta| \mathbf X_n)\| \tilde{q}(\theta) \right) \to \textsc{KL} \left( \pi(\theta| \mathbf X_n)\| \tilde{q}(\theta) \right),
\end{eqnarray}
where the limit is the EP objective using \textsc{KL}~divergence. We define the EP-approximate posterior $s^*_n$ as the distribution in the variational family $\mathcal{Q}$ that minimizes the \textsc{KL}\ divergence between $\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)$ and $\tilde{s}(\theta)$, where $\tilde{s}(\theta)$ is an element of $\mathcal{Q}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
s^*_n(\theta) := \text{argmin}_{\tilde{s} \in \mathcal{Q}}
\left\{\textsc{KL} \left( \pi(\theta| \mathbf X_n)\| \tilde{s}(\theta) \right):= \int_{\Theta} \pi(\theta| \mathbf X_n) \log\left(\frac{\pi(\theta| \mathbf X_n)}{\tilde{s}(\theta) } \right) d\theta \right\} . \label{eq:ep_opt2}
\end{eqnarray}
We note that the EP algorithm~\cite{Mi2001a} is a message-passing algorithm that optimizes an approximations to this objective~\cite{wainwright2008graphical}. Nevertheless, understanding this idealized objective is an important step towards understanding the actual EP algorithm. Furthermore, ideas from~\cite{LiTu2016} can be used to construct alternate algorithms that directly minimize equation~\eqref{eq:ep_opt2}. We thus focus on this objective, and show that under the assumptions in Section~\ref{sec:b-VB}, the EP-approximate posterior is asymptotically consistent as the sample size increases, in the sense that \(s_n^* \Rightarrow \delta_{\theta_0}, \ P_{\theta_0}-a.s. \) as $n \to \infty$. The proofs in this section are corollaries of the results in the previous section.
Recall that the KL divergence lower-bounds the $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence when $\alpha>1$; that is
\begin{align}
\textsc{KL} \left( p(\theta)\| q(\theta) \right) \leq D_{\alpha}\left( p(\theta)\| q(\theta) \right).
\label{eq:DKL}
\end{align}
This is a direct consequence of Jensen's inequality. Analogous to Proposition~\ref{prop:UBfin}, we first show that the minimal \textsc{KL} \ divergence between the true Bayesian posterior and the variational family $\mathcal{Q}$ is asymptotically bounded.
\vspace{.5em}
\begin{proposition}\label{prop:UBfinEP}
For a given $\a>1$, and under Assumptions~\ref{assume:prior},~\ref{assume:lan},~\ref{assume:var}, and~\ref{def:gsequence}, the minimal \textsc{KL} \ divergence satisfies
\begin{align}
\limsup_{n \to \infty} \min_{\tilde s \in \mathcal Q} \textsc{KL} \left( \pi(\theta| \mathbf X_n)\| \tilde{s}(\theta) \right) < \infty \quad P_{\theta_0}-\text{a.s.}
\end{align}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The result follows immediately from Proposition~\ref{prop:UBfin} and~\eqref{eq:DKL}, since for any $\tilde s(\theta) \in \mathcal{Q}$ and $\a > 1$,
\begin{align*}
\textsc{KL} \left( \pi(\theta| \mathbf X_n)\| \tilde{s}(\theta) \right) \leq D_{\alpha}\left( \pi(\theta| \mathbf X_n)\| \tilde{s}(\theta) \right).
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
Next, we demonstrate that any sequence of distributions $\{s_n(\theta)\} \subset \mathcal{Q}$ that converges weakly to a distribution $s(\theta) \in \sQ$ with positive probability outside the true parameter $\theta_0$ cannot achieve zero \textsc{KL}\ divergence in the limit. Observe that this result is weaker than Lemma~\ref{lem:ndegen}, and does not show that the KL divergence is necessarily infinite in the limit. This loses some structural insight.
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:subopt1ep}
There exists an $\eta>0$ in the extended real line such that the \textsc{KL}\ divergence between the true posterior and sequence $\{s_n(\theta)\}$ is bounded away from zero; that is,
\[ \liminf_{n \to \infty} \textsc{KL}(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\| s_n(\theta)) \geq \eta >0 \quad P_{\theta_0}-a.s. \]
\end{lemma}
Now using Proposition~\ref{prop:UBfinEP} and Lemma~\ref{lem:subopt1ep} we show that the EP-approximate posterior converges weakly to the $\delta_{\theta_0}$.
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{theorem}\label{thm:consistencyEP}
Under conditions of Proposition~\ref{prop:UBfinEP}, the EP-approximate posterior $s^*_n(\theta)$ satisfies
\[s^*_n \Rightarrow \delta_{\theta_0} \quad P_{\theta_0}-a.s ~\text{as}~n\to\infty.\]
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Recall~\eqref{eq:eqthm1} from the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:consistency} that there exists a good sequence $\tilde{q}_n(\theta)$
\begin{align*}
\limsup_{n \to \infty} D_{\alpha}(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) \|\tilde q_n(\theta)) = 0 \ P_{\theta_0}-a.s.
\label{eq:eqthm2}
\end{align*}
Now, using~\eqref{eq:DKL} it follows that
\begin{align}
\nonumber
\limsup_{n \to \infty} \textsc{KL} (\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) \|\tilde q_n(\theta)) \leq \limsup_{n \to \infty} D_{\alpha}(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) \|\tilde q_n(\theta)) = 0 \ P_{\theta_0}-a.s,
\end{align}
Since the \textsc{KL}\ divergence is always non-negative, we then have
\begin{align}
\limsup_{n \to \infty} \textsc{KL}(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) \|\tilde q_n(\theta)) = 0 \ P_{\theta_0}-a.s.
\end{align}
Consequently, the sequence of EP-approximate posteriors must also achieve zero \textsc{KL}\ divergence from the true posterior in the large sample limit.
Finally, as demonstrated in Lemma~\ref{lem:subopt1ep}, any other sequence of distribution that converges weakly to a distribution, that has positive probability at any point other that $\theta_0$ cannot achieve zero \textsc{KL}\ divergence. Therefore, it follows that the EP-approximate posterior $s^*_n(\theta)$ must converge weakly to a Dirac delta distribution at the true parameter $\theta_0, P_{\theta_0}-a.s.$, thereby completing the proof.
\end{proof}
\section{Introduction}
Bayesian statistics forms a powerful and flexible framework that allows practitioners to bring prior knowledge to statistical problems, and to coherently manage uncertainty resulting from finite and noisy datasets. A Bayesian represents the unknown state of the world with a possibly vector-valued parameter $\theta$, over which they place a prior probability $\pi(\theta)$, representing {\em a priori} beliefs they might have. $\theta$ can include global parameters shared across the entire dataset, as well as local variables specific to each observation. A likelihood $p(\mathbf X_n|\theta)$ then specifies a probability distribution over the observed dataset $\mathbf X_n$. Given observations $\mathbf X_n$, prior beliefs $\pi(\theta)$ are updated to a posterior distribution $\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)$ calculated through Bayes' rule.
While conceptually straightforward, computing $\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)$ is intractable for many interesting and practical models, and the field of Bayesian computation is focused on developing scalable and accurate computational techniques to approximate the posterior distribution. Traditionally, much of this has involved Monte Carlo and Markov chain Monte Carlo techniques to construct sampling approximations to the posterior distribution. In recent years, developments from machine learning have sought to leverage tools from optimization to construct tractable posterior approximations. An early and still popular instance of this methodology is {\em variational Bayes} (VB)~\cite{BlKuMc2017}.
At a high level, the idea behind VB is to approximate the intractable posterior $\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)$ with an element $q(\theta)$ of some simpler class of distributions $\mathcal{Q}$. Examples of $\mathcal{Q}$ include the family of Gaussian distributions, delta functions, or the family of factorized `mean-field' distributions that discard correlations between components of $\theta$. The variational solution $q$ is the element of $\mathcal{Q}$ that is closest to $\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)$, where closeness is measured in terms of the Kullback-Leibler (KL) divergence. Thus, $q$ is the solution to:
\begin{eqnarray}
q(\theta) = \text{argmin}_{\tilde{q} \in \mathcal{Q}}
\text{KL}(\tilde{q}(\theta)\|\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)). \label{eq:vb_opt}
\end{eqnarray}
We term this as the {KL-VB}\ method. From the non-negativity of the Kullback-Leibler divergence, we can view this as minimizing a lower-bound to the logarithm of the marginal probability of the observations, $\log p(\mathbf X_n) = \log \left(\int p(\mathbf X_n,\theta) \mathrm{d} \theta \right)$. This lower-bound, called the variational lower-bound or evidence lower bound (ELBO) is defined as
\begin{align}
\text{ELBO}(\tilde{q}(\theta)) = \log p(\mathbf X_n) - \text{KL}(\tilde{q}(\theta)\|p(\theta|\mathbf X_n)).\label{eq:vb_opt2}
\end{align}
Optimizing the two equations above with respect to $q$ does not involve either calculating expectations with respect to the intractable posterior $\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)$, or evaluating the posterior normalization constant. As a consequence, a number of standard optimization algorithms can be used to select the best approximation $q(\theta)$ to the posterior distribution, examples including expectation-maximization~\cite{neal1998view} and gradient-based~\cite{kingma2013auto} methods.
This has allowed the application of Bayesian methods to increasingly large datasets and high-dimensional settings. Despite their widespread popularity in the machine learning, and more recently, the statistics communities, it is only recently that variational methods have been been studied theoretically~\cite{alquier2017concentration,abdellatif2018,WaBl2017,yang2017alpha, ZhGa2017}.
\subsection{R\'enyi divergence minimization}
Despite its popularity, variational Bayes has a number of well-documented limitations. An important one is its tendency to produce approximations that underestimate the spread of the posterior distribution~\cite{LiTu2016}: in essence, the variational Bayes solution tends to match closely with the dominant mode of the posterior. This arises from the choice of the divergence measure $\text{KL}(q(\theta)\|\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)) = \mathbb{E}_q[\log(q(\theta)/\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n))]$, which does not penalize solutions where $q(\theta)$ is small while $\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)$ is large. While many statistical applications only focus on the mode of the distribution, definite calculations of the variance and higher moments are critical in predictive and decision-making problems.
A natural solution is to consider different divergence measures than those used in variational Bayes. Expectation propagation (EP)~\cite{Mi2001a} was developed to minimize $\mathbb{E}_p[\log(p/q)]$ instead, though this requires an expectation with respect to the intractable posterior. Consequently, EP can only minimize an approximation of this objective. We will call $\mathbb{E}_p[\log(p/q)]$ the `idealized' EP objective, see~\cite{wainwright2008graphical} for the actual EP loss function.
More recently, R\'enyi's $\alpha$-divergence~\cite{TErvan2012} has been used as a family of parametrized divergence measures for variational inference \cite{LiTu2016, dieng2017variational}. The $\alpha$-R\'enyi divergence is defined as
$$D_{\alpha} \left( \pi(\theta| \mathbf X_n)\| {q}(\theta) \right):= \frac{1}{\alpha-1}
\log \int_{\Theta} {q}(\theta) \left(\frac{\pi(\theta| \mathbf X_n)}{{q}(\theta) } \right)^{\alpha} d\theta. $$
The parameter $\alpha$ spans a number of divergence measures and, in particular, we note that as $\alpha \to 1$ we recover the idealized EP objective $\text{KL}(\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) \| q(\theta))$.
Settings of $\alpha > 1$ are particularly interesting since, in contrast to VB which lower-bounds the log-likelihood of the data (equation~\eqref{eq:vb_opt2}), one obtains tractable upper bounds. Precisely, using Jensen's inequality,
\begin{align}
p(\mathbf X_n)^\alpha &=
\left( \int p(\theta,\mathbf X_n)~ \frac{q(\theta)}{q(\theta)}~ d\theta\right)^\alpha
\le \mathbb{E}_q \left[ \left(\frac{ p(\theta,\mathbf X_n)}{q(\theta)} \right)^\alpha\right]
\intertext{Applying the logarithm function on either side,}
\alpha \log p(\mathbf X_n) & \le \log
\mathbb{E}_q \left[ \left(\frac{ p(\theta,\mathbf X_n)}{q(\theta)} \right)^\alpha\right]\\
&= \alpha \log p(\mathbf X_n) + \log \mathbb{E}_q \left[ \left(\frac{ p(\theta|\mathbf X_n)}{q(\theta)} \right)^\alpha\right] := \mathcal{F}_2(q).
\end{align}
Observe that the second term in the expression for $\mathcal{F}_2(q)$
is just $(\alpha-1) D_\alpha(p(\theta|\mathbf X_n)\|q(\theta))$. Like with the ELBO lower bound, evaluating this upperbound only involves expectations with respect to $q(\theta)$, and only requires evaluating $p(\theta,\mathbf X_n)$, the unnormalized posterior distribution. Optimizing this upper bound over some class of distributions $\mathcal Q$, we obtain the {\it $\alpha$-R\'enyi} approximation. As noted before, standard variational Bayes, which optimizes a lower-bound, tends to produce approximating distributions that underestimate the posterior variance, resulting in predictions that are overconfident and ignore high-risk regions in the support of the posterior. We illustrate this fact in Figure~\ref{fig:1} below that reproduces a result from~\cite{LiTu2016}. The true posterior distribution is an anisotropic Gaussian distribution and the variational family consists of isotropic (or mean field) Gaussian distributions. Standard {KL-VB}, represented by the green curve titled $(\alpha = 0)$, clearly fits the mode of the posterior, but completely underestimates the dominant eigen-direction. On the other hand, for large values of $\alpha$ (the teal shows $\alpha \to +\infty$), the $\alpha$-R\'enyi approximate posterior matches the mode and does a better job of capturing the spread of the posterior. The figure also presents results for the $\alpha = 1$ (or EP) and the $\alpha \to -\infty$ cases. As an aside, we observe that our parametrization of the R\'enyi divergence is different from~\cite{LiTu2016}, where the upper-bounds considered in this paper emerge as $\alpha \to -\infty$.
\begin{figure}[H]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.35]{Image/VarPosterior}
\caption{ Isotropic variational $\alpha$-R\'enyi approximations to an anisotropic Gaussian, for different values of $\alpha$ (see also \cite{LiTu2016})}
\label{fig:1}
\end{figure}
We note, furthermore, that in tasks such as model selection, the marginal likelihood of the data is of fundamental interest~\cite{grosse2015sandwiching}, and the $\alpha$-R\'enyi upper bound provides an approximation that complements the VB lower bound.
Recent developments in stochastic optimization have allowed the $\alpha$-R\'enyi objective to be optimized fairly easily; see~\cite{LiTu2016, dieng2017variational}.
\subsection{Large sample properties}
Despite often state-of-the-art empirical results, variational methods still present a number of unanswered theoretical questions. This is particularly true for $\alpha$-R\'enyi divergence minimization which has empirically demonstrated very promising results for a number of applications~\cite{LiTu2016,dieng2017variational}. In recent work,~\cite{ZhGa2017} have shown conditions under which $\alpha$-R\'enyi variational methods are consistent when $\alpha$ is less than one. Their results followed quite easily from a proof for the regular Kullback-Leibler variational algorithm, and thus only apply to situations when a {\em lower-bound} is optimized. As we mentioned before, the setting with $\alpha$ greater than $1$ is qualitatively different from both Kullback-Leibler and R\'enyi divergence with $\alpha < 1$. This setting, which is also of considerable practical interest, is the focus of our paper and we address the question of asymptotic consistency of the approximate posterior distribution obtained by minimizing the R\'enyi divergence.
Asymptotic consistency~\cite{vdV00} is a basic frequentist requirement of any statistical method, guaranteeing that the `true' parameter is recovered as the number of observations tends to infinity. Table~\ref{tab:1} summarizes the current known results on consistency of VI and EP, and highlights the gap that this paper is intended to fill.
\begin{table}[hbt]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|}
\hline
Methods& Papers \\
\hline
{KL-VB} & \cite{WaBl2017},\cite{ZhGa2017} \\
EP (idealized) & This paper\\
$\alpha$-R\'enyi ($\alpha < 1$) & \cite{ZhGa2017}\\
$\alpha$-R\'enyi ($\alpha > 1$) & This paper\\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Known results on the asymptotic consistency of variational methods.}
\label{tab:1}
\end{table}
As we will see, filling these gaps will require new developments. This follows from two complicating factors: 1) R\'enyi divergence with $\alpha > 1$ {\em upper-bounds} the log-likelihood, and 2) this requires new analytical approaches involving expectations with respect to the intractable $\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n)$. We thus emphasize that the results in our paper are not a consequence of recent analysis in~\cite{WaBl2017,ZhGa2017} for the~{KL-VB}, and our proofs differ substantially from these results.
We establish our main result in Theorem~\ref{thm:consistency} under mild regularity conditions. First, in Assumption~\ref{assume:prior} we assume that the prior distribution places positive mass in the neighborhood of the true parameter $\theta_0$ and that it is uniformly bounded. The former condition is a reasonable assumption to make - clearly, if the prior does not place any mass in the neighborhood of the true parameter (assuming one exists) then neither will the posterior. The uniform boundedness condition on the other hand is attendant to a loss of generality. In particular, we cannot assume certain heavy-tailed priors (such as Pareto) which might be important for some engineering applications. Second, we also make the mild assumption that the likelihood function is locally asymptotically normal (LAN) in Assumption~\ref{assume:lan}. This is a standard assumption that holds for a variety of statistical/stochastic models. However, while the LAN assumption will be critical for establishing the asymptotic consistency results, it is unclear if it is necessary as well. We observe that~\cite{WaBl2017} make a similar assumption in analyzing the consistency of {KL-VB}. We note that any model $P_\theta$ that is twice differentiable in the parameter $\theta$ satisfies the LAN condition~\cite{vdV00}. The properties of the variational family are critical to the consistency result. Assumption~\ref{assume:var} is a mild condition that insists on there existing Dirac delta distributions in an open neighborhood of the true parameter $\theta_0$. While it may appear that this condition is hard to verify, if the variational family consists of Gaussian distributions, for instance, then Dirac delta distributions are present at all points in the parameter space. Consequently, we assert that Assumption~\ref{assume:var} is easy to satisfy in practice. Next, we assume that the variational family contains `good sequences,' that are constructed so as to converge at the same rate as the true posterior (in sequence with the sample size) and the first moment of an element in the sequence is precisely the maximum likelihood estimator of the parameter (at a given sample size). We also require the tails of the good sequence to bound the tails of the true posterior. We provide examples that verify the existence of good sequences in commonly used variational families, such as the mean-field family.
The proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:consistency} is a consequence of a series of auxiliary results. First, in Lemma~\ref{lem:ndegen} we characterize $\alpha$-R\'enyi minimizers and show that the sequence must have a Dirac delta distribution at the true parameter $\theta_0$ in the large sample limit.\ Then, in Lemma~\ref{lem:subopt1} we argue that any convex combination of a Dirac delta distribution at the true parameter $\theta_0$ with any other distribution can not achieve zero $\alpha$-R\'enyi divergence in the limit. \ Next, we show in Proposition~\ref{prop:UBfin} that the $\alpha$-R\'enyi divergence between the true posterior and the closest variational approximator is bounded above in the large sample limit.\ We demonstrate this by showing that a `good sequence' of distributions (see Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence}) has asymptotically bounded $\alpha$-R\'enyi divergence, implying that the minimizers do as well.\ Note that this does not yet prove that the minimizing sequence converges to a Dirac delta distribution at $\theta_0$.
The next stage of the analysis is concerned with demonstrating that the minimizing sequence does indeed converge to a Dirac delta distribution concentrated at the true parameter. We demonstrate this fact as a consequence of Proposition~\ref{prop:UBfin}, Lemma~\ref{lem:ndegen}, and Lemma~\ref{lem:subopt1}. In essence, Theorem~\ref{thm:consistency} shows that, $\alpha$-R\'enyi minimizing distributions are arbitrarily close to a good sequence, in the sense of R\'enyi divergence with the posterior in the large sample limit.
In our next result in Theorem~\ref{thm:degen}, under additional regularity conditions, we further characterize the rate of convergence of the $\alpha-$R\'enyi minimizers. We demonstrate that the $\alpha-$R\'enyi minimizing sequence cannot concentrate to a point in the parameter space at a faster rate than the true posterior concentrates at the true parameter $\theta_0$. Consequently, the tail mass in the $\alpha$-R\'enyi minimizer could dominate that of the true posterior. This is in contrast with~{KL-VB}, where the evidence lower bound (ELBO) maximizer typically under-estimates the variance of the true posterior.
Here is a brief roadmap of the paper. In Section~\ref{sec:b-VB}, we formally introduce the $\alpha$-R\'enyi methodology, and rigorously state the necessary regularity assumptions. We present our main result in Section~\ref{sec:asymptote}, presenting only the proofs of the primary results. In Section~\ref{sec:asymptoteEP} we also recover the consistency of idealized expectation propagation~(EP) approximate posteriors as a consequence of the results in~Section~\ref{sec:asymptote}. All proofs of auxiliary and technical results are delayed to the Appendix.
\section{Numerical results}~\label{sec:numerics}
\section{Variational Approximation using $\alpha-$R\'enyi Divergence}~\label{sec:b-VB}
We assume that the data-generating distribution is parametrized by $\theta \in \Theta \subseteq \bbR^d$, $d \geq 1$ and is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure, so that the likelihood function $p(\cdot|\theta)$ is well-defined. We place a prior $\pi(\theta)$ on the unknown $\theta$, and denote $\pi(\theta|\mathbf X_n) \propto p(\theta,\mathbf X_n)$ as the posterior distribution, where $\mathbf X_n = \{\xi_1,\ldots, \xi_n\}$ are the $n$ independent and identically distributed (i.i.d.) observed samples generated from the `true' measure $P_{\theta_0}$ {\color{black}in the likelihood family}.
In this paper we will study the $\alpha-$R\'enyi-approximate posterior $q^*_n$ that minimizes the $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence between $\pi(\theta| \mathbf X_n)$ and $\tilde{q}(\cdot)$ in the set $\sQ$ $\forall \alpha>1$; that is,
\begin{eqnarray}
q^*_n(\theta) := \text{argmin}_{\tilde{q} \in \mathcal{Q}}
\left\{D_{\alpha} \left( \pi(\theta| \mathbf X_n)\| \tilde{q}(\theta) \right):= \frac{1}{\alpha-1} \log \int_{\Theta} \tilde{q}(\theta) \left(\frac{\pi(\theta| \mathbf X_n)}{\tilde{q}(\theta) } \right)^{\alpha} d\theta \right\} . \label{eq:ep_opt}
\end{eqnarray}
Recall that
\begin{definition}[Dominating distribution]~\label{def:dom}
The distribution $Q$ dominates the distribution P ($P \ll Q$), when $P$ is absolutely continuous with respect to $Q$; that is, $supp(P) \subseteq supp(Q)$.
\end{definition}
Clearly, the $\alpha-$R\'enyi divergence in~\eqref{eq:ep_opt} is infinite for any distribution $q(\theta) \in \mathcal{Q}$ that does not dominate the true posterior distribution \cite{TErvan2012}. Intuitively, this is the reason why the $\alpha$-R\'enyi approximation can better capture the spread of the posterior distribution.
Our goal is to study the statistical properties of the $\alpha-$R\'enyi-approximate posterior as defined in~\eqref{eq:ep_opt}. In particular, we show that under certain regularity conditions on the likelihood, the prior and the variational family the $\alpha-$R\'enyi-approximate posterior is consistent or converges weakly to a Dirac delta distribution at the true parameter $\theta_0$ as the number of observations $n \to \infty.$
\subsection{Assumptions and Definitions}
First, we assume the following restrictions on permissible priors.
\vspace{.5em}
\begin{assumption}[Prior Density]~\label{assume:prior}
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(1)] The prior density function $\pi(\theta)$ is continuous with non-zero measure in the neighborhood of the true parameter
$\theta_0$, and
\item[(2)] there exists a constant $M_p > 0$ such that
$\pi(\theta) \leq M_p~\forall \theta \in \Theta$ and $\bbE_{ \pi(\theta)}[|\theta|]< \infty$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{assumption}
Assumption~\ref{assume:prior}(1) is typical in Bayesian consistency analysis - quite obviously, if the prior does not place any mass on the true parameter then the (true) posterior will not either. Indeed, it is well known~\cite{Sc1965,Gh1997} that for any prior that satisfies Assumption~\ref{assume:prior}(1), under very mild assumptions,
\begin{align}
\label{eq:4}
\pi(U | \mathbf X_n) = \int_{U} \pi(\theta | \mathbf X_n) d\theta \Rightarrow 1 \quad~P_{\theta_0}-a.s.~\text{as}~n\to\infty,
\end{align}
where $P_{\theta_0}$ represents the true data-generating distribution, $U$ is some neighborhood of the true parameter $\theta_0$ and $\Rightarrow$ represents weak convergence of measures. Assumption~\ref{assume:prior}(2), on the other hand, is a mild technical condition which is satisfied by a large class of prior distributions, for instance, most of the exponential-family distributions. For simplicity, we write $q_n (\theta) \Rightarrow q(\theta)$ to represent weak convergence of the distributions corresponding to the densities $\{q_n\}$ and $q$.
We define a generic probabilistic order term, $o_{P_\theta}(1)$ with respect to measure $P_{\theta}$ as follows
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{definition}~\label{def:prob}
For any $\delta > 0$, a sequence of random variables $\{\xi_n\}$ is of probabilistic order $o_{P_\theta}(1)$ when
\[ \lim_{n \to \infty} P_{\theta}( |\xi_n| > \delta) = 0.\]
\end{definition}
We write $a_n \sim b_n$ when the sequence $\{a_n\}$ can be approximated by a sequence $\{b_n\}$ for large $n$,
so that the ratio $\frac{a_n}{b_n}$ approaches 1 as $n \to \infty$, $a_n = O(b_n)$ as $n \to \infty$, when there exists a positive number $M$ and $n_0\geq 1$, such that $a_n \leq M b_n \ \forall n \geq n_0$, and $a_n \lesssim b_n$ when the sequence $\{a_n\}$ is bounded above by a sequence $\{b_n\}$ for large $n$.
Next, we assume the likelihood function satisfies the following asymptotic normality property (see ~\cite{vdV00} as well),
\vspace{1em}
\begin{assumption}[Local Asymptotic Normality]~\label{assume:lan}
Fix $\theta \in \Theta$. The sequence of log-likelihood functions $\{ \log P_n(\theta) = \sum_{i=1}^n \log p(x_i|\theta) \}$ satisfies a \emph{local asymptotic normality (LAN)} condition, if there exists a sequence of matrices $\{r_n\}$, a matrix $I(\theta)$ and a sequence of random vectors $\{\Delta_{n,\theta}\}$ weakly converging to $\sN(0,I(\theta)^{-1})$ as $n \to \infty$, such that for every compact set $K \subset \mathbb{R}^d$
\[
\sup_{h \in K} \left| \log {P_n(\theta + r_n^{-1} h)} - \log {P_n(\theta)} - h^T I(\theta)
\Delta_{n,\theta} + \frac{1}{2} h^T I(\theta)h \right| \xrightarrow{P_{\theta_0}} 0 \ \text{as $n \to \infty$ }.
\]
\end{assumption}
The LAN condition is standard, and holds for a wide variety of models. The assumption affords significant flexibility in the analysis by allowing the likelihood to be asymptotically approximated by a scaled Gaussian centered around $\theta_0$~\cite{vdV00}. We observe that~\cite{WaBl2017} makes a similar assumption in their consistency analysis of the variational lower bound. All statistical models $P_{\theta}$, which are twice differentiable in parameter $\theta$, satisfy the LAN condition with $r_n = \sqrt{n} I$, where $I$ is an identity matrix~\cite[Chapter-7]{vdV00}.
Now, let $\delta_{\theta}$ represent the Dirac delta distribution function, or singularity, concentrated at the parameter $\theta$.\begin{definition}[Degenerate distribution]\label{def:degen}
A sequence of distributions $\{q_n(\theta)\}$ converges weakly to $\delta_{\theta'}$ that is, $q_n(\theta) \Rightarrow \delta_{\theta'} $ for some $ \theta' \in \Theta$, if and only if $\forall \eta > 0$
\begin{align*}
\lim_{n \to \infty } \int_{\{|\theta -\theta'| > \eta\}} {q}_n(\theta) d\theta = 0
\end{align*}
\end{definition}
We use the term `non-degenerate' for a sequence of distributions that does not converge in distribution to a Dirac delta distribution. We also use the term `non-singular' to refer to a distribution that does not contain any singular components (i.e., it is absolutely continuous with respect to the Lebesgue measure). And, conversely, if a distribution contains both singularities and absolutely continuous components we term it a `singular distribution'.
Finally, we come to the conditions on the variational family $\mathcal{Q}$. We first assume that
\vspace{0.25em}
\begin{assumption}[Variational Family]~\label{assume:var}
The variational family $\mathcal{Q}$ must contain all Dirac delta distributions in some open neighborhood of $\theta_0 \in \Theta$.
\end{assumption}
Since we know that the posterior converges weakly to a Dirac delta distribution function, this assumption is a necessary condition to ensure that the variational approximator exists in the limit. Next, we define the rate of convergence of a sequence of distributions to a Dirac delta distribution as follows.
\vspace{1em}
\begin{definition}[Rate of convergence]\label{def:roc}
A sequence of distributions $\{q_n(\theta) \}$ converges weakly to $\delta_{\theta_1}$, $\forall \theta_1 \in\Theta$ at the rate of $\gamma_n$ if
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(1)] the sequence of means $ \{\check \theta_n := \int \theta q_n(\theta) d\theta \}$ converges to $\theta_1$ as $n\to \infty$, and
\item[(2)] the variance of $\{q_n(\theta) \}$ satisfies
\[E_{q_n(\theta)}[|\theta - \check \theta_n|^2] = O\left (\frac{1}{\gamma_n^2} \right).\]
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}
A crucial assumption, on which rests the proof of our main result, is the existence of what we call a `good sequence' in $\mathcal{Q}$.
\vspace{0.5em}
\begin{assumption}[Good sequence]\label{def:gsequence}
The variational family $\mathcal{Q}$ contains a sequence of distributions $\{\bar{q}_n(\theta)\}$ with the following properties:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(1)] the rate of convergence is $\gamma_n = \sqrt{n}$,
\item[(2)] there exists $n_1 \geq 1$ such that $\int_{\Theta}\theta \bar q_n(\theta) d\theta = \hat{\theta}_n $, where $\hat{\theta}_n$ is the maximum likelihood estimate, for each $n\geq n_1$, and
\item[(3)] there exist a compact ball $K \subset \Theta$ containing the true parameter $\theta_0$ and $n_2\geq1$, such that the sequence of Radon-Nikodym derivatives of the Bayes posterior density with respect to the sequence $\{\bar{q}_n\}$ exists and is bounded above by a finite positive constant $M_r$ outside of $K$ for all $n \geq n_2$ ; that is,\[\frac{ \ \pi( \theta | \mathbf X_n)}{ \bar{q}_n(\theta)} \leq M_r, \ \forall \theta \in \Theta \backslash K \text{ and } \forall n\geq n_2, \quad P_{\theta_0}-a.s. \]
\item[(4)] there exists $n_3\geq 1$ such that the good sequence $\{\bar q_n(\theta)\}$ is log-concave in $\theta$ for all $n \geq n_3$.
\end{enumerate}
We term such a sequence of distributions as `good sequences'.
\end{assumption}
The first two parts of the assumption hold so long as the variational family $\mathcal{Q}$ contains an open neighborhood of distributions around $\delta_{\theta_0}$. The third part essentially requires that for $n \geq n_2$, the tails of $\{\bar{q}_n(\theta)\}$ must decay no faster than the tails of the posterior distribution. Since, the good sequence converges weakly to $\delta_{\theta_0}$, this assumption is a mild technical condition. The last assumption implies that the good sequence is, for large sample sizes, a maximum entropy distribution under some deviation constraints on the entropy maximization problem~\cite{grechuk2009maximum}. Note that this does not imply that the good sequence is necessarily Gaussian (which is the maximum entropy distribution specifically under standard deviation constraints).
We note that this assumption is on the family $\mathcal{Q}$, and not on the minimizer of the R\'enyi divergence.
We demonstrate the existence of good sequences for some example models.
\vspace{1em}
\begin{example}
Consider a model whose likelihood is an $m$-dimensional multivariate Gaussian likelihood with unknown mean vector $\pmb{\mu}$ and known covariance matrix $\mathbf{\Sigma}$. Using an $m$-dimensional multivariate normal distribution with mean vector $\pmb{\mu_0}$ and covariance matrix $\mathbf{\Sigma}$ as conjugate prior, the posterior distribution is
\[\pi(\pmb\mu|\mathbf X_n) = \sqrt{ \frac{(n+1)^m}{ (2\pi)^m det\left( {\mathbf \Sigma} \right) } } e^{-\frac{n+1}{2} \left( \pmb{\mu} - \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{n}X_i + \pmb{\mu_0}}{n +1} \right)^T \mathbf\Sigma^{-1} \left( \pmb{\mu} - \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{n}X_i + \pmb{\mu_0}}{n +1} \right) }, \]
where exponents `$T$' and `$-1$' denote transpose and inverse. Next, consider the mean-field variational family, that is the product of $m$ 1-dimensional normal distributions. Consider a sequence in the variational family with mean $\{\mu^j_{q_n}, j \in \{1,2,\ldots, m\} \}$ and variance $\bigg\{\frac{\sigma^2_j}{\gamma^2_n}, j \in \{1,2,$ $\ldots, m\} \bigg\}$:
\[ q_n(\pmb{\mu})= \prod_{j=1}^{m} \sqrt{\frac{\gamma^2_n}{2\pi \sigma^2_j }} e^{-\frac{\gamma^2_n}{2 \sigma_j^2} \left( \mu_j - \mu_{q_n}^j \right)^2
} = \sqrt{\frac{\gamma^{2m}_n}{ (2\pi)^m det( \mathbf I_{\sigma}) }} e^{-\frac{\gamma^2_n}{2 } \left( \pmb \mu - \pmb \mu_{q_n} \right)^T \mathbf I_{\sigma}^{-1} \left( \pmb \mu - \pmb \mu_{q_n} \right)
} , \]
where $\pmb \mu_{q_n} = \{\mu_{q_n}^1 , \mu_{q_n}^2,\ldots, \mu_{q_n}^m\}$ and $\mathbf I_{\sigma}$ is an $m\times m$ diagonal matrix with diagonal elements $\{ \sigma_1^2, \sigma_2^2,$
$\ldots, \sigma_m^2 \}$. Notice that $\gamma_n$ is the rate at which the sequence $\{q_n(\pmb{\mu})\}$ converges weakly.
It is straightforward to observe that the variational family contains sequences that satisfy properties (1) and (2) in Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence}, that is
\[ \gamma_n = \sqrt{n} \text{ and } \pmb{\mu_{q_n}} = \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{n}X_i + \pmb{\mu_0}}{n +1}. \]
For brevity, denote $\pmb{\tilde\mu}_n := \pmb \mu - \pmb \mu_{q_n} = \pmb{\mu} - \frac{\sum_{i=1}^{n}X_i + \pmb{\mu_0}}{n +1} $ . To verify property (3) in Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence} consider the ratio,
\begin{align*}
\frac{\pi(\pmb\mu|\mathbf X_n)}{q_n(\pmb{\mu})} &= \frac{\sqrt{ \frac{(n+1)^m}{ (2\pi)^m det\left( {\mathbf \Sigma} \right) } } e^{-\frac{n+1}{2} \pmb{\tilde\mu}_n^T \mathbf\Sigma^{-1} \pmb{\tilde\mu}_n }}{\sqrt{\frac{\gamma^{2m}_n}{ (2\pi)^m det( \mathbf I_{\sigma}) }} e^{-\frac{\gamma^2_n}{2 } \pmb{\tilde\mu}_n^T \mathbf I_{\sigma}^{-1} \pmb{\tilde\mu}_n
}}.
\end{align*}
Using the fact that $\gamma^2_n = n < n+1$, the ratio above can be bounded above by
\begin{align*}
\frac{\pi(\pmb\mu|\mathbf X_n)}{q_n(\pmb{\mu})} &\leq \sqrt{ \frac{ 2^m det( \mathbf I_{\sigma})}{ det\left( {\mathbf \Sigma} \right) } } \frac{ e^{-\frac{n+1}{2} \pmb{\tilde\mu}_n^T \mathbf\Sigma^{-1} \pmb{\tilde\mu}_n }}{ e^{-\frac{n+1}{2 } \pmb{\tilde\mu}_n^T \mathbf I_{\sigma}^{-1} \pmb{\tilde\mu}_n
}} = \sqrt{ \frac{ 2^m det( \mathbf I_{\sigma})}{ det\left( {\mathbf \Sigma} \right) } } e^{-\frac{n+1}{2} \pmb{\tilde\mu}_n^T \left( \mathbf\Sigma^{-1} - \mathbf I_{\sigma}^{-1} \right) \pmb{\tilde\mu}_n }.
\end{align*}
Observe that if the matrix $\left( \mathbf\Sigma^{-1} - \mathbf I_{\sigma}^{-1} \right)$ is positive definite then the ratio above is bounded by $\sqrt\frac{2^mdet( \mathbf I_{\sigma})}{ det\left( {\mathbf \Sigma} \right) }$ and if $\mathcal{Q}$ is large enough it will contain distributions that satisfy this condition. To fix the idea, consider the univariate case, where the positive definiteness implies that the variance of the good sequence is greater than the variance of the posterior for all large enough `$n$'. That is, the tails of the good sequence decay slower than the tails of the posterior.
\end{example}
\vspace{1em}
\begin{example}
Consider a model whose likelihood is a univariate Normal distribution with unknown mean $\mu$ and known variance $\sigma$. Using a univariate normal distribution with the mean $\mu_0$ and the variance $\sigma$ as prior, the posterior distribution is
\begin{align}
\pi(\mu|\mathbf X_n) = \sqrt{\frac{n+1}{2\pi \sigma^2}} e^{ -\frac{(n+1)} {2 \sigma^2} \left( \mu - \frac{ \mu_0 + \sum_{i=1}^{n}X_i }{n+1} \right)^2 }.
\label{eq:eqg1}
\end{align}
Next, suppose the variational family $\mathcal{Q}$ is the set of all Laplace distributions. Consider a sequence $\{q_n(\mu)\}$ in $\mathcal{Q}$ with the location and the scale parameter $k_n$ and $b_n$ respectively, that is
\[q_n(\mu) = \frac{1}{2 b_n} e^{-\frac{|\mu- k_n |}{b_n}}. \]
To satisfy properties (1) and (2) in Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence}, we can choose $k_n= \frac{ \mu_0 + \sum_{i=1}^{n}X_i }{n+1} $ and $b_n= \sqrt{\frac{\pi \a^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}\sigma^2}{2n}} ,\ \forall \a>1$. For brevity denote $\tilde\mu_n = \mu - \frac{ \mu_0 + \sum_{i=1}^{n}X_i }{n+1}$. To verify property (3) in Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence} consider the ratio,
\begin{align*}
\frac{\pi(\mu|\mathbf X_n)}{q_n(\mu)} &= \frac{\sqrt{\frac{n+1}{2\pi \sigma^2}} e^{ -\frac{(n+1)} {2\sigma^2} \tilde\mu_n^2 } }{ \frac{1}{2} \sqrt{\frac{2n}{\pi \a^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}\sigma^2}} e^{- \frac{\sqrt{2n}|\tilde\mu_n |}{\sqrt{{\pi \a^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}\sigma^2}}} }} \leq \sqrt{\frac{2}{\a^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}}} \frac{ e^{ -\frac{(n+1)} {\pi \a^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}\sigma^2} \tilde\mu_n^2 } }{ e^{- \left | \frac{\sqrt{2(n+1)}|\tilde\mu_n |}{\sqrt{{\pi \a^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}\sigma^2}}} \right| }} \leq \sqrt{\frac{2}{\a^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}}} e^{1/2},
\end{align*}
where the last inequality follows due to the fact that $ e^{-(\frac{x^2}{2}-|x|)}<e^{1/2}$.
For the same posterior, we can also choose $\mathcal{Q}$ to be the set of all Logistic distributions. Consider a sequence $\{q_n(\mu)\}$ in this variational family with the mean and the scale parameter $m_n$ and $s_n$ respectively; that is
\[ q_n(\mu) = \frac{1}{s_n}\left( e^{\frac{\mu-m_n}{2s_n}} + e^{-\frac{\mu-m_n}{2s_n}} \right)^{-2}. \] To satisfy properties (1) and (2) in Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence}, we can choose $m_n= \frac{ \mu_0 + \sum_{i=1}^{n}X_i }{n+1} $ and $s_n= \sqrt{\frac{2\pi \a^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}\sigma^2}{n+1}} ,\ \forall \a>1$. For brevity denote $\tilde\mu_n = \mu - \frac{ \mu_0 + \sum_{i=1}^{n}X_i }{n+1}$. To verify property (3) in Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence} observe that,
\begin{align*}
\frac{\pi(\lambda|\mathbf X_n)}{q_n(\lambda)} &= \frac{\sqrt{\frac{n+1}{2\pi \sigma^2}} e^{ -\frac{(n+1)} {2\sigma^2} \left( \mu - \frac{ \mu_0 + \sum_{i=1}^{n}X_i }{n+1} \right)^2 } }{\frac{1}{s_n}\left( e^{\frac{\mu-m_n}{2s_n}} + e^{-\frac{\mu-m_n}{2s_n}} \right)^{-2}} = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\a^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}}} e^{ -\left(\frac{\tilde \mu_n} {s_n} \right)^2 } \left( e^{ \left(\frac{\tilde \mu_n} {2s_n} \right) } + e^{ -\left(\frac{\tilde \mu_n} {2s_n} \right) } \right) \leq \frac{1}{\sqrt{\a^{\frac{1}{\a-1}}}} 2e^{1/16},
\end{align*}
where the last inequality follows due to the fact that $ e^{-x^2}\left( e^{x/2} + e^{-x/2} \right) < 2e^{1/16}$.
\end{example}
\vspace{1em}
\begin{example}
Finally, consider a univariate exponential likelihood model with the unknown rate parameter $\lambda$. For some prior distribution $\pi(\lambda)$, the posterior distribution is
\[\pi(\lambda|\mathbf X_n) = \frac{\pi(\lambda) \lambda^n e^{-\lambda \sum_{i=1}^n X_i }}{\int \pi(\lambda) \lambda^n e^{-\lambda \sum_{i=1}^n X_i } d\lambda} . \] Choose $\mathcal{Q}$ to be the set of Gamma distributions. Consider a sequence $\{q_n(\mu)\}$ in the variational family with the shape and the rate parameter $k_n$ and $\beta_n$ respectively, that is
\[q_n(\lambda) = \frac{\beta_n^{k_n}}{\Gamma(k_n)} \lambda^{k_n-1}e^{-\lambda \beta_n}, \]
where $\Gamma(\cdot)$ is the $\Gamma-$ function. To satisfy properties (1) and (2) in Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence}, we can choose $k_n= n+1$ and $\beta_n= \sum_{i=1}^{n}X_i$. To verify property (3) in Assumption~\ref{def:gsequence} consider the ratio,
\begin{align*}
\frac{\pi(\lambda|\mathbf X_n)}{q_n(\lambda)} = \frac{\pi(\lambda) \lambda^n e^{-\lambda \sum_{i=1}^n X_i } }{ \frac{\beta_n^{k_n}}{\Gamma(k_n)} \lambda^{k_n-1}e^{-\lambda \beta_n} \int \pi(\lambda) \lambda^n e^{-\lambda \sum_{i=1}^n X_i } d\lambda } = \frac{\pi(\lambda)\Gamma(n+1) }{\left( \sum_{i=1}^n X_i \right)^{n+1}\int \pi(\lambda) \lambda^n e^{-\lambda \sum_{i=1}^n X_i } d\lambda }.
\end{align*}
Now, observe that $ \frac{ \left( \sum_{i=1}^n X_i \right)^{n+1} }{ \Gamma(n+1)} \lambda^n e^{-\lambda \sum_{i=1}^n X_i } $ is the density of Gamma distribution with the mean $\frac{n+1}{\sum_{i=1}^n X_i}$ and the variance $\frac{1}{n+1}\left( \frac{n+1}{\sum_{i=1}^n X_i} \right)^2$. Since, we assumed in Assumption~\ref{assume:prior}(2) that $\pi(\lambda)$ is bounded from above by $M_p$, therefore for large $n$,
\(\frac{ \left( \sum_{i=1}^n X_i \right)^{n+1} }{ \Gamma(n+1)} \int \pi(\lambda) \lambda^n e^{-\lambda \sum_{i=1}^n X_i } d\lambda \sim \pi\left( \frac{n+1}{\sum_{i=1}^n X_i} \right) \). Hence, it follows that for large enough $n$
\[\frac{\pi(\lambda|\mathbf X_n)}{q_n(\lambda)} \leq \frac{M_p}{\pi(\lambda_0)},\]
where $\frac{\sum_{i=1}^n X_i}{n+1} \to \frac{1}{\lambda_0}$ as $n \to \infty$.
\end{example}
\section*{Acknowledgement}
This research is supported by the National Science Foundation (NSF) through awards DMS/1812197 and IIS/1816499, and the Purdue Research Foundation (PRF).
\input{appendix.tex}
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section{Introduction}
Quantum information theory is a new field that allow us to exploit
new possibilities while at the same time imposing fundamental
limitations.
We consider the capacity of
classical quantum channels (AVQCs).
The capacity
of classical quantum channels has been determined in
\cite{Ho}, \cite{Sch/Ni},
and \cite{Sch/Wes}.
An arbitrarily varying channel (AVC) describes
communication
including a jammer who tries to disturb the legal parties'
communication by changing his input in every channel use.
This model completely captures all possible jamming attacks
depending on the knowledge of the jammer.
The arbitrarily varying channel was introduced
in \cite{Bl/Br/Th2}. In the model of message transmission over arbitrarily varying
channels
it is understood that the sender and the receiver have to select
their coding scheme first.
In the conventional model
it is assumed that this coding scheme is known by the
jammer, and he may choose the most advantaged jamming attacking strategy
depending on his knowledge,
but the jammer has neither knowledge about the transmitted codeword
nor knowledge about the message.
To share resources is a well-studied assistance for the transmitters.
For example, in wireless communication, the communication
service may send some signals via satellite to its users.
In 1978 Ahlswede demonstrated in \cite{Ahl1} the importance of
the resources (of shared randomness) in a very clear form by
showing the surprising result
that either the deterministic capacity of an
arbitrarily varying channel is zero or it is equal to its randomness assisted
capacity (Ahlswede dichotomy). After
this discovery, it has remained an open question as to exactly
when the deterministic capacity is nonzero. In 1985
a necessary
condition for this has been delivered in \cite{Rei}, and in 1988
\cite{Cs/Na} proved that this condition is also sufficient.
In \cite{Bo/Ca/De3} it has been shown that the resource must be only known by
the legal channel users, since otherwise it will be completely useless.
In \cite{Bo/No} a classification of various resources is given. A distinction is made between two extremal cases:
randomness and correlation. Randomness is the strongest resource, it
requires a perfect copy of the
outcome of a random experiment, and thus we should assume
an additional perfect channel to generate this kind of resources.
On the other hand, correlation is the weakest resource.
The work \cite{Bo/No} showed
that common randomness is a stronger resource than correlation in the following sense:
a sufficiently large amount of common randomness allows the sender and receiver to
asymptotically simulate the statistics of any correlation. On the contrary,
an example is given when not even a finite amount of common
randomness can be extracted from a given correlation without further communication.
In all the above-mentioned works
it is assumed that the jammer knows the coding scheme,
but has no side information about the codeword which the legal transmitters send.
In many applications,
especially for secure communications, it is too optimistic
to assume this.
In \cite{Bo/Ca/Ca} it has been show that the jammer can
benefice from his knowledge about the sending codeword,
i.e, he may have a better jamming strategy.
Thus in our
previous paper \cite{Bo/Ca/Ca} we
considered the scenario
when the jammer knows both the coding scheme and the input
codeword.
This work is a extension of our
previous paper
\cite{Bo/Ca/Ca}, where we
determined the randomness assisted capacity of
AVCQCs with
a jammer
knowing the channel input.
However, as \cite{Bo/No} showed, common randomness is a very ``costly'' resource.
A
promising result of this work is that
the much
``cheaper'' resource, the
correlation, is also an equally powerful
resource.
Furthermore, a correlation
$(V',V)$ does not have to be ``very good'' to be helpful in achieving a positive
secrecy capacity, since $(V',V)$ is a helpful resource even if
$I(V',V)$ is only slightly larger than
zero.
We also show that the same
capacity can been archived using
a smaller amount (as compared to the number
of channel uses) of correlation.
As an application of our results, we turn to the
question: How much common randomness an
AVCQC with
an informed jammer can
generate using correlation as resource.
Capacities of common randomness generation
over classical perfect channels and
over classical noisy channels have been
determined in \cite{Ahl/Cs}.
In this work, we deliver the
common randomness generation capacity
with informed jammer using correlation as resource.
We also analyze
the case when only a smaller amount (as compared to the number
of channel uses) of correlation is used.
In \cite{Bo/Sch/Ba/Po} the concept of a Turing machine
has been analyzed. The authors have
considered secret key capacities and secure authentication
capacities over several classical channel network models and have
determined whether they are computable, i.e.,
if they can be algorithmically solve
with the help of Turing machines.
As an application of our results, we
extend the objectives of \cite{Bo/Sch/Ba/Po}
to some capacity formulas of quantum networks
and determine whether they are Turing computable.
\vspace{0.3cm}
\section{Definitions and Communication Models}
\subsection{Basic Notations}
Throughout the paper random variables will be denoted by capital
letters e. g., $S,X,Y,$ and their realizations (or values) and
domains (or alphabets) will be denoted by corresponding lower case letters e. g.,
$s,x,y,$ and script letters e.g., ${\cal S},{\cal X},{\cal Y}$, respectively. Random
sequences will be denoted a by capital bold-face letters, whose lengths are understood by the context, e. g.,
${\bf S}=(S_1, S_2, \ldots, S_n)$ and ${\bf X}=(X_1,X_2, \ldots, X_n)$, and deterministic sequences
are written as lower case bold-face letters e. g., ${\bf s}=(s_1,s_2, \ldots, s_n), {\bf x}=(x_1, x_2, \ldots, x_n)$.
$P_X$ is the distribution of random variable $X$. Joint distributions and conditional distributions of random variables $X$ and
$S$ will be written as $P_{SX}$, etc. and $P_{S|X}$ etc., respectively and $P_{XS}^n$ and $P_{S|X}^n$ are their product distributions i. e.,
$P_{XS}^n({\bf x},{\bf s}):= \prod_{t=1}^nP_{XS}(x_t,s_t)$, and
$P_{S|X}^n({\bf s}|{\bf x}):=\prod_{t=1}^nP_{S|X}(s_t|x_t)$.
Moreover, ${\cal T}^n_X, {\cal T}^n_{XS}$ and ${\cal T}^n_{S|X}({\bf x})$ are sets
of (strongly) typical sequences of the type $P_X$, joint type $P_{XS}$ and conditional type $P_{S|X}$, respectively.
The cardinality of a set ${\cal X}$ will be denoted by $|{\cal X}|$. For a positive integer $L$, $[L]:=\{1,2, \ldots, L\}$.
``$Q$ is a classical channel, or a conditional probability distribution, from set ${\cal X}$ to set ${\cal Y}$'' is abbreviated to
``$Q:{\cal X} \rightarrow {\cal Y}$''. ``Random variables $X, Y$ and $Z$ form a Markov chain" is abbreviated to
``$X \leftrightarrow Y \leftrightarrow Z$''. $\mathbb{E}$ will stand for the operator of mathematical expectation.
Throughout the paper dimensions of all Hilbert spaces are finite.
For a finite-dimensional
complex Hilbert space ${\cal H}$, we denote
the (convex) set
of density operators on ${\cal H}$ by
\[\mathcal{S}({\cal H}):= \{\rho \in \mathcal{L}({\cal H}) :\rho \text{ is Hermitian, } \rho \geq 0_{{\cal H}} \text{ , } \mathrm{tr}(\rho) = 1 \}\text{ ,}\]
where $\mathcal{L}({\cal H})$ is the set of linear operators on ${\cal H}$, and $0_{{\cal H}}$ is the null
matrix on ${\cal H}$. Note that any operator in $\mathcal{S}({\cal H})$ is bounded. \vspace{0.3cm}
Throughout the paper the logarithm base is 2. For
a discrete random variable $X$ on a finite set ${\cal X}$ and a discrete
random variable $Y$ on a finite set ${\cal Y}$, we denote the Shannon entropy
of $X$ by
$H(X)=-\sum_{x \in \mathcal{X}}P_X(x)\log P_X(x)$ and the mutual information between $X$
and $Y$ by
$I(X;Y) = \sum_{x \in \mathcal{X}}\sum_{y \in \mathcal{Y}} P_{X,Y}(x,y) \log{ \left(\frac{P_{X,Y}(x,y)}{P_X(x)P_Y(y)} \right) }$.
Here $P_{X,Y}$ is the joint probability distribution function of $X$ and $Y$, and
$P_X$ and $P_Y$ are the marginal probability distribution functions of $X$ and $Y$ respectively.
Let $\mathfrak{P}$ and $\mathfrak{Q}$ be quantum systems. We
denote the Hilbert space of $\mathfrak{P}$ and $\mathfrak{Q}$ by
$G^\mathfrak{P}$ and $G^\mathfrak{Q}$, respectively. Let $\phi^\mathfrak{PQ}$ be a bipartite
quantum state in $\mathcal{S}(G^\mathfrak{PQ})$.
We present the partial
trace over $G^\mathfrak{P}$ by
\[\mathrm{tr}_{\mathfrak{P}}(\phi^\mathfrak{PQ}):=
\sum_{l} \langle l|_{\mathfrak{P}} \phi^\mathfrak{PQ} | l \rangle_{\mathfrak{P}}\text{ ,}\]
where $\{ | l \rangle_{\mathfrak{P}}: l\}$ is an orthonormal basis
of $G^\mathfrak{P}$.
We present the conditional entropy by
\[S(\mathfrak{P}\mid\mathfrak{Q}):=
S(\phi^\mathfrak{PQ})-S(\phi^\mathfrak{Q})\text{
.}\]
Here $\phi^\mathfrak{Q}=\mathrm{tr}_{\mathfrak{P}}(\phi^\mathfrak{PQ})$.
\vspace{0.2cm}
If the sender wants to transmit a classical message set to
the receiver using a quantum channel, his encoding procedure will
include a classical-to-quantum encoder
to prepare a quantum state $\rho \in
\mathcal{S}({\cal H})$ suitable as an input for the channel.
In view of this, we have the following
definition.\vspace{0.3cm}
\begin{definition}
Let ${\cal H}$ be a finite-dimensional
complex Hilbert space.
A \bf classical-quantum channel \rm is
a mapping ${\cal W}: \mathcal{X}\rightarrow\mathcal{S}({\cal H})$,
specified by a set of quantum states $\{\rho(x), x \in {\cal X}\}$ $\subset\mathcal{S}({\cal H})$,
indexed by ``input letters" $x$ in a finite set ${\cal X}$. ${\cal X}$ and ${\cal H}$
are called input alphabet and output space respectively.
We define the $n$-th extension of
classical-quantum channel ${\cal W}$ as follows.
The channel outputs a quantum state
$\rho^{\otimes n}({\bf x}):=\rho(x_1) \otimes \rho(x_2) \otimes \ldots, \otimes \rho(x_n)$,
in the $n$th tensor power ${\cal H}^{\otimes n}$ of the output space ${\cal H}$, when an
input codeword ${\bf x}=(x_1,x_2, \ldots, x_n) \in {\cal X}^n$ of length $n$ is input into the channel.
\end{definition}
\vspace{0.3cm}
Let
${\cal W}$: $\mathcal{X} \rightarrow
\mathcal{S}({\cal H})$ be a classical-quantum
channel. For $P\in P(\mathcal{X})$,
the conditional entropy of the channel for ${\cal W}$ with input distribution $P$
is presented by
\[S({\cal W}|P) := \sum_{x\in {\cal X}} P(x)S({\cal W}(x))\text{
.}\]
Let $\Phi := \{\rho_x : x\in \mathcal{X}\}$
be a classical-quantum
channel, i.e., a
set of quantum states
labeled by elements of $\mathcal{X}$. For a probability distribution $Q$
on $\mathcal{X}$, the Holevo $\chi$ quantity is defined as
\[\chi(Q;\Phi):= S\left(\sum_{x\in \mathbf{A}} Q(x)\rho_x\right)-
\sum_{x\in \mathbf{A}} Q(x)S\left(\rho_x\right)\text{ .}\]
For a probability distribution $P$ on a finite set $\mathcal{X}$ and a positive constant $\delta$,
we present the set of typical sequences by
\[\mathcal{T}^n_{P,\delta} :=\left\{ \mathbf{x} \in \mathcal{X}^n: \left\vert \frac{1}{n} N(x'\mid \mathbf{x})
- P(x') \right\vert \leq \frac{\delta}{|\mathcal{X}|}\forall x'\in \mathcal{X}\right\}\text{ ,}\]
where $N(x'\mid \mathbf{X})$ is the number of occurrences of the symbol $x'$ in the sequence $\mathbf{X}$.\vspace{0.2cm}
Let
${\cal H}$ be a finite-dimensional
complex Hilbert space.
Let $n \in \mathbb{N}$ and $\alpha > 0$.
We suppose $\rho \in \mathcal{S}({\cal H})$ has
the spectral decomposition
$\rho = \sum_{x} P(x) |x\rangle\langle x|$,
its
$\alpha$-typical subspace is the subspace spanned
by $\left\{|\mathbf{x}\rangle, \mathbf{x} \in {\mathcal{T}}^n_{P, \alpha}\right\}$,
where $|\mathbf{x}\rangle:=\otimes_{i=1}^n|x_i\rangle$. The orthogonal subspace projector which projects onto this
typical subspace is
\[ \Pi_{\rho ,\alpha}=\sum_{\mathbf{x} \in {\mathcal{T}}^n_{P, \alpha}}|\mathbf{x}\rangle\langle \mathbf{x}|\text{ .}\]
Similarly, let $\mathcal{X}$ be a finite set, and $G$ be a finite-dimensional
complex Hilbert space.
Let
${\cal W}$: $\mathcal{X} \rightarrow
\mathcal{S}({\cal H})$ be a classical-quantum
channel. For $x\in\mathcal{X}$, suppose
${\cal W}(x)$ has
the spectral decomposition ${\cal W}(x)$
$ =$ $\sum_{j}
V(j|x) |j\rangle\langle j|$
for a stochastic matrix
$V(\cdot|\cdot)$.
The $\alpha$-conditional typical
subspace of ${\cal W}$ for a typical sequence $\mathbf{X}$ is the
subspace spanned by
$\left\{\bigotimes_{x\in\mathcal{X}}|j^{\mathtt{I}_x}\rangle, j^{\mathtt{I}_x} \in \mathcal{T}^{\mathtt{I}_x}_{V(\cdot|x),\delta}\right\}$.
Here $\mathtt{I}_x$ $:=$ $\{i\in\{1,\cdots,n\}: x_i = x\}$ is an indicator set that selects the indices $i$ in the sequence $\mathbf{x}$
$=$ $(x_1,\cdots,x_n)$ for which the $i$-th
symbol $x_i$ is equal to $x\in\mathcal{X}$.
The subspace is often referred to as the $\alpha$-conditional typical
subspace of the state ${\cal W}^{\otimes n}(\mathbf{x})$.
The orthogonal subspace projector which projects onto it is defined as
\[\Pi_{{\cal W}, \alpha}(\mathbf{x})=\bigotimes_{x\in\mathcal{X}}
\sum_{j^{\mathtt{I}_x} \in {\cal
T}^{\mathtt{I}_x}_{{\cal W}(\cdot \mid \mathbf{x}),\alpha}}|j^{\mathtt{I}_x} \rangle\langle j^{\mathtt{I}_x}|\text{ .}
\]
The typical subspace
has the following properties:
For $\sigma \in \mathcal{S}({\cal H}^{\otimes n})$ and $\alpha > 0$
there are positive constants $\beta(\alpha)$, $\gamma(\alpha)$,
and $\delta(\alpha)$, depending on $\alpha$ and tending to zero
when $\alpha\rightarrow 0$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{te1}
\mathrm{tr}\left({\sigma} \Pi_{\sigma ,\alpha}\right) > 1-2^{-n\beta(\alpha)}
\text{ ,}\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{te2}
2^{n(S(\sigma)-\delta(\alpha))}\le \mathrm{tr} \left(\Pi_{\sigma ,\alpha}\right)
\le 2^{n(S(\sigma)+\delta(\alpha))}
\text{ ,}\end{equation}
\begin{equation} \label{te3}
2^{-n(S(\sigma)+\gamma(\alpha))} \Pi_{\sigma ,\alpha} \le \Pi_{\sigma ,\alpha}
{\sigma} \Pi_{\sigma ,\alpha}
\le 2^{-n(S(\sigma)-\gamma(\alpha))} \Pi_{\sigma ,\alpha}
\text{ .}\end{equation}
For
$\mathbf{x} \in {\mathcal{T}}^n_{P, \alpha}$
there are positive constants $\beta(\alpha)'$, $\gamma(\alpha)'$,
and $\delta(\alpha)'$, depending on $\alpha$ and tending to zero
when $\alpha\rightarrow 0$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{te4}
\mathrm{tr}\left({\cal W}^{\otimes n}(\mathbf{x}) \Pi_{{\cal W}, \alpha}(\mathbf{x})\right)
> 1-2^{-n\beta(\alpha)'}
\text{ ,}\end{equation}
\begin{align} \label{te5}
&2^{-n(S(W|P)+\gamma(\alpha)')} \Pi_{W, \alpha}(\mathbf{x})
\le \Pi_{W, \alpha}(\mathbf{x})W^{\otimes n}(\mathbf{x}) \Pi_{W, \alpha}(\mathbf{x})\notag\\
&\le 2^{-n(S(W|P)-\gamma(\alpha)')} \Pi_{W, \alpha}(\mathbf{x})
\text{ ,}\end{align}
\begin{equation} \label{te6}
2^{n(S(W|P)-\delta(\alpha)')}\le \mathrm{tr}\left(
\Pi_{W, \alpha}(\mathbf{x}) \right)\le 2^{n(S(W|P)+\delta(\alpha)')}
\text{ .}\end{equation}
For the classical-quantum channel
$W: \mathcal{X} \rightarrow \mathcal{S}({\cal H})$ and a probability
distribution $P$ on $\mathcal{X}$ we define
a quantum state $PW$ $:=$ $\sum_x P(x)W(x)$ on $\mathcal{S}({\cal H})$.
For $\alpha > 0$ we define an
orthogonal subspace projector $\Pi_{PW, \alpha}$
fulfilling (\ref{te1}), (\ref{te2}), and (\ref{te3}).
Let $\mathbf{x}\in{\mathcal{T}}^n_{P, \alpha}$.
For $\Pi_{PW, \alpha}$ there is a positive constant $\beta(\alpha)''$ such that
following inequality holds:
\begin{equation} \label{te7} \mathrm{tr} \left( \rho^{\otimes n}(\mathbf{x}) \cdot \Pi_{PW, \alpha } \right)
\geq 1-2^{-n\beta(\alpha)''} \text{ .}\end{equation}\vspace{0.3cm}
(\ref{te1}) holds because
$\mathrm{tr}\left({\sigma} \Pi_{\sigma ,\alpha}\right)$
$=$ $\mathrm{tr}\left(\Pi_{\sigma ,\alpha}{\sigma} \Pi_{\sigma ,\alpha}\right) $
$=$ $P^n({\mathcal{T}}^n_{P, \alpha})$.
(\ref{te2}) holds because
$\mathrm{tr} \left(\Pi_{\sigma ,\alpha}\right)$ $=$
$\left\vert {\mathcal{T}}^n_{P, \alpha} \right\vert$.
(\ref{te3}) holds because
$2^{-n(S(\sigma)+\gamma(\alpha))}$ $\le$
$P^n(\mathbf{x})$ $\le$ $2^{-n(S(\sigma)-\gamma(\alpha))}$
for $x\in {\mathcal{T}}^n_{P, \alpha}$ and a positive $\gamma(\alpha)$.
(\ref{te4}), (\ref{te5}), and (\ref{te6})
can be obtained in a similar way.
(\ref{te7}) follows from the permutation-invariance of $\Pi_{PW, \alpha}$.\rm
\begin{flushright}$\square$\end{flushright}\vspace{0.3cm}
\subsection{Code Concepts and Resources}
\begin{figure}[H]\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{KICpic0nocorr.jpg}
\caption{Conventional model: AVCQC when the jammer has no
further knowledge about the channel input and the legal channel users
have no access to any resource: In this scenario
the jammer's inputs do not depend on $x^n$}
\end{center}\end{figure}
\begin{definition}
A arbitrarily varying classical-quantum channel (AVCQC) ${\cal W}$ is specified by a
set $\{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\}$ of classical quantum channels with a common input alphabet ${\cal X}$ and output space ${\cal H}$,
which are indexed by elements $s$ in a finite set ${\cal S}$. Elements $s \in {\cal S}$ usually are called the states of the channel.
${\cal W}$ outputs a quantum state
\begin{equation} \label{eq_f1a}
\rho^{\otimes n}({\bf x}, {\bf s}):=\rho(x_1, s_1) \otimes \rho(x_2, s_2) \otimes \ldots, \otimes \rho(x_n, s_n),
\end{equation}
if an input codeword ${\bf x}=(x_1,x_2, \ldots, x_n)$ is input into the channel,
and the channel is governed by a state sequence ${\bf s}=(s_1, s_2, \ldots, s_n)$,
while the
state varies from symbol to symbol in an arbitrary
manner.
\end{definition}
We assume that
the channel state $s$ is in control of
the jammer.
Without loss of generality we also assume
that the jammer always chooses the most advantageous attacking strategy
according to
his knowledge. This is important for the applications
of our result to other channel models,
e.g. compound channels\vspace{0.2cm}
\begin{definition}\label{lmambfslxybdet}
An
$(n, J_n)$ code $\mathcal{C}$
consists of a encoder $u^n:
\{ 1,\cdots ,J_n\} \rightarrow {{\cal X}}^n$, and
a set of collections of positive-semidefinite operators $\{D_j^n:
j = 1,\cdots ,J_n\}$ on ${\cal H}^{\otimes n}$ which fulfills $\sum_{j=1}^{J_n} D_j^n =
\mathrm{id}_{{\cal H}^{\otimes n}}$.
\end{definition}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\begin{definition}
A non-negative number $R$ is an achievable
rate for a classical-quantum channel
${\rho}(x)$ if for every $\epsilon>0$, $\delta>0$,
and sufficiently large $n$ there exists an $(n, J_n)$
code $\mathcal{C} = \bigl(u^n, \{D_j : j = 1,\cdots J_n\}\bigr)$ such that $\frac{\log
J_n}{n}
> R-\delta$, and
\[1- \frac{1}{J_n} \sum_{j=1}^{J_n}
\mathrm{tr}\left({\rho}^{\otimes n}(u^n)D_j\right) < \epsilon\text{ .}\]
The supremum on achievable deterministic
rates of ${\rho}(x)$ is called the
capacity of ${\rho}(x)$, denoted by
$C( {\rho})$.
\end{definition}
\begin{figure}[H]\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{KICpic0corr.jpg}
\caption{AVCQC with randomness
as coordination resource when the jammer has no
further knowledge about the channel input}
\end{center}\end{figure}
In the context of arbitrarily varying channels, randomness can be an
important resource for reliable communication over an arbitrarily varying channel.
Ahlswede showed in \cite{Ahl1} (cf. also \cite{Ahl2} and \cite{Ahl3}), the surprising result
that either the deterministic capacity of an
arbitrarily varying channel is zero, or it equals its randomness assisted
capacity (Ahlswede Dichotomy).
\cite{Bo/Ca/De} shows there are indeed arbitrarily varying classical-quantum
channels which have zero deterministic capacity and positive random capacity.
Therefore randomness is indeed a very helpful resource
for message transmission (and secure message transmission) through an arbitrarily varying classical-quantum
channel.
Having resource is particularly essential for the scenario we consider
in this work (see the discussion below).
\begin{figure}[H]\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{KICpic1j.jpg}
\caption{AVCQC when the jammer knows the code word having randomness
as coordination resource: The sender and the receiver
share the outcome of a random experiment, i.e., they share common randomness }
\end{center}\end{figure}
Most of the previous works in AVCQCs
consider the case when the jammer knows the coding scheme,
but has no side information about the codeword of the transmitters.
However for secure communications this assumption may be
too optimistic, since \cite{Bo/Ca/Ca} shows that the jammer really can
archive a better jamming strategy when he knows the codeword. Thus
we concentrate on
message transmission over classical quantum
channels with a jammer with additional side information about the codeword.
We assume
that the jammer chooses the most advantageous attacking strategy
according to
his side information.
\vspace{0.3cm}
\begin{definition}
Let $\{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\}$ be an AVCQC.
A non-negative number $R$ is an achievable deterministic rate
with informed jammer under the average error criterion
for $\{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\}$ if for every
$\epsilon>0$, $\delta>0$, and every sufficiently large $n$ there
exists a code
$\mathcal{C} =
\biggl\{u^n,\{D_j^n: j\in\{
1,\cdots ,J_n\}\}\biggr\}$ such that $\frac{\log J_n}{n}
> R-\delta$, and
\[\max_{ {\bf s}^n (\cdot)} P_e(\mathcal{C}, {\bf s}^n(\cdot)) < \epsilon\text{ ,}\]
where $P_e(\mathcal{C}, {\bf s}^n)$ is defined as
\[ P_e(\mathcal{C},{\bf s}^n(\cdot)) := 1- \frac{1}{J_n} \sum_{j=1}^{J_n}
\mathrm{tr}(\rho(u^n(j), {\bf s}^n(u^n(j)))D_j^n)\text{ .}\]
Here the maximum $\max_{ {\bf s}^n (\cdot) }$ is taken over all
functions ${\cal X}^n \rightarrow {\cal S}^n$.
The supremum on achievable deterministic
rates of
$\{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\}$ with informed jammer under the average error criterion is called the
deterministic capacity of
$\{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\}$ with informed jammer, denoted by
$C( \{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\})$.
\end{definition}
\vspace{0.3cm}
Our scenario (when the jammer knows the input codeword)
is already a
challenging topic for classical arbitrarily varying channels.
This has been analyzed by Sarwate in \cite{Sar}, where
only random assisted capacity has been determined.
The deterministic capacity formula, i.e., without additional resource,
is even in the classical case an open problem.
It
has been shown by Ahlswede in \cite{Ahl0} that the classical capacity
under maximal error criterion in this scenario contains the
zero-error capacity of related discrete memoryless channels
as a special case. A deterministic capacity formula
for this is still unknown.
In particular, \cite{Bo/Ca/Ca} shows a violation of Ahlswede dichotomy in our scenario.
Coding for AVCQC is even much
harder.
Due to the non-commutativity of quantum operators,
many
techniques, concepts and methods of classical information theory,
for instance, non-standard decoder and list decoding
(which has been used in \cite{Sar}'s proof),
may not be extended to quantum information theory.
In
\cite{Bo/Ca/Ca} we determined
the random assisted
capacities of AVCQCs when the jammer
has access to the channel input.
\vspace{0.3cm}
\begin{definition}
A random assisted code $\Gamma$ for an AVCQC ${\cal W}$ is a uniformly distributed
random variable taking values in a set of codes
$\{({{\cal V}'}(k), \{{\cal D}(j,k), j \in {\cal J}\}), k \in {\cal K}\}$ with a common
message set ${\cal J}$, where ${{\cal V}'}(k)=\{{\bf u}(j,k), j \in {\cal J}\}$ and $\{{\cal D}(j,k), j \in {\cal J}\}$
are the code book and decoding measurement of the $k$th code in the set respectively. $|{\cal K}|$ is here a
function of $n$, the length of the codes in this set, i.e., for a fixed $n$,
$|{\cal K}|$ is finite. \label{arccg}
\end{definition}\vspace{0.3cm}
\begin{definition}
By assuming that the random message $J$ is uniformly distributed, we define the average probability of error by
\begin{align}
&p_a(\Gamma)=\max_{{\bf s}}\mathbb{E}tr[\rho^{\otimes n}({\bf u}(J,K), {\bf s} ({\bf u}(J,K)))(\mathbb{I}_{\cal H}-{\cal D}(J,K))] \nonumber \\
&=\max_{{\bf s}}\frac{1}{|{\cal J}|} \sum_{j \in {\cal J}} \sum_{k \in {\cal K}} Pr\{K=k\}tr[\rho^{\otimes n}({\bf u}(j,k), {\bf s} ({\bf u}(j,k)))(\mathbb{I}_{\cal H}-{\cal D}(j,k))].
\end{align}
This can be also rewritten as
\begin{align}\label{eq_f2a} &
p_a(\Gamma)=\sum_{{\bf x}} Pr\{{\bf u}(J,K)={\bf x}\} \max_{{\bf s} \in {\cal S}^n}\mathbb{E}\{tr[\rho^{\otimes n}({\bf u}(J,K), {\bf s})(\mathbb{I}_{\cal H}-{\cal D}(J,K))]|{\bf u}(J,K)={\bf x}\}.
\end{align}
A non-negative number $R$ is an achievable \bf rate \rm for the
arbitrarily varying classical-quantum channel
${\cal W}$ \bf under random assisted coding with informed jammer
using the average error criterion \rm
if for every
$\delta>0$ and $\epsilon>0$ and every sufficiently large $n$, there is a
random assisted code
$\Gamma$ of length
$n$ such that
$\frac{\log |{\cal J}|}{n} > R-\delta$ and
$p_a(\Gamma) < \epsilon$.
The
supremum on achievable rate under random assisted coding of ${\cal W}$ with informed jammer
using the average
error criterion is called the
random assisted capacity of
${\cal W}$ with informed jammer
using the average error criterion, denoted by
$C^{*}({\cal W})$.
\end{definition}\vspace{0.3cm}
\begin{figure}[H]\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.75\textwidth]{KICpic1corr.jpg}
\caption{AVCQC when the jammer knows the coding scheme having merely correlation
as resource}
\end{center}\end{figure}
A correlated source is a
discrete memoryless source (DMS) $(({V'}^n,V^n))_n$, observed by the sender and
receiver, modeled by $n$ independent copies of a random variable
$(V',V)$ with values in some finite set ${\cal V}' \times {\cal V}$. The sender
accesses to the random variable $V'$, and the receiver to $V$. We call
$\Bigl(({V'}^n,V^n)\Bigr)_n$ a correlated source, or
a correlation. Since $\Bigl(({V'}^n,V^n)\Bigr)_n$ is memoryless
we also say $(V', V)$ instead of $\Bigl(({V'}^n,V^n)\Bigr)_n$.
Without loss of generality we assume that $(V', V)$
is binary (since one can easily reduce a non-binary $(\bar{V'},\bar{V})$ with $I(\bar{V'},\bar{V})>0$
to some
$(V',V)$ with $I(V',V)>0$). The only exception is Section \ref{lications}, where $(V', V)$
may be not binary.
It has been shown in \cite{Ahl/Cai} that this is a helpful resource for information transmission through an arbitrarily varying classical channel:
The use of mere correlation does already allow one to transmit messages at any rate that is achievable using the optimal form of shared randomness.
The capacity of an arbitrarily varying quantum channel assisted by correlated shared randomness as resource has been discussed in \cite{Bo/No},
where equivalent results were found.
Our previous work
\cite{Bo/Ca/Ca} has determined the
random correlated capacity with informed jammer,
where we used randomness as a resource.
However, as \cite{Bo/No} showed, common randomness is a very ``costly'' resource,
we have to require that the sender and the receiver each obtains a perfect copy
of a random experiment's output.
Thus we consider in this work the correlation as resource, which is a much ``cheaper''
resource in the sense that
we can simulate any $(V',V)$
correlation by common randomness asymptotically, but there exists a class of
sequences of bipartite distributions which cannot model common randomness (cf. \cite{Bo/No}).
\vspace{0.3cm}
Now we consider the correlation assisted code.
\begin{definition}\label{lmambfslxyb}
We assume that the transmitters have access to
an arbitrary correlated source
$(V', V)$ with alphabets $( {\cal V}', {\cal V})$.
A $(V', V)$-correlation assisted
$(n, J_n)$ code $\mathcal{C}(V', V)$ for the
arbitrarily varying classical-quantum channel $\{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\}$
consists of a set of encoders $\left\{u_{{v'}^n}:
\{ 1,\cdots ,J_n\} \rightarrow {{\cal X}}^n:
{v'}^n\in{{\cal V}'}^n\right\}$, and
a set of collections of positive-semidefinite operators $\Bigl\{\{D_j^{(v^n)}:
j = 1,\cdots ,J_n\}:v^n\in{\cal V}^n\Bigr\}
$ on ${\cal H}^{\otimes n}$ which fulfills $\sum_{j=1}^{J_n} D_j^{(v^n)} =
\mathrm{id}_{{\cal H}^{\otimes
n}}$ for every ${v}^n\in{\cal V}^n$.\end{definition}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\begin{definition}
Let $(V', V)$ with alphabets $( {\cal V}', {\cal V})$, be an arbitrary correlated source.
A non-negative number $R$ is an achievable $(V', V)$-correlation assisted rate
with informed jammer under the average error criterion
for the AVCQC $\{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\}$ if for every
$\epsilon>0$, $\delta>0$, and sufficiently large $n$ there
exists a $(V', V)$-correlation assisted $(n, J_n)$ code
$\mathcal{C}(V', V) =
\biggl\{\Bigl(u_{{v'}^n},\{D_j^{({v}^n)}: j\in\{
1,\cdots ,J_n\}\}\Bigr): {v'}^n\in{{\cal V}'}^n,\text{ }
v^n\in{\cal V}^n\biggr\}$ such that $\frac{\log J_n}{n}
> R-\delta$, and
\[\max_{ {\bf s}^n (\cdot) } \sum_{{v'}^n\in{{\cal V}'}^n}\sum_{ v^n\in{\cal V}^n}
p({v'}^n,v^n) P_e(\mathcal{C}({v'}^n,v^n), {\bf s}^n(\cdot)) < \epsilon\text{ ,}\]
where $P_e(\mathcal{C}({v'}^n,v^n), {\bf s}^n(\cdot))$ is defined as
\[ P_e(\mathcal{C}({v'}^n,v^n),{\bf s}^n(\cdot)) := 1- \frac{1}{J_n} \sum_{j=1}^{J_n}
\mathrm{tr}(\rho(u_{{v'}^n}(j), {\bf s}^n(u_{{v'}^n}(j)))D_j^{(v^n)})\text{ .}\]
For a given correlated source $(V', V)$,
the supremum on achievable $(V', V)$-correlation assisted
rates of
$\{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\}$ with informed jammer under the average error criterion is called the
$(V', V)$-correlation assisted capacity with informed jammer, denoted by
$C( \{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\};corr(V', V))$.
Notice that by definition, $C( \{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\};corr(V', V))$
is a function of $(V', V)$.
\end{definition}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\begin{definition}\label{lmambfslxybwithl}
Let $(V', V)$ with alphabets $( {\cal V}', {\cal V})$, be an arbitrary correlated source.
For a sequence of natural numbers $(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$
a $({V'}, V)$-correlation assisted
$(n, l_n, J_n)$ code $\mathcal{C}({V'}^{l_n}, V^{l_n})$ for the
arbitrarily varying classical-quantum channel $\{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\}$
consists of a set of encoders $\left\{u_{{v'}^{l_n}}:
\{ 1,\cdots ,J_n\} \rightarrow {{\cal X}}^n:
{v'}^{l_n}\in{{\cal V}'}^{l_n}\right\}$, and
a set of collections of positive-semidefinite operators $\Bigl\{\{D_j^{(v^{l_n})}:
j = 1,\cdots ,J_n\}:v^{l_n}\in{\cal V}^{l_n}\Bigr\}
$ on ${\cal H}^{\otimes n}$ which fulfills $\sum_{j=1}^{J_n} D_j^{(v^{l_n})} =
\mathrm{id}_{{\cal H}^{\otimes
n}}$ for every ${v}^{l_n}\in{\cal V}^{l_n}$.\end{definition}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\begin{definition}
Let $(V', V)$ with alphabets $( {\cal V}', {\cal V})$, be an arbitrary correlated source.
A non-negative number $R$ is an achievable $((V', V),(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}})$-correlation assisted rate
with informed jammer under the average error criterion
for the AVCQC $\{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\}$ if for every
$\epsilon>0$, $\delta>0$, and sufficiently large $n$ there
exists a $(V', V)$-correlation assisted $(n, l_n, J_n)$ code
$\mathcal{C}(V', V) =
\biggl\{\Bigl(u_{{v'}^{l_n}},\{D_j^{({v}^{l_n})}: j\in\{
1,\cdots ,J_n\}\}\Bigr): {v'}^{l_n}\in{{\cal V}'}^{l_n},\text{ }
v^{l_n}\in{\cal V}^{l_n}\biggr\}$ such that $\frac{\log J_n}{n}
> R-\delta$, and
\[\max_{ {\bf s}^n (\cdot) } \sum_{{v'}^{l_n}\in{{\cal V}'}^{l_n}}\sum_{ v^{l_n}\in{\cal V}^{l_n}}
p({v'}^{l_n},v^{l_n}) P_e(\mathcal{C}({v'}^{l_n},v^{l_n}), {\bf s}^n(\cdot)) < \epsilon\text{ ,}\]
where $P_e(\mathcal{C}({v'}^{l_n},v^{l_n}), {\bf s}^n(\cdot))$ is defined as
\[ P_e(\mathcal{C}({v'}^{l_n},v^{l_n}),{\bf s}^n(\cdot)) := 1- \frac{1}{J_n} \sum_{j=1}^{J_n}
\mathrm{tr}(\rho(u_{{v'}^{l_n}}(j), {\bf s}^n(u_{{v'}^{l_n}}(j)))D_j^{(v^{l_n})})\text{ .}\]
The supremum on achievable $((V', V),(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}})$-correlation assisted
rates of
$\{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\}$ with informed jammer under the average error criterion is called the
$((V', V),(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}})$-correlation assisted capacity with informed jammer, denoted by
$C( \{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\};corr(V', V),(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}})$.
\end{definition}
\vspace{0.3cm}
\section{Main Results and Proofs}\label{mrap}
\subsection{Quantum Version of
Kiefer and Wolfowitz's Results for Classical Channels}
\cite{Ahl/Cai} showed for classical AVCs
the equality
of correlation assisted capacity
and random assisted capacity (under
average error criterion)
for any correlated source $(V', V)$ (with $I(V', V)>0$)
when the jammer has no side information.
The idea of the proof
was at first to show the correlation assisted capacity
satisfies the positivity conditions of \cite{Cs/Na}.
Then
the channel uses can create a sufficient amount
common randomness using a negligible amount of bits.
For
this proof it is essential
that the the randomness is uniformly distributed.
However when the jammer has side information
about the channel input,
the results
of \cite{Cs/Na}
can not be applied
since there is no Ahlswede Dichotomy
(cf. \cite{Bo/Ca/Ca}).
For classical
AVCs with informed jammer, the equality
of correlation assisted capacity
and random assisted capacity can be proved in the following
way: At first we show that the classical correlation assisted capacity
for any correlated source $(V', V)$ satisfies the positivity condition of
\cite{KW62}, i.e., there is a hyperspace separating
the classical channel outputs
into two parts
in their vector space. Then similar to the
proof of \cite{Ahl/Cai}, the
channel uses can create
common randomness using a negligible amount of bits.
Kiefer and Wolfowitz showed
the in \cite{KW62} the positivity,
if their condition is fulfilled,
by constructing
a classical binary point to
point channel.
With this approach we can show that the
$(V', V)$-correlation assisted capacity of a
classical AVC ${\cal W}=\{\rho(x,s):x\in{\cal X}, s\in {\cal S}\}$ is equal to
\begin{equation}\max_P \min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
I(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot)), \label{mmiwip}\end{equation}
when $I(V', V)>0$. Here
$\bar{\bar{{\cal W}}}$
$:=\{\{\sum_s Q(s|x) \rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}: \forall Q: {\cal X} \rightarrow {\cal S}\}$.
In this paper we skip the proof of the coding theorem (\ref{mmiwip}) for analogous arbitrarily varying
classical channel and directly prove it for arbitrarily varying classical channel,
because the former is a special case contained by latter,
although we have a proof for the former.
One of the main difficulties is that
we can not apply the classical results of Kiefer and Wolfowitz for
correlations directly
on the set of quantum states since they do not form a real vector space.
Thus we have to find a new approach to
show a quantum version of
the classical
results of
\cite{KW62} by Lemma \ref{lemmaKW} below.
Furthermore we showed that the
the correlation assisted capacity an AVCQC
for any correlated source $(V', V)$ of satisfies this positivity condition
by Lemma \ref{theorema} below
(cf. also Remark \ref{awcplalaf} for an alternative proof).
The last step is creating a sufficient amount
common randomness using a negligible amount of bits
similar to the technique in \cite{Bj/Bo/Ja/No} and
\cite{Bo/Ca/De2}.
In our previous work \cite{Bo/Ca/Ca} we delivered
the random assisted capacity
when the jammer has side information about
the channel input.
For this proof only a negligible amount
of randomness was needed.
This together with our last step demonstrate
the equality
of correlation assisted capacity
and random assisted capacity
for AVCQCs.
We show the last step in Theorem \ref{lvvwatcv} below.
For
our proof it is essential
that the the randomness is uniformly distributed.
Let $(V', V)$ with alphabets $({\cal V}', {\cal V})$, be an arbitrary correlated source
and $\{\rho(x,s):x\in{\cal X}, s\in {\cal S}\}$ be an AVCQC with input alphabet ${\cal X}$ and output space ${\cal H}$.
For a mapping
$g: {\cal V}' \rightarrow {\cal X}$ and a conditional probability distribution $Q \in {\cal P}({\cal S}|{\cal X})$,
where ${\cal P}({\cal S}|{\cal X})$ is the set of conditional probability distributions from ${\cal X}$ to the state set ${\cal S}$ of ${\cal W}$. we define
\begin{equation}\nu (v|g,Q):= P_{V}(v) P_{V'|V}(g^{-1}(x)|v) \sum_s Q (s|x) \rho\left(x,s\right),\end{equation}
\begin{equation}\vec{\nu} (g,Q):=\left(\nu (v|g,Q)\right)_{v\in V},\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation} \label{eq_KW02}
{\cal A}(g):= \{\vec{\nu} (g,Q): Q\in{\cal P}({\cal S}|{\cal X})\}.
\end{equation}
For a given AVCQC ${\cal W}=\{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\}$ with set of state ${\cal S}$, let
\begin{equation} \label{eq_doublebar}
\bar{\bar{{\cal W}}}:=\{\{\bar{\bar{\rho}}_{Q}( x):=\sum_s Q(s|x) \rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}: \mbox{ for all $Q: {\cal X} \rightarrow {\cal S}$}\}.
\end{equation}\vspace{0.5cm}
\begin{lemma} \label{theorema}
If $I(V';V)>0$ and $\max_{\rho\in\bar{\bar{{\cal W}}}} C(\rho) >0$ then we can
find $g_0$ and $g_1$ $: {\cal V}' \rightarrow {\cal X}$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{eq_KW03}
{\cal A}(g_0) \cap {\cal A}(g_1) =\emptyset.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}\vspace{0.3cm}
{\it Proof:} Let $I(V';V)>0$, $\min_{\rho\in\bar{\bar{{\cal W}}}} C(\rho) >0$, ${\cal V}'={\cal V}=\{0,1\}$ and $|{\cal X}|=\alpha$. We label the input letters in
${\cal X}$ as $x(0),x(1), \ldots, x(\alpha-1)$. Our proof is based on constructions of two functions
$g_0: {{\cal V}'}^{\iota} \rightarrow {\cal X}$ and $g_1: {{\cal V}'}^{\iota} \rightarrow {\cal X}$
(for a properly defined $\iota$ in the next paragraph), satisfying (\ref{eq_KW03}) and
\begin{equation}\label{eq_a01}
P_{V'}^n(g_0^{-1}(x))=P_{V'}^n(g_1^{-1}(x)),
\end{equation}
for all $x \in {\cal X}$.
Notice that we will need property (\ref{eq_a01}) for the proof of Theorem \ref{lvvwatcv})
Let $\iota$ be the smallest integer $\kappa$ such that $\sum_{\tau =0}^{\kappa} \lfloor \frac{1}{2} {\kappa \choose \tau} \rfloor \ge \alpha$.
We shall construct $g_0$ and $g_1$ satisfying (\ref{eq_KW03}).
To this end we shall group the sequences in ${{\cal V}'}^{\iota}$. But, first we need to label them in following way.
$\bullet$ For $h=0,1, \ldots \iota$, divide the sequences in ${{\cal V}'}^{\iota}$ with Hamming weight $h$ to two parts with equal sizes
$\lfloor \frac{1}{2} {\iota \choose h} \rfloor$ and label them as $u^{\iota}(h,1a), u^{\iota}(h,2a), \ldots, u^{\iota}(h, \lfloor \frac{1}{2} {\iota \choose h} \rfloor_a)$
and $u^{\iota}(h,1b), u^{\iota}(h,2b), \ldots, u^{\iota}(h, \lfloor \frac{1}{2} {\iota \choose h} \rfloor_b)$ respectively.
When ${h \choose \tau}$ is odd, we denote the remaining sequence by $u^{\iota}(h^*)$.
$\bullet$ Order labels $(h,k)$, $h=0,1,2,\ldots, \iota, k=1,2,\ldots, \lfloor \frac{1}{2} {\iota \choose h} \rfloor$
by lexicographic order, as $m=1,2, \ldots, \sum_{\tau =0}^{\iota} \lfloor \frac{1}{2} {\iota \choose \tau} \rfloor$ and rewrite $u^{\iota}(h,k_a)$
and $u^{\iota}(h,k_b)$ to $u^{\iota}(m_a)$ and $u^{\iota}(m_b)$ respectively, if $(h,k)$ is the $m$th label in the order.
That is, for $u^{\iota}(m_a)=u^{\iota}(h,k_a)$ and $u^{\iota}(m'_a)=u^{\iota}(h',k'_a)$ ($u^{\iota}(m_b)=u^{\iota}(h,k_b)$ and $u^{\iota}(m'_b)=u^{\iota}(h',k'_b)$), $m < m'$ if and only if $h <h'$ or $h=h'$ and $k < k'$.
Next we assign values of $g_0$ and $g_1$ to the sequences in ${{\cal V}'}^{\iota}$ according to three groups:
{\bf The group 1:} For $m=1,2, \ldots, \alpha-1$, we let $g_0(u^{\iota}(m_a))=g_1(u^{\iota}(m_b))=x(0)$, $g_0(u^{\iota}(m_b))=x(m)$ and $g_1(u^{\iota}(m_a))=x(m)$,
respectively. Notice that, as $u^{\iota}(m_a)$ and $u^{\iota}(m_b)$ have the same Hamming weight for all $m$, for every $u^{\iota}\in{{\cal V}'}^{\iota}$ we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq_apr}
Pr\left( g_0( u^{\iota})= x(m)\right)= Pr\left(u^{\iota}: g_1( u^{\iota})= x(m)\right)
\end{equation}
for $m=0,1,\ldots, \alpha-1$ (i. e. for all $x(m) \in {\cal X}$),
in the assignment to the members in group 1.
{\bf The group 2:} For all $m=\alpha, \alpha+1, \ldots, \sum_{\tau =0}^{\iota} \lfloor \frac{1}{2} {\iota \choose \tau} \rfloor$,
we arbitrarily choose $0 \le \zeta_0(m)) < \zeta_1(m)\le \alpha -1$ and let $g_0(u^{\iota}(m_a))= g_1(u^{\iota}(m_b))=x(\zeta_0(m))$ and
$g_0(u^{\iota}(m_b))= g_1(u^{\iota}(m_a))=x(\zeta_1(m))$. Again, because $u^{\iota}(m_a)$ and $u^{\iota}(m_b)$ have the same Hamming weight, (\ref{eq_apr}) holds too for the assignment to the members of the group 2.
{\bf The group 3:} Finally for each $u^{\iota}(h^*)$, we arbitrarily choose letter in the alphabet ${\cal X}$, say $x(i_h)$ and let $g_0(u^{\iota}(h^*))=g_1(u^{\iota}(h^*))=x(i_h)$. Obviously (\ref{eq_apr}) holds too for the assignment of the group 3.
Notice, the property (\ref{eq_apr}) of the assignments to the 3 groups yields (\ref{eq_a01}). Then next we shall show (\ref{eq_KW03}), by assume a contradiction, that (\ref{eq_KW03})
would not hold. That is, there exist $Q_0, Q_1 \in {\cal P}({\cal S}|{\cal X})$ such that, $\vec{\nu}(g_0,Q_1)=\vec{\nu}(g_1,Q_0)$ or
\[P_V^{\iota}(v^{\iota}) \sum_x P_{V'|V}^{\iota}(g_0^{-1}(x)|v^{\iota}) \sum_s Q_1(s|x) \rho(x,s)=
P_V^{\iota}(v^{\iota}) \sum_{x'} P_{V'|V}^{\iota}(g_1^{-1}(x')|v^{\iota}) \sum_{s'} Q_0(s'|x') \rho(x',s'),\]
for all $v^{\iota}$ which can be rewritten as
\[
P_V^{\iota}(v^{\iota}) \sum_{u^{\iota}} P_{V'|V}^{\iota}(u^{\iota}|v^{\iota})\sum_s Q_1 (s|g_0(u^{\iota})) \rho(g_0(u^{\iota}),s)=
P_V^{\iota}(v^{\iota}) \sum_{u^{\iota}} P_{V'|V}^{\iota}(u^{\iota}|v^{\iota})\sum_{s'} Q_0 (s'|g_1(u^{\iota})) \rho(g_1(u^{\iota}),s'),\]
by re-arrange the terms. That is,
\begin{equation} \label{eq_a02}
\sum_{u^{\iota}} P_{V'|V}^{\iota}(u^{\iota}|v^{\iota})[\sum_s Q_1 (s|g_0(u^{\iota})) \rho(g_0(u^{\iota}),s)-\sum_{s'} Q_0 (s'|g_1(u^{\iota})) \rho(y|g_1(u^{\iota}),s')]=0^{\mathcal{H}},
\end{equation}
for all $v^{\iota}$, where $0^{\mathcal{H}}$ is the zero ensemble on $\mathcal{H}$.
Denoted by $\mathfrak{P}_t$, the $|{\cal V}^t| \times |{{\cal V}'}^t|$ matrix whose $(v,u)$th entry is $P_{V'|V}^t(u^t|v^t)$ for all $t$.
We write $\mathfrak{P}_1=\mathfrak{P}$. Then we observe that for all positive integer $t$, $\mathfrak{P}_t=\mathfrak{P}^{\otimes t}$ i. e.,
$\mathfrak{P}_t$ is $t$th-sensor power of $\mathfrak{P}$. Recalling that we have assume that $I(V';V)>0$, which implies that
$\frac{P_{V'|V}(0|0)}{P_{V'|V}(0|1)} \not= \frac{P_{V'|V}(1|0)}{P_{V'|V}(1|1)}$, or $\det (\mathfrak{P}) \not=0$.
Therefore $\mathfrak{P}$ is a full rank matrix, hence so is $\mathfrak{P}_t$ for all $t$. Next let $\vec{w}$ be the $d|{{\cal V}'}^{\iota}|\times d$ matrix,
where $d:=\dim \mathcal{H}$,
whose components are $\sum_s Q_1 (s|g_0(u^{\iota})) \rho(g_0(u^{\iota}),s)-\sum_{s'} Q_0 (s'|g_1(u^{\iota})) \rho(g_1(u^{\iota}),s'), u^{\iota}\in {{\cal V}'}^{\iota}$,
in a proper order. Then (\ref{eq_a02}) can be rewritten as
\[
\left(\mathfrak{P}_{\iota}\otimes id^{\mathcal{H}}\right) \vec{w}=0^{\mathcal{H}}.
\]
Because $\mathfrak{P}_{\iota}$ is full rank, the linear function $\mathfrak{P}_{\iota} z^{|{{\cal V}'}|^{\iota}}=0$ with respect
to $z^{|{{\cal V}'}|^{\iota}}$ has no non-zero solution. This implies that $\vec{w}={0^{\mathcal{H}}}^{\otimes|{{\cal V}'}|^{\iota}} $, or
\begin{equation} \label{eq_a03}
\sum_s Q_1 (s|g_0(u^{\iota})) \rho(g_0(u^{\iota}),s)=\sum_{s'} Q_0 (s'|g_1(u^{\iota})) \rho(g_1(u^{\iota}),s'),
\end{equation}
for all $u^{\iota}$. Now we substitute $u^{\iota}(m_a)$ for $m=1,2 \ldots, \alpha-1$ in the group 1 to (\ref{eq_a03}) and then have that
\[\sum_s Q_1 (s|x(0)) \rho(x(0),s)=\sum_{s'} Q_0 (s'|x(m)) \rho(x(m),s')\]
for $m=1,2, \ldots \alpha-1$. By choosing $(\sum_s Q_1 (s|x(0)) \rho(x(0),s))$ and
$(\sum_{s'} Q_0 (s'|x(m)) \rho(x(m),s'))$ for $m=1,2, \ldots, \alpha-1$,
we have a channel in $\bar{\bar{{\cal W}}}$ with identity row,
which is contradict to the assumption $\min_{\rho\in\bar{\bar{{\cal W}}}} C(\rho) >0$ and
therefore (\ref{eq_KW03}) is proven.
\hfill \ensuremath{\Box}\vspace{0.5cm}
\begin{lemma} \label{lemmaKW}
There is $r >0$ such that for all $\epsilon, \lambda >0$, there is $(n, 2^{nr})$ correlation assisted code for sufficiently large $n$, with maximum probability of error
smaller than $\lambda$ and rate $r'> r-\epsilon$, if the exists two mappings $g_k, k=0,1$ from $V'$ to ${\cal X}$ with
\begin{equation} \label{eq_KW03a}
{\cal A}(g_0) \cap {\cal A}(g_1) =\emptyset.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}\vspace{0.3cm}
{\it Proof:} We show the lemma in the same way as in \cite{KW62}.
The set $P(\mathcal{S}|\mathcal{X})$
is bounded and equal to $\overline{P(\mathcal{S}|\mathcal{X})}$
and thus convex and compact.
For a fixed $g$, $\vec{v}(g,\cdot)$ $:P(\mathcal{S}|\mathcal{X})
\rightarrow \mathcal{H}^{|\tilde{\mathcal{V}}|}$ is linear, thus
for every given $g$, $\mathcal{A}(g)$ is also a convex compact set.
${\cal A} (g_k), k=0,1$ are compact convex sets in the $|{\cal V}||\mathcal{X}|$-dimensional real space.
When $\mathcal{A}(g_0) \cap \mathcal{A}(g_1) = \emptyset$ holds,
then there is a hyperspace $\grave{H}$ which separates
$\mathcal{A}(g_0)$ and $\mathcal{A}(g_1)$. Let $b$ be a
real number such that $\grave{H}-b$ is a subspace,
by Riesz representation theorem we can find a self-adjoint operator $A'$
$=\Bigl(a(v)\Bigr)_{v \in {\cal V}}$ on ${\cal H}^{d|\tilde{\mathcal{V}}| }$ such
that \[\mathrm{tr}\left((A'-b\cdot\mathrm{id})(\vec{v}(g_0,s))\right)>0\] for all $\vec{v}(g_0,s) \in \mathcal{A}(g_0)$
and \[\mathrm{tr}\left((A'-b\cdot\mathrm{id})(\vec{v}(g_1,s))\right)<0\] for all $\vec{v}(g_1,s) \in \mathcal{A}(g_1)$.
We define the
the self-adjoint operator $A$ on ${\cal H}^{d|\tilde{\mathcal{V}}|}$
by $A:= A'-b\cdot\mathrm{id}$.
Suppose $A$ has a spectral decomposition $A=\sum_{l=1}^{d|\mathcal{V}|}a_l A_l$.
Similar to \cite{Ahl/Bj/Bo/No},
we define for every $m\in\mathbb{N}$ and $l^m=(l_1,\cdots,l_m)$
\[\mathsf{P}_0^m:= \sum_{l^m: \sum_{i=1}^m a_{l_i}<0} A_{l^m}\text{;}~~
\mathsf{P}_1^m:= \sum_{l^m: \sum_{i=1}^m a_{l_i}>0} A_{l^m}\text{ ,}\]
where $A_{l^m} :=\bigotimes_{i=1}^m A_{l_i}$. We have $\mathsf{P}_0 + \mathsf{P}_1= \mathrm{id}^m$
We define
\[C:=\max_{\vec{v}(j,Q) \in \mathcal{A}(g_j)}
\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{tr}(A \vec{v}(g_j,Q))^{-2}
\left(\mathrm{tr}(A^2 \vec{v}(g_j,Q))
-\mathrm{tr}(A \vec{v}(g_j,Q))^2
\right)
. \]
Now we consider every terms in $\sum_{v^m} P_{V}^m(v^m) \sum_{x^m} P_{V'|V}^m((g_0^{-1})^{m}(x^m)|v^m)\sum_{s^m} Q^m(s^m|x^m)
\rho^{\otimes m}(x^m, {s}^m)$
$=\sum_{v^m} P_{V}^m(v^m)$ $\sum_{u^m} P_{V'|V}^m(u^m|v^m)$ $\sum_{s^m} Q^m(s^m|g_0^{m}(u^m))$
$\rho^{\otimes m}(g_0^{m}(u^m), {s}^m)$.
We define
\begin{align*}&L^m:= \biggl\{l^m: \left|\sum_{i=1}^m a_{l_i}
- \min_{Q \in {\cal P}({\cal S}|{\cal X})}\mathrm{tr}\left( A\left[
P_{V}(v_i) P_{V'|V}(g_0^{-1}(x)|v_i) \sum_s Q (s|x) \rho\left(x,s\right)\right]
\right)\right|\\
&\leq\frac{1}{2} \min_{Q \in {\cal P}({\cal S}|{\cal X})}\mathrm{tr}\left( A\left[
P_{V}(v_i) P_{V'|V}(g_0^{-1}(x)|v_i) \sum_s Q (s|x) \rho\left(x,s\right)\right]
\right)\biggr\}.\end{align*}
For
every fixed $u\in \mathcal{U}$,
we have $\{\mathbf{s}(g_0(u)) , \mathbf{s}(\cdot) \in \mathbf{S} \}$ $=\mathcal{S}$,
thus similar to the proof in \cite{Ahl/Bj/Bo/No} we may
apply Chebyshev's inequality for every $s^m\in \mathcal{S}$ to show
\begin{align}&\min_{\mathbf{s}^m(\cdot)\in \mathbf{S}}\mathrm{tr}\left(\mathsf{P}_0^m\left(P(v^m)\rho (g_0^m(v^m),\mathbf{s}^m(g_0^m(v^m)))\right)_{v^m\in{\cal V}^m}\right)\allowdisplaybreaks\notag\\
&=\min_{\mathbf{s}^m(\cdot) \in \mathbf{S}}
\mathrm{tr}\left(\left(\sum_{l^m: \sum_{i=1}^m a_{l_i}<0} A_{l^m}\right)\left(P_{V}(v^m)\rho (g_0^m(v^m),\mathbf{s}^m(g_0^m(v^m)))\right)_{v^m\in{\cal V}^m}\right)\allowdisplaybreaks\notag\\
&=\min_{\mathbf{s}^m(\cdot) \in \mathbf{S}}\sum_{l^m: \sum_{i=1}^m a_{l_i}<0} \prod_{i=1}^{m} \mathrm{tr}\left( A_{l_i}
\left(P_{V}(v_i)\rho (g_0(v_i),\mathbf{s}_i(g_0(v_i)))\right)\right)\allowdisplaybreaks\notag\\
&\geq\min_{\mathbf{s}^m(\cdot) \in \mathbf{S}}\sum_{l^m\in L^m} \prod_{i=1}^{m} \mathrm{tr}\left( A_{l_i}
\left(P(v_i)\rho (g_0(v_i),\mathbf{s}_i(g_0(v_i)))\right)\right)\allowdisplaybreaks\notag\\
&\geq\sum_{l^m\in L^m} \prod_{i=1}^{m} \min_{Q \in {\cal P}({\cal S}|{\cal X})}\mathrm{tr}\left( A_{l_i}\left[
P_{V}(v_i) P_{V'|V}(g_0^{-1}(x)|v_i) \sum_s Q (s|x) \rho\left(x,s\right)\right]
\right)\allowdisplaybreaks\notag\\
&\geq 1-\frac{1}{4m}\max_{Q \in {\cal P}({\cal S}|{\cal X})}\biggl[
(\mathrm{tr}(A P_{V}(v_i) P_{V'|V}(g_0^{-1}(x)|v_i) \sum_s Q (s|x) \rho\left(x,s\right)))^{-2}\allowdisplaybreaks\notag\\
&\left(\mathrm{tr}(A^2 P_{V}(v_i) P_{V'|V}(g_0^{-1}(x)|v_i) \sum_s Q (s|x) \rho\left(x,s\right))
-\mathrm{tr}(A P_{V}(v_i) P_{V'|V}(g_0^{-1}(x)|v_i) \sum_s Q (s|x) \rho\left(x,s\right))^2\right)\biggr]\allowdisplaybreaks\notag\\
&= 1-\frac{1}{m}\max_{\vec{v}(g_0,Q) \in \mathcal{A}(g_0)}
\frac{1}{4}\mathrm{tr}(A \vec{v}(g_0,Q))^{-2}
\left(\mathrm{tr}(A^2 \vec{v}(g_0,Q))
-\mathrm{tr}(A \vec{v}(g_0,Q))^2
\right)\allowdisplaybreaks\notag\\
&\geq 1-\frac{C}{m},\end{align}
where $N(s|s^m)$ the number of occurrences of the symbol $s$ in $s^m$.\vspace{0.2cm}
Similarly
\begin{equation}\min_{\mathbf{s}^m(\cdot)\in \mathbf{S}}\mathrm{tr}\left(\mathsf{P}_1^m\left(P(v^m)\rho (g_0^m(v^m),\mathbf{s}^m(g_0^m(v^m)))\right)_{v^m\in{\cal V}^m}\right)
\geq 1-\frac{C}{m}.\end{equation} \vspace{0.4cm}
Using the idea of \cite{Ahl/Bj/Bo/No} we can now define a classical binary
AVC by
\[\hat{W}(0|g_i,s^m):=\sum_{(v^m,y^m) \in {\cal B}} \sum_{x^m} P_{V}^m(v^m) P_{V'|V}^m((g_i^{m})^{-1}(x^m)|v^m)\rho^m(x^m,\mathbf{s}^m(x^m))\]
and
\[\hat{W}(1|g_i,s^m):=\sum_{(v^m,y^m) \in {\cal B}^c} \sum_{x^m} P_{V}^m(v^m) P_{V'|V}^m((g_i^{m})^{-1}(x^m)|v^m)\rho^m(x^m,\mathbf{s}^m(x^m))\] for $i=0,1$,
\[\hat{\cal W}:=\{\hat{W}(\cdot|\cdot, \hat{s}), \hat{s} \in \hat{\cal S}\} \mbox{ for $\hat{\cal S}=\mathbf{S}^m$}.\]
$\hat{\cal W}$ (with input alphabet $\{g_0^m,g_1^m\}$ is a binary AVC such that $\hat{W}(0|g_0,\hat{s})>1-\eta$ and
$\hat{W}(0|g_1,\hat{s'})<\eta$ for all $\hat{s}, \hat{s'} \in \hat{\cal S}$.
Every deterministic code for $\hat{W}$ also define a correlation assisted code for $\rho$. This show
Lemma \ref{lemmaKW}.
\hfill \ensuremath{\Box}\vspace{0.5cm}
\begin{remark}\label{awcplalaf}
At first please observe that
we can not apply the classical the
results of
Kiefer and Wolfowitz in
\cite{KW62} on the set of quantum states
$\{\nu (v|g,Q)\}$ since the set of probability
matrices do not form a vector space over $\mathbb{C}$.
However there is an isometric which maps every set of
Hermitian complex $m\times m$ matrices to a
$m^2$-dimensional
subspace of the $2m^2$-dimensional vector space of complex
$m\times m$ matrices over $\mathbb{R}$. Thus
alternatively we can prove
Lemma \ref{theorema} and
Lemma \ref{lemmaKW} as follows.
Let $\{|v\rangle: v\in{\cal V}\}$ be an orthonormal basis of ${\cal H}^{\otimes |{\cal V}|}$.
Then the output $\vec{v}(g;Q)$ of
the channel can be presented as a classical-quantum state in the $d|{\cal V}|$-dimensional
complex Hilbert space:
\begin{equation}\sigma_{Q,g_i}:= \sum_{v} P_V(v)|v\rangle \langle v|
\otimes P_{V'\mid V} \left(g_i^{-1}(x)\mid v\right)\sum_s Q(s\mid x) \rho(x,s)\text{ ,}\end{equation}
when one apply the function $g_i$, $i = 0, 1$ to input of the channel according to the
output of the source $V'$. Consequently with the notation, ${\cal A}(g_i)$ is presented as
$\{\sigma_{Q,g_i}: Q \in {\cal P}({\cal S}\mid {\cal X})\}$, a compact convex subset in the
real vector space $\mathfrak{S}$ formed
by $d|{\cal V}| \times d|{\cal V}|$ Hermitian matrices, a $(d|{\cal V}|)^2$-dimensional real Hilbert subspace of
$2(d|{\cal V}|)^2$-dimensional space of complex $d|{\cal V}| \times d|{\cal V}|$
matrices (with inner product of
$A$ and $B$, $\langle A | B \rangle = tr(A*B)$. Let $\phi$ be a linear isomorphic mapping from $\mathfrak{S}$ to
the $(d|{\cal V}|)^2$-dimensional real linear vector space $\mathfrak{V}$, (keep inner product unchanged
$\langle A | B \rangle = tr(A*B)$). Then $\phi(A(g_i)) := \{\phi(\sigma_{Q,g_i}) : Q \in {\cal P}({\cal S}\mid {\cal X})\}$
for $i = 0, 1$, are
compact convex subsets in $\mathfrak{V}$. Now let
\[{\cal A}(g_0) \cap {\cal A}(g_1) =\emptyset,\]
then we have
\[\phi({\cal A}((g_0)) \cap \phi({\cal A}(g_1)) =\emptyset,\]
as well, by the isomorphism. Thus, $\phi({\cal A}((g_0)$ and $\phi({\cal A}((g_0)$ can be separated by a
hyperplane. Namely, there is a $(d|{\cal V}|)^2$-dimensional real vector $\vec{\mathbf{a}}$
and a real number
$b$ such that
\[\langle \phi(\sigma_{Q_0,g_0}) | \vec{\mathbf{a}} \rangle < b <\langle \phi(\sigma_{Q_1,g_1}) | \vec{\mathbf{a}} \rangle \]
for all $\phi(\sigma_{Q_i,g_i}) \in \phi(A(g_i))$, $i = 0, 1$.
Let $A$ be the inverse image of $\vec{\mathbf{a}}$ under the mapping $\phi$. Then by the isomorphism
again, we have that
\begin{equation} tr(\sigma_{Q_0,g_0}A) < b < tr(\sigma_{Q_1,g_1}A)\label{tsq0g0a}\end{equation}
for all $\sigma_{Q_i,g_i} \in A(g_i)$, $i = 0, 1$.
(Notice, we have that $\sigma_{Q_i,g_i}* = \sigma_{Q_i,g_i}$
and $A* = A$ here.) Let $\lambda_1, \lambda_2, \cdots, \lambda_{d|{\cal V}|}$ be
eigenvalues of $A$ according descending order and
$\underline{\lambda} := \min(0,\lambda_{d|{\cal V}|})$. Then $A - \underline{\lambda}id$
is semi-positive and with the maximum eigenvalue $\lambda_1 - \underline{\lambda}$.
Obviously $\lambda_1 - \underline{\lambda}\not= 0$, because otherwise we would have
$\lambda_1=\lambda_2= \cdots=\lambda_{d|{\cal V}|}$, which yields
$ tr(\sigma_{Q_i,g_i}A) = \lambda_1$, $i = 0, 1$, a contradiction to (\ref{tsq0g0a}).
Thus we have $0_{{\cal H}^{\otimes d|{\cal V}|}} \leq M_1 \leq id_{{\cal H}^{\otimes d|{\cal V}|}}$,
if we define $M_1 := \frac{1}{\lambda_1 - \underline{\lambda}}(A - \underline{\lambda}id)$
and $M_0 := id_{{\cal H}^{\otimes d|{\cal V}|}}-M_1$. That is, $\{M_0,M_1\}$ is a
quantum measurement of the output space of the channel.
Next we show that with a correlation $(V', V )$ such that $I(V', V ) > 0$,
one can reduce the original AVCQC to a binary classical AVC by perform a
measurement in ``one use'' as follows. With the correlation assistant, the sender
use $g_i$ to choose input, if he would like to send a bit $i\in\{0,1\}$, such that the
receiver receivers the classical-quantum state $\sigma_{Q,g_i}$ (in the case that the jammer
uses $Q$ to choose the state of AVCQC). Then receiver performs the measurement
$\{M_0,M_1\}$ on the output quantum state received by him. Thus with the probability
$V_Q(j\mid i) = tr(\sigma_{Q,g_i}M_j )$, the measurement outputs a bit $j$. Thus we have had a binary
classical AVC $\{V_Q: Q \in {\cal P}({\cal S}\mid {\cal X})\}$, whose maximum deterministic capacity clearly
does not exceed the correlated assisted capacity of the original AVCQC. Hence to
complete the proof of the lemma, it is sufficient for us to so the maximum error
capacity of $\{V_Q: Q \in {\cal P}({\cal S}\mid {\cal X})\}$ is positive.
(\ref{tsq0g0a}) implies that
for all $Q_0, Q_1 \in {\cal P}({\cal S}\mid {\cal X})$
\[1 -V_{Q_0}(0\mid 0) = V_{Q_0}(1\mid 0) = tr(\sigma_{Q_0,g_0}M_1)
< tr(\sigma_{Q_1,g_1}M_1) = V_{Q_1}(1\mid 1).\]
That is, $V_{Q_0}(0\mid 0) + V_{Q_1}(1\mid 1) > 1$, for all $Q_0, Q_1 \in {\cal P}({\cal S}\mid {\cal X})$.
Now we apply a lemma due to Ahlswede and Wolfowitz \cite{AW70},
\begin{lemma} Let $W^{bc} := \left\{\{W(j\mid i, s), i, j \in \{0,1\}\}, s\in{cal S}\right\}$ be a binary
classical AVC. Then its deterministic code capacity is equal to
\[\max_P \min_{\bar{\bar{W}}\in \bar{\bar{W^{bc}}}} I(P, \bar{\bar{W}})>0 \]
if for all $s,s'$ we have $W(0\mid 0,s) + W(1\mid 1,s') > 1$.\label{mpmbbwibbwbc}
\end{lemma}
Applying Lemma \ref{mpmbbwibbwbc}
we can construct a binary point to
point channel with positive capacity.
This delivers an
alternatively proof for
Lemma \ref{theorema} and
Lemma \ref{lemmaKW}.
\end{remark}\vspace{0.5cm}
\subsection{Main Result and Proof}
Now we are going to state our main result.\vspace{0.3cm}
\begin{theorem}
Let $(V', V)$ with alphabets $({\cal V}', {\cal V})$, be an arbitrary correlated source
and ${\cal W}=\{\rho(x,s):x\in{\cal X}, s\in {\cal S}\}$ be an AVCQC.
When $I(V', V)>0$ holds, then
\begin{equation}C( {\cal W};corr(V', V))=\max_P \min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot)). \end{equation}
\label{lvvwatcv}
\end{theorem}
Theorem \ref{lvvwatcv} delivers a single letter characterization
of the correlation assisted capacity with informed jammer.
This single letter characterization
is particularity interesting
promising, on the one hand because correlation is
the weakest resource in the hierarchy
of resources, on the other hand because
the deterministic capacity formula
for arbitrarily varying channels with
informed jammer is still an open problem,
even for classical arbitrarily varying channels,
where the well-know Shannon's
zero-error capacity is
contained as a special case of this
scenario.
Our model is a generalization of the
standard AVC model, since in the standard ACV model
is limited on the case when the jammer has no side information about the codeword.
Furthemore our model is more complicated
than the standard AVC model.
Since the jammer can choose his
jamming strategy according to a block of the channel input, the size of the eavesdropper's possible
output will be double-exponential of the code length.
Because of this, Theorem \ref{lvvwatcv} delivers the
surprising and
promising result that the weakst form of
resource is powerful enough to protect
against such a mighty jamming strategy.
{\it Proof:}
In \cite{Bo/Ca/Ca} it has been shown that the random
random correlated capacity of
$ {\cal W}$
under the average error criterion with informed jammer
is equal to $\min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P_X, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))$.
In this proof a we use a random variable
uniformly distributed on a finite set $\mathcal{K}$
such that
\[\left|\mathcal{K}\right|= c_kn^2,\]
where $c_k$ is a a positive constant depending on $|{\cal X}|$ and $|{\cal S}|$.
\vspace{0.2cm}
Since the $(V', V)$-correlation assisted capacity cannot
exceed the randomness assisted capacity, the converse is trivial.
When $\min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P_X, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))$ $=0$ holds, then the randomness assisted capacity
of ${\cal W}$ is equal to zero and thus the $(V', V)$-correlation assisted capacity
of ${\cal W}$ is also equal to zero. This case is trivial. Now
we assume that both $I(V', V)>0$ and $\min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P_X, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))$ $>0$ hold.
Our idea is to build a two-part code word, the first part is used to
create the common randomness for the sender and the receiver, the second is used to transmit the message to the
receiver.
\vspace{0.2cm}
Our idea is at fist to build a pre-code, which is a $(V', V)$-correlation assisted code, generating
the random variable
uniformly distributed on a finite set $\mathcal{K}$ we used for the randomness assisted code
\cite{Bo/Ca/Ca}.
The next step is to
apply the result of \cite{Bo/Ca/Ca}, i.e., a
second code for message transmission which is
a randomness
assisted code using the random variable we generated.
Thus the code we use at the end consists of
two part codewords.
\bf Definition of pre-code \rm\vspace{0.2cm}
Let $\mathcal{K}$ be a finite set such that $\left|\mathcal{K}\right|$ is of polynomially size of $n$.
We denote $\nu(n):= \frac{3}{r}\log n$, where $r$ is defined as in
Lemma \ref{lemmaKW}. Recall $\left|\mathcal{K}\right|= c_kn^2<2^{\nu(n)r}$
By Lemma \ref{lemmaKW} we can apply coding theorem of AVC with binary output.
Every deterministic code for $\hat{W}$ also define a correlation assisted code for $\rho$. Thus by
Lemma \ref{lemmaKW} there exists a
$(V', V)$-correlation assisted code
$\Bigl(\left(u_{{v'}^{\nu(n)}}(k)\right)_{k=1,\cdots,\left|\mathcal{K}\right|}, \{D_{k}^{\nu(n)}:
k=1,\cdots,\left|\mathcal{K}\right|\}\Bigr)$ with deterministic encoder $u_{{v'}^{\nu(n)}}(k) \in\{g_0^m,g_1^m\}^{\nu(n)}$
for ${\cal W}$ of
length $\nu(n)$ (cf. \cite{KW62}),
such that
\begin{align} &
\min_{s^{\nu(n)}(\cdot)} \frac{1}{\left|\mathcal{K}\right|}
\sum_{k=1}^{\left|\mathcal{K}\right|}
\mathrm{tr}\biggl(\rho(u_{{v'}^{\nu(n)}}(k), s^{\nu(n)}(u_{{v'}^{\nu(n)}}(k)))
D_{k}^{\nu(n)}\biggr)\geq 1-\vartheta \text{ .} \label{ineqfornocausal}\end{align}
Here we use the property (\ref{eq_a01})in the proof of Lemma
\ref{theorema} that $P_{V'}^n(g_0^{-1}(x))=P_{V'}^n(g_1^{-1}(x))$
for all $x \in {\cal X}$ to show that the randomness we built
is a uniformly distributed random variable.\vspace{0.2cm}
When the
jammer knew the shared randomness, he
would render the shared randomness completely useless (cf. \cite{Bo/Ca/De3}).
Thus we have to show that we can archive that
the jammer, knowing the code word, has no access to the randomness.
Notice that the sender sends input $(g_{{v'}_1},g_{{v'}_2}, \ldots, g_{{v'}_{\nu(n)}})$ of ACCQC ${\cal W}$,
if he would like to send binary input ${v'}_1{v'}_2 \ldots {v'}_{\nu(n)})$ to the binary classical AVC $\hat{W}$.
Since $P_{V'}^n(g_0^{-1}(x))=P_{V'}^n(g_1^{-1}(x))$
holds, for any $x^{\nu(n)}\in\mathcal{X}^{\nu(n)}$ we have
\[Pr\left(g_{{{v'}_1}^{\nu(n)}}^{-1}(x^{\nu(n)})\right)=Pr\left(g_{{v_2'}^{\nu(n)}}^{-1}(x^{\nu(n)})\right) \]
for every ${v_1'}^{\nu(n)}$, ${v_2'}^{\nu(n)}$ $\in {\tilde{\cal V'}}^{\nu(n)}$.
This means that
the jammer, knowing the code word, has no access to the randomness.
\vspace{0.4cm}
\bf Definition of two-part code \rm\vspace{0.2cm}
By \cite{Bo/Ca/Ca} there is a $(n , J_n)$ random code
$\Bigl\{u(j,k ), D_{k,j}^{n}\Bigr\}$ such
that
\[\max_{s(\cdot)}\frac{1}{|{\cal J}|} \frac{1}{\left|\mathcal{K}\right|}
\sum_{j \in {\cal J}} \sum_{k \in {\cal K}}
tr[\rho^{\otimes n}(u(j,k), s (u(j,k)))(\mathbb{I}_{\cal H}-{\cal D}(j,k))]<\lambda .\]\vspace{0.2cm}
Now we can construct a $(V',V)$-correlation assisted $(\nu(n) +n,
J_n)$ random code $\mathcal{C}(V',V) =
\biggl\{\Bigl(u_{{v'}^{\nu(n)+n}},\{D_j^{v^{\nu(n)+n}}:
j\in \{ 1,\cdots
,J_n\}\}\Bigr) :{v'}^{\nu(n)+n}\in{\mathcal{V}'}^{\nu(n)+n},v^{\nu(n)+n}\in\mathcal{V}^{\nu(n)+n}\biggr\}$,
where we set
\[u_{{v'}^{\nu(n)+n}}(j,k)=
(u_{{v'}^{\nu(n)}}(k) ,u(j,k))
\text{ ,}
\] and \[D_j^{v^{\nu(n)+n}} := \sum_{k=1}^{\left|\mathcal{K}\right|}
D_{(v^{\nu(n)}),k}^{\nu(n)}\otimes D_{k,j}^{n} \text{ .}
\]
\begin{remark}
Notice that the first part of this two-part codeword does not
depend on the message, while the second part does not depend
on the correlation. Thus our $(n,J_n)$ code $\mathcal{C}(V',V)$
is actually a $(\nu(n)+n,J_n, \nu(n))$ code
of $\nu(n)+n$ length.
\label{nttfpot}
\end{remark}\vspace{0.2cm}
By (\ref{ineqfornocausal}), for any $s^{\nu(n) +n}(\cdot)$ we have
\begin{align}&1-\sum_{{v'}^{\nu(n) +n}} \sum_{v^{\nu(n) +n}}
p({v'}^{\nu(n) +n},v^{\nu(n)
+n})\frac{1}{J_n}\sum_{j=1}^{J_n}\mathrm{tr}\biggl(\biggl[\frac{1}{\left|\mathcal{K}\right|}
\sum_{k=1}^{\left|\mathcal{K}\right|}\allowdisplaybreaks\notag\\
&\rho(u_{{v'}^{\nu(n)}}(k), s^{\nu(n)}(u^{\nu(n)}))\otimes \rho(u(j,k),s^{n}(u(j,k))))\biggr]\cdot\left[\sum_{k=1}^{\left|\mathcal{K}\right|}
D_{(v^{\nu(n)}),k}^{\nu(n)}\otimes D_{k,j}^{n}\right]
\biggr)\allowdisplaybreaks\notag\\
&\leq 1-\sum_{{v'}^{\nu(n) +n}} \sum_{v^{\nu(n) +n}}
p({v'}^{\nu(n) +n},v^{\nu(n)
+n})
\frac{1}{J_n}\sum_{j=1}^{J_n}\mathrm{tr}\biggl(\frac{1}{\left|\mathcal{K}\right|}
\sum_{k=1}^{\left|\mathcal{K}\right|}\allowdisplaybreaks\notag\\
&\left[\rho(u_{{v'}^{\nu(n)}}(k), s^{\nu(n)}(x^{\nu(n)}))\otimes
\rho(u(j,k),s^{n}(u(j,k)))\right]\cdot\left[
D_{(v^{\nu(n)}),k}^{\nu(n)}\otimes D_{k,j}^{n}\right]
\biggr)\allowdisplaybreaks\notag\\
&=1-\sum_{{v'}^{\nu(n) }} \sum_{v^{\nu(n) }}
p({v'}^{\nu(n) },v^{\nu(n)})
\frac{1}{J_n}\sum_{j=1}^{J_n}\mathrm{tr}\biggl(\frac{1}{\left|\mathcal{K}\right|}
\sum_{k=1}^{\left|\mathcal{K}\right|}\allowdisplaybreaks\notag\\
&\left[\rho(u_{{v'}^{\nu(n)}}(k), s^{\nu(n)}(u_{{v'}^{\nu(n)}}(k)))
D_{(v^{\nu(n)}),k}^{\nu(n)}\right]\otimes\left[\sum_x
\rho(u(j,k),s^{n}(u(j,k))) D_{k,j}^{n}\right]
\biggr)\allowdisplaybreaks\notag\\
&=1-\sum_{{v'}^{\nu(n) }} \sum_{v^{\nu(n) }}
p({v'}^{\nu(n) },v^{\nu(n)})\frac{1}{\left|\mathcal{K}\right|}
\sum_{k=1}^{\left|\mathcal{K}\right|}\mathrm{tr}\left(
\rho(u_{{v'}^{\nu(n)}}(k),s^{\nu(n)}(u_{{v'}^{\nu(n)}}(k)))
D_{(v^{\nu(n)}),k}^{\nu(n)}\right) \allowdisplaybreaks\notag\\
&\cdot\left(\frac{1}{J_n}\sum_{j=1}^{J_n} \mathrm{tr}(
\rho(u(j,k),s^{n}(u(j,k)^{n})) D_{k,j}^{n})\right)\allowdisplaybreaks\notag\\
&\leq \lambda+\vartheta\text{ .}\label{errordetb}\end{align}\hfill \ensuremath{\Box}
\vspace{0.5cm}
\begin{corollary}
Let $(V', V)$ with alphabets $({\cal V}', {\cal V})$, be an arbitrary correlated source
and ${\cal W}=\{\rho(x,s):x\in{\cal X}, s\in {\cal S}\}$ be an AVCQC.
There is a positive $r''$ such that
for any sequence of natural numbers $(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ such that $r''<$ $\liminf_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{l_n}{\log n}$
$\leq\limsup_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{l_n}{\log n}$ $< \infty$,
when $I(V', V)>0$ holds, we have
\begin{equation}C( {\cal W};corr(V', V),(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}})= \min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P_X, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot)).\end{equation}
\label{awcvvlmrc}
\end{corollary}
{\it Proof:} We define $r'':= \frac{3}{r}$,
where $r$ is defined as in Lemma \ref{lemmaKW}.
Let $(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ be a sequence that sequence
$\frac{\nu(n)}{\log n}$ $=r''$ $<\liminf_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{l_n}{\log n}$
$\leq\limsup_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{l_n}{\log n}$ $< \infty$.
We have: $l_n \geq \nu(n)$ for all $n$.
By Remark \ref{nttfpot} for any positive $\delta$, $\epsilon$ and sufficiently large $n$ there
is a $(l_n+n,J_n, l_n)$ code,
where $J_n = 2^{n(\min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}\chi(P_X, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot)) - \delta)}$,
such that
\[\max_{ {\bf s}^{l_n+n} \in \mathbf{S}^{l_n+n}} \sum_{{v'}^{l_n}\in{{\cal V}'}^{l_n}}\sum_{ v^{l_n}\in{\cal V}^{l_n}}
p({v'}^{l_n},v^{l_n}) P_e(\mathcal{C}({v'}^{l_n},v^{l_n}), {\bf s}^{l_n+n}) < \epsilon\text{ .}\]
Since
$2^{l_n}$ is in polynomial order of $n$,
for any positive $\varepsilon$, if $n$ is large enough we have $\frac{1}{n}\log J_n -\frac{1}{l_n +n}\log J_n
\leq \varepsilon$.
Thus when $I(V', V)>0$
\[C( {\cal W};corr(V', V),(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}})= \min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P_X, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot)).\] \hfill \ensuremath{\Box}\vspace{0.5cm}
\begin{lemma} Let
${\cal W}=\{\rho(x,s):x\in{\cal X}, s\in {\cal S}\}$ be an AVCQC.
When for every $n\in \mathbb{N}$ and every $x_1$, $x_2\in {\cal X}^n$ we have
\[conv\left(\{\rho^{\otimes n} (x_1,s^n): s^n\in {\cal S}^n\} \right) \cap conv\left(\{\rho^{\otimes n} (x_1,s^n): s^n\in {\cal S}^n\} \right) \not= \emptyset \]
holds, then the deterministic capacity of ${\cal W}$ with informed jammer
is zero.
\end{lemma}
{\it Proof:}
When for every $n\in \mathbb{N}$ and every $x_1$, $x_2\in {\cal X}^n$ we have
\[conv\left(\{\rho^{\otimes n} (x_1,s^n): s^n\in {\cal S}^n\} \right) \cap conv\left(\{\rho^{\otimes n} (x_1,s^n): s^n\in {\cal S}^n\} \right) \not= \emptyset \]
holds, by \cite{Ahl/Bj/Bo/No} the deterministic capacity of ${\cal W}$ with uninformed jammer
is zero.
Since the deterministic capacity of ${\cal W}$ with informed jammer
cannot exceed the deterministic capacity of ${\cal W}$ with uninformed jammer,
the lemma has been shown.
\hfill \ensuremath{\Box}\vspace{0.5cm}
\section{Applications} \label{lications}
Common randomness generating plays a fundamental role in various problems of cryptography and information
theory.
Here the channel users want to calculate a
shared random variable
using an AVCQC and
correlation as resource.
This can be used, for instance, as a strong resource for a randomized protocol.
Obviously, the message transmission capacity of
any channel is upper bounded by its common randomness capacity.
Furthermore, the common randomness capacity of
any channel is upper bounded by its identification capacity.
Common randomness generating over a classical arbitrarily varying channel
using correlation
as resource was first introduced in \cite{Ahl/Cs},
where it has been assumed that the jammer has no
side information about the input codeword.
As an application of our results in Section \ref{mrap}
we want now analyze the common randomness generating
using correlation
as resource for our scenario in Section \ref{mrap}, i.e.,
we assume that the jammer knows the input codeword.
We assume that the sender and the receiver
use a correlated assisted code to generate
a pair of random variables $(J,L)$, both distributed on a finite set ${\cal J}$
such that the probability that
$J \not= L$
can be kept arbitrarily small.\vspace{0.2cm}
As a second application of our results
we analyze the capacity formulas of this work and some of
our previous works to determine whether
they are Turing computable.
\subsection{Capacity Definition and Communication Scenario}
\begin{definition}
Let ${\cal W}$ $=\{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\}$ be an AVCQC
and $(V', V)$ with alphabets $( {\cal V}', {\cal V})$ be an arbitrary correlated source.
A non-negative number $R$ is an achievable $(V', V)$-correlation
assisted
common randomness rate
with informed jammer
for ${\cal W}$
if for every
$\epsilon>0$, $\delta>0$, and sufficiently large $n$ there
exists a random variables $J$ distributed on a finite set ${\cal J}$,
a set of encoders $\left\{u_{{v'}^{n}}:
{\cal J} \rightarrow {{\cal X}}^n:
{v'}^{n}\in{{\cal V}'}^{n}\right\}$
and a set of measurements $\left\{L_{{v}^{n}}:
\mathcal{S}({\cal H}^{\otimes n})\rightarrow {\cal J}
:{v}^{n}\in{{\cal V}}^{n}\right\}$
such that $\frac{1}{n}H(J)>R-\delta$ and
\[\max_{ {\bf s}^n (\cdot) } Pr \left\{J \not=
L\left( \rho\left(U_{{V'}^{n}},{\bf s}^{n}(U_{{V'}^{n}})\right), V^{n} \right)\right\} <\epsilon\]
The supremum on achievable $(V', V)$-correlation
and $((V', V),(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}})$-correlation, respectively,
assisted common randomness rate
with informed jammer
for ${\cal W}$ is called the $(V', V)$-correlation assisted
common randomness capacity
with informed jammer
for ${\cal W}$, denoted by $\tilde{C}({\cal W})$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
Let ${\cal W}$ $=\{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\}$ be an AVCQC
and $(V', V)$ with alphabets $( {\cal V}', {\cal V})$ be an arbitrary correlated source.
A non-negative number $R$ is an achievable
$((V', V),(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}})$-correlation assisted
common randomness rate
with informed jammer
for ${\cal W}$
if for every
$\epsilon>0$, $\delta>0$, and sufficiently large $n$ there
exists a encoders $\left\{u_{{v'}^{l_n}}:
{\cal J} \rightarrow {{\cal X}}^n:
{v'}^{l_n}\in{{\cal V}'}^{l_n}\right\}$,
and a set of measurements $\left\{L_{{v}^{l_n}}:
\mathcal{S}({\cal H}^{\otimes n})\rightarrow P({\cal J})
:{v}^{l_n}\in{{\cal V}}^{l_n}\right\}$,
such that $\frac{1}{n}H(J)>R-\delta$ and
\[
\max_{ {\bf s}^n (\cdot) } Pr \Bigl\{J
\not=
L\left( \rho\left(U_{{V'}^{l_n}},{\bf s}^{n}(U_{{V'}^{l_n}})\right), V^{l_n} \right)\Bigr\} <\epsilon
\text{.}\]
The supremum on achievable on $((V', V),(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}})$-correlation
assisted common randomness rate
with informed jammer
for ${\cal W}$ is called the
$((V', V),(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}})$-correlation assisted
common randomness capacity
with informed jammer
for ${\cal W}$, denoted by
$\tilde{C}({\cal W}, (l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}})$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
A sequence of rational numbers $\{r_n: n\in\mathbb{N}\}$ is called a computable
sequence if there exist recursive functions $a$, $b$, and $s$ $: \mathbb{N}\rightarrow
\mathbb{N}$ such that for all $n\in\mathbb{N} $ we have
$b(n) \not= 0$ and
\[r_n=(-1)^{s(n)}\frac{a(n)}{b(n)} .\]
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
A function $f$ : $\mathbb{R}_c \rightarrow \mathbb{R}_c$
is called Banach-Mazur computable if it maps any
computable sequence
$\{r_n: n\in\mathbb{N}\}$ of real numbers into a computable sequence
$\{f(r_n): n\in\mathbb{N}\}$ ff(xn)g1n
=1 of real numbers.
Here $\mathbb{R}_c$, the set of
computable
numbers, is defined as the set of
real numbers that are computable by Turing
machines.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition}
A function $f$ : $\mathbb{R}_c \rightarrow \mathbb{R}_c$ is called Borel computable
if there is an algorithm that transforms each given
rapidly converging Cauchy representation of a computable
real $x$ into a corresponding representation for $f(x)$.
\end{definition}
Notice that Borel computability implies Banach-Mazur computability.
\begin{definition}
An AVCQC ${\cal W}$
with input alphabet ${\cal X}$ and output space ${\cal H}$
is computable
if it maps every letter in ${\cal X}$
quantum state in $\mathcal{S}({\cal H})$
with
computable coefficient in $\mathbb{C}$.
\end{definition}
\begin{definition} Assume we have two
random variables
$(V',V)$ and $(\dot{V}',\dot{V})$ both taking values in a finite set ${\cal V}' \times {\cal V}$
with joint distributions $P_{V',V}$ and $P_{\dot{V}',\dot{V}}$, respectively.
We define their distance by
\[\|P_{V',V}-P_{\dot{V}',\dot{V}}\|_{1}=\sum_{v'\in{\cal V}'}\sum_{v\in{\cal V}}
|P_{V',V}(v',v)-P_{\dot{V}',\dot{V}}(v',v)|.\]
Assume we have two AVCQCs
${\cal W}$ $=\{\{\rho(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\}$ and
$\dot{{\cal W}}$ $=\{\{\dot{\rho}(x,s), x \in {\cal X}\}, s \in {\cal S}\}$
with correlated sources
$(V',V)$ and $(\dot{V}',\dot{V})$ with alphabets $( {\cal V}', {\cal V})$, respectively.
We define a distance of
$\Bigl({\cal W},(V',V)\Bigr)$
and $\Bigl(\dot{{\cal W}},(\dot{V}',\dot{V})\Bigr)$
by
\[ d\biggl(\Bigl({\cal W},(V',V)\Bigr), \Bigl(\dot{{\cal W}},(\dot{V}',\dot{V})\Bigr)\biggr)
:=\|{\cal W}-\dot{{\cal W}}\|_{\lozenge}+\|P_{V',V}-P_{\dot{V}',\dot{V}}\|_{1}.\]
Here \[ \|W \|_{\lozenge}:=\sup_{n\in \mathbb{N}}\max_{a\in S(\mathbb{C}^n
\otimes H'), \|a\|_1=1}\| (\mathrm{id}_n \otimes W)(a)\|_1\text{ .}\]
\label{t2awoniah}
\end{definition}
\subsection{Correlation Assisted
Common Randomness Capacity
with Informed Jammer }
\begin{corollary}\label{vvinlirhlcrb}
Let $(V', V)$ with alphabets $({\cal V}', {\cal V})$, be an arbitrary correlated source
and ${\cal W}=\{\rho(x,s):x\in{\cal X}, s\in {\cal S}\}$ be an AVCQC.
There is a positive $r''$ such that
for any sequence of natural numbers $(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ such that $r''<$ $\liminf_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{l_n}{\log n}$
$\leq\limsup_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{l_n}{\log n}$ $< \infty$,
when $I(V', V)>0$ holds, then
\begin{equation}\tilde{C}({\cal W}, (l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}})\geq \max_P \min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\liminf_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{n-l_n}{n}\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))+\liminf_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{l_n}{n} r''.\end{equation}
\end{corollary}\vspace{0.2cm}
{\it Proof:}
We define $r'':= \frac{3}{r}$,
where $r$ is defined as in Lemma \ref{lemmaKW}.
We fix a $P$ and define \[J_n:=\lfloor 2^{ n\min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))-\delta} \rfloor\] for an arbitrary positive $\delta$.
Now the sender chooses a
random variable uniformly distributed on $\{1,\cdots J_n\}$.
Let $(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}}$ be a sequence that sequence
$\frac{\nu(n)}{\log n}$ $=r''$ $<\liminf_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{l_n}{\log n}$
$\leq\limsup_{n\rightarrow\infty} \frac{l_n}{\log n}$ $< \infty$.
By Corollary \ref{awcvvlmrc}
he can send the output to the receiver
using an $(n, l_n, J_n)$ code.
When the receiver fails to decode the output he chooses randomly one element in
$\{1,\cdots J_n\}$. By Corollary \ref{awcvvlmrc} when $I(V', V)>0$ the probability of failure with informed jammer
can be
kept arbitrarily small when $n$ is sufficiently large.
We define $L_{l_n}:=\lfloor 2^{l_n r} \rfloor$.
Now by classical common randomness generation technique in \cite{Ahl/Cs}
we can define a set of $L_{l_n}$
deterministic code $\{{\cal C}^{\hat{W}}_{l}: l\in \{1,\cdots, L_{l_n}\}\}$ for $\hat{W}$,
the classical channel we defined in Lemma \ref{lemmaKW},
such that
$L_{l_n}$ messages can be send, and furthermore,
for ever random variable $K_s$ distributed on
$\{{\cal C}^{\hat{W}}_{l}: l\in \{1,\cdots, L_{l_n}\}\}$
the receiver can generate random variable
$K_r$ distributed on $\{1,\cdots, L_{l_n}\}$, such that
when $l_n$ is sufficiently large $Pr\{K_s\not= K_r\}<\epsilon$ for
any positive $\epsilon$.
Let $\mathcal{K}$ be the set on that the common randomness taking value pn
the proof of Theorem \ref{lvvwatcv}.
$\{{\cal C}^{\hat{W}}_{l}: l\in \{1,\cdots, L_{l_n}\}\}$ defines a
$(V', V)$-correlation assisted code
\[\Bigl\{\Bigl(\left(u_{{v'}^{\nu(n)}}(k)\right)_{k=1,\cdots,\left|\mathcal{K}\right|}, \{D_{k}^{\nu(n)}:
k=1,\cdots,\left|\mathcal{K}\right|\}\Bigr)_{l}: l\in \{1,\cdots, L_{l_n}\}\Bigr\}.\] with deterministic encoder $u_{{v'}^{\nu(n)}}(k) \in\{g_0^m,g_1^m\}^{\nu(n)}$
for ${\cal W}$ of
length $\nu(n)$ such that when $l_n$ is sufficiently large
$L_{l_n}$ messages can be sent,
and the receiver can generate random variable
$K_r$ on $\{1,\cdots, L_{l_n}\}$ with
$Pr\{K_s\not= K_r\}<\epsilon$ for
any positive $\epsilon$.
We choose \[{\cal J}:= \{1,\cdots J_n\} \times \{1,\cdots, L_n\}.\]
Now we can contract an $(n-l_n, l_n, J_n)$
two-part code as in the proof for Theorem
\ref{lvvwatcv}, where the second part is a common randomness
assisted code sending the random output of a
variable uniformly distributed on $\{1,\cdots J_n\}$,
and the first part is used both to
sending $L_{l_n}$ messages
(which are used as common randomness for the second part),
and to create to generate random variables $K_s$ and
$K_r$, both uniformly distributed on $\{1,\cdots, L_{l_n}\}$, with
$Pr\{K_s\not= K_r\}<\epsilon$ for
any positive $\epsilon$.
\hfill \ensuremath{\Box}\vspace{0.3cm}
\begin{corollary}\label{vvinlirhlcrbn}
Let $(V', V)$ with alphabets $({\cal V}', {\cal V})$, be an arbitrary correlated source
and ${\cal W}=\{\rho(x,s):x\in{\cal X}, s\in {\cal S}\}$ be an AVCQC.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \label{itemb1}
When
\[I(V', V) \leq \max_P \min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))\]
holds, then
\begin{equation}\tilde{C}({\cal W})= \max_P \min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))+ I(V', V).\end{equation}
\item \label{itemb2} When
\[I(V', V) > \max_P \min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))\]
holds, then
\begin{equation}\tilde{C}({\cal W})=\sup_{U\rightarrow V'\rightarrow V} \Bigl\{I(U,V'): I(U;V')-I(U;V) \leq \max_P \min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}} (\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{\cal W}}}\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot)) \Bigr\}.
\end{equation}\end{enumerate}
\end{corollary}\vspace{0.2cm}
{\it Proof:}
Our proof based on the approach in \cite{Ahl/Cs}
for correlation assisted
common randomness of classical channels.
At first we assume that
$I(V', V) \leq \max_P \min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))$ holds.
We fix a $P$ and define \[J_n':=\lfloor 2^{ n(\min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))+ I(V', V))-\delta } \rfloor\] for an arbitrary positive $\delta$.
Our idea is having the transmitters share a random variable uniformly distributed on $\{1,\cdots J_n'\}$
by means of ${\cal W}$.
Let $\mathcal{K}$ be the set on that the common randomness taking value pn
the proof of Theorem \ref{lvvwatcv}.
We choose a $|{\cal V}|$ dimensional Hilbert Space ${\cal H}^{|{\cal V}|}$ and
a set of pairwise orthogonal pure quantum states
$\{\sigma_{v}:v\in V'\} \in \mathcal{S}( {\cal H}^{|{\cal V}|})$.
We further define a map $g: {\cal V} \rightarrow \{\sigma_{v}:v\}$
by $g(v)= \sigma_{v}$. We have $\chi(V', g(\cdot)) = I(V', V)$.
We now generate
\[ \left|\mathcal{K}\right|\left|{\cal V}'\right|\lfloor 2^{ n(\min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))+ I(V', V))-\delta} \rfloor\]
random variable
\[\{U_{k,v'}(j): j\in\{1,\dots J_n'\}, k\in k\in \mathcal{K}, v' \in {\cal V}' \}, \]
u in ${\cal X}$.
Since
\[\chi(P\times V'; \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot)\otimes g(\cdot)) \geq \chi(P; \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot)) + I(V', V),\]
by \cite{Bo/Ca/Ca} when $n$ is sufficiently large then with
a positive probability
according to the joint distribution of
$V'$, $V$, and the uniform distribution on $\mathcal{K}$
there is a map $g: {\cal V} \rightarrow \{\sigma_{v}:v\}$, a realization
$\{u_{k,v'}(j): j, k, v' \} $ of
$\{U_{k,v'}(j): j, k, v' \} $, and a family of
decoding sets
\[\Bigl\{\{{\cal D}(j,k,g(v)), j \in \{1,\dots J_n'\}\}, k \in {\cal K}, v \in {\cal V}\Bigr\}\]
such that for any positive $\epsilon$ and sufficiently large $n$
\begin{equation}\min_{{\bf s}}\frac{1}{J_n'} \sum_{j=1}^{J_n'}
\mathbb{E}tr[\rho^{\otimes n}({\bf u}(j,K,V'), {\bf s} ({\bf u}(j,K,V'))){\cal D}(j,K,V)] > \epsilon\label{mbs1jkv}\end{equation}
according to the joint distribution of
$V'$, $V$, and the uniform distribution on $\mathcal{K}$
with an informed jammer.
Now we can contract an $(n, J_n')$
two-part code.
By Corollary \ref{vvinlirhlcrb}
we can
define a
deterministic code of negligible length
such that
$\left|\mathcal{K}\right|$ messages can be send.
The first part of the codeword are these codewords
sending $\left|\mathcal{K}\right|$ messages
as common randomness for the second part.
The second part is the randomness
assisted code
defined in (\ref{mbs1jkv}),
sending the random output of a
variable distributed on $\{1,\cdots J_n'\}$.
This shows the direct part for this case.
For the converse we
suppose that after the message transmission,
the sender and the receiver share a
random variable $M$ which is independent of
$V'$ and $V$. We now
consider
the Markov chain
$M\rightarrow PV' \rightarrow \rho(\cdot)V \rightarrow M$.
By the data processing inequality and the capacity formula for
$\rho$ with informed jammer in \cite{Bo/Ca/Ca} we have
\[H(M) \leq \chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))+ I(V', V).\]
\vspace{0.2cm}
Now we assume that
$I(V', V) > \max_P \min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))$ holds.
Similar to above
we fix a $P$ and define \[J_n'':=\lfloor 2^{ n(\min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))+ I(U; V))-\delta } \rfloor\] for an arbitrary positive $\delta$
and an
$U\rightarrow V'\rightarrow V$ such that $I(U;V')-I(U;V) \leq \chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))$.
We now generate
\[ \left|\mathcal{K}\right|\left|{\cal V}'\right|\lfloor 2^{ n(\min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))+ I(U, V))-\delta} \rfloor\]
random variable
\[\{U_{k,v'}(j): j\in\{1,\dots J_n''\}, k\in k\in \mathcal{K}, v' \in {\cal V}' \}\]
Similar to above we want to have the transmitters share a random variable uniformly distributed on $\{1,\cdots J_n''\}$
by means of ${\cal W}$.
When $U\rightarrow V'\rightarrow V$ holds then it also holds
$U\times P \rightarrow V'\times P \rightarrow g(V)\otimes \rho(P)$.
Since
\[\chi(P\times U; \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot)\otimes g(\cdot)) \geq \chi(P; \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot)) + I(U, V),\]
when $n$ is sufficiently large then with
a positive probability
according to the joint distribution of
$V'$, $V$, and the uniform distribution on $\mathcal{K}$
there is a map $g: {\cal V} \rightarrow \{\sigma_{v}:v\}$, a realization
$\{u_{k,v'}(j): j, k, v' \} $ of
$\{U_{k,v'}(j): j, k, v' \} $, and a family of
decoding sets
\[\Bigl\{\{{\cal D}(j,k,g(v)), j \in \{1,\dots J_n''\}\}, k \in {\cal K}, v \in {\cal V}\Bigr\}\]
such that for any positive $\epsilon$ and sufficiently large $n$
\[\min_{{\bf s}}\frac{1}{J_n''} \sum_{j=1}^{J_n''}\mathbb{E}tr[\rho^{\otimes n}({\bf u}(j,K,V'), {\bf s} ({\bf u}(j,K,V'))){\cal D}(j,K,V)] > \epsilon\]
according to the joint distribution of
$V'$, $V$, and the uniform distribution on $\mathcal{K}$.
Similar to above we can contract an $(n, J_n'')$
two-part code, where
the first part is used to
sending $\left|\mathcal{K}\right|$ messages and
the second part is a randomness
assisted code
sending the random output of a
variable distributed on $\{1,\cdots J_n''\}$.
For the converse we consider a $U$ with
$U \rightarrow V'\rightarrow V$.
Let $Y$ be the classical random outcome of the decoding measurement.
By the data processing inequality
and the capacity formula for
$\rho$ with informed jammer in \cite{Bo/Ca/Ca} we have
\[I(X;Y) \leq \chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot)).\]
We now apply the results for common randomness capacity
via classical channel in \cite{Ahl/Cs} on the resulting classical
arbitrarily varying channel wit informed jammer
$X\rightarrow Y$, we have
\begin{align*}&
\tilde{C}({\cal W})\\
&\leq \sup_{U\rightarrow V'\rightarrow V} \Bigl\{I(U,V'): I(U;V')-I(U;V) \leq I(X;Y) \Bigr\}\\
&\leq \sup_{U\rightarrow V'\rightarrow V} \Bigl\{I(U,V'): I(U;V')-I(U;V) \leq \max_P \min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}
(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{\cal W}}}\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot)) \Bigr\} \text{ .}\end{align*}
\hfill \ensuremath{\Box}\vspace{0.5cm}
\subsection{Computability}
As an application of our capacity results,
in this section we want to
analyze whether these capacity formulas,
determined in the previous section,
are computable functions of the channel
parameters on a Turing machine or not.
\begin{theorem} If the condition \ref{itemb1}
is satisfied, then
$\tilde{C}({\cal W})$ is Banach-Mazur computable
and
Turing computable
\end{theorem}
{\it Proof:}
We define
\begin{equation}\Phi({\cal W}, P_{(V', V)}) := \max_P \min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))+ I(V', V). \end{equation}
If \ref{itemb1}
is satisfied, then by Corollary \ref{vvinlirhlcrbn} we have
\[\tilde{C}({\cal W})=\Phi({\cal W}, P_{(V', V)}) .\]
The two expressions
$\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))$ and
$I(V', V)$ are both Turing computable continuous functions.
Since the minimum of a computable continuous function
on a computable set is also a computable continuous function,
$\max_P \min_{\bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot) \in \bar{\bar{W}}}
\chi(P, \bar{\bar{\rho}}(\cdot))$ is Turing computable.
$\Phi({\cal W}, P_{(V', V)})$ is the sum of two
computable functions and thus also a computable function.
\hfill \ensuremath{\Box}\vspace{0.4cm}
\begin{theorem}
$\tilde{C}({\cal W}, (l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}})$ is in general
not Banach-Mazur computable
and thus not
Turing computable.\label{tacsvvwivvso}
\end{theorem}\vspace{0.3cm}
{\it Proof:}
Let ${\cal V}'={\cal V}=\{1,2\}$. For $n\in\mathbb{N}$
we consider a correlated source
$(V_{n}', V_{n})$ with alphabets $( {\cal V}', {\cal V})$
and joint distributions $P_{V_{n}', V_{n}}$
\[\left( \begin{array} {cc}\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2^n}&\frac{1}{2^n}\\
\frac{1}{2^n}&\frac{1}{2}-\frac{1}{2^n}
\end{array}\right)\text{ .}\]
We have $I(V_{n}', V_{n})>0$ for all $n>1$.
Let $(V', V)$ be the correlated source
on $( {\cal V}', {\cal V})$ with joint distributions $P_{V', V}$
\[\left( \begin{array} {rr}\frac{1}{2}&0\\
0&\frac{1}{2}
\end{array}\right)\text{ .}\]
We have \[\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\| (V_{n}', V_{n})-(V', V)\|_{1}=0 .\]
We consider an
AVCQC ${\cal W}=\{\rho(x,s):x\in{\cal X}, s\in {\cal S}\}$
such that for all
$s\in {\cal S}$ and all $x\in{\cal X}$ we have
\[\rho(x,s)= \delta\]
for a fixed quantum state $\delta\in\mathcal{S}({\cal H})$.
It holds
\begin{align*}&
\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty} d\biggl(\Bigl({\cal W},(V',V)\Bigr), \Bigl({\cal W},(V_{n}', V_{n})\Bigr)\biggr)\\
&=\lim_{n\rightarrow\infty}\| (V_{n}', V_{n})-(V', V)\|_{1}=0 .\end{align*}
The correlated assisted message transmission capacity is always zero
even when the jammer has no side information about
the input. Further any classical channels which
arise from ${\cal W}$ has also zero capacity.
Thus the $(V_{n}', V_{n})$-correlation assisted
common randomness capacity of ${\cal W}$ with informed jammer is
equal to the $(V_{n}', V_{n})$-correlation assisted
common randomness capacity of an useless classical arbitrary varying channel
without jamming attack.
Here useless classical channel means a
classical channel
with zero message transmission capacity.
By \cite{Wit}
the $(V_{n}', V_{n})$-correlation assisted
common randomness capacity of any useless classical arbitrary varying channel
without jamming attack is equal to zero,
thus
$\tilde{C}({\cal W}, (V_{n}', V_{n}))=0$ for $n>1$.
Furthermore it is not hard to see that
$\tilde{C}({\cal W}, (V', V))=1$.
Thus $\tilde{C}({\cal W}, (V', V))$
and $\tilde{C}({\cal W}, (V_{n}', V_{n}))$ for all $n>1$
lie in the set of computable numbers.
We let $n$
tend to infinity
the correlation assisted
common randomness capacity is discontinuous
on $({\cal W}, (V', V))$.
Since a Banach-Mazur computable function
is continuous on the computable sets,
the correlation assisted
common randomness capacity is
not Banach-Mazur computable
and thus not
Turing computable
(cf. \cite{Bo/Sch/Ba/Po}).
\hfill \ensuremath{\Box}\vspace{0.4cm}
\begin{corollary}
The $((V', V),(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}})$-correlation assisted
common randomness capacity of an AVCQC ${\cal W}$
with no informed jammer is in general
not Turing computable.
\end{corollary}\vspace{0.3cm}
{\it Proof:}
In the no-computable
example which we given in
the proof of Corollary
\ref{tacsvvwivvso},
the correlated assisted message transmission capacity is always zero
even when the jammer has no side information about
the input.
Thus the $(V_{n}', V_{n})$-correlation assisted
common randomness capacity of ${\cal W}$ with no informed jammer is
equal to the $(V_{n}', V_{n})$-correlation assisted
common randomness capacity of an arbitrary useless classical channel
without jamming attack, too.
By the proof of Corollary
\ref{tacsvvwivvso}, the $(V_{n}', V_{n})$-correlation assisted
common randomness capacity is not Turing computable
even when the jammer has no side information about
the input.
\hfill \ensuremath{\Box}\vspace{0.4cm}
\begin{corollary}
The $((V', V),(l_n)_{n\in\mathbb{N}})$-correlation assisted
common randomness capacity of a classical quantum channel $\rho$
with no jammer
is in general not Turing computable.
\end{corollary}\vspace{0.3cm}
{\it Proof:}
In the no-computable
example which we given in
the proof of Corollary
\ref{tacsvvwivvso},
we consider there is no
jamming attack.
Thus $(V_{n}', V_{n})$-correlation assisted
randomness generation
over classical quantum channels
with no jammer contains
this example
as a special case.
\hfill \ensuremath{\Box}\vspace{0.4cm}
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The work of H. Boche and N. Cai was supported by the
Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz program of the German Research Foundation
(DFG) via Grant BO 1734/20-1. The work of M. Cai was supported
by the by the Bundesministerium f\"ur Bildung und Forschung (BMBF) via
Grant 16KIS0118K. The research direction on jamming and active attacks
on communication
systems was initiated by the German Research Foundation (DFG) under
Grants BO 1734/24-3 and BO 1734/25-1.
|
\section{Introduction}
The discovery of a new class of materials by Shechtman \textit{et al.} in 1984 \cite{PhysRevLett.53.1951}, when they were studying the diffraction figures for an alloy of Aluminum and Manganese ( that give him the Nobel Prize in Chemistry of 2011 \cite{NOBEL-qcrystal}), had started up a new and very rich research area. At the first view, this system was defined as an intermediate structure between crystalline and amorphous solids, but today is well recognized that quasicrystals, is interpreted as a natural extension of the notion of a crystal to structures with quasiperiodic (QP), instead of periodic, arrangements of atoms \cite{PhysRevLett.53.2477,Enrique2014}. A more recent updated definition of quasicrystals with dimensionality {\it n} ({\it n} = 1, 2 or 3) is that they can also be defined as a projection of a periodic structure in a higher dimensional space $mD$, where $m >n$ \cite{Vardeny}.
The diffraction figure found by Schectman and collaborators has a long-range order but has no translational periodicity as the crystals, but rather the self-similarity property by scaling \cite{PhysRevLett.53.1951}. In the icosahedral and decagonal quasicrystals, the self-similarity is related to the \textit{Golden Ratio} $((1 + \sqrt{5})/2)$, so that the atoms are separated by distances that represent the Fibonacci sequence. These new materials have great potential for applications, as some researches show that they are rigid and brittle with unique transport characteristics \cite{RECHTSMAN2008} and have very low surface energies that make them good thermal insulators with photonic and thermoelectric properties \cite{SORDELET1997,HIPPERT1994,DUBOIS2000}. Its spectrum features a fractal structure and aspects of electronic localization \cite{MVASCONCELOS2007,MVASCONCELOS2011} and optical \cite{MVASCONCELOS1998, MVASCONCELOS1999, MVASCONCELOS2007}. The growing studies on quasicrystalline materials made it possible to obtain systems with very thin layers arranged in a quasiperiodic sequence \cite{PhysRevLett.90.055501}or wires with quantum wells of width around 7 nm\cite{PhysRevLett.112.146404}.
Levine \textit{et al.} works \cite{LEVINE19841D}, with the synthesis of a quasicrystal defined by the Fibonacci sequence inspired Merlin \textit{et al.} to create, in the laboratory, the first one-dimensional quasicrystal \cite{MERLIN19851D}. Since that, the way of studying one-dimensional quasicrystals structures has become standard. In this procedure we define two distinct building blocks, each of which carries the necessary physical information, and then they are arranged according to a particular sequence. For example, they can be described in terms of a series of generations that obey the relation of particular recursion\cite{MVASCONCELOS1999}.The researches have shown fractal properties in their spectra and the existence of a non-trivial phase transition, such as the metal-insulating phase \cite{DalNegro2003, Kyek2000} only by adjusting some parameters of the generation sequence. Recently, it was reported that it is possible to have a topological phase in photonic quasicrystals (in 2D) without any magnetic field applied, but instead introducing an artificial gauge field via dynamic modulation \cite{PhysRevX.6.011016}. The idea that photonic crystals could exhibit an analog like the quantum Hall edge states was initially proposed by Haldane and Raghu\cite{PhysRevLett.100.013904} in tridimensional photonic crystals.
On the other hand, phononic crystals are intensively studied as means to manipulate sound or elastic waves (for review see \cite{ISI:000337909500003}) in the same way like in photonic crystals. Following the same idea of Haldane and Ragh, researches have given attention to the search of the existence of topologically protected edge states \cite{PhysRevLett.115.104302,ISI:000387480100001} in those systems, which could be beneficial for many practical applications\cite{PhysRevB.96.134307,Ni_2015,ISI:000364919700001}. The topological effects in the band structure in one-dimensional phononic crystal can be characterized through topological invariants such as Berry phases \cite{RevModPhys.82.1959,PhysRevLett.62.2747} and Zak phases\cite{ISI:000327944600018,ISI:000378949500001,ISI:000431113100004}. Recently, it was shown that these edge modes exist in the band gap of 1D phononic crystals composed of two different phononic crystals, with distinct topological properties\cite{ISI:000379070900001}. It also has been founded in other types of phononic cystals\cite{Susstrunk47}. In this work, we investigate a system where it is possible to have these edge modes in 1D, i.e., we study the edge modes in 1D phononic quasicrystals.
Indeed, 1D quasicrystals were studied through the Harper model \cite{KRAUS2012,HARPERDISORD1958}. Many works on one-dimensional quasicrystals showed that the localization property of the Harper model \cite{HARPERDISORD1958} could be found in a quasicrystal through the Hamiltonian of Aubry-André, considering the potential incommensurable with the lattice parameter \cite{BIDDLE2011-IPR,GANESHAN2013-EZERO,ROSAS1998}. This model proved to present itself as a topological insulator which exhibits border states and non-trivial phases, experimentally verified in the works of Kraus \textit{et al.} \cite{KRAUS2012}, which used waveguides to obtain the frequency spectrum in a quasicrystal, indicating the existence of a photonic gap \cite{ZOOROB2000, ZHANG2001}. The vast majority of published papers use superlattices, showing a fragmented energy spectrum of the famous Hofstadter butterfly \cite{HOFSTADTER1976} at the electronic level, as well as for the optical case \cite{LANG2012}.
\par Theoretical models for predicting the properties of quasiperiodic systems have been of considerable interest to the scientific community, resulting in many theoretical and experimental studies \cite{BABOUX2017,WANG2018,JeevanH.S.2004,KRAUS2012,MAN2003}. However, some properties, like edges modes and topological states, in one-dimensional quasicrystals remain unexplored. The localization of phonons in one-dimensional lattices has already been studied for the Frankel-Kontorova model \cite{Kontorova1938, FK-AUBRY-DISCRETE1983} and for quasiperiodic systems by the transfer matrix formalism \cite{BURKOV1996, SALAZAR2003}. Some works compare the frequency spectrum with the energy bands obtained for a quasicrystal defined by the transfer matrix formalism \cite{KOHMOTO1986,YOU1990}, in which the results retain fractality properties. However, these studies do not consider the effects of the initial phase $\phi$, as in the works of Kraus \textit{et al.} \cite{KRAUS2012}.
Therefore, in this work, we have studied the frequency spectrum, and localization of phonons in a quasiperiodic lattice through a modulation of the Aubry-André \cite{AUBRY1980} model in order to characterize these edge states as phononic topological states, and also we studied the analogous to metal-insulator phase transition for this system.
This paper is organized in the following way. In section 2, we present the theoretical model for the 1D Quasicrystals studied here. In section 3 we show our numerical results and discussion. First, we present a profile spectra similar to the Hofstadter butterfly \cite{HOFSTADTER1976}. After, we present the topological states of phonons, considering an equivalent model studied by Kraus \textit{et al.} \cite{KRAUS2012}, showing the presence of border states for phonons. At last, we study the phase transition through the Inverse Participation Rate (IPR), where the system changes from extended to localized. Finally, in section 4, we present the conclusions of this paper.
\section{Theoretical Model}
The simple model for the phonon system can be defined through the motion equation that represents the atoms as a spring-bound system with force constant $K _{n}$.
\begin{eqnarray}
\omega^2 u_{n} =-K_{n + 1} u_{n + 1}-K_{N} u_{n-1} + V_{n} u_n
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $\omega$ matches the vibration frequency, $u_{n} $ are the individual displacementes around the equilibrium position and $V_{n} = K_{n + 1} + K_{n-1}$.
Considering a system of $N$ atoms the motion equation has the following matrix form:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq:matrix-fonon}
\begin{pmatrix}
V_{0} & -K_{n} & 0 & 0\\
-K_{n} & V_{1} & -K_{n+1} & 0\\
0 &\ddots&\ddots &\colon \\
0 & 0 & -K_{N+1} & V_{N}
\end{pmatrix}
\begin{pmatrix}
u_{0}\\
u_{1} \\
\colon\\
u_{N}
\end{pmatrix}=\omega^2\begin{pmatrix}
u_{0}\\
u_{1} \\
\colon\\
u_{N}
\end{pmatrix}
\end{eqnarray}
The $u_{n}$ represent the position of successive atoms in the chain at a given site $n$, vibrating around the equilibrium position with frequency $\omega$.
The force constant $K_n$ obeys a quasiperiodic modulation, undergoing small changes dependent on each site, as shown in the Figure \ref{fig:fk-system}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Fig1}
\caption{Quasiperiodic lattice with the interaction of the potential of Aubry-André. Each atom is subject to a force constant $K_n$, incommensurate with the lattice parameter.}
\label{fig:fk-system}
\end{figure}
Each atom has a mass $m_{n} = 1.0$, connected by springs with force constant $K_{n}$, given by:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:string}
K_n = C(1+\lambda \cos(2\pi b n +\varphi)); \qquad\ \ \beta=\frac{1+\sqrt{5}}{2}
\end{equation}
The sine term of $K_{n}$ comes from the interaction with the external potential of amplitude $\lambda$ on the force constant $C$. The $\varphi$ variable corresponds to the initial phase when $n = 0$. This type of system presents different results, depending on whether the inverse of the period is rational or irrational \cite{FKVANOSSI2000}.
From the eigenvalues of the motion equation \eqref{eq:matrix-fonon} we can obtain the frequency spectrum, while the eigenvectors give us the individual displacements for each site. The nature of these displacements $u_{n}$, similar to what occurs with the wave-function, can show itself as distributed over all sites or located in just a few ones \cite{BURKOV1996}. If this location is concentrated at the edge of the system, these correspond to the topological states of the border.
\par The location of the displacements can be obtained by the inverse of the participation rate (IPR) \cite{BIDDLE2011-IPR}. The IPR of the eigenvector $k$ can be obtained by the following relation:
\begin{eqnarray}
\text{IPR$_{(k)}$} = \displaystyle\frac{\sum_{l}|u_{k,l}|^{4}}{\left(\sum_{l}|u_{k,l}|^{2}\right)^{2}},
\end{eqnarray}
where the $l$ index represents the sum over all sites on the lattice. The IPR indicates the inverse of the number of occupied sites $L$, so when the oscillations are equally distributed, the IPR $\approx 1/L$, whereas on the opposite situation of extreme localization, we have only one site vibrating with the respective frequency, which results in IPR $\approx 1$.
The numerical results were obtained from the diagonalization equation \eqref{eq:matrix-fonon}, with unitary values for both the mass $(m_{n} = 1.0)$ and the force constant amplitude $(C = 1.0)$. In this way, we can study the influence of modulation on the force constant $K_n$, on the frequency spectrum of the phonons in a quasicrystal.
\par From the diagonalization of the phonon system matrix \eqref{eq:matrix-fonon}, we found the frequency spectrum, in order to analyze the propagation of phonons in this quasiperiodic media. In the works of You, J. Q \textit{et al}, this model was studied for the case in which the masses of successive atoms obey a Fibonacci sequence, using the formalism of the transfer matrix \cite{YOU1990}. They showed that the spectrum is truncated in a fractal to a larger amount of atoms, also evidenced in the works of Kohomoto \textit{et al} \cite{KOHMOTO1986} and in the works of F. Salazar \textit{et al} \cite{SALAZAR2003}, which proposed a modulation in the equation of motion. In our model, we used the computational package of \textit{Gnu Scientific Library} (GSL)\cite{GSL2009}, implemented in C++ routines to find the properties of the phonon spectrum in quasiperiodic media from a sine-type modulation in the force constant between neighboring atoms, with a varying $\varphi$ phase.
\section{Results and Discussion}
The phonon spectrum in the motion equation with force constant modeled in \eqref{eq:string} presents a profile similar to the Hofstadter butterfly, when plotted as a function of the inverse of the period $b$ \cite{HOFSTADTER1976}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Fig2}
\caption{Hofstadter butterfly for the frequency spectrum in three different $\lambda$ values for the quasicrystalline potential with 100 atoms ($N = $100) and $\varphi=0$. We can notice that in $\lambda=1.0$ the spectrum presents a considerable amount of bands separated by increasingly narrow gaps characterizing a multifractal behavior.}
\label{fig:ph-but-lbda}
\end{figure}
The equation \eqref{eq:string} depicts a spectrum of the quasicrystal, shown when $b = \beta $. In Figure \ref{fig:ph-but-lbda} we have the phonon spectrum for three different values of the potential amplitude $\lambda$ as a function of the inverse of the period $b$. In $\lambda=0.5$ the spectrum presents bands very close while for $\lambda=1.0$ we have the parameter which represents a critical system \cite{Wilkinson1984}. For this value of $\lambda$, the allowed frequencies are defined by several bands composed of increasingly narrow gaps located between the four larger gaps, characterizing a multifractal spectrum, as we will see further in Fig. 3. As $\lambda$ grows, there is a like deformation between the gaps and the spectrum loses this characteristic, and we can see the deformation of the larger gaps for $\lambda = 3.0$ due to intense variations in the force constant (Fig. \ref{fig:ph-but-lbda} on top at right ).
\par On the other hand, the states that cross larger gaps are sensitive to the number of atoms in the lattice \cite{KRAUS2012}. Inspired in previous works, we have used a number of $N = $100 sites, and we obtained a spectrum with certain bands circumventing the larger gaps. In Figure \ref{fig:ph-but-lbda-one} we show the frequency spectrum as a function of the inverse of the period $b$, for $400$ sites and setting the phase $\varphi = \pi/2$ to obtain higher definition in the frequency spectrum of phonons.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Fig3}
\caption{Hofstadter butterfly for the frequency spectrum in a quasicrystal as a function of parameter $b$. We use $N = 400$, $\varphi = \pi/2$ and $\lambda = 1.0$. We highlight (red in online color version) the expansion in the region where $b \approx 0.618$ to evince the frequency replication pattern, where the spectrum repeats in a self-similar fashion.}
\label{fig:ph-but-lbda-one}
\end{figure}
We can see that the figure is similar to the Hofstadter butterfly obtained for the electronic case of the Hamiltonian of Aubry-André \cite{AUBRY1980,MADSEN2013}. The variations of $b$ present a characteristic of self-similarity for the frequencies, maintaining the structure composed by the larger gaps and some crossed modes. In the highlighted region we see that the three major gaps are replicated, and the frequency spectrum follows the same pattern. The limit for this replication is ruled by the precision of step, $b$, where we consider an increment of $10^{-3}$ for a fixed phase $\varphi = \pi/2$ in the equation \eqref{eq:string}.
\par The phonon equivalent for the Hofstadter Butterfly has a strong influence on the number of sites and the $\lambda$ parameter. In Figure \ref{fig:ph-comp-N} we show the frequency modes around the dashed vertical line, in highlighted region of Figure \ref{fig:ph-but-lbda-one} (red dashed vertical line in online color version). For $N = 100$ the bands cross only the smaller gaps, regardless of the two values of $\lambda$, while increasing the number of sites up to 206 the bands are narrowed, and these states cross all gaps. When $\lambda = 1.0$ and $N = 100$ from Figure \ref{fig:ph-comp-N} we verify the presence of forbidden bands for any approximation value for $b = \beta$, within the analyzed range ($1.615$ up to $1.62$), similar to what occurs in the electronic case, where it appears only for the finite system and the origin of this effect is due to the conservation of the number of particles \cite{MADSEN2013}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Fig4}
\caption{Frequency spectrum around $b = 1.618$ for $\lambda = 0.5$ and $ \lambda = 1.0$, varying the number of sites on the network. We can see that the location of the states that cross the gaps is modified by the number of sites, and the bands are narrowed as we change $\lambda$}
\label{fig:ph-comp-N}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Fig5}
\caption{Phonon frequency spectrum, as a function of the $\varphi$ phase. The parameters used were: $N = 100$; $\lambda = 0.5$. Below, we present the eigenvectors found at points marked with a \textbf{\textcolor[rgb]{1.00,0.00,0.00}{$\times$}} on the spectrum.}
\label{fig:ph-egval-l-05-n100-u}
\end{figure}
\par The $\varphi$ phase also modifies the shape of the spectrum, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:ph-egval-l-05-n100-u}, where we consider a lattice with $100$ atoms and $\lambda = 0.5$. We can notice that the frequencies are distributed in four separate intervals with larger gaps. Only a few modes cross the forbidden frequency gaps, with an almost sinusoidal dispersion. Below of the main painel, we can see the displacements $u_n$ (eq. 2) against the index $n$, calculated for three case, characterized by the (red) cross in main painel on the Figure \ref{fig:ph-egval-l-05-n100-u}, namelly $(u_ {1})$, $(u_ {2})$ and to the right $(u_3)$. We can se that $u_ {1}$ and $u_ {3}$ modes are strongly localized at the edges of the system, while the calculated mode for the center, labeled by $u_ {2}$, it is extended mode through all sites. The modes $u_ {1}$ and $u_ {3}$ represent the topological states of phonons in this system. They are formed by oscillations at the edge of the quasiperiodic lattice for a set of well specified parameters $\phi $, $\lambda $ and $ N $ (For a review \cite{KRAUS2012}).
\par The numerical precision for the inverse of the frequency ($b$) in the force constant $K _{n}$ considerably alters the allowed eigenvalues in the spectrum as a function of the potential phase, as shown in Figure \ref{fig:phonon-b-precision}. In this way, we can see that the phonon states remain crossing the gaps, however, a translation occurs in the modes, and also a gentle deformation can be observed. All the eigenvalues were obtained from the equation \eqref{eq:matrix-fonon}, and they were calculated for four different $b$ approximations, for $\varphi$ values between $0$ and $2 \pi$. The border states that emerge in the larger gaps move, arising for different phase values.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Fig6}
\caption{Frequencies as functions of the $\varphi$ phase, obtained for changes in the value of $b$ in the third decimal place with $N = 100$ and $\lambda = 0.5$}
\label{fig:phonon-b-precision}
\end{figure}
\par The location of the frequency ranges within the upper gap depends heavily on the $\lambda$ parameter, which represents the amplitude of the cosine modulation in eq. (3). Clearly, from Fig. 2 we can see that there is two behavior in the energy (frequency) spectra, banded (where the bands are well defined) or unbanded (where the states are very narrow sets so that it is impossible to define it as a band) spectrum, depending on the parameter $\lambda$. It will play an important role in the referred phase transition. In order to study this
phase transition, in Figure \ref{fig:ipr-phonon-n100} we present the inverse of the participation rate for the frequency values located within the upper gap (frequency values greater than $1.7$).
We can see that, depending on the $\lambda$ parameter, the IPR can present a phase transition in the displacements $u_{n}$ of the lattice. For values smaller than $ \lambda = 1.0$ the displacements are scattered across all sites representing extended states of the system, but as we increase the value of $\lambda$, the IPR shows an intense localization (high IPR), representing a transition in the system's oscillations, from extended displacements to localized oscillations.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Fig7}
\caption{Inverse of the participation rate for displacements with $N = 100$ and frequencies in the gap ($1.7$ up to $3.0$), showing a transition between displacements for values of $\lambda >1.0$}
\label{fig:ipr-phonon-n100}
\end{figure}
The location of the displacements in the phonon spectrum is also modified, as a function of the $\varphi$ phase, as we can see in Figure \ref{fig:ph-w-X-phi-IPR}, where we added the gray (color, in online version) scale for a system with $100$ sites and $\lambda = 0.5$. The states that cross the second largest gap present a more intense localization between the gaps in this figure (higher IPR, dark less color), while the remainder is fully extended (more gray, or red in color version, i.e., lower IPR; see Fig. \ref{fig:ph-egval-l-05-n100-u}).
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Fig8}
\caption{Frequency spectrum as a function of the $\varphi$ phase of the potential with IPR in color scale for $ \lambda = 0.5$ in a lattice with 100 atoms.}
\label{fig:ph-w-X-phi-IPR}
\end{figure}
When we vary the $\lambda$ parameter up to the critical value ($\lambda = 1.0 $), the set of extended bands are narrowed and the states that cross the larger gaps are more localized, as seen in Figure \ref{fig:ph-w_phi-lbda09}.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Fig9}
\caption{Frequency spectrum as a function of the $\varphi$ phase of the potential, with IPR in color scale for $ \lambda = 1.0$, in a lattice with 100 atoms.}
\label{fig:ph-w_phi-lbda09}
\end{figure}
The frequency range where the gaps exist are very close to that ones in Figure \ref{fig:ph-w-X-phi-IPR}, mainly in the upper gap, not altering, therefore, the frequency range for emergence of the topological states.
\begin{figure}[ht!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1.0\linewidth]{Fig10}
\caption{Frequency dispersion as function of the amplitude parameter $\lambda$, with $100$ atoms in the lattice, considering the initial phase $\varphi = 0$. We can see that for values greater than $\lambda=1.0$ the spectrum presents many narrow bands spread with hight band gaps, and for, less than $1.0$, we have more larger and well orgnized bands, characterizing $ \lambda=1.0$, as a critical value for a phase transition. }
\label{fig:spctrxlbda}
\end{figure}
In Figure \ref{fig:spctrxlbda} we present the frequency dispersion as a function of the amplitude of the potential, incommensurate with the IPR, in color scale. We can see that for $ \lambda<1.0$ the frequencies present itself as bands separated by larger gaps, while for $\lambda=1.0$ the spectrum comes down to vibration modes at specific and well-defined frequencies. The $\lambda$ parameter allows one to control the distribution of bands in the spectrum, representing a multifractal when they are close enough ($ \lambda = 1.0 $) and deforming the spectrum for higher values of $\lambda$, organizing itself in modes of vibration with wide gaps.
\section{Conclusions}
The system studied here consists of an adaptation of the Hamiltonian of Aubry-André to deal with the elementary vibrations of the unidimensional quasicrystalline lattice. The equation of the eigenvalues for our case consists of a coupled system, with the elementary oscillations in each site interacting by a force constant given in the coupling with the neighboring atoms. We have used the numerical diagonalization method to find the allowed frequencies (computational package of GSL). We have found that the frequency spectrum is modified according to the $\lambda$ interaction parameter, presenting the phonon equivalent for the Hofstadter Butterfly's for $\lambda= 1.0 $, keeping the symmetry and gaps close to the one obtained in the electronic case. Also, we have verified that the number of atoms in the network influences the number of gaps and edges modes that cross these gaps. For the very precise value of the $b$ parameter (around $b = 1.618$), and choosing a given $\lambda$, it is possible to control these frequency bands.
The interaction with this quasicrystalline potential can be modulated by the $\varphi$ phase, causing the atoms on the edge of the system to vibrate with one modulated frequency lying between the gaps, characterizing an edge mode. It is well known that topological phases are characterized by edge states confined near the boundaries of the system, whose the modes are lying in a bulk energy (or frequency) gap \cite{2015Bahri}, and it is unaffected by disorder or deforming, for example. Therefore, we can infer that due to the analogy with the photonic case studied by Kraus et. al \cite{KRAUS2012}, we have a phononic topological phase exhibiting the so-called ``topological states".
Indeed, the topological properties of the 1D quasicrystals can emerge in two ways \cite{KRAUS2012}: through the existence of quantum phase transitions when we have a continuously deforming between two topologically distinct quasicrystals or by the appearance of robust boundary states which traverse the bulk gaps as a function of some controllable parameter (which in this case is the initial phase $\phi$). Specifically, we have considered the second way in a 1D phononic quasicrystal, on order to show that is possible to have localized boundary states (edges states), which manifest the same topological properties of a 2D photonic quasicrystal \cite{PhysRevX.6.011016}. Therefore, it is possible to define an equivalent Chern number for our case and classify topologically the states of the system studied here\cite{KRAUS2012,Deymier2016}. We will consider this in furthers works.
On the other hand, studying the individual displacements $u_{n}$, for a given frequency it is possible to characterize an equivalent metal-insulator phase transition. Therefore, as we can see studying the IPR (Fig. 7), this phase transition can be characterized by a critical value of $\lambda= 1.0$.
\begin{acknowledgments}
We would like to thank CNPq (Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cient\'{\i}fico e tecnol\'{o}gico) for the partial financing. This study was financed in part by the Coordenao de Aperfeioamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - Brasil (CAPES) - Finance Code 88881.172293/2018-01.
\end{acknowledgments}
|
\section{Introduction} \label{Introduction}
Distinguishing knots and links up to ambient isotopy is the central problem in knot theory.
The recipe that a knot theorist uses is to compute some knot invariants and see if one of them can be of help.
Classically one used the Alexander polynomial, which has a topological
definition
\cite[p.160]{Rolfsen}, to distinguish knots.
Over the last 35 years tremendous progress has been made in the development of several new knot
invariants, starting with the Jones polynomial and the HOMFLY-PT polynomial
\cite{Jones_poly86}.
Recently even more sophisticated invariants such as Heegard-Floer homology groups \cite{Manolescu}
and Khovanov homology groups \cite{BarNatan_Categorification} have been added to the toolkit.
These homology theories are called {\it categorifications} of polynomial invariants, because
passage to an appropriate Euler characteristic retrieves a polynomial invariant.
Though these invariants are well understood to a great extent,
it is very difficult to compute them for a given knot whose crossing number is only moderately large.
Moreover, some of these invariants yield a very large amount of numerical data, and the problem arises of
parsing, or summarizing, the data in a reasonable way.
Since the Alexander polynomial can clearly be related to topology, it is natural to want to relate the
new invariants to topological or geometric features of knots or links.
In the 1980s William Thurston's seminal result
\cite[Corollary 2.5]{Thurston82}
that most knot complements have
the structure of a hyperbolic manifold,
combined with Mostow's rigidity theorem
\cite[Theorem 3.1]{Thurston82}
giving uniqueness of such structures,
establishes a strong connection between hyperbolic geometry and knot theory, since knots are determined by their complements.
Indeed, any geometric invariant of a knot complement, such as the hyperbolic volume, becomes a topological invariant of the knot.
Thus, investigating if data derived from the new knot invariants is related to natural differential
geometric invariants becomes another natural problem.
In this paper, we take up the family of weaving
knots $W(p,n)$, where $p$ and $n$ are positive integers. We compute the
signature for the general knot $W(p,n)$, and compute the polynomial knot invariants for the subfamily $W(3,n)$.
We explore the two problems just mentioned using our computations.
In particular, Dasbach and Lin \cite{DasbachLin} have provided some bounds on the hyperbolic volume of alternating knots
in terms of coefficients of the Jones polynomial. They also define {\it higher twist numbers} for knots in terms of coefficients
of the Jones polynomials and suggested that these may have some correlation with the hyperbolic volume of the knots.
We investigate this idea for the $W(3,n)$ knots. As for parsing the enormous amount of numerical information
yielded by our methods, we explore the approximation of normalized Khovanov homology by normal distributions
from mathematical statistics. A preprint \cite{Distributions} developing this idea further is in preparation.
Let us pause for more explanation of our decision to focus on weaving knots.
According to \cite{Weaving_vol}, these knots have recently attracted interest,
because it was conjectured that their complements would have the largest hyperbolic volume for a fixed crossing number.
Concerning the conjecture about the volume, we cite the following theorem.
\begin{theorem*}
[Theorem 1.1, \cite{Weaving_vol}]
If $p \geq 3$ and $q \geq 7$, then
\begin{equation} \label{CKPbounds}
v_{{\rm oct}}(p-2)\,q\,\biggl(1 - \frac{(2\pi)^2}{q^2}\biggr)^{3/2} \leq {\rm vol}(W(p,q))
< \bigl(v_{{\rm oct}}(p-3) + 4\,v_{{\rm tet}}) q.
\end{equation}
\end{theorem*}
Here $v_{{\rm oct}}$ and $v_{{\rm tet}}$ denote the volumes of the ideal octahedron and ideal tetrahedron respectively.
Champanerkar, Kofman, and Purcell call these bounds asymptotically sharp because their ratio approaches 1,
as $p$ and $q$ tend to infinity. Since the crossing number of $W(p,q)$ is known to be $(p{-}1)q$, the volume
bounds in the theorem imply
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{p,q \to \infty}\frac{{\rm vol}(W(p,q))}{c(W(p,q))} = v_{{\rm oct}} \approx 3.66
\end{equation*}
Their study raises the general question of examining the asymptotic behaviour of other
invariants of weaving knots. We also investigate the efficiency of the upper and lower bounds given in the theorem
for weaving knots $W(3,n)$.
Turning to practical matters, here is the weaving knot $W(3,4)$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{equation*}
\xygraph{ !{0;/r1.5pc/:}
!{\hcap}[u]
!{\hcap[3]}[u]
!{\hcap[5]}[llllllll]
!{\xcaph[-8]@(0)}[dl]
!{\xcaph[-8]@(0)}[dl]
!{\xcaph[-8]@(0)}[uul]
!{\hcap[-5]}[d]
!{\hcap[-3]}[d]
!{\hcap[-1]}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[dl]
!{\htwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uul]
!{\htwistneg}
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[dl]
!{\htwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uul]
!{\htwistneg}
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[dl]
!{\htwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uul]
!{\htwistneg}
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[dl]
!{\htwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uul]
!{\htwistneg}
}
\end{equation*} \vspace{-8em}
\end{figure}
\newline
Enumerating strands $1, \ldots, p$ from the outside inward, our example is
the closure of the braid $(\sigma_1 \sigma_2^{-1})^4$ on three strands.
The weaving knot $W(p,n)$ is obtained from the torus knot $T(p,n)$
by making a standard diagram of the torus knot alternating. Symbolically, $T(p,n)$ is the
closure of the braid $(\sigma_1 \sigma_2 \cdots \sigma_{p-1})^n$, and
$W(p,n)$ is the closure of the braid $(\sigma_1 \sigma_2^{-1} \cdots \sigma_{p-1}^{\pm 1})^n$.
Obviously, the parity of $p$ is important. If the greatest common divisor $\gcd(p,q) > 1$,
then $T(p,n)$ and $W(p,n)$ are both links with $\gcd(p,n)$ components. In general we
are interested only in the cases when $W(p,n)$ is an actual knot.
The first invariant that we compute for $W(p,n)$ is the signature $\sigma(W(p,n))$
using a combinatorial method useful for alternating knot diagrams discussed
in \cite{Lee_Endo04}. We then focus on the knots $W(3,n)$ which are closures of $3$-strand braids.
From early in the development of Khovanov homology, computer experimentation has played a role in advancing the theory.
For example, \cite{BarNatan_Categorification} provided {\em Mathematica} routines to
compute Khovanov homology of knots of up to 10 crossings and provided tables of Betti numbers. Based on the computations,
he makes a number of observations and conjectures about the structure of Khovanov homology.
Subsequently, \cite{Khovanov_Patterns} recorded some observations about patterns in Khovanov homology and a remarkable
relationship between the volume of a knot complement and the total rank of the knot's Khovanov homology. Some of the
conjectures on patterns are proved in \cite{Lee_Endo04}, on which our results depend.
In this paper we start a study of the asymptotic behavior of Khovanov homology of weaving knots. With the assistance
of the computer algebra system {\em Maple}, we provide data on
the Khovanov homology of weaving knots $W(3,n)$ with up to 652 crossings. The Khovanov homology groups are truly enormous,
so we approximate the distribution of dimensions using probability density functions. We find that
normal distributions fit the data surprisingly well.
In more detail, this paper is organized as follows.
In section \ref{Weaving}, we discuss the generalities of weave knots and compute the signature $\sigma(W(p,n))$.
We also make observation on Rasmussen's invariant \cite{Rasmussen} for these knots.
In section \ref{Hecke} we prepare to follow the development of polynomial invariants in \cite{Jones_poly86}, starting from
representations of braid groups into Hecke algebras. For weaving knots $W(3,n)$, which are naturally represented as the closures
of braids on three strands, we develop recursive formulas for their representations in the Hecke algebras.
We note that the survey \cite{BirmanMenasco} collects a number of facts and tools to facilitate computations
of invariants of knots and links that are the closures of 3-strand braids, as well as classifying the prime knots that are
closure of 3-strand braids but not of 2-strand braids. We would also like to point out that
\cite{Takahashi} studies the Jones polynomials of knots that are the closures of general 3-strand braids,
but the method is based on the skein relation satisfied by the Jones polynomial.
Our formulas are used not only
in computer calculations of the polynomial invariants we need, but also in the development of information about particular
coefficients of these polynomials.
Section \ref{Polys} builds on the recursion formulas
to develop information about the Alexander polynomial $\Delta_{W(3,n)}(t)$ and Jones polynomial $V_{W(3,n)}(t)$.
As an application we exploit the relation between the Heegard-Floer homology associated to an alternating knot
and its Alexander polynomial given in \cite[Theorem 1.3]{OSFloer},
as well as properties of Heegard-Floer homology,
to prove that the complements of the knots $W(3,n)$ are fibered over $S^1$.
In section \ref{TwistNumbersVolume} we investigate for knots $W(3,n)$ the higher twist numbers defined by Dasbach and Lin
in \cite{DasbachLin} in terms of the Jones polynomial. They ask if there is a correlation between the values of the higher
twist numbers and the hyperbolic volume of the knot complements. As new results we have formulas for the second and
third twist numbers of the knots $W(3,n)$, as well as conjectures for even higher twist numbers. We believe that
improved lower bounds on the volume of knots $W(3,n)$ can be derived from the higher twist numbers, displaying
results of computer experiments to support this idea. We also exhibit plots of higher twist numbers against volume
that support the idea that values of higher twist numbers are correlated with volume.
In section \ref{Jones-to-Khovanov} we explain how to obtain the two-variable Poincar\'{e} polynomial for Khovanov homology
with rational coefficients, and
we present the results of calculations in a few relatively small examples.
Using recent results of Shumakovitch \cite{Khovanovtorsion} that explain how, for alternating knots, the rational Khovanov homology
determines the integral Khovanov homology, we provide a display of the integral Khovanov homology of the knot $W(3,4)$.
Concerning rational Khovanov homology, we observe that the distributions of
dimensions in Khovanov homology resemble normal distributions. We explore this further in section \ref{Data}, where we present
tables displaying summaries of calculations for weaving knots $W(3,n)$ for selected values of $n$ satisfying $\gcd(3, n) = 1$
and ranging up to $n=326$. The standard deviation $\sigma$ of the normal distribution we attach to the Khovanov homology
of a weaving knot is a significant parameter. The geometric significance of this number is an open question.
In section \ref{PolynomialsExtra} we display expressions for a few polynomials arising from the Hecke algebra representations
of braid representations of $W(3,n)$, as they are used in section \ref{TwistNumbersVolume}, and values of the Jones polynomial,
Alexander polynomial and HOMFLY-PT polynomial for knots $W(3,4)$, $W(3,5)$, $W(3,10)$ and $W(3, 11)$. Finally, in section \ref{ComputerNotes}
we provide some information about the computer experiments we have performed with the knots $W(3,n)$ and how the experimental
results influenced the formulations of propositions and theorems.
Finally, we thank several colleagues, especially Dr.~Joan Birman, for advice and suggestions concerning the exposition.
\section{Generalities on Weaving knots} \label{Weaving}
We have already mentioned that weaving knots are alternating by definition.
Various facts about alternating knots facilitate our calculations of the Khovanov homology of weaving knots $W(3,n)$.
For example, we appeal first to the following theorem of Lee.
\begin{theorem}[Theorem 1.2, \cite{Lee_Endo04}] \label{locateKHLee}
For any alternating knot $L$ the Khovanov invariants
${\mathcal H}^{i,j}(L)$
are supported in two lines
\begin{equation*}
j = 2i -\sigma(L) \pm 1. \qed
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
We will see that this result also has several practical implications.
For example, to obtain a vanishing result for a particular alternating
knot, it suffices to compute the signature.
Likewise, in connection with Heegard-Floer homology for $W(p,n)$,
\cite[Theorem 1.3]{OSFloer}
essentially says that Heegard-Floer homology for an alternating knot is completely determined
by the coefficients of its Alexander polynomial and the signature.
Thus, it is important to compute the signature.
Indeed, it turns out that there is a combinatorial formula for the
signature of oriented non-split alternating links. To state the formula requires the following terminology.
\begin{definition} \label{crossings}
For a link diagram $D$ let $c(D)$ be the number of crossings of $D$, let $x(D)$ be number of
negative crossings, and let $y(D)$ be the number of positive crossings. For an
oriented link diagram, let $o(D)$ be the number
of components of $D(\emptyset)$, the diagram obtained by $A$-smoothing every crossing.
\end{definition}
\vspace{-3em}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{minipage}[h!]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\begin{equation*}
\UseComputerModernTips \xygraph{ !{0;/r3pc/:}
!{\htwist=>}[rr]
!{\htwistneg=>}[rr]
}
\end{equation*}
\caption{Positive and negative crossings}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[h!]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\begin{equation*}
\UseComputerModernTips \xygraph{ !{0;/r3pc/:}
!{\huntwist}[rr]
!{\vuntwist}
}
\end{equation*}
\caption{$A$-smoothing a positive, resp., negative, crossing}
\end{minipage}
\label{fig:crossings_smoothings}
\end{figure}
In words, $A$-regions in a neighborhood of a crossing are the regions swept out as the upper strand sweeps
counter-clockwise toward the lower strand. An $A$-smoothing removes the crossing to connect these regions.
With these definitions, we may cite the following proposition.
\begin{proposition}[Proposition 3.11, \cite{Lee_Endo04}]
\label{basic_signature}
For an oriented non-split alternating link $L$ and a reduced alternating diagram $D$ of $L$,
$\sigma(L) = o(D) - y(D) -1$. \qed
\end{proposition}
We now use this result to compute the signatures of weaving knots.
For a knot or link $W(m, n)$ drawn in the usual way, the number of crossings $c(D) = (m{-}1)n$.
In particular, for $W(2k{+}1,n)$, $c\bigl(W(2k{+}1,n)\bigr)= 2kn$; for $W(2k, n)$, $c\bigl( W(2k, n) \bigr) = (2k{-}1)n$.
Evaluating the other quantities in definition \ref{crossings}, we calculate the signatures of weaving knots.
\begin{proposition} \label{weavingsignature}
For a weaving knot $W(2k{+}1,n)$, $\sigma\bigl( W(2k{+}1,n) \bigr) = 0$,
and for $W(2k, n)$, $\sigma\bigl( W(2k, n) \bigr) = -n{+}1$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{corollary}
For a weaving knot $W(2k{+}1, n)$, the Rasmussen $s$-invariant is zero. For
a weaving knot $W(2k, n)$, the Rasmussen $s$-invariant is $-n{+}1$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
For alternating knots, it is known that the $s$-invariant coincides with the
signature \cite[Theorems 1--4]{Rasmussen}.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{equation*}
\xygraph{ !{0;/r1.5pc/:}
!{\hcap}[u]
!{\hcap[3]}[u]
!{\hcap[5]}[llllllll]
!{\xcaph[-8]@(0)}[dl]
!{\xcaph[-8]@(0)}[dl]
!{\xcaph[-8]@(0)}[uul]
!{\hcap[-5]}[d]
!{\hcap[-3]}[d]
!{\hcap[-1]}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[dl]
!{\htwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uul]
!{\htwistneg}
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[dl]
!{\htwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uul]
!{\htwistneg}
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[dl]
!{\htwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uul]
!{\htwistneg}
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[dl]
!{\htwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uul]
!{\htwistneg}
}
\end{equation*} \vspace{-9em}
\caption{The weaving knot $W(3,4)$}
\label{fig:w34}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{equation*}
\xygraph{ !{0;/r1.5pc/:}
!{\hcap}[u]
!{\hcap[3]}[u]
!{\hcap[5]}[llllllll]
!{\xcaph[-8]@(0)}[dl]
!{\xcaph[-8]@(0)}[dl]
!{\xcaph[-8]@(0)}[uul]
!{\hcap[-5]}[d]
!{\hcap[-3]}[d]
!{\hcap[-1]}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[dl]
!{\huntwist}[u]
!{\huncross}[ddl]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uu]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[dl]
!{\huntwist}[u]
!{\huncross}[ddl]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uu]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[dl]
!{\huntwist}[u]
!{\huncross}[ddl]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uu]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[dl]
!{\huntwist}[u]
!{\huncross}[ddl]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uu]
}
\end{equation*} \vspace{-9em}
\caption{The $A$-smoothing of $W(3,4)$}
\label{fig:w34a}
\end{figure}
\begin{proof}[Proof of Proposition \ref{weavingsignature}]
Consider first the example $W(3,n)$, illustrated by figures \ref{fig:w34} and \ref{fig:w34a} for $W(3,4)$.
After $A$-smoothing the diagram, the outer ring of crossings produces a circle bounding the
rest of the smoothed diagram.
On the inner ring of crossings the $A$-smoothings produce $n$ circles in a cyclic arrangement. Therefore
$o\bigl( W(3,n) \bigr) = 1 + n$. The outer ring of crossings consists of positive crossings
and the inner ring of crossings consists of negative crossings, so $x(D) = y(D) = n$.
Applying the formula of proposition \ref{basic_signature}, we obtain the result $\sigma\bigl( W(3,n) \bigr)=0$.
For the general case $W(2k{+}1, n)$, we have the following considerations.
The crossings are organized into $2k$ rings. Reading from the outside toward the center, we have
first a ring of positive crossings, then a ring of negative crossings, and so on, alternating
positive and negative. Thus, $y(D) = kn$. Considering the $A$-smoothing of the diagram of $W(2k{+}1,n)$,
as in the special case, a bounding circle appears from the smoothing of the outer ring.
A chain of $n$ disjoint smaller circles appears inside the second ring. No circles appear in the third ring, nor in any odd-numbered ring
thereafter. On the other hand, chains of $n$ disjoint smaller circles appear in each even-numbered ring. Since there are $k$ even-numbered
rings, we have $o(D) = 1 + kn$.
Applying the formula of proposition \ref{basic_signature}
\begin{equation*}
\sigma\bigl( W(2k{+}1, n)\bigr) = o(D) - y(D) -1 = (1+kn) - kn -1 = 0.
\end{equation*}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{equation*}
\xygraph{ !{0;/r1.2pc/:}
!{\hcap}[u]
!{\hcap[3]}[u]
!{\hcap[5]}[u]
!{\hcap[7]}[lllllllllll]
!{\xcaph[-11]@(0)}[dl]
!{\xcaph[-11]@(0)}[dl]
!{\xcaph[-11]@(0)}[dl]
!{\xcaph[-11]@(0)}[uuul]
!{\hcap[-7]}[d]
!{\hcap[-5]}[d]
!{\hcap[-3]}[d]
!{\hcap[-1]}[d]
!{\xcaph[2]@(0)}[dl]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[dl]
!{\htwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uul]
!{\htwistneg}[u]
!{\htwist}[ddl]
!{\htwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uul]
!{\htwistneg}[ul]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}
!{\htwist}[ddl]
!{\htwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uul]
!{\htwistneg}[ul]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}
!{\htwist}[ddl]
!{\htwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uul]
!{\htwistneg}[ul]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}
!{\htwist}[ddl]
!{\htwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[2]@(0)}[uul]
!{\htwistneg}[ul]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}
!{\htwist}[ddl]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}
}
\end{equation*} \vspace{-9em}
\caption{The weaving knot $W(4,5)$}
\label{fig:w45}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\begin{equation*}
\xygraph{ !{0;/r1.2pc/:}
!{\hcap}[u]
!{\hcap[3]}[u]
!{\hcap[5]}[u]
!{\hcap[7]}[lllllllllll]
!{\xcaph[-11]@(0)}[dl]
!{\xcaph[-11]@(0)}[dl]
!{\xcaph[-11]@(0)}[dl]
!{\xcaph[-11]@(0)}[uuul]
!{\hcap[-7]}[d]
!{\hcap[-5]}[d]
!{\hcap[-3]}[d]
!{\hcap[-1]}[d]
!{\xcaph[2]@(0)}[dl]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[dl]
!{\huntwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uul]
!{\huncross}[u]
!{\huntwist}[ddl]
!{\huntwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uul]
!{\huncross}[ul]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}
!{\huntwist}[ddl]
!{\huntwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uul]
!{\huncross}[ul]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}
!{\huntwist}[ddl]
!{\huntwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}[uul]
!{\huncross}[ul]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}
!{\huntwist}[ddl]
!{\huntwist}[d]
!{\xcaph[2]@(0)}[uul]
!{\huncross}[ul]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}
!{\huntwist}[ddl]
!{\xcaph[1]@(0)}
}
\end{equation*} \vspace{-9em}
\caption{The $A$-smoothing of $W(4,5)$}
\label{fig:w45a}
\end{figure}
For the case $W(2k, n)$, we show $W(4,5)$ in figures \ref{fig:w45} and \ref{fig:w45a} as an example.
Our standard diagram may be organized into $2k{-}1$ rings of crossings.
In each ring there are $n$ crossings, so the total number of crossings is $c(D) = (2k{-}1)n$.
In our standard representation, there is an outer ring of $n$ positive crossings, next a ring of $n$ negative crossings, alternating
until we end with an innermost ring of $n$ positive crossings. There are thus $k$ rings of $n$ positive crossings and $k{-}1$ rings
of $n$ negative crossings. Therefore, $y(D) = kn$ and $x(D) = (k{-}1)n$.
Considering the $A$-smoothing of the diagram, a bounding circle appears from the smoothing of the outer ring. As before, a chain of $n$ disjoint
smaller circles appears inside the second ring and in each successive even-numbered ring. As previously noted, there are $k{-}1$ of these
rings. No circles appear in odd-numbered rings, until we reach the last ring, where an inner bounding circle appears.
Thus, $o(D) = 1 + (k{-}1)n + 1 = (k{-}1)n + 2$.
Consequently,
\begin{equation*}
\sigma\bigl( W(2k, n)\bigr) = o(D) - y(D) -1 = \bigl((k{-}1)n + 2\bigr) - kn - 1
= -n{+}1. \qedhere
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\label{locateKH}
For a weaving knot $W(2k{+}1,n)$ the non-vanishing Khovanov homology ${\mathcal H}^{i,j}\bigl( W(2k{+}1, n) \bigr)$ lies on the
lines
\begin{equation*}
j = 2i \pm 1.
\end{equation*}
For a weaving knot $W(2k, n)$ the non-vanishing Khovanov homology ${\mathcal H}^{i,j}\bigl( W(2k, n) \bigr)$ lies on the lines
\begin{equation*}
j = 2i + n -1 \pm 1
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Substitute the calculations made in proposition \ref{weavingsignature} into
the formula of theorem \ref{locateKHLee}.
\end{proof}
\section{Recursion in the Hecke algebra} \label{Hecke}
We review briefly the definition of the Hecke algebra $H_{N+1}$ on generators $1$ and $T_1$ through $T_N$,
and we define the representation of the braid group $B_3$ on three strands in $H_3$.
Theorem \ref{heckerecursion} sets up recursion relations for the coefficients in the expansion
of the image in $H_3$ of the braid $(\sigma_1 \sigma_2^{-1})^{n}$,
whose closure is the weaving knot $W(3,n)$.
These coefficients are polynomials in a parameter $q$, which is built into the definition \ref{Heckealgebras} of
the Hecke algebra. The recursion relations are essential for automating
the calculation of the Jones polynomial for the knots $W(3,n)$.
Proposition \ref{C121} uses the relations developed in theorem \ref{heckerecursion}
to prove a vanishing result for one of the coefficients. Being able to ignore one of
the coefficients speeds up the computations slightly.
Proposition \ref{trailing} evaluates the constant terms of the families of polynomials,
proposition \ref{degreeone} evaluates the degree one coefficients, and
theorem \ref{palindromes} proves certain identities satisfied by the polynomials.
These identities imply symmetry properties of the coefficients and enable calculation
of the degrees of the polynomials in corollary \ref{degrees1}.
\begin{definition}
\label{Heckealgebras}
Working over the ground field $K$ containing an element $q \neq 0$, the Hecke
algebra $H_{N+1}$ is the associative algebra with $1$ on generators $T_1$, \ldots, $T_N$ satisfying these relations.
\begin{align}
T_iT_j &= T_jT_i, \quad \text{whenever $\abs{i-j} \geq 2$,} \label{commutativity}
\\
T_iT_{i+1}T_i &= T_{i+1}T_iT_{i+1}, \quad \text{for $1 \leq i \leq N{-}1$,} \label{interchange}
\intertext{and, finally,}
T_i^2 &= (q{-}1)T_i + q,\quad \text{for all $i$.} \label{inverse}
\end{align}
It is well-known
\cite{Jones_poly86}
that $(N{+}1)!$ is the dimension of $H_{N+1}$ over $K$.
\end{definition}
Recasting the relation
$T_i^2 = (q{-}1)T_i + q$ in the form $q^{-1} \bigl(T_i - (q-1)\bigr)\cdot T_i = 1$ shows that
$T_i$ is invertible in $H_{N+1}$ with
$T_i^{-1} = q^{-1}\bigl( T_i - (q-1) \bigr)$.
Consequently, the specification
$\rho(\sigma_i) = T_i$, combined with relations \eqref{commutativity} and \eqref{interchange}, defines a homomorphism
$\rho \colon B_{N+1} \ra H_{N+1} $ from $B_{N+1}$, the group of braids on $N{+}1$ strands,
into the multiplicative monoid of $H_{N+1}$.
For work in $H_3$, choose the ordered basis
$\{1, T_1, T_2, T_1T_2, T_2T_1, T_1T_2T_1\}$.
The word in the Hecke algebra corresponding to the knot $W(3,n)$ is formally
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:basicw3n}
\rho\bigl( (T_1T_2^{-1})^n\bigr)
= q^{-n}\bigl(C_{n,0}+ C_{n,1}\cdot T_1 + C_{n,2} \cdot T_2 + C_{n,12} \cdot T_1T_2
+ C_{n,21} \cdot T_2T_1 + C_{n,121} \cdot T_1T_2T_1 \bigr),
\end{equation}
where the coefficients $C_{n,*} = C_{n,*}(q)$ of the monomials in $T_1$ and $T_2$ are polynomials in $q$.
For $n = 1$,
\begin{equation*}
\rho ( \sigma_1 \sigma_2^{-1}) = T_1T_2^{-1} = q^{-1}\cdot\bigl( T_1 ( -(q{-}1) + T_2) \bigr)
= q^{-1}\bigl( -(q{-}1)\cdot T_1 + T_1T_2 \bigr),
\end{equation*}
so we have initial values
\begin{equation} \label{initialCs}
C_{1,0}(q) = 0, \; C_{1,1}(q) = -(q{-}1), \; C_{1,2}(q) = 0, \; C_{1,12}(q) = 1,
\; C_{1,21}(q) = 0, \; \text{and} \; C_{1,121}(q) = 0.
\end{equation}
\begin{theorem}
\label{heckerecursion}
These polynomials satisfy the following recursion relations.
\begin{align}
C_{n,0}(q) &= q^2\cdot C_{n-1,21}(q) - q(q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q) \label{cn0}
\\
C_{n,1}(q) &= - (q{-}1)^2\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q) - (q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,0}(q) + q^2\cdot C_{n-1,121}(q) \label{cn1}
\\
C_{n,2}(q) &= q\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q) \label{cn2}
\\
C_{n,12}(q) &= (q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q) + C_{n-1,0}(q) \label{cn12}
\\
\begin{split}
C_{n, 21}(q) &= -(q{-}1)\cdot C_{(n-1),2}(q) + q\cdot C_{n-1,12}(q)\\
& \hspace{3em} - (q{-}1)^2\cdot C_{n-1,21}(q) + q(q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1, 121}(q) \label{cn21}
\end{split}
\\
C_{n,121}(q) &= C_{n-1,2}(q) + (q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,21}(q) \label{cn121}
\end{align}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We have
\begin{multline} \label{exp0}
\rho( T_1T_2^{-1} )^n = \rho( T_1T_2^{-1} )^{n-1} \cdot \rho (T_1T_2^{-1})
\\
= q^{-n+1}\bigl(C_{n-1,0}+ C_{n-1,1}\cdot T_1 + C_{n-1,2} \cdot T_2 + C_{n-1,12} \cdot T_1T_2
+ C_{n-1,21} \cdot T_2T_1 + C_{n-1,121}\cdot T_1T_2T_1 \bigr)
\\ \cdot q^{-1}\bigl( -(q{-}1)\cdot T_1 + T_1T_2 \bigr)
\\
= q^{-n}\biggl( -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,0}\cdot T_1 -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,1}\cdot T_1^2 -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,2} \cdot T_2T_1
\\
-(q{-}1)C_{n-1,12} \cdot T_1T_2T_1 -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,21} \cdot T_2T_1^2 -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,121}\cdot T_1T_2T_1^2
\\
+ C_{n-1,0} \cdot T_1T_2+ C_{n-1,1}\cdot T_1^2T_2 + C_{n-1,2} \cdot T_2T_1T_2
\\
+ C_{n-1,12} \cdot T_1T_2T_1T_2 + C_{n-1,21} \cdot T_2T_1^2T_2 + C_{n-1,121}\cdot T_1T_2T_1^2T_2 \biggr)
\\
= q^{-n}\biggl( \Bigl( -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,0}\cdot T_1 -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,2} \cdot T_2T_1 -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,12} \cdot T_1T_2T_1 + C_{n-1,0} \cdot T_1T_2\Bigr)
\\
+ \Bigl\{-(q{-}1)C_{n-1,1}\cdot T_1^2 -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,21} \cdot T_2T_1^2 -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,121}\cdot T_1T_2T_1^2 + C_{n-1,1}\cdot T_1^2T_2
\\
+C_{n-1,2} \cdot T_2T_1T_2 + C_{n-1,12} \cdot T_1T_2T_1T_2 + C_{n-1,21} \cdot T_2T_1^2T_2 + C_{n-1,121}\cdot T_1T_2T_1^2T_2 \Bigr\} \biggr)
\end{multline}
after collecting powers of $q$ and expanding. In the last grouping, the first four terms inside the parentheses $( \ )$
involve only elements of the preferred basis;
the second eight terms in the pair of braces $\{\ \}$ all require further expansion, as follows.
\begin{align}
\begin{split} -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,1}\cdot T_1^2 &= -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,1}\cdot ((q-1)T_1 + q)
\\ &= -(q-1)^2C_{n-1,1}\cdot T_1 - q(q-1)C_{n-1,1} \end{split} \label{expa}
\\
\begin{split} -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,21} \cdot T_2T_1^2 &= -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,21} \cdot T_2((q-1)T_1 + q)
\\ &= -(q-1)^2C_{n-1,21}\cdot T_2T_1 - q(q-1)C_{n-1,21} \cdot T_2 \end{split} \label{expb}
\\
\begin{split} -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,121}\cdot T_1T_2T_1^2 &= -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,121} \cdot T_1T_2((q-1)T_1 + q)
\\ & = -(q-1)^2C_{n-1,121}\cdot T_1T_2T_1 - q(q-1)C_{n-1,121} \cdot T_1T_2 \end{split} \label{expc}
\\
\begin{split} C_{n-1,1}\cdot T_1^2T_2 &= C_{n-1,1}\cdot( (q{-}1) T_1 + q) T_2
\\ &= (q{-}1)C_{n-1,1}\cdot T_1T_2 + qC_{n-1,1} \cdot T_2
\end{split} \label{expd}
\\
C_{n-1,2} \cdot T_2T_1T_2 &= C_{n-1,2} \cdot T_1T_2T_1 \label{expe}
\\
\begin{split}
C_{n-1,12} \cdot T_1T_2T_1T_2 &= C_{n-1,12}\cdot T_1^2T_2T_1 = C_{n-1,12}((q{-}1)T_1 + q)T_2T_1
\\ &= (q{-}1)C_{n-1,12}\cdot T_1T_2T_1 + qC_{n-1,12}\cdot T_2T_1
\end{split} \label{expf}
\\
\begin{split}
C_{n-1,21} \cdot T_2T_1^2T_2 &= C_{n-1,21}\cdot T_2 ((q{-}1)T_1 + q) T_2
\\ &= (q{-}1)C_{n-1,21} \cdot T_2T_1T_2 + qC_{n-1,21} \cdot T_2^2
\\ &= (q{-}1)C_{n-1,21} \cdot T_1T_2T_1 + qC_{n-1,21}\cdot ((q{-}1)T_2 + q)
\\ &= (q{-}1)C_{n-1,21} \cdot T_1T_2T_1 + q(q{-}1)C_{n-1,21}\cdot T_2 + q^2C_{n-1,21})
\end{split} \label{expg}
\\
\begin{split}
C_{n-1,121}\cdot T_1T_2T_1^2T_2 &= C_{n-1,121} \cdot T_1T_2((q{-}1)T_1 + q)T_2
\\ &= (q{-}1)C_{n-1,121} \cdot T_1T_2T_1T_2 + qC_{n-1,121} \cdot T_1T_2^2
\\ &= (q{-}1)C_{n-1,121} \cdot T_1^2T_2T_1 + qC_{n-1,121}\cdot T_1((q{-}1)T_2+ q)
\\ &= (q{-}1)C_{n-1,121} \cdot ((q{-}1)T_1+ q)T_2T_1
\\ & \hspace{3em} + qC_{n-1,121}\cdot T_1((q{-}1)T_2+ q)
\\ &= (q{-}1)^2C_{n-1,121}\cdot T_1T_2T_1 + q (q{-}1)C_{n-1,121}\cdot T_2T_1
\\ & \hspace{3em} + q(q{-}1)C_{n-1,121}\cdot T_1T_2+ q^2C_{n-1,121} \cdot T_1
\end{split} \label{exph}
\end{align}
Collecting the constant terms from \eqref{expa} and \eqref{expg}, we get
\begin{align*}
C_{n,0} &= - q(q-1)C_{n-1,1} + q^2C_{n-1,21}.
\intertext{Collecting coefficients of $T_1$ from \eqref{exp0}, \eqref{expa}, \eqref{exph}, we get}
C_{n,1} &= -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,0} -(q-1)^2C_{n-1,1} + q^2C_{n-1,121}.
\intertext{Collecting coefficients of $T_2$ from \eqref{expb}, \eqref{expd}, and \eqref{expg}, we get}
C_{n,2} &= - q(q-1)C_{n-1,21} + qC_{n-1,1} + q(q{-}1)C_{n-1,21} = qC_{n-1,1}.
\intertext{Collecting coefficients of $T_1T_2$ from \eqref{exp0}, \eqref{expc}, \eqref{expd}, and \eqref{exph}, we get}
C_{n,12} &= C_{n-1,0} - q(q-1)C_{n-1,121} + (q{-}1)C_{n-1,1} + q(q{-}1)C_{n-1,121} = C_{n-1,0} + (q{-}1)C_{n-1,1}
\intertext{Collecting coefficients of $T_2T_1$ from \eqref{exp0}, \eqref{expb}, \eqref{expf}, and \eqref{exph}, we get}
C_{n,21} &= -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,2} -(q-1)^2C_{n-1,21} + qC_{n-1,12} + q (q{-}1)C_{n-1,121}.
\intertext{Collecting coefficients of $T_1T_2T_1$ from \eqref{exp0}, \eqref{expc}, \eqref{expe}, \eqref{expf}, \eqref{expg}, and \eqref{exph},
we get}
C_{n,121} &= -(q{-}1)C_{n-1,12} -(q-1)^2C_{n-1,121} + C_{n-1,2}
\\
&\hspace{3em}+ (q{-}1)C_{n-1,12} + (q{-}1)C_{n-1,21} + (q{-}1)^2C_{n-1,121}
\\
&= C_{n-1,2} + (q{-}1)C_{n-1,21}
\end{align*}
Up to simple rearrangements and expansion of notation, these are formulas \eqref{cn0} through ~\eqref{cn121}.
\end{proof}
\begin{example} \label{secondCs}
Applying the recursion formulas just proved to the table of initial polynomials,
or by computing $\rho\bigl( (\sigma_1 \sigma_2^{-1})^2 \bigr)$ directly from the definitions,
we find
\begin{align}
C_{2,0}(q) &= q^2 \cdot C_{1,21}(q) - q(q{-}1)\cdot C_{1,1}(q) = q(q{-}1)^2,
\\
C_{2,1}(q) &= -(q{-}1)^2\cdot C_{1,1}(q)-(q{-}1)\cdot C_{1,0}(q) = (q{-}1)^3,
\\
C_{2,2}(q) &= q \cdot C_{1,1}(q) = -q(q{-}1),
\\
C_{2,12}(q) &= (q{-}1)\cdot C_{1,1}(q) + C_{1,0}(q) = -(q{-}1)^2,
\\
C_{2,21}(q) &= -(q{-}1)\cdot C_{1,2}(q) + q \cdot C_{1,12}(q) - (q{-}1)^2\cdot C_{1,21}(q) = q,
\\
C_{2,121}(q) &=0.
\end{align}
\end{example}
As a first application, we have the following vanishing result.
\begin{proposition}
\label{C121}
For all $n$, $C_{n,121}(q) = 0$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
For $n \geq 1$, we claim $C_{n+1,121}(q) = 0$.
Make the inductive assumption that $C_{k,121}(q) = 0$ for $1 \leq k \leq n$. Apply \eqref{cn121}, \eqref{cn21}, and the
inductive hypothesis to write
\begin{multline*}
C_{n+1,121}(q) = C_{n,2}(q) + (q{-}1)\cdot C_{n,21}(q)
\\
\shoveleft = C_{n,2}(q)
\\
+ (q{-}1)\Bigl( -(q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,2}(q) + q\cdot C_{n-1,12}(q) - (q{-}1)^2\cdot C_{n-1,21}(q)
+ q(q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1, 121} \Bigr)
\\
= C_{n,2}(q) +
(q{-}1)\bigl( -(q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,2}(q) + q\cdot C_{n-1,12}(q) -
(q{-}1)^2\cdot C_{n-1,21}(q) \bigr).
\end{multline*}
Using \eqref{cn2} to replace the first term $C_{n,2}(q)$ and \eqref{cn12} to replace the third term factor $C_{n-1,12}(q)$ on the right,
\begin{align*}
C_{n+1, 121}(q) &= q\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q) - (q{-}1)^2C_{n-1,2}(q) + q(q{-}1)\bigl( (q{-}1)C_{n-2,1}(q)+C_{n-2,0}(q) \bigr)
\\
&\hspace{3em} - (q{-}1)^3C_{n,21}(q)
\\
&= q\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q) - (q{-}1)^2C_{n-1,2}(q) + (q{-}1)^2\Bigl( q C_{n-2,1}(q) \Bigr) + q(q{-}1)C_{n-2,0}(q)
\\
&\hspace{3em} - (q{-}1)^3C_{n,21}(q)
\\
&= q\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q) - (q{-}1)^2C_{n-1,2}(q) + (q{-}1)^2C_{n-1,2}(q)+ q(q{-}1)C_{n-2,0}(q)
\\
&\hspace{3em} - (q{-}1)^3C_{n,21}(q),
\end{align*}
where we use \eqref{cn2} in reverse to rewrite the term $q C_{n-2,1}(q) $. Making the obvious cancellation,
\begin{align*}
C_{n+1, 121} &= q\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q)+ q(q{-}1) \cdot C_{n-2,0}(q) - (q{-}1)^3 \cdot C_{n,21}(q)
\\
&=q\bigl( C_{n-1,1}+ (q{-}1)C_{n-2,0}\bigr) - (q{-}1)^3 \cdot C_{n-1, 21}
\\
&= q\Bigl(\bigl(-(q{-}1)^2 \cdot C_{n-2,1} - (q{-}1) \cdot C_{n-2,0}\bigr) + (q{-}1) \cdot C_{n-2,0}\Bigr) - (q{-}1)^3 \cdot C_{n-1, 21},
\end{align*}
since
\begin{align*}
C_{n-1,1}(q) &= - (q{-}1)^2\cdot C_{n-2,1}(q) - (q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-2,0}(q) + q^2\cdot C_{n-2,121}(q)
\\
& = - (q{-}1)^2\cdot C_{n-2,1}(q) - (q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-2,0}(q)
\end{align*}
by \eqref{cn1} and the inductive hypothesis. Therefore,
\begin{align*}
C_{n+1,121}(q) &= -q(q{-}1)^2\cdot C_{n-2,1}(q) - (q{-}1)^3\cdot C_{n-1, 21}(q)
\\
&= -(q{-}1)^2\cdot C_{n-1,2}(q) - (q{-}1)^3\cdot C_{n-1,21}(q),
\intertext{using \eqref{cn2} in the form $ C_{n-1,2}(q) = q\cdot C_{n-2,1}(q) $,}
&= -(q{-}1)^2\bigl( C_{n-1, 2}(q) - (q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,21} (q)\bigr)
\\
&= -(q{-}1)^2\cdot C_{n, 121}(q) = 0,
\end{align*}
using \eqref{cn121} and the inductive hypothesis.
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition}
\label{trailing}
For $n \geq 1$, the degree $0$ terms in the non-vanishing polynomials $C_{n,-}$ are as follows:
\begin{gather}
C_{n,0}(0) = c_{n,0,0} = 0,\;C_{n,1}(0) = c_{n,1,0} = (-1)^{n-1},\; C_{n,2}(0) = c_{n,2,0}=0,\notag
\\
C_{n,12}(0) =c_{n,12,0}= (-1)^{n-1},\; C_{n,21}(0) = c_{n,21,0}=0. \label{trailingcoefftable}
\end{gather}
\end{proposition}
Since proposition \ref{C121} proves that $C_{n, 121}(q)$ is identically zero, it does not appear in the list just given or anywhere
in the later parts of this paper.
\begin{proof}
Examinination of the formulas for the polynomials $C_{1,-}(q)$ given in equations \eqref{initialCs}
and for $C_{2, -}(q)$ given in example \ref{secondCs} starts the inductive proof.
Substituting $q{=}0$ in the recursive formulas \eqref{cn0} and \eqref{cn2} immediately yields
$C_{n,0}(0) = 0$ and $C_{n,2}(0) = 0$. Substituting $q{=}0$ into formula \eqref{cn1} yields
\begin{equation*}
c_{n,1,0} = C_{n,1}(0) = - (0{-}1)^2\cdot C_{n-1,1}(0) - (0{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,0}(0) = -(-1)^{n-2} + 0 = (-1)^{n-1},
\end{equation*}
by the inductive hypothesis. Similarly, substituting $q{=}0$ into formula \eqref{cn12} yields
\begin{equation*}
c_{n,12,0} = C_{n,12}(0) = (0{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,1}(0) + C_{n-1,0}(0) = (-1)\cdot(-1)^{n-2} + 0 = (-1)^{n-1}.
\end{equation*}
Finally, substituting $q{=}0$ into formula \eqref{cn21} yields
\begin{multline*}
c_{n,21,0}= C_{n,21}(0) = -(0{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,2}(0) + 0\cdot C_{n-1,12}(0) - (0{-}1)^2\cdot C_{n-1,21}(0)
\\
= 1\cdot 0 + 0\cdot(-1)^{n-2} - 1\cdot 0 = 0. \qedhere
\end{multline*}
\end{proof}
\begin{proposition} \label{degreeone}
For $n \geq 2$ the degree one coefficients in the non-vanishing polynomials $C_{n,-}(q)$ are as follows:
\begin{gather}
c_{n,0,1} = (-1)^n, \quad c_{n,1,1} = (-1)^n(n{+}1), \quad c_{n,2,1} = (-1)^n, \notag
\\
c_{n,12,1} = (-1)^nn, \quad c_{n,21,1} = (-1)^n. \label{degonetable}
\end{gather}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
These are all handled in the same manner. Namely, differentiate the recursive relations
for each successive polynomial, substitute $q{=}0$, and use the values from proposition \ref{trailing} as appropriate.
Concerning $C_{n,0}(q)$, differentiate \eqref{cn0} with respect to $q$, obtaining
\begin{equation*}
C_{n,0}'(q) = 2q \cdot C_{n-1,21}(q) + q^2 C_{n-1,21}'(q) - (2q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q) - q(q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,1}'(q),
\end{equation*}
whence
\begin{equation*}
c_{n,0,1} = C_{n,0}'(0) = -(-1)\cdot C_{n-1,1}(0) = (-1)^{n-2}= (-1)^n.
\end{equation*}
Concerning $C_{n,1}(q)$, differentiate \eqref{cn1} with respect to $q$, obtaining
\begin{equation*}
C_{n,1}'(q) = -2(q{-}1) \cdot C_{n-1,1}(q) - (q{-}1)^2\cdot C_{n-1,1}'(q) - C_{n-1,0}(q) - (q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,0}'(q),
\end{equation*}
whence
\begin{multline*}
c_{n,1,1} = C_{n,1}'(0) = 2\cdot C_{n-1,1}(0) - C_{n-1,1}'(0) -
C_{n-1,0}(0) + C_{n-1,0}'(0)
\\
= 2\cdot(-1)^{n-2}-c_{n-1,1,1} - 0 + (-1)^{n-1}.
\end{multline*}
Thus, we have the recursive formula $c_{n,1,1} = (-1)^n - c_{n-1,1,1}$. Starting from $C_{2,1}(q) = (q-1)^3$ and $c_{2,1,1} = 3$, we obtain
the closed form expression $c_{n,1,1} = (-1)^n(n{+}1)$.
Concerning $C_{n,2}(q)$, differentiate \eqref{cn2} with respect to $q$, obtaining
\begin{equation*}
C_{n,2}'(q) = C_{n-1,1}(q) + q \cdot C_{n-1,1}'(q),
\end{equation*}
whence
\begin{equation*}
c_{n,2,1} = C_{n,2}'(0) = C_{n-1,1}(0),\quad \text{and} \quad c_{n,2,1} = c_{n-1,1,0} = (-1)^{n-2}.
\end{equation*}
Concerning $C_{n,12}(q)$, differentiate \eqref{cn12} with respect to $q$, obtaining
\begin{equation*}
C_{n,12}'(q) = C_{n-1,1}(q) + (q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,1}'(q) + C_{n-1,0}'(q),
\end{equation*}
whence
\begin{multline*}
c_{n,12,1} = C_{n,12}'(0) = C_{n-1,1}(0) - C_{n-1,1}'(0) + C_{n-1,0}'(0)
\\
= c_{n-1,1,0} - c_{n-1,1,1} + c_{n-1,0,1} = (-1)^{n-2} -(-1)^{n-1}n + (-1)^{n-1} = (-1)^nn.
\end{multline*}
At last, concerning $C_{n,21}(q)$, we have from \eqref{cn21}
\begin{multline*}
C_{n,21}'(q) = - C_{n-1,2}(q) - (q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,2}'(q)
\\
+ C_{n-1,12}(q) + q\cdot C_{n-1,12}'(q)
\\
-2(q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,21}(q) - (q-1)^2\cdot C_{n-1,21}'(q),
\end{multline*}
so, since $C_{n-1,2}(0) = 0$ and $C_{n-1,21}(0) = 0$,
\begin{align*}
c_{n, 21,1} &= C_{n,21}'(0) = -(-1)\cdot C_{n-1,2}'(0) + C_{n-1,12}(0) - (-1)^2\cdot C_{n,21}'(0)
\\
&= c_{n-1,2,1} + c_{n-1,12,0} - c_{n-1,21,1} = (-1)^{n-3} + (-1)^{n-2} - c_{n-1,21,1}
\\
&= -c_{n-1,21,1}.
\end{align*}
Starting from $C_{2,21}(q) = q$ and $c_{2,21,1} = 1$, we deduce $c_{n,21,1}= (-1)^n$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem}
\label{palindromes}
The following identities are satisfied by the polynomials $C_{n,-}(q)$.
\begin{gather}
C_{n,0}(q) = q^{2n}C_{n,0}(q^{-1}), \quad
C_{n,1}(q) = -q^{2n-1}C_{n,1}(q^{-1}), \quad
C_{n,2}(q) = -q^{2n-1}C_{n,2}(q^{-1}), \notag
\\
C_{n,12}(q) = q^{2n-2} C_{n,12}(q^{-1}),\quad
C_{n,21}(q) = q^{2n-2}C_{n,21}(q^{-1}). \label{palindromicidentities}
\end{gather}
In terms of the coefficients of the various polynomials, we have
\begin{gather}
c_{n,0,i} = c_{n,0,2n-i}, \quad c_{n,1,i} = -c_{n,1,2n-1-i}, \quad c_{n,2,i} = -c_{n,2,2n-1-i}, \notag
\\
c_{n,12,i} = c_{n,12, 2n-2-i}, \quad c_{n,21,i} = c_{n,21,2n-2-i}. \label{coeffidentities}
\end{gather}
\end{theorem}
These identities reflect certain palindromic properties of the polynomials and permit us to compute their degrees in
corollary \ref{degrees1}. We will say a polynomial $p(x) = a_0 + a_1\, x + \cdots + a_n\,x^n$ of degree $n$ is {\em palindromic} if
\begin{equation*}
p(x) = x^np(x^{-1}) = x^n(a_0 + a_1\,x^{-1} + \cdots + a_n\,x^{-n}) = a_n + a_{n-1}\,x + \cdots + a_0\, x^n.
\end{equation*}
We say a polynomial of degree $n$ is {\em skew-palindromic} if $p(x) = - x^np(x^{-1})$.
Obviously, for a palindromic or a skew-palindromic polynomial the leading and trailing coefficients are both non-vanishing.
\begin{proof}
These are all proved by induction, using the recursive formulas from theorem \ref{heckerecursion}.
For the first identity,
\begin{align*}
C_{n,0}(q) &= q^2\cdot C_{n-1,21}(q) - q(q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q)
\\
& = q^2 \cdot q^{2n-4}C_{n-1,21}(q^{-1}) - q(q{-}1)\cdot \bigl(-q^{2n-3}C_{n-1,1}(q^{-1})\bigr)
\\
&= q^{2n}\cdot\bigl(q^{-2}C_{n-1,21}(q^{-1})\bigr) - q^{2n}\cdot\bigl(q^{-1}(q^{-1}-1)\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q^{-1})\bigr) = q^{2n}\cdot C_{n,0}(q^{-1}).
\end{align*}
For the second identity,
\begin{align*}
C_{n,1}(q) &= - (q{-}1)^2\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q) - (q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,0}(q)
\\
&= -(q{-}1)^2\cdot (-1) \cdot q^{2n-3}C_{n-1,1}(q^{-1}) -(q{-}1)\cdot q^{2n-2}C_{n-1,0}(q^{-1})
\\
&= q^{2n-1}\cdot\bigl((1{-}q^{-1})^2\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q^{-1}) + (q^{-1}{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,0}(q^{-1})\bigr)
\\
&= -q^{2n-1}\cdot C_{n,1}(q^{-1}).
\end{align*}
For the third identity,
\begin{multline*}
C_{n,2}(q) =q\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q)
=q\cdot(-1)\cdot q^{2n-3}\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q^{-1})
\\
= -q^{2n-1}\cdot\bigl( q^{-1}\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q^{-1})
= -q^{2n-1}\cdot C_{n,2}(q^{-1}).
\end{multline*}
For the fourth identity,
\begin{align*}
C_{n,12}(q) &= (q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q) + C_{n-1,0}(q)
\\
&=(q{-}1)\cdot (-1)\cdot q^{2n-3} \cdot C_{n-1,1}(q^{-1}) + q^{2n-2}\cdot C_{n-1,0}(q^{-1})
\\
&=q^{2n-2}\cdot \bigl(q^{-1}{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q^{-1}) + C_{n-1,0}(q^{-1}) \bigr)
\\
&= q^{2n-2}\cdot C_{n,12}(q^{-1}).
\end{align*}
Finally, for the fifth identity,
\begin{align*}\begin{split}
C_{n,21}(q) &= -(q{-}1)\cdot C_{n-1,2}(q) + q\cdot C_{n-1,12}(q) - (q{-}1)^2\cdot C_{n-1,21}(q)
\\
&= -(q{-}1)\cdot (-1)\cdot q^{2n-3}\cdot C_{n-1,2}(q^{-1}) + q \cdot q^{2n-4} \cdot C_{n-1,12}(q^{-1})
\\
&\hspace{18em} - (q{-}1)^2\cdot q^{2n-4}\cdot C_{n-1,21}(q^{-1})
\\
&= q^{2n-2}\cdot \bigl( q^{-1}{-}1)^2 \cdot C_{n-1,2}(q^{-1}) + q^{-1}\cdot C_{n-1,12}(q^{-1}) - (q^{-1}{-}1)^2\cdot C_{n-1,21}(q^{-1})\bigr)
\\
&= q^{2n-2}\cdot C_{n,21}(q^{-1}). \qedhere
\end{split}
\end{align*}
\end{proof}
Now we state the implications for the polyomials $C_{n,*}(q)$.
\begin{corollary}
\label{degrees1}
The degrees of the polynomials $C_{n,*}(q)$ are as follows.
\begin{gather}
\deg(C_{n,0}) = 2n{-}1, \quad \deg(C_{n,1}) = 2n{-}1 , \quad \deg(C_{n,2}) = 2n{-}2, \notag
\\
\deg(C_{n,12}) = 2n{-}2, \quad \text{and} \quad \deg(C_{n,21}) = 2n{-}3. \label{degreevalues}
\end{gather}
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Consider first $C_{n,0}(q)$. We know from proposition \ref{trailing} that $C_{n,0}(0){=}0$, so $q$ is a
factor. That is, $P_{n,0}(q) = q^{-1}C_{n,0}(q)$ is also a polynomial, and its trailing coefficient is $c_{n,0,1} \neq 0$ by proposition
\ref{degreeone}. We observe
\begin{equation*}
P_{n,0}(q) = q^{-1}C_{n,0}(q) = q^{-1}\cdot q^{2n}C_{n,0}(q^{-1}) = q^{2n-2}\cdot q\,C_{n,0}(q^{-1}) = q^{2n-2}\cdot P_{n,0}(q^{-1}).
\end{equation*}
Thus, $C_{n,0}(q)$ is $q$ times a palindromic polynomial of degree $2n{-}2$, which means $C_{n,0}(q)$ has degree $2n{-}1$.
Similarly, we conclude that $C_{n,2}(q)$ and $C_{n,21}(q)$ are, respectively, $q$ times a skew-palindromic polynomial of
degree $2n{-}3$ and $q$ times a palindromic polynomial of degree $2n{-}4$. Thus $C_{n,2}(q)$ has degree $2n{-}2$ and
$C_{n,21}(q)$ has degree $2n{-}3$. Since $C_{n,1}(0){\neq}0$ and $C_{n,12}(0){\neq}0$, the identities stated in theorem
yield that $C_{n,1}(q)$ is a skew-palindromic polynomial of degree $2n{-}1$ and that $C_{n,12}(q)$ is a palindromic polynomial
of degree $2n{-}2$.
\end{proof}
Accordingly, set
\begin{align}
C_{n,0}(q) &= \sum_{i=1}^{2n-1} c_{n,0,i}q^i, &
C_{n,1}(q) &= \sum_{i=0}^{2n-1} c_{n,1,i}q^i, &
C_{n,2}(q) &= \sum_{i=1}^{2n-2} c_{n,2,i}q^i, \notag
\\
C_{n,12}(q) &= \sum_{i=0}^{2n-2} c_{n,12,i}q^i,
& &\text{and} &
C_{n,21}(q) &= \sum_{i=1}^{2n-3} c_{n,21,i}q^i. \label{Cexpansions}
\end{align}
\section{Obtaining the Polynomial Invariants} \label{Polys}
Following the construction given in
\cite[p.288]{Jones_poly86}
we work over the function field $K = {\mathbf C}(q,z)$
and follow their recipes to obtain expressions for the two-variable HOMFLY-PT polynomials,
the one-variable Jones polynomials $V_{W(3,n)}(t)$,
and the Alexander polynomials $\Delta_{W(3,n)}(t)$.
The expressions are subsequently refined to incorporate information obtained in section \ref{Hecke}.
From this point we evaluate the span of the Jones polynomial $V_{W(3,n)}(t)$ in proposition \ref{span}, a
result already known to Kauffman \cite[Theorem~2.10]{States}, where we demonstrate how to use
equations \eqref{trailingcoefftable} and \eqref{coeffidentities}.
Let $H_{N+1}$ be the Hecke algebra over $K$ corresponding
to $q$ with $N$ generators as in definition \ref{Heckealgebras}. The
starting point is the following theorem.
\begin{theorem}
\label{traces}
For $N \geq 1$ there is a family of trace functions $\Tr \colon H_{N+1} \ra K$ compatible with the inclusions $H_N \ra H_{N+1}$ satisfying
\begin{enumerate}
\item $\Tr(1) = 1$,
\item $\Tr$ is $K$-linear and $ \Tr(ab) = \Tr(ba)$,
\item If $a, b \in H_N$, then $\Tr (aT_Nb) = z\Tr(ab)$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
Property 3 enables the calculation of $\Tr$ on basis elements of $H_{N+1}$ through use of the defining relations and induction.
For $H_3$, note that
\begin{equation*}
\Tr(T_1) = \Tr(T_2) = z, \quad \Tr(T_1T_2) = \Tr(T_2T_1) = z^2, \quad \Tr(T_1T_2T_1) = z \Tr(T_1^2) = z \bigl((q{-}1)z + q\bigr),
\end{equation*}
and we put $w=1{-}q{+}z$.
The next step toward the polynomial invariants of the knot that is the closure of
the braid $\alpha \in B_{N+1}$ is given by the formula
\begin{equation*}
V_{\alpha}(q,z) = \Bigl(\frac{1}{z}\Bigr)^{(N + e(\alpha))/2}
\cdot \Bigl( \frac{q}{w} \Bigr)^{(N-e(\alpha))/2}\cdot \Tr\bigl(\rho(\alpha)\bigr),
\end{equation*}
where $e(\alpha)$ is the exponent sum of the word $\alpha$. The expression defines an element in the quadratic extension $K(\sqrt{q/zw})$.
For the weaving knot $W(3,n)$, viewed as the closure of $(\sigma_1\sigma_2^{-1})^n$, we have the exponent sum $e=0$, and $N=2$, and
\begin{equation*}
\rho\bigl( (\sigma_1\sigma_2^{-1})^n \bigr)= (T_1T_2^{-1})^n
= q^{-n}\bigl( C_{n,0}(q) + C_{n,1}(q)\cdot T_1 + C_{n,2}(q) \cdot T_2 + C_{n,12}(q) \cdot T_1T_2 + C_{n,21}(q) \cdot T_2T_1\bigr) ,
\end{equation*}
thanks to proposition \ref{C121}, which says the expression for $(T_1T_2^{-1})^n$ requires only the use of the basis elements
$1$, $T_1$, $T_2$, $T_1T_2$ and $T_2T_1$. Then we have
\begin{multline}
V_{(\sigma_1\sigma_2^{-1})^n}(q,z) \\ = \Bigl(\frac{1}{z}\Bigr)\cdot \Bigl( \frac{q}{w} \Bigr)\cdot q^{-n}
\Tr \bigl(C_{n,0}(q) + C_{n,1}(q)\cdot T_1 + C_{n,2}(q) \cdot T_2 + C_{n,12}(q) \cdot T_1T_2
+ C_{n,21}(q) \cdot T_2T_1 \bigr)
\\
= \Bigl(\frac{q}{zw}\Bigr)\cdot q^{-n} \cdot \bigl( C_{n,0}(q) + C_{n,1}(q) \cdot z + C_{n,2}(q) \cdot z + C_{n,12}(q) \cdot z^2
+ C_{n,21} (q) \cdot z^2 \bigr), \label{Heckeoutput}
\end{multline}
using the facts that $\Tr T_1 = \Tr T_2 = z$ and $\Tr T_1T_2 = \Tr T_2T_1 = z^2$.
This expression is the starting point for our manipulations.
Following \cite{Jones_poly86}, we point out that the universal skein invariant
$P_{W(3,n)}(\ell, m)$, an element of the Laurent polynomial ring ${\mathbf Z}[\ell, \ell^{-1}, m , m^{-1}]$, is obtained by rewriting
$V_{(\sigma_1\sigma_2^{-1})^n}(q,z)$ in terms of $\ell = i(z/w)^{1/2}$ and $m = i(q^{-1/2} - q)$, a task
easily managed in a computer algebra system by simplifying $V_{(\sigma_1\sigma_2^{-1})^n}(q,z)$ with
respect to side relations. Starting from
$P_{W(3,n)}(\ell, m)$, the Jones polynomial $V_{W(3,n)}(t)$ is obtained by
setting $\ell = it $ and $m = i (t^{1/2}{-}t^{-1/2}) $, the Alexander polynomial $\Delta_{W(3,n)}(t)$ is obtained
by setting $\ell = i$ and $m = i (t^{1/2}{-}t^{-1/2})$, and the HOMFLY-PT polynomial is obtained by
setting $\ell = ia$ and $m = iz$. We have no specific use for the HOMFLY-PT polynomial
in this paper, so we content ourselves with a few values in section \ref{PolynomialsExtra}.
To obtain the Alexander polynomial from $V_{(\sigma_1\sigma_2^{-1})^n}(q,z)$, it is useful to first rewrite
\begin{equation*}
V_{(\sigma_1\sigma_2^{-1})^n}(q,z)
= q^{-n+1} \cdot \bigl( C_{n,0}(q)\cdot(zw)^{-1} + \bigl(C_{n,1}(q){+}C_{n,2}(q)\bigr) \cdot w^{-1}
+ \bigl(C_{n,12}(q) {+} C_{n,21} (q)\bigr) \cdot zw^{-1} \bigr).
\end{equation*}
First set $q=t$ and make the substitutions
\begin{equation*}
z = \frac{\ell^2(t-1)}{1+\ell^2}, \quad w = 1- q + z = 1- t + z = \frac{-1(t{-}1)}{1+\ell^2}
\end{equation*}
to obtain an expression
\begin{multline*}
t^{-n+1}\cdot \Bigl( C_{n,0}(t) \cdot \biggl(\frac{(1+\ell^2)}{\ell^2}\biggr)^2\cdot \frac{1}{(t-1)t}
+ \bigl(C_{n,1}(t) + C_{n,2}(t)\bigr)\cdot \frac{(-1)\dot( 1 + \ell^2)}{t-1}
\\
+ \bigl(C_{n,12}(t) + C_{n,21}(t)\bigr)\cdot (-1) \cdot \ell^2\Bigr)
\end{multline*}
Now make the substitution $\ell = i$ and we arrive at
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:alexander}
\Delta_{W(3,n)}(t) = t^{-n+1} \bigl(C_{n, 12}(t) + C_{n, 21}(t)\bigr).
\end{equation}
Evidently a lot of information from the braid representation of $W(3,n)$ has been lost.
To see what remains, corollary \ref{degrees1} says that the degree of $C_{n,12}(t)$ is $2n{-}2$ and
the degree of $C_{n,21}(t)$ is $2n{-}3$. It follows that the degree of $\Delta_{W(3,n)}(t)$ is
$(2n{-}2) - n + 1= n{-}1$. Moreover, the lowest order non-vanishing coefficients are
$c_{n, 12, 0} = (-1)^n $ and $c_{n,21,1} = (-1)^n$. By theorem \ref{palindromes} we also have
$c_{n, 12, 2n-2} = c_{n, 12, 0} = (-1)^n$ and $c_{n, 21, 2n-3} = c_{n, 21, 1}= (-1)^n$. Thus,
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:alexanderw3n}
\Delta_{W(3,n)}(t) = a_0 + \sum_{s>0} a_s(t^s+t^{-s}) = (-1)^n \cdot t^{-n+1} + \cdots + (-1)^n\cdot t^{n-1}.
\end{equation}
\begin{theorem}
\label{HFhomology}
The Seifert genus of $W(3,n)$ is $n{-}1$, and the complement of $W(3,n)$ is fibered over $S^1$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We know the signature of $W(3,n)$ is zero, by Proposition \ref{weavingsignature}, so
we apply \cite[Theorem 1.3]{OSFloer} relating the coefficients of the Alexander polynomial and the signature
of $W(3,n)$ to the ranks of the Heegard-Floer homology groups of $S^3$ associated to $W(3,n)$. The result is
\begin{equation*}
\widehat{HFK}_s(S^3, W(3,n), s) =
\begin{cases}
{\mathbf Z}^{\abs{a_s}}, \quad \text{$0 \leq s \leq n{-}1$},
\\
0, \quad \text{else}.
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
By \cite[Theorem 1.2]{OSFloer2}, Seifert genus of $W(3,n)$ is $n{-}1$.
Since we have explicitly
\begin{equation*}
\widehat{HFK}_s(S^3, W(3,n), n{-}1) \iso {\mathbf Z},
\end{equation*}
\cite[Theorem 2.5]{Manolescu} says that the complement of $W(3,n)$ is fibered over $S^1$.
\end{proof}
Turning to the Jones polynomial, we follow a similar scheme, but the details are necessarily more complicated. To start, the substitutions
\begin{equation*}
q = t, \quad z = \frac{t^2}{1+t}, \quad w = \frac{1}{1+t}
\end{equation*}
in \eqref{Heckeoutput} lead to the one-variable Jones polynomial
\begin{multline*}
V_{W(3,n)}(t) = \frac{t(1{+}t)^2}{t^2} \cdot t^{-n} \cdot
\Bigl( C_{n,0}(t) + (C_{n,1}(t)+C_{n,2}(t))\cdot \frac{t^2}{1{+}t} + (C_{n,12}(t) + C_{n,21}(t)) \cdot \frac{t^4}{(1{+}t)^2}\Bigr)
\\
= t^{-n-1}\cdot\bigl( (1{+}t)^2\cdot C_{n,0}(t) + (1{+}t)\cdot( C_{n,1}(t) + C_{n,2}(t) )\cdot t^2 + (C_{n,12}(t) + C_{n,21}(t))\cdot t^4 \bigr).
\end{multline*}
\begin{example}
For $W(3,1)$, which is the unknot, we have
\begin{align*}
V_{W(3,1)}(t)
&= t^{-2}\cdot\bigl( (1{+}t)^2\cdot C_{1,0}(t) + (1{+}t)\cdot( C_{1,1}(t) + C_{1,2}(t) )\cdot t^2 + (C_{1,12}(t) + C_{1,21}(t))\cdot t^4 \bigr)
\\
&= t^{-2}\cdot\bigl( (1{+}t)^2\cdot 0 + (1{+}t)\cdot(-(t-1) + 0 )\cdot t^2 + (1 + 0 )\cdot t^4 \bigr)
\\
&= t^{-2}\cdot ( (1{-}t^2) t^2 + t^4 ) = 1.
\end{align*}
\end{example}
\begin{example} \label{jonesfig8knot}
For $W(3,2)$, which is the figure-8 knot, we have
\begin{align*}
V_{W(3,2)}(t)
&=t^{-3}\cdot \bigl( (1{+}t)^2\cdot C_{2,0}(t) + (1{+}t)\cdot( C_{2,1}(t) + C_{2,2}(t) )\cdot t^2
+ (C_{2,12}(t) + C_{2,21}(t))\cdot t^4 \bigr)
\\
&=t^{-3}\cdot \bigl( (1{+}t)^2\cdot t(t{-}1)^2 +(1{+}t)\cdot( (t{-}1)^3 - t(t{-}1) ) \cdot t^2
+( -(t{-}1)^2+ t ) \cdot t^4 \bigr)
\\
&= t^{-3}\cdot \bigl( t^5 - t^4 + t^3 -t^2 + t \bigr) = t^2 - t + 1 -t^{-1} + t^{-2}
\end{align*}
\end{example}
Now we take a closer look at the formal expression
\begin{multline*}
V_{W(3,n)}(t) =
\\
= t^{-n-1}\cdot\bigl( (1{+}t)^2\cdot C_{n,0}(t) + (1{+}t)\cdot( C_{n,1}(t) + C_{n,2}(t) )\cdot t^2 + (C_{n,12}(t) + C_{n,21}(t))\cdot t^4 \bigr)
\end{multline*}
for the Jones polynomial of the weaving knot $W(3,n)$.
Incorporating the formal expansions given in equations \eqref{Cexpansions}, we have
\begin{align}
V_{W(3,n)}(t)
&= t^{-n-1}\cdot \bigl( (1{+}t)^2\cdot C_{n,0}(t) + (t^2{+}t^3)\cdot( C_{n,1}(t) + C_{n,2}(t) ) + t^4 \cdot (C_{n,12}(t) + C_{n,21}(t)) \bigr) \notag
\\
\begin{split}
&= t^{-n-1}\cdot \Biggl( (1{+}t)^2\cdot \biggl(\sum_{i=1}^{2n-1} c_{n,0,i}t^i\biggr)
\\
& \hspace{0.15\linewidth} + (t^2{+}t^3)\cdot \Bigl( \sum_{i=0}^{2n-1} c_{n,1,i}t^i + \sum_{i=1}^{2n-2} c_{n,2,i}t^i \Bigr)
\\
& \hspace{0.30\linewidth} + t^4 \cdot \biggl(\sum_{i=0}^{2n-2} c_{n,12,i}t^i + \sum_{i=1}^{2n-3} c_{n,21,i}t^i\biggr) \Biggr). \label{Vformal1}
\end{split}
\\
&= t^{-n-1}\cdot P(t) = t^{-n-1}\cdot( p_0 + p_1\,t + p_2 \, t^2 + p_3\, t^3 + p_4\, t^4 + \cdots). \label{Vformal2}
\end{align}
The first piece of information about the Jones polynomial $V_{W(3,n)}(t)$ we obtain by using results about the $C_{n,-}$ is the following
fact, due to Kauffmann \cite[Theorem~2.10]{States}.
\begin{proposition} \label{span}
The span of the Jones polynomial $V_{W(3,n)}(t)$ is $2n$, and the trailing and leading coefficients are $(-1)^n$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We observe that $ p_0 = P(0) = 1\cdot c_{n,0,0} = 0 $ by proposition \ref{trailing}, so the lowest non-zero term in $V_{W(3,n)}(t)$ is
$t^{-n-1}\cdot p_1\,t$. Clearly, $p_1 = c_{n,0,1} = (-1)^{n}$ by proposition \ref{degreeone}.
One identifies the top degree term in the polynomial factor of \eqref{Vformal1} as the term of degree $2n{+}2$ with coefficient
\begin{equation*}
c_{n,1,2n-1} + c_{n,12,2n-2} = -c_{n,1,0} + c_{n,12,0} = -(-1)^{n-1} + (-1)^{n-1} = 0,
\end{equation*}
where we use the palindromic equations \eqref{coeffidentities} and the table of trailing coefficients
\eqref{trailingcoefftable} to do the computation.
Turning to the term of degree $2n{+}1$, we find the coefficient is
\begin{align*}
c_{n,0,2n-1} &+ c_{n,1,2n-1} + c_{n,1, 2n-2} + c_{n,2,2n-2} + c_{n,12, 2n-3} + c_{n,21,2n-3}
\\
&= c_{n,0,1} - c_{n,1,0} - c_{n,1,1} -c_{n,2,1} + c_{n,12,1} + c_{n,21,1}
\\
&= (-1)^n - (-1)^{n-1} - (-1)^n(n{+}1) - (-1)^n + (-1)^nn + (-1)^n
\\
&= (-1)^n,
\end{align*}
using first \eqref{coeffidentities} and then the tables \eqref{trailingcoefftable} and \eqref{degonetable} to complete the evaluation.
\end{proof}
Thus, we may write the Jones polynomial in the form
\begin{equation*}
V_{W(3,n)}(t) = (-1)^n\, t^{-n} + v_{-n+1}t^{-n+1} + v_{-n+2}t^{-n+2} + \cdots + v_{n-2}t^{n-2} + v_{n-1}t^{n-1} + (-1)^n\,t^n,
\end{equation*}
where it is known that $v_{-n+i} = v_{n-i}$, since $W(p,q)$ for $p$ odd is amphicheiral.
The twist number of $W(3,n)$ is $\abs{v_{-n+1}}{+}\abs{v_{n-1}}$ according to \cite{DasbachLin}.
We will now recompute the twist number for $n \geq 3$ from the information we have gathered
about the coefficients of the Jones polynomial.
First, observe that
\begin{equation}\label{vfirst}
v_{-n+1}t^{-n+1} = t^{-n-1}\cdot p_2 \, t^2,
\end{equation}
and $p_2\,t^2$ is computed from
\begin{equation*}
(1+2t)\cdot(c_{n,0,1}\,t + c_{n,0,2}\,t^2) + t^2\cdot c_{n,1,0} = c_{n,0,1}\, t + (c_{n,0,2}{+}2\,c_{n,0,1}{+}c_{n,1,0})\cdot t^2,
\end{equation*}
and no other terms from the expansion \eqref{Vformal1}, because $c_{n,2,0} = 0$ by proposition \ref{trailing}.
We have
\begin{align*}
p_2 &= c_{n,0,2}+2\,c_{n,0,1}+c_{n,1,0} = c_{n,0,2} + 2 \cdot (-1)^n + (-1)^{n-1}
\intertext{by propositions \ref{trailing} and \ref{degreeone},}
&= c_{n,0,2} + (-1)^n.
\end{align*}
We identify $c_{n,0,2}$ by reducing the recursive description \eqref{cn0} mod $q^3$, obtaining
\begin{align*}
c_{n,0,0} + c_{n,0,1} \, q + c_{n,0,2}\, q^2 &\equiv q^2\cdot (c_{n-1, 21,0}) + (- q^2 + q)\cdot(c_{n-1,1,0} + c_{n-1,1,1}\, q)
\\
&\equiv c_{n-1,1,0}\,q + (c_{n-1,21,0} +c_{n-1,1,1}{-}c_{n-1,1,0})\cdot q^2 \mod q^3
\end{align*}
After extracting the coefficient of $q^2$,
\begin{align}
c_{n,0,2} &= c_{n-1,21,0} +c_{n-1,1,1}{-}c_{n-1,1,0} \notag
\\
&= 0 + (-1)^{n-1}((n{-}1)+1) - (-1)^{n-2} = (-1)^{n-1}(n+1), \quad \text{for $n \geq 3$,} \label{cn0deg2}
\end{align}
by propositions \ref{trailing} and \ref{degreeone}. Since we have used the formula for $c_{n-1,1,1}$ in \eqref{degonetable},
we must assume $n{-}1 \geq 2$.
Referring to \eqref{vfirst},
\begin{equation*}
v_{-n+1} = p_2= c_{n,0,2}+(-1)^n = (-1)^{n-1}n + (-1)^{n-1} + (-1)^n = (-1)^{n-1}n.
\end{equation*}
Thus, we have reproved the following formula given in theorem 5.1 of \cite{DasbachLin}.
\begin{proposition} \label{twistnumber}
For $n \geq 3$, the twist number of $W(3,n)$ is $\abs{v_{-n+1}}{+}\abs{v_{n-1}} {=} n {+} n {=} 2n$. \qed
\end{proposition}
\section{Higher Twist Numbers and Volume} \label{TwistNumbersVolume}
In \cite{DasbachLin}, Dasbach and Lin define higher twist numbers of a knot in terms of the Jones polynomial,
with the idea that these invariants also correlate with the hyperbolic volume of the knot complement.
If
\begin{equation*}
V_K(t) = \lambda_{-m}t^{-m} + \lambda_{-m+1}t^{-m+1} + \cdots + \lambda_{n-1}t^{n-1} + \lambda_nt^n,
\end{equation*}
then the $j$th twist number of $K$ is $T_j(K) = \abs{\lambda_{-m+j}} + \abs{\lambda_{n-j}}$.
Note that twist numbers $T_j(K)$ are only defined for $j$ within the span of the Jones polynomial. In the
case of weaving knots $W(3,n)$, the relevant twist numbers are defined for $1 \leq j \leq n{-}1$.
In proposition \ref{twistnumber} we have recomputed the first twist number of $W(3,n)$ using our results from section \ref{Hecke}.
In theorems \ref{twistnumber2} and \ref{twistnumber3} we extend the technique to compute the second and third twist numbers.
In the appendix to \cite{DasbachLin} one finds a scatter plot generated from a table of alternating knots of 14
crossings by plotting along a horizontal axis the higher twist numbers of the knots and along the vertical axis
the volume of the complement. The authors also construct similar plots starting from a table of non-alternating
knots of 14 crossings. In both cases, there appears to be some correlation between these combinatorial invariants and the
geometric invariant. We are going to explore how well higher twist numbers and volume correlate as the number of crossings
increases.
We supplement our rigorous calculations of $T_2\bigl(W(3,n)\bigr)$ and $T_3\bigl(W(3,n)\bigr)$
with some conjectural calculations in the following table of higher twist numbers.
To obtain these results, we use {\em Mathematica} or {\em Maple}
to extract the coefficients $\lambda_{-n+k}$ of $t^{-n+k}$ in $V_{W(3,n)}(t)$ for $k = 4$, $5$, $6$, and $7$
associated to weaving knots $W(3,n)$ starting near $n = 2k$.
We conjecture that the $k$th twist number $T_k\bigl(W(3,n)\bigr)$ is a polynomial in $n$ of degree $k$.
Taking iterated differences of the coefficient sequences, we find they are
consistent with the conjecture as long as $n$ is sufficiently large. The following formulas for the twist numbers
$T_k\bigl(W(3,n)\bigr) = 2 \abs{\lambda_{-n+k}}$ for $k = 4$, $5$, $6$, and $7$ were produced by fitting polynomials
to sufficiently large selections of coefficients $\lambda_{-n+k}$ and comparing polynomial
values with computed coefficients for different values of $n$.
\begin{table}[h!]
\caption{Higher twist numbers for $W(3,n)$}
\label{highertwists}
\centering \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.25}
\begin{tabular}[h]{|l|l|}\hline
$k$ & $T_k\bigl(W(3,n)\bigr)$
\\ \hline
2 & $-n+n^2$
\\ \hline
$3$ & $ n ( n{-}1 ) ( n{-}2 )/3 +2\,n$
\\ \hline
$4$ & $-(9/2)\,n+(35/12)\,{n}^{2} -(1/2)\,{n^{3}}+(1/12)\,{n^{4}}$
\\ \hline
$5$ & $ (42/5) \,n - (35/6)\,{n}^{2} + (19/12)\,{n}^{3} - (1/6)\,n^{4} + (1/60)\,{n}^{5}$
\\ \hline
$6$ & $- (52/3) \,n + (2237/180) \,n^2 - (29/8) \,n^3 + (41/72) \,n^4 - (1/24)\,n^{5} + (1/360) \, n^{6} $
\\ \hline
$7$ & $(254/7) \,n - (413/15) \,n^2 + (1541/180)\,n^3 $
\\
& $\qquad \qquad \qquad - (35/24)\,n^4 + (11/72) \,n^5 - (1/120)\, n^6 + (1/2520)\, n^7$ \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
Figures \ref{fig:secondtwistvsvolume}, \ref{fig:thirdtwistvsvolume}, and \ref{fig:fourthtwistvsvolume}
plot horizontally values of the twist numbers $T_2$, $T_3$, and the conjectured $T_4$ and vertically
values of the volume of the link complement. We used the program SnapPy \cite{SnapPy} to compute estimates of
the volume.
In addition,
one can ask how efficient are the bounds given in \eqref{CKPbounds} for the volume of weaving knots $W(p,q)$.
For weaving knots $W(3,n)$ the bounds simplify to
\begin{equation*}
v_{{\rm oct}}\,n\,\biggl(1 - \frac{(2\pi)^2}{n^2}\biggr)^{3/2} \leq {\rm vol}(W(3,n)) < 4\,v_{{\rm tet}}\cdot n.
\end{equation*}
If we consider the volume relative to the crossing number ${\rm vol}(W(3,n))/2n$, then we have the chain
\begin{equation} \label{CKPboundspecialrelative}
\frac{v_{{\rm oct}}}{2}\biggl(1 - \frac{(2\pi)^2}{n^2}\biggr)^{3/2} \leq \frac{{\rm vol}(W(3,n))}{2n} < 2\,v_{{\rm tet}}
\end{equation}
For a fixed value of $n$ there is a gap between the upper and lower bounds.
We can ask whether or not better bounds on the relative volume of weaving knots $W(3,n)$ can be teased out of the
higher twist numbers of these knots.
To obtain some information on the question we appeal to algorithms in the program SnapPy to generate estimates of the
volume of these knots.
We perform the following manipulations on the formula for $T_k\bigl(W(3,n)\bigr)$. First take the $k$th root
of the expression and then divide by the crossing number $2n$ to obtain an expression whose limit as
$n$ tends to infinity is finite. Then multiply by a normalization constant $C_k$ so that
\begin{equation*}
\lim_{n \ra \infty}C_k \frac{\sqrt[k]{T_k\bigl(W(3,n)\bigr)}}{2n} = 2 \, v_{{\rm tet}}.
\end{equation*}
In figure \ref{fig:comparingbounds}
we show the upper bound from equation \eqref{CKPboundspecialrelative} as a horizontal line at the top of the
plot and the lower bound as the lowest curve. Values ${\rm vol}\bigl(W(3,n)\bigr)/2n$ according to SnapPy
are plotted as points.
We also plot $C_k \cdot \sqrt[k]{T_k\bigl(W(3,n)\bigr)}/2n$ for $k=2$, $3$, and $4$. We see that all three of these
curves provide better lower bounds on the relative volume than the lower bound given in \eqref{CKPboundspecialrelative}.
Indeed, for $n$ sufficiently large the lower bound from $T_2$ is better than the bound from $T_3$, which is, in turn,
better than the bound from $T_4$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.75\linewidth]{comparebounds_31jan.eps}
\caption{Comparing bounds}
\label{fig:comparingbounds}
\end{figure}
\begin{theorem}
\label{twistnumber2}
For $n \geq 5$, the second twist number of $W(3,n)$ is $n(n-1)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Comparing \eqref{Vformal1} with \eqref{Vformal2}, and noting that $C_{n,12}(t)$ and $C_{n,21}(t)$ start in degrees $0$ and $1$, respectively,
we want to compute the term $p_3\,t^3$ from the truncated expansion
\begin{multline*}
p_1\, t + p_2\,t^2 + p_3\,t^3
\\
= (1+t)^2(c_{n,0,0} + c_{n,0,1}t + c_{n,0,2}\,t^2 + c_{n,0,3}\,t^3)
+ (t^2+t^3)\bigl((c_{n,1,0} + c_{n,1,1}\,t) + (c_{n,2,0} + c_{n,2,1}\,t)\bigr).
\end{multline*}
Extracting the coefficient of $t^3$ and substituting from \eqref{trailingcoefftable} and \eqref{degonetable} as well as
equation \eqref{cn0deg2} yields
\begin{multline} \label{p3}
p_3 = (c_{n,0,3} + 2 c_{n,0,2} + c_{n,0,1}) + (c_{n,1,0} + c_{n,1,1}) + (c_{n,2,0} + c_{n,2,1})
\\
=( c_{n,0,3} + 2(-1)^{n-1}(n+1)+ (-1)^n) + \bigl( (-1)^{n-1} + (-1)^n(n+1) \bigr) + \bigl(0+ (-1)^{n} \bigr)
\\
= c_{n,0,3} + (-1)^{n-1}n. \hspace{12em}
\end{multline}
We reduce the recursive formula \eqref{cn0} modulo $t^4$ to compute $c_{n,0,3}$.
\begin{align*}
C_{n,0}(t) &= t^2\cdot C_{n-1,21}(t) - t(t-1)\cdot C_{n-1,1}(t)
\\
& \equiv t^2(c_{n-1,21,0} + c_{n-1,21,1}\, t) - t^2(c_{n-1,1,0} + c_{n-1,1,1}\,t) + t(c_{n-1,1,0} + c_{n-1,1,1}\,t + c_{n-1,1,2}\,t^2)
\\
&\quad \mod t^4,
\end{align*}
so after extracting the coefficient of $t^3$, we have
\begin{multline} \label{cn0deg3}
c_{n,0,3} = c_{n-1,21,1} - c_{n-1,1,1} + c_{n-1,1,2}
\\
= (-1)^{n-1}-(-1)^{n-1}n + c_{n-1,1,2} = (-1)^{n}(n{-}1) + c_{n-1,1,2}.
\end{multline}
Thus, we need a formula for $c_{n-1,1,2}$. For this return to the recursive formula \eqref{cn1} and differentiate twice, obtaining
\begin{equation*}
C_{n,1}^{(2)}(q) = -2\cdot C_{n-1,1}(q) - 4(q-1)\cdot C_{n-1,1}'(q) - (q-1)^2\cdot C_{n-1,1}^{(2)}(q) - 2 C_{n-1,0}'(q) -(q-1)\cdot C_{n-1,0}^{(2)}(q).
\end{equation*}
Substituting $q=0$, we get
\begin{align*}
2 c_{n,1,2} &= -2 c_{n-1,1,0} + 4 c_{n-1,1,1} - 2 c_{n-1,1,2} - 2 c_{n-1,0,1} +2 c_{n-1,0,2},
\\
&=-2\cdot (-1)^{n-2} + 4 \cdot (-1)^{n-1}n - 2 c_{n-1,1,2} - 2(-1)^{n-1} + 2 (-1)^{n-2}\,n,
\end{align*}
applying propositions \ref{trailing} and \ref{degreeone} and formula \eqref{cn0deg2}. Note that the use of
\eqref{cn0deg2} requires $n{-}1 \geq 3$, so we have to have $n\geq 4$.
Rewriting this expression, we get
\begin{equation}
c_{n,1,2} + c_{n-1,1,2} = (-1)^{n-1}n, \quad \text{for $n \geq 4$.} \label{cn1deg2recursion}
\end{equation}
Now we create a closed form expression for $c_{n,1,2}$ by forming a telescoping sum.
\begin{align*}
c_{n,1,2} + c_{n-1,1,2} &= (-1)^{n-1}n
\\
- c_{n-1,1,2} - c_{n-2,1,2} &= (-1)^{n-1}(n{-}1)
\\ &\cdots
\\
(-1)^k c_{n-k,1,2} + (-1)^k c_{n-k-1,1,2} &= (-1)^k(-1)^{n-k-1}(n{-}k)
\\
&\cdots
\\
(-1)^{n-5} c_{5,1,2} + (-1)^{n-5}c_{4,1,2} &= (-1)^{n-1}5
\\
(-1)^{n-4} c_{4,1,2} + (-1)^{n-4}c_{3,1,2} &= (-1)^{n-1}4.
\end{align*}
Adding these equations yields
\begin{multline*}
c_{n,1,2} + (-1)^{n-4}c_{3,1,2} = (-1)^{n-1}\sum_{k=4}^n k
\\
= (-1)^{n-1}\biggl( \frac{n(n+1)}{2} - \frac{3(3+1)}{2} \biggr)
= (-1)^{n-1}\bigl( n(n+1)/2 - 6\bigr) .
\end{multline*}
From section \ref{PolynomialsExtra},
$C_{3,1}(q) = 1 - 4\,q + 7\,q^2 - 7\,q^3 + 4 \, q^4 - q^5$, so $c_{3,1,2} = 7$ and we obtain
\begin{equation}
\label{cn1deg2}
c_{n,1,2} = (-1)^{n-1}\Bigl( \frac{n(n+1)}{2}+1\Bigr), \quad \text{for $n \geq 4$.}
\end{equation}
Substituting the results of \eqref{cn0deg3} and \eqref{cn1deg2} into \eqref{p3}, we obtain
\begin{align}
\label{p3final}
v_{-n+2} = p_3 &= (-1)^{n-1}n + c_{n,0,3} \notag
\\
&= (-1)^{n-1}n + \bigl( (-1)^{n}(n{-}1) + c_{n-1,1,2}\bigr) \notag
\\
&= \bigl( (-1)^{n-1}n + (-1)^{n}(n{-}1)\bigr) + (-1)^{n-2}(n-1)n/2 +(-1)^{n-2} \notag
\\
&= (-1)^n(n-1)n/2.
\end{align}
for $n{-}1 \geq 4$, or $n\geq 5$.
We conclude the second twist number for $W(3,n)$ is $\abs{v_{-n+2}} + \abs{v_{n-2}}= n(n-1)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{theorem} \label{twistnumber3}
For $n \geq 5$ the coefficient of $t^{-n+3}$ in the Jones polynomial $V_{W(3,n)}(t)$ is
\begin{equation*}
v_{-n+3} = (-1)^{n-1}\bigl(n(n-1)(n-2)/6 + n\bigr),
\end{equation*}
so third twist number for $W(3,n)$ is $\abs{v_{-n+3}} + \abs{v_{n-3}}= n(n-1)(n-2)/3 + 2n$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The essential point is to compute the coefficient $p_4$ in the expansion \eqref{Vformal2}. Starting from the
truncated polynomial expression
\begin{multline*}
(1+2t+t^2)(c_{n,0,1}t+c_{n,0,2}t^2+ c_{n,0,3}t^3 + c_{n,0,4}t^4)
\\
+ (t^2 + t^3)\bigl[(c_{n,1,0} + c_{n,1,1}t + c_{n,1,2}t^2) + (c_{n,2,0} + c_{n,2,1}t + c_{n,2,2}t^2)\bigr]
\\
+ t^4(c_{n,12,0}+c_{n,21,0}),
\end{multline*}
we extract the coefficient of $t^4$, obtaining
\begin{align}
p_4 &= (c_{n,0,4}+2\,c_{n,0,3} + c_{n,0,2}) + \bigl[(c_{n,1,1}+c_{n,1,2}) + (c_{n,2,1}+c_{n,2,2})\bigr] + (c_{n,12,0}+c_{n,21,0})\notag
\\
&= (c_{n,0,4}+2\,c_{n,0,3} + c_{n,0,2}) + \bigl[((-1)^n(n+1)+c_{n,1,2}) + ((-1)^n+c_{n,2,2})\bigr] + (-1)^{n-1} \notag
\intertext{by \eqref{trailingcoefftable} and \eqref{degonetable},}
&= (c_{n,0,4}+ 2\,c_{n,0,3} +(-1)^{n-1}(n{+}1)) + \bigl[((-1)^n(n+1)+c_{n,1,2}) + c_{n,2,2})\bigr] \notag
\intertext{evaluating $c_{n,0,2} = (-1)^{n-1}(n{+}1)$ for $n \geq 3$ by \eqref{cn0deg2}, }
&= c_{n,0,4} + 2\, c_{n,0,3} + c_{n,1,2} + c_{n,2,2} \notag
\\
&= c_{n,0,4} +2 \bigl( (-1)^{n}(n-1) + c_{n-1,1,2} \bigr) + c_{n,1,2} + c_{n-1,1,1} \notag
\intertext{substituting for $c_{n,0,3}$ from \eqref{cn0deg3} and using \eqref{cn2} which implies $c_{n,2,2}=c_{n-1,1,1}$, }
&= c_{n,0,4} + 2(-1)^{n}(n-1) + c_{n-1,1,2} + (-1)^{n-1}n + (-1)^{n-1}n \notag
\intertext{since $ c_{n,1,2} + c_{n-1,1,2} = (-1)^{n-1}n$ by \eqref{cn1deg2recursion} and $c_{n-1,1,1} = (-1)^{n-1}n$ by \eqref{degonetable}, }
&= c_{n,0,4} +c_{n-1,1,2} + 2(-1)^{n-1} \label{p4v1}
\end{align}
Compute $c_{n,0,4}$ from the recursion formula \eqref{cn0} reduced modulo $q^5$, which yields
\begin{multline*}
c_{n,0,0} + c_{n,0,1}\,q + c_{n,0,2}\,q^2 + c_{n,0,3}\,q^3 + c_{n,0,4}\,q^4
\\
= q^2\bigl( c_{n-1,21,0} + c_{n-1,21,1}\, q + c_{n-1,21,2}\, q^2 \bigr)
- q^2\bigl( c_{n-1,1,0} + c_{n-1,1,1}\, q + c_{n-1,1,2}\,q^2 \bigr)
\\
+ q\bigl( c_{n-1,1,0} + c_{n-1,1,1}\, q + c_{n-1,1,2}\,q^2 + c_{n-1,1,3}\,q^3\bigr)
\end{multline*}
Extracting the coefficients of $q^4$ gives
\begin{equation}
\label{cn04step1}
c_{n,0,4} = c_{n-1,21,2} - c_{n-1,1,2} + c_{n-1,1,3},
\end{equation}
so we have
\begin{align}
p_4 &= c_{n,0,4} +c_{n-1,1,2} + 2(-1)^{n-1} = (c_{n-1,21,2} - c_{n-1,1,2} + c_{n-1,1,3})+c_{n-1,1,2} + 2(-1)^{n-1} \notag
\\
&= c_{n-1,21,2} +c_{n-1,1,3} + 2(-1)^{n-1} \label{p4v2}
\end{align}
We now deal with $c_{n-1,21,2}$
by reducing the recurrence relation \eqref{cn21} mod $q^3$.
We get
\begin{multline*}
c_{n,21,0} + c_{n,21,1}\,q + c_{n,21,2}\,q^2
\\
\equiv (-q{+}1)\bigl(c_{n-1,2,0} + c_{n-1,2,1}\,q + c_{n-1,2,2}\,q^2\bigr) + q \bigl(c_{n-1,12,0}+ c_{n-1,12,1}\, q \bigr)
\\
-(q{-}1)^2\bigl( c_{n-1,21,0} + c_{n-1,21,1} \, q + c_{n-1,21,2}\, q^2 \bigr) \mod q^3.
\end{multline*}
Extracting the coefficient of $q^2$ gives
\begin{equation*}
c_{n,21,2} = c_{n-1,2,2} - c_{n-1,2,1} + c_{n-1,12,1}
+ (-c_{n-1,21,2} + 2\,c_{n-1,21,1} - c_{n-1,21,0})
\end{equation*}
or, since $C_{n-1,2}(q) = q\cdot C_{n-2,1}(q)$ by \eqref{cn2}, we have $c_{n-1,2,2}= c_{n-1,1,1}$, so
\begin{align}
c_{n,21,2} &= c_{n-2,1,1}- c_{n-1,2,1} + c_{n-1,12,1} + (-c_{n-1,21,2} + 2\,c_{n-1,21,1} - c_{n-1,21,0}) \notag
\\
&= (-1)^{n-2}(n-1) - (-1)^{n-1} + (-1)^{n-1}(n-1) - c_{n-1,21,2} + 2(-1)^{n-1} - 0, \notag
\intertext{substituting from \eqref{degonetable} and \eqref{trailingcoefftable},}
&= - c_{n-1,21,2} + (-1)^{n-1}.
\end{align}
We compute an alternating sum of another sequence of equalities
\begin{align*}
c_{n,21,2} + c_{n-1,21,2} &= (-1)^{n-1}
\\
(-1)\bigl( c_{n,21,2} + c_{n-1,21,2}\bigr) &= (-1)(-1)^{n-2}
\\
&\cdots
\\
(-1)^{k-1}\bigl(c_{n-k+1,21,2} + c_{n-k,21,2}\bigr) &= (-1)^{k-1}(-1)^{n-k}
\\
(-1)^k\bigl(c_{n-k,21,2} + c_{n-k-1,21,2}\bigr) &= (-1)^k(-1)^{n-k-1}
\end{align*}
Adding the equations we get
\begin{equation*}
c_{n,21,2} + (-1)^kc_{n-k-1,21,2} = (-1)^{n-1}(k{+}1),
\; \text{or} \;
c_{n,21,2} + (-1)^{n-j-1}c_{j,21,2} = (-1)^{n-1}(n{-}j),
\end{equation*}
if we write $k=n-j-1$, so that $j=n-k-1$.
Referring to section \ref{PolynomialsExtra}, the first $j$ for which $c_{j,21,2} \neq 0$ is $j=3$,
and $C_{3,21}(q) = -q+ 2\,q^2 - q^3$, so $c_{3,21,2} = 2$. Substituting and rearranging,
\begin{equation}
\label{cn21deg2}
c_{n,21,2} = (-1)^{n-1}(n{-}3) - (-1)^nc_{3,21,2} = (-1)^{n-1}\bigl((n-3)+2 \bigr) = (-1)^{n-1}(n-1),
\end{equation}
and this holds for $n \geq 3$. Substituting into \eqref{p4v2}, we get
\begin{equation}
\label{p4v3}
p_4 = c_{n-1,1,3} + (-1)^{n-2}(n-2) + 2(-1)^{n-1} = c_{n-1,1,3} + (-1)^nn + 4(-1)^{n-1}.
\end{equation}
The most straightforward approach to computing $c_{n-1,1,3}$ is through the recursion relation \eqref{cn1}.
Reducing the relation mod $q^4$ gives
\begin{multline*}
c_{n,1,0} + c_{n,1,1}\, q + c_{n,1,2}\,q^2 + c_{n,1,3}\, q^3
\\
(-1+ 2q - q^2)(c_{n-1,1,0} + c_{n-1,1,1}\,q + c_{n-1,1,2}q^2 + c_{n-1,1,3}\,q^3)
\\
+ (1-q) (c_{n-1,0,0} + c_{n-1,0,1}\,q + c_{n-1,0,2}\,q^2 + c_{n-1,0,3}\,q^3) \mod q^4,
\end{multline*}
and extracting the coefficient of $q^3$ gives
\begin{align*}
c_{n,1,3} &= -c_{n-1,1,3} + 2\, c_{n-1,1,2} - c_{n-1,1,1} + c_{n-1,0,3} - c_{n-1,0,2}
\\&=-c_{n-1,1,3} + 2\, c_{n-1,1,2} + c_{n-1,0,3},
\end{align*}
since $c_{n-1,1,1} + c_{n-1,0,2} = (-1)^{n-1}n + (-1)^{n-2}n = 0$ for $n \geq 4$ by
\eqref{degonetable} and \eqref{cn0deg2}.
Making the substitution for $c_{n-1,0,3}$ from \eqref{cn0deg3},
\begin{align} \begin{split}
c_{n,1,3} + c_{n-1,1,3} &= 2\,(-1)^{n-2}\Bigl(\frac{n(n-1)}{2}+1\Bigr) + c_{n-1,0,3}
\\
&= (-1)^{n-2}\bigl( n(n-1)+2\bigr) + (-1)^{n-1}(n-2) + c_{n-2,1,2}
\\
&= (-1)^{n-2}\bigl( n(n-1)+2\bigr) + (-1)^{n-1}(n{-}2) + (-1)^{n-3}\bigl((n{-}1)(n{-}2)/2 + 1\bigr)
\\
&= (-1)^n\frac{n^2}{2} + (-1)^{n-1}\frac{n}{2} + (-1)^n2
\end{split}
\end{align}
Now generate a telescoping sum from the chain of equalities
\begin{align*}
c_{n,1,3} + c_{n-1,1,3} &= (-1)^n\biggl[\frac{n^2}{2} - \frac{n}{2} +2\biggr]
\\
(-1)\bigl[ c_{n-1,1,3} + c_{n-2,1,3}\bigr] &= (-1)(-1)^{n-1}\biggl[\frac{(n{-}1)^2}{2} -\frac{n{-}1}{2} + 2\biggr]
\\
&\cdots
\\
(-1)^k\bigl[c_{n-k,1,3} + c_{n-k-1,1,3}\bigr] &=(-1)^k (-1)^{n-k}\biggl[\frac{(n{-}k)^2}{2} - \frac{(n{-}k)}{2} + 2 \biggr]
\end{align*}
Adding these equalities gives
\begin{equation*}
c_{n,1,3} + (-1)^kc_{n-k-1,1,3} = (-1)^n\biggl[\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=n-k}^n j^2 - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{j=n-k}^n j + (k{+}1)2\biggr]
\end{equation*}
and, if we write $n-k-1 = \ell$, so that $n-k = \ell + 1$ and $k+1 = n - \ell$,
\begin{align}
\begin{split}
c_{n,1,3} + (-1)^{n-\ell -1} c_{\ell,1,3}
&= (-1)^n\biggl[\frac{1}{2}\sum_{j=\ell+1}^n j^2 - \frac{1}{2} \sum_{j=\ell+1}^n j + (n{-}\ell)2\biggr]
\\
&= (-1)^n\biggl[\frac{1}{2}\frac{n(n{+}1)(2n{+}1)}{6} - \frac{1}{2}\frac{\ell(\ell{+}1)(2\ell{+}1)}{6}
\\ &\hspace{6em}
- \frac{1}{2} \frac{n(n{+}1)}{2} + \frac{1}{2}\frac{\ell(\ell{+}1)}{2} + (n{-}\ell)2 \biggr]
\end{split}
\end{align}
Taking $\ell=4$, so that, from section \ref{PolynomialsExtra},
$ C_{4,1}(q) = -1 + 5\,q - 11 \, q^2 + 16\, q^3 - \cdots$ and $c_{4,1,3} = 16$,
we evaluate
\begin{align*}
\begin{split}
c_{n,1,3} - (-1)^n(16) &=
(-1)^n\biggl[\frac{1}{2} \frac{2n^3}{6} + \frac{1}{2}\frac{3n^2}{6} + \frac{1}{2} \frac{n}{6} - \frac{1}{2}\frac{4\cdot 5 \cdot 9}{6}
\\
&\hspace{8em} - \frac{1}{2}\frac{n^2}{2} - \frac{1}{2}\frac{n}{2} + \frac{1}{2}\frac{4\cdot 5}{2} + 2(n-4)\biggr]
\\
&= (-1)^n \biggl[\frac{n^3}{6} - \frac{n}{6} - 10 + 2n -8 \biggr]
\\
&= (-1)^n \biggl[ \frac{n(n-1)(n+1)}{6} + 2n - 18 \biggr]
\end{split}
\end{align*}
Therefore,
\begin{equation}
\label{cn1deg3}
c_{n,1,3} = (-1)^n\biggl[ \frac{n(n-1)(n+1)}{6} + 2n - 18 + 16 \biggr] = (-1)^n\biggl[ \frac{n(n-1)(n+1)}{6} + 2n - 2\biggr],
\end{equation}
a formula valid for $n \geq 4$, but failing for $n = 3$, so
\begin{align}
\lambda_{-n+ 3} = p_4 &= c_{n-1,1,3} + (-1)^nn + 4(-1)^{n-1} \notag
\\
&= (-1)^{n-1}\biggl[ \frac{n(n-1)(n-2)}{6} + 2(n-1) - 2\biggr] - (-1)^{n-1}n + 4(-1)^{n-1} \notag
\\
&= (-1)^{n-1}\bigl( n(n-1)(n-2)/6 + n \bigr), \label{p4v4}
\end{align}
which is consequently valid for $n \geq 5$. This ends the proof.
\end{proof}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.3\linewidth]{secondtwistvsvolume_22jan.eps}
\caption{Second twist number versus volume}
\label{fig:secondtwistvsvolume}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.3\linewidth]{thirdtwistvsvolume_22jan.eps}
\caption{Third twist number versus volume}
\label{fig:thirdtwistvsvolume}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 0.3\linewidth]{fourthtwistvsvolume_22jan.eps}
\caption{Fourth twist number versus volume}
\label{fig:fourthtwistvsvolume}
\end{figure}
\section{From the Jones Polynomial to Khovanov homology} \label{Jones-to-Khovanov}
In this section we amplify Theorem \ref{locateKH}, at least the first part of it. \addtocounter{section}{-3} \addtocounter{theorem}{4}
\begin{theorem}
For a weaving knot $W(2k{+}1,n)$ the non-vanishing Khovanov homology ${\mathcal H}^{i,j}\bigl( W(2k{+}1, n) \bigr)$ lies on the
lines
\begin{equation*}
j = 2i \pm 1.
\end{equation*}
For a weaving knot $W(2k, n)$ the non-vanishing Khovanov homology ${\mathcal H}^{i,j}\bigl( W(2k, n) \bigr)$ lies on the lines
\begin{equation*}
j = 2i + n -1 \pm 1
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
We have the following definition of the bi-graded Euler characteristic
associated to Khovanov homology.
\begin{equation*}
Kh(L)(t,Q) \stackrel{{\rm def}}{=} \sum t^iQ^j \dim {\mathcal H}^{i,j}(L)
\end{equation*}
\addtocounter{section}{3} \addtocounter{theorem}{-5}
\begin{theorem}[Theorem 1.1, \cite{Lee_Endo04}] \label{Lee1}
For an oriented link $L$, the graded Euler characteristic
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{i,j \in {\mathbf Z}} (-1)^iQ^j \dim {\mathcal H}^{i,j}(L)
\end{equation*}
of the Khovanov invariant ${\mathcal H}(L)$ is equal to $(Q^{-1}{+}Q)$
times the Jones polynomial $V_L(Q^2)$ of $L$.
In terms of the associated polynomial $Kh(L)$,
\begin{equation} \label{JonesfromKhovanov}
Kh(L)(-1, Q) = (Q^{-1}+Q)V_L(Q^2). \qed
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}[Compare Theorem 1.4 and subsequent remarks from \cite{Lee_Endo04}] \label{Lee4}
For an alternating knot $L$, its Khovanov invariants ${\mathcal H}^{i,j}(L)$ of
degree difference $(1,4)$ are paired except in the $0$th cohomology group.
\qed \end{theorem}
This fact may be expressed in terms of the polynomial $Kh(L)$, as follows.
There is another polynomial $Kh'(L)$ in one variable and an equality
\begin{equation} \label{polynomialperiodicity}
Kh(L)(t, Q) = Q^{-\sigma(L)}\bigl\{ (Q^{-1}{+}Q) + (Q^{-1}+tQ^2\cdot Q)\cdot Kh'(L)(tQ^2) \bigr\}
\end{equation}
When we combine theorems \ref{Lee1} and \ref{Lee4}, we find that the bi-graded Euler characteristic and
the Jones polynomial of an alternating link determine one another. Obviously, the equality \eqref{JonesfromKhovanov}
shows that one knows $V_L$ if one knows $Kh(t,Q)$.
To obtain $Kh(t,Q)$ from $V_L(Q^2)$ requires a certain amount of manipulation. Implementing these
manipulations in {\em Maple} and {\em Mathematica} is an important step in our experiments.
Setting $t{=}-1$ in \eqref{polynomialperiodicity} and combining with equation \eqref{JonesfromKhovanov}, one has
\begin{align*}
(Q^{-1} + Q) \cdot V_L(Q^2) &= Q^{-\sigma(L)}\bigl\{ (Q^{-1}{+}Q) + (Q^{-1}- Q^3)\cdot Kh'(L)(-Q^2) \bigr\}.
\intertext{Consequently,}
V_L(Q^2) &= Q^{-\sigma(L)}\bigl\{ 1 + \frac{(Q^{-1}- Q^3)}{(Q^{-1}{+}Q)}\cdot Kh'(L)(-Q^2) \bigr\}
\\
&= Q^{-\sigma(L)}\bigl\{ 1 + (1 - Q^2)\cdot Kh'(L)(-Q^2)\bigr\}.
\intertext{Furthermore,}
Q^{\sigma(L)} \cdot V_L(Q^2) -1 &= (1 - Q^2)\cdot Kh'(L)(-Q^2),
\intertext{or}
Kh'(L)(-Q^2) &= (1 - Q^2)^{-1}\cdot \bigl(Q^{\sigma(L)} \cdot V_L(Q^2) -1\bigr) .
\end{align*}
Replacing $Q^2$ in the last equation by $-tQ^2$ is the last step to obtain $Kh'(L)$ from the Jones polynomial.
Within a computer algebra system, one must first replace $Q^2$ by $-X$ and then replace $X$ by $tQ^2$. Once one has
$Kh'(L)(tQ^2)$, one obtains $Kh(t,Q)$ directly from equation~\eqref{polynomialperiodicity}.
\begin{example}
We have computed $V_{W(3,2)}(t) = t^{-2} - t^{-1} + 1 - t + t^2$ in example \ref{jonesfig8knot}, so
\begin{align*}
Kh'\bigl(W(3,2)\bigr)(-Q^2) &= (1- Q^2)^{-1} \cdot \bigl( Q^0 \cdot ( Q^{-4} - Q^{-2} - Q^2 + Q^4) \bigr)
\\
&= (1-Q^2)^{-1} \cdot \bigl( (1 - Q^2) \cdot ( Q^{-4} - Q^2) \bigr)
\\
&= Q^{-4} - Q^2.
\end{align*}
It follows that $Kh'\bigl( W(3,2) \bigr) (tQ^2) = t^{-2}Q^{-4} + tQ^2$, and
\begin{multline*}
Kh\bigl(W(3,2)\bigr) (t, Q) = (Q+Q^{-1})+ (Q^{-1} + tQ^3)(t^{-2}Q^{-4} + tQ^2)
\\
= t^{-2}Q^{-5} + t^{-1}Q^{-1} + Q^{-1} + Q + tQ + t^2Q^5.
\end{multline*}
\end{example}
\section{Khovanov homology examples} \label{Khovanov}
Once one has the Khovanov polynomial one can make a plot of the Khovanov
homology in an $(i,j)$-plane as in this example. The Betti number $\dim {\mathcal H}^{i,j}\bigl( W(3,11) \bigr)$ is plotted
at the point with coordinates $(i,j)$.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6in]{KHW3_10.eps}
\caption{Khovanov homology of $W(3,10)$}
\label{fig:w310}
\end{figure}
Clearly, as $n$ gets larger, it is going to be harder to make sense of such
plots. Notice that the ``knight move'' $(1,4)$-periodicity
of the Khovanov homology for these knots essentially makes the information on one of the lines $j-2i = \pm 1$ redundant.
Before we continue to explore Khovanov homology with rational coefficients,
we observe we can also compute the integral Khovanov homology.
By Corollary 5 of \cite{Khovanovtorsion} there is only torsion of order 2 in the integral Khovanov homology.
Even better, there are rules for calculating the number of ${\mathbf Z}/2{\mathbf Z}$-summands
present. We have already noted how rational Khovanov homology spaces are related by so-called ``knight moves.''
Except when one lands or starts in a space ${\mathcal H}^{0,*}\bigl(W(3,n)\bigr)$, a move from
${\mathcal H}^{i,j}\bigl(W(3,n)\bigr)$ to ${\mathcal H}^{i+1,j+4}\bigl(W(3,n)\bigr)$ is a move from one space
into another space of the same dimension.
If one reduces the dimensions of the spaces ${\mathcal H}^{0,*}\bigl(W(3,n)\bigr)$ by one, then this phenomenon persists without
qualification on the bidegrees. Having made this adjustment,
Shumakovitch \cite[1.G~Definitions]{Khovanovtorsion} provides the following rules for
computing the integral Khovanov homology:
If $\dim {\mathcal H}^{i,2i+1}\bigl(W(3,n)\bigr) = a \neq 0$, then
${\mathcal H}^{i,2i+1}\bigl(W(3,n); {\mathbf Z} \bigr)$ is torsion-free of rank $a$.
Moreover, for every non-zero pair linked by a knight move,
${\mathcal H}^{i-1,2i-3}\bigl(W(3,n); {\mathbf Z} \bigr)$ and ${\mathcal H}^{i,2i+1}\bigl(W(3,n); {\mathbf Z} \bigr)$ have the same
rank, but groups along the line $j{-}2i = -1$ may have torsion.
In fact, the two-torsion part of ${\mathcal H}^{i,2i-1}\bigl(W(3,n)\;{\mathbf Z} \bigr)$
is an abelian $2$-group $({\mathbf Z}/2{\mathbf Z})^a$. The table \ref{IKHW34} shows the rules in operation
for the knot $W(3,4)$, also identified as 8\_18 in standard knot tables. Integer entries along
the line $j{-}2i = 1$ indicate
the ranks of free abelian groups and an entry $r, a_2$ along the line
$j {-} 2i= -1$ indicates a free abelian group of rank $r$ summed with a 2-group $({\mathbf Z}/2{\mathbf Z})^a$.
\begin{table}
\caption{Integral Khovanov homology of $W(3,4)$}\label{IKHW34}
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}[h]{||c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c||} \hline \hline
& -4 & -3 & -2 & -1 & 0 & 1 &2 & 3 & 4
\\ \hline
9 & & & & & & & & & 1
\\ \hline
7 & & & & & & & & 3 & $1_2$
\\ \hline
5 & & & & & & & 3 & 1, $3_2$ &
\\ \hline
3 & & & & & & 4 & 3, $3_2$ & &
\\ \hline
1 & & & & & 5 & 3 ,$4_2$ & & &
\\ \hline
-1 & & & & 3 & 5, $4_2$ & & & &
\\ \hline
-3 & & & 3 & 4, $3_2$ & & & & &
\\ \hline
-5 & & 1 & 3, $3_2$ & & & & & &
\\ \hline
-7 & & 3, $1_2$ & & & & & & &
\\ \hline
-9 & 1 & & & & & & & &
\\ \hline \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
Returning to rational Khovanov homology,
we take advantage of the ``knight move'' periodicity and simplify by recording the Betti numbers from only along the line $j- 2i = 1$.
In order to study the asymptotic behavior of Khovanov homology we have to normalize the data. This is done
by computing the total rank of the Khovanov homology along the line and dividing each Betti number by the
total rank. We obtain normalized Betti numbers that sum to one.
This raises the possibility of approximating the distribution of normalized Betti numbers by a probability distribution.
For our baseline experiments we choose to use the normal $N(\mu, \sigma^2)$ probability density function
\begin{equation*}
f_{\mu, \sigma^2}(x) = \frac{1}{\sigma \sqrt{2\pi}} \exp \Bigl( - \frac{(x-\mu)^2}{2\sigma^2} \Bigr)
\end{equation*}
Fit a quadratic function
$q_n(x)= -(\alpha \, x^2 - \beta\, x + \delta)$
to the logarithms of the normalized Khovanov dimensions along the line $j=2i+1$
and exponentiate the quadratic function.
Since the total of the normalized dimensions is 1, we normalize the
exponential, obtaining
\begin{equation*}
\rho_n(x) = A_n e^{q_n(x)} \quad \text{satisfying} \quad \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \rho_n(x) \; dx = 1.
\end{equation*}
To obtain a formula for $A_n$, complete the square
\begin{equation*}
q_n(x) = -\alpha \cdot \bigl( x - (\beta/2\alpha) \bigr)^2 +\bigl( (\beta^2/4\alpha) - \delta\bigr).
\end{equation*}
Then consider
\begin{align*}
1 &= A_n \int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \exp q_n(x) \; dx
\\
&= A_n \cdot
\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \exp \bigl((\beta^2/4\alpha) - \delta \bigr)
\cdot \exp \bigl( -\alpha \cdot \bigl( x -(\beta/2\alpha) \bigr)^2\bigr) \; dx
\\
&= A_n \cdot \exp \bigl((\beta^2/(4\alpha) - \delta \bigr) \cdot
\int_{-\infty}^{\infty} \exp \bigl( -\alpha \cdot \bigl( x -(\beta/2\alpha) \bigr)^2\bigr) \; dx
\\
&= A_n \cdot \exp \bigl((\beta^2/4\alpha) - \delta\bigr) \cdot \sqrt{\pi/\alpha}
\end{align*}
Thus, the expression for $A_n$ is
\begin{equation*}
A_n = \exp\bigl( -\bigl((\beta^2/4\alpha) - \delta\bigr)\bigr) \cdot \sqrt{\alpha/\pi}.
\end{equation*}
Equate the expressions
\begin{equation*}
\rho_n(x) = \frac{1}{\sigma_n \sqrt{2\pi}} \exp \Bigl( - \frac{(x-\mu_n)^2}{2\sigma_n^2} \Bigr)
\quad \text{and} \quad
\rho_n(x) = A_n \exp ( q_n(x)),
\end{equation*}
and observe $\mu_n = \beta/2\alpha$ by equating the two expressions for the location of the local maximum
of $\rho_n(x)$. Then the efficient way to the parameter $\sigma_n$ is to solve the equation
\begin{equation*}
\frac{1}{\sigma_n \sqrt{2\pi}} = \rho_n(\beta/2\alpha) = A_n \exp( q_n(\beta/2\alpha))
= \exp\bigl( -\bigl((\beta^2/4\alpha) - \delta\bigr)\bigr) \cdot \sqrt{\alpha/\pi} \cdot
\exp\bigl( (\beta^2/4\alpha) - \delta \bigr),
\end{equation*}
obtaining $\sigma_n = 1/ \sqrt{2\alpha} $.
Working this out for $W(3,10)$, and carrying only 3 decimal places,
the raw dimensions are
\begin{center}
\begin{small}
\begin{tabular}[h!]{c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c}
$i$ & -9 & -8 & -7 & -6 & -5 & -4 & -3& -2 &-1 & 0
\\
$\dim$ & 1& 9& 36& 94& 196& 346& 529& 721& 879& 970
\\
$i$ & 1& 2& 3& 4& 5& 6& 7& 8& 9& 10
\\
$\dim$ & 971& 879& 721& 529& 346& 196& 94& 36& 9& 1
\end{tabular}
\end{small}
\end{center}
and, to three significant digits, the logarithms of the normalized dimensions are
\begin{center}
\begin{small}
\begin{tabular}[h!]{c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c|c}
$i$ & -9 & -8 & -7 & -6 & -5 & -4 & -3& -2 &-1 & 0
\\
& -17.9& -15.7& -14.3& -13.3& -12.6& -12.0& -11.6& -11.3& -11.1& -11.0
\\
$i$ & 1& 2& 3& 4& 5& 6& 7& 8& 9& 10
\\
& -11.0& -11.1& -11.3& -11.6& -12.0& -12.6& -13.3& -14.3& -15.7& -17.9
\end{tabular}
\end{small}
\end{center}
Fitting a quadratic to this information, we get
\begin{equation*}
q_{10}(x) = -10.7 + 0.0720\, x - 0.0720\, x^2,\quad \alpha = \beta = 0.0720, \quad \delta = 10.7.
\end{equation*}
To three significant digits $\mu_{10} = 0.500$ and $\sigma_{10} = 2.64$.
By the symmetry of Khovanov homology, the mean $\mu_n$ approaches $1/2$ rapidly, so this parameter is of little interest.
On the other hand, relating the parameter $\sigma_n$ to some geometric quantity, say, some hyperbolic invariant
of the complement of the link, is a very interesting problem.
For $W(3,10)$, the density function is
\begin{multline*}
\rho_{10}(x) = 11686.8431618280538\,\sqrt {{\pi }^{-1}} \\
\cdot \exp ({- 10.7018780565714309+ 0.0716848579220777243\,x- 0.0716848579220778631\,{x}^{2}})
\end{multline*}
When placed into standard form, $\mu_{10} =0.5000054030 $ and $\sigma_{10} = 2.640882970 $.
Figure \ref{fig:w310comp} compares the plot of the density function $\rho_{10}$ with a point plot of normalized dimensions.
\begin{figure}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.0in]{khw3_10_11apr17.eps}
\caption{normalized homology of $W(3,10)$ compared with density function}
\label{fig:w310comp}
\end{figure}
\newline
For the knot $W(3,11)$
the expression for the density function is
\begin{multline*}
\rho_{11}(x) =29676.8676257830375\,\sqrt {{\pi }^{-1}} \\
\cdot \exp ({- 11.6724860231789886+ 0.0661625395821569817\,x- 0.0661623073574252735\,{x}^{2}})
\end{multline*}
When placed into standard form, $\mu_{11} =0.5000017550 $ and $\sigma_{11} = 2.749031276$.
Figure \ref{fig:w311comp} compares the plot of the density function $\rho_{11}$ with a point plot of normalized dimensions.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.0in]{khw3_11_11apr17.eps}
\caption{normalized homology of $W(3,11)$ compared with density function}
\label{fig:w311comp}
\end{figure}
\newline
For $W(3,22)$, the density function is
\begin{multline*}
\rho_{22}(x) =833596689.149608016\,\sqrt {{\pi }^{-1}} \\
\cdot \exp ({- 22.2219365040983057+ 0.0353061029354434300\,x- 0.0353061029347388616\,{x}^{2}})
\end{multline*}
When placed into standard form, $\mu_{22} =0.500000000 $ and $\sigma_{22} = 3.763224354$.
Figure \ref{fig:w322comp} compares the plot of the density function $\rho_{22}$ with a point plot of normalized dimensions.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.0in]{khw3_22_11apr17.eps}
\caption{normalized homology of $W(3,22)$ compared with density function}
\label{fig:w322comp}
\end{figure}
\newline
For $W(3,23)$, the density function is
\begin{multline*}
\rho_{23}(x) = 2113964949.23002362\,\sqrt {{\pi }^{-1}} \\
\cdot exp( {- 23.1731352596503442+ 0.0338545815354610105\,x- 0.0338545815348441914\,{x}^{2}})
\end{multline*}
When placed into standard form, $\mu_{23} =0.5000000000 $ and $\sigma_{23} =3.843052143 $.
Figure \ref{fig:w323comp} compares the plot of the density function $\rho_{23}$ with a point plot of normalized dimensions.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[height=2.0in]{khw3_23_11apr17.eps}
\caption{normalized homology of $W(3,23)$ compared with density function}
\label{fig:w323comp}
\end{figure}
\newline
{\em Maple} worksheets and, later, {\em Mathematica} notebooks will be available at URL \cite{software} prepared by the second-named author.
\section{Data Tables}\label{Data}
This section contains tables of data generated using {\em Maple} to implement some of the results of earlier sections.
The first table collects data for weaving knots $W(3,n)$ with $n \equiv 1 \mod 3$; the second table does the same for
weaving knots $W(3,n)$ with $n \equiv 2 \mod 3$.
In each table the first column lists the value of $n$;
the second column lists the total dimension of the Khovanov homology lying along the line $j = 2i{+}1$; and the third
column lists the dimension of the vector space ${\mathcal H}^{0,1}\bigl( W(3,n)\bigr)$.
Columns four and five display measures of the deviation of the proposed normal distributions from
the actual distribution of normalized dimensions.
In section \ref{Khovanov} we have approximated a distribution of normalized
Khovanov dimenstions by a standard normal distribution, and we have displayed
graphics comparing an actual distribution with its approximation.
To quantify those visual impressions, we compute and tabulate an $L^1$- and an $L^2$-deviation. Let
\begin{equation*}
\text{Total dimension} = \sum_{i=-2n}^{2n+1} \dim {\mathcal H}^{i, 2i+1}\bigl( W(3,n) \bigr).
\end{equation*}
For the $L^2$-comparison, we compute
\begin{equation*}
\Biggl( \sum_{i = -2n}^{2n+1} \biggl( \rho_n(i)- \frac{\dim {\mathcal H}^{i, 2i+1}\bigl( W(3,n) \bigr)}{\text{Total dimension}} \biggr)^2 \Biggr)^{1/2}
\end{equation*}
For the $L^1$-comparison, we compute
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{i = -2n}^{2n+1} \Babs{ \rho_n(i) - \frac{\dim {\mathcal H}^{i, 2i+1}\bigl( W(3,n) \bigr)}{\text{Total dimension} } }
\end{equation*}
The $L^2$ comparisons appear to tend to 0, whereas the $L^1$ comparisons
appear to be growing slowly.
\begin{table} \caption{Data for $W(3,n)$ with $n \equiv 1 \mod 3$}
\begin{tabular}[h!]{|c|c|c|c|c|c|}
$n$ & Total dimension & $\dim {\mathcal H}^{0,1}$ & $\sigma$ & $L^2$-comparison & $L^1$ comparison
\\
10 & 7563 & 970 & 2.64088 & 0.040510 & 0.134828
\\
13 & 135721 & 15418 & 2.95616 & 0.041133 & 0.150599
\\
16 & 2435423 & 250828 & 3.24564 & 0.040792 & 0.155995
\\
19 & 43701901 & 4146351 & 3.51339 & 0.040145 & 0.161336
\\
22 & 784198803 & 69337015 & 3.76322 & 0.039413 & 0.165763
\\
25 & 14071876561 & 1169613435 & 3.99810 & 0.038678 & 0.167576
\\
28 & 252509579303 & 19864129051 & 4.22032 & 0.037971 & 0.167790
\\
31 & 4531100550901 & 339205938364 & 4.43167 & 0.037303 & 0.170736
\\
34 & 81307300336923 & 5818326037345 & 4.63358 & 0.036676 & 0.172392
\\
37 & 1459000305513721 & 100173472277125 & 4.82719 & 0.036089 & 0.173119
\\
40 & 26180698198910063 & 1730135731194046 & 5.01342 & 0.035541 & 0.173178
\\
43 & 469793567274867421 & 29963026081609060 & 5.19306 & 0.035028 & 0.173812
\\
46 & 8430103512748703523 & 520131503664409798 & 5.36674 & 0.034546 & 0.175052
\\
49 & $1.51272\cdot 10^{20}$ & $ 9.04765\cdot10^{18}$ & 5.53502 & 0.034093 & 0.175779
\\
52 & $ 2.71447\cdot 10^{21}$ & $ 1.57670\cdot 10^{20} $ & 5.69838 & 0.033667 & 0.176100
\\
55 & $ 4.87091\cdot 10^{22} $ & $ 2.75210\cdot 10^{21} $ & 5.85721 & 0.033265 & 0.176098
\\
58 & $ 8.74050\cdot 10^{23} $ & $ 4.81071\cdot 10^{22} $ & 6.01187 & 0.032885 & 0.175898
\\
61 & $ 1.56842\cdot 10^{25} $& $ 8.42017\cdot 10^{23}$ & 6.16267 & 0.032524 & 0.176778
\\
64 & $ 2.81441\cdot 10^{26} $ & $ 1.47552\cdot 10^{25} $ & 6.30989 & 0.032182 & 0.177369
\\
67 & $5.05026\cdot 10^{27}$ & $ 2.58843\cdot 10^{26} $ & 6.45376 & 0.031857 & 0.177716
\\
70 &$ 9.06233\cdot 10^{28} $& $4.54520\cdot 10^{27}$ & 6.59451 & 0.031547 & 0.177859
\\
73 & $1.62617\cdot 10^{30}$ & $7.98842\cdot 10^{28}$ & 6.73233 & 0.031251 & 0.177831
\\
76 & $ 2.91804\cdot 10^{31}$ & $1.40517 \cdot 10^{30}$ & 6.86740 & 0.030968 & 0.177657
\\
79 & $5.23621\cdot 10^{32}$ & $ 2.47359 \cdot 10^{31}$ & 6.99986 & 0.030697 & 0.177995
\\
82 & $9.39600\cdot 10^{33} $& $4.35747 \cdot 10^{32}$& 7.12988 & 0.030437 & 0.178445
\\
85 & $1.68604\cdot 10^{35} $& $7.68116 \cdot 10^{33}$ & 7.25757 & 0.030188 & 0.178746
\\
88 & $ 3.02548\cdot 10^{36} $ & $1.35483 \cdot 10^{35}$ & 7.38305 & 0.029948 & 0.178918
\\
91 & $ 5.42901\cdot 10^{37} $ & $ 2.39106 \cdot 10^{36} $ & 7.50645 & 0.029718 & 0.178976
\\
94 & $ 9.74196\cdot 10^{38}$ & $ 4.22211 \cdot 10^{37} $ & 7.62786 & 0.029496 & 0.178935
\\
97 & $ 1.74812\cdot 10^{40} $ & $7.45910 \cdot 10^{38}$ & 7.74736 & 0.029282 & 0.178807
\\
100 & $3.13688\cdot 10^{41} $ & $1.31840 \cdot 10^{40} $& 7.86506 & 0.029075 & 0.178890
\\
121 & $1.87923\cdot 10^{50} $& $ 7.18477\cdot 10^{48} $ & 8.64424 & 0.027805 & 0.179577
\\
142 & $1.12580\cdot 10^{59} $ & $ 3.97500 \cdot 10^{57} $ & 9.35886& 0.026769& 0.180247
\\
163 & $6.74436\cdot 10^{67} $ & $2.22337 \cdot 10^{66}$ & 10.0227& 0.025900& 0.180596
\\
184 & $4.04037\cdot 10^{76}$ & $ 1.25398 \cdot 10^{75} $ & 10.6453& 0.025156& 0.180629
\\
205 & $ 2.42049\cdot 10^{85}$ & $7.11854 \cdot 10^{83} $ & 11.2334& 0.024508& 0.180907
\\
247 & $8.68689\cdot 10^{102}$ & $2.32816 \cdot 10^{101} $ & 12.3258& 0.023423& 0.181027
\\
289 & $3.11764\cdot 10^{120} $ & $7.72623 \cdot 10^{118} $ & 13.3289& 0.022542& 0.181268
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table} \caption{Data for $W(3,n)$ with $n \equiv 2 \mod 3$}
\begin{tabular}{c|c|c|c|c|c}
$n$ & Total dimension & $\dim {\mathcal H}^{0,1}$ & $\sigma$ & $L^2$-comparison & $L^1$ comparison
\\
11 & 19801&2431& 2.74903& 0.040906& 0.141925
\\
14&355323&38983& 3.05533& 0.041079& 0.153170
\\
17&6376021&637993& 3.33710& 0.040595& 0.156595
\\
20&114413063&10591254& 3.59850& 0.039905& 0.163190
\\
23&2053059121&177671734& 3.84305& 0.039166& 0.166596
\\
26&36840651123&3004390818& 4.07348& 0.038438& 0.167789
\\
29&661078661101&51124396786& 4.29190& 0.037744& 0.168941
\\
32&11862575248703&874400336044& 4.49997 & 0.037089& 0.171411
\\
35&212865275815561&15018149469823& 4.69899& 0.036476& 0.172723
\\
38&3819712389431403&258853011125599& 4.89004& 0.035903& 0.173203
\\
41&68541957733949701&4474997964407374& 5.07400& 0.035366& 0.173083
\\
44&1229935526821663223& 77563025486587315& 5.25158& 0.034864& 0.174290
\\
47&22070297525055988321& 1347390412214087833 & 5.42341 & 0.034392& 0.175346
\\
50& $ 3.96035\cdot 10^{20} $& $ 2.34525 \cdot 10^{19} $ & 5.59000& 0.033949& 0.175926
\\
53& $ 7.10657\cdot 10^{21} $& $ 4.08927 \cdot 10^{20} $& 5.75181 & 0.033531 & 0.176131
\\
56& $ 1.27522\cdot 10^{23} $& $ 7.14133\cdot 10^{21} $& 5.90921 & 0.033136 & 0.176037
\\
59& $ 2.28829\cdot 10^{24} $& $ 1.24888 \cdot 10^{23} $& 6.06255& 0.032763 & 0.176227
\\
62& $ 4.10617\cdot 10^{25} $& $ 2.18679\cdot 10^{24} $& 6.21213& 0.032408& 0.177005
\\
65& $ 7.36823\cdot 10^{26} $& $ 3.83347\cdot 10^{25} $& 6.35821& 0.032072& 0.177510
\\
68& $ 1.32218\cdot 10^{28} $& $ 6.72713\cdot 10^{26} $& 6.50102& 0.031752& 0.177785
\\
71& $ 2.37255\cdot 10^{29} $& $ 1.18163\cdot 10^{28} $& 6.64077 & 0.031446 & 0.177867
\\
74& $ 4.25736\cdot 10^{30} $& $ 2.07736\cdot 10^{29} $& 6.77765 & 0.031155 & 0.177787
\\
77& $ 7.63953\cdot 10^{31} $& $ 3.65504 \cdot 10^{30} $& 6.91183 & 0.030876 & 0.177602
\\
80& $ 1.37086\cdot 10^{33} $& $ 6.43571 \cdot 10^{31} $& 7.04347 & 0.030609 & 0.178163
\\
83& $ 2.45990\cdot 10^{34} $& $ 1.13397 \cdot 10^{33} $& 7.17269 & 0.030353 & 0.178561
\\
86& $ 4.41412\cdot 10^{35} $& $ 1.99933 \cdot 10^{34} $& 7.29963 & 0.030107 & 0.178817
\\
89& $ 7.92082\cdot 10^{36} $& $ 3.52717\cdot 10^{35} $& 7.42441 & 0.029871 & 0.178949
\\
92& $ 1.42133\cdot 10^{38} $& $ 6.22605\cdot 10^{36} $& 7.54714 & 0.029643& 0.178972
\\
95& $ 2.55048\cdot 10^{39} $& $ 1.09958\cdot 10^{38} $& 7.66790 & 0.029424 & 0.178901
\\
98& $ 4.57665\cdot 10^{40} $& $ 1.94290\cdot 10^{39} $& 7.78679 & 0.029212 & 0.178747
\\
119& $ 2.74175\cdot 10^{49} $& $ 1.05696\cdot 10^{48} $& 8.57308& 0.027914& 0.179650
\\
140& $ 1.64251\cdot 10^{58} $& $ 5.84051 \cdot 10^{56} $& 9.29316& 0.026859& 0.180257
\\
161& $ 9.83989\cdot 10^{66} $& $ 3.26385\cdot 10^{65} $& 9.96138& 0.025977& 0.180552
\\
182& $ 5.89483\cdot 10^{75} $& $ 1.83951\cdot 10^{74} $& 10.5875& 0.025223& 0.180539
\\
203& $ 3.53144\cdot 10^{84} $& $ 1.04367\cdot 10^{83} $& 11.1787& 0.024566& 0.180926
\\
245& $ 1.26740\cdot 10^{102} $& $ 3.41053\cdot 10^{100} $& 12.2759& 0.023469& 0.181064
\\
287& $ 4.54858\cdot 10^{119} $& $ 1.13115\cdot 10^{118} $& 13.2829& 0.022580& 0.181221
\\
329& $ 1.63244\cdot 10^{137} $& $ 3.79224\cdot 10^{135} $& 14.2187& 0.021838& 0.181399
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\newpage
\section{More on Polynomials} \label{PolynomialsExtra}
First we collect basic values of polynomials $C_{n,*}(q)$, some of which are
referred to in sections \ref{Hecke}, \ref{Polys}, and \ref{TwistNumbersVolume}.
Recall the initilization values:
\begin{equation*}
C_{1,0}(q) = 0, \; C_{1,1}(q) = -(q{-}1), \; C_{1,2}(q) = 0, \; C_{1,12}(q) = 1,
\; C_{1,21}(q) = 0, \; \text{and} \; C_{1,121}(q) = 0.
\end{equation*}
\begin{align*}
C_{2,0}(q) &= q(q{-}1)^2 = q - 2\,q^2 + q^3 & C_{3,0}(q) &= -q + 4\, q^2 - 5\,q^3 + 4\,q^4 - q^5
\\
C_{2,1}(q) &= (q{-}1)^3 = - 1 + 3\, q - 3\,q^2 + q^3 & C_{3,1}(q) &= 1 - 4\, q + 7\,q^2 - 7q^3 + 4\, q^4 - q^5
\\
C_{2,2}(q) &= -q(q{-}1) = q - q^2 & C_{3,2}(q) &= - q + 3\, q^2 - 3\, q^3 + q^4
\\
C_{2,12}(q) &= -(q{-}1)^2 = -1 + 2\,q -q^2 & C_{3,12}(q) &= 1 - 3\, q + 4\,q^2 - 3\,q^3 + q^4
\\
C_{2,21}(q) &= q & C_{3,21}(q) &= -q + 2\,q^2 - q^3
\end{align*}
\begin{align*}
C_{4,0}(q) &= q- 5\,q^2+ 10 \,q^3 -12\,q^4 +10\,q^5 - 5\,q^6 + q^7
\\
C_{4,1}(q) &= -1 + 5\,q - 11 \, q^2 + 16\, q^3 - 16\, q^4 + 11\, q^5 - 5 \, q^6 + q^7
\\
C_{4,2}(q) &= q - 4\,q^2 + 7\,q^3 - 7\,q^4 + 4\,q^5 - q^6
\\
C_{4,12}(q) &= -1 + 4\,q - 7\,q^2 + 9\,q^3 - 7\,q^4 + 4 \,q^5 - q^6
\\
C_{4,21}(q) &= q - 3\,q^2 + 4\,q^3 - 3 \, q^4 + q^5
\end{align*}
\begin{table}[h!]
\caption{Alexander polynomials for $W(3,n)$}
\label{alexpolys}
\centering \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.25}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|} \hline
$n$ & $\Delta_{W(3, n)}(t)$
\\ \hline
4 & $-t^{3}+5\,t^{2}-10\,t+13-10\,t^{-1}+5\,t^{-2}-t^{-3}$
\\ \hline
5 & $t^{4}-6\,t^{3}+15\,t^{2}-24\,t+29-24\,t^{-1}+15\,t^{-2}-6\,t^{-3}+t^{-4}$
\\ \hline
10 & $ -t^{9}+11\,t^{8}-55\,t^{7}+174\,t^{6}-409\,t^{5}+777\,t^{4} -1243\,t^{3}$
\\
& $+1716\,t^{2}-2073\,t+2207-2073\,t^{-1}+1716\,t^{-2}$
\\
& $-1243\,t^{-3}+777\,t^{-4}-409\,t^{-5}+174\,t^{-6}-55\,t^{-7}+11\,t^{-8}-t^{-9}$
\\ \hline
11 & $t^{10}-12\,t^{9}+66\,t^{8}-230\,t^{7}+593\,t^{6}-1232\,t^{5}+2157\,t^{4}-3268\,t^{3}$
\\
& $+4356\,t^{2}-5158\,t+5455 -5158\,t^{-1}+4356\,t^{-2}$
\\
& $ -3268\,t^{-3}+2157\,t^{-4}-1232\,t^{-5} +593\,t^{-6}-230\,t^{-7}+66\,t^{-8}-12\,t^{-9}+t^{-10}$
\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h!]
\caption{Jones polynomials for $W(3,n)$}
\label{Jonesw3n}
\centering \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.25}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|} \hline
$n$ & $V_{W(3,n)}(t)$
\\ \hline
4 & $t^{4}-4\,t^{3}+6\,t^{2}-7\,t+9-7\,t^{-1}+6\,t^{-2}-4\,t^{-3}+t^{-4}$
\\ \hline
5 & $-t^{5}+5\,t^{4}-10\,t^{3}+15\,t^{2}-19\,t+21-19\,t^{-1}+15\,t^{-2}-10\,t^{-3}+5\,t^{-4}-t^{-5}$
\\ \hline
10 & $t^{10}-10\,t^{9}+45\,t^{8}-130\,t^{7}+290\,t^{6}-542\,t^{5}+875\,t^{4}$
\\
& $-1250\,t^{3}+1600\,t^{2}-1849\,t+1941-1849\,t^{-1} +1600\,t^{-2}-1250\,t^{-3}$
\\
& $+875\,t^{-4}-542\,t^{-5}+290\,t^{-6}-130\,t^{-7}+45\,t^{-8}-10\,t^{-9}+t^{-10}$
\\ \hline
11 & $-t^{11}+11\,t^{10}-55\,t^{9}+176\,t^{8}-429\,t^{7}+869\,t^{6}-1518\,t^{5}+2343\,t^{4}$
\\
& $-3245\,t^{3}+4070\,t^{2}-4652\,t+ 4863-4652\,t^{-1}+4070\,t^{-2}-3245\,t^{-3}$
\\
& $+2343\,t^{-4}-1518\,t^{-5}+869\,t^{-6}-429\,t^{-7}+176\,t^{-8}-55\,t^{-9}+11\,t^{-10}-t^{-11}$
\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\newpage
\begin{table}[h!]
\caption{HOMFLY-PT polynomials for $W(3,n)$}
\label{homflyptw3n}
\centering \renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.25}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|} \hline
$n$ & $H_{W(3,n)}(a, z)$
\\ \hline
4 & $a^2\bigl( {z}^{4}+{z}^{2}-1 \bigr)
+ \bigl(-{z}^{6}-3\,{z}^{4}-{z}^{2}+3 \bigr)
+ a^{-2}\bigl( {z}^{4}+{z}^{2}-1 \bigr)$
\\ \hline
5 & $ a^2\bigl( -{z}^{6}-2\,{z}^{4}+{z}^{2}+2 \bigr)
+ \bigl( {z}^{8}+4\,{z}^{6}+3\,{z}^{4}-4\,{z}^{2}-3\bigr)
+ a^{-2}\bigl( -{z}^{6}-2\,{z}^{4}+{z}^{2}+2 \bigr)$
\\ \hline
10 & $a^2\bigl( {z}^{16}+7\,{z}^{14}+14\,{z}^{12}-2\,{z}^{10}-29\,{z}^{8}-11\,{z}^{6}+ 18\,{z}^{4}+6\,{z}^{2}-3 \bigr)$
\\
& $+ \bigl( -{z}^{18}-9\,{z}^{16}-28\,{z}^{14}-26\,{z}^{12}+33\,{z}^{10}+69\,{z}^{8}+4\,{z}^{6}-42\,{z}^{4}-9\,{z}^{2}+7\bigr)$
\\
&$ + a^{-2}\bigl( {z}^{16}+7\,{z}^{14}+14\,{z}^{12}-2\,{z}^{10}-29\,{z}^{8}-11\,{z}^{6}+ 18\,{z}^{4}+6\,{z}^{2}-3 \bigr)$
\\ \hline
11 & $a^2\bigl( -{z}^{18}-8\,{z}^{16}-20\,{z}^{14}-6\,{z}^{12}+40\,{z}^{10}+34\,{z}^{8}-25\,{z}^{6}-24\,{z}^{4}+6\,{z}^{2}+4 \bigr) $
\\
& $+ \bigl( {z}^{20}+10\,{z}^{18}+36\,{z}^{16}+46\,{z}^{14}-28\,{z}^{12}-114\,{z}^{10}-43\,{z}^{8}+74\,{z}^{6}+42\,{z}^{4}-16\,{z}^{2}-7 \bigr) $
\\
& $ + a^{-2}\bigl( -{z}^{18}-8\,{z}^{16}-20\,{z}^{14}-6\,{z}^{12}+40\,{z}^{10}+34\,{z}^{8}-25\,{z}^{6}-24\,{z}^{4}+6\,{z}^{2}+4 \bigr)$
\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\section{Notes on Computing}
\label{ComputerNotes}
This file contains some remarks on the roles played by {\em Mathematica} and
{\em Maple} experiments in generating data, conjectures, and results.
Our initial interest was in the Khovanov homology of weaving knots, which we knew was determined in a straightforward
manner by the Jones polynomials. It also turns out that the Khovanov homology of our knots can be determined by knowing
half of the Khovanov homology, essentially. Instead of having to keep track of a bigraded object, the study of Khovanov
homology of weaving knots is reduced to the study of a graded object. We normalized our examples by dividing each dimension
in the graded object by the total dimension and plotted the results for a large number of the knots. In the plots
bell-shaped curves appear as envelopes of the plots of the normalized dimensions. First, this led us to conjecture
that the standard deviations of the bell curves may be an interesting invariant for the family of knots $W(3, n)$.
As mentioned, the Jones polynomial of a weaving knot $W(3,n)$ determines the two-variable Khovanov polynomial of
the bi-graded Khovanov homology. To simplify matters, we studied the Jones polynomial on its own terms.
We knew that the Jones polynomials have the form
\begin{equation*}
V_{W(3,n)}(t) = \pm t^{-n} + \lambda_{-n+1}t^{-n+1} + \cdots \lambda_{n-1}t^{n-1} + \pm t^n,
\end{equation*}
so we conjectured that $\lambda_{-n+k} = \lambda_{n-k}$ is a polynomial
function of degree $k$ in $n$. The basis for this conjecture is the well-known binomial distribution approximating
the standard normal distribution. To investigate
this conjecture further, we detoured through another round of experiments.
During a visit to the University of Osnabr\"{u}ck in Germany, the second-named author was tutored in {\em Mathematica}
by Prof.~Dr.~Karl-Heinz Spindler. During the demonstrations of techniques for manipulating polynomials, Dr.~Spindler
asked if we knew explanations of the patterns we were observing. These questions led to the formulation and
proof of the palindromic properties of the building block polynomials $C_{n,-}(q)$ stated in theorem \ref{palindromes}.
For a large sample of computed Jones polynomials, we extracted the coefficients $\lambda_{-n+k}$ obtaining sequences of
integers upon which {\em Mathematica} routines computed iterated differences. In accordance with the conjectured
behavior, we observed the differences vanishing after the expected number of iterations. From these experiments
it was possible to generate formulas for the numbers $\lambda_{-n+2}$ and $\lambda_{-n+3}$
eventually proved in theorems \ref{twistnumber2} and \ref{twistnumber3}.
One may also obtain expressions for
two-variable HOMFLY-PT polynomial $H_{(W(3,n)}(a, z)$ normalized to $H({\rm Unknot})(a,z) = 1$.
This amounts to applying a different sequence of substitutions to the Hecke algebra output
$ V_{(\sigma_1\sigma_2^{-1})^n}(q,z) $ given in \eqref{Heckeoutput}.
Since we have no immediate use for these gadgets, we offer the brief table \ref{homflyptw3n}.
Turning to the volume computations, we thank Ilya Kofman for a significant
improvement of our first script for computing volumes using SnapPy \cite{SnapPy}. According to our
data, the volume of the complement of $W(3,n)$ is growing roughly linearly with $n$, so it is not so
surprising that the volume is strongly correlated with the higher twist numbers. Another feature
of the SnapPy data is that, although the volume is growing linearly, the number of simplices used
by SnapPy to compute the volume is growing quite irregularly.
\bibliographystyle{plain}
|
\section*{Abstract}
Restriction enzymes recognize and
bind to specific sequences on invading
bacteriophage DNA.
Like a key in a lock, these proteins
require many contacts
to specify the correct DNA sequence.
Using information theory
we develop an equation that defines
the number of independent contacts, which is the dimensionality
of the binding. We show that EcoRI,
which binds to the sequence GAATTC,
functions in 24 dimensions.
Information theory
represents messages as spheres in high dimensional spaces.
Better sphere packing leads to better communications
systems. The densest known packing of hyperspheres occurs on the Leech lattice
in 24 dimensions. We suggest that the single protein
EcoRI molecule employs a Leech lattice in its operation.
Optimizing density of sphere packing explains why 6 base restriction enzymes
are so common.
\newpage %
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Restriction
enzymes provide a defense mechanism in procaryotes
against foreign DNA injected by
bacteriophages~\cite{Roberts2005,Pingoud.Wende2014}.
These proteins bind to specific sequences on DNA and cleave the DNA,
rendering it susceptible to attack by
exonucleases~\cite{Simmon.Lederberg1972, Heitman.Model1989}
and preventing viral replication. The
bacterial genome is protected by modification enzymes that methylate
the same pattern that the restriction enzymes cut. Though the
sequences bound by restriction enzymes usually consist of only $4$ or
$6$ base pairs,
even a single base change
of the GAATTC EcoRI
binding site decreases EcoRI binding by at least 1000 fold
\cite{Lesser.Jen-Jacobson1990}.
How can
restriction enzymes have such precise recognition? Why do we find the
majority of restriction enzymes have exactly $4$ or $6$ base pair long
recognition sequences?
We begin with a brief overview of how
concepts from information and coding theory can
be used to answer these questions.
We address this paper to
both biologists and information/coding
theorists.
Therefore some of this material may be familiar to one audience and
foreign to the other.
In this paragraph, we state our main result.
We model the binding process of restriction enzymes
as a selection between distinct states.
These states can be represented as spheres packed together in a high
dimensional `coding' space, and the equations of information theory along
with empirical data for EcoRI binding allow us to determine the
dimensionality of the space. Surprisingly, operating at the maximum
biological efficiency,
the $6$-base cutting enzyme EcoRI
works in a $24$ dimensional space, and so is likely to use the best
sphere packing known, the famous $24$ dimensional Leech
lattice~\cite{Leech1964}.
Using the Leech lattice would allow restriction enzymes to
minimize their errors and so cut precisely.
The $4$-base cutters should work in a $16$ dimensional space,
and in that dimension there are also good sphere packings.
Apparently, restriction enzymes have evolved
over a high dimensional landscape
to take advantage
of the best sphere packings.
To model recognition of EcoRI binding to DNA,
we distinguish two different energy flows in time.
The first is the energy dissipated
during the binding or `operation'
of the molecules
$P$ (power)
\cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
To describe $P$ for EcoRI we consider two states,
and in both states the protein is associated with the DNA.
The dissipation of $P$ proceeds from a
high energy `before' state in which the EcoRI molecule
is somewhere on the DNA but not bound specifically.
Then, after a Brownian motion search
\cite{Weber.Steitz1984a,Piatt.Price2019}
when EcoRI encounters a binding site it may
begin to form specific bonds \cite{Weber.Steitz1984b, McClarin.Rosenberg1986}.
As these bonds form,
energy is dissipated to the surrounding water until
EcoRI has formed all its bonds to the DNA. We call this
latter low energy state the `after' state.
The energetic difference between these
two states is the
specific binding energy,
$P = -\Delta G^{\circ}_{\text{spec}}$
with units of joules per binding
\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010}.
The time of this dissipation may vary, but the total energy
dissipated is constant between the two states,
as indicated by the measurability of
$\Delta G^{\circ}_{\text{spec}}$
for the operation \cite{Clore.Davies1982}.
The second important energy flow involved in EcoRI binding
is the thermal noise that passes through the molecule
\emph{during the binding operation}.
This noise, $N$, interferes with bond formation.
These concepts are parallel to the communications
model developed by Shannon in which the power $P$
of the communication signal is absorbed
into and then dissipates from the receiver
while it selects
a particular message
\cite{Shannon1948}.
The receiver must also handle additional energy
caused by thermal noise $N$ added to the power.
The $P/N$ ratio is called the `signal-to-noise' ratio, but
this term is not appropriate for EcoRI since there is
no external signal. However, in both models
there are the two energies
dissipated in time, $P$ and $N$,
and
there is a selection of specific states.
Of course, a sufficiently strong thermal noise
will eventually dislodge EcoRI
from its specific binding, but this reversal is
not the selection process we are interested in.
Having set up these concepts allows us to apply
powerful theorems from information theory
to the recognition problem
\cite{Shannon1949, Schneider.ccmm, Schneider.edmm, Schneider-emmgeo2010}.
However, the problem of recognition
cannot be explained by thinking about the protein-DNA
contact
as a single
interaction.
Instead, there are multiple
interactions including
hydrogen, van der Waals and electrostatic
bonds.
To describe this set of interactions takes a series of numbers.
Some of these interactions
could be
independent like the pins in a lock.
As in a lock, it is advantageous for the pins to be
independent because that way the lock can represent more combinations
and is more secure \cite{Macaulay1998}.
Unlike a lock,
the microscopic EcoRI molecule is continuously impacted and
violently jostled by thermal noise ($N$).
Each molecular `pin' has a velocity that is the sum of many small
impacts, so the central limit theorem from statistics tells us
that the velocity will be approximately Gaussian
\cite{Uhlenbeck.Ornstein1930}.
So the moving parts of a molecule--the `pins'-- that help
EcoRI select GAATTC can be
modeled as a set of independent molecular oscillators
moving under the influence of thermal noise
\cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
EcoRI potentially has many pins, each with
a particular velocity.
When one has a set of independent numbers they can be described
as a point in a high dimensional space.
Furthermore,
when two independent Gaussian distributions are combined
at right angles to represent their independence,
the resulting 2-dimensional distribution is circular
\cite{Schneider.shannonbiologist2006}.
With three independent Gaussian distributions
the combined distribution is a sphere and
when there are more than three the distribution is still
spherical,
a hypersphere.
The radius of the sphere is proportional to the square root
of the thermal noise impacting on the molecule
\cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
The higher the dimension of the sphere, the more the distribution
converges to a single radius and the sphere skin or `thickness'
becomes smaller \cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
To see this, consider
the volume of a ball (the region enclosed by a sphere)
embedded in a $D$ dimensional space,
\begin{equation}
V_D(r) =
\frac {\pi^{\frac{D}{2}}}
{\Gamma \left(\frac{D}{2} + 1 \right)}
r^{D} ~.
\label{eqn.V}
\end{equation}
For a radius $r$,
let half the volume lie in the shell between $r_* < r$ and $r$, that is
$\frac12 =
\frac{V_D(r_*)}{V_D(r)} =
\frac{r_*^{D}}{r^{D}}$.
Rearranging gives $r_* =
(\frac12)^{1/D} r$ and as $D\to\infty$, $r_*\to r$, so the volume
is densest near the surface.
So the state of EcoRI bound to GAATTC after dissipation
can be represented as a hypersphere.
Because the pins of EcoRI have an instantaneous position and velocity,
at any one instant EcoRI is at a particular point on the sphere
and moves by Brownian motion across the sphere surface.
EcoRI bound to a different DNA sequence, such as CAATTC,
is on a different hypersphere.
If these two spheres were to intersect, then EcoRI would
be able to bind sites other than GAATTC and this error would be
fatal to the bacterium whose DNA is only protected at GAATTC.
Thus the hyperspheres should not intersect.
When EcoRI binds to DNA,
that provides a finite amount energy that can be dissipated per binding
($P$), so there is a finite set of hyperspheres that can be bound.
During evolution
EcoRI will tend to minimize the binding energy, while the number
of hypersphere states it selects between remains constant
\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010}
so the hyperspheres
become tightly packed together without intersecting
(\fig{fig.packing}).
\figmargin{fig.packing}
Thus EcoRI can evolve to bind efficiently, using the minimum energy
to select between the maximum number of binding states.
In addition, by using many interactions in a high dimensional space,
the hyperspheres become sharply defined
because the distribution around the sphere radius
(the thickness) becomes smaller
\cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
This allows EcoRI to evolve to reduce
the number of times
it cuts the wrong sequence, giving it a low error rate.
\begin{figure}[tbhp]%
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\centering %
\scalebox{1.00}{\includegraphics*{spherepacking.eps}} %
\caption{Sphere packing.
Circles demonstrate square and hexagonal
sphere packing in two dimensions.
The hexagonal packing is $12$\% more dense.
In higher dimensional spaces sphere packing is less intuitive.
When hyperspheres pack together there is an odd property
diagramed on the right side of the figure (which is derived
from Shannon's proof of the channel capacity theorem,
Theorem 2 in his figure 5
\cite{Shannon1949}).
The vertical arrow represents moving
from the center of one hypersphere to the center
of a second hypersphere.
For Shannon,
working with electrical communications,
this voltage is proportional to the square
root of the power dissipation, $\sqrt{P}$.
In a 100 dimensional space, the thermal noise in the second
sphere (green circle) disturbs the signal in all directions,
shown by splayed arrows with lengths proportional to $\sqrt N$.
However, 99 of those dimensions do not perturb
in the direction of the power dissipation.
In his proof, Shannon neglected the 1\% of the noise in
the direction of the power since this represents the error,
and it can be made as small as one may desire by increasing
the dimensionality---in 1000 dimensions the error is only 0.1\%.
So relative to the direction of the power, the received
hypersphere can be treated as a flat surface since all the
other directions (splayed arrows) are at right angles
to the power direction.
If two hyperspheres are to be separated with as low
an error as desired,
then the power to get from one to the next must just
exceed the thermal noise power of the first sphere,
so $\sqrt{P} > \sqrt{N}$
and $P > N$.
}
\vspace{-0.3cm}
\label{fig.packing}
\end{figure} %
Shannon dealt with a closely related problem regarding
maximizing the information that could
be sent over a phone line for a given power ($P$, joules per second)
\cite{Shannon1948,Shannon1949}.
Messages from a transmitter
can be broken into a series of independent voltages and so the
set of numbers describing a particular message can be represented
as a point in a high dimensional
space which we call the `coding space' since the message
is represented by a code,
the set of voltage values along each dimension.
In addition, thermal noise on the phone wire
causes the received voltage pulses to vary according
to a Gaussian distribution.
So if a message were repeated many times the received
message points would form a sphere in the high dimensional space.
When the receiver gets one of these noise-disturbed points,
it can determine which of the possible transmitted messages is closest
and
thereby
`decode' the message to produce a clear noise-free signal
for the person.
Shannon recognized that the received spheres
should not intersect if the receiver is to avoid
ambiguity in decoding.
The receiver in a communications system selects particular
symbols from all possible symbols that the transmitter might send.
Similarly,
a molecule such as EcoRI selects a particular
state (binding to GAATTC) from an array of possible states
(binding to any arbitrary 6 base long sequence).
This concept applies to many other biological macromolecules.
These `molecular machines'
include proteins that bind DNA, proteins that detect light such
as rhodopsin in the eye
and proteins that cause motion such as myosin moving on actin
in muscle \cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
In every case the molecular machines dissipate energy in order to settle
into one of several possible lower energy states
and they do this despite the presence of violent thermal noise.
This paper answers the question of
why restriction enzymes have such high fidelity
despite being disturbed by thermal noise
by showing
how to calculate the coding space dimensionality of
nucleic-acid recognizing molecular machines.
The measured dimensionalities imply
that restriction enzymes have evolved to exploit coding techniques
only recently developed for modern communication systems.
This in turn suggests that humans should also be able to
build nanometer scale molecules that decode signals.
Background concepts important for understanding these results are
basic information theory~\cite{Pierce1980,SchneiderPrimer}, general
molecular biology~\cite{Watson1987}, and how to measure the
information content of binding sites on DNA or RNA in
bits~\cite{Schneider.Ehrenfeucht1986, Schneider.ev2000}
as in
sequence logos~\cite{Schneider.Stephens1990}.
In addition,
messages in a communications system and the states of molecular
machines can be represented by spheres packing together in a high
dimensional coding space~\cite{Shannon1949, Conway.Sloane1998,
Schneider.ccmm}.
The isothermal efficiency is described in
\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010, Schneider-brmit2010}.
For reviews, see \cite{Schneider.nano2,Schneider2006,
Schneider-brmit2010}.
The organization of this paper is as follows.
Section \ref{sec:lower}
develops an equation for a lower bound on the dimensionality
and we show how it applies to restriction enzymes in
Section \ref{sec:apply.lower}.
Section \ref{sec:upper} then develops an upper bound,
and
Section \ref{sec:pincers} shows that these bounds converge to
a unique dimension, twice the number of bits.
In Section \ref{sec:dimensionality}
we analyze the dimensionality of over 4000 restriction enzymes
and find that the 4- and 6- base cutting restriction enzymes prefer to
operate in $16$ and $24$ dimensions. These dimensions contain
dense hypersphere packings.
Section \ref{sec:lattices}
discusses the implications of restriction enzymes using
good sphere packings and examines possible biological reasons
why some restriction enzymes use packings in other dimensions.
Section \ref{sec:hi.dim.coding} examines biophysical mechanisms
that restriction enzymes might use to attain high dimensional coding.
Section \ref{sec:coding.spaces}
explores the relationship between high dimensional codes and
restriction enzymes and
examines additional details of how restriction enzymes
recognize DNA in different dimensions.
In Section
\ref{sec:fitness.landscape}
we discuss how the coding space may represent the
biological fitness landscape through which restriction enzymes evolve.
Finally in Section
\ref{sec:transcription.factors}
we apply the theory to transcription factors in general
and find that they are probably functioning not only in
a high dimensional space, but the space dimensionality
is not an integer so (by definition) they function in
a high dimensional fractal space.
\section{A lower bound on the dimensionality of molecular machines}
\label{sec:lower}
Molecular machines are
molecules that select
specific states while dissipating energy
\cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
The information, in bits, that a molecular machine
can gain is the base 2 logarithm of the number of states
it selects amongst
\cite{Schneider.Ehrenfeucht1986, Schneider.Stephens1990, Schneider.ev2000}.
The maximum number of bits that
can be gained for the energy dissipated
in a communications system is the channel capacity
\cite{Shannon1949}.
For molecular machines, we call the corresponding measure
the molecular machine capacity
\cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
Formulas for the capacities contain a term that represents
the dimensionality of the coding space in which the
state spheres are packed.
Therefore a rearrangement of the formula leads to an equation
for the dimensionality.
This provides a step towards
understanding the nature of the coding space of molecular machines.
The maximum number of distinct choices that a molecular machine can
make in the presence of thermal noise $N$ by dissipating energy $P$
depends on these two factors and also on the number of independent
moving parts of the machine or `pins,' $\ds$, following the lock and
key analogy of molecular machines~\cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
In communications,
the channel capacity sets the upper bound on the rate
that information can be faithfully transmitted~\cite{Shannon1948, Shannon1949}.
Corresponding to the
channel capacity
of communications systems
a molecular machine's capacity is:
\begin{equation}
C = \ds \log_{2}{ \left( \frac{P}{N} + 1 \right) }
\;\;\;\;\; \mbox{(bits per operation)} ~,
\label{eqn.Cy}
\end{equation}%
where a molecular machine operation is, for example, the process of
going from non-specific to specific DNA binding by a nucleic acid
recognizer~\cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
This formula was derived by counting the maximum number of distinct
molecular states, represented as spheres in a high dimensional space
(see \cite{Schneider.nano2,Schneider2006,Schneider-brmit2010} for reviews),
assuming white Gaussian noise.
At the molecular level,
relevant to the functionality of
molecular machines such as restriction enzymes,
the noise is overwhelmingly thermal,
justifying the use of Shannon's results.
In order to faithfully transmit information,
Shannon's channel capacity theorem~\cite{Shannon1949} implies that the
sequence information a nucleic acid recognizing molecular machine uses
to locate its binding sites, $R = R_{\text{sequence}}$
\cite{Schneider.Ehrenfeucht1986}, can evolve up to but not beyond this
capacity:
\begin{equation}
R \le C ~.
\label{eqn.R.Cy}
\end{equation}
For nucleic acid recognizers,
$R_{\text{sequence}}$ is the area under a sequence logo
\cite{Schneider.Stephens1990}.
The dimensionality of the coding space used to describe these states is:
\begin{equation}
D = 2 \ds
\label{eqn.D.ds}
\end{equation}
since there are both a phase and an amplitude for each of the
independent oscillator pins that describe the motions of a molecule at
thermal equilibrium \cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
Combining equations~\eq{eqn.Cy},~\eq{eqn.R.Cy}, and~\eq{eqn.D.ds}
gives a lower bound for the dimensionality:
\begin{equation}
\frac{2 R}{\log_{2}{\left( \frac{P}{N} + 1 \right)}} \le D ~.
\label{eqn.lower.D.bound}
\end{equation}
This lower bound is a function of the information gain $R$ and the $P/N$ ratio.
\section{Applying the dimensional lower bound to restriction enzyme coding space}
\label{sec:apply.lower}
The maximum theoretical isothermal efficiency of a molecular machine
is defined entirely by the dissipated energy $P$ and the thermal noise
$N$ in terms of the normalized energy dissipation $\rho = P/N$:
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_t = \frac{\ln \left(\frac{P}{N} + 1 \right)}{\frac{P}{N}}
= \frac{\ln \left(\rho + 1 \right)}{\rho}
\label{eqn.epsilon.t}
\end{equation}
where $0 < \epsilon_t \le 1$
\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010}.
This expression was first used to describe the efficiency of satellite
communications in terms of the `signal-to-noise' ratio, $P/N$
\cite{Pierce.Cutler1959}.
The efficiency of EcoRI and
other molecular machines is observed to be close to
$70$\%~\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010}. This can be explained if $P
\approx N$, in which case equation~\eq{eqn.epsilon.t} shows
$\epsilon_t \approx \ln 2 \approx 0.69$.
The relationship between $P$ and $N$
measures the distance between hyperspheres
(\fig{fig.packing})
so
$P=N$
implies that
the state of being bound to one sequence is distinct from the state of
being bound to a different sequence.
When there is a choice to be made among several molecular states, such
as the strong discrimination EcoRI makes between GAATTC and single
base changes of that sequence~\cite{Lesser.Jen-Jacobson1990}, then the
molecular machine operates under the condition that its states are
separated, which has been shown geometrically to be equivalent to
\begin{equation}
P > N
\label{eqn.P.N}
\end{equation}
(\fig{fig.packing})
\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010}.
This inequality limits the efficiency to $70$\%.
Substituting into equation~\eq{eqn.lower.D.bound}, the inequality~\eq{eqn.P.N} implies that
\begin{equation}
2 R < D ~.
\label{eqn.R.D.noequal}
\end{equation}
For fully evolved bistate molecular machines the dimensionality of the coding space is
more than twice the information content of a binding site when the latter is expressed in bits.
Thus, a lower bound of the dimensionality for the EcoRI coding space is found by noting that GAATTC is $6$ bases or $12$ bits, so EcoRI operates in a coding space of at least $24$ dimensions.
Similarly, as a consequence of the inequality~\eq{eqn.P.N}, $\ds$
supplies a lower bound for the channel capacity in
equation~\eq{eqn.Cy},
\begin{equation}
\ds < C ~.
\label{eqn.ds.C.bound}
\end{equation}
For example, given $P>N$, if $P=31N$ then $C=5 \ds$, so $C > \ds$.
\section{An upper bound on the dimensionality of molecular
machines}\label{sec:upper}
The higher the dimension that a molecular machine can work in,
the more the probability density tightens around the radius
of the hyperspheres
\cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
This suggests that biological systems may tend to evolve to
extremely high dimensions to reduce the error rate caused by
switching between the hyperspheres.
So having determined
a lower bound on the dimensionality of a molecular machine
(equation \eq{eqn.lower.D.bound})
is tantalizing but unsatisfying because
biological systems may have much higher dimensionality.
For this reason we sought an upper bound on the dimensionality.
The dimensionality of a molecule is related to the number
of degrees of freedom ($\nu$) that a molecule has.
For $n$ atoms there are 3 independent
axes each atom can move on, but the three
translational motions and three rotations about the axes do not
contribute
to the functioning
of the machine, so there are only
\begin{equation}
\nu = 3n -6
\label{eqn.nu.n}
\end{equation}
degrees of freedom.
For water $n = 3$ so $\nu = 3$ normal modes
that can be observed in the vibrational spectrum of the molecule.
These three motions can be described by common arm exercises
with the head representing oxygen and the fists hydrogen:
pushup/pullup ($\nu_1$ symmetric stretch),
jumping jack ($\nu_2$ bending mode)
and
one-two punch ($\nu_3$ asymmetric stretch)
\cite{Chaplin2000}.
Although
the number of degrees of
freedom of an entire molecule consisting of $n$ atoms is $3n -6$,
the relevant number of degrees of freedom involved
in the molecular machine selection process coding space ($D$)
is most likely much smaller
\cite{Schneider.ccmm}:
\begin{equation}
D = 2 \ds \ll 2 \nu = 2(3n - 6) ~,
\label{eqn.ds.real.two}
\end{equation}
because to be able to evolve each molecular machine `pin'
consists of an average of up to $n/\ds \gg 1$ atoms.
For a large molecule like EcoRI with thousands of atoms,
the relevant degrees of freedom ($D$)
for DNA binding will be much smaller
than given by equation
\eq{eqn.ds.real.two},
so
that relationship does not give a useful upper bound.
As Jaynes pointed out~\cite{Jaynes1983,Jaynes1988},
based on the classical equipartition theorem,
the energy per degree of freedom of a single thermal oscillator
in a molecular machine (lock pin) is $\frac{1}{2}\kb T$;
with $D$ degrees of freedom the total thermal noise flowing through
a molecule during one dissipation step of $P$ that selects a
specific molecular state is
\begin{equation}
N = \frac{1}{2} \kb T \cdot D
\;\;\;\;\;\;\mbox{(joules per operation)}
\label{eqn.Ny.D}
\end{equation}
(see also equation (31) in~\cite{Schneider.ccmm}).
For molecules that make distinct decisions by selecting between
nonoverlapping hyperspherical states, the inequality~\eq{eqn.P.N}
applies.
Substituting \eq{eqn.P.N}
into equation~\eq{eqn.Ny.D},
\begin{equation}
D < \frac{P}{\frac{1}{2}\kb T} ~.
\label{eqn.first.upper.D.bound}
\end{equation}
This provides a upper bound on the functional dimensionality, whereas
equation~\eq{eqn.lower.D.bound} provides a lower bound.
We convert equation~\eq{eqn.first.upper.D.bound} to a more useful form by noting that the energy available in coding space for making selections at one temperature and pressure~\cite{Schneider.ccmm,Schneider-emmgeo2010,Schneider-brmit2010} is the Gibbs free energy:
\begin{equation}
P = -\deltaGnaught
\; \; \; \; \; \mbox{(joules per operation)}
\label{eqn.Py.deltaGnaught}
\end{equation}
\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010}.
The maximum number of bits that can be gained for that free energy dissipation is
\begin{equation}
R_\text{energy} \equiv - \deltaGnaught / \Emin
\; \; \; \; \; \mbox{(bits per operation)}
\label{eqn.Renergy}
\end{equation}
\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010}.
$\Emin$ can be derived from information theory~\cite{Felker1952}
or the second law of thermodynamics~\cite{Szilard1929,Schneider.edmm}.
It serves as an ideal conversion factor between energy and bits:
\begin{equation}
\Emin = \kb T \ln 2
\; \; \; \; \; \mbox{(joules per bit)}
\label{eqn.Emin}
\end{equation}
\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010}.
Further, a `real' isothermal efficiency
$\epsilon_r$, that may be less than the theoretical
efficiency of equation \eq{eqn.epsilon.t},
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_r \le \epsilon_t ~,
\label{eqn.epsilon.r.le.epsilon.t}
\end{equation}
can be measured
by the information gained, $R$, \emph{versus} the information that could have been gained for the given energy dissipation, $R_\text{energy}$:
\begin{equation}
\epsilon_r = R/R_\text{energy}
\label{eqn.epsilon}
\end{equation}
\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010}.
Successively combining
equations~\eq{eqn.Py.deltaGnaught} to \eq{eqn.epsilon} gives
\begin{eqnarray}
P &=& \Emin R_\text{energy} \\ \nonumber
&=& (\kb T \ln 2) \, R_\text{energy} \\ \nonumber
&=& \kb T R \ln 2 /\epsilon_r ~. %
\label{eqn.Py.R}
\end{eqnarray}
Inserting this result into equation~\eq{eqn.first.upper.D.bound} gives
\begin{equation}
D < \frac {2 R \ln 2 } {\epsilon_r} ~,
\label{eqn.upper.D.bound}
\end{equation}
which we recognize as an upper bound on the coding space dimensionality as a function of the information gain $R$ and the isothermal efficiency $\epsilon_r$.
\section{Pincers on the dimensionality of molecular machines}
\label{sec:pincers}
Having determined both
a lower bound
(equation \eq{eqn.lower.D.bound})
and an upper bound
(equation \ref{eqn.upper.D.bound})
on the dimensionality of the coding space,
we have the opportunity to determine what will happen
as the molecular machine evolves to be optimally efficient.
Combining equations~\eq{eqn.lower.D.bound} and~\eq{eqn.upper.D.bound} gives
\begin{equation}
\frac{2 R \ln 2}{\ln{\left(\rho + 1 \right)}} \le D < \frac{2 R \ln 2}{\epsilon_r} ~,
\label{eqn.lower.upper.D.bound}
\end{equation}
where we have recast the left hand side in terms of $\rho = P / N$ and expressed the logarithm in base $e$ to emphasize the striking symmetry of the two sides
(the numerators are identical and the denominators are
related by equations \eq{eqn.epsilon.t} and \eq{eqn.epsilon.r.le.epsilon.t}).
The dimensionality is constrained to lie between these bounds, which form closing `pincers' as the molecular machine evolves to become optimal.
In the limit as
$P \rightarrow N$
and
$\epsilon_r$ evolves to its maximum value of $\ln 2$~\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010},
both sides converge to $2 R$, and $D$ is squeezed between them.
An optimally evolved molecular machine will operate in $2R$ dimensions:
\begin{equation}
D_{\text{optimal}} = 2 R ~.
\label{eqn.D.optimal.bits}
\end{equation}
However, because the state hyperspheres have a finite
thickness~\cite{Schneider.ccmm}, $P$ must at least slightly exceed
$N$, and the left hand side
of \eq{eqn.lower.upper.D.bound}
remains slightly smaller than $2 R$.
Likewise, because of equations~\eq{eqn.epsilon.t}
and~\eq{eqn.epsilon.r.le.epsilon.t}, $P > N$ also means that the
efficiency $\epsilon_r$ is slightly below $\ln 2$, which makes the
right hand side
of \eq{eqn.lower.upper.D.bound}
sightly larger than $2 R$. So the dimensionality is
restricted to a small interval. This allowed variation in the coding
space dimensionality is caused by the effective thickness of the
sphere surface fuzziness (which depends on the dimensionality $D$
itself) and the evolutionarily acceptable error rate determined by the
environment which limits how closely the coding spheres can approach
each other and still allow survival~\cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
For example, DNA polymerase has a certain error rate,
and of course if that error rate were to increase
the organism would experience a higher number mutations and
be at a selective disadvantage.
However,
there are also
mutations of the polymerase that decrease its error
rate~\cite{Herr.Preston2011}.
This would reduce the mutation load on the organism, but presumably it
does not occur in the wild because the organism would then be less
able to evolutionarily adapt to changing conditions compared to
siblings that have the higher error rate.
In many but not all cases they would also replicate more slowly.
Likewise, the error rate for translation is about $1$ in $1000$ amino
acids
\cite{Wohlgemuth.Rodnina2010}
which means that roughly one in every three proteins has an error.
Yet organisms survive quite well at this error rate.
The error rate set by the environment of the organism in turn determines the acceptable placement and thickness of the spheres.
Note that the lower bound constraint comes from equation~\eq{eqn.R.Cy},
the channel capacity theorem of Shannon~\cite{Shannon1949}, which limits the efficiency $\epsilon_r$.
The upper bound comes from equation~\eq{eqn.P.N}, the finite energy available to perform state selections ($P$) relative to the thermal noise ($N$), which satisfies the biologically required separation of molecular states~\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010}.
These two independent bounds are plotted on a graph of the efficiency curve
(\fig{fig.effcurvebounds},
\figmargin{fig.effcurvebounds}
equation~\eq{eqn.epsilon.t}~\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010}).
\begin{figure}[tbhp]%
\begin{center}
\scalebox{1.8}{\includegraphics*{effcurvebounds.eps}} %
\end{center}
\caption{Isothermal efficiency curve
for molecular machines showing
bounds that constrain
the coding space dimensionality $D$.
Real
molecular machines that select between two or more distinct states
may have parameters anywhere in the shaded (green) area
in which the real isothermal efficiency $\epsilon_r$
is bounded above
by the theoretical isothermal efficiency $\epsilon_t$
(equation \eq{eqn.epsilon.t})
and to the left
by the power to noise ratio $\rho = P/N > 1$ (equation \eq{eqn.P.N}).
During evolution,
they tend to lose unnecessary energy dissipation,
which decreases $\rho$ towards the lower
limit of $\rho=1$.
Independently,
they tend to increase their information use ($R$) for the energy
dissipated,
which increases $\epsilon_r$ toward
the theoretical maximum $\epsilon_t$
determined by the channel capacity.
These factors lead to an `optimal' molecular machine in which
$\rho = 1$
and
$\epsilon_r =\epsilon_t = \ln 2$.
At that point the dimensionality
has been squeezed in a pincers (equation \eq{eqn.lower.upper.D.bound})
until it reaches $D = 2 R$.
}
\label{fig.effcurvebounds}
\end{figure} %
The efficiency curve is an upper bound representing functioning at the
channel capacity (equation~\eq{eqn.R.Cy}). Points below the curve
have $R < C$. Since the dimensionality parameter $D = 2\ds$ is part
of the upper bound for $C$ in equation~\eq{eqn.Cy}, this leads to the
lower bound on $D$ in equation~\eq{eqn.lower.D.bound}. Independently
of that, the $\rho = P/N > 1$ ratio on the horizontal axis
of~\fig{fig.effcurvebounds} is orthogonal to the efficiency and
channel capacity of the vertical axis. The thermal noise $N$ is
determined by the absolute temperature of the molecular machine and
the dimensionality (equation~\eq{eqn.Ny.D}). Since $P$ is an upper
bound on the noise, equation~\eq{eqn.P.N} leads to an upper bound on
the dimensionality in equation~\eq{eqn.upper.D.bound}.
These two independent constraints on $\epsilon_r$ and $\rho$ determine
the possible range of the dimensionality. As shown
previously~\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010}, the normalized energy
dissipation $\rho$ will tend to decrease over evolutionary time
because excess contacts that are not required for maintaining
information will be lost by mutation. This decrease will continue
until at $\rho = 1$ the distinctness of molecular states is threatened
by a large error rate caused by the increasing intersection of after
state spheres. Meanwhile, the efficiency $\epsilon_r$ will tend to
increase up to $\ln 2$, squeezing the dimensionality towards a single
value, $2 R$ by equation~\eq{eqn.lower.upper.D.bound}. This result is
consistent with the dimensional analysis of
Collier~\cite{Collier2017}, who showed that information is related to
the degrees of freedom, which is of course the dimensionality of the
space.
\section{Dimensionality of restriction enzyme coding space}
\label{sec:dimensionality}
Now that we know that the dimensionality of an optimal
molecular machine is simply twice the number of bits that it
selects amongst
(equation \eq{eqn.D.optimal.bits})
we can determine the dimensionalities of
the thousands of known restriction enzymes
if we assume that they too are optimal.
In the case of restriction enzyme EcoRI,
experimental data \cite{Clore.Davies1982} show that
the efficiency is close to
$\epsilon_r = \ln 2$~\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010}, so that $\rho = P/N$
must be close to $1$.
Thus, although complete data are not available
about specific and non-specific binding of other restriction enzymes,
we assume that, like EcoRI,
these molecular machines
have also evolved to be close to $\ln 2$ efficiency
as shown in \fig{fig.effcurvebounds}.
We believe this is a reasonable assumption
because they should all distinguish their binding sites from
other sequences with as small an error as possible so
their hypersphere states should not overlap significantly ($P>N$),
and they should maximize the information gain for energy dissipation
(the efficiency) but
they cannot exceed the efficiency upper bound
shown in equation \eq{eqn.epsilon.t}
\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010, Schneider-brmit2010}.
Since a $6$ base cutting restriction enzyme
recognizes $R = 6 \times 2\ \mathrm{bits} = 12$ bits, from
equation~\eq{eqn.lower.upper.D.bound}, we see that the EcoRI coding
space must be close to $24$ dimensions.
If we characterize a restriction enzyme by the number of bases it recognizes,
then there are a maximum of two bits per base,
so the dimensionality of a $70$\% efficient molecule is:
\begin{equation}
D = 4 \times \mbox{(bases per binding site)} ~.
\label{eqn.D.bases}
\end{equation}
Thus, EcoRI, which has a $6$ base recognition site GAATTC,
works in $24$ dimensions, while TaqI, which recognizes only the 4
bases TCGA, should work in $16$ dimensions. The highest known
dimension used by a restriction enzyme is $32$ dimensions for
restriction enzymes such as NotI (GCGGCCGC)
and SfiI (GGCCNNNNNGGCC), which cut DNA at patterns $8$ base pairs
long~\cite{Qiang.Schildkraut1987,Roberts.Macelis2015}.
In the case of restriction enzymes that digest at partially variable
patterns such as GT(T/C)(A/G)AC (HincII), we can use the information
needed to describe the pattern to predict the dimension.
In this case, for the first two and last two bases (GT and AC), a
total of $8$ bits are required, while for each of the middle two bases
only $1$ bit is required to distinguish two of the four bases so $R =
10$ bits per site~\cite{Schneider.Ehrenfeucht1986}, even though the
binding site is $6$ bases long.
Thus, if HincII is optimal at $70$\% efficiency, it should operate in
$2R=20$ dimensions.
In the special case where a base is avoided by a restriction enzyme,
we record the information as $2 - \log_2 3$ bits for that
base~\cite{Schneider.Ehrenfeucht1986}. So formula~\eq{eqn.D.bases}
has only a limited application. The number of bits in a binding site
is not strictly computed from the physical length of the site, but
rather from the average number of bases if all the information were
compressed into the smallest region
possible~\cite{Schneider.Ehrenfeucht1986}. This is the `area' under a
sequence logo~\cite{Schneider.Stephens1990}.
The predicted dimensionality of over $4000$
Type II restriction enzymes in
Roberts' REBASE database \cite{Roberts.Macelis2015} is given
in~\tablereference{enzymetable} \tablemargin{enzymetable}
and~\fig{fig.restpack}A.
\figmargin{fig.restpack}
There are two major peaks at $24$ and $16$ dimensions, corresponding
to $6$ and $4$ base cutters. There is also a minor peak at $32$
dimensions for the $8$ base cutters.
The 4297 enzymes we studied consist mostly (98\%)
of Type II restriction enzymes.
A set of 482 Type I enzymes,
which cut randomly at a distance away from where they bind specifically,
were also collected from REBASE
\cite{Roberts.Macelis2015}
\\
(\url{http://rebase.neb.com/rebase/rebadvsearch.html}
on 9/30/2019
using the search paramters:
`Type I',
`Specificity subunit',
`Non-putative',
`Prototype'
and columns:
'Enzyme name' and
'Recognition sequence').
They
primarily use
24 (105 cases),
26 (112 cases) and
28 (206 cases) dimensions.
Since the additional enzymes are a small fraction of the database
our conclusions would not change by including them.
\begin{table}
\center
\colorlet{tablerowcolor}{gray!19.0} %
\rowcolors{4}{white}{tablerowcolor} %
\scalebox{0.90}{%
\input{enzymetable.tex}
}
\caption{
Coding space dimensionality ($D$)
and number ($N$) of restriction enzymes.
The information content in bits, $R$, of the recognition sequence of
4297 %
restriction enzymes from
REBASE (restriction enzyme database)
\url{http://rebase.neb.com} or
\url{ftp://ftp.neb.com/pub/rebase/} version allenz.801
(Dec 27 2017)~\cite{Roberts.Macelis2015}
was computed.
A fully conserved base
(A, C, G, T)
contributes $2 - \log_2 1=2$ bits,
two possibilities
(%
R=G/A,
Y=C/T,
M=A/C,
K=G/T,
S=C/G,
W=A/T)
contributes $2 - \log_2 2=1$ bit,
three possibilities
(%
B=C/G/T,
D=A/G/T,
H=A/C/T,
V=A/C/G)
contributes $2 - \log_2 3 \approx 0.42$ bits
and
any allowed base
(N)
contributes $2 - \log_2 4 = 0$
bits~\cite{Dixon.Stockwell1985,Schneider.Ehrenfeucht1986}.
The sum of the information at each base, $R$, was used to find the
corresponding
number of compressed bases ($\lambda=R/2$)
and then
the coding dimension ($D=2R$),
assuming that each enzyme has an efficiency of $\epsilon_r=\ln 2$ and
$\rho = 1$ so that there is a unique dimension
according to equation \eq{eqn.lower.upper.D.bound}.
The most commercially available
enzymes and their reported recognition sequences are given
as examples.
When the DNA backbone cleavage site is known it
is indicated by an arrow ($\downarrow$).
The distance to cleavage sites outside the given sequence is
shown in parenthesis for the corresponding and complementary strands.
Star activity (variation within the canonical site)
and flanking sequence effects are found for many restriction
enzymes~\cite{Kamps-Hughes.Johnson2013}.
However,
the patterns in the database
are reported as consensus sequences
that may distort the information
content~\cite{Schneider.Zen2002},
and so may affect the results given here.
}
\label{enzymetable}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[tbhp]%
\centering %
\scalebox{0.70}{\includegraphics*{restpack.eps}} %
\caption{Comparison of restriction enzyme frequency and
best known sphere packing density in different dimensions.
A. Coding dimensions used by restriction enzymes.
The number of enzymes at each dimensionality is plotted
from~\tablereference{enzymetable}.
B. Best known sphere packings in high dimensions
were given by
Conway and Sloane~\cite{Conway.Sloane1998,Sloane1998}.
The graph is equivalent to their Figure~1.5;
see
Table I.1(a), Table I.1(b) on
pages xix and xx; and pages 14 to 16.
The updated sphere center density formulas used here
were from %
\url{http://www.math.rwth-aachen.de/~Gabriele.Nebe/LATTICES/density.html} %
(Last modified Feb. 2012, accessed Jan 06, 2018).
The sphere center density,
$\delta$,
is the number of sphere centers per unit volume when sphere radii are
set to 1.
Without the logarithm, a graph of $\delta$ versus $D$
appears nearly flat from
$D = 7$
to
$D = 18$.
Circles ($\circ$) represent lattice packings;
x's ($\times$) represent nonlattice packings.}
\label{fig.restpack}
\end{figure} %
\section{Biological lattices in high dimensional spaces
explain restriction enzyme 4 and 6 base pair preferences}
\label{sec:lattices}
Ever since Shannon published his
theory of hypersphere packing as a description of a communications system
\cite{Shannon1949}
mathematicians and
engineers have been determining how best to pack spheres together
in high dimensional spaces
\cite{Conway.Sloane1998}.
The restriction enzymes appear to favor particular dimensions
for their coding spaces,
so we can compare their preferences to the best known packings
that humans have determined.
In two dimensions there are two ways to regularly
pack circles: in a square lattice or in a hexagonal lattice
(\fig{fig.packing}).
The square packing fills
$\Delta = \pi r^2 / (2 \times r)^2 = 79$\%
of the plane, while a hexagonal packing fills
$\Delta = \pi / \sqrt{12} = 91$\%~\cite{Conway.Sloane1998}.
Hexagonal packing is more dense than square packing.
In general, the sphere packing density is
\begin{equation}
\Delta = \frac{V_n r^n}{(\mbox{\scriptsize det}\, \Lambda)^{1/2}}
\label{eqn.bigDelta}
\end{equation}
where $V_n$ is the volume of an $n$ dimensional
sphere
with radius $r$
\cite{Sommerville1929,Kendall1961,Hayes2011n},
and
$\mbox{det}\, \Lambda$ is the determinant of the lattice $\Lambda$.
The determinant provides the volume of the polytope
that the sphere is encased in.
For convenience,
Leech introduced the concept of
the sphere center density
\begin{equation}
\delta = \frac{\Delta}{V_n}
\label{eqn.littledelta}
\end{equation}
which counts the average number of sphere centers per unit volume of the
space~\cite{Leech1964}.
Leech, Conway and Sloane rescaled or normalized the sphere center
density in several different ways to
emphasize the symmetries
of the sphere center density
as a function of dimension
\cite{Leech1964, Conway.Sloane1982, Conway.Sloane1998}.
As these rescalings do not have any biological significance
that we are aware of, we only take the logarithm of $\delta$
to graph the best known sphere packings up to $40$ dimensions
(\fig{fig.restpack}B).
Since each sphere center represents one sphere,
and
in a biological context
spheres represent biological states,
the center density is a measure of the number of states
available to the system.
Shannon recognized that the packing of spheres in higher dimensions
corresponds to the problem of faithfully transmitting a series of
distinct messages over a noisy communications
channel~\cite{Shannon1949,Sloane1984,Conway.Sloane1998,Cipra1990}.
In this model,
transmitted messages are points in a high dimensional space, and
each sphere represents a message received with
Gaussian noise added along each dimension.
Most of the sphere density is on the surface in high
dimensions~\cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
To avoid message ambiguity, the spheres must not intersect, which
spaces the transmitted messages
and allows a decoding that removes
the noise from the received signal.
The total volume available in which to pack spheres is
a large sphere whose radius is
determined by the power and thermal noise absorbed by the receiver,
while the volume of a smaller message sphere
is determined by the thermal noise alone~\cite{Shannon1949}.
A corresponding theory also describes the states of molecular
machines as spheres in high dimensional space
\cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
In both theories, the maximum number of possible messages
(or molecular states), known as the capacity,
is determined from the number of small spheres
that can be packed together inside the larger sphere.
As in $2$ dimensions, there are many possible ways to pack high
dimensional spheres; the more spheres that can be packed together,
the more the channel can be utilized.
Because of its application to communications
and a variety of mathematical and physics fields,
the highest sphere packing densities in various dimensions have
been determined, as shown in
\fig{fig.restpack}B.
The histogram
in \fig{fig.restpack}A
is compiled from data corresponding
to $4297$ restriction enzymes, whereas the center density
graph in \fig{fig.restpack}B
is an exact
mathematical result for $51$ lattice packings. It is striking how
well they match at $D=16$ and $D=24$, corresponding to $4$ and $6$ base
cutters. The histogram also has minor peaks at $D=18$ and $D=20$ that are
not reflected in the density plot. We argue below that this happens
for biological reasons. Similarly, the peak at $D=32$ in the center
density plot does not have a corresponding large peak in the histogram.
As discussed below,
we explain that this is for biological reasons as evolution seems to
prefer recognition and excision of smaller pieces of DNA.
The most dense known sphere packing is in $24$ dimensions, a
packing known as the Leech lattice (symbolized as $\Lambda_{24}$)
\cite{Leech1964,Conway.Sloane1998,
Stewart2003, %
Cohn.Elkies2003, %
Cohn.Kumar2004, %
%
Cohn.Kumar2009, %
%
Klarreich2016,
Viazovska2017, Cohn.Viazovska2017}.
This packing has been extensively studied,
and because of its density it
was used in a commercial Motorola modem
\cite{Lang.Longstaff1989}.
Surprisingly, the most common dimensionality of the restriction
enzymes is also $24$ dimensions, as shown in~\fig{fig.restpack}A.
This suggests that EcoRI and the other restriction enzymes
may be $6$ base cutters because that takes advantage of the
dense packing of the Leech lattice.
In other words, we hypothesize that
the reason so many restriction enzymes are $6$ base
cutters is that they have discovered the Leech lattice packing
by Darwinian evolution.
How the Leech lattice is implemented by the atomic structure of
restriction enzyme proteins is not known.
For restriction enzymes,
the next most commonly used dimensionality
is $16$ dimensions (\fig{fig.restpack}A),
and we see in \fig{fig.restpack}B that
a good packing,
the Barnes--Wall lattice $\Lambda_{16}$
(BW${}_{16}$),
has also been found for this dimension
relative to the other dimensions of similar magnitude \cite{Sloane1998}.
There are an estimated $10^7$
good packings equivalent to
BW${}_{16}$
\cite{Conway.Sloane1995}.
Thus, the $4$ base cutting restriction enzymes may be using $8$ bit
recognition to take advantage of the good hypersphere
packings possible in $16$ dimensions.
The longest known restriction enzyme sites have $8$ bases,
and so these enzymes should use a $8 \times 4 = 32$ dimensional space.
Correspondingly,
$32$ dimensions also represents a peak in the known dense lattices
called the
Quebbemann's lattice, $Q_{32}$~\cite{Sloane1998}.
Cohn and Elkies report a peak in $28$ dimensions
\cite{Cohn.Elkies2003} and,
intriguingly, this corresponds to $99$ cases of $7$ base cutters
(\tablereference{enzymetable}).
Transcription factors in \emph{E.\ coli}
have information contents in the range $16$ to $23$
bits~\cite{Schneider.Ehrenfeucht1986};
these may function with the high density packings known
to exist above $40$ dimensions.
On the lower dimensional end,
it is worth noting that
there is a small local maximum for the density of
sphere packings at $12$ dimensions.
This would correspond
to a $3$ base long biological object
for which
the obvious candidate is the codon of the genetic code.
It may be that the genetic code functions in a $12$ dimensional space,
but the coding is probably not performed via the
cubic lattice $Z^{12}$
suggested by Sadegh--Zadeh
\cite{SadeghZadeh2000} %
since there are better packings such
as the Coxeter--Todd lattice
$K_{12}$~\cite{Conway.Sloane1998}.
Finally, in $8$ dimensions the most efficient possible sphere packing
is on an $E_8$ lattice~\cite{Viazovska2017};
this corresponds to $2$ base pair recognition.
Biologically this code might be used for precisely recognizing
and methylating CpG base pairs, the basis of an important
epigenetic control~\cite{Miranda.Jones2007, %
Song.Patel2012}. %
Thus, all of the peaks in
\fig{fig.restpack}b
could correspond to known biological systems.
Restriction enzymes can evolve from one
dimension to the next since this only requires increasing or decreasing
the number of base contacts \cite{Pingoud.Pingoud2005,Chinen.Kobayashi2000}.
So there is some fluidity in the dimensions chosen, but
for several reasons
we do not expect a complete correspondence between \fig{fig.restpack}A
and \fig{fig.restpack}B.
First, because restriction enzymes have evolved, there
is a good deal of history in the current choices and some
of this may be locked in.
Some patterns will be common
simply because that particular bacterial species
is prevalent and their restriction enzymes were discovered more easily
than others.
Second,
the $8$ base enzymes ($32$ dimensions)
won't attack an invading DNA as frequently as shorter ones,
so bacteria may tend to avoid using higher dimensions.
Third, short patterns that cut frequently
would necessitate more self-protective methylation
and so would be expensive \cite{Chinen.Kobayashi2000}.
Fourth, evolutionary pressures to increase
or decrease the binding site information may not be equal
\cite{Chinen.Kobayashi2000}.
Finally,
unknown effects could come into play to eliminate, for example,
most of the
$5.5$ base ($22$ dimensional)
restriction enzymes
even though the
$5$ ($20$ dimensional)
and
$6$ ($24$ dimensional)
base sites are quite common.
The information content
of transcription factor
DNA binding sites
evolves based predominantly on the size of the genome
and the number of binding
sites~\cite{Schneider.Ehrenfeucht1986, Schneider.ev2000}.
Unlike transcription factors,
the information content of restriction enzyme sites
cannot evolve based on invading genomes
because there are no regular specific sequences to bind to.
However, the size of the intruding genome does provide some criterion
since
restriction enzymes protect bacteria from invading bacteriophage.
Typical sizes are on the order of $40,000$ base pairs, such as
$\lambda$ ($48502$ base pairs) \cite{Sanger.Petersen1982}
and
T7 ($39937$ base pairs) \cite{Dunn.Studier1983}.
The restriction enzyme must cut the invader
at least once, and preferably more, to disable the phage
genome. Thus, it requires approximately
$\log_2 48502 = 16$ bits in the site to attack $\lambda$ once.
A $12$ bit (6 base pairs) site such as EcoRI would cut $\lambda$
$2^{16 - 12} = 16$ times; $5$ sites are observed.
Perhaps this number is lower than expected because phage
evolve away from restriction sites;
EcoRI would cut T7 $8$ times but none are observed.
An $8$ bit ($4$ base pairs) site would cut more frequently
than a $12$ bit site
but the cell would
then have to methylate
$2^{12-8} = 16$ times as many sites.
Perhaps this is one reason that 6 base restriction
sites are more abundant than 4 base cutters:
6 bases is short enough that
phage are killed but also sufficiently long
that methylation is minimized.
Only the best choices of sphere packings
in biologically useful dimensions
may be reflected in the restriction enzymes.
The central suggestion of this paper is that,
although restriction enzymes are
highly divergent
\cite{Chmiel.Skowronek2005,
Bujnicki2000,
Bujnicki2003,
Gupta.Sharma2012,
Jeltsch.Pingoud1995},
most of them
have discovered that sphere packing in 16 and 24 dimensions
is more dense than packings in other dimensions.
This provides an explanation for why 4 and 6 base cutters have been found so
frequently.
In addition, the significant
peaks at $18$ and $20$ dimensions
in \fig{fig.restpack}A
suggest the biological use of dense codes in those dimensions
that may be consistent with known packings.
We regard an explanation as being a theoretical justification for an
observed feature within a data set. Alternative reasons for
restriction enzyme 4 and 6 base preferences might including ease of
coding or efficacy of protein folding, but there needs to be a
specific hypothesis justified by a mathematical model in order to
provide a competing explanation. To our knowledge, there isn't an
alternative model that explains the features we have noted. In our
view, since restriction enzymes are highly divergent
\cite{Chmiel.Skowronek2005, Bujnicki2000, Bujnicki2003,
Gupta.Sharma2012, Jeltsch.Pingoud1995}, ease of coding and protein
folding are unlikely to explain the convergence to 4 and 6 bases.
Also, our model provides a compelling explanation for which dimensions
are preferred.
\section{Mechanism of high dimensional coding}
\label{sec:hi.dim.coding}
For an evolved molecular machine
$D = 2 \ds$ (from equation \eq{eqn.D.ds})
and
$D = 2 R$ (from equation \eq{eqn.lower.upper.D.bound})
so
$\ds = R$.
So, curiously,
for an optimal molecular machine the number of bits
is the number of pins.
However, how the independent pins are implemented
in molecular architecture is a difficult open problem.
As in genetics, the underlying mechanism
of
DNA recombination
was not initially known
but the results,
linearity of genes,
were still valid.
Here, we know the dimensionality from the theory, but
we would also like to know how the molecule works.
There are at least two basic mechanisms
by which high dimensional coding could be implemented by molecules:
direct contacts and vibrational modes.
For example,
EcoRI cuts double stranded DNA at the sequence
GAATTC.
In the co-crystal between EcoRI and this sequence,
McClarin \emph{et al.}~\cite{McClarin.Rosenberg1986,Kim.Rosenberg1990}
observed that
each of the $6$ bases is contacted with two hydrogen bonds,
for a total of $12$ specific hydrogen bonds.
If each hydrogen bond
corresponds to a single `pin' of the molecular machine,
with two degrees of freedom per pin~\cite{Schneider.ccmm},
there would be $24$ dimensions.
That such contacts often act
independently,
and so could be coding space dimensions, is suggested by experiments
on several other
recognizers~\cite{Childs1985,Stormo.Gold1986,Barrick.Stormo1994,%
Takeda.Rivera1989,Lehming.MullerHill1990,Schneider.ccmm}.
However, experiments with mutant
EcoRI imply that it uses more than
just hydrogen bonding in
recognition~\cite{Heitman.Model1990b}, %
and bases of DNA recognition proteins
are not entirely independent~\cite{Man.Stormo2004, Bulyk.Church2002}.
Though including dinucleotides may be
sufficient~\cite{Stormo2011, Zhao.Stormo2012},
finding the important independent dimensions may be challenging.
All such pairwise correlations can be displayed with a
$3$ dimensional sequence logo~\cite{Bindewald.Shapiro2006}.
Alternatively,
the coding space could consist
of normal modes of molecular vibration since these
are by definition independent~\cite{Doruker.Kurkcuoglu2006}. %
In particular, localized vibrational modes called `discrete
breathers'~\cite{Csermely.Nussinov2010} %
may represent the molecular machine pins.
\section{Coding spaces}
\label{sec:coding.spaces}
In classical information theory, a continuous communications
signal, such as a song, can be represented by a series of independent
numerical values~\cite{Shannon1949}. An
analog signal of duration $t$ seconds that has a range of frequencies
(bandwidth) $W$
is described by $D = 2 t W$ Fourier components.
Since these sine wave amplitudes are independent,
they define $D$ numbers and hence a single point in a $D$ dimensional
coding space.
Because they are designed from scratch,
the dimensionality in communications systems is known \emph{a priori}.
By contrast molecular systems, which also have been shown to use
coding spaces~\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010}, do not have a known
dimensionality so determining this parameter is an important step towards
fully characterizing and understanding their function.
Equations~\eq{eqn.lower.D.bound} and~\eq{eqn.upper.D.bound}
establish
lower and upper bounds on the dimensionality
of molecular machines.
These constraints can be represented geometrically
(\fig{fig.effcurvebounds}).
The restriction that the
information $R$ cannot be larger than the machine capacity
$C$
(equation \eq{eqn.R.Cy})
ultimately comes from Shannon's 1949 model
of communication in which he divided the volume
of a large `\emph{before}' sphere, representing the space of all possible
messages, by the volume of a small `\emph{after}' sphere,
representing a single message
expanded in all possible directions by thermal noise,
to determine
the maximum number of possible distinct messages $M$
in time $t$
and hence
the channel capacity in bits,
\begin{equation}
C = \lim_{t \rightarrow \infty}\frac{\log_2 M}{t}
\label{eqn.C.limit}
\end{equation}
\cite{Shannon1949}.
The corresponding model for molecular states
(equation \eq{eqn.Cy})~\cite{Schneider.ccmm}
leads to the
lower bound on the dimensionality
(equation~\eq{eqn.lower.D.bound}).
In this case there are two geometrical constraints, state spheres must
not intersect and the state spheres are confined to the larger sphere
defined by the available energy.
The observation of $70$\% efficient molecular machines comes from
the restriction that for biological states to be distinct, the
\emph{after} state spheres must avoid intersecting each other
\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010},
as expressed by
$P > N$
(equation~\eq{eqn.P.N}).
The two constraints on the dimensionality therefore come from
the \emph{after} state spheres
bumping into each other
and from them being compressed within the larger \emph{before} sphere.
We found that when a DNA binding protein evolves to be optimally
efficient, the upper and lower dimensional bounds converge to twice
the information content of the binding site as measured in bits
(\fig{fig.effcurvebounds}).
Using this result, we found that the common $6$ base pair recognizing
restriction enzymes, which require $12$ bits to describe their pattern,
use a $24$ dimensional coding space.
When EcoRI is bound to a DNA sequence
its state can be described as a sphere in
the high dimensional coding space with each
of the possible $4^6=4096$
hexamer sequences represented
by a different sphere~\cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
If the sphere for EcoRI bound to GAATTC were to
overlap with any other sequence sphere, then EcoRI could bind to
and cut at inappropriate locations
that are unprotected by the corresponding methylase, leading to
death~\cite{Heitman.Model1989}.
Since EcoRI binding to sequences other than
GAATTC is at least $10^6$ fold down in
digestion~\cite{Lesser.Jen-Jacobson1990},
these spheres effectively do not intersect.
Excess binding energy that retains the same binding pattern
will be lost by mutational changes in the EcoRI protein structure,
so the spheres must be tightly packed
together in the $24$ dimensional space.
Remarkably,
it has already been shown by coding theorists
that the best known sphere packing is the Leech lattice in
$24$ dimensions~\cite{Conway.Sloane1998, Sloane1998, Cohn.Viazovska2017}.
Likewise the $4$ base pair restriction enzymes
use a $16$ dimensional coding space,
and there are good packings known in that space
(\fig{fig.restpack})~\cite{Conway.Sloane1995}.
Thus, there is
a correlation between commonly observed restriction enzyme
DNA site sizes and the best packing of spheres in high dimensional
spaces.
Could this be a coincidence?
We believe it is not for the following additional reasons.
First, the data sets are large. The entire collection represents
nearly $4300$ %
restriction enzyme sites
(\tablereference{enzymetable}).
Restriction enzymes are initially discovered by their ability
to digest DNA, and this method does not indicate the sequence of the binding
site, which is unknown until after the enzyme has been
isolated, purified, and characterized.
Odd classes of sites are noticed and publicized because these
are eagerly sought as research reagents.
Likewise,
the data on different kinds of high dimensional
sphere packings
(\fig{fig.restpack}b)
represent research efforts
spanning the $70$ years since Shannon's publication in 1948,
and there are strong economic
incentives to discover and publicize new
packings because they can be used to improve communications.
Second, the correlation between sphere packing and restriction enzymes
was derived without introducing any free parameters to the boundary equations
for the dimensionality.
It is a natural consequence of previously established molecular machine
theory~\cite{Schneider.ccmm, Schneider.edmm, Schneider-emmgeo2010,
Schneider-brmit2010}.
Presumably natural systems discovered the Leech lattice long ago,
but the details of how a small protein can implement
such a code are unknown.
However,
the fact that restriction enzymes have apparently discovered
good codes
should help us to understand
how they can recognize
short DNA sequences so precisely.
Conversely,
understanding the molecular mechanism of restriction enzyme decoding
could lead to single-molecule communications
devices~\cite{Schneider.ccmm}.
The distribution of restriction enzyme choice of dimensionality
is well explained by the best packings of spheres in various
dimensions
(\fig{fig.restpack}).
The major peak of $6$ base cutting restriction enzymes is
most likely explained
by their use of the Leech lattice in $6 \times 4 = 24$ dimensions.
Likewise, the peaks at $16$ and $32$ dimensions correspond to the $4$
and $8$ base cutters respectively.
In addition, restriction enzyme use of $18$, $20$, and $28$ dimensions
appears to correspond to good nonlattice packings that
are known in those dimensions.
This leaves three holes in the distribution at $22$, $26$, and $30$
dimensions which are rarely used by restriction enzymes but which
have decent sphere packings.
We suggest that restriction enzymes with dimensions close to a peak
evolve into the peak.
For dimension $30$,
\tablereference{enzymetable}
gives the example of KpnBI
with the recognition sequence
CAAANNNNNNRTCA.
Notably this is an asymmetric recognition sequence with
a part that recognizes exactly 4 bases
CAAA
on the $5'$ side and
RTCA on the $3'$ side.
Recognition of a purine R is typically accomplished by
a single hydrogen bond to the N7 position of either A or G
\cite{Seeman.Rich1976, Schneider.oxyr}.
If an additional contact or hydrogen bond into the major groove evolves
(for example to
the N6 of A
or
O6 of G
and on the complementary strand the
methyl of T,
O4 of T
or
N4 of C),
then the enzyme could specify exactly A or G and the dimensionality
would increase to $32$.
This could improve the sphere packing
according to our current knowledge of lattices in $30$ and $32$ dimensions,
so the lack of $D = 30$ enzymes is likely
to be because most have already evolved to the nearby better packing.
Since there are two known $D = 30$ enzymes according to
\tablereference{enzymetable},
we can test this idea by inspection of the other one.
Indeed, that enzyme is
Eco851I with recognition sequence GTCANNNNNNTGAY.
Since Y pairs to R on the complementary strand,
alteration of the terminal Y to a specific base would switch
this enzyme from $30$ to $32$ dimensions by the same mechanism.
Indeed, a similar explanation for an evolutionarily easy switch
from $26$ to the $24$ dimensional Leech lattice is suggested by the enzyme
RsrII CGGWCCG,
while
the $22$ dimensional
PpuMI RGGWCCY
has three such opportunities.
In each of these cases, merely having the disfavored dimension leads
to a pattern vulnerable to evolution to a nearby dimension.
Whether there are biological or mathematical constraints that prevent
the rare cases from evolving to the best packing dimensions is
unknown.
Two additional biological constraints on the distribution
of restriction enzyme dimensionalities were mentioned earlier.
We expect few if any restriction enzymes to
function at low dimensionality (below $4$ bases or $16$ dimensions) since
such enzymes would digest DNA frequently and so would
require extensive methylation protection which may be disadvantageous.
Restriction sites longer than $8$ bases or $32$ dimensions would
only be found rarely on invading DNA and so presumably these too
would not have much advantage.
These factors limit the range of functionally useful dimensions.
\section{Coding space as a fitness landscape}
\label{sec:fitness.landscape}
Considering how well the
restriction enzyme frequency
(\fig{fig.restpack}A)
and
best sphere packing center density
(\fig{fig.restpack}B)
distributions match overall given the biological constraints
on the range that restriction enzymes can function in,
the sphere packing center density
distribution appears to be
a measure of fitness
for restriction enzymes
evolving over
a high dimensional
adaptive fitness landscape,
similar to the high dimensional spaces described by
Wright~\cite{Wright1932, Gavrilets1997, Gavrilets2010,
Pigliucci2008}.
For biological systems, the number of sphere centers
corresponds to the number of distinct states the system can be in.
The center density $\delta$
(equation \eq{eqn.littledelta})
is therefore a more appropriate measure than the filled
volume of
the lattice defined by $\Delta$
(equation \eq{eqn.bigDelta})
since biological systems evolve
to have distinct states~\cite{Schneider-emmgeo2010}.
The volume of the state is itself irrelevant.
So we propose that
$\log_2 \delta$ vs.\ $D$ represents the biological coding landscape.
Plotting $\log_2\delta$ instead of $\delta$
emphasizes the detailed features of the curve.
A biological system can evolve to
obtain the highest number of distinct states
by maximizing the sphere center packing density $\delta$.
Because the capacity is the logarithm of the number of states,
this also maximizes the information and the efficiency.
Since the logarithm is monotonic, if
$\delta_1 > \delta_2$, $\log_2{\delta_1} > \log_2{\delta_2}$.
Examining~\fig{fig.restpack}B, we notice several important features.
For lattice packings,
since $\log \delta \le 0$,
there is no more than one center per
unit sphere packing volume for $D\in [0,30]$.
There is exactly one in $D=0$ and $D=24$:
these are the densest sparse packings.
In higher dimensions ($D>30$),
there can be more than one center per
unit sphere packing volume.
Comparing~\fig{fig.restpack}A to~\fig{fig.restpack}B,
we encounter a puzzle.
The center density in $D=20$ is larger than
the center density in $D=16$.
Why then are there more $4$ base cutters than
$5$ base cutters?
There are at least three explanations.
Evolutionary selection
should increase
the molecular machine
capacity by finding relative maxima
of the sphere packing center density
but evolution also
minimizes the expenditure of resources by a cell.
On average, an
enzyme that recognizes a shorter sequence requires less protein
structure
and so requires less energy
to synthesize.
Perhaps
the gain in information density at dimension $20$ compared to dimension $16$
is insufficient to offset the greater energy cost.
In contrast,
the significant
improvement of information density at dimension $24$ may provide a
superior benefit to the organism despite the extra expenditure in
energy and this may explain why there are more $6$ base enzymes than $4$ base
enzymes.
A second consideration
is the number of target restriction sites needed
on foreign DNA.
Larger target DNAs would be best digested less frequently
so that the restriction enzyme spends less time on small regions
and conversely some enzymes may be targeted to smaller DNAs,
leading to a smaller dimensionality.
A third factor is the ease of evolving recognition patterns.
Protein
dimerization allows the creation of a 4 base cutting restriction site
from two half sites.
Five base recognition is probably more difficult
to evolve
since the central base has to be handled separately or the entire
site has to become asymmetric.
The best center density $\delta$ in $16$ dimensions has the
same value as the best center density in
$17$ dimensions
(\fig{fig.restpack})~\cite{Conway.Sloane1998}.
Since higher dimensionality allows lower error rates~\cite{Shannon1949},
why isn't $17$ dimensions used
to provide more accurate restriction?
A $17$ dimensional packing would take $4.25$ bases and the $0.25$
bases could be contacted in the center of the site.
Dimeric proteins use less protein structure than a monomer and so
require smaller DNA coding,
but
only one of the two monomers
could contact the center at a time.
Perhaps this awkward wasteful situation is unfavorable compared
to using $16$ dimensions.
In fact, odd dimensions are avoided by restriction enzymes in general
(\tablereference{enzymetable}).
Another possibility is that the huge number of known packings
in $16$ dimensional space
($10^7$,
\cite{Conway.Sloane1995})
overwhelms a smaller number of packings in $17$ dimensions.
Similar considerations apply to dimensions $7$ and $8$,
where the center densities are equal.
Here, because $8$ is even,
the $E_8$ lattice is known to be highly symmetric,
and the error rates are smaller, the preference for
$D=8$ over $D=7$ is clear.
According to \fig{fig.restpack}A there are several hundred restriction
enzymes that operate in $16$, $18$ and $20$ dimensional coding spaces.
Just as the $E_8$ and Leech lattices allow for dense sphere packings
in $8$ and $24$ dimensions, evolution may select similarly dense
packings in other even dimensions, especially those divisible by $4$.
There may be best packings in these dimensions that have not been
discovered yet; this is an open problem in mathematics.
Evidently many restriction enzymes have discovered the Leech lattice,
but does this merely reflect divergent evolution from a common
ancestor?
Many restriction enzymes
have widely different
structures~\cite{Pingoud.Wende2014}, %
suggesting convergent evolution.
Perhaps a deeper understanding of the coding spaces
will help to classify these enzymes.
In addition,
the coding spaces of restriction enzymes may provide
a fertile ground for precise quantitative analysis of population genetics
and theoretical evolutionary biology
since much is known about sphere packing in high
dimensions~\cite{Conway.Sloane1998}.
Though
we have found a strong
correlation between the high dimensional sphere center packing landscape
and restriction enzyme information content preferences,
this still leaves the important task of understanding
how the codes are implemented by the protein structures
as a major problem for coding theorists and biologists.
\section{Transcription factors use high dimensional fractal coding}
\label{sec:transcription.factors}
Experimental evidence has been obtained indicating that
for the transcription factor Fis,
the specific DNA binding mode differs sharply from
non-specific DNA binding
since there is a break in the
binding curve at zero bit binding
sites~\cite{Schneider.edmm, Schneider-Ri1997, Shultzaberger.Schneider-spr2007}.
Shannon pointed out that a mapping from a high dimensional
space to lower dimensions creates discontinuities~\cite{Shannon1949},
so this
result suggests that Fis functions in a high dimensional
coding space
close to $2 \times 7.86 \pm 0.27 = 15.72 \pm 0.54 \approx 16$
dimensions~\cite{Hengen.Schneider-fisinfo1997}.
For nucleic acid recognizing molecules
that have specific sites on the genome,
such as transcription factors,
the information
in the binding sites, $R_{\text{sequence}}$, evolves to match
the information needed to locate the binding sites,
\begin{equation}
R_{\text{frequency}} = - \log_2 \gamma / G
\;\;\;\;\;\mbox{(bits per molecular operation)}
\label{eqn.rf}
\end{equation}
where $G$ is the number of potential
binding sites in the genome
and $\gamma$ is the number of specific binding
sites~\cite{Schneider.Ehrenfeucht1986, Schneider.ev2000}.
In the case of restriction enzymes equation~\eq{eqn.rf} does
not apply since there are no specific binding sites in the foreign
DNA attacked by these enzymes
and $\gamma$ does not have a particular value.
However, the principle that
$R_{\text{sequence}} \approx R_{\text{frequency}}$
does apply to many other genetic systems
such as
transcription factors~\cite{Schneider.Ehrenfeucht1986},
promoters~\cite{Shultzaberger.Schneider-flexprom2007, Penotti1990},
ribosome binding sites \cite{Shultzaberger.Schneider2001, Schneider2005},
and mRNA splicing~\cite{Stephens.Schneider-splice1992}.
In general
$G / \gamma$ is not an exact power of two,
so $R_{\text{frequency}}$, and therefore $R_{\text{sequence}}$ is usually not an integer.
Equation~\eq{eqn.lower.upper.D.bound}
then implies that
for an optimal molecular machine in which $D = 2R$,
the dimension of the binding sites
will not be an integer.
Objects with non-integer dimensions are called
fractals~\cite{Mandelbrot1983, Muslih.Agrawal2009, Sorensen.Roberts1997}.
As shown in
\tablereference{enzymetable}, many restriction enzymes
may also have fractal dimensions, although more close inspection
using sequencing technologies may be required to confirm the
observation~\cite{Cohen-Karni.Zheng2011}.
How a molecular coding system can have non-integer dimensions and
the possible applications of
such high dimensional fractal codes for communication systems
remain to be investigated.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
TDS thanks
N.~J.~A.~Sloane for useful discussions about the normalization
of the sphere packing density function,
Rich Roberts
for useful discussions about REBASE
and
for pointing out that Type I restriction enzymes differ from Type II,
Michael Smith
for suggesting that sphere packing density may be an adaptive landscape,
Eckart Bindewald,
Misha Kashlev,
Ryan Shultzaberger
and
Randall Johnson
for comments on the manuscript
and the Advanced Biomedical Computing Center (ABCC) for support.
VJ thanks the U.S.~National Cancer Institute
Werner H. Kirsten Student Intern Program,
Soren Brunak, and the
Technical University of Denmark for hospitality during initial stages
of this project in 1994.
\textbf{Data and materials availability:}
see
Table \ref{enzymetable}
and
\fig{fig.restpack}.
\nolinenumbers
\raggedright
|
\section{Introduction}\label{Intro} Let $F$ be a finite type surface and $\zeta$ a complex root of unity. The Kauffman bracket skein algebra $K_\zeta(F)$ is an important object in both classical and quantum topology as it has relations to the character variety, the Teichm\"uller space, the Jones polynomial, and the Witten-Reshetikhin-Turaev Topological Quantum Field Theories. We recall the definition of $K_\zeta(F)$ in Section \ref{prel}.
The linear representations of $K_\zeta(F)$ play an important role in hyperbolic Topological Quantum Field Theories. In \cite{FKL} we prove the Unicity Conjecture of Bonahon and Wong \cite{BW4} which among other things states that generically all irreducible representations of $K_\zeta(F)$ have the same dimension equal to the square root of the dimension of $K_\zeta(F)$ over its center $Z_\zeta(F)$. Here if $A$ is an algebra whose center is a domain $Z$ then the dimension of $A$ over $Z$, denoted by $\dim_ZA$, is defined to be the dimension of the vector space $A \otimes_Z \tilde Z$ over the field of fractions $\tilde Z$ of $Z$. The calculation of the dimension $\dim_Z_\zeta(F) K_\zeta(F)$ is one of the main result of this paper.
\begin{thm}
[ See Theorem \ref{thm.dim}] \label{thm.1}
Suppose F is a finite type surface of genus $g$ with $p$ punctures and negative Euler characteristic, and $\zeta$ is a root of unity of order $\mathrm{ord}(\zeta)$. Let $m$ be the order $\zeta^4$, then
\[\dim_{Z_\zeta(F)} K_\zeta(F)= \begin{cases}
m^{6g-6 + 2p} \qquad &\text{if }\ \mathrm{ord} (\zeta) \not \equiv 0 \pmod 4 \\ 2^{2g} \, m^{6g-6 + 2p} \qquad &\text{if } \ \mathrm{ord} (\zeta) \equiv 0 \pmod 4.\end{cases}\]
\end{thm}
We show that $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F):= K_\zeta(F) \otimes_Z_\zeta(F) \tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$, where $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$ is the field of fractions of $Z_\zeta(F)$, is a division algebra having finite dimension over its center $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$. Thus every element $\alpha \in \tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$ lies in a finite field extension of $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$ and hence has the reduced trace $\mathrm{tr}_\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)(\alpha) \in \tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$. We recall the definition of the reduced trace in Section \ref{divalg}. The second goal of the paper is to compute the reduced trace of elements of $K_\zeta(F)$.
To state the theorem, denote by $\mathscr S$ the set of all isotopy classes of simple diagrams on $F$, where a simple diagram is the union of disjoint, non-trivial simple closed curves on $F$. For each $\alpha\in \mathscr S$ one can define an element $T(\alpha) \in K_\zeta(F)$, such that the set $\{ T(\alpha) \mid \alpha \in \mathscr S\}$ is a $\mathbb C$-basis of $K_\zeta(F)$ and $T(\alpha)$ is central if and only if $\alpha$ is in a certain subset $\mathscr S_\zeta$ of $\mathscr S$. See Section \ref{sec.Cheb} for details. The definition of $T(\alpha)$ involves Bonahon and Wong's threading map \cite{BW2}.
As the $\mathbb C$-vector space $K_\zeta(F)$ has basis $\{ T(\alpha) \mid \alpha \in \mathscr S\}$, hence it is enough to compute the trace of each $T(\alpha)$.
\begin{thm} [See Theorem \ref{thm.trace}] \label{thm.2}
Let $F$ be a finite type surface and $\zeta$ be a root of 1. For $\alpha\in \mathscr S$ one has
$$
\mathrm{tr}_\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)(T(\alpha))= \begin{cases}
T(\alpha) \quad &\text{if $T(\alpha)$ is central, i.e., } \alpha\in \mathscr S_\zeta \\
0 & \text{otherwise.}
\end{cases}
$$
\end{thm}
Along the way we develop tools for determining when a collection of skeins forms a basis for $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$.
The last goal of the paper is to prove that there exists a splitting of $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$ over its center coming from pairs of pants decompositions of the surface.
\begin{thm}
[See Theorem \ref{r.decomp}] \label{thm.3}
Let $F$ be a finite type surface of negative Euler characteristic.
There exist two pants decompositions $\mathcal P$ and ${\mathcal Q}$ of $F$ such that for any root of unity $\zeta$ the $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$-linear map
$$
\psi:\cC_\zeta(\mathcal P) \otimes _{\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)} \cC_\zeta({\mathcal Q}) \to \tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F), \quad \psi(x\otimes y) \to xy,
$$
is a $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$-linear isomorphism of vector spaces. Here $\cC_\zeta(\mathcal P)$ (respectively $\cC_\zeta({\mathcal Q})$) is the $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$-subalgebra of $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$ generated by the curves in $\mathcal P$ (respectively in ${\mathcal Q}$). Both $\cC_\zeta(\mathcal P)$ and $\cC_\zeta({\mathcal Q})$ are maximal commutative subalgebras of the division algebra $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$.
\end{thm}
This theorem has an application in defining invariants of links in 3-manifold which will be investigated in a future work.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section \ref{divalg} we survey results about division algebras that have finite rank over their center, and facts about trace, and filtrations of algebras, with a goal of applying these to the Kauffman bracket skein algebra.
We follow by introducing the Kauffman bracket skein algebra in Section \ref{prel}. Its basis is given in terms of simple diagrams, so we describe ways of parametrizing simple diagrams on a surface. We also introduce a residue group. In section \ref{stabledt} we show that after enough twisting the Dehn Thurston coordinates of a simple diagram on a closed surface stabilize to become an affine function of the number of twists. This allows us to define stable Dehn-Thurston coordinates. In Section \ref{residue} we introduce a degree map and use it to formulate a criterion for independence of a collection of skeins over its center. Section \ref{dimkoverz} computes the dimension of the Kauffman bracket skein algebra over its center, proving Theorem \ref{thm.1}. In section \ref{sec.42} we find bases for commutative subalgebras of $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$ generated by the curves in a primitive non-peripheral diagram on $F$ with coefficients in $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$. In Section \ref{calcoftr} we find a formula for computing the trace, proving Theorem \ref{thm.2}. The paper concludes in Section \ref{pantedec} which proves the splitting theorem (Theorem \ref{thm.3}).
\subsection{Acknowledgment } The authors thank F. Luo and D. Thurston for their comments.
This material is based upon work supported by and while serving at the National Science Foundation. Any opinion, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. T.L. thanks the CIMI Excellence Laboratory, Toulouse, France, for inviting him on a Excellence Chair during the period of January -- July 2017 when part of this work
was done.
\section{Division algebras, trace, filtrations}\label{divalg}
In this section we survey some well-known facts about division algebras, trace, and filtrations of algebras that will be used in the paper
\subsection{Notations and conventions} Throughout the paper $\mathbb N$, $\mathbb Z$, $\mathbb Q$, $\mathbb R$, $\mathbb C$ denote respectively the set of natural numbers, integers, rational numbers, real numbers, and complex numbers. Note that $0 \in \mathbb N$. Let $\mathbb Z_2= \mathbb Z/(2\mathbb Z)$ be the field with 2 elements.
A complex number $\zeta$ is a {\em root of 1} if there is a positive integer $n$ such that $\zeta^n=1$, and the smallest such positive integer is called the {\em order } of $\zeta$, denoted by $\mathrm{ord}(\zeta)$.
All rings are assumed to be associative with unit, and ring homomorphisms preserve 1. A {\em domain} is a ring $A$, not necessarily commutative, such that if $xy=0$ with $x,y\in A$, then $x=0$ or $y=0$.
For a ring $A$ denote by $A^*$ the set of all non-zero elements in $A$. For example, $\mathbb C^*$ is the set of all non-zero complex number.
\subsection{Algebras finitely generated over their centers}
The following is well-known, and we present a simple proof for completeness.
\begin{prop} \label{r.sfield} (a) If $k$ is a field and $A$ is $k$-algebra which is a domain and has finite dimension over $k$, then $A$ is a division algebra.
(b) Let $Z$ be the center of a domain $A$ and $\tilde Z$ be the field of fractions of $Z$. Assume $A$ is finitely generated as a $Z$-module. Then $\tilde A= A\otimes_ Z \tilde Z$ is a division algebra.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} (a) Suppose $0\neq a\in A$. The $k$-subalgebra of $A$ generated by $a$, being a commutative finite domain extension of the field $k$, is a field. Hence $a$ has an inverse.
(b) Every element of $\tilde A$ can be presented in the form $a z^{-1}$ where $a\in A$ and $0\neq z \in Z$. From here it is easy to show that $\tilde A$ is a domain and the natural map $A \to \tilde A$ is an embedding. Since $A$ is $Z$-finitely generated, $\tilde A$ is also $\tilde Z$-finitely generated, and (b) follows from (a). \end{proof}
The above proposition reduces many problems concerning domains which are finitely generated as modules over their centers to the case of division algebras finitely generated over their centers.
\subsection{Trace}
Suppose $k$ is a field and $A$ is a $k$-algebra which is finite-dimensional as a $k$-vector space. For $a\in A$, the left multiplication by $a$ is a $k$-linear operator acting on $A$, and its trace is denoted by $\mathrm{TR}_{A/k}(a)$.
The {\em reduced trace} is defined by
$$ \mathrm{tr}_{A/k} (a)= \frac{1} {\dim_kA} \mathrm{TR}_{A/k}(a) \in k.$$
Again, the following is well-known.
\begin{prop}\label{r.trace1} Suppose that $k$ is a field, and $A$ is division $k$-algebra
having finite dimension over $k$. Suppose $0\neq a\in A$.
(a) If $P(x)=x^l + c_{l-1} x^{l-1} + \dots c_1 x + c_0$ is the minimal polynomial of $a$ over $k$, then $\mathrm{tr}_{A/k}(a)=- c_{l-1}/l$.
(b) If $B$ is a division algebra with $a \in B \subset A$, then $\mathrm{tr}_{B/k}(a)= \mathrm{tr}_{A/k}(a)$.
(c) The function $\mathrm{tr}_{A/k}: A \to k$ is non-degenerate in the sense that for $0\neq a\in A$ there exists $b\in A$ such that $\mathrm{tr}_{A/k}(ab) \neq 0$. In particular, $A$ is a Frobenius algebra.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} (a) Let $C$ be the $k$-subalgebra of $A$ generated by $a$, then $C$ is a field. By the definition of the minimal polynomial,
\begin{equation}C\cong k[x]/(P(x)).\end{equation}
As a $k$-vector space $C$ has basis $\{1,a, \dots, a^{l-1}\}$. It follows that $\mathrm{TR}_{C/k} = - c_{l-1}$.
Let $\{a_1,\dots, a_t\}$ be a basis of $A$ over $C$ so that
$ A =\bigoplus_{i=1}^t C a_i$. Each $C a_i$ is invariant under the left multiplication by $a$, and the action of $a$ on each $Ca_i$ has trace equal to
$ \mathrm{TR}_{C/k}(a)$. Hence,
$$ \mathrm{TR}_{A/k}(a) = t \mathrm{TR}_{C/k}(a) = - t c_{l-1} = (\dim_kA) \frac{-c_{l-1}}{l}.$$
From here we have $\mathrm{tr}_{A/k}(a) = \frac{-c_{l-1}}{l}$.
(b) follows immediately from (a).
(c) Let $b= a^{-1}$. Then $\mathrm{tr}(a b) = \mathrm{tr}(1)=1\neq 0$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Maximal commutative subalgebras} Suppose $A$ is a division algebra with center $k$.
If $C\subset A$ is a maximal commutative subalgebra, then $C$ is a field and
\begin{equation}
\dim_kA = (\dim_k C)^2. \end{equation}
\subsection{Dimension} Suppose a $\mathbb C$-algebra $A$ has center $Z$ which is a commutative domain. Let $\tilde Z$ be the field of fractions of $Z$. The {\em dimension } $\dim_ZA$ is defined to be the dimension of the $\tilde Z$-vector space $A \otimes_Z \tilde Z$.
A {\em filtration compatible with the product} of $A$ is a sequence $\{ F_i\}_{i=0}^\infty$ of $\mathbb C$-subspaces of $A$ such that $F_i \subset F_{i+1}$, $\bigcup_{i=0}^\infty F_i = A$, and $ F_j F_j \subset F_{i+j}$.
For any subset $X \subset A$ let $F_i(X) = F_i \cap X$.
\begin{lemma} \label{r.lim2}
Suppose $\dim_ZA < \infty$ and $\dim_\mathbb C F_i(A) < \infty$ for every $i$. There exists a positive integer $u$ such that for all $k \ge u$,
\begin{equation} \label{eq.lim2}
\dim_{Z} A \le \frac{\dim_\mathbb C F_k(A)}{\dim_\mathbb C F_{k-u}(Z)}.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Assume $a_1,\dots, a_d \in A$ form a basis of $A\otimes_Z \tilde Z$ over $\tilde Z$. Let $u$ be a number such that all $a_j$ are in $F_u(A)$. Since $a_1,\dots, a_d$ are linearly independent over $Z$, the sum $\sum_{j=1}^d Z a_j$ is a direct sum. We have
\begin{equation} \bigoplus_{j=1}^d F_{k-u}(Z) a_j \subset F_k( \bigoplus_{j=1}^d Z a_j) \subset F_k(A).
\label{eq.s9}
\end{equation}
The dimension of the first space in \eqref{eq.s9} is $d \dim_\mathbb C F_{k-u}(Z)$, while the dimension of the last one is $\dim_\mathbb C F_k(A)$. Hence,
$ d \dim_\mathbb C F_{k-u}(Z) \le \dim_\mathbb C F_k(A)$, which is \eqref{eq.lim2}.
\end{proof}
\def\mathrm{vol}{\mathrm{vol}}
\subsection{Lattice points in polytope} Suppose $\mathbb R^n$ is the standard $n$-dimensional Euclidean space. A {\em lattice} $\Lambda \subset \mathbb R^n$ is any abelian subgroup of maximal rank $n$. A {\em convex polyhedron} $Q$ is the convex hull of a finite number of points in $\mathbb R^n$ and its $n$-dimensional volume is denoted by $\mathrm{vol}(Q)$. Let $ k Q :=\{ kx \mid x \in Q\}.$
\begin{lemma} \label{r.lim3}
Suppose $\Gamma \subset \Lambda$ are lattices in $\mathbb R^n$ and $Q\subset \mathbb R^n$ is the union of a finite number of convex polyhedra with $\mathrm{vol}(Q) >0$. Let $u$ be a positive integer. One has
\begin{align}
\lim_{k\to \infty} \frac{ |\Lambda \cap kQ| }{ |\Gamma \cap (k-u)Q|} &= [\Lambda : \Gamma]. \label{eq.vol3}
\end{align}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Define $\mathrm{vol}(\Lambda)$ to be the $n$-dimensional volume of the parallelepiped spanned by a $\mathbb Z$-basis of $\Lambda$. One has
$$
[\Lambda : \Gamma] = \frac{\mathrm{vol}(\Gamma)}{\mathrm{vol}(\Lambda)}, \qquad
\lim_{k\to \infty} \frac{|\Lambda \cap k Q|}{k^n} = \frac{\mathrm{vol}(Q)}{\mathrm{vol} (\Lambda)}
$$
from which one easily obtains \eqref{eq.vol3}.
\end{proof}
\section{Kauffman bracket skein algebra}\label{prel} The Kauffman bracket skein module of a 3-manifold was introduced independently by Przytycki and Turaev. For a surface the skein module has an algebra structure first considered in \cite{Turaev}.
In this section we recall the definition of the Kauffman bracket skein algebra of a finite type surface $F$, and present some results concerning its center. We also explain how to coordinatize the set of curves on $F$ and use coordinates to define a residue group associated to $F$ and a root of 1.
\subsection{Finite type surface}
An oriented surface $F$ of the form $F= \bar F \setminus \mathcal V$, where $\bar F$ is an oriented closed connected surface and $\mathcal V$ is finite (possibly empty), is called a {\em finite type surface}. A point in $\mathcal V$ is called a puncture.
The genus $g= g(F)$ and the puncture number $p= |\mathcal V|$ totally determine the diffeomorphism class of $F$, and for this reason we denote $F= F_{g,p}$. The Euler characteristic of $F$ is $2-2g -p$, which is non-negative only in 4 cases:
$$ (g,p) = (0,0), (0,1), (0,2), \ \text{or} \ (1,0).$$
Since the analysis of these four surfaces is simple and requires other techniques, very often we consider these cases separately.
\def\mathring{\cS}{\mathring{\mathscr S}}
\def{\cS}^\ev{\mathscr S^{\mathrm{ev}}}
\def\cS^\partial{\mathscr S^\partial}
Throughout this section we fix a finite type surface $F=F_{g,p}$.
In this paper a {\em loop} on $F$ is a unoriented submanifold diffeomorphic to the standard circle. A loop is {\em trivial} if it bounds a disk in $F$; it is {\em peripheral} if it bounds a disk in $\bar F$ which contains exactly one puncture. A {\em simple diagram} is the union of several disjoint non-trivial loops.
A simple diagram is {\em peripheral} if all its components are peripheral.
If $a: [0,1]\to \bar F$ is a smooth map such that $a(0), a(1) \in \mathcal V$ and $a$ embeds $(0,1)$ into $F$ then the image of $(0,1)$ is called an {\em ideal arc}. Isotopies of ideal arcs are always considered in the class of ideal arcs.
Suppose $\alpha\subset F $ is either an ideal arc or a simple diagram and $\beta \subset F$ is a simple diagram. The geometric intersection number $I(\alpha,\beta)$ is the minimum of $|\alpha' \cap \beta''|$, with all possible $\alpha'$ isotopic to $\alpha$ and $\beta'$ isotopic to $\beta$. We say that $\alpha$ is {\em $\beta$-taut}, or $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are {\em taut}, if they are transverse and $|\alpha \cap \beta| = I(\alpha,\beta)$.
A simple diagram $\alpha\subset F$ is {\em even} if $I(\alpha,a)$ is even for every loop $a\subset F$. It is easy to see that $\alpha$ is even if and only if $\alpha$ represents the zero element in the homology group $H_1(\bar F, \mathbb Z_2)$
Very often we identify a simple diagram with its isotopy class.
Denote by $\mathscr S= \mathscr S(F)$ the set of all isotopy classes of simple diagrams on $F$. Let ${\cS}^\ev\subset \mathscr S$ be the subset of all classes of even simple diagrams, and $\cS^\partial\subset \mathscr S$ be the subset of all peripheral ones. For convenience, we make the convention that the empty set $\emptyset$ is a peripheral simple diagram. Thus $\emptyset \in \cS^\partial \subset {\cS}^\ev \subset \mathscr S$.
\subsection{Kauffman bracket skein algebra}
A {\em framed link} in $F\times [0,1]$ is an embedding of a disjoint union of oriented annuli in $F\times [0,1]$. By convention the empty set is considered as a framed link with 0 components and is isotopic only to itself.
For a non-zero complex number $\zeta$, the {\em Kauffman bracket skein module} of $F$ at $\zeta$, denoted by $K_\zeta(F)$, is the $\mathbb C$-vector space freely spanned by all isotopy classes of framed links in $F \times [0,1]$ subject to the following {\em skein relations}
\begin{align}
\raisebox{-5pt}{\mbox{}\hspace{1pt &= \zeta \raisebox{-5pt}{\mbox{}\hspace{1pt+ \zeta ^{-1}\raisebox{-5pt}{\mbox{}\hspace{1pt \label{KBSR}\\
\bigcirc \sqcup L &= (- \zeta^2 -\zeta^{-2}) L\label{KBSR2}.
\end{align}
Here the framed links in
each expression are identical outside the balls pictured in the diagrams, and the arcs in the pictures are supposed to have blackboard framing.
If the two arcs in the crossing belong to the same component then it is assumed that the same side of the annulus is up.
\begin{theorem} \cite{PS,SW} \label{r.basis}
The set $\mathscr S$ of isotopy classes of simple diagrams is a basis of $K_{\zeta}(F)$ over $\mathbb{C}$.
\end{theorem}
For two framed links $L_1$ and $L_2$ in $S \times [0,1]$, their product, $L_1L_2$, is defined by first isotoping $L_1$ into $F \times (1/2, 1)$ and $L_2$ into $F\times (0, 1/2)$ and then taking the union of the two. This product gives $K_\zeta(F)$ the structure of a $\mathbb C$-algebra, which is in most cases non-commutative.
Let $Z_\zeta(F)$ be the center of $K_\zeta(F)$.
\begin{theorem} Let $F$ be a finite type surface and $\zeta$ a root of 1.
(a) \cite{PS1} The algebra $K_\zeta(F)$ is a domain.
(b) \cite{FKL} The module $K_\zeta(F)$ is finitely generated as a $Z_\zeta(F)$-module.
\end{theorem}
\no {
From Theorem \ref{r.basis} we immediately get the following statement.
\begin{prop}\label{transcendent
Let $\{C_i\}_{i=1}^k$ be a collection of disjoint non-trivial loops on $F$ such that no two of them are isotopic. Then the $\mathbb C$-subalgebra of $K_\zeta(F)$ generated by the $\{C_i\}_{i=1}^k$ is naturally isomorphic to the algebra $\mathbb C[C_1,\dots, C_k]$ of polynomials in $k$ variables $C_1,\dots, C_k$. \end{prop}
}
Let $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)= K_\zeta(F) \otimes_{Z_\zeta(F)} \tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$, where $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$ is the field of fractions of $Z_\zeta(F)$.
From Proposition \ref{r.sfield}, we have the following corollary.
\begin{cor} \label{r.Fro}
For a finite type surface $F$ and a root of unity $\zeta$, the localized algebra $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$ is a division algebra and a Frobenius algebra.
\end{cor}
\begin{remark} Corollary \ref{r.Fro}
was proved in \cite{AF} for the case when $p\ge 1$ and $\mathrm{ord}(\zeta) \neq 0 \mod 4$, using explicit calculation of the trace. \end{remark}
\subsection{Chebyshev basis and center} \label{sec.Cheb}
The {\em Chebyshev polynomials of the first kind} are defined recursively by
\begin{equation}
T_0(x)=2 ,\ \ T_1(x)=x\ \mbox{ and} \ T_k(x)=xT_{k-1}(x)-T_{k-2}(x).
\end{equation}
They
satisfy the product to sum formula,
\begin{equation} T_k(x)T_l(x)=T_{k+l}(x)+T_{|k-l|}(x).
\label{eq.Che1}
\end{equation}
Suppose $\alpha\in \mathscr S$ is a simple diagram. Some components of $\alpha$ may be isotopic to each other. Let
$C_1, \dots, C_k$ be a maximal collection of components of $\alpha$ such that no two of them are isotopic. Then there are positive integers $(l_1,\ldots,l_k)$ such that $\alpha$ is the union of $l_j$ parallel copies of $C_j$ with $j=1,\dots, k$. In other words,
$ \alpha = \prod_{j=1}^k C_j^{l_j} \ \text{ in $K_\zeta(F)$}.
$
Let
\begin{equation}
T(\alpha) = \prod_{j=1}^k T_{l_j} (C_j) \in K_\zeta(F).
\end{equation}
\def{\cA}^{\bullet}{{\mathcal A}^{\bullet}}
\def{\cA}^\partial{{\mathcal A}^\partial}
\def\overline{ \cA}{\bar A}
\def\overline {\cB}{\overline {\mathcal B}}
\def{\cA}^\ev{{\mathcal A}^{\mathrm{ev}}}
\def{\cS}^\ev{{\mathscr S}^{\mathrm{ev}}}
\def\overline{ \cA}{\overline{ \mathcal A}}
\def\overline{ \Ae}{\overline{ {\cA}^\ev}}
\def\overline{ \Ad}{\overline{ {\cA}^\partial}}
\def\cS^\partial{\mathscr S^\partial}
\def\mathrm{vol}{\mathrm{vol}}
If $\alpha, \beta\in \mathscr S$ then in general $\alpha \beta \not \in \mathscr S$. However, if $I(\alpha, \beta) =0$ where $\alpha, \beta \in \mathscr S$, then $\alpha$ and $\beta$ can be represented by disjoint simple diagrams, and hence $\alpha \beta \in \mathscr S$. In particular,
if $\alpha \in \mathscr S$ and $ \beta \in \cS^\partial$, then $\alpha \beta =\beta \alpha \in \mathscr S$. Further,
if $\alpha\in \mathscr S$, then $\alpha^k \in \mathscr S$.
\no{For a subset $U\subset \mathscr S$ define
\begin{align*}
U^{\star k} &= \{ \alpha^k \mid \alpha \in U\}, \\
\cS^\partial \star U &= \{ \beta \alpha \mid \beta \in \cS^\partial, \alpha \in U.\}
\end{align*}
}
Assume that $\zeta$ is a root of unity. Let $m= \mathrm{ord}(\zeta^4)$. Note that $m = \mathrm{ord}(\zeta)/\gcd(4, \mathrm{ord} (\zeta))$. Define the following subset $\mathscr S_\zeta$ of $\mathscr S$ by
\begin{itemize}
\item If $\mathrm{ord}(\zeta) \neq 0 \mod 4$, then $\mathscr S_\zeta = \{ \alpha \beta^m \mid \alpha \in \cS^\partial, \beta \in \mathscr S\}$.
\item If $\mathrm{ord}(\zeta) = 0 \mod 4$, then $\mathscr S_\zeta = \{ \alpha \beta^m \mid \alpha \in \cS^\partial, \beta \in {\cS}^\ev\}$.
\end{itemize}
\no{
\begin{equation}
\mathscr S_\zeta :=
\begin{cases}
\{ \alpha \beta^m \mid \alpha \in \cS^\partial, \beta \in \mathscr S\}
\quad &\text{if} \ \mathrm{ord}(\zeta) \neq 0 \mod 4 \\
\{ \alpha \beta^m \mid \alpha \in \cS^\partial, \beta \in {\cS}^\ev\}
&\text{if} \ \mathrm{ord}(\zeta) = 0 \mod 4. \end{cases}
\end{equation}
}
\begin{theorem} \cite{FKL}\label{center}
Let $F$ be a finite type surface and $\zeta$ be a root of 1. Recall that $Z_\zeta(F)$ is the center of the skein algebra $K_\zeta(F)$.
(a) $ \{T(\alpha) \mid \alpha \in \mathscr S\}$ is a basis of the $\mathbb C$-vector space $K_\zeta(F)$.
(b) $\{ T(\alpha) \mid \alpha \in \mathscr S_\zeta\}$ is a basis of the $\mathbb C$-vector space $Z_\zeta(F)$.
\end{theorem}
The point is while $K_\zeta(F)$ has a $\mathbb C$-basis parameterized by $\mathscr S$, its center $Z_\zeta(F)$ has a basis parameterized by $\mathscr S_\zeta$.
\begin{remark} The Chebyshev basis is important in the theory of quantum cluster algebras and quantum Teichm\"uller spaces of surfaces.
It was first used, for the case when $F$ is a torus, by Frohman-Gelca \cite{FG}. The famous positivity conjecture states that the Chebyshev basis is positive \cite{Le, Th}. \end{remark}
\def{\mathfrak A}{{\mathfrak A}}
\subsection{Filtrations on skein algebras} \label{sec.filter}
Suppose ${\mathfrak A}=\{ a_1, \dots, a_k\}$, where each $a_i$ is an ideal arc or a loop on $F$.
For each $n\in \mathbb N$ define $F_n = F_n^{\mathfrak A}(K_\zeta(F))$ to be the $\mathbb C$-subspace of $K_\zeta(F)$ spanned by $\alpha\in \mathscr S$ such that $\sum_{i=1}^k I(\alpha, a_i) \le n$. The following is well-known and its variants were used extensively in the study of skein algebras, see e.g., \cite{FKL, Le0,Le1}.
\begin{prop} \label{r.filt}
The sequence $\{ F_n\}_{n=0}^\infty$ is a filtration of $K_\zeta(F)$ compatible with the product.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} It is clear that $F_n\subset F_{n+1}$ and $\bigcup F_n = K_\zeta(F)$. It remains to show that $F_n F_l \subset F_{n+l}$.
Suppose $\alpha, \beta\in \mathscr S$ and $\alpha\in F_n, \beta \in F_l$. The product $\alpha\beta$ is obtained by placing $\alpha$ above $\beta$.
Using the skein relation \eqref{KBSR} we see that $\alpha\beta= \sum c_\gamma \gamma$, where each $\gamma$ is a diagram obtained by a smoothing of all the crossings in $\alpha\beta$
and hence $I(\gamma,a_i) \le I(\alpha, a_i) + I(\beta,a_i)$. It follows that $\alpha \beta \in F_{n+l}$.
\end{proof}
\def\cA_\zeta{\mathcal A_\zeta}
\subsection{Coordinates and residues, open surface case} When $F= F_{g,p}$ has negative Euler characteristic, one can parameterize the set $\mathscr S$ of simple diagrams on $F$ by embedding it into the free abelian group $\mathbb Z^r$, where $r= 6g-6+3p$. This embedding depends on an object that we call the {\em coordinate datum}. In this subsection we describe this embedding for open surfaces.
Suppose $F=F_{g,p}$ with $p \ge 1$ and $F$ has negative Euler characteristic, $\chi(F)=2-2g-p$.
By definition, a {\em coordinate datum} of $F$ is an {\em ordered ideal triangulation}, which is any sequence
$\{ e_1, \dots , e_r \}$ of disjoint ideal arcs on $F$ such that no two are isotopic. Here $r= 6g-6+3p=-3\chi(F)$. Such ideal triangulations always exists and we fix one of them. The ideal arcs $(e_i)_{i=1}^r$ cut $F$ into triangles.
Recall that $I(\alpha, e_i)$ is the geometric intersection number. Define
$$
\nu : \mathscr S \to \mathbb N^r, \quad \text{by} \quad \nu (\alpha) := (\nu_i(\alpha))_{i=1}^r,\ \mbox{where}\ \nu_i(\alpha) : = I(\alpha, e_i).
$$
It is known that $\nu $ is injective, and its image
$\mathcal A:= \nu (\mathscr S)$ consists of all $(n_1,\dots, n_r) \in \mathbb N^r$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{eq.cA}
\text{whenever $e_i, e_j, e_k$ are edges of a triangle, $n_i+ n_j + n_k$ is even and $n_i \le n_j + n_k$.}
\end{equation}
We call $\nu (\alpha)$ the {\em edge-coordinates} of $\alpha$ with respect to the coordinate datum. Let $S: \mathcal A \to \mathscr S$ be the inverse of $\nu $. That is, $S(\mathbf n)$ is the simple diagram whose edge coordinates are $\mathbf n$. Note that $0 = \nu(\emptyset)\in \mathcal A$, and $\mathcal A$ is closed under addition. Hence $\mathcal A$ is a submonoid of $\mathbb Z^r$. For a submonoid $X$ of $\mathbb Z^r$ let $\overline{X}$ be the subgroup of $\mathbb Z^r$ generated by $X$, then $\overline{X}= \{ x_1 - x_2 \mid x_1, x_2 \in X\}$.
\def\bX{ \overline{X}}
\begin{lemma}\label{r.surj}
Let $X$ be a submonoid of $\mathbb Z^k$ and $Y$ a subgroup of $\overline{X}$. If $\bX/Y$ is finite then the monoid homomorphism $\phi: X \to \bX/Y$ is surjective.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
As $X$ generates $\bX$ as a group, $\phi(X)$ generates $\bX/Y$. The monoid $\phi(X)$, being finite, is a group. Hence $\phi(X)= \bX/Y$.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} (a) $\overline{ \cA}$ is the subset of $\mathbb Z^{r}$ consisting of $(n_1,\dots, n_r)$ such that
whenever $e_i, e_j, e_k$ are edges of a triangle, $n_i+ n_j + n_k$ is even.
(b) The index of $\overline{ \cA}$ in $\mathbb Z^r$ is $2^{4g-5+2p}=2^{-2\chi(F)-1}$.
\label{r.index1}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} (a) follows from the description \eqref{eq.cA} of $\mathcal A$.
(b) Consider the triangulation as a cellular decomposition of $\bar F$ which has $p$ zero-cells and $r$ one-cells. Identify $(\mathbb Z_2)^r$ with the set of all maps from one-cells to $\mathbb Z_2$, and let $C_1\subset $ be the set of all one-cocycles. Let $f: \mathbb Z^r \to (\mathbb Z_2)^r$ be the reduction modulo 2, then $\overline{ \cA} = f^{-1}(C_1)$. Therefore $\mathbb Z^r / \overline{ \cA} \cong (\mathbb Z_2)^r/C_1$ and hence
\begin{equation}
[\mathbb Z^r : \overline{ \cA}] = |(\mathbb Z_2)^r| /|C_1| = 2^r /|C_1|. \label{eq.eq4}
\end{equation}
The following sequence is exact
$$ 0 \to H_0(\bar F,\mathbb Z_2) \to C_0 \overset \delta \longrightarrow C_1 \to H_1(\bar F, \mathbb Z_2) \to 0,$$
where $C_0= (\mathbb Z_2)^p$ is the set of all 0-cochains.
In an exact sequence of finite groups, the alternating product of orders of groups is 1. Hence
$$ |C_1| = \frac{|C_0| |H_1(\bar F,\mathbb Z_2)|}{|H_0(\bar F,\mathbb Z_2)|}= \frac{2^p 2^{2g}}{2} = 2^{2g+p-1}.$$
Plugging this value of $|C_1|$ in \eqref{eq.eq4}, we get the result.
\end{proof}
The following follows easily from the definition.
\begin{prop} \label{r.prod}
If $\alpha, \beta\in \mathscr S$ and $I(\alpha,\beta) =0$, then $\alpha\beta \in \mathscr S$ and
\begin{equation}
\nu(\alpha \beta) = \nu(\alpha) + \nu(\beta).
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
Let ${\cA}^\ev:= \nu (\mathscr S^{\mathrm{ev}}), {\cA}^\partial= \nu (\cS^\partial), \cA_\zeta = \nu (\mathscr S_\zeta)$. Each of $\mathcal A, {\cA}^\ev, {\cA}^\partial, \cA_\zeta$ is a submonoid of $\mathbb N^r \subset \mathbb Z^r$.
\def\cS^{\bullet}{\mathscr S^{\bullet}}
\begin{prop}\label{quotmon} (a) The group $\overline{ \Ad}$ is a direct summand of $\overline{ \cA}$.
(b) The quotient $\overline{ \cA}/\overline{ \Ae}$ is isomorphic to $\mathbb{Z}_2^{2g}$.
\end{prop}
\def\bar h{\bar h}
\proof (a)
The group $\overline{ \Ad}$ is a direct summand of $\overline{ \cA}$ if and only if it is {\em primitive} in the sense that \\
(*) if $kx \in \overline{ \Ad}$, where $k$ is a positive integer and $ x\in \overline{ \cA}$,
then $x\in \overline{ \Ad}$.
Let $\cS^{\bullet}\subset \mathscr S$ be the set of all simple diagrams containing no peripheral loops, with the convention that the empty diagram is in $\mathscr S^\bullet$, and let ${\cA}^{\bullet}= \nu(\cS^{\bullet})$.
Every simple diagram can be presented in a unique way as the product of an element in ${\cA}^\partial$ and an element in ${\cA}^{\bullet}$. By Proposition \ref{r.prod} every $x\in \mathcal A$ can be presented uniquely as
\begin{equation}
x = x^\bullet + x ^\partial, \quad \text{where} \ x^\bullet \in {\cA}^{\bullet}, x^\partial \in{\cA}^\partial.
\label{eq.decomp1}
\end{equation}
Suppose $x\in \overline{ \cA}$ satisfies (*). There are $x_1, x_2 \in \mathcal A$ such that $x = x_1 - x_2$. Since $kx\in \overline{ \Ad}$, there are $y_1, y_2 \in {\cA}^\partial$ such that $k(x_1- x_2) = y_2 -y_1$. Using the decomposition \eqref{eq.decomp1} for $x_1$ and $x_2$, we get
$$ k x^\bullet_1 + (k x^\partial_1 + y_1) = k x^\bullet_2 + (k x^\partial_2 + y_2).$$
By Proposition \ref{r.prod}, $k x^\bullet_1, k x^\bullet_2 \in {\cA}^{\bullet}$. The uniqueness of \eqref{eq.decomp1} shows that $k x^\bullet_1 = k x^\bullet_2$, or
$ x^\bullet_1 = x^\bullet_2$. Then $x= x_1 - x_2 = x^\partial_1 - x^\partial_2 \in \overline{ \Ad}$, proving (a).
(b) The composition $ \mathcal A \overset {S} \longrightarrow \mathscr S \overset {h} \longrightarrow H_1(\bar F,\mathbb Z_2)$, where $h(\alpha)$ is the homology class of $\alpha$, is a surjective monoid homomorphism and extends to a surjective group homomorphism $\bar h: \overline{ \cA} \to H_1(\bar F,\mathbb Z_2)$. By definition, $\ker \bar h = \overline{ \Ae}$. Hence $\overline{ \cA}/\overline{ \Ae}\cong
H_1(\bar F,\mathbb Z_2)\cong \mathbb Z_2^{2g}$.\qed
\def\mathfrak{R}{\mathfrak{R}}
\def\mathfrak{R}_\zeta{\mathfrak{R}_\zeta}
\def\overline {\Az}{\overline {\cA_\zeta}}
Suppose $\zeta$ is a root of 1. From Theorem \ref{center} and the bijection $\nu:\mathscr S \to \mathcal A$, we see that the center $Z_\zeta(F)$ has a $\mathbb C$-basis parameterized by $\cA_\zeta$ while $K_\zeta(F)$ has a basis parameterized by $\mathcal A$. Hence we want to study the quotient $\mathcal A/\cA_\zeta$. Define the $\zeta$-residue group
\begin{equation} \label{resdef} \mathfrak{R}_\zeta(F)= \overline{ \cA}/\overline {\Az} \end{equation}
which depends on a coordinate datum of $F$.
Let $m = \mathrm{ord}(\zeta^4)$. Define the following integer
\begin{equation}
D_\zeta(F)= \begin{cases} m^{6g-6+2p} \quad & \text{if} \quad \mathrm{ord}(\zeta) \neq 0 \mod 4 \\
2^{2g} m^{6g-6+2p} &\text{if} \quad \mathrm{ord}(\zeta) = 0 \mod 4 \end{cases}.
\end{equation}
\def\hat \cA{\hat \mathcal A}
\begin{prop}\label{r.dim1}
Let $F=F_{g,p}$ have negative Euler characteristic and $p\ge 1$. Let $\zeta$ be a root of 1.
For any coordinate datum of $F$,
\begin{equation}
|\mathfrak{R}_\zeta(F)| = D_\zeta(F).
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\proof Case 1: $\mathrm{ord}(\zeta) \neq 0 \mod 4$. Then $\cA_\zeta = {\cA}^\partial + m \mathcal A$, and
$$ \mathfrak{R}_\zeta(F) = \frac{\overline{ \cA}}{\overline{ \Ad} + m \overline{ \cA}} \cong \frac{\overline{ \cA}/\overline{ \Ad}}{ (\overline{ \Ad} + m \overline{ \cA})/ \overline{ \Ad} } \cong \frac{\overline{ \cA}/\overline{ \Ad}}{ m (\overline{ \cA}/ \overline{ \Ad}) } .$$
Note that $\mathrm{rk} \overline{ \cA} = 6g-6 + 3p$ while $\mathrm{rk} \overline{ \Ad} =p$. Since $\overline{ \Ad}$ is a direct summand of $\overline{ \cA}$ by Proposition \ref{quotmon}, the group $\overline{ \cA}/\overline{ \Ad}$ is free abelian of rank $6g-6+2p$. It follows that $\frac{\overline{ \cA}/\overline{ \Ad}}{ m(\overline{ \cA}/\overline{ \Ad})}$ has cardinality $m^{6g-6+2p}$.
Case 2: $\mathrm{ord}(\zeta)= 0 \mod 4$. Then $\cA_\zeta = {\cA}^\partial + m {\cA}^\ev$. Since ${\cA}^\partial \subset {\cA}^\ev$, the same argument as in Case 1 with $\mathcal A$ replaced by $\mathcal A^{\mathrm{ev}}$ gives
$$ |\overline{ \Ae} /(\overline{ \Ad} + m \overline{ \Ae})| = m^{6g-6+2p}. $$
By Proposition \ref{quotmon}, we have $ \left | \mathcal A / \mathcal A^{\mathrm{ev}} \right | = 2^{2g}$. Hence
$$|\mathfrak{R}_\zeta(F)|= \left | \frac{\overline{ \cA}}{ \overline{ \Ad} + m \overline{ \Ae}} \right | = \left | \frac{\overline{ \cA}}{\overline{ \Ae}} \right | \, \left | \frac{\overline{ \Ae}}{ \overline{ \Ad} + m \overline{ \Ae}} \right | = 2^{2g} m^{{6g-6+2p}} .$$
In all cases we have $| \mathfrak{R}_\zeta(F)|= D_\zeta(F)$.
\qed
We use the collection ${\mathfrak A}=\{e_1,\dots,e_r\}$ to define the filtrations $F_k= F_k^{\mathfrak A}(K_\zeta(F))$, as described in Subsection \ref{sec.filter}. That is, $F_k$ is the $\mathbb C$-subspace spanned by $S(\mathbf n), \mathbf n\in \mathcal A$ such that $|\mathbf n|:= \sum_{i=1}^r n_i \le k$.
\begin{prop} \label{r.prod1}
For $\mathbf n, \mathbf n'\in \mathcal A$ there exists $j(\mathbf n,\mathbf n')\in \mathbb Z$ such that
\begin{equation}
S(\mathbf n) S(\mathbf n') = \zeta^{ j(\mathbf n,\mathbf n')} S(\mathbf n+\mathbf n') \pmod F_{|\mathbf n| + |\mathbf n'| -1}.
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
This was proved in \cite{AF,FKL} for a slightly different filtration but the easy proof there works also for this case. In \cite{FKL}, an explicit formula for $j(\mathbf n,\mathbf n')$ is given.
\subsection{Coordinates and residues, closed surface case} \label{sec.Coor2}
Let $F$ be a closed oriented surface of genus $g>1$. A {\em coordinate datum} of $F$ consists of an ordered pants decomposition $\mathcal P$ and a dual graph $\mathcal D$ defined as follows.
{\em An ordered pants decomposition} of $F$ is a sequence
$\mathcal P=(P_1, \dots, P_{3g-3})$ of disjoint non-trivial loops such that no two of them are isotopic. The collection $\mathcal P$ cuts $F$ into $2g-2$ pairs of pants (i.e., thrice punctured spheres).
A {\em dual graph $\mathcal D$ to $\mathcal P$} is a trivalent graph embedded into $F$ having exactly $2g-2$ vertices, one in the interior of each pair of pants, and $3g-3$ edges $(e_{i})_{i=1}^{3g-3}$ such that $e_i$ intersects $P_i$ transversally in a single point and is disjoint with $P_j$ for $j\neq i$.
For technical simplicity we assume that $\mathcal D$ does not have an edge with endpoints in the same vertex, in other words each pair of pants has 3 different boundary components. Such a coordinate datum always exists, and we fix one.
Let $N(\mathcal D)$ be a regular neighborhood of $\mathcal D$ and $\Omega=\partial N(\mathcal D)$ be its boundary. We assume that for each pair of pants $C$ the intersection $C \cap N(\mathcal D)$ is a regular neighborhood (in $C$) of $\mathcal D \cap C$, and $\Omega\cap C$ consists of 3 arcs as in Figure \ref{ppants}. We call $C \cap N(\mathcal D)$ the red hexagon of $C$.
\begin{figure}[H] \begin{center} \scalebox{.33}{\includegraphics{ppants.pdf}} \end{center}
\caption{The pair of pants $C$ bounded by loops $P_i, P_j, P_l$. The trivalent graph is $\mathcal D\cap C$. The bold arcs $a_i$, $a_j$, $a_l$ are $\Omega\cap C$. The red hexagon contains the trivalent graph and is bounded by $a_i$, $a_j$, $a_l$ and parts of $P_i, P_j,P_l$.}\label{ppants} \end{figure}
The curves $\{P_i\}_{i=1}^{3g-3}$ and the system of red hexagons allow to define the Dehn-Thurston coordinates as in \cite{LS}, which is an injective map
$$ \nu: \mathscr S \hookrightarrow \mathbb Z^{6g-6}, \quad \nu(\alpha) = (\nu_i(\alpha))_{i=1}^{6g-g}.$$
For $i\le 3g-3$ one has $\nu_i(\alpha)=I(\alpha, P_i)$. The remaining $3g-3$ coordinates of $\nu(\alpha)$ are the {\em twist} coordinates, where $\nu_{i+3g-3}(\alpha)$ is the twist coordinate of $\alpha$ at the loop $P_i$. We use the same conventions for the DT coordinates as in \cite{FKL}.
Our description relates to those of other authors as follows: Our dual graph is embedded as a spine of the complement of the red hexagon of \cite{LS}; in relation to \cite{FLP} it is embedded so that it misses the windows and is disjoint from the triangular model curves. The approach in \cite{Penner} is the same as in \cite{FLP}. All those conventions result in the same DT coordinates of simple diagrams.
Let $\mathcal A= \nu(\mathscr S)\subset \mathbb Z^{6g-6}$ and let $S: \mathcal A \to \mathscr S$ be the inverse of $\nu$.
The set $\mathcal A$ consists of all $\mathbf n= (n_1,\dots, n_{6g-6})\in \mathbb Z^{6g-6}$ such that
\begin{equation} \label{eq.cA2}
\begin{cases}
\text{ If $ i \le 3g-3$ then $n_i \ge 0$.}\\
\text {If $P_i,P_j,P_l$ bound a pair of pants then $n_i+n_j+n_l$ is even.}\\
\text{ If $n_i=0$ for some $i\le 3g-3$ then $n_{i+ 3g-3}\geq 0$.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
Since these conditions are linear, $\mathcal A$ is a submonoid of $\mathbb Z^{6g-6}$. Let $\overline{ \cA}$ be the group generated by $\mathcal A$.
\def\cS^\Delta{\mathscr S^\Delta}
\def\cA^\Delta{\mathcal A^\Delta}
\def\cA^\Delta{\mathcal A^\Delta}
\def{\boldsymbol \delta}{{\boldsymbol \delta}}
\def\tilde \nu{\tilde \nu}
\begin{lemma} The index of $\overline{ \cA}$ in $\mathbb Z^{6g-6}$ is $2^{2g-3}$.
\label{r.index2}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Identify $\mathbb Z^{6g-6} = \mathbb Z^{3g-3} \oplus \mathbb Z^{3g-3}$ and let $p_1$ be the projection from $\mathbb Z^{6g-6}$ onto the first summand. Note that $\nu(P_j)= \vec{0} \oplus {\boldsymbol \delta}_j$, where $\vec{0} \in \mathbb Z^{3g-3}$ is the zero element and ${\boldsymbol \delta}_j\in \mathbb Z^{3g-3}$ is the element all of whose coordinates are zero except the $j$-th entry which is 1. It follows that $\overline{ \cA} = p_1(\overline{ \cA}) \oplus \mathbb Z^{3g-3}$. Hence the index of $\overline{ \cA}$ in $\mathbb Z^{6g-6}$ is equal to the index of $p_1(\overline{ \cA})$ in $\mathbb{Z}^{3g-3}$.
By \eqref{eq.cA2}, set $p_1(\overline{ \cA})$ is the subset of $\mathbb Z^{3g-3}$ such that \\
(*) whenever $P_i, P_j, P_k$ bound a pair of pants, $n_i + n_j + n_k$ is even.
The interior $\mathring N(\mathcal D)$ of $N(\mathcal D)$ is a finite type open surface with $\chi(\mathring N(\mathcal D))= 1-g$. Let $e_i:= P_i \cap \mathring N(\mathcal D)$, then $(e_i)_{i=1}^{3g-3}$
is an ideal triangulation, giving rise to edge-coordinates of simple diagrams on $\mathring N(\mathcal D)$, and the set of all such edge-coordinates is denoted by $\mathcal A'$. Note that $P_i, P_j, P_k$ bound a pair of pants if and only if $e_i, e_j, e_k$ are edges of an ideal triangle. Condition (*) and Lemma \ref{r.index1}(a) show that
$ p_1(\overline{ \cA})= \overline{\mathcal A'}$. Hence
$$ [\mathbb Z^{3g-3}: p_1(\overline{ \cA})]= [\mathbb Z^{3g-3}: \overline{\mathcal A'}]= 2^{-2\chi(\mathring N(\mathcal D)) -1}= 2^{2g-3},$$
where the second identity
follows from Lemma \ref{r.index1}(b).
\end{proof}
\no{
\begin{proof}
Let $\overline{\mathcal A}_0$ denote the subgroup of $\overline{\mathcal A}$ consisting of tuples whose twist coordinates are zero. Let $\{\vec{0}\}\times \mathbb{Z}^{3g-3}$ denote the subgroup of $\mathbb{Z}^{6g-6}$ whose first $3g-3$ coordinates are zero. Since
$\nu( P_i)=\vec{\delta}_{3g-3+i}$ (the vector all of whose coordinates are zero except the $3g-3+i$ entry), we have $\{\vec{0}\}\times \mathbb{Z}^{3g-3}\leq \overline{\mathcal A}$. If $\vec{s}=\nu(\alpha)$ for some $\alpha \in \mathscr S$, then $\vec{s}_0=\nu(\alpha_0)\in\mathcal A$, where $\alpha_0$ has the same pants coordinates as $\alpha$ and has the twist coordinates equal to $0$.
Therefore $\overline{\mathcal A}$ is the interior direct sum of $\overline{\mathcal A}_0$ and $\{\vec{0}\}\times \mathbb{Z}^{3g-3}$. Hence the index of $\overline{\mathcal A}$ in $\mathbb{Z}^{6g-6}$ is equal to the index of $\overline{\mathcal A}_0$ in $\mathbb{Z}^{3g-3}\times \{\vec{0}\}$.
We abuse notation and think of $\overline{\mathcal A}_0$ as a subgroup of $\mathbb{Z}^{3g-3}$. Denote the elements of the monoid of pants coordinates $\mathcal A_0$. We call an element of $\mathcal A_0$ triangular if for any pair of pants, its entries corresponding to the boundary curves of the pairs of pants satisfy the triangle inequality. If $\vec{n}\in \mathcal A_0$ then there exists $k$ such that $\vec{n}+k\vec{2}$ is triangular. Hence in $\overline{\mathcal A}_0$ we can write $\vec{n}=(\vec{n}+k\vec{2})-k\vec{2}$. Since both terms are triangular we have shown that $\overline{\mathcal A}_0$ is generated by Dehn-Thurston coordinates that satisfy the triangle inequality. We denote this set $\mathcal A^{\Delta}_0$.
Let $\mathring N(\mathcal D)$ be a regular neighborhood of $\mathcal D$ that is transverse to the pants curves and intersects each pants curve in a single arc. The intersection of $\mathcal P$ with $\mathring N(D)$ is an ideal triangulation. Identifying $\mathbb{Z}^{3g-3}$ coming from the pants coordinate of the curve $P_i$ with the geometric intersection number with the arc $P_i\cap \mathring N(D)$ the set $\mathcal A^{\Delta}_0$ corresponds exactly to the admissible colorings of the ideal triangulation of $\mathring N(D)$ coming from the $P_i$. Therefore the index of $\overline{\mathcal A}_0$ in $\mathbb{Z}^{6g-6}$ is equal to the index of the admissible colorings of the triangulation of $\mathring N(D)$. Since the Euler characteristic of $\mathring N(D)$ is half the Euler characteristic of $F$, we have the desired result. \qed
Note that this index is determined by the pants coordinates, since $\overline{ \cA}$ has last $3g-3$ components equal to $\mathbb Z$.
The group $\overline{ \cA}$ is spanned by the image of triangular diagrams.
The open surface $\mathring N(\mathcal D)$ has Euler characteristic half of $E(F)$ and the formula follows from Lemma \ref{r.index1}.
\end{proof}
}
Suppose $\zeta$ is a root of 1. Let ${\cA}^\ev= \nu({\cS}^\ev)$ and $\cA_\zeta = \nu(\mathscr S_\zeta)$, then ${\cA}^\ev, \cA_\zeta$ are submonoids of $\mathcal A$.
Let $m = \mathrm{ord}(\zeta^4)$. Define the $\zeta$-residue group $\mathfrak{R}_\zeta(F)$ and the number $D_\zeta(F)$ just like in the case of open surfaces (noting $p=0$). That is,
\begin{equation} \label{resdef1} \mathfrak{R}_\zeta(F)= \overline{ \cA}/\overline {\Az} \end{equation}
which depends on a coordinate datum of $F$. The formulas for $D$ are the same:
\begin{equation}
D_\zeta(F)= \begin{cases} m^{6g-6} \quad & \text{if} \quad \mathrm{ord}(\zeta) \neq 0 \mod 4 \\
2^{2g} m^{6g-6} &\text{if} \quad \mathrm{ord}(\zeta) = 0 \mod 4.\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\def\hat \cA{\hat \mathcal A}
\begin{prop}\label{r.dim1a}
Suppose $F$ is a closed finite type surface with $g(F)\ge 2$. Let $\zeta$ be a root of 1.
For any Dehn-Thurston datum of $F$,
\begin{equation}
|\mathfrak{R}_\zeta(F)| = D_\zeta(F).
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
\proof The proof is almost identical to that in the case of open surfaces.
(a) Case 1: $\mathrm{ord}(\zeta) \neq 0 \mod 4$. In this case $\cA_\zeta = m\mathcal A$, and
$ \mathfrak{R}_\zeta(F) = \overline{ \cA}/m \overline{ \cA}$. Since
$\mathrm{rk} \overline{ \cA} = 6g-6$, we have $|\overline{ \cA}/m \overline{ \cA}| = m^{6g-6}$.
Case 2: $\mathrm{ord}(\zeta) = 0 \mod 4$. In this case $\cA_\zeta = m {\cA}^\ev$.
First note that $|\overline{ \cA} /\overline{ \Ae}| = 2^{2g}$. The proof of this fact is identical to that of Proposition \ref{quotmon}.
\no{In fact, the composition $ \mathcal A \overset {S} \longrightarrow \mathscr S \overset {h} \longrightarrow H_1(\bar F,\mathbb Z_2)$, where $h(\alpha)$ is the homology class of $\alpha$, is a surjective monoid homomorphism and extends to a surjective group homomorphism $\bar h: \overline{ \cA} \to H_1(\bar F,\mathbb Z_2)$. By definition, $\ker \bar h = \overline{ \Ae}$. Hence $\overline{ \cA}/\overline{ \Ae}\cong
H_1(\bar F,\mathbb Z_2)\cong \mathbb Z_2^{2g}$, and $|\overline{ \cA} /\overline{ \Ae}| = 2^{2g}$.}
Now we have
$$ |\mathfrak{R}_\zeta(F)| = |\overline{ \cA}/m \overline{ \Ae}| = |\overline{ \cA} /\overline{ \Ae}| |\overline{ \Ae}/ m \overline{ \Ae}| = 2^{2g} m^{6g-6}= D_\zeta(F). \ \qed$$
When $F$ is closed we don't have a nice product formula like the identity in Proposition \eqref {r.prod1}. However, this identity still holds for the class of triangular simple diagrams defined as follows.
A simple diagram $\alpha\subset F$ is {\em triangular} with respect to $\mathcal P$ if it is $\mathcal P$-taut and for every pair of pants $C$ each connected component of $\alpha \cap C$ is an arc whose two endpoints are in two different components of $\partial C$. In particular, $\alpha$ cannot have a component isotopic to any $P_i$.
Let $\cS^\Delta\subset \mathscr S$ be the subset consisting of triangular simple diagrams, and $\cA^\Delta= \nu(\cS^\Delta)$.
Then $\mathbf n= (n_1,\dots,n_{6g-6})\in \mathcal A$ is in $\cA^\Delta$ if and only if
\begin{itemize}
\item whenever $P_i, P_j, P_k$ bound a pair of pants, $n_i \le n_j + n_k$, and
\item whenever $n_i=0$ for some $i\le 3g-3$, one has $n_{i+3g-3}=0$.
\end{itemize}
We use the collection ${\mathfrak A}=\{P_1,\dots,P_{3g-3}\}$ to define the filtrations $F_k= F_k^{\mathfrak A}(K_\zeta(F))$, as described in Subsection \ref{sec.filter}. That is, $F_k$ is the $\mathbb C$-subspace spanned by $S(\mathbf n), \mathbf n\in \mathcal A$ such that $|\mathbf n|_1:=\sum_{i=1}^{3g-3} n_i \le k$. Unlike the case of open surface, $F_k$ has infinite dimension over $\mathbb C$.
\begin{prop} \cite{FKL}\label{prsi} For $\mathbf n, \mathbf n'\in \cA^\Delta$ there is $j\in\mathbb Z$ such that
\begin{equation}
S(\mathbf n) S(\mathbf n') = \zeta^j S(\mathbf n+\mathbf n') \mod F_{|\mathbf n|_1 + |\mathbf n'|_1 -1}.
\label{eq.prod2}
\end{equation}
\end{prop}
In \cite{FKL} we proved a stronger result, giving the exact value of $j$ in \eqref{eq.prod2}.
\section{Stable Dehn-Thurston coordinates}\label{stabledt}
Throughout this section $F$ is a closed surface with $g=g(F) \ge 2$, and with a fixed coordinate datum $(\mathcal P,\mathcal D)$.
Proposition \ref{prsi} only works for triangular simple diagrams. We show that after enough twisting by $\Omega$ a simple diagram becomes triangular and its DT coordinates become an affine function of the number of twists.
\subsection{Stable DT coordinates}
\begin{theorem} \label{thm.stab} Let $F$ be a closed surface of genus $g\ge 2$ equipped with coordinate datum $(\mathcal P,\mathcal D)$. Let $h_{\Omega}:F\rightarrow F$ be the product of the Dehn twists about $o_1, \dots, o_l$, which are the components of
$\Omega=\partial N(\mathcal D)$.
Let $\alpha\subset F$ be a simple diagram. There exists $\eta(\alpha) \in \mathbb Z^{6g-6}$ such that if $k$ is large enough
then $h^{k}_\Omega(\alpha)$ is triangular with respect to $\mathcal P$, and
\begin{equation}
\nu(h^{k}_\Omega(\alpha)) = k \mu(\alpha) + \eta(\alpha),\label{stabdt}
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
\mu(\alpha)= \sum_{j=1}^{l} I(\alpha,o_j) \nu(o_j). \label{eq.mu}
\end{equation}
In particular,
the last $3g-3$ coordinates of $\mu(\alpha)$ are equal to $0$.
\end{theorem}
Note that the action of any element of the mapping class of the surface on diagrams extends linearly to yield an automorphism of the skein algebra, In specific, it makes sense to talk about $h^{k}_\Omega(x)$ for $x\in K_\zeta(F)$.
We present the proof of Theorem \ref{thm.stab} in Subsection \ref{sec.pf1}.
\subsection{Piecewise affine functions} A function $f: \mathbb R^k \to \mathbb R^l$ is {\em affine} if there is an $l \times k $ matrix $A$ and a vector $B$ such that
$$ f(x) = A\cdot x + B.$$
A function $f: \mathbb R^k \to \mathbb R^l$ is {\em piecewise affine} if
there is a finite collection of proper affine subspaces
of $\mathbb R^k$ such that
in the closure of any connected component of
the complement of these affine spaces $f$ is equal to an affine function. It is easy to see that the class of piecewise affine functions is closed under linear combinations and compositions.
A function $f: X \to \mathbb Z^l$, where $X\subset \mathbb R^k$, is {\em piecewise affine} if it is the restriction of a piecewise affine function $\overline{f}: \mathbb R^k \to \mathbb R^l$.
\begin{lemma} If $f: \mathbb N \to \mathbb N$ is convex and bounded from above by an affine function, then $f$ is piecewise affine.
\label{r.convex}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The lemma follows easily from the definition.
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} For any $\alpha, \beta \in \mathscr S$ and $k>0$ one has
\begin{equation}
|I(h^{k}_\Omega(\alpha), \beta) - k \sum_{j=1}^l I(\alpha, o_j) I(o_j, \beta) | \le I(\alpha, \beta).
\label{eq.b1}
\end{equation}
\label{r.b1}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
This is a special case of Proposition A1 of \cite[Section 4]{FLP}.
\end{proof}
In order to prove the next proposition we need to explore the topology of Dehn-Thurston datum $(\mathcal P,\mathcal D)$ of a closed surface $F$. To define a geometric intersection of a simple diagram $S$ with the graph $\mathcal D$ we add the assumption that $S$ misses the vertices of $\mathcal D$. That is, $I(S,\mathcal D)$ is the minimum cardinality of $S'\cap \mathcal D$ where $S'$ is isotopic to $S$, misses the vertices of $\mathcal D$ and is transverse to its edges.
\begin{lemma} \label{bound} If $(\mathcal P,\mathcal D)$ is DT-datum for the closed surface $F$ and $S$ is simple diagram with Dehn-Thurston coordinates $(\mathbf n (S), {\mathbf t}(S))$,
then \begin{equation} \sum_j|t_j(S)|\leq 2I(S,\mathcal D). \end{equation} \end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Given Dehn-Thurston datum for $F$ let $A_j$ denote the annuli which are collars of the pants curves $P_j$, and let $Q_i$ be the pairs of pants that are the complement of $\cup A_j$ in $F$. These are the shrunken pairs of pants, versus the pairs of pants $C_j$ as defined in section \ref{sec.Coor2}.
By assumption $\mathcal D$ is transverse and minimizes its intersection with the boundaries of the annuli $A_j$. We say that a simple diagram is in {\em standard position} if
\begin{itemize}
\item its intersection with the $Q_i$ is isotopic to standard model curves in the complement of $\mathcal D$,
\item its intersection with $\partial A_j$ is disjoint from $\partial A_j \cap \mathcal D$,
\item it minimizes its intersection with $\mathcal D\cap A_j$, for each $j$.
\end{itemize}
If a simple diagram is in standard position then its twists coordinates are given by its signed intersection numbers with
$\mathcal D\cap A_i$.
We are most interested in the case that $S$ is triangular. In Figure \ref{model} we show the triangular model curve $d_{12}$ and another curve $d'_{12}$ that will play a role in the following. For each pair of boundary components of each pair of pants $Q_i$ there are two curves like this, the model curve $d_{ij}$ and its mate $d'_{ij}$. Recall that model curves describe possible ways in which a simple diagram in standard position intersects a pair of pants (see, e.g., \cite{FKL}).
\begin{figure}[H]\begin{center}\scalebox{.5}{\begin{picture}(150,151)\includegraphics{model.pdf}\put(-110,120){$d_{12}$}\put(-50,120){$d'_{12}$}\end{picture}}
\end{center}
\caption{The model curve $d_{12}$ and the curve $d'_{12}$.}\label{model}\end{figure}
We say a triangular diagram $S$ is in {\em special position} if:
\begin{itemize}
\item It realizes $I(S,\partial A_j)$ for all $j$;
\item It realizes $I(S,\mathcal D)$;
\item It does not intersect $\mathcal D\cap \partial A_j$ for any $j$;
\item It minimizes the intersection $S\cap \mathcal D \cap Q_i$ for all $i$, among all $S$ satisfying the first condition.
\end{itemize}
It is easy to see that if $S$ is a triangular diagram in special position then it intersects each $Q_j$ in curves parallel to model curves $d_{kl}$ and the new curves $d'_{kl}$.
To move a curve from special position to standard position, each curve of type $d'_{kl}$ needs to be isotoped to a curve of type $d_{kl}$. In the Figure \ref{deformed} we show a curve of the form $d_{kl}'$ in the process of being pushed into standard position. Its intersection with $\mathcal D$ needs to be pushed inside the annuli. As the result the intersection of $S$ with $\mathcal D\cap A_j$ in each of the annuli on either end of $d_{kl}$ is incremented by $1$.
\begin{figure}[H]\begin{center}\scalebox{.5}{\begin{picture}(150,151)\includegraphics{deformed.pdf}\end{picture}}
\end{center}
\caption{Deforming the curve $d_{12}'$ on the way to standard position}\label{deformed}\end{figure}
Thus \begin{equation} \sum_j |t_j(S)|\leq 2I(S,\mathcal D). \end{equation} \end{proof}
\begin{prop} \label{r.fact1} Let $F$ be a closed surface of genus $g$ with fixed coordinate datum.
(a)
There exists an additional collection of $6g-6$ loops $P_j$ with $j=3g-2, \dots, 9g-9$, and
a piecewise affine function $G: \mathbb Z^{9g-9} \to \mathbb Z^{6g-6}$ such that for all $\alpha\in \mathscr S$,
\begin{equation}
\nu(\alpha) = G\Big( I(\alpha,P_1), \dots , I(\alpha, P_{9g-9}) \Big ). \label{eq.twistpl}
\end{equation}
(b) For any $\alpha, \beta \in \mathscr S $, the function $f_{\alpha,\beta}: \mathbb Z \to \mathbb Z$, defined by
$f_{\alpha,\beta}(k)= I(h_{\Omega}^k(\alpha), \beta))$, is piecewise affine.
(c) For any $\alpha\in \mathscr S$, the twist coordinates of $h_{\Omega}^k(\alpha)$ are bounded, meaning that there is a constant $M>0$ such that for all $k$ and all $i=3g-2,\dots, 6g-6$, one has $|(h_{\Omega}^k(S))_i| < M$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} (a) This follows from \cite[Proposition 4.4]{LS}. In \cite{LS} it was proved that the Dehn-Thurston coordinates can be expressed as homogeneous continuous functions of the intersection numbers. But the explicit functions appeared there are actually piecewise linear.
(b) By \cite[Corollary 3]{Luo2}, the function $f_{\alpha,\beta}: \mathbb N \to \mathbb N$ is convex.
By Lemma \ref{r.b1}, $f_{\alpha,\beta}$ is bounded from above by an affine function.
\no{
When doing Dehn twist about $\Omega$ we modify $\alpha$ in a small neighborhood of $\Omega$ by inserting arcs wrapping about $\Omega$. It follows that $I(h_{\Omega}^k(\alpha), b))$ is bounded from above by an affine function.}
By Lemma \ref{r.convex}
$f_{\alpha,\beta}$ is piecewise affine.
(c) Notice that applying $h_{\Omega}^k$ to a diagram $S$ does not increase $i(S,\mathcal D)$. By Lemma \ref{bound} the twist coordinates of $h_{\Omega}^k(S)$ are bounded above by $2i(S,\mathcal D)$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm.stab}} \label{sec.pf1}
Let $\alpha\in \mathscr S$.
Parts (a) and (b) of Proposition \ref{r.fact1} along with Formula \eqref{eq.twistpl} imply that the function $k \to \nu(h^k_\Omega(\alpha))$ is piecewise affine. Hence it is affine for big enough $k$. Thus there exist $k_0$ and $ \mu(\alpha), \eta(\alpha) \in \mathbb Z^{6g-6}$ such that if $k \ge k_0$ then
\begin{equation}
\nu(h^{k}_\Omega(\alpha)) = k \mu(\alpha) + \eta(\alpha). \label{stabdt1a}
\end{equation}
By Proposition \ref{r.fact1}(c), the twist coordinates of $h^{k}_\Omega(\alpha)$ are bounded. It follows that the last $3g-3$ coordinates of $\mu(\alpha)$ must be 0.
Assume $ i\le 3g-3$. By definition, $\nu_i(h^{k}_\Omega(\alpha))=I(h^{k}_\Omega(\alpha), P_i)$.
\no{ There are an upper bound and an lower bound for the intersection numbers of Dehn twists of simple diagrams in \cite[Appendix to Section 4]{FLP}. By \cite[Proposition A1, Section 4]{FLP}, we have
$$ |I(h^{k}_\Omega(\alpha), P_i) - k \sum_{j=1}^l I(\alpha, o_j) I(o_j, P_i) | \le I(\alpha, P_i).$$
}
Comparing the slope of $\nu_i(h^{k}_\Omega(\alpha))$ in \eqref{stabdt1a} and \eqref{eq.b1}, with $\beta= P_i$, we get
$$ \mu_i(\alpha)= \sum_{j=1}^l I(\alpha, o_j) I(o_j, P_i) = \sum_{j=1}^l I(\alpha, o_j) \nu_i(o_j).$$
As the twists coordinates of $o_j$, as well as the last $3g-3$ coordinates of $\mu(\alpha)$, are all 0, we have
\begin{equation} \mu(\alpha) = \sum_{j=1}^l I(\alpha, o_j) \nu(o_j).
\label{eq.stab5}
\end{equation}
It remains to show that $h^{k}_\Omega(\alpha)$ is triangular for large $k$. Suppose $P_i, P_j, P_l$ bound a pair of pants $C$. An arc in $C$ having one endpoint in $P_j$ and one end point in $P_l$ is called a $(j,l)$-arc. An arc having both endpoints in $P_i$ is called an $(i,i)$-arc.
\begin{lemma} Let $\beta$ be a $\mathcal P$-taut simple diagram.
(a) If $\beta\cap C$ has a $(j,l)$-arc, then $\beta\cap C$ does not have $(i,i)$-arcs.
(b) If $\beta\cap C$ does not have $(i,i)$-arcs, then $\nu_i(\beta)\le \nu_j(\beta) + \nu_l(\beta)$.
\end{lemma} \label{r.arcs}
\begin{proof}
Both statements follow from the well-known facts \cite{FLP}:\\
$\bullet$ The number of $(j,l)$-arcs is $\max(0, (\nu_j(\beta) + \nu_l(\beta) - \nu_i(\beta))/2)$,\\
$\bullet$ The number of $(i,i)$-arcs is $\max(0, ( \nu_i(\beta)-\nu_j(\beta) - \nu_l(\beta) )/2)$.
\end{proof}
Note that $\Omega\cap C$ consists of 3 arcs, a $(j,l)$-arc $a_i$, a $(k,i)$-arc $a_j$, and a $(j,i)$-arc $a_k$, see Figure \ref{fig:ppants}. For each $s=i,j,l$ let $m_s$ be the intersection number of $\alpha$ with the component of $\Omega$ containing $a_s$. By \eqref{stabdt1a} and \eqref{eq.stab5}, for $k \ge k_0$ we have
\begin{align}
\nu_i(h^k_\Omega(\alpha))&= k(m_j + m_l) + \eta_i(\alpha) \label{eq.b2} \\
\nu_j(h^k_\Omega(\alpha))&= k(m_i + m_l) + \eta_j(\alpha) \notag \\
\nu_l(h^k_\Omega(\alpha))&= k(m_i + m_j) + \eta_l(\alpha). \notag
\end{align}
It follows that
\begin{equation} \nu_j(h^k_\Omega(\alpha)) + \nu_l(h^k_\Omega(\alpha)) - \nu_i(h^k_\Omega(\alpha)) = 2 k m_i + \eta_l(\alpha)+ \eta_j(\alpha) - \eta_i(\alpha). \end{equation}
Hence if $m_i >0$ then, for sufficiently large $k$ we have
\begin{equation}
\nu_j(h^k_\Omega(\alpha)) + \nu_l(h^k_\Omega(\alpha)) - \nu_i(h^k_\Omega(\alpha)) \ge 0. \label{eq.in2}
\end{equation}
Suppose now $m_i=0$. Let $o_s$ be the component of $\Omega$ containing $a_i$. Then $I(\alpha, o_s)=m_i=0$ and we can assume $\alpha \cap o_s= \emptyset$. Since $o_s$ is a component of $\Omega$, for any $k>0$ we also have $h^k_\Omega(\alpha) \cap o_s= \emptyset$.
Let $\beta= h^k_\Omega(\alpha) \cup o_s$, then $\beta$ has a $(j,l)$-arc in $C$, which is $a_i$. By Lemma \ref{r.arcs}(a), $\beta$ does not have $(i,i)$-arcs. As $h^k_\Omega(\alpha)$ is a sub-diagram of $\beta$, it does not have an $(i,i)$ arc neither. By Lemma \ref{r.arcs}(b), we have \eqref{eq.in2}. Thus in all cases, we have \eqref{eq.in2} for large enough $k$.
It remains to show that for $k$ large, $h^k_\Omega(\alpha)$ does not have a component isotopic to $P_i$. Suppose $h^{k_1}_\Omega(\alpha)$ has a component isotopic to $P_i$ for some $k_1$. As $P_i$ has non-trivial intersection with the components of $\Omega$ which contains $a_j$ and $a_l$, we have $m_j, m_l >0$. From \eqref{eq.b2} it follows for large $k$ we have $\nu_i(h^k_\Omega(\alpha)) >0$, implying $h^k_\Omega(\alpha)$ does not have components isotopic to $P_i$. This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{thm.stab}. \qed
\subsection{More on Theorem \ref{thm.stab}} We call $\tilde \nu(\alpha):= (\mu(\alpha),\eta(\alpha))\in \mathbb Z^{12g-12}$ the {\em stable DT-coordinate} of $\alpha\in \mathscr S$ with respect to the coordinate datum $(\mathcal P, \mathcal D)$.
Recall that $\overline{ \cA}$ is the subgroup of $\mathbb Z^{6g-6}$ generated by the monoid $\mathcal A$. Let $\vec 0\in \mathbb Z^{3g-3}$ be the element having all $0$'s as entries, and ${\boldsymbol \delta}_i\in \mathbb Z^{3g-3}$ be the element having all $0$'s as entries except a $1$ in the $i$-th entry.
\begin{prop} \label{r.aden}
(a) The map $\tilde \nu:\mathscr S \to \mathbb Z^{12g-12}$ is injective.
(b) For any $\alpha\in \mathscr S$ one has $\eta(\alpha) \in \overline{ \cA}$.
(c) If $I(\alpha, \Omega)=0$ then $\eta(\alpha) = \nu(\alpha)$ and $\mu(\alpha) =(\vec0, \vec 0)$.
(d) For all $k\in \mathbb Z$ one has
\begin{equation}
\eta(h^k_\Omega(\alpha))= \eta(\alpha) + k \sum_{i=1}^l I(\alpha, o_i)\nu(o_i). \label{eq.eta}
\end{equation}
(e) One has $\eta(P_j) = (\vec 0, - {\boldsymbol \delta}_j)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} (a) If $(\mu(\alpha), \eta(\alpha))= (\mu(\beta), \eta(\beta))$, then \eqref{stabdt} shows $h^k_\Omega(\alpha)=h^k_\Omega(\beta) $ for large $k$. Applying $h^{-k}_\Omega$, we get $\alpha=\beta$.
(b) As $\eta(\alpha)= \nu(h^k_\Omega(\alpha)) - k \sum_i I(\alpha, o_i) \nu(i)$ is the difference of two elements in $\mathcal A$, we have $\eta(\alpha) \in \overline{ \cA}$.
(c) If $I(\alpha, \Omega)=0$ then $h^k_\Omega(\alpha)= \alpha$ for all $k$. The result follows.
(d) Applying $h_\Omega^j$ to \eqref{stabdt}, noting that $h_\Omega(o_i)=o_i$, we get
$$\eta(h^j_\Omega(\alpha))= \eta(\alpha) + j\sum_{i=1}^l I(\alpha, o_i)\nu(o_i),$$
which is \eqref{eq.eta} with $k=j >0$. Replacing $\alpha$ by $h^{-k}_\Omega$ in \eqref{eq.eta} we get \eqref{eq.eta} with $k$ replaced by $-k$.
(e)
Note that $\nu(P_j) = (\vec 0, {\boldsymbol \delta}_j)$. After twisting once along $\Omega$ its twist coordinate becomes $-{\boldsymbol \delta}_j$,
\begin{equation}
\nu(h^k_\Omega(P_j))= (\vec 0, - {\boldsymbol \delta}_j)+ k \sum_{i=1}^l I(P_j, o_i)\nu(o_i)
\end{equation}
Since $h_{\Omega}(P_j)$ makes no bigons with $P_j$ and its intersection with $D$ is contained inside the annulus around $P_j$, therefore its DT coordinates change linearly, and the result follows.
\end{proof}
\no{In the next section we will develop a similar concept, the stable residue of a simple diagram, which also takes into account the arithmetic of a root of unity.
\begin{prop}[Addendum to Theorem \ref{thm.stab}] Let $S$ be a simple diagram on surface $F$ with Dehn-Thurston data $(\mathcal P, \mathcal D)$. Suppose that $P_j\in \mathcal P$ is one of the pants curves. If there is a component $a$ of $\Omega$ such that $i(S,a) i(a,P_j) \neq 0$, i.e., $i(S,a) n_j(a)\neq 0$, then $j$-th stable twist coordinate of $S$ is non-positive. That is, the $(3g-3 +j)$-th component of $Y_S$ is non-positive.
On the other hand, if $i(S,a) i(a,P_j) =0 $ for all components $a$ of $\Omega$, then the $3g-3+j$-th component of $Y_s$ is equal to $t_j(S)$.
\end{prop}
}
\def\KF^*{K_\zeta(F)^*}
\def\ZF^*{Z_\zeta(F)^*}
\def\deg_\zeta{\deg_\zeta}
\section{Independence over the center}\label{residue}
We formulate a criterion for independence of a collection of elements of $K_\zeta(F)$ over the center.
Throughout this section we fix a finite type surface $F= F_{g,p}$ with negative Euler characteristic equipped with coordinate datum. One can define the coordinates $\nu: \mathscr S \hookrightarrow \mathbb Z^r$, where $r= 6g-6+3p$. The set of possible coordinates $\mathcal A= \nu(\mathscr S)$ is a submonoid of $\mathbb Z^r$. Let $\overline{ \cA}$ denote the subgroup of $\mathbb Z^r$ generated by $\mathcal A$. For a root of unity $\zeta$ we also define the submonoid $\cA_\zeta$ and its group $\overline {\Az}$ as in Section \ref{prel}.
For a ring $R$ we denote by $R^*$ the set of non-zero elements of $R$. Since $K_\zeta(F)$ is a domain, $\KF^*$ is a monoid under multiplication.
\subsection{General result}\label{genres}The degree of polynomials in one variable satisfies the following two properties: for non-zero polynomials $x$ and $y$,
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] $ \deg(xy) = \deg(x) + \deg(y)$ (monoid homomorphism),
\item[(ii)] if $\deg(x_i)$ for $i=1, \dots, d$ are pairwise distinct, then $\sum_i x_i \neq 0$.
\end{itemize}
For a domain $R$, a {\em degree map} is a map $\deg: R^* \to M$, where $M$ is a monoid, satisfying the above two properties.
\no{ Note that (iii) is implied by
the following
\begin{itemize}
\item[(iii)] if $\deg(x) > \deg(y)$, then $x+y \neq 0$ and $\deg(x+y) = \deg(x)$.
\end{itemize}
}
\begin{theorem}
\label{r.gen1} Given a finite type surface $F= F_{g,p}$ with negative Euler characteristic and a fixed coordinate datum, let $\zeta$ be a root of 1.
There exists a degree map
\begin{equation} \deg: \KF^* \to \overline{ \cA} \end{equation}
such that
$ \deg(\ZF^*) \subset \overline {\Az}$. Moreover, the composition
\begin{equation} \deg_\zeta: \KF^* \overset{ \deg} \longrightarrow \overline{ \cA} \to \overline{ \cA}/\overline {\Az}= \mathfrak{R}_\zeta
\label{eq.dzdef}
\end{equation}
is a surjective monoid homomorphism.
\end{theorem}
We will construct the map $\deg$ in later subsections. We want to mention an important corollary that we will use in the future.
\begin{cor} \label{r.dimlow}
Assume the hypothesis of Theorem \ref{r.gen1}.
(a) If $x_1, \dots, x_d\in \KF^*$ such that $\deg_\zeta(x_1), \dots, \deg_\zeta(x_d)$ are pairwise distinct, then $x_1, \dots, x_d$ are linearly independent over $Z_\zeta(F)$.
(b) One has $\dim_Z_\zeta(F) K_\zeta(F) \ge |\mathfrak{R}_\zeta| = D_\zeta(F)$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof} (a)
Suppose $z_1, \dots z_d\in \ZF^*$.
From the assumption, the elements $\deg(z_1 x_1), \dots, \deg(z_d x_d)$ are pairwise distinct in $\overline{ \cA}$. By Property (ii) of degree maps, the sum $\sum z_i x_i \neq 0$.
(b) Since $\deg_\zeta( \KF^* )= \mathfrak{R}_\zeta(F)$, from (a) we have $\dim_Z_\zeta(F) K_\zeta(F) \ge |\mathfrak{R}_\zeta|$, which is equal to $D_\zeta(F)$ by Propositions \ref{r.dim1} and \ref{r.dim1a}.
\end{proof}
As $\deg_\zeta(Z_\zeta(F))=0$, the map $\deg_\zeta$ extends to a surjective group homomorphism, also denoted by $\deg_\zeta$:
\begin{equation}
\deg_\zeta: \tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)^* \to \overline{ \cA}/\overline {\Az}= \mathfrak{R}_\zeta.
\label{eq.Rd}
\end{equation}
\subsection{Lead term}
Since $\mathscr S$ is a $\mathbb C$-basis of $K_\zeta(F)$, for every $x\in \KF^*$ there is a unique set $\mathrm{supp}(x) \subset \mathscr S$ such that $x$ has the presentation
\begin{equation}
x = \sum_{\alpha \in \mathrm{supp}(x)} c_\alpha \alpha, \quad 0\neq c_\alpha \in \mathbb C.
\label{eq.supp}
\end{equation}
If $\le$ is a total order on $\mathscr S$, then $c_\alpha \alpha$, where $\alpha =\max \mathrm{supp}(x)$, is called the $(\le)$-lead term of $x$, and we can write
\begin{equation}
x = c_\alpha \alpha + G_<(\alpha),
\end{equation}
where $G_<(\alpha)$ is the $\mathbb C$-span of $\{ \beta\in \mathscr S \mid \beta < \alpha\}$.
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{r.gen1} for open surfaces} Suppose $F$ is an open
finite type surface with negative Euler characteristic and coordinate datum $\{e_1, \dots, e_r\}$.
Let $\iota: \mathbb Z^r \hookrightarrow \mathbb Z^{r+1}$ be the embedding
$$ \iota(\mathbf n) = (|\mathbf n|, \mathbf n),$$
where $|\mathbf n| = \sum n_i$. Let $\unlhd$ be the total order on $\mathscr S$ and $\mathcal A$ induced from the lexicographic order on $\mathbb Z^{r+1}$ via the embeddings
$$ \mathscr S \overset{\nu}\longrightarrow \mathcal A \hookrightarrow \overline{ \cA} \hookrightarrow \mathbb Z^r \overset{\iota}\hookrightarrow\mathbb Z^{r+1}.$$
The order $\unlhd$ makes $\overline{ \cA}$ an ordered group. Define
$\deg: \KF^* \to \overline{ \cA}$ by
\begin{equation}
\deg(x) = \nu(\alpha),\quad \text{where} \ \alpha = \max \mathrm{supp}(x).
\label{eq.defdeg1}
\end{equation}
Suppose $x_1\dots, x_n \in \KF^*$. If $\deg(x_1), \dots, \deg(x_d)$ are distinct, then $\sum_i x_i\neq 0$ and $\deg(\sum_i x_i) = \max \{ \deg(x_i)\}$.
Proposition \ref{r.prod1} implies that $\deg(xy)= \deg(x) + \deg(y)$ for any $x,y\inK_\zeta(F)$. Hence $\deg$ is a degree map.
By definition $\deg(\mathscr S) = \mathcal A$, which by Proposition \ref{r.surj} surjects onto $\overline{ \cA}/\overline {\Az}=\mathfrak{R}_\zeta$. Since $\mathscr S\subset \KF^*$, we also have $\deg_\zeta(\KF^*)= \mathfrak{R}_\zeta$. This completes the proof of Theorem \ref{r.gen1} for open surface.
\def\tilde \nu{\tilde \nu}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{r.gen1} for closed surfaces} Suppose $F=F_{g,0}$ with $g\ge 2$, equipped with coordinate datum $(\mathcal P, \mathcal D)$.
In this case $r=6g-6$. Let $\kappa: \mathbb Z^r \hookrightarrow \mathbb Z^{r+1}$ be the group embedding given by
$$ \kappa(n_1,\dots, n_r) = (\sum_{i=1}^{3g-3} n_i, n_1, n_2, \dots, n_r).$$
Let the order $\le$ on $\mathscr S$ and $\mathbb Z^r$ be the one induced from the lexicographic order of $\mathbb Z^{r+1}$ via the embeddings
$$ \mathscr S \overset{\nu}\longrightarrow \mathcal A \hookrightarrow \overline{ \cA} \hookrightarrow \mathbb Z^r \overset{\kappa}\hookrightarrow\mathbb Z^{r+1}.$$
Since the first component is used to define the filtrations appeared in Proposition \ref{prsi}, for $\mathbf n,\mathbf n'\in \cA^\Delta$, there is $j$ such that
\begin{equation}
S(\mathbf n) S(\mathbf n')= \zeta^j S(\mathbf n+\mathbf n') + G_<(\mathbf n+\mathbf n'), \label{eq.sum2}
\end{equation}
where $G_<(\mathbf n+\mathbf n')$ is a $\mathbb C$-span of $\{\alpha\in \mathscr S \mid\alpha < S(\mathbf n+\mathbf n')\}$. This holds only for triangular $\mathbf n, \mathbf n'$.
There is a better order on $\mathscr S$.
\begin{lemma} There is a total order $\unlhd$ which makes $\mathbb Z^r \times \mathbb Z^r$ an ordered group, induces an order on $\mathscr S$
via $\tilde \nu: \mathscr S \hookrightarrow \mathbb Z^r \times \mathbb Z^r$, and has a
property that
$\alpha \unlhd \beta$ if and only if
$ h^k_\Omega(\alpha) \le h^k_\Omega(\beta)$ for sufficiently large $k$.
\end{lemma}
\def\tilde \kappa{\tilde \kappa}
\begin{proof} For $\mathbf n=(n_1,\dots, n_{6g-6})$ let $\|\mathbf n\|_1= \sum_{i=1}^{3g-3} n_i$. For $\mathbf n, \mathbf{m} \in \mathbb Z^r$,
$$\kappa( k \mathbf n +\mathbf{m})= (k\|\mathbf n\|_1 + \|\mathbf{m}\|_1, kn_1+ m_1, kn_2+ m_2,\dots, kn_r + m_r) .$$
Define the embedding $\tilde \kappa:\mathbb Z^r \times \mathbb Z^r \hookrightarrow \mathbb Z^{2r+2}$ by
$$ \tilde \kappa(\mathbf n,\mathbf{m})= (\|\mathbf n\|_1 ,\|\mathbf{m}\|_1, n_1, m_1, n_2, m_2, \dots, n_r , m_r) .$$
The order $\unlhd$ on $\mathbb Z^r \times \mathbb Z^r$ induced from the lexicographic order of $\mathbb Z^{2r+2}$ via $\tilde \kappa$ satisfies the lemma.
\end{proof}
From the definition, $c_\alpha \alpha$ is the ($\unlhd$)-lead term of $x\in \KF^*$ if and only if $c_\alpha h^k_\Omega(\alpha)$ is the $(\le)$-lead term of $h^k_\Omega(x)$ for
sufficiently large $k$. This yields an ordering that gives us control of lead terms of all diagrams, not just triangular ones.
From here we have the following.
\begin{lemma} \label{r.10}
Suppose $x\in \KF^*$, $\alpha_k\in \mathscr S$ and $0\neq c_{k} \in \mathbb C$ such that for sufficiently large $k$ we have
$$ h^k_\Omega(x) = c_k \alpha_{k} + G_{<} (\alpha_k).$$
Then $c_k\alpha_k= c_\alpha h^k_\Omega(\alpha)$ for large $k$, where $c_\alpha \alpha$ is the $(\unlhd)$-lead term of $x$.
\end{lemma}
A crucial property of the $\unlhd$ order is that its lead term is a monoid map.
\begin{lemma} Suppose $\alpha, \beta\in \mathscr S$ and $\gamma= \max_\unlhd (\mathrm{supp}(\alpha\beta))$, then $\tilde \nu(\gamma) = \tilde \nu(\alpha) + \tilde \nu(\beta)$, i.e. $\mu(\gamma)= \mu(\alpha) + \mu(\beta)$ and $\eta(\gamma)= \eta(\alpha) + \eta(\beta)$.
\label{r.sum3}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
By Theorem \ref{thm.stab} there exists $K\in\mathbb N$ such that for all $k>K$ the diagrams
$h^k_\Omega(\alpha)$ and $h^k_\Omega(\beta)$ are triangular by. By \eqref{eq.sum2},
\begin{align*}
h^k_\Omega(\alpha \beta) & = h^k_\Omega(\alpha ) h^k_\Omega(\beta) \\
&= q^{j(k)} (S( \nu(h^k_\Omega(\alpha )) + \nu(h^k_\Omega(\beta ))) + G_<(\nu(h^k_\Omega(\alpha )) + \nu(h^k_\Omega(\beta ))).
\end{align*}
Hence by Lemma \ref{r.10} we have $h^k_\Omega(\gamma) = S( \nu(h^k_\Omega(\alpha )) + \nu(h^k_\Omega(\beta )))$, or
$$ \nu(h^k_\Omega(\gamma)) = \nu(h^k_\Omega(\alpha )) + \nu(h^k_\Omega(\beta )).$$
Using \eqref{stabdt} we have
$$ k\mu(\gamma) + \eta(\gamma) = k\mu(\alpha) + \eta(\alpha) + k\mu(\beta) + \eta(\beta).$$
It follows that $\mu(\gamma)= \mu(\alpha) + \mu(\beta)$ and $\eta(\gamma)= \eta(\alpha) + \eta(\beta)$.
\end{proof}
Define the map $\deg: \KF^* \to \overline{ \cA}$ by
\begin{equation} \deg(x) = \eta(\alpha) \in \overline{ \cA}, \quad \text{where} \
\alpha= {\max}_\unlhd(\mathrm{supp}(x)).
\label{eq.defdeg2}
\end{equation}
We show that this is in fact a degree mapping in the sense of subsection \ref{genres}.
\begin{lemma} \label{r.monoid1}
(a) $\deg: \KF^* \to \overline{ \cA}$ is a monoid homomorphism.
(b) Suppose $x_1, \dots , x_d \in \KF^*$ such that $\deg(x_1), \dots, \deg(x_d)$ are distinct, then $\sum_i x_i \neq 0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} (a) follows from Lemma \ref{r.sum3} and the fact that $\overline{ \cA}\times \overline{ \cA}$, equipped with $\unlhd$, is an ordered monoid.
(b) Let $c_i \alpha_i$ be the $(\unlhd)$-lead term of $x_i$. Since $\deg(x_i)=\eta(\alpha_i)$, the $\alpha_i$ are distinct. It follows that $\sum_i x_i\neq 0$.
\end{proof}
\def\mathscr S_\zeta{\mathscr S_\zeta}
\begin{lemma} (a) Suppose $\alpha\in \mathscr S_\zeta$, then $\deg(\alpha) \in \overline {\Az}$.
(b) Suppose $z\in \ZF^*$, then $\deg(z)\in \overline {\Az}$. \label{r.l2}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} (a) For sufficiently large $k$, from \eqref{stabdt} we have
\begin{equation}
\eta(\alpha)= \nu(h^k_\Omega(\alpha)) - k \mu(\alpha).
\label{eq.s6}
\end{equation}
Since $\mathscr S_\zeta$ is invariant under Dehn twists, $h^k_\Omega(\alpha)\in \mathscr S_\zeta$, and
$\nu(h^k_\Omega(\alpha))\in \cA_\zeta$. One the other hand, if $k\in 2m \mathbb Z$, then $k \mu(\alpha)\in \cA_\zeta$ since $2m \mathcal A \subset \cA_\zeta$. Hence from \eqref{eq.s6} we see that $\eta(\alpha)$, being the difference of two elements of $\cA_\zeta$, is in $\overline {\Az}$.
(b)
Since $\{ T(\alpha) \mid \alpha \in \mathscr S_\zeta\}$ is a $\mathbb C$-basis of $\ZF^*$ (see Theorem \ref{center}), we have
$$ z = \sum_{\alpha \in U \subset \mathscr S_\zeta} c_\alpha T(\alpha), \quad c_\alpha \in \mathbb C^*.$$
From the definition, $\max_\unlhd \mathrm{supp}(T(\alpha))= \alpha$. Hence $ \deg(z) = \eta(\alpha)$, where $\alpha = \max_\unlhd U$. Since $\alpha\in \mathscr S_\zeta$, the result follows from (a).
\end{proof}
\begin{lemma} The monoid homomorphism $\deg: \KF^* \to \overline{ \cA}/\overline {\Az}= \mathfrak{R}_\zeta$ is surjective. \label{r.l3}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof
Let $\overline{ \eta(\mathscr S)}$ be the $\mathbb Z$-span of $\eta(\mathscr S)$.
One has to show that $\overline{ \eta(\mathscr S)} \supset \overline{ \cA}$.
From the description of $\mathcal A$ in Section \ref{sec.Coor2} we see that
$\overline{ \cA} = (\overline{ \cA})_1 \oplus \mathbb Z^{3g-3}$, and $(\overline{ \cA})_1$ is the set of all
$\mathbf n=(n_1,\dots, n_{3g-3})\in \mathbb Z^{3g-3}$ such that whenever $P_i, P_j, P_l$ bound a pair of pants,
$n_i+ n_j + n_l$ is even.
The set $\mathcal A_1'$ of all $\mathbf n=(n_1,\dots, n_{3g-3})\in \mathbb N^{3g-3}$, such that whenever $P_i, P_j, P_l$ bound a pair of pants, $n_i+ n_j + n+l$ is even and $n_i \le n_j + n_l$, spans $(\overline{ \cA})_1$ over $\mathbb Z$. If $\mathbf n\in \mathcal A_1'$ then there is a simple diagram $\alpha$ lying entirely in $N(\mathcal D)$ such that $\nu(\alpha) =(\mathbf n, \vec 0)$.
By Proposition \ref{r.aden}(c), one has $\eta(\alpha) = \nu(\alpha) = (\mathbf n, \vec0)$. It follows that
$\overline{\eta(\mathscr S)} \supset (\overline{ \cA})_1 \oplus \{ \vec0 \}$.
Since $\eta(P_i) = - (\vec 0, {\boldsymbol \delta}_i)$ by Proposition \ref{r.aden}(e), we have $\overline{\eta(\mathscr S)} \supset \{ \vec0 \} \oplus\mathbb Z^{3g-3}$. Thus, $\overline{\eta(\mathscr S)} \supset (\overline{ \cA})_1 \oplus \mathbb Z^{3g-3} = \overline{ \cA}$.
\end{proof}
Theorem \ref{r.gen1} follows from Lemmas \ref{r.monoid1}, \ref{r.l2}, and \ref{r.l3}. \qed
\subsection{More on $\deg_\zeta$}
The degree map yields a characterization of central skeins and allows the exploration of the independence of diagrams.
\begin{prop} \label{primitive} Suppose $F= F_{g,p}$ has negative Euler characteristic and a coordinate datum. Let $\zeta$ be a root of 1, with $m =\mathrm{ord}(\zeta^4)$.
(a) If $\alpha\in \mathscr S$ then $\deg_\zeta(\alpha)=0$ if and only if $\alpha\in \mathscr S_\zeta$.
(b) Let $C_1, \dots, C_k$ be a sequence of disjoint non-trivial non-peripheral loops such that no two of them are isotopic. For $\mathbf n=(n_1,\dots,n_k) \in \mathbb N^k$ let $C^\mathbf n= \prod_{i=1}^k (C_i)^{n_i} \in \mathscr S$. Suppose $\deg_\zeta(C^\mathbf n)=0$.
(i) If $\mathrm{ord} (\zeta) \neq 0 \pmod 4$ then
$\mathbf n\in m \mathbb Z^k$.
(ii) If $\mathrm{ord} (\zeta) = 0 \pmod 4$ then $\mathbf n\in m \mathbb Z^k$ and $C^{\mathbf n/m}\in \mathscr S^{\mathrm{ev}}$.
\no{
\begin{itemize}
\item If $\mathrm{ord}(\zeta)\neq 0 \mod{4}$ then $\deg_\zeta(T(C^\mathbf{m}))=0$ if and only if $\mathbf{m} \in m\mathbb N^k$.
\item If $\mathrm{ord}(\zeta)=0 \mod{4}$ then $\deg_\zeta(T(C^\mathbf{m}))=0$ if and only if $\mathbf{m} \in m\mathbb N^k$, and $C^{\mathbf{m}/m}$ represents $0$ in $H_1(\overline{F};\mathbb{Z}_2)$.
\end{itemize}
}
\end{prop}
\begin{proof} (a) By definition, $\deg_\zeta(\alpha)=0$ if and only if $\deg(\alpha) \in \overline {\Az}$.
Case 1: $p>0$. In this case $\deg(\alpha) = \nu(\alpha)$. If $\alpha\in\mathscr S_\zeta$ then $\deg(\alpha)=\nu(\alpha)\in \nu(\mathscr S_\zeta)= \cA_\zeta\subset \overline {\Az}$. Conversely, suppose $\nu(\alpha)\in \overline {\Az}$ then $\nu(\alpha) \in \overline {\Az} \cap \mathcal A= \cA_\zeta$. Hence $\alpha\in \mathscr S_\zeta$.
Case 2: If $p=0$ then $\deg(\alpha)= \eta(\alpha)$. If $\alpha\in \mathscr S_\zeta$ then $\deg(\alpha)= \eta(\alpha)\in \overline {\Az}$ by Lemma \ref{r.l2}.
Suppose $\eta(\alpha) \in \overline {\Az}$. For large $l$ we have
$$ \nu(h^l_\Omega(\alpha))= l \mu(\alpha) + \eta(\alpha).$$
When $l$ is a multiple of $2m$, one has $l \mu(\alpha)\in 2m \mathcal A \subset \cA_\zeta$, and the right hand side of the above is in $\overline {\Az}$. It follows that $\nu(h^l_\Omega(\alpha)) \in \overline {\Az} \cap \mathcal A= \cA_\zeta$. Hence $h^l_\Omega(\alpha)\in \mathscr S_\zeta$. As $\mathscr S_\zeta$ is invariant under automorphisms of $F$, we have $\alpha\in \mathscr S_\zeta$.
(b) By part (a), we have $C^\mathbf n \in \mathscr S_\zeta$. From the definition of $\mathscr S_\zeta$ (see Section \ref{sec.Cheb}) one has $C^\mathbf n= \beta \gamma^m$ where $\beta\in {\cA}^\partial$ and $\gamma \in \mathcal A$. Since there are no peripheral elements among the $C_i$ we must have $\beta=\emptyset$ and $C^\mathbf n= \gamma^m$. This proves $\mathbf n \in m \mathbb N^k$. Moreover $\gamma= C^{\mathbf n/m}$.
If $\mathrm{ord}(\zeta)=0 \mod{4}$, then the definition of $\mathscr S_\zeta$ requires $\gamma\in {\cS}^\ev$. Hence in this case $C^{\mathbf n/m}\in {\cS}^\ev$.
\end{proof}
\def\mathfrak A{\mathfrak A}
\def{\mathfrak Z}{{\mathfrak Z}}
\def{\tilde \ZL}{{\tilde {\mathfrak Z}}}
\section{Dimension of $K_\zeta(F)$ over $Z_\zeta(F)$}\label{dimkoverz}
\subsection{Formulation of result}
Recall that for a finite type surface $F=F_{g,p}$ and a root of unity $\zeta$ with $m =\mathrm{ord}(\zeta^4)$,
\begin{equation} D_\zeta(F) = \begin{cases}
m^{6g-6 + 2p} \qquad &\text{if }\ \mathrm{ord} (\zeta) \not \equiv 0 \pmod 4 \\
2^{2g} \, m^{6g-6 + 2p} \qquad &\text{if } \ \mathrm{ord} (\zeta) \equiv 0 \pmod 4.
\label{eq.dimdef}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\begin{theorem} \label{thm.dim}
Suppose $F$ is a finite type surface with negative Euler characteristic and $\zeta$ is a root of 1, then
$\dim_{Z_\zeta(F)} K_\zeta(F) = D_\zeta(F)$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{remark} Let us discuss the cases excluded by Theorem \ref{thm.dim}, namely the cases when the Euler characteristic of $F_{g,p}$ is non-nagative. There are four such cases: the sphere with zero, one or two punctures and the torus. The skein algebras of the first three are commutative so they have dimension $1$ over their respective centers. For the torus in the case where $n$ is odd this was done in \cite{AF1} and the dimension is $m^2$. The case when $m$ has residue $2$ on division by $4$ is similar and the dimension is $m^2$. Finally, when $n$ is divisible by $4$ the dimension is $4m^2$.
\end{remark}
\begin{cor} \label{r.dim=}
Let $F=F_{g,p}$ be a finite type surface with negative Euler characteristic equipped with a coordinate datum.
Suppose $X$ is a $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$-vector subspace of $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$ such that $\deg_\zeta(X \setminus \{0\})= \mathfrak{R}_\zeta$. Then $X= \tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof} Let $\mathcal B\subset X$ be such that $\deg_\zeta$ is a bijection from $\mathcal B$ to $\mathfrak{R}_\zeta$. By Corollary \ref{r.dimlow}, $\mathcal B$ is $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$-linearly independent. Thus
$\dim_\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F) X \ge |\mathfrak{R}_\zeta|= D_\zeta(F) = \dim_\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F) \tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$, and hence $X= \tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$.
\end{proof}
By Corollary \ref{r.dimlow} we have $\dim_{Z_\zeta(F)} K_\zeta(F) \ge D_\zeta(F)$. To prove Theorem \ref{thm.dim} we need to prove the converse inequality
\begin{equation}
\dim_{Z_\zeta(F)} K_\zeta(F) \le D_\zeta(F). \label{eq.dimup}
\end{equation}
\def\mathscr S_\zeta{\mathscr S_\zeta}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm.dim}, open surface case} Assume $p>0$.
Fix a coordinate datum (a triangulation) $
\{e_1,\dots, e_r\}$.
Let $F_k(K_\zeta(F))$ be the $\mathbb C$-vector subspace of $K_\zeta(F)$ spanned by $\{ \alpha\in \mathscr S\mid \sum_{i=1}^r \nu_i(\alpha) \le k\}$. By Proposition \ref{r.filt},
$(F_k(K_\zeta(F)))_{k=0}^\infty$ is a filtration of $K_\zeta(F)$ compatible with the product.
Let $Q\subset \mathbb R^r$ be the simplex
$$ Q= \{ (x_1,\dots, x_r) \in \mathbb R^r \mid x_i \ge 0,\ \sum x_i \le 1\}.$$
From Theorem \ref{center} it follows that
\begin{align*}
&\{ T(S(\mathbf n)) \mid \mathbf n \in \mathcal A \cap kQ \} \quad \text{is a $\mathbb C$-basis of $F_k(K_\zeta(F))$} \\
&\{ T(S(\mathbf n)) \mid \mathbf n \in \mathcal A_\zeta \cap kQ \} \quad \text{is a $\mathbb C$-basis of $F_k(Z_\zeta(F))$}.
\end{align*}
It follows that
\begin{align}
\dim_\mathbb C F_k(K_\zeta(F))& = |\mathcal A \cap kQ|= |\overline{ \cA} \cap kQ|\\
\dim_\mathbb C F_k(Z_\zeta(F))& = |\cA_\zeta \cap kQ| = |\overline {\Az} \cap kQ|.
\end{align}
Hence by Lemma \ref{r.lim2}, there is a positive integer $u$ such that
\begin{equation}
\dim_{Z_\zeta(F)} K_\zeta(F) \le \lim_{k\to \infty} \frac{|\overline{ \cA} \cap kQ| }{|\overline {\Az} \cap (k-u)Q|}= |\overline{ \cA}/\overline {\Az}| = D(F,\zeta),
\end{equation}
where the first identity follows from \eqref{eq.vol3} and the second one follows from Proposition \ref{r.dim1}. This proves Theorem \ref{thm.dim} for open surfaces. \qed
\subsection{Piecewise-rational-linear functions}
A function $f: \mathbb R^k \to \mathbb R^l$ is {\em rational-linear} if there is
is a matrix $A$ with rational entries such that $f(x) = A x$. A function $f: \mathbb R^k \to \mathbb R^l$ is {\em piecewise-rational-linear} if it is continuous and there are rational-linear functions $f_1,\dots, f_k: \mathbb R^k \to \mathbb R$ such that on each connected component of the complement of all the hyperplanes $\{ x\in \mathbb R^k \mid f_i(x) =0\}$, the function $f$ is equal to the restriction of a rational-linear function.
For $X \subset \mathbb R^k$ a function $h: X \to \mathbb R^l$ is {\em piecewise-rational-linear} if there is a piecewise-rational-linear function from $\mathbb R^k$ to $\mathbb R^l$ restricting to $h$.
It is clear that sums of piecewise-rational-linear functions are piecewise-rational-linear, and that a piecewise-rational-linear function $h$ is positively homogeneous, i.e. $h(t x) = t h(x)$ for all real $ t\ge 0$.
A {\em rational convex polyhedron} is the convex hull of a finite number of points in $\mathbb Q^n$.
The following properties are easy consequences of the definition.
\begin{prop} \label{r.rpwl}
Suppose $h_1, \dots, h_l : \mathbb R^n \to \mathbb R$ are piecewise-rational-linear, $c_1,\dots, c_l\in \mathbb Q$ and
$$ Q =\{ x\in \mathbb R^n \mid h_i(x) \ge c_i\}.$$
(a) If $Q$ is not bounded, then $Q$ contains a set of the form
$\{ tx \mid t \in \mathbb R_{\ge 0}\}$
for some non-zero $x\in \mathbb Q^n$. We call such set a {\em rational ray}.
(b)
If $Q$ is bounded, then $Q$ is the union of a finite number of rational convex polyhedra. \end{prop}
\subsection{Infinite sector $Q_\infty$} Suppose $F=F_{g,0}$ with $g\ge 2$. Fix a coordinate datum $(\mathcal P,\mathcal D)$ which gives the DT coordinate map
$$ \nu : \mathscr S \hookrightarrow \mathbb Z^{6g-6}.$$
Here $\mathcal P=(P_1,\dots, P_{3g-3})$ is a pants decomposition.
The set $\mathcal A= \nu(\mathscr S)$
consists of all points
$(x_1, \dots, x_{6g-6}) \in \mathbb Z^{6g-6}$ satisfying
\begin{itemize}
\item [(i)] $x_i \ge 0$ for $i=1,\dots, 3g-3$,
\item [(ii)] if $x_i = 0$ for some $i=1,\dots, 3g-3$, then $x_{i+3g-3}\ge0$,
\item[(iii)]
if $P_i, P_j, P_l$ bound a pair of pants, then $x_i + x_j + x_l$ is even.
\end{itemize}
Let $Q_\infty$ be the set of all $(x_1,\dots, x_{6g-6})\in \mathbb R^{6g-6}$ satisfying conditions (i) and (ii) above. Note that we allow points in $Q_\infty$ to have real coordinates.
For any submonoid $X$ of $\mathbb Z^{6g-6}$, let $\overline X$ be the subgroup generated by $X$. The set $Q_\infty$ was introduced so that
$
\mathcal A = \overline{ \cA} \cap Q_\infty. $
\begin{lemma} (a) For any subset $Q'\subset Q_\infty$ one has
\begin{equation}
\mathcal A \cap Q' = \overline{ \cA} \cap Q'
\end{equation}
(b) If $x \in Q_\infty\cap \mathbb Z^{6g-6}$ then $ 2x \in \mathcal A$.
\end{lemma}
\proof (a)
$\ \overline{ \cA} \cap Q' = \overline{ \cA} \cap (Q_\infty \cap Q') = (\overline{ \cA} \cap Q_\infty) \cap Q'= \mathcal A \cap Q'$.
(b) follows from (iii) above.\qed
\subsection{DT coordinates and geometric intersection numbers}
\begin{lemma} \label{r.plDT}
(a) There are $6g-6$ loops $P_{3g-2},\dots, P_{9g-9}$ such that any $\alpha\in \mathscr S$ is totally determined by the collection $(I(\alpha, P_i))_{i=1}^{9g-9}$.
(b) Moreover, for each $i$ the function $\mathcal A\to \mathbb R$,
defined by $ \mathbf n \to I(S(\mathbf n), P_i)$, is piecewise-rational-linear.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
(a)
follows, for example, from the computations in Section 4 of \cite{LS}.
(b) The more general fact: ``For any simple closed curve $\alpha$, the function $\mathcal A\to \mathbb R$,
defined by $ \mathbf n \to I(S(\mathbf n), \alpha)$, is piecewise-rational-linear" is well-known. It was formulated as Theorem 3 in \cite{Thurston} without proof. Here is a short proof based on \cite{Penner}. First if $\alpha$ is one of $P_i$ with $i \le 3g-3$ then the statement is obvious as $I(S(\mathbf n), P_i)=n_i$. Suppose now $\alpha$ is an arbitrary simple closed curve. Choose a coordinate datum $(\mathcal P', \mathcal D')$ such that $\alpha$ is a curve in $\mathcal P'$. By \cite{Penner}, the change from DT coordinates associated with $(\mathcal P', \mathcal D')$ to the one associated with $(\mathcal P,\mathcal D)$ is piecewise-rational-linear. The result follows.
\end{proof}
It follows that there is a piecewise-rational-linear $h: \mathbb R^{6g-6} \to \mathbb R$ such that
\begin{equation}
h(\mathbf n) = \sum_{i=1}^{9g-9} I(S(\mathbf n), P_i) \quad \text{for all $\mathbf n \in \mathcal A$}.
\end{equation}
Let $Q:= \{ x \in Q_\infty \mid h(x) \le 1\} $. Since $(I(P_i, \alpha))_{i=1}^{9g-9}$ totally determine $\alpha\in \mathscr S$, the set $ \mathcal A \cap kQ$ is finite for any $k \ge 0$.
\begin{lemma}\label{r.Q} The set $Q$ is the union of a finite number of convex polyhedra. Moreover, $Q$ has positive volume in $\mathbb R^{6g-6}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof} Let us prove that $Q$ is bounded. Suppose to the contrary that $Q$ is not bounded. By Proposition \ref{r.rpwl}(a), $Q$ contains a rational ray, which in turns contains infinitely many points whose coordinates are even integers. Since each such point is in $\mathcal A$, the set $\mathcal A \cap Q$ is infinite, a contradiction. Thus $Q$ is bounded, and by Proposition \ref{r.rpwl}(b), $Q$ is the union of a finite number of convex polyhedra.
Choose $\alpha\in \mathscr S$ with $\nu(\alpha)= (n_1,\dots,n_{6g-6})$ satisfying $n_i >0$ and whenever $P_i, P_j, P_l$ bound a pair of pants then $n_i < n_j + n_l$. Let $h(\nu(\alpha))= k$ then the point $\nu(\alpha)/(k+1)$ is an interior point of $Q$. Hence $Q$ has positive volume.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm.dim}, closed surface case} Let $F_k(K_\zeta(F))$ be the $\mathbb C$-subspace spanned by
$\{ \alpha\in \mathscr S \mid h(\nu(\alpha)) \le k\}$.
By Proposition \ref{r.filt}, $(F_k(K_\zeta(F)))_{k=0}^\infty$ is a filtration of $K_\zeta(F)$ compatible with the product.
Then $\{ S(\mathbf n) \mid \mathbf n \in \mathcal A \cap k Q\}$ is a $\mathbb C$-basis of $F_k(K_\zeta(F))$, hence
\begin{equation}
\dim_\mathbb C F_k(K_\zeta(F)) = | \mathcal A \cap kQ| = |\overline{ \cA} \cap kQ|. \label{eq.ine1}
\end{equation}
If $\mathbf n\in \cA_\zeta \cap kQ $, then by Theorem \ref{center} one has $T(S(\mathbf n)) \in Z_\zeta(F) \cap F_k(K_\zeta(F)) = F_k(K_\zeta(F)) $. Since the collection $\{ T(S(\mathbf n)), \mathbf n \in \cA_\zeta \cap kQ \}$ is $\mathbb C$-linearly independent, we have
\begin{equation}
\dim_\mathbb C F_k (Z_\zeta(F)) \ge |\cA_\zeta \cap kQ| = |\overline {\Az} \cap kQ|. \label{eq.ine2}
\end{equation}
Using Lemma \ref{r.lim2} then \eqref{eq.ine1} and \eqref{eq.ine2}, we get, for some integer $u>0$,
$$ \dim_{Z_\zeta(F)}{K_\zeta(F)} \le \lim_{k\to \infty } \frac{\dim_\mathbb C F_k(K_\zeta(F))}{\dim_\mathbb C F_{k-u} (Z_\zeta(F))} \le \lim_{k\to \infty } \frac{|\overline{ \cA} \cap kQ|}{|\overline {\Az} \cap (k-u)Q|} .$$
The latter, by \eqref{eq.vol3}, is $[\overline{ \cA}: \overline {\Az}]$, which is equal to $D_\zeta(F)$ by Proposition~\ref{r.dim1a}. Thus, $ \dim_{Z_\zeta(F)}{K_\zeta(F)} \le D_\zeta(F)$, completing the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm.dim}.\qed
\section{Commutative subalgebras of $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$} \label{sec.42}
In this section we study commutative subalgebras generated by collections of disjoint loops and describe their bases.
For a finite type surface $F$ and a root of unity $\zeta$ recall that $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$ is the field of fractions of the center $Z_\zeta(F)$ of $K_\zeta(F)$, and $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)= K_\zeta(F) \otimes _Z_\zeta(F) \tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$ is a division algebra. Recall that if $F$ is a surface with punctures $\{p_1,\dots, p_k\}$ then $\overline{F}=F\cup\{p_1,\dots, p_k\}$.
\begin{prop} \label{r.com}
Suppose $C_1, \dots C_k$ are non-peripheral, non-trivial, disjoint, pairwise non-isotopic loops on a finite type surface $F=F_{g,p}$ of negative Euler characteristic. Let $\zeta$ be a root of unity with $m=\mathrm{ord}(\zeta^4)$. Let $\mathcal C$ be the $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$-subalgebra of $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$ generated by $C_1, \dots , C_k$.
For $\mathbf n=(n_1,\dots,n_k)\in \mathbb N^k$ let $C^\mathbf n= \prod_{i=1}^k (C_i)^{n_i} \in \mathscr S$.
(a) Suppose $\mathrm{ord}(\zeta) \neq 0 \pmod 4$ then $\dim_\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F) \mathcal C = m^k$ and the set
\begin{equation} B=\{ C^\mathbf n \mid 0\le n_i < m\}\end{equation}
is a basis of $\mathcal C$ over $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$.
(b) Suppose $n=0 \pmod 4$ then $\dim_\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F) \mathcal C = 2^t m^k$, where $t$ is the $\mathbb Z_2$-rank of the subgroup
$H$ of $H_1(\bar F,\mathbb Z_2)$ generated by $C_1, \dots, C_k$.
Assume that after a re-indexing $\{C_1,\dots,C_t\}$ is a basis for $H$. The set
\begin{equation}\label{bml} B =\{ C^\mathbf n \mid n_i < 2 m \ \text{for} \ i \le t, \ {n_i < m}\ \text{for} \ i > t\}\end{equation}
is a basis of $\mathcal C$ over $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$.
\end{prop}
\begin{proof}
(a) In this case $(C_i)^m \in \mathscr S_\zeta$ for all each $i$. By Theorem \ref{center},
$T_m(C_i)=T((C_i)^m) \in Z_\zeta(F)$, which implies that the degree of $C_i$ over $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$ is $\le m$. Hence $B$ spans $\mathcal C$ as a vector space over $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$.
By Corollary \ref{r.dimlow}, to prove that $B$ is linearly independent it is enough to show that $\deg_\zeta(x), x \in B$, are distinct. Assume $\deg_\zeta(C^\mathbf n) = \deg_\zeta(C^{\mathbf n'})$. Let ${\bf m}$ be the $k$-tuple all of whose entries are $m$. Since $\deg_\zeta$ is a monoid homomorphism and $\deg_\zeta(C^\mathbf{m})=0$, we have $\deg_\zeta(C^{\mathbf{m}-\mathbf n + \mathbf n'})=0$. By Proposition \ref{primitive}(b), for each $i$ we have
$$m-n_i+ n'_i =0\pmod m.$$ Since $0\leq n_i,n_i'\leq m-1$, the only way this can happen is if $n_i=n_i'$.
(b) Let $\mathcal C_0$ be the $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$-subalgebra generated by $C_1, \dots, C_t$. Since
$T_{2m}(C_i)\in Z_\zeta(F)$, the set $B_0=\{ C_1^{n_1} \dots C_t^{n_t} \mid n_i < 2m\}$ spans $\mathcal C_0$ over $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$. Suppose $i>t$. There are $j_1, \dots j_l \le t$ such that the simple diagram $\beta= C_i \cup C_{j_1} \cup \dots \cup C_{j_l}$ is even. This implies that $\beta^m\in \mathscr S_\zeta$. Hence $T(\beta^m) \in Z_\zeta(F)$ by Theorem \ref{center}. Using the definition of $T(\beta^m)$,
$$Z_\zeta(F) \ni T(\beta^m) = T_m(C_i) \left[T_m(C_{j_1}) \dots T_m(C_{j_l}) \right].$$
The element in the square bracket is in $\mathcal C_0$. It follows that $T_m(C_i)\in \mathcal C_0$, which implies that the degree of $C_i$ over $\mathcal C_0$ is less than equal to $m$ for each $i\ge t+1$. Hence $B_1:=\{ C_{t+1}^{n_{t+1}} \dots C_k^{n_k} \mid n_i < m\}$ spans $\mathcal C$ over $\mathcal C_0$. Combining the spanning sets $B_0$ and $B_1$, we get that $B$ spans $\mathcal C$ over $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$.
Let us show that $\deg_\zeta(x), x \in B$, are distinct. Suppose $\deg_\zeta(C^\mathbf n )= \deg_\zeta(C^{\mathbf n'})$. Let $\mathbf{m}=(m_1,\dots,m_k)$ where $m_i=2m$ for $i \le t$ and $m_i=m$ for $i>t$. Then $\deg_\zeta(C^\mathbf{m})=0$. It follows that $\deg_\zeta(C^{\mathbf{m} -\mathbf n + \mathbf n'})=0$. By Proposition \ref{primitive}(b), we have $\mathbf{m} -\mathbf n + \mathbf n'\in m\mathbb Z^k$. This forces $n_i = n'_i$ for $i>t$ as in this case $ m_i -n_i + n'_i$ is sandwiched between $1$ and $2m-1$. Further $C^{(\mathbf{m} -\mathbf n + \mathbf n)/m}$ is even by Proposition \ref{primitive}(b). Since $C_1, \dots, C_t$ are linearly independent over $\mathbb Z_2$ in $H_1(\bar F,\mathbb Z_2)$, for each $i\le t$, $(m_i -n_i + n'_i)/m$ is even. As $m_i=2m$ and $0\le n_i, n'_i <2m$, this forces $n_i= n'_i$. Thus $\deg_\zeta(x), x \in B$, are distinct, and by Corollary \ref{r.dimlow} the set $B'$ is linearly independent over $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$.
\end{proof}
\begin{cor} Assume the conditions of Proposition \ref{r.com}.
\label{r.deg}
Let $\mathcal C'$ be the $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$-subalgebra of $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$ generated by $C_1, \dots, C_{k-1}$. The minimal polynomial of $C_k$ over $\mathcal C^{'}$ is of the form
$T_{m'}(x) - u$, where $u\in \mathcal C'$ and
$$ m' = \begin{cases}
m \quad & \text{if } \mathrm{ord}(\zeta) \neq 0 \pmod 4, \ \text{or}\ n = 0 \pmod 4 \ \text{and} \ k>t, \ \\
2m & \text{if} \ \mathrm{ord}(\zeta) = 0 \pmod 4 \ \text{and} \ k= t. \end{cases}
$$
Moreover $u$ is transcendental over $\mathbb Q$.
\end{cor}
\begin{proof} Since $\mathcal C=\mathcal C'(C_k)$, the degree of $C_k$ over $\mathcal C'$ is
$$[\mathcal C:\mathcal C']= \frac{\dim_\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F) \mathcal C}{\dim_\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F) \mathcal C'} \ , $$ which is equal to $m'$ using the formula for $\dim_\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F) C$ and $\dim_\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F) C'$ given by Proposition \ref{r.com}. In the proof of Proposition \ref{r.com} we see that $T_{m'}(C_k) = u\in \mathcal C'$. Hence $T_{m'}(x) -u$ is the minimal polynomial of $C_k$ over $\mathcal C'$.
Suppose $u= T_{m'}(C_k)$ is algebraic over $\mathbb Q$. Since $m'>0$ this implies $C_k$ is algebraic over $\mathbb Q$. But
$\{C_k^i, i\geq 0\}$ is a subset of $\mathscr S$, which is a $\mathbb C$-basis of $K_\zeta(F)$ and hence the non-trivial $\mathbb Q$-linear combination of these elements is never $0$. This shows $u$ is transcendental over $\mathbb Q$.
\end{proof}
\section{Calculation of the reduced trace}\label{calcoftr}
Let $F$ be a finite type surface and $\zeta$ a root of unity. Since $K_{\zeta}(F)$ is finitely generated as a module over its center $Z_\zeta(F)$, it has a reduced trace. The goal of this section is to find a formula for computing it.
By Theorem \ref{center} the set $\{ T(\alpha) \mid \alpha \in \mathscr S\}$ is a $\mathbb C$-basis of $K_\zeta(F)$. Therefore it is enough to calculate $\mathrm{tr}(T(\alpha))$ for each $\alpha \in \mathscr S$.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm.trace}
Let $F$ be a finite type surface, $\zeta$ be a root of 1, and
$$
\mathrm{tr}: \tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)\rightarrow \tilde Z_{\zeta}F)
$$
be the reduced trace. For $\alpha\in \mathscr S$ one has
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{tr}(T(\alpha))= \begin{cases}
T(\alpha) \quad &\text{if $T(\alpha)$ is central, i.e., } \alpha\in \mathscr S_\zeta \\
0 & \text{otherwise.}
\end{cases}
\end{equation}
\end{theorem}
First consider the case when $F_{g,p}$ has non-negative Euler characteristic.
The skein algebras of $F_{g,p}$ for $g=0$ and $p=0,1,2$ are commutative, so the result is trivial. For $F_{1,0}$ and $n$ not divisible by $4$ this is proved in \cite{AF1}. The remaining case of $K_{\zeta}(F_{1,0})$ and $n$ divisible by $4$ can be proved using similar methods. Hence we will assume that $F$ has positive Euler characteristic.
\no{There are only four connected oriented surfaces of nonnegative Euler characteristic. Of these only the closed surface of genus one has noncommutative skein algebras, in the other cases as the skein algebra is a one dimensional vector space over its center, the normalized trace is the identity map. In the case of the torus, when the order of $\zeta$ has remainder $2$ on division by $4$, the normalized trace was computed in \cite{AF1} and the answer is the same as in Theorem \ref{thm.trace}. The case when $n$ works similarly to this case. Hence we focus on the case when $n$ is divisible by $4$. Let $(a,b)_c\in K_\zeta(\Sigma_{1,0})$ where $(a,b)\in \mathbb{Z}\times \mathbb{Z}$ be the noncommutative cosine from \cite{FG}. We have $(a,b)_c=(-a,-b)_c$. Also,
\begin{equation} (a,b)_c*(e,f)_c=\zeta^{\left|\begin{matrix} a & b \\ e & f \end{matrix}\right|}(a+e,b+f)_c+ \zeta^{-\left|\begin{matrix} a & b \\ e & f \end{matrix}\right|}(a-e,b-f)_c. \end{equation}
Letting $m=n/4$, it is easy to see that $(a,b)_c$ is central in $K_{\zeta}(\Sigma_{1,0})$ if and only if $2m$ divides both $a$ and $b$. The trace of any $(a,b)_c$ where $a$ or $b$ is not divisible by $m$ is $0$ as its shifts the grading by $\mathbb{Z}_2$-homology. Hence we only need to understand the case or $(a,b)_c$
where $a$ and $b$ are divisible by $m$. This is a four dimensional vector space, over its center and the computation of trace is immediate and agrees with the formula in the theorem above.}
\subsection{Lemma on traces} \label{sec.41} Recall that $T_l(x)$ is defined in Section \ref{sec.Cheb}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{r.trace0}
Suppose $k_1\subset k_2$ are finite field extensions of a field $k_0$ and $x_1\in k_1, x_2 \in k_2$.\\
(a) If\ $\mathrm{TR}_{k_2/k_1}(x_2)=0$ then\ $\mathrm{TR}_{k_2/k_0} (x_1 x_2)=0$.\\
(b) Assume the minimal polynomial of $x_2$ over $k_1$ is $T_l(x) - u$, where $u\in k_1$ is transcendental over $\mathbb Q$, and $l\ge 2$. For $0< s < l$ we have
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{TR}_{k_2/k_0} (x_1 T_s(x_2))=0.
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
(a) A property of the trace is that for any $x\in k_2$ we have
$$\mathrm{TR}_{k_2/k_0}(x)= \mathrm{TR}_{k_1/k_0} \left( \mathrm{TR}_{k_2/k_1}(x)\right),$$
see eg \cite{Mc}. With $x= x_1 x_2$, we have
$$ \mathrm{TR}_{k_2/k_0}(x_1 x_2)= \mathrm{TR}_{k_1/k_0} \left( \mathrm{TR}_{k_2/k_1}(x_1 x_2)\right) = \mathrm{TR}_{k_1/k_0} \left(x_1 \mathrm{TR}_{k_2/k_1}(x_2)\right) =0.$$
(b) From (a) it is enough to show that $\mathrm{TR}_{k_2/k_1}(T_s(x_2))=0$.
Let $t$ be the smallest positive integer such that $l|ts$.
Note that $ t\ge 2$. Denote $m= ts/l$. Define $u_0=1$ and $u_i= T_i(u)$ for $i\ge 1$.
{\em Claim.} The minimal polynomial of $y:= T_s(x_2)$ over $k_1$ is $P=T_t(x) - u_m$.
Assume the claim for now. Since $t\ge 2$ and $T_t$ is either even or odd polynomial, the second-highest coefficient of $T_t-v$ is 0. By Proposition \ref{r.trace1}(a), we have $\mathrm{TR}_{k_2/k_1}(T_s(x_2))=0$. Thus (b) follows from the claim.
{\em Proof of the Claim.} First note the $P(y)=0$. In fact, we have
$$ T_t(y)= T_t(T_s(x_2))= T_{ts}(x_2)= T_{ml}(x_2)= T_m(T_l(x_2))= T_m(u)=u_m,$$
which shows $P(y)=0$.
Let us show that no polynomial $Q(x) $ of degree $< t$ can annihilate $y$. Since $\{T_i(x)\}$ forms a basis, we can write $Q(x)= \sum_{i=0}^ {d} c_i T_i(x)$ with $d<t$, $c_i\in k_1$, and $c_d=1$.
We have
\begin{equation}
0= Q(y) = \sum_{i=0}^ {d} c_i T_{is}(x_2).
\end{equation}
Since $T_l(x) -u$ is the minimal polynomial of $x_2$, we have
\begin{equation} \sum_{i=0}^ {d} c_i T_{is}(x) \equiv 0 \mod {(T_l(x) -u)}.
\end{equation}
Let
$R_i(x)$ be the remainder obtained upon dividing $T_{is}$ by $T_l(x) -u$, then we must have
\begin{equation} \label{eq.04a}
\sum_{i=0}^ {d} c_i R_i(x) = 0. \end{equation}
To finish the proof we need another lemma:
\begin{lemma} \label{r.rrr4} Suppose $ 0 \le r <l$. When $T_{ql+r}(x)$ is divided by $(T_l(x) -u)$, the remainder is $S_q(u) T_r (x) - S_{q-1}(u) T_{l-r}(x) $,
where $S_i(x)$ is the Chebyshev polynomial of the second kind defined recursively by
$$ S_0=1, S_1(x)=x, S_n(x) = x S_{n-1}(x) - S_{n-2}(x).$$
\begin{proof}[Proof of Lemma \ref{r.rrr4}] One can easily check that
\begin{equation}
S_i (u) = \sum _{0 \le j \le (i/2)} u_{i- 2j}=u_i + u_{i-2 } + \dots. \end{equation}
Using $T_m T_n = T_{m+n} + T_{|m-n|}$, we get
\begin{align*}
T_{ql+r}(x) &= T_r(x) T_{ql}(x) - T_{ql-r}(x) = T_r(x) T_{q}(T_l(x)) - T_{(q-1)l+l-r}(x) \\
&\equiv T_r(x) u_q - T_{(q-1)l+l-r}(x) \pmod {(T_l(x) -u)}\\
&\equiv T_r(x) u_q - T_{l-r}(x) u_{q-1} + T_{(q-2)l+r}(x) \pmod {(T_l(x) -u)} \\
&\equiv T_r(x) u_q - T_{l-r}(x) u_{q-1} + T_r(x) u_{q-2} - T_{(q-3)l+l-r}(x) \pmod {(T_l(x) -u)} \\
&\equiv T_r(x) (u_q + u_{q-2} + u_{q-4} + \dots) - T_{l-r}(x) (u_{q-1} + u_{q-3} + \dots) \pmod {(T_l(x) -u)} \\
&\equiv S_q(u) T_r (x) - S_{q-1}(u) T_{l-r}(x) \pmod{(T_l(x) -u)}.
\end{align*} \end{proof}
\no{
\begin{equation}
T_{ql+r}(x) \equiv S_q(u) T_r (x) - S_{q-1}(u) T_{l-r}(x) \pmod{(T_l(x) -u)}.
\end{equation}
}
\end{lemma}
Suppose $ds = ql + r$, with $0\le r <l$. By Lemma \ref{r.rrr4},
\begin{equation}
R_d = S_q(u) T_r(x) - S_{q-1}(u) T_{l-r}(x).
\end{equation}
Note that
(*) there is no index $j \in [0,d-1]$ such that $js$ has remainder $r$ when divided by $l$.
Consider two cases: (i) $r=l-r$ and (ii) $r\neq l-r$.
(i) $r=l-r$. Then $R_d= (S_q(u) - S_{q-1}(u)) T_r(x)$. From (*) we see that no index $j \neq d$ contributes to the term $T_r(x)$ in \eqref{eq.04a}. Hence $S_q(u) - S_{q-1}(u) =0$, contradicting the fact that $u$ is transcendental over $\mathbb Q$.
(ii) $r\neq l-r$. There is exactly one index $j\in [0,d-1]$ such that $js$ has remainder $l-r$ when divided by $l$, which is $j= (t-d)$. Suppose $ (t-d) s = q' l + (l-r),$
then
$$ R_{t-d} = S_{q'}(u) T_{l-r}(x) - S_{q'-1}(u) T_{r}(x).$$
By looking at the coefficients of $ T_r(x) $ and $ T_{l-r}(x) $ in \eqref{eq.04a}, we get
(with $c= c_{t-d}$)
\begin{align}
S_q(u) - c S_{q'-1}(u) &= 0 \\
-S_{q-1}(u) + c S_{q'}(u) &= 0.
\end{align}
Multiply the first by $S_{q'}(u)$, the second by $S_{q'-1}(u)$, and sum up the two, we get
$$ S_q(u) S_{q'}(u) - S_{q'-1}(u) S_{q-1}(u)=0
$$
contradicting the fact that $u$ is transcendental over $\mathbb Q$. \end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{thm.trace}}
\begin{proof} Note that if $z\in Z_\zeta(F)$ then $\mathrm{tr}(z)= z$, and more generally
\begin{equation}
\mathrm{tr}(zx)= z\mathrm{tr}(x) \quad\text{ if } \ z\in Z_\zeta(F). \label{eq.cen1}
\end{equation}
Hence we assume that $T(\alpha)\not \in Z_\zeta(F)$ and we will show $\mathrm{tr}(T(\alpha) )=0$.
Assume $\alpha = \prod_{i=1}^k (C_i)^{m_i}$, where $C_1, \dots, C_k$ are non-trivial loops, no two of which are isotopic, then $T(\alpha) = \prod_{i=1}^k T_{m_i}(C_i)$. If a component $C_i$ is peripheral then $C_i\in Z_\zeta(F)$, and \eqref{eq.cen1} shows that one reduces to the case when non of $C_i$ is peripheral.
From the product to sum formula \eqref{eq.Che1}, we have
\begin{align}
T_n (x) &= T_{2m}(x) T_{n-2m} - T_{|(n -2m)-2m|}(x) \quad \text{if} \ n \ge 2m \label{eq.red2}\\
T_n (x) &= T_{m}(x) T_{n-m} - T_{|(n -m) -m|}(x) \quad \text{if} \ n \ge m. \label{eq.red1}
\end{align}
Let $\mathcal C$ be the $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$-subalgebra of $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$ generated by $C_1,\dots, C_k$ and $\mathcal C'$ be the subalgebra generated by $C_1,\dots, C_{k-1}$. Consider several cases.
(a) Suppose $n\neq 0 \pmod 4$. In this case $T_m(C)\in Z_\zeta(F)$ for any loop $C$ on $F$. Using \eqref{eq.red1} and \eqref{eq.cen1} we reduce to the case $m_i < m$ for all $i$.
By Corollary \ref{r.deg} the minimal polynomial of $C_k$ over $\mathcal C'$ is $T_m -u$ for some $u\in \mathcal C'$ and $u$ is transcendental over $\mathbb Q$. Lemma \ref{r.trace0} with $k_0= \tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F), k_1=\mathcal C', k_2= \mathcal C, x_1= \prod_{i=1}^{k-1} T_{m_i}(C_i)$, and $x_2=C_k$ shows that $\mathrm{tr}(T(\alpha) )=0$.
(b) Suppose $n= 0 \pmod 4$.
Since $T_{2m}(C_i) \in Z_\zeta(F)$, using \eqref{eq.red2} and \eqref{eq.cen1} we reduce to the case $m_i < 2m$ for all $i$.
(i) Suppose $C_1, \dots, C_k$ are $\mathbb Z_2$-linearly independent in $H_1(\bar F,\mathbb Z_2)$. By Corollary \ref{r.deg} the minimal polynomial of $C_k$ over $\mathcal C'$ is $T_{2m} -u$ for some $u\in \mathcal C'$ transcendental over $\mathbb Q$. Lemma \ref{r.trace0}
with $k_0= \tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F), k_1=\mathcal C', k_2= \mathcal C, x_1= \prod_{i=1}^{k-1} T_{m_i}(C_i)$, and $x_2=C_k$
shows that $\mathrm{tr}(T(\alpha) )=0$.
(ii) Suppose $C_1, \dots, C_k$ are not $\mathbb Z_2$-linearly independent in $H_1(\bar F,\mathbb Z_2)$. There are indices $j_1,\dots, j_l$ such that $\sum_{i} C_{j_i} =0$ in $H_2(\bar F,\mathbb Z_2)$. This implies that $ \prod_{i} T_m(C_{j_i})\in Z_\zeta(F)$. If all $m_{j_i} \ge m$, then $2m > m_{j_i} \ge m$. Taking the product of $l$ Equations \eqref{eq.red1} with $n= m_{ji}$ then using \eqref{eq.cen1}, we reduce to the case when there is $i$ such that $m_{j_i} <m$.
Re-indexing, we assume that $j_i=k$. Thus $m_k < m$, and $C_k$, as an element of $H_1(\bar F,\mathbb Z_2)$, is in the $\mathbb Z_2$-span of $C_1, \dots, C_{k-1}$.
By Corollary \ref{r.deg} the minimal polynomial of $C_k$ over $\mathcal C'$ is $T_{m} -u$ for some $u\in \mathcal C'$ transcendental over $\mathbb Q$. Again Lemma \ref{r.trace0}
shows that $\mathrm{tr}(T(\alpha) )=0$.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Trace and $\deg_\zeta$}
The following is a consequence of Theorem \ref{thm.trace}.
\begin{prop}\label{zerores} If $x \in K_\zeta(F)^*$ and $\deg_\zeta(x) =0$,
then $\mathrm{tr}(x)\neq 0$. \end{prop}
\begin{proof}
This is proved for punctured surfaces and $n$ not divisible by $4$ in \cite{FK}, Lemma 3.8. Other cases are similar, with a stable lead term replacing the lead term in the argument.
\end{proof}
The following theorem extends the exhaustion criterion from \cite{FK}.
\begin{theorem}\label{exhaustion} Suppose $\mathcal{B}$ be a collection of nonzero elements in a $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$-subalgebra $A$ of $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$.
\begin{itemize}
\item[(i)] If $\deg_\zeta(\mathcal{B})= \deg_\zeta(A^*)$ then $\mathcal{B}$ spans ${\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)}$ over $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$.
\item[(ii)] The dimension of $A$ over $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$ is equal to $|\deg_\zeta(A)|$.
\end{itemize}
\end{theorem}
\no{\blue{We don't need this theorem in the sequence. True, but it is nice on its own (:}}
\proof (i)
Since $\deg_\zeta(A^*)$ is a group, for every $x\in A^*$ there exists $b \in \mathcal{B}$ such that $\deg_\zeta(xb) =\deg_\zeta(x) + \deg_\zeta(b)=0$. By Proposition \ref{zerores}, $\mathrm{tr}(xb)\neq 0$. Therefore the set $\mathcal{B}$ exhausts the bilinear form given by the trace on $A\otimes_\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F) A$. Consequently $\mathcal{B}$ spans $A$.
(ii) Choose a subset $\mathcal{B}$ of $A^*$ such that $\deg_\zeta|_{\mathcal{B}}:\mathcal{B}\rightarrow \deg_\zeta(A^*)$ is bijective. By (i), $\mathcal{B}$ spans $A$. By Proposition \ref{r.dimlow}(a), $\mathcal{B}$ is linearly independent over $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$. Hence $\mathcal B$ is a basis. \qed
\section{Pants subalgebra decomposition}\label{pantedec}
In this section we give a splitting of the localized skein algebra as a module over its center.
Throughout, $F=F_{g,p}$ is a finite type surface with negative Euler characteristic, with or without punctures, $\zeta$ is a root of unity, and $m= \mathrm{ord}(\zeta^4)$.
\subsection{The Splitting}
Recall that a pants decomposition of $F$ is a collection of curves $\mathcal P=\{ C_1,\dots, C_{3g-3+p}\}$ such that each component of the complement of $\mathcal P$ in $F$ is a planar surfaces of Euler characteristic $-1$.
Given a pants decomposition $\mathcal P$ of $F$, let $\cC_\zeta(\mathcal P)$ be the $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$-subalgebra of $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$ generated by the curves in $\mathcal P$. By Proposition \ref{r.com} and Theorem \ref{thm.dim}
$$ \dim_{\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)} \cC_\zeta(\mathcal P)= \sqrt{\dim_\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F) \tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)}.
\no{=\begin{cases}
m^{3g-3+p} \quad &\text{if } \ \mathrm{ord}(\zeta) \neq 0 \pmod 4\\
2^g m^{3g-3+p} \quad &\text{if } \ \mathrm{ord}(\zeta)= 0 \pmod 4,
\end{cases}}$$
Hence $\cC_\zeta(\mathcal P)$ is a maximal commutative subalgebra of the division algebra $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$.
In \cite{FK} the first two authors constructed a splitting of $\tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$, when $F$ has at least one puncture and $\mathrm{ord}(\zeta) \neq 0 \pmod 4$.
Here we prove that this decomposition works for all surfaces and all roots of unity.
\begin{theorem} \label{r.decomp}
Let $F$ be a finite type surface of negative Euler characteristic.
There exist two pants decompositions $\mathcal P$ and ${\mathcal Q}$ of $F$ such that for any root of unity $\zeta$ the $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$-linear map
\begin{equation}
\psi:\cC_\zeta(\mathcal P) \otimes _{\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)} \cC_\zeta({\mathcal Q}) \to \tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F), \quad \psi(x\otimes y) \to xy,
\label{eq.psi}
\end{equation}
is a $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$-linear isomorphism of vector spaces.
\end{theorem}
\def N'(\cD){ N'(\mathcal D)}
\def\mathring N(\cD){\mathring N(\mathcal D)}
\def\BC[\partial]{\mathbb C[\partial]}
\def\BC[\mathcal P]{\mathbb C[\mathcal P]}
\def\BC[\cQ]{\mathbb C[{\mathcal Q}]}
\subsection{Pants decompositions} Let $\BC[\partial]$ be the $\mathbb C$-subalgebra of $K_\zeta(F)$ generated by peripheral loops. For a pants decomposition $\mathcal P$ let $\mathbb C[\mathcal P]$ be the $\mathbb C$-subalgebra of $K_\zeta(F)$ generated by loops in $\mathcal P$. For a set $U\subset \mathbb Z^r$ let ${\overline U}$ be the $\mathbb Z$-span of $U$.
\begin{lemma} \label{r.p1} Suppose $F_{g,p}$ is a finite type surface with negative Euler characteristic. There exist a coordinate datum for $F_{g,p}$ and two pants
decompositions $\mathcal P$ and ${\mathcal Q}$ such that
\begin{equation} \overline{ \cA} = \overline{\deg(\BC[\partial]^*)} + \overline{ \deg(\mathbb C[\mathcal P]^*)} + \overline{\deg (\mathbb C[{\mathcal Q}]^*}).
\label{eq.full6}
\end{equation}
It is understood that if $p=0$ then $\BC[\partial]$ is the 0 vector space.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
To prove the lemma we use the following result that follows from the computation of the determinants in the proof of Theorem 4.5 in \cite[Section 4]{FK}:
\begin{lemma}\label{r.full1}
Suppose $F_{g,p}$ has negative Euler characteristic and $p>0$. There exist a coordinate datum $(a_i)_{i=1}^{6g-6+3p}$ and two pants decompositions $\mathcal P, {\mathcal Q}$ such that the $\mathbb Z$-span of $\nu(\mathcal P), \nu({\mathcal Q})$ and ${\cA}^\partial$
has index $2^{4g-5+2p}$ in $\mathbb Z^{6g-6+3p}$. In other words, if $C_1, \dots, C_{6g-6+3p}$ it the set of curves consisting of components of $\mathcal P, {\mathcal Q}$ and the $p$ peripheral loops, then
\begin{equation}
\det\left[ I(a_i, C_j)_{i,j=1}^{6g-6+3p} \right] = 2^{4g-5+2p}.
\label{eq.index}\qed
\end{equation}
\end{lemma}
\no{\blue{We need to add a proof for the case when $p>1$. And do not use color in Figure as it is very costly}.}
Pants decompositions for a surface of genus $3$ and $1$ puncture are shown in Figure \ref{PandQ}. Additional curves needed for more than one puncture are shown in Figure \ref{punct} for the case of four punctures. For a detailed description of those curves see \cite{FK}.
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}\scalebox{0.5}{\includegraphics{Pnew.pdf}}\hspace{0.1in}\scalebox{0.5}{\includegraphics{Qnew.pdf}}\end{center}
\caption{$P$ and $Q$ for a surface of genus $3$ and $1$ puncture}\label{PandQ}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\begin{center}\scalebox{0.5}{\includegraphics{Ppunctnew.pdf}}\hspace{0.1in}\scalebox{0.5}{\includegraphics{Qpunctnew.pdf}}\end{center}
\caption{Additional curves in families $P$ and $Q$ for $4$ punctures}\label{punct}
\end{figure}
By Lemma \ref{r.index1}, the index of $\overline{ \cA}$ in $\mathbb Z^{6g-6+3p}$ is also $2^{4g-5+2p}$. Hence $\overline{ \cA}$ is equal to the $\mathbb Z$-span of $\nu(\mathcal P), \nu({\mathcal Q})$ and ${\cA}^\partial$.\\
To prove Lemma \ref{r.p1} consider cases when $p>0$ and $p=0$.
(a) Suppose $p>0$. Use the ideal triangulation and the two pants decompositions of Lemma \ref{r.full1}.
When $p>0$, by the definition in Equation \eqref{eq.defdeg1}, one has $\deg(\alpha) =\nu(\alpha)$ for all $\alpha\in \mathscr S$. Hence
$$ \overline {\deg(\BC[\partial]^*)} = \overline{ \cA}, \ \overline { \deg(\mathbb C[\mathcal P]^*)}= \overline { \nu(\mathcal P)} , \ \overline {\deg(\mathbb C[{\mathcal Q}]^*)}= \overline { \nu({\mathcal Q}) }.$$
Thus the right hand side of \eqref{eq.full6} is the $\mathbb Z$-span of ${\cA}^\partial, \nu(\mathcal P), \nu({\mathcal Q})$, which by Lemma \ref{r.full1} is equal to $\overline{ \cA}$.
(b) Suppose $p=0$. Let $\Sigma$ be a compact planar surface with $g+1$ boundary components, then $\mathring{\Sigma}= \Sigma\setminus \partial \Sigma$ is a finite type surface of type $F_{0,g}$. Let $(a_i)_{i=1}^{3g-3}$, ${\mathcal Q}_1$, ${\mathcal Q}_2$ be respectively the ideal triangulation, the pants decompositions $\mathcal P$ and ${\mathcal Q}$ of Lemma \ref{r.full1} for the surface $\mathring{\Sigma}$. Let $\mathcal D\subset \mathring{\Sigma}$ be the trivalent graph dual to the system $(a_i)_{i=1}^{3g-3}$. We can assume that the topological closure $\bar a_i$ of $a_i$ in $\Sigma$ is a proper embedding of $[0,1]$ into $\Sigma$ and that the $6g-6$ endpoints of all $3g-3$ arcs $\bar a_i$ are distinct. Take another copy $\Sigma'$ of $\Sigma$ and assume that $\varphi: \Sigma \to \Sigma'$ is a diffeomorphism. Let $F$ be the result of gluing $\Sigma$ with $\Sigma'$ along the boundary by the identification $x \equiv \varphi(x)$ for every $x\in \partial \Sigma$. Let $\mathcal P= (P_1,\dots, P_{3g-3})$ where $P_i= \bar a_i \cup \varphi(\bar a_i)$ and ${\mathcal Q}=(Q_1,\dots, Q_{3g-3})$ be the collection of components of ${\mathcal Q}_1$, $\partial \Sigma$, and $\varphi({\mathcal Q}_2)$, in some order. We claim that the coordinate datum $(\mathcal P, \mathcal D)$ and the two pants decompositions $\mathcal P, {\mathcal Q}$ satisfy \eqref{eq.full6}. Note that we can take $\Sigma=N(\mathcal D)$, and $\Omega = \partial \Sigma$.
The surface $\mathring{\Sigma}$ has genus $g'=0$ and puncture number $p'=g+1$.
It follows from \eqref{eq.index} that
\begin{equation} \label{eq.p9}
\det\left[ I(P_i, Q_j)_{i,j=1}^{3g-3} \right] = 2^{4g' -5 + 2p'}= 2^{2g-3}.
\end{equation}
Since $F$ is closed, $\deg(\alpha)= \eta(\alpha)$ for $\alpha\in \mathscr S$ by Definition \eqref{eq.defdeg2}. Hence
\begin{equation}
\overline {\deg(\mathbb C[\mathcal P]^*)} = \overline{ \eta(\mathcal P )}, \quad \overline {\deg(\mathbb C[{\mathcal Q}]^*)} = \overline{ \eta({\mathcal Q}) }.
\end{equation}
Thus, to prove the lemma we need to show that
\begin{equation} \overline{ \eta(\mathcal P )} + \overline{ \eta({\mathcal Q} )}= \overline{ \cA}.
\label{eq.full4}
\end{equation}
Since the left hand side is a subgroup of the right hand side, we only need to show that they have the same index in $\mathbb Z^{6g-6}$.
Let $\vec 0\in \mathbb Z^{3g-3}$ be the 0 vector and ${\boldsymbol \delta}_i \in \mathbb Z^{3g-3}$ is the vector whose entries are all 0 except for the $i$-th one which is 1. By Proposition \ref{r.aden}(e), we have $\eta(P_i)= (\vec 0, -{\boldsymbol \delta}_i)$. Hence $
\overline{ \eta(\mathcal P )} = \{\vec 0\} \oplus \mathbb Z^{3g-3}
$.
It follows that index of $ \overline{ \eta({\mathcal Q} )} + \overline{ \eta(\mathcal P )}$ in $\mathbb Z^{6g-6}$ is equal to the index of $\left[\overline{ \eta({\mathcal Q} )}\right]_1$ in $\mathbb Z^{3g-3}$, where $\left[\overline{ \eta({\mathcal Q} )}\right]_1 $ is the $\mathbb Z$-span of $(3g-3)$-tuples which are the first $3g-3$ coordinates of $\eta(Q_i)$, $i=1, \dots, 3g-3$.
Since each $Q_i$ has 0 intersection with $\Omega$,
by Proposition \ref{r.aden} one has $\eta(Q_i)= \nu(Q_i)$. The first $3g-3$ coordinates of $\nu(Q_i)$ are given by $I(Q_i, P_j) _{j=1}^{3g-3}$. Hence the index of
$\left[\overline{ \eta({\mathcal Q} )}\right]_1$ is $\mathbb Z^{3g-3}$ in $\det\left[ I(P_i, Q_j)_{i,j=1}^{3g-3} \right]
$, which is equal to $2^{2g-3}$ by \eqref{eq.p9}.
Thus the index of $ \overline{ \eta(\mathcal P )} + \overline{ \eta({\mathcal Q} )}$ in $\mathbb Z^{6g-6}$ is $2^{2g-3}$, equal to the index of $\overline{ \cA}$ in $\mathbb Z^{6g-6}$, by Lemma \ref{r.index2}. Hence we have \eqref{eq.full4}, which proves the lemma.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Proof of Theorem \ref{r.decomp}} Let $X$ be the image of $\psi$ defined in \eqref{eq.psi} and $X^*= X \setminus \{0\}$. Choose the coordinate datum and the pants decompositions $\mathcal P$, ${\mathcal Q}$ as in Lemma \ref{r.p1}. Let
$$ \mathcal B: = \deg(\BC[\partial]^*) + \deg(\mathbb C[\mathcal P]^*) + \deg (\mathbb C[{\mathcal Q}]^*).$$
Note that $\mathcal B$ is a submonoid of $\overline{ \cA}$, and Lemma \ref{r.p1} implies that $\overline {\mathcal B}= \overline{ \cA}$. By Lemma \ref{r.surj} the natural map $\phi: \mathcal B \to \overline {\mathcal B}/\overline {\Az} = \overline{ \cA} /\overline {\Az}=\mathfrak{R}_\zeta$ is surjective.
Let $Y= \{ y_1 y_2 y_3 \mid y_1 \in \BC[\partial]^*, y_2 \in \BC[\mathcal P]^*, y_3 \in \BC[\cQ]^*\}$, then
$ \deg(Y)=\mathcal B.$
Since $Y \subset X$, we have the following commutative diagram
$$
\begin{tikzcd}
Y \arrow[twoheadrightarrow,"\deg"]{r} \arrow[hookrightarrow] {d}& \mathcal B \arrow[twoheadrightarrow, "\phi"]{d} \\
X \arrow[rightarrow,"\deg_\zeta"]{r} & \mathfrak{R}_\zeta
\end{tikzcd}
$$
Since $\deg$ and $\phi$ are surjective, $\deg_\zeta$ is also surjective. This means $\deg_\zeta(X)= \mathfrak{R}_\zeta$. By Corollary \ref{r.dim=} we have $X= \tilde{K}_{\zeta}(F)$. Thus $\psi$ is surjective. Since the dimension over $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$ of the domain and the codomain of $\psi$ are the same, $\psi$ is a $\tilde{Z}_{\zeta}(F)$-linear isomorphism.\qed
\no{\subsection{General division algebra}
We also have a more general splitting conjecture
\begin{conjecture} Let $D$ be a division algebra which is finite dimensional over its center $Z$. Suppose $C_1 \cap C_2=Z$, where $C_1$ and $C_2$ are maximal commutative algebras of $D$, then the map given by sending $c_1\otimes c_2$ to $c_1c_2$
\begin{equation} C_1\otimes_{Z}C_2\rightarrow D \end{equation}
is an isomorphism of $Z$-modules. \end{conjecture}
This is equivalent to the statement that if $C_1$ and $C_2$ are maximal commutative subalgebras of $D$ that intersect in $Z$ then $C_1C_2$ is a subalgebra of $D$.
\blue{Do we need this? If this true, it is probably known. If not, it is very difficult. It is not likely that we can make a good conjecture in the old theory of division algebras.}}
\no{ |
\section{Introduction}
The \emph{conformal Einstein field equations} are a conformal representation of
the Einstein field equations which permit us to study the global properties of the
solutions to equations of General Relativity by means of Penrose's procedure of
conformal compactification --- see e.g. \cite{Fri15,CFEBook} for an entry point
to the literature on the subject. Crucially, a solution to the conformal
Einstein field equations implies a solution to the Einstein field equations away
from the conformal boundary.
\medskip
A key step in the analysis involving the conformal Einstein field equations is
the so-called \emph{procedure of hyperbolic reduction}, in which a subset of
the field equations is cast in the form of a hyperbolic evolution system (the
\emph{evolution system}) for which known techniques of the theory of partial
differential equations allow us to establish well-posedness. An important
ingredient in the hyperbolic reduction is the choice of a gauge, which in the
case of the conformal Einstein field equations involves not only fixing
coordinates (the \emph{coordinate gauge}) but also the representative of the
conformal class of the spacetime metric (the so-called \emph{unphysical
metric}) to be considered (the \emph{conformal gauge}). Naturally, gauge
choices should bring to the fore the physical and geometric features of the
setting under consideration. In order to make contact with the Einstein field
equations, the procedure of hyperbolic reduction has to be supplemented by an
argument concerning the \emph{propagation of the constraints}, by means of
which one identifies the conditions under which one can guarantee that a
solution to the evolution system implies a solution to the full system of
conformal equations, independently of the gauge choice. The propagation of the
constraints involves the construction of a \emph{subsidiary evolution system}
describing the evolution of the conformal field equations and of the conditions
representing the gauge. The construction of the subsidiary system requires
lengthy manipulations of the equations which are underpinned by integrability
conditions inherent to the field equations.
\medskip
Most of the results concerning the conformal Einstein field equations available
in the literature make use of hyperbolic reductions leading to first order
\emph{symmetric hyperbolic evolution systems}. This approach works best for the
frame and spinorial versions of the conformal equations. Arguably, the simplest
variant of the conformal Einstein field equations is given by the so-called
\emph{metric conformal Einstein field equations} in which the field equations are
presented in tensorial form and the unphysical metric is determined by means of
an \emph{unphysical Einstein field equation} relating the Ricci tensor of the
unphysical metric to the various geometric fields entering in the conformal
equations --- these can be thought of as corresponding to some fictitious
unphysical matter. Remarkably, until recently, there was no suitable hyperbolic
reduction procedure available for this version of the conformal field
equations. In \cite{Pae15} Paetz has obtained a satisfactory hyperbolic
procedure for the metric vacuum Einstein field equations which is based on the
construction of second order wave equations. To round up his analysis, Paetz
then proceeds to construct a system of subsidiary wave equations for tensorial
fields encoding the conformal Einstein field equations (the so-called
\emph{geometric zero-quantities}) showing, in this way, the propagation of the
constraints. The motivation behind Paetz's approach is that the use of second
order hyperbolic equations gives access to a different part of the theory of
partial differential equations which complements the results available for
first order symmetric hyperbolic systems --- see e.g.
\cite{ChrPae13b,CarVal18b}. Paetz's construction of an evolution system
consisting of wave equations has been adapted to the case of the spinorial
conformal Einstein field equations in \cite{GasVal15}. In addition to its
interest in analytic considerations, the construction of wave equations for the
metric conformal Einstein field equations is also of relevance in numerical
studies, as the gauge fixing procedure and the particular form of the equations
is more amenable to implementation in current mainstream numerical codes than
other formulations of the conformal equations.
\medskip
The purpose of the present article is twofold: first, it generalises Paetz's
construction of a system of wave equations for the conformal Einstein field
equations to the case of matter models whose energy-momentum tensor has a
vanishing trace --- i.e. so-called \emph{tracefree matter}. The case of
tracefree matter is of particular interest since the equation of conservation
satisfied by the energy-momentum is conformally invariant; moreover, the
associated equations of motion for the matter fields can, usually, be shown to
possess good conformal properties --- see \cite{CFEBook}, Chapter 9. Second, it
clarifies the inner structure of Paetz's original construction by identifying
the integrability conditions underlying the mechanism of the propagation of the
constraints. The motivation behind this analysis is to extend the recent
analysis of the construction of vacuum anti-de Sitter-like spacetimes in
\cite{CarVal18b} to the case of tracefree matter. However, we believe that the
analysis we present has an interest on its own right as it brings to the fore
the subtle structure of the metric conformal Einstein field equations.
\medskip
The main results of this article can be summarised as follows:
\begin{main}
The geometric fields in the metric conformal Einstein field equations
coupled to a tracefree matter field satisfy a system of wave
equations which is regular up to and beyond the conformal boundary of
a spacetime admitting a conformal extension. Moreover, the associated
geometric zero-quantities satisfy a (subsidiary) system of homogeneous wave
equations independently of the matter model. The subsidiary system is
also regular on the conformal boundary.
\end{main}
The precise statements concerning the above main result are contents
of Lemmas \ref{Lemma:EvolutionSystem} and \ref{Lemma:SubsidiarySystem}.
\begin{remark}
{\em A remarkable property of our analysis is that it renders suitable
evolution equations for the conformal fields and the zero-quantities without
having to make any assumptions on the matter model except that it satisfies
\emph{good} evolution equations in the conformally rescaled
spacetime. Thus, our discussion can be regarded as a
\emph{once-for-all} analysis of the evolution equations associated
to the geometric part of the metric conformal field equations valid for a
wide class of coordinate gauges prescribed in terms of the
coordinate gauge source function appearing in the \emph{generalised
wave coordinate condition}.}
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
{\em The homogeneity of the subsidiary system on the geometric
zero-quantities is the key structural property required to ensure
the propagation of the constraints by exploiting the uniqueness of
solutions to a system of wave equations.}
\end{remark}
The approach followed to obtain our main result is based on the identification
of a family of integrability conditions associated to the metric conformal
Einstein field equations. To the best of our knowledge, these integrability
conditions have not appeared elsewhere in the literature. In our opinion this
approach brings better to the fore the structural properties of the conformal
Einstein field equations and, in particular, it makes the construction of the
subsidiary evolution system more transparent than the \emph{brute force}
approach adopted in \cite{Pae15}. A similar strategy is also adopted to study
the propagation of the gauge. In particular, by setting the matter fields to
zero, our analysis provides an alternative version of the main results of
\cite{Pae15} --- the initial conditions on the gauge required in the present
analysis differ from those in \cite{Pae15} though. Despite offering a more
sleek approach to the construction of an evolution system for the conformal
Einstein field equations, our analysis still requires heavy computations which
are best carried out in a computer algebra system. In the present case we have
made systematic use of the suite {\tt xAct} for the manipulation of tensorial
expressions in {\tt Mathematica} --- see \cite{xAct}.
\medskip
We supplement our general analysis of the metric conformal Einstein
field equations with an analysis of the evolution and subsidiary
evolution equations of some of the tracefree matter models more
commonly used in the literature: the Maxwell field, the Yang-Mills
field and the conformally invariant scalar field. For each of these
fields we construct suitably second order wave equations for the
matter fields and the associated \emph{matter zero-quantities}. For
the case of the Yang-Mills field, our analysis makes no assumptions on
the gauge group.
\medskip
As an application of our analysis, in the final section of this article
we present stability results for the de Sitter spacetime for
perturbations which include the Maxwell, Yang-Mills or conformally
invariant scalar field. Proofs of this result for the Maxwell and
Yang-Mills fields have been obtained in \cite{Fri91} using the spinorial
version of the conformal equations and a first order hyperbolic
reduction. The stability result for the conformally invariant scalar
field is, to the best of our knowledge, new.
\subsection*{Overview of the article}
In Section \ref{Section:MatterCFE} we briefly summarise the key properties of
the metric conformal Einstein field equations coupled to tracefree matter and
their relation to the Einstein field equations. Section \ref{Section:
WEGeomFields} provides the derivation of the geometric wave equations for the
geometric fields appearing in the conformal Einstein field equations. Section
\ref{Section: ZQandIC} introduces the key notion of geometric zero-quantity
and discusses the identities and integrability conditions associated to objects
of this type. Section \ref{Section:SubsidiarySystem} provides the construction
of the subsidiary evolution system for the geometric zero-quantities used in
the argument of the propagation of the constraints. This is, in principle, the
most calculationally intensive part of our analysis. However, using the
integrability conditions of Section \ref{Section: ZQandIC} we provide a
streamlined presentation thereof. In Section \ref{Section:GaugeConsiderations}
we discuss the gauge freedom inherent in the geometric evolution systems
obtained in Sections \ref{Section: WEGeomFields} and
\ref{Section:SubsidiarySystem} and how this freedom can be used to complete the
hyperbolic reduction of the equations. Section \ref{Section:PropOfGauge}
establishes the consistency of the gauge introduced in the previous section,
independently of the particular tracefree matter model. Section
\ref{Section:MatterFields} provides a case-by-case analysis of three
prototypical tracefree matter models --- the conformally invariant scalar field
(Subsection \ref{Subsection:ScalarField}), the Maxwell field (Subsection
\ref{Subsection:MaxwellField}) and the Yang-Mills field (Subsection
\ref{Subsection:YangMillsField}). The discussion for each of these matter
models includes the construction of suitable wave evolution equations and
subsidiary evolution equations. Finally, Section \ref{Section:Applications}
provides an application of the analysis developed in this article to the global
existence and stability of de Sitter-like spacetimes.
\subsection*{Conventions}
In what follows, $(\tilde{\mathcal{M}},\tilde{g}_{ab})$ will denote a spacetime
satisfying the Einstein equations with matter --- later we will make the
further assumption that the energy-momentum tensor is tracefree. The signature
of the spacetime metric is $(-,+,+,+)$. The lowercase Latin letters $a,\, b,\,
c, \ldots$ are used as abstract spacetime indices, while Greek letters $\mu, \,
\nu, \, \lambda,\ldots$ will be used as spacetime coordinate indices. Our
conventions for the curvature are
\[
\nabla_c \nabla_d u^a -\nabla_d \nabla_c u^a = R^a{}_{bcd} u^b.
\]
\section{The metric conformal Einstein field equations with tracefree matter}
\label{Section:MatterCFE}
The purpose of this section is to provide a brief overview of the basic
properties of the conformal Einstein field equations with tracefree matter. A
more extended discussion of the properties of these equations, as well as their
derivation, can be found in Chapter 8 of \cite{CFEBook}.
\subsection{Basic relations}
In what follows let $(\tilde{\mathcal{M}},\tilde{g}_{ab})$ denote a spacetime
satisfying the \emph{Einstein field equations with matter}
\begin{equation}
\tilde{R}_{ab} -\tfrac{1}{2}\tilde{R}\tilde{g}_{ab} + \lambda
\tilde{g}_{ab}= \tilde{T}_{ab},
\label{EFEMatter}
\end{equation}
where $\tilde{R}_{ab}$ and $\tilde{R}$ denote, respectively, the Ricci
tensor and Ricci scalar of the metric $\tilde{g}_{ab}$, $\lambda$ is
the Cosmological constant and $\tilde{T}_{ab}$ is the energy-momentum
tensor. As a consequence of the contracted Bianchi identity one
obtains the conservation law
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\nabla}^a \tilde{T}_{ab}=0.
\label{DivergencePhysicalEnergyMomentum}
\end{equation}
Here $\tilde{\nabla}_a$ denotes the Levi-Civita covariant derivative of the
metric $\tilde{g}_{ab}$. Now, let $(\mathcal{M},g_{ab})$ denote a spacetime
related to $(\tilde{\mathcal{M}},\tilde{g}_{ab})$ via a conformal embedding
\[
\tilde{\mathcal{M}}\stackrel{\varphi}{\hookrightarrow}\mathcal{M},
\qquad \tilde{g}_{ab} \stackrel{\varphi}{\mapsto} g_{ab}\equiv
\Xi^2 \big( \varphi^{-1})^*\tilde{g}_{ab}, \qquad
\Xi|_{\varphi(\tilde{\mathcal{M}})}>0,
\]
where is $\Xi$ a smooth scalar field --- the so-called \emph{conformal factor}.
With a slight abuse of notation we write
\begin{equation}
g_{ab} = \Xi^2 \tilde{g}_{ab}.
\label{Definition:ConformalRescaling}
\end{equation}
\begin{remark}
{\em Following the standard usage, we refer to
$(\tilde{\mathcal{M}},\tilde{g}_{ab})$ as the \emph{physical
spacetime} while $(\mathcal{M},g_{ab})$ will be called the
\emph{unphysical spacetime}. }
\end{remark}
\subsubsection{The unphysical energy-momentum tensor}
Since equation
\eqref{Definition:ConformalRescaling} does not determine the way
$\tilde{T}_{ab}$ transforms, it will be convenient to define the
\emph{unphysical energy-momentum tensor} as
\[
T_{ab}\equiv \Xi^{-2} \tilde{T}_{ab}.
\]
Using the transformation rules between the Levi-Civita covariant derivatives of
conformally related metrics, equation \eqref{DivergencePhysicalEnergyMomentum}
takes the form
\[
\nabla^a T_{ab} = \Xi^{-1} T \nabla_b \Xi,
\]
with $\nabla_a$ the Levi-Civita covariant derivative of $g_{ab}$
and $T\equiv g^{ab} T_{ab}$. It then follows that
\[
\nabla^a T_{ab}=0 \qquad \mbox{ if and only if} \qquad T=0.
\]
\begin{assumption}
\label{Assumption:AssumptionDivergenceUnphysicalEnergyMomentum}
{\em In the remainder of this article we restrict our attention to matter
models for which $T=0$, so that the corresponding unphysical energy-momentum
tensor $T_{ab}$ is divergence-free, that is,
\begin{equation}
\nabla^a T_{ab}=0.
\label{DivergenceUnphysicalEnergyMomentum}
\end{equation}}
\end{assumption}
\subsection{Basic properties of the conformal Einstein field
equations}
\label{Section:BasicPropertiesCFE}
The \emph{metric tracefree conformal Einstein field equations} have been first
discussed in \cite{Fri91}. In terms of the notation and conventions used in
this article they are given by
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\nabla_{a}\nabla_{b}\Xi = -\Xi
L_{ab}+sg_{ab}+\tfrac{1}{2}\Xi^{3}T_{ab}, \label{TraceCFE1}
\\
&&\nabla_{a}s=-L_{ab}\nabla^{b}\Xi+\tfrac{1}{2}\Xi^{2}\nabla^{b}\Xi
T_{ab}, \label{TraceCFE2}
\\
&&\nabla_{a}L_{bc}-\nabla_{b}L_{ac}=\nabla_{e}\Xi
d^{e}{}_{cab}+\Xi T_{abc}, \label{TraceCFE3}
\\
&&\nabla_{e}d^{e}{}_{abc}=T_{bca}, \label{TraceCFE4}
\\
&&6\Xi s-3\nabla_{c}\Xi\nabla^{c}\Xi=\lambda, \label{TraceCFE5}\\
&& R^c{}_{dab} = \Xi d^c{}_{dab} + 2( \delta^c{}_{[a}L_{b]d} -
g_{d[a}L_{b]}{}^c). \label{TraceCFE6}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
A detailed derivation of these equations can be found in \cite{CFEBook}. In
the above expressions $L_{ab}$, $s$, $d^a{}_{bcd}$ and $T_{abc}$ denote,
respectively, the Schouten tensor, the Friedrich scalar, the rescaled Weyl
tensor and the rescaled Cotton tensor. These objects are defined as
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& L_{ab}\equiv\tfrac{1}{2}R_{ab}-\tfrac{1}{12}g_{ab}R, \label{SchoutenTensor} \\
&& s\equiv \tfrac{1}{4}\nabla^{c}\nabla_{c}\Xi+\tfrac{1}{24}R\Xi, \label{FriedrichScalarDefinition}
\\
&& d^a{}_{bcd} \equiv \Xi^{-1} C^a{}_{bcd},\\
&& T_{abc} \equiv \Xi \nabla_{[a}T_{b]c} +3 \nabla_{[a} \Xi
T_{b]c} - g_{c[a}T_{b]e} \nabla^e\Xi, \label{RescaledCottonTensor}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
where $C^a{}_{bcd}$ is the conformally invariant Weyl tensor. Observe that
$T_{abc}$ has the following symmetries:
\begin{equation}
T_{abc} = T_{[ab]c}, \quad T_{[abc]} = 0.
\label{CottonTensorProperties}
\end{equation}
Relevant for the subsequent discussion is the well-known fact that the
rescaled Weyl tensor has two associated Hodge dual tensors, namely
\[
\,^*d_{abcd} \equiv \tfrac{1}{2} \epsilon_{ab}{}^{ef} d_{efcd}, \quad
d^*_{abcd} \equiv \tfrac{1}{2} \epsilon_{cd}{}^{ef} d_{abef},
\]
where $\epsilon_{abcd}$ is the 4-volume form of the metric $g_{ab}$. One can
check that $\,^*d_{abcd} = d^*_{abcd}$. Similarly, we also define the Hodge
dual of $T_{abc}$ as
\begin{equation}
\,^*T_{abc} \equiv \tfrac{1}{2} \epsilon_{ab}{}^{de} T_{dec}.
\label{DefinitionCottonDual}
\end{equation}
Moreover, if \Cref{Assumption:AssumptionDivergenceUnphysicalEnergyMomentum} and
equation \eqref{TraceCFE1} are taken into account, one obtains some additional
relations, namely
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \nabla_c T_{ab}{}^c = 0, \\
&& \nabla_c \,^*T_{ab}{}^c = 0, \\
&& \nabla_c T_a{}^c{}_b = \nabla_c T_{(a}{}^c{}_{b)}.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
\begin{remark}
{\em Equations \eqref{TraceCFE1}-\eqref{TraceCFE4} will be regarded as
a set of differential conditions for the fields $\Xi$, $s$, $L_{ab}$
and $d^a{}_{bcd}$. Equation \eqref{TraceCFE5} can be shown to play the
role of a constraint which only needs to be verified at a single point
--- see e.g. \cite{CFEBook}, Lemma 8.1. Equation \eqref{TraceCFE6},
providing the link between the conformal fields $d^c{}_{dab}$,
$L_{ab}$ and the irreducible decomposition of the Riemann tensor,
allows us to deduce a differential condition for the components of the
unphysical metric $g_{ab}$ --- see Section
\ref{Section:GeneralisedWaveCoordinates}}.
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
{\em By a solution to the metric tracefree conformal Einstein field equations
it will be understood a collection of fields
$(g_{ab},\Xi,s,L_{ab},d^a{}_{bcd},T_{ab})$ satisfying equations
\eqref{DivergenceUnphysicalEnergyMomentum} and
\eqref{TraceCFE1}-\eqref{TraceCFE6}.}
\end{remark}
\medskip
The relation between the metric tracefree conformal Einstein field equations
and the Einstein field equations \eqref{EFEMatter} is given in the following
proposition --- see \cite{CFEBook}, Proposition 8.1.
\begin{proposition}
Let $(g_{ab},\Xi,s,L_{ab},d^a{}_{bcd},T_{ab})$ denote a solution to the
metric tracefree conformal Einstein field equations such that $\Xi\neq 0$ on an open
set $\mathcal{U}\subset \mathcal{M}$. Then the metric $\tilde{g}_{ab} =\Xi^{-2}
g_{ab}$ is a solution to the Einstein field equations \eqref{EFEMatter} with
energy momentum tensor given by $\tilde{T}_{ab} = \Xi^2 T_{ab}$ on
$\mathcal{U}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
The proof given in \cite{CFEBook} omits equation \eqref{TraceCFE6} and
implicitly assumes that the field $L_{ab}$ can be identified with the
Schouten tensor of the metric $g_{ab}$. With equation \eqref{TraceCFE6}
at hand, one is allowed to make this identification. From here
onwards one can apply the argument in Proposition 8.1 in \cite{CFEBook}.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{An alternative equation for $d^a{}_{bcd}$}
For our purposes, it will be convenient to consider an alternative version of
the conformal field equation for the rescaled Weyl tensor. This can be obtained
as follows: multiplying \eqref{TraceCFE4} by $\epsilon_{fg}{}^{bc}$ and
exploiting the identity $\,^*d_{abcd} = d^*_{abcd}$ results in
\[
2\nabla_a{}^*d_{fgc}{}^a = 2\nabla_a{}d^*_{fgc}{}^a = -2 {}^*T_{fgc}.
\]
From here it follows that
\begin{equation}
3 \nabla_{[e}d_{ab]cd} + \epsilon_{eabf}{}^*T_{cd}{}^f = 0. \label{TraceCFE4Alt}
\end{equation}
\begin{remark}
\label{Remark: TraceCFE4Alt}
\em {This last equation is equivalent to \eqref{TraceCFE4} and will be
essential in sections \ref{Section: WEGeomFields} and \ref{Section: ZQandIC}
where a system of wave equations for the geometric fields and the zero-quantities
associated to the equations \eqref{TraceCFE1}-\eqref{TraceCFE6} is discussed.}
\end{remark}
\subsection{An equation for the components of the metric $g_{ab}$}
Taking the natural trace in equation \eqref{TraceCFE6} leads to the relation
\begin{equation}
R_{ab} = 2L_{ab} + \tfrac16 R g_{ab}. \label{EquationMetric}
\end{equation}
Here, $R_{ab}$ and $L_{ab}$ are considered as independent
variables. In particular, the Ricci tensor $R_{ab}$ is assumed to be
expressed in terms of first and second derivatives of the components of the
metric whilst $L_{ab}$ is a field satisfying equations
\eqref{TraceCFE1}-\eqref{TraceCFE5}. This will be further discussed in
\Cref{Section:GaugeConsiderations} where a suitable wave equation for the
components of the metric is constructed.
\begin{remark}
{\em As pointed out in \cite{Fri03a}, equation \eqref{EquationMetric}
can be regarded as an Einstein field equation for the unphysical
metric $g_{ab}$. From this point of view, the geometric fields $\Xi$,
$s$, $L_{ab}$ and $d_{abcd}$ can be regarded as unphysical matter
fields. Accordingly, in the following we refer to
equation \eqref{EquationMetric} as the \emph{unphysical Einstein
equation}. This approach should allow to adapt well-tested
numerical methods for the Einstein field equations to the case of the
conformal field equations.}
\end{remark}
\section{The evolution system for the geometric fields}
\label{Section: WEGeomFields}
In this section we show how to construct an evolution system for the
geometric fields appearing in the conformal Einstein field equations,
equations \eqref{TraceCFE1}-\eqref{TraceCFE6}. These evolution
equations take the form of \emph{geometric wave equations}
--- that is, their principal part involves the D'Alambertian $\square
\equiv \nabla_a \nabla^a$ associated to the conformal metric $g_{ab}$.
\medskip
In \cite{Pae15}, Paetz has obtained a system of geometric wave equations for
the set of conformal fields $(\Xi, s, L_{ab}, d^a{}_{bcd})$ in the vacuum case.
This can be generalised to include a tracefree matter component. The next statement
summarises this result:
\begin{lemma}
\label{Lemma:EvolutionSystem}
The metric tracefree conformal Einstein field equations
\eqref{TraceCFE1}-\eqref{TraceCFE6} imply the following system of geometric
wave equations for the conformal fields:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \square\Xi = 4s - \tfrac16 \Xi R, \label{CWE1} \\
&& \square s = - \tfrac{1}{6} s R + \Xi L_{ab} L^{ab} - \tfrac{1}{6} \nabla_{a}R \nabla^{a}\Xi
+ \tfrac{1}{4} \Xi^5 T_{ab} T^{ab} - \Xi^3 L_{ab}T^{ab}
+ \Xi \nabla^{a}\Xi \nabla^{b}\Xi T_{ab}, \label{CWE2} \\
&& \square L_{ab} = -2 \Xi d_{acbd} L^{cd} + 4 L_{a}{}^{c} L_{bc} - L_{cd} L^{cd} g_{ab}
+ \tfrac{1}{6} \nabla_{a}\nabla_{b}R + \tfrac{1}{2} \Xi^3 d_{acbd} T^{cd}
\nonumber \\
&& \hspace{1.3cm} - \Xi \nabla_{c}T_{a}{}^{c}{}_{b} - 2 T_{(a|c|b)}
\nabla^{c}\Xi, \label{CWE3} \\
&& \square d_{abcd} = - 4 \Xi d_{a}{}^{f}{}_{[c}{}^{e} d_{d]ebf} - 2 \Xi d_{a}{}^{f}{}_{b}{}^{e} d_{cdfe}
+ \tfrac{1}{2} d_{abcd} R - T_{[a}{}^f \Xi^2 d_{b]fcd} - \Xi^2 T_{[c}{}^f d_{d]fab} \nonumber \\
&& \hspace{1.5cm} - \Xi^2 g_{a[c} d_{d]gbf} T^{fg} + \Xi^2 g_{b[c} d_{d]gaf} T^{fg}
+ 2 \nabla_{[a}T_{|cd|b]} + \epsilon_{abef} \nabla^{f}\,^*T_{cd}{}^{e}. \label{CWE4Alternative}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Equation \eqref{CWE1} is a direct consequence of \eqref{TraceCFE1}. Equations
\eqref{CWE2} and \eqref{CWE3} result, respectively, from applying a covariant
derivative to \eqref{TraceCFE2} and \eqref{TraceCFE3}, and using the second
Bianchi identity. The wave equation for $d^a{}_{bcd}$, on the other hand,
requires to consider the alternative conformal field equation
\eqref{TraceCFE4Alt}. Applying $\nabla^e$ to the latter and using equation
\eqref{TraceCFE4} along with the first Bianchi identity, a long but
straightforward calculation yields the wave equation
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \square d_{abcd} = - 4 \Xi d_{a}{}^{f}{}_{[c}{}^{e} d_{d]ebf} - 2 \Xi d_{a}{}^{f}{}_{b}{}^{e} d_{cdfe}
+ \tfrac{1}{3} d_{abcd} R - 2d_{cdf[a} L_{b]}{}^{f} - 2d_{abf[c} L_{d]}{}^{f}
\nonumber \\
&& \hspace{1.5cm}- 2g_{a[c} d_{d]ebf} L^{fe} + 2 g_{b[c} d_{d]fae} L^{ef}
+ 2\nabla_{[a}T_{|cd|b]} + \epsilon_{abef}\nabla^f {}^*T_{cd}{}^e. \label{CWE4}
\end{eqnarray}
It is possible to eliminate terms containing $L_{ab}$ from the wave
equation \eqref{CWE4} through the generalisation of an identity obtained in \cite{Pae15} to
the case of tracefree matter. Multiplying equation \eqref{TraceCFE4Alt} by $\Xi$, using
the definitions of $d^a{}_{bcd}$ and $^*T_{abc}$, equation \eqref{TraceCFE3}
and the second Bianchi identity to simplify it, one finds that
\begin{equation}
d_{cd[ag}\nabla_{b]}\Xi + d_{de[ag}g_{b]c}\nabla^e\Xi - d_{ce[ag}g_{b]d}\nabla^e\Xi = 0.
\label{PaetzIdentityInter}
\end{equation}
Applying a further covariant derivative $\nabla^g$ to the last expression and
making use of equations \eqref{TraceCFE1}, \eqref{TraceCFE4} and
\eqref{TraceCFE4Alt} as well as the properties of the rescaled Cotton tensor,
the following identity is obtained:
\begin{eqnarray}
&& 2\Xi d_{cdf[a} L_{b]}{}^{f} + 2\Xi d_{abf[c} L_{d]}{}^{f}
+ 2 g_{a[c} \Xi d_{d]gbf} L^{fg} - 2\Xi g_{b[c} d_{d]gaf} L^{fg}
+ \tfrac{1}{6} \Xi d_{abcd} R \nonumber \\
&& - \Xi^3 d_{cdf[a} T_{b]}{}^{f} - \Xi^3 d_{abf[c} T_{d]}{}^{f}
- \Xi^3 g_{a[c} d_{d]gbf} T^{fg} + \Xi^3 g_{b[c} d_{d]gaf} T^{fg} = 0.
\label{PaetzIdentity}
\end{eqnarray}
By substituting this into expression \eqref{CWE4} we get equation
\eqref{CWE4Alternative}, which does not involve the Schouten tensor.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
{\em In concrete applications it may prove useful to express the Schouten
tensor in terms of the tracefree Ricci tensor and the Ricci scalar through the
formula
\begin{equation}
L_{ab} = \Phi_{ab} + \tfrac{1}{24}R g_{ab}.
\label{DecompositionSchouten}
\end{equation}
As will be discussed in Section \ref{Section:ConformalGaugeSourceFunctions},
the Ricci scalar $R$ is associated to the particular choice of conformal gauge.
Thus, the decomposition \eqref{DecompositionSchouten} allows us to split the
field $L_{ab}$ into a gauge part and a part which is determined through the
field equations. Keeping the simplicity of the presentation in mind, we do not
pursue this approach further as it leads to lengthier expressions.}
\end{remark}
\section{Zero-quantities and integrability conditions}
\label{Section: ZQandIC}
In this section we consider a convenient setting for the discussion and
book-keeping of the evolution equations implied by the conformal Einstein field
equations with tracefree matter. Our approach is based on the observation that
the metric conformal Einstein field equations constitute an overdetermined
system of differential conditions for the various conformal fields. Thus, the
equations are related to each other through \emph{integrability conditions} ---
i.e. necessary conditions for the existence of solutions to the equations.
\subsection{Definitions and basic properties}
First we proceed to introduce the set of \emph{geometric zero-quantities} (also
called \emph{subsidiary variables}) associated to the system of metric
tracefree conformal Einstein field equations
\eqref{TraceCFE1}-\eqref{TraceCFE5}. These fields are defined as:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \Upsilon_{ab} \equiv \nabla_{a}\nabla_{b}\Xi +\Xi
L_{ab}+sg_{ab} - \tfrac{1}{2}\Xi^{3}T_{ab}, \label{ZQ1} \\
&& \Theta_a \equiv \nabla_{a}s + L_{ac}\nabla^{c}\Xi - \tfrac{1}{2}\Xi^{2}\nabla^{c}\Xi
T_{ac}, \label{ZQ2} \\
&& \Delta_{abc} \equiv \nabla_{a}L_{bc}-\nabla_{b}L_{ac} - \nabla_{e}\Xi d^{e}{}_{cab}
- \Xi T_{abc}, \label{ZQ3} \\
&& \Lambda_{abc} \equiv T_{bca} - \nabla_{e}d^{e}{}_{abc}, \label{ZQ4} \\
&& Z \equiv \lambda - 6\Xi s
+3\nabla_{c}\Xi\nabla^{c}\Xi, \label{ZQ5}\\
&& P^c{}_{dab}\equiv R^c{}_{dab} - \Xi d^c{}_{dab} - 2( \delta^c{}_{[a}L_{b]d} -
g_{d[a}L_{b]}{}^c). \label{ZQ6}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
In terms of the above, the conformal Einstein field equations
\eqref{TraceCFE1}-\eqref{TraceCFE6} can be expressed as the conditions
\[
\Upsilon_{ab}=0, \qquad \Theta_a=0, \qquad \Delta_{abc} = 0, \qquad
\Lambda_{abc}=0, \qquad Z=0,\qquad P^c{}_{dab}=0,
\]
from where these fields take their name.
\subsubsection{Properties of the zero-quantities}
By definition, the zero-quantities possess the following symmetries:
\begin{equation}
\begin{gathered}
\Upsilon_{ab} = \Upsilon_{(ab)}, \quad \Delta_{abc} = \Delta_{[ab]c}, \quad
\Delta_{[abc]} = 0, \quad \Lambda_{abc} = \Lambda_{a[bc]}, \quad \Lambda_{[abc]} =0, \\
\Delta_a{}^b{}_b = 0, \quad \Lambda^b{}_{ab} = 0.
\label{ZQIdentities}
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
Moreover, one can check that $\Delta_{abc}$ and $\Lambda_{abc}$ satisfy the
identities
\begin{equation}
\Delta_{abc} = \tfrac23 \Delta_{abc} + \tfrac13\Delta_{acb} - \tfrac13\Delta_{bca}, \qquad
\Lambda_{abc} = \tfrac23 \Lambda_{abc} + \tfrac13\Lambda_{bac} - \tfrac13\Lambda_{cab}, \label{LanczosDeltaLambda}
\end{equation}
which are useful for simplifying certain combinations of zero-quantities. Regarding
$P^a{}_{bcd}$, it inherits the symmetries of the Riemann tensor; in particular,
we can define its Hodge dual tensors
\begin{equation}
^*P_{abcd} \equiv \tfrac12\epsilon_{ab}{}^{ef} P_{efcd},
\quad P^*_{abcd} \equiv \tfrac12\epsilon_{cd}{}^{ef} P_{abef}.
\label{ZQ6Duals}
\end{equation}
In addition, it will result useful to introduce a further auxiliary
zero-quantity associated to equation \eqref{TraceCFE4Alt} --- see
\Cref{Remark: TraceCFE4Alt}:
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \Lambda_{abcde} \equiv 3\nabla_{[a}d_{bc]de} + \epsilon_{abcf}{}^*T_{de}{}^f
= 3\Lambda_{d[ab} g_{c]e} - 3\Lambda_{e[ab} g_{c]d}.
\label{Lambda_abcde}
\end{eqnarray}
Here, the second equality has been obtained through a calculation similar to
the one yielding \eqref{TraceCFE4Alt}. From the above definition it follows that
$\Lambda_{ab}{}^d{}_{cd} = \Lambda_{abc}$, as well as
\begin{equation}
\Lambda_{abcde} = \Lambda_{[abc]de}, \qquad \Lambda_{abcde} =
\Lambda_{abc[de]}.
\label{Identity:LambdaFiveIndices}
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Some consequences of the wave equations}
Key for our subsequent analysis is the observation that assuming the validity
of the geometric wave equations for the conformal fields implies a further set of
relations satisfied by the zero-quantities. These are summarised in the
following lemma:
\begin{lemma}
\label{LemmaZQWE}
Assume that the wave equations \eqref{EquationMetric},
\eqref{CWE1}-\eqref{CWE4Alternative}, and
\Cref{Assumption:AssumptionDivergenceUnphysicalEnergyMomentum} hold. Then the
geometric zero-quantities satisfy the identities
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \Upsilon_a{}^a = 0, \label{ZQWE1} \\
&& P^c{}_{acb} = 0, \label{ZQWE6} \\
&& \nabla_b \Upsilon_a{}^b = 3 \Theta_a, \label{DivergenceZQ1} \\
&& \nabla_a\Theta^a = \Upsilon^{ab}L_{ab} -\tfrac12 \Xi^2 \Upsilon^{ab}T_{ab}, \label{ZQWE2} \\
&& \nabla_c\Delta_a{}^c{}_b = \Upsilon^{cd}d_{acbd} + \Lambda_{abc}\nabla^c\Xi
- L^{cd}P_{acbd}, \label{ZQWE3} \\
&& \nabla_c\Delta_{ab}{}^c = 2\Xi T_{c[a}\Upsilon_{b]}{}^c -\Lambda_{cab}\nabla^c\Xi, \label{DivergenceDelta1} \\
&& \nabla_c \Lambda^c{}_{ab} = d_{[a}{}^{cde}P_{b]cde} -2T_{c[a}\Upsilon_{b]}{}^c, \label{DivergenceLambda1} \\
&& \nabla_c \Lambda_{[ab]}{}^c = 2d_{[a}{}^{cde}P_{b]dec}, \label{SymmetricDivergenceLambda} \\
&& \nabla_d P_{abc}{}^d = -\Delta_{abc} -\Xi \Lambda_{cab} , \label{DeltaLambdaIdentity} \\
&& \nabla_{c}\Lambda_{eg}{}^{c}{}_{mn} = 2 \nabla_{[e}\Lambda_{g]mn} + 2
d_{[e}{}^{c}{}_{|m|}{}^{h}P_{g]cnh} - 2 d_{[e}{}^{c}{}_{|n|}{}^{h}P_{g]cmh} + 2
d_{mn}{}^{ch}P_{ecgh}. \label{ZQWE4}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The result follows directly from the definitions of the zero-quantities with
the aid of the wave equations for the conformal fields \eqref{EquationMetric}
and \eqref{CWE1}-\eqref{CWE4Alternative}, the second Bianchi identity and the
properties of the rescaled Cotton tensor. It is worth mentioning that
\eqref{ZQWE4} is obtained by using \eqref{CWE4} instead of
\eqref{CWE4Alternative} as it considerably simplifies the calculation.
\end{proof}
\subsection{Integrability conditions}
The zero-quantities are not independent of each other but they are related via
a set of identities, the so-called \emph{integrability conditions}. These
relations are key for the computation of a suitable (subsidiary) system of wave
equations for the zero-quantities. The procedure to obtain these relations is
to compute suitable antisymmetrised covariant derivatives of the
zero-quantities which, in turn, are expressed in terms of lower order objects.
Following this general strategy we obtain the following:
\begin{proposition}
\label{Proposition:IntegrabilityConditions}
The geometric zero-quantities defined in \eqref{ZQ1}-\eqref{ZQ3} and
\eqref{ZQ5}-\eqref{ZQ6} satisfy the identities
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& 2\nabla_{[a}\Upsilon_{c]b} = 2g_{b[a} \Theta_{c]} + \Xi
\Delta_{acb} + P_{acbd}\nabla^d\Xi, \label{IC1}\\
&& 2\nabla_{[a}\Theta_{b]} = - 2L_{[a}{}^{c} \Upsilon_{b]c} +
\Delta_{abc} \nabla^{c}\Xi + \Xi^2
T_{c[a}\Upsilon_{b]}{}^c, \label{IC2}\\
&& 3\nabla_{[d}\Delta_{ab]c} =
\Lambda_{abdce} \nabla^{e}\Xi + 3 \Upsilon_{[a}{}^{e}d_{bd]ce} + 3
L_{[a}{}^{e}P_{bd]ce} - \tfrac{3}{2} \Xi^2 P_{[ab|c|}{}^{e}T_{d]e} + 2
\Xi \Upsilon_{[a}{}^{e}g_{b|c|}T_{d]e} \nonumber \\
&& \hspace{2cm} + \Xi \Upsilon_{[a}{}^{e}g_{|c|b}T_{d]e}, \label{IC3} \\
&& \nabla_a Z = -6\Xi \Theta_a + 6 \Upsilon_{ab}\nabla^b\Xi, \label{IC5} \\
&& 3 \nabla_{[e}P_{gh]mn} = \Xi \Lambda_{eghnm} - 3 \Delta_{[eg|m|}g_{h]n} + 3 \Delta_{[eg|n|}g_{h]m}.
\label{IC6}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
Equations \eqref{IC1}-\eqref{IC5} follow from direct calculations employing the
definitions of the zero-quantities, the rescaled Cotton tensor and the first
Bianchi identity. Equation \eqref{IC6}, on the other hand, can be obtained in a
similar manner as \eqref{TraceCFE4Alt}: multiplying \eqref{DeltaLambdaIdentity}
by $\epsilon_{mn}{}^{cd}$ and exploiting the fact that $^*P_{abcd} =
P^*_{abcd}$ --- which is a consequence of \eqref{ZQWE6} --- yields
\begin{equation}
2\nabla_a{}^*P_{mnb}{}^a = 2 \nabla_a P^*_{mnb}{}^a = -\epsilon_{mnac}(\Xi\Lambda_b{}^{ac} + \Delta^{ac}{}_b).
\end{equation}
By substituting back the definition of $P^*_{mnab}$, \eqref{IC6} is found after
some simplifications.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
{\em Observe that these relations have right-hand sides consisting of lower
order expressions which are homogeneous in the zero-quantities. This property
will be key when suitable wave equations for these fields are derived in the
next section. Equations \eqref{IC1}-\eqref{IC6} together with \eqref{ZQWE4}
constitute the set of integrability conditions for the geometric zero-quantities
associated to the tracefree conformal Einstein field equations.}
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
\label{Remark:EquivalenceWaveEquationsWeyl}
{\em The expressions in Lemma \eqref{LemmaZQWE} and Proposition
\eqref{Proposition:IntegrabilityConditions} allow us to show, in particular, that
the wave equations \eqref{CWE4Alternative} and \eqref{CWE4} differ
from each other by a homogeneous combination of
zero-quantities. Thus, in arguments involving the propagation of
the constraints, both forms of the evolution equation can be used interchangeably.}
\end{remark}
\section{The subsidiary evolution system for the zero-quantities}
\label{Section:SubsidiarySystem}
An important aspect of any \emph{hyperbolic reduction procedure} for the
(conformal) Einstein field equations is the identification of the conditions
upon which a solution to the (reduced) evolution equations implies a
solution to the full set of field equations --- this type of analysis is
generically known as the \emph{propagation of the constraints}. In
practice, the propagation of the constraints requires the construction
of a suitable system of evolution equations for the zero-quantities
associated to the field equations.
\subsection{Construction of the subsidiary system}
In this section it is shown how the set of integrability conditions
provides a systematic and direct way to obtain wave
equations for the zero-quantities --- a so-called \emph{subsidiary evolution
system}. The propagation of the constraints then follows from the structural
properties of the subsidiary system as a consequence of the uniqueness
of solutions to systems of wave equations.
\subsubsection{Equations for $\Upsilon_{ab}$, $\Theta_a$,
$\Delta_{abc}$, $Z$ and $P_{abcd}$}
Equation \eqref{IC1} serves as the starting point to obtain a wave equation for
$\Upsilon_{ab}$. After applying $\nabla^c$ and commuting derivatives, equation
\eqref{DivergenceZQ1} renders it as a suitable wave equation. Remaining first
order derivatives can be rewritten and simplified via equations
\eqref{LanczosDeltaLambda}, \eqref{ZQWE1}, \eqref{ZQWE2}, \eqref{ZQWE3} and
\eqref{DeltaLambdaIdentity} resulting in:
\begin{align}
\square \Upsilon_{ab} = & \tfrac{1}{6} \Upsilon_{ab} R - 2 \Upsilon^{cd}
L_{cd} g_{ab} + \tfrac{1}{2} \Xi^2 \Upsilon^{cd} g_{ab} T_{cd} + 4
\nabla_{(a}\Upsilon_{b)} - 2 \Xi \Upsilon^{cd}d_{acbd} + 4\Upsilon_{(a}{}^{c}L_{b)c} \nonumber \\
& - 2 \Upsilon^{cd}P_{acbd} + 2 \Xi
L^{cd}P_{acbd} - \tfrac{1}{2} \Xi^3 P_{abcd}T^{cd}.
\label{WEZQ1}
\end{align}
Regarding $\Theta_a$, an analogous calculation using expression \eqref{IC2} in
conjunction with the same equations as in the previous case leads directly to a
wave equation for this field. Exploiting \eqref{TraceCFE3},
\eqref{RescaledCottonTensor} and \eqref{IC1} to simplify it one obtains
\begin{align}
\square\Theta_c = & \ 6 L_{ca} \Theta^{a} - 2 \Upsilon^{ab}
\Delta_{cab} + 2 \Xi L^{ab} \Delta_{cab} - \Xi^3 \Delta_{c}{}^{ab}
T_{ab} - 2 \Xi^2 \Theta^{a} T_{ca} - 2 \Upsilon^{bd} d_{cbad} \nabla^{a}\Xi \nonumber \\
& + \tfrac{3}{2} \Xi \Upsilon_{c}{}^{b} T_{ab} \nabla^{a}\Xi + \tfrac{1}{2} \Xi^2
P_{cbad} T^{bd} \nabla^{a}\Xi + \tfrac{1}{2} \Xi \Upsilon_{a}{}^{b} T_{cb}
\nabla^{a}\Xi - \tfrac{1}{6} \Upsilon_{ca} \nabla^{a}R - \tfrac{5}{2} \Xi
\Upsilon^{ab} T_{ab} \nabla_{c}\Xi \nonumber \\
& + 2 \Upsilon^{ab} \nabla_{c}L_{ab} - \Xi^2 \Upsilon^{ab}\nabla_{c}T_{ab}.
\label{WEZQ2}
\end{align}
A wave equation for $\Lambda_{abc}$ can be obtained by applying $\nabla^d$ to
integrability condition \eqref{IC3}, commuting derivatives and using
\eqref{ZQWE3} to eliminate the second order derivatives. A direct but long
calculation exploiting the same relations used in the previous two cases, along
with \eqref{TraceCFE4} and \eqref{Lambda_abcde}, yields
\begin{align}
\square \Delta_{abc} = & \ 2 \Lambda_{cab} s - \Upsilon_{c}{}^{d} T_{abd} - \Xi \Lambda_{abdce} L^{de} + 3
d_{abcd} \Theta^{d} + \tfrac{1}{3} R \Delta_{abc} + L_{c}{}^{d} \Delta_{abd} +
\tfrac{1}{2} \Xi^3 \Lambda_{abdce} T^{de} \nonumber \\
& - \Xi P_{abce} T_{d}{}^{e} \nabla^{d}\Xi + \tfrac{1}{6} P_{abcd} \nabla^{d}R + \nabla^{d}\Xi
\nabla_{e}\Lambda_{ab}{}^{e}{}_{cd} + 2 \Upsilon^{de} \nabla_{e}d_{abcd} + L^{de} \nabla_{e}P_{abcd} \nonumber \\
& - \tfrac{1}{2} \Xi^2 T^{de} \nabla_{e}P_{abcd} + 2 \Upsilon_{[a}{}^{d}T_{b]cd}
- \Xi \Upsilon_{[a}{}^{d}\nabla_{|c|}T_{b]d}
- 2 \Xi d_{[a}{}^{d}{}_{b]}{}^{e}\Delta_{dec} + 2 \Xi d_{[a}{}^{d}{}_{|c|}{}^{e}\Delta_{b]de} \nonumber \\
& + 2 d_{[a}{}^{d}{}_{|c|}{}^{e}\nabla_{b]}\Upsilon_{de} - 2d_{[a}{}^{d}{}_{|c}{}^{e}\nabla_{d|}\Upsilon_{b]e}
- 2 L_{[a}{}^{d}\Delta_{b]dc} + 2L^{de}\nabla_{[a}P_{b]dce} - 2 P_{[a}{}^{d}{}_{b]}{}^{e}\Delta_{dec} \nonumber \\
& + 2 P_{[a}{}^{d}{}_{|c|}{}^{e}\Delta_{b]de} - 2 P_{[a}{}^{d}{}_{|c|}{}^{e}\nabla_{b]}L_{de}
- 2 P_{[a}{}^{d}{}_{|c}{}^{e}\nabla_{d|}L_{b]e} + \Xi^2 P_{[a}{}^{d}{}_{|c}{}^{e}\nabla_{d|}T_{b]e}
- \Xi^2 \Delta_{c}{}^{d}{}_{[a}T_{b]d} \nonumber \\
& + \Xi T_{[a}{}^{d}\nabla_{|c|}\Upsilon_{b]d} - 2 \nabla^{d}\Xi\nabla_{[a}\Lambda_{b]cd}
+ 2 \Upsilon^{de}T_{[a|de|}g_{b]c}
+ \Xi \Upsilon^{de}g_{[a|c}\nabla_{d|}T_{b]e} - \Upsilon_{[a}{}^{d}T_{b]d}\nabla_{c}\Xi \nonumber \\
& - 2 L^{de}\Delta_{[a|de|}g_{b]c} + 3 \Xi \Upsilon^{d}g_{[a|c|}T_{b]d}
+ 2 \Xi P_{[a}{}^{d}{}_{|c|}{}^{e}T_{b]e}\nabla_{d}\Xi
- \Xi g_{[a|c}T^{de}\nabla_{d|}\Upsilon_{b]e} \nonumber \\
& + \Upsilon_{[a}{}^{d}g_{b]c}T_{d}{}^{e}\nabla_{e}\Xi + \Upsilon^{de}g_{[a|c|}T_{b]d}\nabla_{e}\Xi.
\label{WEZQ3}
\end{align}
A wave equation for $Z$ is readily found by simply applying $\nabla^a$ to
equation \eqref{IC5}:
\begin{equation}
\square Z = 6 \Upsilon_{ab} \Upsilon^{ab} - 12 \Xi \Upsilon^{ab} L_{ab}
+ 6 \Xi^3 \Upsilon^{ab} T_{ab} + 12 \Theta^{a} \nabla_{a}\Xi.
\label{WEZQ5}
\end{equation}
In the case of $P_{abcd}$, application of $\nabla^h$ together with equations
\eqref{ZQWE6}, \eqref{ZQWE3}, \eqref{DeltaLambdaIdentity}, as well as the
various symmetries of $\Lambda_{abc}$ and $P^a{}_{bcd}$ results, after a rather
direct calculation in:
\begin{align}
\square P_{egmn} = & \tfrac{1}{3} R P_{egmn} - 2L_{[m}{}^{h} P_{n]heg} +
2\Lambda_{[n|eg|} \nabla_{m]}\Xi + 2\Xi \nabla_{[m}\Lambda_{n]eg} +
2\nabla_{[m}\Delta_{|eg|n]} + 2 \Xi \nabla_{[e}\Lambda_{g]mn} \nonumber \\
& + 2 \nabla_{[e}\Delta_{|mn|g]} - 2
\Lambda_{[e|mn|}\nabla_{g]}\Xi - 2 \Xi d_{[e}{}^{h}{}_{g]}{}^{a}P_{mnha}
- 2 \Xi d_{[e}{}^{h}{}_{|m|}{}^{a}P_{g]hna} + 2 \Xi d_{[e}{}^{h}{}_{|n|}{}^{a}P_{g]hma} \nonumber \\
& - 2 L_{[e}{}^{h}P_{g]hmn} - 2 P_{[e}{}^{h}{}_{g]}{}^{a}P_{mnha}
- 4 P_{[e}{}^{h}{}_{|m|}{}^{a}P_{g]hna} + 2 \Xi g_{[e|m}\nabla^{h}\Lambda_{n|g]h}
- 2 \Xi g_{[e|n}\nabla^{h}\Lambda_{m|g]h} \nonumber \\
& + 2 \Upsilon^{ha}d_{[e|hma|}g_{g]n} - 2\Upsilon^{ha}d_{[e|hna|}g_{g]m}
+ 2\Lambda_{[g|nh|}g_{e]m} + 2 \Lambda_{n[g|h|}g_{e]m} + 2\Lambda_{m[e|h|}g_{g]n} \nonumber \\
& + 2\Lambda_{[e|mh|}g_{g]n} - 4 L^{ha}P_{[e|hma|}g_{g]n} + 4L^{ha}P_{[e|hna|}g_{g]m}.
\label{WEZQ6}
\end{align}
\subsubsection{Equation for $\Lambda_{abc}$}
Notice that the integrability condition for $\Lambda_{abc}$, equation
\eqref{ZQWE4}, contains derivatives of zero-quantities on both sides of the
equation. This feature seems to hinder our standard approach for the
construction of a subsidiary equation. Then, in order to construct a suitable
wave equation it will be necessary to exploit the symmetries of
$\Lambda_{abcde}$. Applying $\nabla^e$ to the integrability condition
\eqref{ZQWE4} and commuting derivatives leads to
\begin{align}
\square \Lambda_{gmn} = & \
\Lambda^{c}{}_{mn} R_{gc} + \nabla_{g}\nabla_{c}\Lambda^{c}{}_{mn} - 2
P_{g}{}^{ceh} \nabla_{h}d_{mnce} - 2 d_{mn}{}^{ce} \nabla_{h}P_{gce}{}^{h} -
\nabla^{c}\nabla^{e}\Lambda_{gce[mn]} \nonumber \\
& - 2 \Lambda^{c}{}_{[m}{}^{e}R_{|gc|n]e} -
2 d_{[m}{}^{ceh}\nabla_{|e}P_{gh|n]c} - 2
d_{g}{}^{c}{}_{[m}{}^{e}\nabla^{h}P_{n]ech} - 2 P_{[m}{}^{ceh}\nabla_{|e}d_{gh|n]c} \nonumber \\
& - 2 P_{g}{}^{c}{}_{[m}{}^{e}\nabla^{h}d_{n]ech}. \nonumber
\end{align}
Here, the double-derivative terms put at risk the hyperbolicity of the system.
For the second derivative of $\Lambda_{abc}$ one can use
\eqref{DivergenceLambda1}, while the one involving $\Lambda_{abcde}$ can be
eliminated by recalling that this field is antisymmetric under any permutation
of the first three indices --- see \eqref{Identity:LambdaFiveIndices}. Using
this property and commuting derivatives gives
\begin{align}
\square \Lambda_{gmn} = & - \Xi \Lambda^{c}{}_{g}{}^{e} d_{mnce} + 4 \Lambda^{c}{}_{mn} L_{gc} + 2
d_{mnce} \Delta_{g}{}^{ce} - 2 P_{g}{}^{ceh} \nabla_{h}d_{mnce} + 2
\Upsilon_{[m}{}^{c}\nabla_{|g|}T_{n]c} \nonumber \\
& - 2 \Xi \Lambda^{c}{}_{[m}{}^{e}d_{|g|n]ce}
- 4 \Xi \Lambda^{c}{}_{[m}{}^{e}d_{|ge|n]c} - 4 \Lambda^{c}{}_{g[m}L_{n]c} +
2 \Lambda_{[m}{}^{ce}P_{|gc|n]e} + 2 \Lambda^{c}{}_{g}{}^{e}P_{[m|c|n]e} \nonumber \\
& - 2 T_{[m}{}^{ce}P_{|ge|n]c} + 2 d_{g}{}^{c}{}_{[m}{}^{e}\Delta_{n]ec} - 2
d_{[m}{}^{ceh}\nabla_{|e}P_{gh|n]c} - 2 P_{[m}{}^{ceh}\nabla_{|e}d_{gh|n]c} - 2
T_{[m}{}^{c}\nabla_{|g|}\Upsilon_{n]c} \nonumber \\
& - \Xi \Lambda^{ceh}d_{[m|ceh}g_{g|n]} - 4
\Lambda^{c}{}_{[m}{}^{e}L_{|ce}g_{g|n]} - \Lambda^{ceh}P_{[m|ceh}g_{g|n]}.
\label{WEZQ4}
\end{align}
The results of this section can be summarised in the following lemma:
\begin{lemma}
\label{Lemma:SubsidiarySystem}
Assume that the conformal fields satisfy equations \eqref{EquationMetric} and
\eqref{CWE1}-\eqref{CWE4Alternative}. Then, the geometric zero-quantities
\eqref{ZQ1}-\eqref{ZQ6} satisfy the homogeneous system of geometric wave
equations \eqref{WEZQ1}-\eqref{WEZQ4}.
\end{lemma}
\subsection{Propagation of the constraints}
As it will be discussed in detail in Section \ref{Section:GaugeConsiderations},
the system of geometric wave equations \eqref{WEZQ1}-\eqref{WEZQ4} implies, in
turn, a system of proper (hyperbolic) wave equations for which a theory of the
existence and uniqueness of solutions is readily available --- see e.g.
\cite{HugKatMar77}. From the latter one directly obtains the following result:
\begin{proposition}
\label{Proposition:PropagationOfTheConstraints}
Assume that the geometric zero-quantities and their first derivatives vanish on a
fiduciary spacelike hypersurface $\mathcal{S}_\star$ of an unphysical spacetime
$(\mathcal{M},g_{ab})$. Then, the geometric zero-quantities vanish on the domain of
dependence $D(\mathcal{S}_\star)$ of $\mathcal{S}_\star$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{remark}
{\em Working, for example, with coordinates adapted to the hypersurface
$\mathcal{S}_\star$, it can be readily checked that the completely spatial parts
of the zero-quantities $\Upsilon_{ab}$, $\Theta_a$, $\Lambda_{abc}$,
$\Delta_{abc}$, $Z$ and $P^a{}_{bcd}$ encode the same information as the
conformal Einstein constraint equations --- see e.g. \cite{CFEBook}, Chapter
11. Similarly, projections with a transversal (i.e. timelike) component can be
read as a first order evolution system for the geometric conformal fields ---
we ignore null components as these can be obtained as linear combinations of
transversal and intrinsic components. Thus, in order to ensure the vanishing of
the zero-quantities on the initial hypersurface $\mathcal{S}_\star$, one needs,
firstly, to produce a solution to the conformal constraint equations; this
ensures the vanishing of the spatial part of the zero-quantities. Secondly, one
reads the transversal components of the zero-quantities as definitions for the
normal derivatives of the conformal fields which can be readily computed from
the solution to the conformal constraints. In this way, the transversal
components of the zero-quantities vanish \emph{a fortiori}.}
\end{remark}
\section{Gauge considerations}
\label{Section:GaugeConsiderations}
This section provides a brief overview of the gauge freedom inherent to the
conformal Einstein field equations and the associated evolution equations. This
gauge freedom is of two types: \emph{conformal} and \emph{coordinate}. The
discussion in this section follows closely Section 2.3 in \cite{CarVal18b} and
is provided for completeness and to ease the reading of the article.
\subsection{Conformal gauge source functions}
\label{Section:ConformalGaugeSourceFunctions}
An important feature of the conformal Einstein field equations is that the
Ricci scalar $R$ of the metric $g_{ab}$ can be regarded as a \emph{conformal
gauge source} specifying the representative in the conformal class
$[\tilde{\bmg}]$ of the (conformal) unphysical metric. Accordingly, one can
always find (locally) a conformal rescaling such that the metric $g'_{ab}$ has
a prescribed Ricci scalar $R'$.
\begin{remark}
\label{Remark:ConformalGaugeSourceFunction}
{\em Based on the previous discussion, in what follows the Ricci
scalar of the metric $g_{ab}$ is regarded as a prescribed function $\mathcal{R}(x)$
of the coordinates, so one writes
\[
R=\mathcal{R}(x).
\] }
\end{remark}
\subsection{Generalised harmonic coordinates and the reduced Ricci
operator}
\label{Section:GeneralisedWaveCoordinates}
The components of the Ricci
tensor $R_{ab}$ can be explicitly written in terms of the components
of the metric tensor $g_{ab}$ in general coordinates $x=(x^\mu)$ as
\[
R_{\mu\nu} =
-\frac{1}{2}g^{\lambda\rho} \partial_\lambda \partial_\rho
g_{\mu\nu} + g_{\sigma(\mu}\nabla_{\nu)} \Gamma^\sigma + g_{\lambda\rho}
g^{\sigma\tau} \Gamma^\lambda{}_{\sigma\mu} \Gamma^\rho{}_{\tau\nu}
+ 2 \Gamma^\sigma{}_{\lambda\rho} g^{\lambda\tau} g_{\sigma(\mu} \Gamma^\rho{}_{\nu)\tau},
\]
with
\[
\Gamma^\nu{}_{\mu\lambda} \equiv \frac{1}{2}g^{\nu\rho} ( \partial_\mu
g_{\rho\lambda} + \partial_\lambda g_{\mu\rho} - \partial_\rho g_{\mu\lambda}),
\]
where we have defined the \emph{contracted Christoffel symbols} as
$\Gamma^\nu \equiv g^{\mu\lambda} \Gamma^\nu{}_{\mu\lambda}$. A direct
computation then gives $\square x^\mu = - \Gamma^\mu$. Following the
well-known procedure for the hyperbolic reduction of the Einstein
field equations, we introduce \emph{coordinate gauge source functions}
$\mathcal{F}^\mu(x)$ to prescribe the value of the contracted
Christoffel symbols via the condition $\Gamma^\mu = \mathcal{F}^\mu(x)$.
This means that the coordinates $x=(x^\mu)$ satisfy the \emph{generalised
wave coordinate condition}
\begin{equation}
\square x^\mu = -\mathcal{F}^\mu(x)
\label{GeneralisedWaveCoordinates}
\end{equation}
--- see e.g. \cite{Cho08,Ren08,CFEBook}. Associated to the latter, it
is convenient to define the \emph{reduced Ricci operator}
$\mathscr{R}_{\mu\nu}[\bmg]$ as
\begin{equation}
\mathscr{R}_{\mu\nu}[\bmg] \equiv R_{\mu\nu} - g_{\sigma(\mu}\nabla_{\nu)}\Gamma^\sigma +
g_{\sigma(\mu}\nabla_{\nu)} \mathcal{F}^\sigma(x).
\label{DefinitionReducedRicci}
\end{equation}
More explicitly, one has that
\[
\mathscr{R}_{\mu\nu}[\bmg] =
-\frac{1}{2}g^{\lambda\rho} \partial_\lambda \partial_\rho
g_{\mu\nu} - g_{\sigma(\mu}\nabla_{\nu)} \mathcal{F}^\sigma(x) + g_{\lambda\rho}
g^{\sigma\tau} \Gamma^\lambda{}_{\sigma\mu} \Gamma^\rho{}_{\tau\nu}
+ 2 \Gamma^\sigma{}_{\lambda\rho} g^{\lambda\tau} g_{\sigma(\mu} \Gamma^\rho{}_{\nu)\tau}.
\]
Thus, by choosing coordinates satisfying the generalised wave coordinates
condition \eqref{GeneralisedWaveCoordinates}, the unphysical Einstein equation
\eqref{EquationMetric} takes the form
\begin{equation*}
\mathscr{R}_{\mu\nu}[\bmg] = 2 L_{\mu\nu} +\frac{1}{6}\mathcal{R}(x) g_{\mu\nu}.
\end{equation*}
Assuming that the components $L_{\mu\nu}$ are known, the latter is a quasilinear wave
equation for the components of the metric tensor.
\subsubsection{The reduced wave operator}
\label{Section:ReducedWaveOperator}
The geometric wave operator $\square$ acting on tensorial fields contains
derivatives of the Christoffel symbols which, in turn, contain second order
derivatives of the components of the metric tensor. The presence of these
second order derivative terms is problematic as they destroy, in principle, the
hyperbolicity of the evolution equations \eqref{CWE3} and
\eqref{CWE4Alternative} since they enter in the principal part of the system.
However, as discussed in e.g. \cite{Pae15,CarVal18b}, the generalised wave
coordinate condition \eqref{GeneralisedWaveCoordinates} can be used to reduce
the geometric wave operator $\square$ to a proper second order hyperbolic
operator.
\begin{definition}
\label{Definition:DefinitionBlackBoxOperator}
The reduced wave operator $\blacksquare$ acting on a covariant tensor field
$T_{\lambda\cdots\rho}$ is defined as
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& \blacksquare T_{\lambda \cdots \rho} \equiv \square
T_{\lambda\cdots\rho} +\bigg( (2 L_{\tau\lambda} + \frac{1}{6}\mathcal{R}(x)
g_{\tau\lambda} - R_{\tau\lambda}) -
g_{\sigma\tau}\nabla_\lambda (\mathcal{F}^\sigma(x)-\Gamma^\sigma) \bigg)T^\tau{}_{\cdots\rho}
+\cdots\\
&& \hspace{3cm} \cdots + \bigg( (2 L_{\tau\rho} + \frac{1}{6}\mathcal{R}(x)
g_{\tau\rho} - R_{\tau\rho}) -
g_{\sigma\tau}\nabla_\rho (\mathcal{F}^\sigma(x)-\Gamma^\sigma)
\bigg)T_{\lambda\cdots}{}^\tau,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $\square \equiv g^{\mu\nu}\nabla_\mu\nabla_\nu$. The action of
$\blacksquare$ on a scalar $\phi$ is simply given by
\[
\blacksquare \phi \equiv g^{\mu\nu}\nabla_\mu\nabla_\nu \phi.
\]
\end{definition}
\begin{remark}
\label{Remark:DefinitionProper}
{\em The operator $\blacksquare$ provides a proper second order hyperbolic
operator for systems which involve the metric as an unknown, in contrast to
$\square$. Accordingly, when working in generalised harmonic coordinates, all
the second order derivatives of the metric tensor can be removed from the
principal part of geometric wave equations. A system of evolutions equations
expressed in terms of the reduced wave operator $\blacksquare$ (rather than in
terms of the geometric wave operator $\square$) will be said to be
\emph{proper}.}
\end{remark}
\subsection{Summary: gauge reduced evolution equations}
The discussion of the previous sections leads us to consider the
following \emph{gauge reduced} system of evolution equations for the
components of the conformal fields $\Xi$, $s$, $L_{ab}$,
$d_{abcd}$ and $g_{ab}$ with respect to coordinates $x=(x^\mu)$
satisfying the generalised wave coordinate condition \eqref{GeneralisedWaveCoordinates}:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&&\hspace{-13mm} \blacksquare \Xi = 4s -\frac{1}{6}\Xi \mathcal{R}(x), \label{ReducedWaveCFE1} \\
&&\hspace{-13mm} \blacksquare s = - \tfrac{1}{6} s \mathcal{R}(x) + \Xi L_{\mu\nu} L^{\mu\nu}
- \tfrac{1}{6} \nabla_{\mu}\mathcal{R}(x)
\nabla^{\mu}\Xi + \tfrac{1}{4} \Xi^5 T_{\mu\nu}T^{\mu\nu} - \Xi^3 L_{\mu\nu}T^{\mu\nu}
+ \Xi \nabla^{\mu}\Xi \nabla^{\nu}\Xi T_{\mu\nu},
\label{ReducedWaveCFE2} \\
&&\hspace{-13mm} \blacksquare L_{\mu\nu} = -2 \Xi d_{\mu\rho\nu\lambda} L^{\rho\lambda}
+ 4 L_{\mu}{}^{\lambda} L_{\nu\lambda} - L_{\lambda\rho} L^{\lambda\rho} g_{\mu\nu}
+ \tfrac{1}{6} \nabla_{\mu}\nabla_{\nu}\mathcal{R}(x) + \tfrac{1}{2} \Xi^3 d_{\mu\lambda\nu\rho} T^{\lambda\rho}
\nonumber \\
&& \hspace{0.1cm} - \Xi \nabla_{\lambda}T_{\mu}{}^{\lambda}{}_{\nu}
- 2 T_{(\mu|\lambda|\nu)} \nabla^{\lambda}\Xi,\label{ReducedWaveCFE3} \\
&&\hspace{-13mm} \blacksquare d_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho} = - 4 \Xi
d_{\mu}{}^{\tau}{}_{[\lambda}{}^{\sigma} d_{\rho]\sigma\nu\tau} - 2 \Xi
d_{\mu}{}^{\tau}{}_{\nu}{}^{\sigma} d_{\lambda\rho\tau\sigma} + \tfrac{1}{2}
d_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho} \mathcal{R}(x) - T_{[\mu}{}^\sigma \Xi^2 d_{\nu]\sigma\lambda\rho} -
\Xi^2 T_{[\lambda}{}^\sigma d_{\rho]\sigma\mu\nu} \nonumber \\
&& \hspace{0.3cm} - \Xi^2 g_{\mu[\lambda} d_{\rho]\sigma\nu\tau} T^{\tau\sigma}
+ \Xi^2 g_{\nu[\lambda} d_{\rho]\sigma\mu\tau} T^{\tau\sigma}
+ 2 \nabla_{[\mu}T_{|\lambda\rho|\nu]} + \epsilon_{\mu\nu\sigma\tau} \nabla^{\tau}\,^*T_{\lambda\rho}{}^{\sigma},
\label{ReducedWaveCFE4}\\
&& \hspace{-13mm}\mathscr{R}_{\mu\nu}[\bmg] = 2 L_{\mu\nu}
+\frac{1}{6}\mathcal{R}(x) g_{\mu\nu}. \label{ReducedWaveCFE5}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
\begin{remark}
\label{Remark:WaveEquationsExplicit}
{\em The reduced system of evolution equations
\eqref{ReducedWaveCFE1}-\eqref{ReducedWaveCFE5} is a system
of quasilinear wave equations for the fields $\Xi$, $s$,
$L_{\mu\nu}$, $d_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}$ and $g_{\mu\nu}$. More
explicitly, one has that
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& g^{\sigma\tau}\partial_\sigma\partial_\tau \Xi = X
\big(\bmg,\partial\bmg, \Xi,s,\mathcal{R}(x)\big), \\
&& g^{\sigma\tau}\partial_\sigma\partial_\tau s =
S\big(\bmg,\partial\bmg,\Xi, \partial\Xi,s,{\bm
L},\mathcal{R}(x),\partial\mathcal{R}(x), \bmT \big), \\
&& g^{\sigma\tau}\partial_\sigma\partial_\tau L_{\mu\nu}
=F_{\mu\nu}\big(\bmg,\partial\bmg,\Xi,{\bm L},{\bm d},
\mathcal{R}(x),\partial^2\mathcal{R}(x), \bmT, \partial\bmT\big), \\
&& g^{\sigma\tau}\partial_\sigma\partial_\tau
d_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}=D_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}\big(\bmg,\partial\bmg,\Xi,{\bm
d},\mathcal{R}(x), \partial\bmT\big), \\
&& g^{\sigma\tau}\partial_\sigma\partial_\tau g_{\mu\nu}
=G_{\mu\nu}\big(\bmg,\partial\bmg,{\bmL},\mathcal{R}(x)\big),
\end{eqnarray*}
where $X$, $S$, $F_{\mu\nu}$, $D_{\mu\nu\lambda\rho}$ and $G_{\mu\nu}$ are
polynomial expressions of their arguments. Strictly speaking, the system is a
system of wave equations only if $g_{\mu\nu}$ is known to be Lorentzian. The
basic existence, uniqueness and stability results of systems of the above type
have been given in \cite{HugKatMar77} --- these results are the second order
analogues of the theory developed in \cite{Kat75} for symmetric hyperbolic
systems. The basic theory for initial-boundary value problems can be found in
\cite{CheWah83,DafHru85}.}
\end{remark}
\section{Propagation of the gauge}
\label{Section:PropOfGauge}
This section is devoted to studying the consistency of the conformal and
coordinate gauge introduced in \Cref{Section:GaugeConsiderations} by
constructing a system of homogeneous wave equations for a set of subsidiary
fields. The coming discussion extends the analysis in \cite{CarVal18b},
Section 5, for the vacuum case which is closely followed --- accordingly, we
mainly focus on the new features arising from the presence of matter.
\subsection{Basic relations}
Consider a set of coordinates $x=(x^\mu)$. Let $g_{\mu\nu}$ denote the
components of a metric $g_{ab}$ in these coordinates. Similarly, $R_{\mu\nu}$
denotes the components of the associated Ricci tensor $R_{ab}$, while $R$ is
the corresponding Ricci scalar. We now investigate the requirements for $R$ and
$R_{\mu\nu}$ to coincide, respectively, with $\mathcal{R}(x)$ and
$\mathscr{R}_{\mu\nu}$. In addition, we also need to investigate the
conditions under which $L_{\mu\nu}$ corresponds to the components of the
Schouten tensor. This can be expressed as the vanishing of the following
fields:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& Q \equiv R -\mathcal{R}(x), \label{QScalar} \\
&& Q^\mu \equiv \Gamma^\mu - \mathcal{F}^\mu(x), \label{QVector} \\
&& Q_{\mu\nu} \equiv R_{\mu\nu} - \mathscr{R}_{\mu\nu}.
\label{QTensor}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
We make the following assumption:
\begin{assumption}
\label{Assumption:AssumptionGauge}
Let $T_{\mu\nu}$ and $T_{\mu\nu\lambda}$ be, respectively, the components of a
tracefree energy momentum tensor with vanishing divergence and its associated
rescaled Cotton tensor. Let $g_{\mu\nu}$ and $L_{\mu\nu}$ be solutions to the
equations:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \mathscr{R}_{\mu\nu} = 2L_{\mu\nu} + \tfrac16\mathcal{R}(x)g_{\mu\nu}, \label{ReducedRicciGauge} \\
&& \blacksquare L_{\mu\nu} = -2 \Xi d_{\mu\rho\nu\lambda} L^{\rho\lambda}
+ 4 L_{\mu}{}^{\lambda} L_{\nu\lambda} - L_{\lambda\rho} L^{\lambda\rho} g_{\mu\nu}
+ \tfrac{1}{6} \nabla_{\mu}\nabla_{\nu}\mathcal{R}(x) + \tfrac{1}{2} \Xi^3 d_{\mu\lambda\nu\rho} T^{\lambda\rho}
\nonumber \\
&& \hspace{1.3cm} - \Xi \nabla_{\lambda}T_{\mu}{}^{\lambda}{}_{\nu} -
2 T_{(\mu|\lambda|\nu)} \nabla^{\lambda}\Xi. \label{BlackBoxPhiGauge}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
\end{assumption}
As a direct consequence of equation \eqref{ReducedRicciGauge}, one can find that
the gauge zero-quantities \eqref{QScalar}-\eqref{QTensor} are not
independent of each other. Simple calculations yield
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& Q_{\mu\nu} = \nabla_{(\mu}Q_{\nu)}, \label{QIdentities1} \\
&& Q = Q_\mu{}^\mu = \nabla_\mu Q^\mu. \label{QIdentities2}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
Furthermore, equation \eqref{DefinitionReducedRicci} and
\Cref{Definition:DefinitionBlackBoxOperator} lead to
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \mathscr{R}_{\mu\nu}[\bmg] = R_{\mu\nu} -\nabla_{(\mu} Q_{\nu)}, \label{ReducedRicci}\\
&& \blacksquare L_{\mu\nu} = \square L_{\mu\nu} - (Q_{\mu\sigma}
-\nabla_\mu Q_\sigma) L^\sigma{}_\nu - (Q_{\nu\sigma} -\nabla_\nu
Q_\sigma)L^\sigma{}_\mu. \label{ReducedWave}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
\begin{remark}
\em{ Equations \eqref{QIdentities1}-\eqref{QIdentities2} show that if $Q^\mu =0$
then $Q$ and $Q_{\mu\nu}$ automatically vanish. In this sense, we will consider
$Q^\mu$ as the basic gauge zero-quantity of the system.}
\end{remark}
\subsection{The gauge subsidiary evolution system}
In this subsection we obtain a system of homogeneous wave equations for the
gauge subsidiary variables. This will be achieved by exploiting the properties
of the so-called \emph{Bach tensor} which will play the role of an
integrability condition for the system.
\subsubsection{The Bach tensor}
Let $g_{ab}$ be a 4-dimensional metric. The Bach tensor is defined as:
\begin{equation}
B_{ab} \equiv \nabla^c\nabla_a L_{bc} - \nabla^c\nabla_c L_{ab} - C_{acdb}L^{cd}.
\end{equation}
From this definition it is easy to verify that $B_{ab}$ is symmetric and
tracefree. Additionally, it satisfies the following identity, independently
of the validity of the Einstein field equations:
\begin{equation}
\nabla^aB_{ab} = 0. \label{DivergenceBach}
\end{equation}
\begin{remark}
{\em A straightforward calculation shows that the Bach tensor can be expressed
in terms of the geometric zero-quantities as
\begin{equation*}
B_{ab} = - L^{cd} P_{acbd} - \tfrac{1}{2} \Xi^3 d_{acbd} T^{cd} + \Xi
\nabla_{c}T_{a}{}^{c}{}_{b} + 2T_{(a|c|b)} \nabla^{c}\Xi.
\end{equation*}
Consequently, if $g_{ab}$ is a solution to the tracefree metric
conformal Einstein field equations then the Bach tensor vanishes if $T_{ab} =
0$.}
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
{\em In view of the fact that trivial initial conditions for the
zero-quantities imply the vanishing of $P^a{}_{bcd}$ --- see
\Cref{Proposition:PropagationOfTheConstraints} --- throughout the remainder of the
article, and for the sake of simplicity, our calculations will assume that
$P^a{}_{bcd} = 0$.}
\end{remark}
\subsubsection{Wave equations for the gauge subsidiary variables}
The Bach tensor can be conveniently expressed in terms of the gauge
zero-quantities. Terms containing $R_{\mu\nu}$ and $R$ can be rewritten
according to definitions \eqref{QScalar} and \eqref{QTensor} along with
\eqref{QIdentities1} and \eqref{ReducedRicci}. A procedure similar to
that of Section 5.2 in \cite{CarVal18b} allows us to show that the Bach
tensor can be expressed in the form
\begin{equation}
B_{\mu\nu} = B'_{\mu\nu} +N_{\mu\nu},
\label{BachSplit}
\end{equation}
where $B'_{\mu\nu}$ is an expression homogeneous on $Q$, $Q_\mu$, $Q_{\mu\nu}$
and its derivatives up to fourth order and which is identical to the one found
in \cite{CarVal18b}. Here, the contributions from $T_{\mu\nu}$
have been grouped in the symmetric tensor
\[
N_{\mu\nu} \equiv - \tfrac12\Xi^3 d_{\mu\lambda\nu\rho}T^{\lambda\rho} + 2
T_{(\mu|\lambda|\nu)}\nabla^\lambda\Xi + \Xi \nabla_\lambda
T_\mu{}^\lambda{}_\nu.
\]
Next, we introduce the auxiliary field
\begin{equation}
M_\mu \equiv \square Q_\mu. \label{WEGaugeM}
\end{equation}
Taking the divergence of equation \eqref{BachSplit}, and after some direct manipulations,
equations \eqref{QIdentities1}-\eqref{QIdentities2} and
\eqref{DivergenceBach} imply that
\[
\square M_\mu = H_\mu (\nabla\bmM, \nabla\bmQ, \nabla Q, \bmQ, Q) + 4\nabla^\nu N_{\nu\mu},
\]
where $\bmQ$ stands for $Q_\mu$ and, for simplicity, $H_\nu$ represents a
homogeneous function of its arguments. On the other hand, we can rewrite the
term $\nabla^\nu N_{\nu\mu}$ in a suitable way by using the symmetries of
$T_{abc}$ along with the help of equations \eqref{QTensor},
\eqref{ReducedRicci} and the geometric zero-quantities. A direct calculation
shows that
\[
\nabla^\nu N_{\nu\mu} = -T_{\mu\nu\lambda}\Upsilon^{\nu\lambda}
- \tfrac12 \Xi^3 T_{\nu\lambda}\Lambda^\nu{}_\mu{}^\lambda,
\]
so the wave equation for $M_\mu$ takes the schematic form
\begin{equation}
\square M_\mu = H_\mu (\nabla\bmM, \nabla\bmQ, \nabla Q, \bmQ, Q, \bmUpsilon, \bmLambda).
\label{WEGaugeQa}
\end{equation}
Lastly, a wave equation for $Q$ is required to close the system. This can be
obtained by direct application of the $\square$ operator on the definition of
$Q$ along with the aid of equations \eqref{QScalar}, \eqref{QIdentities2} and
\eqref{ReducedRicci}, resulting in
\begin{equation}
\square Q = -2L_{\mu\nu}\nabla^\mu Q^\nu - \nabla^\mu Q^\nu \nabla_{(\mu}Q_{\nu)}
- \tfrac12 Q^\mu\nabla_\mu Q - \tfrac12 Q^\mu\nabla_\mu \mathcal{R}(x) - \tfrac16\mathcal{R}(x)Q
+ \nabla^\mu M_\mu.\label{WEGaugeQ}
\end{equation}
\begin{remark}
{\em The gauge subsidiary evolution system, equations
\eqref{WEGaugeM}-\eqref{WEGaugeQ}, is homogeneous in $M_\mu, \ Q_\mu, \ Q, \
\Upsilon_{\mu\nu}$, $\Lambda_{\mu\nu\lambda}$ and their first derivatives. }
\end{remark}
The previous discussion leads to the following result:
\begin{lemma}
\label{Lemma:InitialGaugeConditions}
Assume that the hypotheses of Lemma \ref{Lemma:SubsidiarySystem} hold.
Moreover, let the quantities $M_\mu$, $Q_\mu$, $Q$,
$\Upsilon_{\mu\nu}$ and $\Lambda_{\mu\nu\lambda}$
along with their first covariant derivatives vanish on a fiduciary hypersurface
$\mathcal{S_\star}$. Then the unique solution to the system
\eqref{WEGaugeM}-\eqref{WEGaugeQ} on a small enough slab of
$\mathcal{S}_\star$ corresponds to $Q = 0$, $Q_\mu= 0$ and $M_\mu= 0$, which in
turn implies that $Q_{\mu\nu}=0$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{remark}
{\em As discussed in Section 5.2.3 of \cite{CarVal18b} the initial
gauge conditions in Lemma \ref{Lemma:InitialGaugeConditions} can be
rephrased in terms of conditions on the lapse and shift (and their
derivatives) associated to the coordinate gauge source function
$\mathcal{F}^\mu(x)$. It must be pointed out that these initial
gauge conditions are not equivalent, in the vacuum case, to those
considered in \cite{Pae15} which only require the vanishing of the
gauge zero-quantities and their first derivatives on the initial
hypersurface. In the present case, the conditions require the
vanishing of third order derivatives via the definition of $M_\mu$.}
\end{remark}
\section{Evolution equations for the matter fields}
\label{Section:MatterFields}
Having settled the analysis of the \emph{geometric} part of the metric tracefree
conformal Einstein equations, we now proceed to investigate the
evolution of the subsidiary equations associated to a number of matter models
of interest: the conformally invariant scalar field, the Maxwell field and the
Yang-Mills field.
\subsection{The conformally invariant scalar field}
\label{Subsection:ScalarField}
It is well-known that the equation
\[
\tilde{\nabla}^{a}\tilde{\nabla}_{a}\tilde{\phi}=0,
\]
where $\tilde\phi$ is a scalar field, is not conformally invariant. This
deficiency can be healed by the addition of a term involving the coupling with
the Ricci scalar, namely
\begin{equation}
\tilde{\nabla}^{a}\tilde{\nabla}_{a}\tilde{\phi}-\tfrac{1}{6}\tilde
R\tilde \phi=0.
\label{WaveEqnScalarFieldPhysical}
\end{equation}
Defining the unphysical scalar field
\[
\phi\equiv \Xi^{-1}\tilde\phi,
\]
a direct computation shows that equation \eqref{WaveEqnScalarFieldPhysical} implies
\begin{equation}
\square\phi-\tfrac{1}{6}R\phi=0.
\label{ConformallyInvariantWaveEquation}
\end{equation}
In what follows, for convenience, equation \eqref{WaveEqnScalarFieldPhysical}
will known as the \emph{conformally invariant wave equation} --- or the
\emph{conformally coupled wave equation}. The energy-momentum tensor associated
to this field takes the form
\begin{equation}
T_{ab}=\nabla_{a}\phi\nabla_{b}\phi-\tfrac{1}{4}g_{ab}\nabla_{c}\phi\nabla^{c}\phi-
\tfrac{1}{2}\nabla_{a}\nabla_{b}\phi+\tfrac{1}{2}\phi^{2}L_{ab},
\label{EMTensorScalarField}
\end{equation}
so that $\nabla^a T_{ab}=0$ holds if equation
\eqref{ConformallyInvariantWaveEquation} is satisfied. It can be readily
verified that $T_{ab}$, as given by the expression above, is also tracefree.
\begin{remark}
{\em The second derivatives of $\phi$ in equation \eqref{EMTensorScalarField}
will lead to the appearance of second and third order derivatives of the matter field in
the expression of the rescaled Cotton tensor --- see equation
\eqref{RescaledCottonTensor} --- which may affect the hyperbolicity of the
system \eqref{ReducedWaveCFE1}-\eqref{ReducedWaveCFE5}. Moreover, $T_{ab}$ is
also coupled to the geometric sector via the Schouten tensor. These
difficulties will be addressed in the sequel.}
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
{\em The conformally invariant scalar field is related to the standard
scalar field satisfying the wave equation through a transformation
originally due to Bekenstein \cite{Bek74}. Thus, in principle, the
theory for the conformally invariant scalar field developed in this section
can be rephrased in terms of the standard scalar field.}
\end{remark}
\subsubsection{Auxiliary fields and the evolution equations}
We start the analysis by observing that the third order derivative terms in the
expression of the rescaled Cotton tensor for the conformally invariant scalar
field are of the form $\nabla_{[a} \nabla_{b]} \nabla_c \phi$. Using the
commutator of covariant derivatives, these terms can be transformed into first
order derivative terms according to the formula
\[
\nabla_{[a} \nabla_{b]} \nabla_c \phi = - \tfrac12 R_{abc}{}^d \nabla_d\phi.
\]
Thus, one is left with an expression for the Cotton tensor containing, at most,
second order derivatives. In order to eliminate these derivatives which,
potentially, could destroy the hyperbolic nature of the wave equations
\eqref{ReducedWaveCFE1}-\eqref{ReducedWaveCFE4}, one needs to promote the first
and second derivatives of $\phi$ as further (independent) unknowns.
Accordingly, we define
\begin{equation}
\phi_{a}\equiv\nabla_a\phi,\qquad \phi_{ab}\equiv\nabla_{a}\nabla_{b}\phi.
\label{ScalarFieldSubstitutions}
\end{equation}
Following the previous discussion, and exploiting equation \eqref{TraceCFE3},
one can write the rescaled Cotton tensor for the conformally invariant scalar
field as
\begin{eqnarray}
&& T_{abc} = \bigg(1 - \tfrac14\Xi^2\phi^2 \bigg)^{-1} \bigg(\tfrac32\Xi\phi L_{c[b}\phi_{a]}
+ \tfrac32\Xi \phi_{[b}\phi_{a]c} - \tfrac14\Xi\phi^2 d_{abcd}\nabla^d\Xi
-\tfrac14\Xi^2\phi d_{abcd}\phi^d \nonumber \\
&& \hspace{1.2cm} + \tfrac12\Xi\phi g_{c[b}L_{a]d}
+ \tfrac12 \Xi g_{c[a}\phi_{b]d}\phi^d + g_{c[b}T_{a]d}\nabla^d\Xi
+3 T_{c[b}\nabla_{a]}\Xi \bigg).
\label{RescaledCottonScalarFieldGood}
\end{eqnarray}
\medskip
We now proceed to construct suitable evolution equations for $\phi_a$ and $\phi_{ab}$
by means of a set of integrability conditions for these fields.
Firstly, the identity $\nabla_a\phi_{b} = \nabla_b\phi_{a}$ represents an
integrability condition for $\phi_a$. A wave equation then readily follows
after applying $\nabla^b$ and using equation
\eqref{ConformallyInvariantWaveEquation}:
\begin{equation}
\square\phi_a
= 2\phi^bL_{ab} + \tfrac13 R\phi_a + \tfrac16\phi\nabla_a R.
\label{WaveEqnDPhi}
\end{equation}
On the other hand, an integrability condition for $\phi_{ab}$ can be obtained
directly from its definition:
\[
2\nabla_{[c}\phi_{a]b} = \phi_d R_{cab}{}^d =
-\Xi\phi^d d_{acbd} -2\phi_{[c}L_{a]b} + 2\phi^d g_{b[c}L_{a]d}.
\]
Applying $\nabla^c$ to this relation and using equations
\eqref{TraceCFE3}, \eqref{TraceCFE4}, \eqref{ConformallyInvariantWaveEquation}
and \eqref{WaveEqnDPhi}, a straightforward calculation leads to:
\begin{align}
\square\phi_{ab} = & \tfrac{1}{2} \phi_{ab} R - \tfrac{1}{3} R \phi L_{ab} - 2 \phi^{cd} L_{cd}
g_{ab} - \tfrac{1}{6} \phi^{c} g_{ab} \nabla_{c}R + \tfrac{1}{6} \phi
\nabla_{(a}\nabla_{b)}R - 2 \Xi \phi^{cd}d_{(a|c|b)d} \nonumber \\
& + 8 \phi_{(a}{}^{c}L_{b)c} + 2 \Xi \phi^{c}T_{(a|c|b)} + \tfrac{2}{3}
\phi_{(a}\nabla_{b)}R + 2 \phi^{c}\nabla_{(a}L_{b)c}
- 2 \phi^{c}d_{(acb)}{}^{d}\nabla_{d}\Xi.
\label{WaveEqnDDPhi}
\end{align}
\begin{remark}
{\em In equation \eqref{WaveEqnDDPhi} it is understood that the rescaled Cotton
tensor $T_{bca}$ is expressed in terms of the auxiliary fields $\phi_a$ and
$\phi_{ab}$ according to \eqref{RescaledCottonScalarFieldGood} so does not
contain second or higher derivatives of the fields.}
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
\label{Remark:BoxOperatorScalarField}
{\em When coupling the wave equations \eqref{ConformallyInvariantWaveEquation},
\eqref{WaveEqnDPhi} and \eqref{WaveEqnDDPhi} to the system
\eqref{ReducedWaveCFE1}-\eqref{ReducedWaveCFE5} satisfied by the geometric
conformal fields, it is understood that the geometric wave operator $\square$
is replaced by its reduced counterpart $\blacksquare$ as discussed in
Section \ref{Section:ReducedWaveOperator}. }
\end{remark}
\subsubsection{Subsidiary equations}
To verify the consistency of our approach in dealing with the higher order
derivative terms in the rescaled Cotton tensor for the conformally invariant
scalar field we introduce the following subsidiary fields:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& Q_{a}\equiv \phi_{a}-\nabla_{a}\phi, \label{DefinitionQVector}\\
&& Q_{ab} \equiv \phi_{ab}-\nabla_{a}\nabla_{b}\phi. \label{DefinitionQTensor}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
\medskip
A wave equation for $Q_a$ can be obtained in a straightforward way: applying
$\square$ to definition \eqref{DefinitionQVector} and with the help of
relations \eqref{ConformallyInvariantWaveEquation} and \eqref{WaveEqnDPhi},
a short calculation yields
\begin{equation}
\square Q_{a} = \square \phi_a - \nabla_a\square\phi - R_{ab}\nabla^b\phi
=\tfrac{1}{3}RQ_{a}+2L_a{}^b Q_b \label{WaveEquationQVector}.
\end{equation}
Similarly, applying $\square$ to equation \eqref{DefinitionQTensor}, commuting
covariant derivatives and using the definitions of the geometric
zero-quantities one obtains
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \square Q_{ab}= \tfrac{1}{2} Q_{ab} R - 2 Q^{cd} L_{cd} g_{ab} -
\tfrac{1}{6} Q^{c} g_{ab} \nabla_{c}R + 2 Q^{c} \nabla_{c}L_{ab}
- 2 \Xi Q^{cd}d_{acbd} + 8 Q_{(a}{}^{c}L_{b)c} \nonumber \\
&& \hspace{1.4cm} - 2 \phi^{c}\Delta_{(a|c|b)}
+ 4 \Xi Q^{c}T_{(a|c|b)} + 4Q^{c}\Delta_{(a|c|b)} + \tfrac{2}{3} Q_{(a}\nabla_{b)}R
- 4 Q^{c}d_{(a|c|b)}{}^{d}\nabla_{d}\Xi.
\label{WaveEquationQTensor}
\end{eqnarray}
\begin{remark}
{\em The system of wave equations \eqref{WaveEquationQVector} and
\eqref{WaveEquationQTensor} is homogeneous in $Q_a, \ Q_{ab}$ and
$\Delta_{abc}$ Thus, it follows from general uniqueness results for solutions
to wave equations that if these quantities and their derivatives vanish on an
initial hypersurface $\mathcal{S}_\star$, then necessarily $Q_a=0$ and
$Q_{ab}=0$ at least on a small enough slab around $\mathcal{S}_\star$. }
\end{remark}
\subsubsection{Summary}
The analysis of the conformally invariant scalar field can be summarised
in the following manner:
\begin{proposition}
The system of equations \eqref{ReducedWaveCFE1}-\eqref{ReducedWaveCFE5} with
rescaled Cotton tensor given by \eqref{RescaledCottonScalarFieldGood},
together with the conformally invariant wave equation
\eqref{ConformallyInvariantWaveEquation} and the auxiliary system
\eqref{WaveEqnDPhi}-\eqref{WaveEqnDDPhi} written in terms of the reduced wave
operator $\blacksquare$, constitute a \emph{proper} system of quasilinear wave
equations --- see Remark \ref{Remark:DefinitionProper}.
\end{proposition}
\subsection{The Maxwell field}
\label{Subsection:MaxwellField}
The next example under consideration is the electromagnetic field. The physical
Maxwell equations expressed in terms of the antisymmetric Faraday tensor
$\tilde{F}_{ab}$ are given by
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& \tilde{\nabla}^{a}\tilde{F}_{ab}=0,\\
&& \tilde{\nabla}_{[a}\tilde{F}_{bc]}=0.
\end{eqnarray*}
It is well-known that the Maxwell equations are conformally invariant by
defining the \emph{unphysical Faraday tensor} $F_{ab}$ as
\[
F_{ab} \equiv \tilde{F}_{ab}.
\]
From here it follows that the physical Maxwell equations imply
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \nabla^{a}F_{ab}=0, \label{UnphysicalMaxwell1} \\
&& \nabla_{[a}F_{bc]}=0, \label{UnphysicalMaxwell2}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
with the associated \emph{unphysical Maxwell energy-momentum tensor} given by
\begin{equation}
T_{ab}=F_{ac}F_{b}{}^{c}-\frac{1}{4}g_{ab}F_{cd}F^{cd}.
\label{UmphysicalEMTensorMaxwell}
\end{equation}
Alternatively, defining the Hodge dual $F^*_{ab}$ of the Faraday tensor as
\begin{equation}
F^*_{ab} \equiv -\frac12 \epsilon_{ab}{}^{cd}F_{cd},
\end{equation}
the second unphysical Maxwell equation \eqref{UnphysicalMaxwell2} can be
written as:
\begin{equation}
\nabla^a F^*_{ab}=0 \label{UnphysicalMaxwell2Alt}.
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Auxiliary field and the evolution equations}
A geometric wave equation for the Faraday tensor can be obtained from
differentiation of the Maxwell equation \eqref{UnphysicalMaxwell2}, which
represents a natural integrability condition for this field. Commuting
covariant derivatives and applying equation \eqref{UnphysicalMaxwell1}, a
calculation yields
\begin{equation}
\square F_{bc}=\tfrac{1}{3}F_{bc}R-2\Xi F^{ad}d_{bacd}.
\label{WaveEquationFaraday}
\end{equation}
\medskip
From equation \eqref{RescaledCottonTensor} it follows that the rescaled
Cotton tensor contains first derivatives of $F_{ab}$. This puts at risk the
hyperbolicity of the system \eqref{ReducedWaveCFE1}-\eqref{ReducedWaveCFE4}.
In order to deal with this problem we introduce the auxiliary variable
\begin{equation}
F_{abc} \equiv \nabla_a F_{bc},
\label{DefinitionFabc}
\end{equation}
satisfying $F_{abc} = F_{a[bc]}$. By virtue of equation
\eqref{UnphysicalMaxwell2} it also follows that $F_{[abc]}=0$. In terms of
this quantity, it can be readily checked that the rescaled Cotton tensor for the
Maxwell field takes the form
\begin{align}
T_{abc} = & \ \Xi F_{[b}{}^d F_{a]cd} - \tfrac12 \Xi F_c{}^d F_{dab}
+ \tfrac12 \Xi g_{c[a}F^{de}F_{b]de} - 3 F_{cd} F_{[a}{}^d \nabla_{b]}\Xi
+ F_{de}F^{de}g_{c[a}\nabla_{b]}\Xi \nonumber \\
& - g_{c[a}F_{b]}{}^e F_{de}\nabla^d\Xi.
\label{RescaledCottonMaxwell}
\end{align}
From definition \eqref{DefinitionFabc} it follows that $F_{abc}$ possesses two
independent divergences: $\nabla^a F_{abc}$ is simply the right-hand side of
wave equation \eqref{WaveEquationFaraday} whilst the other is given by
\begin{equation}
\nabla_c F_{ab}{}^c = \Xi F^{cd}d_{acbd} - \frac16 RF_{ab} + 2F_{[a}{}^c L_{b]c}, \label{DivergenceFabc2}
\end{equation}
as a direct calculation confirms. In order to obtain an integrability
condition for $F_{abc}$, consider the expression $3\nabla_{[d}F_{|a|bc]}$.
Commuting covariant derivatives and using the first Bianchi identity for the
Weyl tensor, a straightforward calculation results in:
\begin{equation}
3\nabla_{[d}F_{|a|bc]} = -3 \Xi F_{[d}{}^e d_{|ae|bc]} + 6 F_{[db}L_{c]a}
+ 6 g_{a[d}F_b{}^e L_{c]e} \label{ICFabc}.
\end{equation}
A geometric wave equation can be obtained by applying $\nabla^d$ to the last expression and
commuting derivatives. Using equations \eqref{TraceCFE3}, \eqref{TraceCFE4},
\eqref{DefinitionCottonDual}, \eqref{TraceCFE4Alt},
\eqref{DivergenceFabc2} as well as the symmetries of $d_a{}_{bcd}$ and
$T_{abc}$ to simplify it, a long but direct calculation yields
\begin{align}
\square F_{abc} = & -2\Xi F_{a}{}^{d} T_{bcd} + 4\Xi F_{[b}{}^{d} T_{|ad|c]}
- 2 \Xi F_{a}{}^{de} d_{bdce} - 4 \Xi F^{d}{}_{[b}{}^{e} d_{c]ead}
+ \tfrac{1}{2} F_{abc} R + 4 F^{d}{}_{bc} L_{ad} \nonumber \\
& - 4 F^{d}{}_{a[b} L_{c]d}
- 4 F^{d}{}_{[b}{}^{e} g_{c]a} L_{de} + \tfrac{1}{3} F_{bc} \nabla_{a}R
- 2 F^{de} d_{ade[b}\nabla_{c]}\Xi - 4 \Xi F^{de} \nabla_{[b}d_{c]ead} \nonumber \\
& - \tfrac{1}{3} F_{a[b} \nabla_{c]}R
- 2 F_{[b}{}^{e} d_{c]ead} \nabla^{d}\Xi - F_{d}{}^{e} d_{aebc} \nabla^{d}\Xi
- 4 F_{[b}{}^{e} d_{c]dae} \nabla^{d}\Xi - F_{a}{}^{e} d_{bcde} \nabla^{d}\Xi \nonumber \\
& + 2 F^{ef} g_{a[b} d_{c]edf}\nabla^{d}\Xi + \tfrac{1}{3} g_{a[b} F_{c]d} \nabla^{d}R.
\end{align}
This equation can be further simplified via a pair of observations. Firstly,
by multiplying equation \eqref{PaetzIdentityInter} by $F^{dg}$ the following
auxiliary identity is found:
\begin{equation}
2 F_{[a}{}^{e} d_{b]ecd} \nabla^{d}\Xi - 2 F_{[c}{}^{e} d_{d]eab} \nabla^{d}\Xi
+ 2 F^{de} d_{ced[a} \nabla_{b]}\Xi - 2 F^{eg} g_{c[a} d_{b]edg} \nabla^{d}\Xi =0.
\label{Aux1}
\end{equation}
Secondly, from equation \eqref{TraceCFE4Alt} we have the following relations:
\begin{eqnarray}
&& 4 \Xi F^{de} \nabla_{[b}d_{c]ead} = -2\Xi\epsilon_{bcef}F^{de} \,^*T_{ad}{}^f
+ 2\Xi F^{de}\nabla_e d_{adbc}, \nonumber \\
&& \Xi F^{de} \nabla_{e}d_{adbc} =
- \tfrac{1}{2} \Xi \epsilon_{adef} F^{de} \,^*T_{bc}{}^{f} - \tfrac{1}{2}
\Xi F^{de} \nabla_{a}d_{bcde}. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
Combining them we readily obtain the identity
\begin{equation}
4 \Xi F^{de} \nabla_{[b}d_{c]ead} = 4 \Xi F_{[b}{}^{d} T_{|a|c]d} - 2 \Xi
F_{a}{}^{d} T_{bcd} + \Xi F^{de} \nabla_{a}d_{bcde}. \label{Aux2}
\end{equation}
Making use of \eqref{Aux1} and \eqref{Aux2}, the wave equation for $F_{abc}$
takes a simpler form:
\begin{align}
\square F_{abc} = & \ 4\Xi F_{[b}{}^d T_{c]da}
- 2 \Xi F_{a}{}^{de} d_{bdce} - 4 F^d{}_{[b}{}^e d_{c]ead}
+ \tfrac{1}{2} F_{abc} R + 4 F^{d}{}_{bc} L_{ad} - 4 F^{d}{}_{a[b} L_{c]d} \nonumber \\
& - 4 F^{d}{}_{[b}{}^{e} g_{c]a} L_{de} + \tfrac{1}{3} F_{bc} \nabla_{a}R
- \tfrac{1}{3} F_{a[b} \nabla_{c]}R + \tfrac{1}{3} g_{a[b} F_{c]d} \nabla^{d}R
- 4 F^{de} d_{ade[b} \nabla_{c]}\Xi \nonumber \\
& - 4 F_{[b}{}^{e} d_{c]dae} \nabla^{d}\Xi
-2 F_a{}^e d_{bcde}\nabla^d\Xi - \Xi F^{de}\nabla_a d_{bcde}. \label{WaveEquationDerFaraday}
\end{align}
As remarked in the case of the conformally invariant scalar field, the
geometric operator $\square$ is to be replaced by $\blacksquare$ when equations
\eqref{WaveEquationFaraday} and \eqref{WaveEquationDerFaraday} are coupled to
the system \eqref{ReducedWaveCFE1}-\eqref{ReducedWaveCFE5}.
\subsubsection{Subsidiary equations}
In order to complete the discussion of the Maxwell field it is necessary to
construct suitable evolution equations for the zero-quantities
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& M_{b} \equiv \nabla^{a}F_{ab}, \label{DefinitionZQMaxwell1}\\
&& M_{abc}\equiv \nabla_{[a}F_{bc]}, \label{DefinitionZQMaxwell2}\\
&& Q_{abc} \equiv F_{abc} - \nabla_a F_{bc}. \label{DefinitionZQMaxwellAuxiliary}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
Here, $M_{abc}$ possesses the symmetries
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
M_{abc} = M_{a[bc]} = M_{[ab]c} = M_{[abc]}.
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
Also, one can verify the following identities:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \nabla^a M_a = 0, \label{DivergenceMa}\\
&& \nabla^c M_{abc} = -\tfrac23 \nabla_{[a}M_{b]}. \label{DivergenceMabc}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
\begin{remark}
{\em Following the spirit of the discussion in the previous section, the
zero-quantities $M_a$ and $M_{abc}$ encode Maxwell equations
\eqref{UnphysicalMaxwell1} and \eqref{UnphysicalMaxwell2}, respectively, while
$Q_{abc}$ does so for the auxiliary field $F_{abc}$.}
\end{remark}
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Equation for $M_a$.} Observe that equation \eqref{DivergenceMabc} works
as an integrability condition for $M_a$. Applying $\nabla^b$, using
\eqref{DivergenceMa} and exploiting the various symmetries of $M_{abc}$, one
obtains
\begin{equation}
\square M_{a} = \tfrac{1}{6} M_{a}R + 2 M^{b} L_{ab}.
\label{WEZQMaxwell1}
\end{equation}
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Equation for $M_{abc}$.} In order to avoid lengthy expressions it is
simpler to consider the Hodge dual of $M_{abc}$ defined as
\begin{equation}
M^*_a \equiv \nabla^b F^*_{ba} = \frac12 \epsilon_a{}^{bcd} M_{bcd}.
\end{equation}
Here, the second equality is a consequence of equations \eqref{DefinitionFabc}
and \eqref{DefinitionZQMaxwell2}. From this definition it can be easily checked
that $M^*_a$ is divergencefree which, in turn, implies an integrability
condition. More explicitly:
\begin{equation}
\nabla^a M^*_a = 0 \iff \nabla_{[d}M_{abc]} = 0.
\label{ICMabc}
\end{equation}
Applying $\nabla^d$ to \eqref{ICMabc} and commuting derivatives, a straightforward
calculation leads to
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \square M_{abc} = \tfrac{1}{2} R M_{abc} - 6 \Xi
d_{[a}{}^{d}{}_{b}{}^{e}M_{c]de} - 6 L_{[a}{}^{d}M_{bc]d},
\label{WEZQMaxwell2}
\end{eqnarray}
where it has been used that $\nabla_{[a}\nabla_{|d|}M_{bc]}{}^d$ vanishes by
virtue of equation \eqref{DivergenceMabc}.
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Equation for $Q_{abc}$.} A wave equation for the field $Q_{abc}$ can
be obtained by direct application of the $\square$ operator. Employing
definitions \eqref{DefinitionZQMaxwell1} and \eqref{DefinitionZQMaxwellAuxiliary},
along with equations \eqref{ZQ3}, \eqref{ZQ4},
\eqref{WaveEquationFaraday} and \eqref{WaveEquationDerFaraday}, one obtains the
expression
\begin{align}
\square Q_{abc} = & \ 4 \Xi F_{[b}{}^{d} \Lambda_{|a|c]d} - 2 \Xi Q_{a}{}^{de} d_{bdce}
- 2 \Xi Q^{d}{}_{[b}{}^{e} d_{c]ead} + \tfrac{1}{2} Q_{abc} R
- 4 M_{[b} L_{c]a} + 4 Q^{d}{}_{bc} L_{ad} \nonumber \\
& - 4 Q^{d}{}_{a[b} L_{c]d}
+ 6 L_{a}{}^{d} M_{bcd} - 4 Q^{d}{}_{[b}{}^{e} g_{c]a} L_{de}
+ 2 F^{de} d_{bdce} \nabla_{a}\Xi - 4 F^{de} d_{ade[b} \nabla_{c]}\Xi \nonumber \\
& - 6 F_{[a}{}^{e} d_{bc]de} \nabla^{d}\Xi.
\end{align}
In order to show that the terms not containing zero-quantities vanish,
observe that the first Bianchi identity implies that
\[
2 F^{de} d_{bdce} \nabla_{a}\Xi - 4 F^{de} d_{ade[b}\nabla_{c]}\Xi = 3 F^{de} d_{de[ab}\nabla_{c]}\Xi.
\]
On the other hand, multiplying definition $\eqref{Lambda_abcde}$ by
$F^{de}$, a short calculation yields the auxiliary identity
\begin{equation*}
3 F^{de} d_{de[ab}\nabla_{c]}\Xi - 6 F_{[a}{}^e d_{bc]de}\nabla^d\Xi = 0.
\end{equation*}
From the last two expressions it follows then that
\begin{align}
\square Q_{abc} = & \ 4 \Xi F_{[b}{}^{d} \Lambda_{|a|c]d} - 2 \Xi Q_{a}{}^{de} d_{bdce}
- 2 \Xi Q^{d}{}_{[b}{}^{e} d_{c]ead} + \tfrac{1}{2} Q_{abc} R
- 4 M_{[b} L_{c]a} + 4 Q^{d}{}_{bc} L_{ad} \nonumber \\
& - 4 Q^{d}{}_{a[b} L_{c]d}
+ 6 L_{a}{}^{d} M_{bcd} - 4 Q^{d}{}_{[b}{}^{e} g_{c]a} L_{de}.
\label{WEZQMaxwellAuxiliary}
\end{align}
\begin{remark}
\em{ Geometric wave equations \eqref{WEZQMaxwell1}, \eqref{WEZQMaxwell2} and
\eqref{WEZQMaxwellAuxiliary} are crucially homogeneous in $M_a$, $M_{abc}$,
$Q_{abc}$ and $\Lambda_{abc}$. Thus, if these quantities and their first
covariant derivatives vanish on an initial hypersurface $\mathcal{S}_\star$, it
can be guaranteed that there exists a unique solution on a small enough slab
of $\mathcal{S}_\star$, and it corresponds to $M_a = 0$, $M_{abc} = 0$ and
$Q_{abc} = 0$.}
\end{remark}
\subsubsection{Summary}
The previous discussion about the coupling of the Maxwell field to the
metric tracefree conformal Einstein field equations can be summarised as
follows:
\begin{proposition}
The system of wave equations \eqref{ReducedWaveCFE1}-\eqref{ReducedWaveCFE5}
with rescaled Cotton tensor given by \eqref{RescaledCottonMaxwell} together
with the wave equations \eqref{WaveEquationFaraday} and
\eqref{WaveEquationDerFaraday} written in terms of the wave operator
$\blacksquare$ is a proper quasilinear system of wave equations for the
Einstein-Maxwell system.
\end{proposition}
\subsection{The Yang-Mills field}
\label{Subsection:YangMillsField}
The Yang-Mills field is the last example of a tracefree matter model we study
in this paper. Due to its similarities with the Faraday field, some of the
calculations will result analogous to the ones performed in the previous
subsection. However, one of the distinctive features of the Yang-Mills field is
the fact that, in order to obtain a hyperbolic reduction of the equations, one
needs to introduce a set of gauge source functions fixing the divergence of the
gauge potential. The consistency of this gauge choice will be analysed towards
the end of the section.
\subsubsection{Basic equations}
The \emph{Yang-Mills field} consists of a set of \emph{gauge potentials}
$\tilde{A}^\fraka{}_\mu$ and \emph{gauge fields} $\tilde{F}^\fraka{}_{\mu\nu}$
where the indices $\fraka,\;\frakb,\dots$ take values in a Lie algebra
$\mathfrak{g}$ of a Lie group $\mathfrak{G}$. The equations satisfied by the
fields $\tilde{A}^\fraka{}_\mu$ and $\tilde{F}^\fraka{}_{\mu\nu}$ are:
\begin{eqnarray*}
&& \tilde{\nabla}_a \tilde{A}^\fraka{}_b - \tilde{\nabla}_a \tilde{A}^\fraka{}_b +
C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc} \tilde{A}^\frakb{}_a \tilde{A}^\frakc{}_b -\tilde{F}^\fraka{}_{ab} =0, \\
&& \tilde{\nabla}^a \tilde{F}^\fraka{}_{ab} + C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}
\tilde{A}^{\frakb a} \tilde{F}^\frakc{}_{ab}=0, \\
&& \tilde{\nabla}_{[a} \tilde{F}{}^\fraka{}_{bc]} + C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}
\tilde{A}^\frakb{}_{[a} \tilde{F}^\frakc{}_{bc]} =0.
\end{eqnarray*}
Here $C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}=C^\fraka{}_{[\frakb\frakc]}$ denote the
structure constants of the Lie algebra $\mathfrak{g}$ which satisfy the
\emph{Jacobi identity}
\begin{equation}
C^\fraka{}_{\frakd\frake} C^\frakb{}_{\fraka\frakc}
+C^\fraka{}_{\frake\frakc}C^\frakb{}_{\fraka\frakd}+C^\fraka{}_{\frakc\frakd}C^\frakb{}_{\fraka\frake}=0.
\label{JacobiIdentityStructureConstants}
\end{equation}
Also, the energy-momentum tensor associated to the Yang-Mills field is given by
\[
\tilde{T}_{ab} = \tfrac{1}{4} \delta_{\fraka\frakb}\tilde{F}^\fraka{}_{cd}
\tilde{F}^{\frakb cd} \tilde{g}_{ab}
-\delta_{\fraka\frakb}\tilde{F}^\fraka{}_{ac}\tilde{F}^\frakb{}_b{}^c.
\]
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Conformal invariance.} The Yang-Mills equations are well-known
to be conformally invariant. More precisely, defining the
\emph{unphysical fields}:
\[
F^\fraka{}_{ab} \equiv \tilde{F}^\fraka{}_{ab}, \qquad A^\fraka{}_{a}
\equiv \tilde{A}^\fraka{}_{a},
\]
a direct computation under the conformal rescaling \eqref{Definition:ConformalRescaling} renders
the \emph{unphysical Yang-Mills equations}
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \nabla_a A^\fraka{}_b - \nabla_b A^\fraka{}_a +
C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc} A^\frakb{}_a A^\frakc{}_b -F^\fraka{}_{ab} =0, \label{UnphysicalYM1}\\
&& \nabla^a F^\fraka{}_{ab} + C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}
A^{\frakb a} F^\frakc{}_{ab}=0, \label{UnphysicalYM2}\\
&& \nabla_{[a} F{}^\fraka{}_{bc]} + C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}
A^\frakb{}_{[a} F^\frakc{}_{bc]} =0. \label{UnphysicalYM3}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
In addition, the unphysical energy-momentum tensor is
\begin{equation}
T_{ab} = \tfrac{1}{4} \delta_{\fraka\frakb}F^\fraka{}_{cd}
F^{\frakb cd} g_{ab}
-\delta_{\fraka\frakb}F^\fraka{}_{ac}F^\frakb{}_b{}^c. \label{EMTensorYM}
\end{equation}
Finally, it will result useful to introduce the dual of $F^\fraka{}_{ab}$
defined as
\begin{equation}
F^{*\fraka}{}_{ab} \equiv -\tfrac12\epsilon_{ab}{}^{cd}F^\fraka{}_{cd}.
\label{FaradayYMDual}
\end{equation}
\begin{remark}
\em{Due to the form of the energy-momentum tensor given in \eqref{EMTensorYM},
first derivatives of $F^\fraka{}_{ab}$ will appear in the rescaled Cotton tensor,
putting at risk the hyperbolicity of the system
\eqref{ReducedWaveCFE1}-\eqref{ReducedWaveCFE4}. As in the case of the
Maxwell field, this will make necessary the introduction of an auxiliary quantity.}
\end{remark}
\subsubsection{Evolution equations for the Yang-Mills fields} Suitable wave
equations for the Yang-Mills fields can be obtained by a procedure analogous to
the one used for the Maxwell field. Accordingly, we introduce the auxiliary field
\begin{equation}
F^\fraka{}_{abc} \equiv \nabla_a F^\fraka{}_{bc} + C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}A^\frakb{}_a
F^\frakc{}_{bc}.
\label{DefinitionFabcYM}
\end{equation}
Moreover, the construction of a geometric wave equation for the Yang-Mills
gauge potentials requires the introduction of \emph{gauge source functions}
$f^\fraka(x)$ depending in a smooth way on the coordinates and fixing the value
of the divergence of the potential. More precisely, in the following we set
\begin{equation}
\nabla^a A^\fraka{}_a \equiv f^\fraka(x). \label{Definition:YMGaugeSourceFunction}
\end{equation}
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Equation for the field strength.} The Yang-Mills Bianchi identity,
equation \eqref{UnphysicalYM3}, represents an integrability condition for the
field strength tensors $F^\fraka{}_{ab}$. Differentiating it and making use of
equations \eqref{JacobiIdentityStructureConstants} and
\eqref{UnphysicalYM1}-\eqref{UnphysicalYM3}, a straightforward calculation
results in
\begin{align}
\square F^{\fraka}{}_{ab} = & -2 \Xi F^{\fraka cd}
d_{acbd} + \tfrac{1}{3} F^{\fraka}{}_{ab} R +
2C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc} F^\frakb{}_a{}^c F^\frakc{}_{bc}
- 2C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc} F^\frakc{}_{cab}A^{\frakb c}
- C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frake} C^\frake{}_{\frakc\frakd}
F^\frakd{}_{ab}A^{\frakb c} A^\frakc{}_c \nonumber \\
& + C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc} f^\frakb(x) F^\frakc{}_{ab}.
\label{CWEFaradayYM}
\end{align}
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Equation for the gauge potential.} Equation \eqref{UnphysicalYM1}
provides a natural integrability condition for the gauge potential field. After
applying $\nabla^b$, commuting derivatives and using equation
\eqref{UnphysicalYM2}, one arrives to:
\begin{equation}
\square A^{\fraka}{}_{a} = \tfrac{1}{6} A^{\fraka}{}_{a} R + 2 A^{\fraka b} L_{ab}
+ C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakc} F^{\frakc}{}_{ab} A^{\frakb b}
+ C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakc} f^\frakc(x) A^{\frakb}{}_{a}
- C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakc} A^{\frakb b} \nabla_{b}A^{\frakc}{}_{a} + \nabla_{a}f^{\fraka}(x).
\label{CWEPotentialYM}
\end{equation}
\medskip
\noindent \textbf{Equation for the auxiliary field.} A suitable integrability
condition for the field $F^\fraka{}_{abc}$ can be obtained from its definition.
Using this and equation \eqref{UnphysicalYM3}, some manipulations yield
\[
3\nabla_{[d}F^\fraka{}_{|a|bc]} = -3 \Xi F^\fraka{}_{[b}{}^e d_{cd]ae} + 6 F^\fraka{}_{[bc}L_{d]a}
+ 6 g_{a[b}F^\fraka{}_c{}^e L_{d]e} - 3 C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}F^\frakc{}_{a[bc}A^\frakb{}_{d]}
- 3 C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}\nabla_a A^\frakb{}_{[b} F^\frakc{}_{cd]}.
\]
Proceeding as in the case of the wave equation for $F^\fraka{}_{abc}$, as well
as using the Jacobi identity and definitions
\eqref{DefinitionZQYM1}-\eqref{DefinitionDerFaradayZQYM}, a lengthy calculation
results in
\begin{align}
\square F^\fraka{}_{abc} = & \ \tfrac{1}{2} F^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{abc} R + 4 F^{\mathfrak{a} d}{}_{bc} L_{ad} + 2
F^{\mathfrak{b} d}{}_{bc} F^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{ad} C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b}
\mathfrak{c}} - F^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{abc} f^{\mathfrak{b}}(x)
C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b} \mathfrak{c}}
- F^{\mathfrak{d}}{}_{abc} A^{\mathfrak{b} d} A^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{d} C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b} \frake}
C^{\frake}{}_{\mathfrak{c} \mathfrak{d}} \nonumber \\
& \ + \tfrac{1}{3} F^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{bc}
\nabla_{a}R - 2 A^{\mathfrak{b} d} C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b} \mathfrak{c}}
\nabla_{d}F^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{abc}
- F^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{d}{}^{e} d_{aebc}
\nabla^{d}\Xi - F^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{a}{}^{e} d_{bcde} \nabla^{d}\Xi + 2
\Xi F^{\mathfrak{a} de} \nabla_{e}d_{adbc} \nonumber \\
& \ - 4 \Xi F^{\mathfrak{a}d}{}_{[b}{}^{e}d_{|ad|c]e}
- 2 \Xi F^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{a}{}^{de}d_{[b|d|c]e}
- 4 F^{\mathfrak{a} d}{}_{a[b}L_{c]d} + 4 \Xi F^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{[b}{}^{d}T_{c]da}
+ 4 \Xi F^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{[b}{}^{d}T_{|ad|c]} \nonumber \\
& \ - \tfrac{1}{3}F^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{a[b}\nabla_{c]}R
+ 4 F^{\mathfrak{b}}{}_{a[b}{}^{d}F^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{c]d}C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b}
\mathfrak{c}} - 4 F^{\mathfrak{a} d}{}_{[b}{}^{e}L_{|de}g_{a|c]}
- 2 \Xi F^{\mathfrak{a} de}T_{[b|de}g_{a|c]} \nonumber \\
& \ - 4 F^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{[b}{}^{d}d_{|ad|c]}{}^{e}\nabla_{e}\Xi - 2
F^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{[b}{}^{d}d_{|a|}{}^{e}{}_{c]d}\nabla_{e}\Xi
+ 2 F^{\mathfrak{a} de}d_{ad[b|e|}\nabla_{c]}\Xi - \tfrac{1}{3}
F^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{[b}{}^{d}g_{|a|c]}\nabla_{d}R \nonumber \\
& \ - 2 F^{\mathfrak{a}de}g_{a[b}\nabla_{|d|}L_{c]e}.
\label{CWEDerFaradayYM}
\end{align}
In a similar manner to the two previous matter models, when equations
\eqref{CWEFaradayYM}, \eqref{CWEPotentialYM} and \eqref{CWEDerFaradayYM} are
coupled to the system of wave equations for the conformal fields, the $\square$
operator is to be replaced by its counterpart $\blacksquare$.
\subsubsection{Subsidiary equations}
The next step in the analysis of the Yang-Mills field is the introduction of
the corresponding subsidiary quantities and the consequent construction of
suitable geometric wave equations for them. For this purpose define the
following set of zero-quantities:
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& M^\fraka{}_a \equiv \nabla^b F^\fraka{}_{ba} + C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}
A^{\frakb b} F^\frakc{}_{ba} , \label{DefinitionZQYM1}\\
&& M^\fraka{}_{ab} \equiv \nabla_a A^\fraka{}_b - \nabla_b A^\fraka{}_a +
C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc} A^\frakb{}_a A^\frakc{}_b -F^\fraka{}_{ab}, \label{DefinitionZQYMPotential}\\
&& M^\fraka{}_{abc} \equiv \nabla_{[a} F{}^\fraka{}_{bc]} + C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}
A^\frakb{}_{[a} F^\frakc{}_{bc]}, \label{DefinitionZQYM2} \\
&& Q^\fraka{}_{abc} \equiv F^\fraka{}_{abc} - \nabla_a F^\fraka{}_{bc}
-C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}A^\frakb{}_a F^\frakc{}_{bc}.
\label{DefinitionDerFaradayZQYM}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
Notice that, unlike the Maxwell field analysis, an additional field
$M^\fraka{}_{ab}$ must be considered due to the introduction of the gauge
potential $A^\fraka{}_a$. Combining \eqref{DefinitionZQYM2} and
\eqref{DefinitionDerFaradayZQYM} an auxiliary relation is directly
obtained, namely
\begin{equation}
3 M^\fraka{}_{abc} + 3Q^\fraka{}_{[abc]} - 3F^\fraka{}_{[abc]} = 0.
\label{AdemIdentityYM}
\end{equation}
From these definitions, it follows that $M^\fraka{}_{abc}$ and $M^\fraka{}_{ab}$ possess the symmetries
\begin{equation}
M^\fraka{}_{abc} = M^\fraka{}_{a[bc]} = M^\fraka{}_{[ab]c} = M^\fraka{}_{[abc]},
\quad M^\fraka{}_{ab} = -M^\fraka{}_{ba}.
\end{equation}
Furthermore, direct calculations show that the Yang-Mills
zero-quantities satisfy the relations
\begin{subequations}
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \nabla_a M^{\fraka a} = -C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc} A^{\frakb a} M^\frakc{}_a
+\tfrac12 C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc} F^{\frakb ab} M^\frakc{}_{ab},
\label{DivergenceMaYM}\\
&& \nabla^b M^\fraka{}_{ab} = M^\fraka{}_a, \label{DivergenceMabYM} \\
&& \nabla_a M^\fraka{}_{bc}{}^a = - \tfrac23\nabla_{[b}M^\fraka{}_{c]}
- \tfrac23 C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}A^\frakb{}_{[b}M^\frakc{}_{c]}
- C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}A^{\frakb a}M^\frakc{}_{abc}
- \tfrac23 C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}A^{\frakb a}Q^\frakc{}_{abc}
\nonumber \\
&& \hspace{1.9cm} - \tfrac23 C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc} F^\frakb{}_{[b}{}^a M^\frakc{}_{c]a}.
\label{DivergenceMabcYM}
\end{eqnarray}
\end{subequations}
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Equation for $M^\fraka{}_{ab}$.} Consider the expression
$3\nabla_{[c}M^\fraka{}_{ab]}$. Commuting covariant derivatives, substituting
expressions \eqref{DefinitionZQYM2}, \eqref{DefinitionDerFaradayZQYM} and
exploiting the Jacobi identity for the structure constants, the integrability
condition is obtained:
\begin{equation}
3\nabla_{[c}M^\fraka{}_{ab]} = - M^\fraka{}_{abc} - 3 C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}A^\frakb{}_{[a} M^\frakc{}_{bc]}.
\label{ICPotentialZQYM}
\end{equation}
Applying $\nabla^c$ to the last equation, a short calculation using equations
\eqref{DivergenceMaYM} and \eqref{DivergenceMabcYM} yields
\begin{align}
\square M^\fraka{}_{ab} = & \ 3 C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc} A^\frakb M^\frakc{}_{abc} +
2 C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc} A^{\frakb c} Q^\frakc{}_{cab} +\tfrac13 R M^\fraka{}_{ab}
-2 d_{acbd}M^{\fraka cd} - C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}f^\frakb M^\frakc{}_{ab} \nonumber \\
& - 2 C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc} F_{[a}{}^c M^\frakc{}_{b]c} + 2\nabla_c M^\fraka{}_{ab}{}^c
-C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc} A^{\frakb c}\nabla_c M^\frakc{}_{ab}
-2 C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc} M^\frakc{}_{c[a}\nabla^c A^\frakb{}_{b]}.
\label{WEZQYMPotential}
\end{align}
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Equation for $M^\fraka{}_a$.} Equation \eqref{DivergenceMabcYM}
constitutes an integrability condition for the field $M^\fraka{}_a$. A
suitable wave equation can be obtained by first applying $\nabla^c$, commuting
derivatives and observing that $\nabla_c\nabla_a M^\fraka{}_b{}^{ac} =
\nabla_{[c}\nabla_{a]} M^\fraka{}_b{}^{ac}$. Then, using definitions
\eqref{DefinitionZQYM1}-\eqref{DefinitionDerFaradayZQYM} along with
\eqref{DivergenceMaYM}, \eqref{DivergenceMabYM}, \eqref{ICPotentialZQYM}, the
Jacobi identity, and an appropriate substitution of \eqref{AdemIdentityYM}, a
long but straightforward computation results in:
\begin{align}
\square M^\fraka{}_b = & \ 2 L_{ba} M^{\mathfrak{a} a} + \tfrac{1}{6} R
M^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{b} + 2 F^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{ba} C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b}
\mathfrak{c}} M^{\mathfrak{b} a} - f^{\mathfrak{b}}(x)
C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b} \mathfrak{c}} M^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{b}
- A^{\mathfrak{b} a} A^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{a} C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b} \frake}
C^{\frake}{}_{\mathfrak{c} \mathfrak{d}} M^{\mathfrak{d}}{}_{b} \nonumber \\
& - \tfrac{3}{2} F^{\mathfrak{b} ac}
C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b} \mathfrak{c}} M^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{bac} + 3
A^{\mathfrak{b} a} A^{\mathfrak{c} c} C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b} \mathfrak{d}}
C^{\mathfrak{d}}{}_{\mathfrak{c} \frake} M^{\frake}{}_{bac}
+ 2A^{\mathfrak{b} a} A^{\mathfrak{c} c} C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b} \mathfrak{d}}
C^{\mathfrak{d}}{}_{\mathfrak{c} \frake} Q^{\frake}{}_{cba} \nonumber \\
& - \tfrac{3}{2}
C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b} \mathfrak{c}} M^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{bac} M^{\mathfrak{b}
ac} + 2 F^{\mathfrak{b} a}{}_{b}{}^{c} C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b} \mathfrak{c}}
M^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{ac} - 2 C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b} \mathfrak{c}}
Q^{\mathfrak{b} a}{}_{b}{}^{c} M^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{ac} \nonumber \\
& + F^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{b}{}^{c} A^{\mathfrak{b} a} C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{c}
\mathfrak{d}} C^{\mathfrak{d}}{}_{\mathfrak{b} \frake} M^{\frake}{}_{ac} - 2
A^{\mathfrak{b} a} C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b} \mathfrak{c}}
\nabla_{a}M^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{b} + 2 A^{\mathfrak{b} a} C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b}
\mathfrak{c}} \nabla_{c}Q^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{ab}{}^{c} \nonumber \\
& - 3 C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b} \mathfrak{c}} M^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{bac}
\nabla^{c}A^{\mathfrak{b} a} + 2 C^{\mathfrak{a}}{}_{\mathfrak{b} \mathfrak{c}}
Q^{\mathfrak{c}}{}_{abc} \nabla^{c}A^{\mathfrak{b} a}.
\label{WEZQYM1}
\end{align}
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Equation for $M^\fraka{}_{abc}$.} In a similar fashion to the
approach adopted for the electromagnetic
zero-quantity $M_{abc}$, and in order to simplify the
calculations, we introduce the Hodge dual of $M^\fraka{}_{abc}$:
\begin{equation}
M^{*\fraka}{}_a \equiv C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc} F^{*\frakc}{}_{ba}A^{\frakb b} +
\nabla^b F^{*\fraka}{}_{ba} = \tfrac12 \epsilon_a{}^{bcd}M^\fraka{}_{bcd}.
\end{equation}
Here, the second equality has been obtained with help of
\eqref{FaradayYMDual} and \eqref{DefinitionZQYM2}. With this expression
we compute the divergence of $M^{*\fraka}{}_a$. Making use of
\eqref{DefinitionZQYMPotential} and the Jacobi identity, a calculation yields
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \nabla_a M^{*\fraka a} = -C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frake}C^\frake{}_{\frakc\frakd}F^{*\frakd}{}_{ab}
A^{\frakb a}A^{\frakc b} - C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frake}A^{\frakb a}M^{*\frakc}{}_a
+C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frake}F^{*\frakc}{}_{ab}\nabla^b A^{\frakb a} \nonumber \\
&& \hspace{1.4cm} = - C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frake}A^{\frakb a}M^{*\frakc}{}_a
- \tfrac14 C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frake} \epsilon_{ab}{}^{cd}F^{\frakb ab}M^\frakc{}_{cd}. \nonumber
\end{eqnarray}
In terms of non-dual objects this takes the form of an integrability condition:
\begin{eqnarray}
&& \epsilon^{abcd} \nabla_d M^{\fraka}{}_{abc} =
C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakc}\epsilon^{abcd} A^{\frakb}{}_a M^{\frakc}{}_{bcd}
+ \tfrac{1}{2} C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakc}\epsilon^{abcd} F^{\frakb}{}_{ab} M^{\frakc}{}_{cd} \nonumber \\
&& \hspace{-0.55cm} \iff 4\nabla_{[a}M^\fraka{}_{bcd]} = 4 C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakc} A_{[a}M^\fraka{}_{bcd]}
+ 2C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakc} F^{\frakb}{}_{[ab}M^{\frakc}{}_{cd]}.
\end{eqnarray}
Then, a suitable wave equation can be obtained applying $\nabla^d$ and
commuting derivatives. After a long calculation in which definitions
\eqref{DefinitionZQYM1}-\eqref{DefinitionDerFaradayZQYM}, equations
\eqref{AdemIdentityYM}-\eqref{ICPotentialZQYM} and the Jacobi identity
are employed, one finds that
\begin{align}
\square M^{\fraka}{}_{abc} = & \ \tfrac{1}{2} R M^{\fraka}{}_{abc} -
A^{\frakb d} A^{\frakc}{}_{d} C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakd}
C^{\frakd}{}_{\frakc \frake} M^{\frake}{}_{abc} - C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakc}
f^\frakb(x) M^{\frakc}{}_{abc} - 2 A^{\frakb d} C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakc} \nabla_{d}M^{\frakc}{}_{abc} \nonumber \\
& - 6 \Xi d_{[a}{}^{d}{}_{b}{}^{e}M^{\fraka}{}_{c]de} - 6 L_{[a}{}^{d}M^{\fraka}{}_{bc]d}
+ 2 F^{\frakb d}{}_{[ab}C^{\fraka}{}_{|\frakb \frakc |}M^{\frakc}{}_{c]d} - 6
F^{\frakb}{}_{[a}{}^{d}C^{\fraka}{}_{|\frakb \frakc
|}M^{\frakc}{}_{bc]d} \nonumber \\
& - 2 A^{\frakb d}C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakc}\nabla_{[a}Q^{\frakc}{}_{|d|bc]}
+ 2 C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakc}Q^{\frakb d}{}_{[ab}\nabla_{c]}A^{\frakc}{}_{d}
- 2 C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakc}Q^{\frakb d}{}_{[ab}M^{\frakc}{}_{c]d} \nonumber \\
& + F^{\frakb}{}_{[ab}A^{\frakc d}C^{\fraka}{}_{|\frakb\frakd}C^{\frakd}{}_{\frakc \frake |}M^{\frake}{}_{c]d}
- 2 A^{\frakb}{}_{[a}A^{\frakc d}C^{\fraka}{}_{|\frakb \frakd}C^{\frakd}{}_{\frakc \frake}Q^{\frake}{}_{d|bc]}.
\label{WEZQYM2}
\end{align}
\medskip
\noindent
\textbf{Equation for $Q^\fraka{}_{abc}$.} Similar to the case for the Maxwell
field, a wave equation for $Q^\fraka{}_{abc}$ can be obtained by directly applying the
$\square$ operator to its definition. Since the identity used in the
deduction of equation \eqref{WEZQMaxwellAuxiliary} has the same form for the
Yang-Mills strength field, an analogous procedure can be followed.
A long computation gives:
\begin{align}
\square Q^\fraka{}_{abc} = & \ 6 L_{a}{}^{d} M^{\fraka}{}_{bcd} +
\tfrac{1}{2} R Q^{\fraka}{}_{abc} + 4 L_{a}{}^{d} Q^{\fraka}{}_{dbc}
- f^{\frakb}(x) C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakc} Q^{\frakc}{}_{abc} - 2 F^{\frakb}{}_{a}{}^{d}
C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakc} Q^{\frakc}{}_{dbc} \nonumber \\
& - A^{\frakb d} A^{\frakc}{}_{d} C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakd}
C^{\frakd}{}_{\frakc \frake} Q^{\frake}{}_{abc} + 2
A^{\frakb}{}_{a} A^{\frakc d} C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakd}
C^{\frakd}{}_{\frakc \frake} Q^{\frake}{}_{dbc} + F^{\frakc}{}_{bc} A^{\frakb d} C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakc \frakd}
C^{\frakd}{}_{\frakb \frake} M^{\frake}{}_{ad} \nonumber \\
& - 2 F^{\frakc}{}_{bc} A^{\frakb d} C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakd}
C^{\frakd}{}_{\frakc \frake} M^{\frake}{}_{ad} + 2
C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakc} Q^{\frakc}{}_{dbc}
\nabla_{a}A^{\frakb d} + 4 A^{\frakb d} C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb
\frakc} \nabla_{[a}Q^{\frakc}{}_{d]bc} \nonumber \\
& + 2 C^{\fraka}{}_{\frakb \frakc} M^{\frakb}{}_{a}{}^{d} \nabla_{d}F^{\frakc}{}_{bc}
+ 4 \Xi F^{\fraka}{}_{[b}{}^{d}\Lambda_{c]ad}
+ 4 \Xi F^{\fraka}{}_{[b}{}^{d}\Lambda_{|a|c]d} - 2 \Xi
d_{[b}{}^{d}{}_{c]}{}^{e}Q^{\fraka}{}_{ade} \nonumber \\
& + 4 \Xi d_{a}{}^{d}{}_{[b}{}^{e}Q^{\fraka}{}_{|d|c]e} + 4 L_{a[b}M^{\fraka}{}_{c]}
+ 4 L_{[b}{}^{d}Q^{\fraka}{}_{|da|c]} + \Xi F^{\fraka de}\Lambda_{[b|de}g_{a|c]} \nonumber \\
& + 4 F^{\frakb}{}_{[b}{}^{d}C^{\fraka}{}_{|\frakb
\frakc}Q^{\frakc}{}_{a|c]d} + 4 L^{de}g_{a[b}Q^{\fraka}{}_{|d|c]e}.
\label{WEZQYMQ}
\end{align}
\subsubsection{Propagation of the gauge}
In this subsection we show the consistency of the introduction of the gauge
source functions $f^\fraka(x)$ into the analysis of the propagation of the
constraints for the Yang-Mills potential. For this purpose we introduce the
zero-quantity $P^\fraka$ defined as:
\begin{equation}
P^\fraka \equiv \nabla^a A^\fraka{}_a - f^\fraka(x).
\end{equation}
The computation of a wave equation for this field is straightforward:
first, a short calculation employing equations \eqref{CWEPotentialYM},
\eqref{DefinitionZQYM1}, \eqref{DefinitionZQYMPotential} and
\eqref{DivergenceMabYM} gives
\[
\nabla_a P^\fraka = -A^\frakb{}_b C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}P^\frakc
-M^\fraka{}_b +\nabla_a M^\fraka{}_b{}^a .
\]
From here, application of a further covariant derivative results directly in
\begin{equation}
\square P^\fraka = -f^\frakb C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}P^\frakc
+A^{\frakb a}C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}M^\frakc{}_a
-\tfrac12 F^{\frakb ab}C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}M^\frakc{}_{ab}
- A^{\frakb b}C^\fraka{}_{\frakb\frakc}\nabla_b P^\frakc. \label{WEZQYMGauge}
\end{equation}
\begin{remark}
{\em Geometric wave equations \eqref{WEZQYMPotential}, \eqref{WEZQYM1},
\eqref{WEZQYM2}, \eqref{WEZQYMQ} and \eqref{WEZQYMGauge} are homogeneous in
$M^\fraka{}_a, \ M^\fraka{}_{ab}, \ M^\fraka{}_{abc}, \ Q^\fraka{}_{abc}$,
$P^\fraka$, $\Lambda_{abc}$ and their first covariant derivatives.
Thus, if these fields vanish on an initial hypersurface
$\mathcal{S}_\star$, it can be guaranteed that there exists a unique solution
on a small enough slab of $\mathcal{S}_\star$ and this solution is the trivial
one.}
\end{remark}
\subsubsection{Summary}
The previous discussion about the Yang-Mills field coupled to the conformal
Einstein field equations leads to the following statement:
\begin{proposition}
The system of wave equations \eqref{ReducedWaveCFE1}-\eqref{ReducedWaveCFE5}
with energy-momentum tensor given by \eqref{EMTensorYM} coupled to wave
equations \eqref{CWEFaradayYM}, \eqref{CWEPotentialYM} and
\eqref{CWEDerFaradayYM} written in terms of the operator $\blacksquare$
is a proper quasilinear system of wave equations for the Einstein-Yang-Mills system.
\end{proposition}
\section{Applications}
\label{Section:Applications}
The purpose of this section is to provide a direct application of the
analysis of the evolution systems and subsidiary equations associated
to the conformal Einstein field equations coupled to tracefree
matter. Arguably, the simplest applications of our analysis to a
problem of global nature is that of the existence and stability of
de-Sitter like spacetimes. The original stability result of this type,
for vacuum perturbations, was carried in \cite{Fri86b}. For the sake
of conciseness of the presentation and given that the key technical
details have been discussed in the literature --- see
e.g. \cite{CFEBook}, Chapter 15 --- here we pursue a \emph{high-level}
presentation in the spirit of \cite{Fri15}.
\medskip
In order to present the result, it is recalled that one of the key features of
the conformal Einstein field equations is that they are regular up to the
conformal boundary. This property is also satisfied by the conformally invariant
scalar field equation, the Maxwell equations and the Yang-Mills equations.
Thus, they admit initial data prescribed on spacelike hypersurfaces describing
the conformal boundary of spacetime. In an analogous way to the Einstein field
equations, the metric conformal Einstein field equations admit a 3+1
decomposition with respect to a foliation of spacelike hypersurfaces. The
equations in this decomposition which are intrinsic to the spacelike
hypersurfaces are known as the \emph{conformal Einstein constraint equations}
--- see e.g. \cite{CFEBook}, Chapter 11. When evaluated on a spacelike
hypersurface representing the conformal boundary of a de Sitter-like spacetime,
these equations simplify considerably and a procedure to construct the
solutions to these equations is available --- see \cite{CFEBook}, Proposition
11.1 for the vacuum case; this result can be generalised to include tracefree
matter models. From the geometric side, the freely specifiable data in this
construction are given by the intrinsic metric of the conformal boundary and a
TT-tensor prescribing the electric part of the rescaled Weyl tensor. The
initial data obtained by this type of construction will be known as
\emph{asymptotic de Sitter-like initial data}. The component of the conformal
boundary where the asymptotic de Sitter-like data are prescribed can be either
the future or the past one. In the following, for convenience, we restrict the
discussion to the case of the past component of the conformal boundary.
\medskip
For asymptotic initial data sets of the type described in the
previous paragraph one has the following result:
\begin{theorem}
\label{Theorem:Application}
Consider (past) asymptotic de-Sitter initial data for the Einstein field equations with
positive Cosmological constant coupled
to any of the following matter models:
\begin{enumerate}[(i)]
\item the conformally invariant scalar field,
\item the Maxwell field,
\item the Yang-Mills field.
\end{enumerate}
Then one has that:
\begin{enumerate}[(a)]
\item The initial data determine a unique, maximal, globally hyperbolic solution to the
Einstein field equations which admits a smooth de Sitter-like
conformal future extension.
\item The set of initial data sets leading to developments which admit
smooth conformal extensions to both the future and past is an open
set (in the appropriate Sobolev norm) of the set of asymptotic
initial data.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We only provide a sketch of the proof as the strategy is similar to
the one followed in the proof of the stability of the Milne spacetime
in \cite{GasVal15}. A version of the proof which uses first order
symmetric hyperbolic systems can be found in \cite{CFEBook}, Chapter 15.
\medskip
The first main observation is that the conformal representation of the (vacuum)
de Sitter spacetime in terms of the embedding into the Einstein cylinder gives
rise to a solution to the conformal Einstein field equations. Coordinates
$(x)=(t,\underline{x})$ can be chosen so that the two components of the
conformal boundary are located at $t=\pm \tfrac{1}{2}\pi$. For this
representation the Ricci scalar takes the value $-6$ and the conformal factor
is given by $\mathring{\Xi}=\cos t$. In the following we denote by
$\mathring{\mathbf{u}}$ this solution to the conformal equations and by
$\mathring{\mathbf{u}}_\star$ its restriction to the hypersurface
$t=-\tfrac{1}{2}\pi$ which corresponds to the past conformal boundary
$\mathscr{I}^-$. We will look for solutions to the conformal evolution
equations of the form $\mathbf{u}= \mathring{\mathbf{u}} + \breve{\mathbf{u}}$
with initial data given by $\mathbf{u}_\star= \mathring{\mathbf{u}}_\star +
\breve{\mathbf{u}}_\star$. The fields $ \breve{\mathbf{u}}$ and
$\breve{\mathbf{u}}_\star$ describe the (non-linear) perturbations. Substituting
this form of the solution into the evolution equations one obtains a system of
quasilinear equations for the components of $\breve{\mathbf{u}}$ which can be
schematically written as
\begin{equation}
\label{WaveEquationProof}
\big( \mathring{g}^{\mu\nu}(x)
+\breve{g}^{\mu\nu}(x;\breve{\mathbf{u}})\big) \partial_\mu\partial_\nu
\breve{\mathbf{u}} = \bmF(x;\breve{\mathbf{u}},\partial\breve{\mathbf{u}}).
\end{equation}
In the above expression $\mathring{g}^{\mu\nu}$ denote the
components of the contravariant metric on the Einstein cylinder. The
above equation is in the form for which the local existence and Cauchy
stability theory of quasilinear wave equations as given in, say,
\cite{HugKatMar77} applies. Initial data for the system
\eqref{WaveEquationProof} are of the form
$(\breve{\mathbf{u}}_\star,\partial_t\breve{\mathbf{u}}_\star)$. The
size of the initial data is encoded in the expression
\[
\parallel (\breve{\mathbf{u}}_\star,\partial_t\breve{\mathbf{u}}_\star)\parallel_{\mathbb{S}^3,m}\equiv \parallel
\breve{\mathbf{u}}_\star\parallel_{\mathbb{S}^3,m}+ \parallel
\partial_t\breve{\mathbf{u}}_\star\parallel_{\mathbb{S}^3,m}
\]
where $\parallel \phantom{}\parallel_{\mathbb{S}^3,m}$ denotes the standard
Sobolev norm of order $m\geq 4$ on a manifold which is topologically
$\mathbb{S}^3$. If the initial data
$(\breve{\mathbf{u}}_\star,\partial_t\breve{\mathbf{u}}_\star)$ are
sufficiently small then the contravariant metric on $\mathscr{I}^-$ given by
$\mathring{g}^{\mu\nu}(x_\star)
+\breve{g}^{\mu\nu}(x_\star;\breve{\mathbf{u}}_\star)$ is Lorentzian --- this
property is preserved in the evolution. Now, the background solution
$\mathring{\mathbf{u}}$ is well-defined and smooth on the whole of the Einstein
cylinder; in particular, up to $t=\pi$ for which one has that
$\mathring{\Xi}|_{t=\pi}=-1$. It follows from the Cauchy stability statements
in \cite{HugKatMar77} that if $\parallel
(\breve{\mathbf{u}}_\star,\partial_t\breve{\mathbf{u}}_\star)\parallel_{\mathbb{S}^3,m}$
is sufficiently small then the solution will exists up to $t=\pi$. By
restricting, if necessary, the size of the data one has that
\[
\Xi|_{t=\pi}= -1 + \breve{\Xi}_{t=\pi} <0.
\]
From the above observation it can be argued that the function
$\Xi=\mathring{\Xi}+\breve{\Xi}$ over the Einstein cylinder becomes zero on a
spacelike hypersurface which lies between the times $t=0$ and $t=\pi$. This
hypersurface corresponds to the future conformal boundary ($\mathscr{I}^+$)
arising from the data
$(\breve{\mathbf{u}}_\star,\partial_t\breve{\mathbf{u}}_\star)$ on
$\mathscr{I}^-$.
\smallskip
Once the existence of a global solution to the evolution system has been
established, one makes use of the uniqueness of solutions to systems of
quasilinear wave equations to prove the propagation of the constraints. To this
end one observes that if the initial data satisfies the conformal constraints
at the past conformal boundary $\mathscr{I}^-$, then a calculation shows that
the zero-quantities and their normal derivatives also vanish on
$\mathscr{I}^-$. As the subsidiary evolution system is homogeneous in the
zero-quantities, it follows that its unique solution must be the trivial (i.e.
vanishing) one. Thus, one has obtained a global solution to the conformal
Einstein field equations. From the general theory of the conformal Einstein
field equations --- see e.g. Proposition 8.1 in Chapter 8 of \cite{CFEBook} ---
this solution implies, in turn, a solution to the Einstein field equations with
positive Cosmological constant having de Sitter-like asymptotics.
\end{proof}
\begin{remark}
{\em The above theorem is a global stability result for the de Sitter spacetime
under perturbations involving a conformally invariant scalar field, a Maxwell
field or a Yang-Mills field as (trivially) the de Sitter spacetime can be
constructed from asymptotic initial data. Thus, for a suitably small
neighbourhood of asymptotic de Sitter data, all data in the neighbourhood give
rise to global solutions.}
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
{\em The cases (ii) and (iii) --- the Maxwell and Yang-Mills fields, have been
studied using first order symmetric hyperbolic systems in \cite{Fri91}.
However, the case (i) --- the conformally invariant scalar field --- has, hitherto,
not been considered in the literature.}
\end{remark}
\begin{remark}
{\em The theory in \cite{HugKatMar77} is the analogue for systems wave
equations of the theory for symmetric hyperbolic systems developed
in \cite{Kat75}. A version of the key existence and Cauchy stability
result in \cite{HugKatMar77} given in the form used in Theorem
\ref{Theorem:Application} can be found in the Appendix of \cite{GasVal15}. }
\end{remark}
\section{Concluding remarks}
The global existence and stability result presented in Theorem
\ref{Theorem:Application} is the simplest application of the analysis of the
second order conformal evolution equations developed in this article. A further
application is to the construction of anti-de Sitter-like spacetimes with
tracefree matter models following the strategy implemented in \cite{CarVal18b}
--- this construction will be presented elsewhere \cite{CarVal19b}. The theory
developed in this article should also allow to obtain matter generalisation of
the existence results for characteristic initial value problems considered in
\cite{ChrPae13b}.
More crucially, the analysis in this article should also pave the road for
numerical simulations of spacetimes with tracefree matter in the conformal
setting. The use of the metric conformal Einstein equations in conjunction with
a coordinate gauge prescribed in terms of generalised wave condition provides a
formulation of the evolution equations for the conformal fields which can be
regarded as a (unphysical) \emph{reduced Einstein equation} with (unphysical)
matter described by the conformal factor, Friedrich scalar, Schouten tensor and
the rescaled Weyl tensor. Viewed in this way, one can readily adapt the
plethora of numerical know-how that has been developed in the numerical
simulations of the Einstein field equations. A further discussion of this idea
can be found in \cite{Fri03a}.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
We thank Alfonso Garc\'{\i}a-Parrado for his help with certain aspects of the
computer algebra implementation of the calculations carried out in this
article. DAC thanks support granted by CONACyT (480147). We thank the anonymous
referee for comments and suggestions which have improved the presentation and
results of the article.
|
\section{Efficient Algorithm for Mean Estimation}
\label{sec:efficient}
In this section, we define a semi-definite programming relaxation of the polynomial optimization problem \ref{eq:mte}. We then design new Distance Estimation and Gradient Estimation algorithms that use the tractable solutions to the relaxation instead of the original polynomial optimization problem. We then use these solutions to update our mean estimate along the same lines as those from Section~\ref{sec:intuition}, albeit with some added technical difficulty. Finally, we provide the analysis of the method and prove Theorem~\ref{thm:sgmest}.
\subsection{The Semi-Definite Relaxation of \ref{eq:mte}}
Here, we propose a semidefinite programming relaxation of \ref{eq:mte}, a variant of the Threshold-SDP from (\cite{hopkins2018sub}). We first define a semidefinite matrix $X \in \mb{R}^{(k + d + 1) \times (k + d + 1)}$ symbolically \newpage
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Distance Estimation}
\label{alg:dest}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE \textbf{Input}: Data Points $\bm{Z} \in \mb{R}^{k\times d}$, Current point $x$
\STATE $d^* = \argmax_{r > 0} MT(x,r,\bm{Z}) \geq 0.9 k$
\STATE \textbf{Return: } $d^*$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\vspace{-.5cm}
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Gradient Estimation}
\label{alg:gest}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE \textbf{Input}: Data Points $\bm{Z} \in \mb{R}^{k\times d}$, Current point $x$
\STATE $d^*$ = Distance Estimation$(\bm{Z}, x)$
\STATE $(X, m) = MT(x,d^*,\bm{Z})$
\STATE $X_v = \text{Submatrix of $X$}$ corresponding to the indices $v_i$
\STATE $g = \text{Top singular vector of $X_{v}$}$
\STATE $\mathcal{H} = \{i: \inp{Z_i - x}{g} \geq 0\}$
\IF {$\abs{\mathcal{H}} \geq 0.9k$}
\STATE \textbf{Return: }$g$
\ELSE
\STATE \textbf{Return: }$-g$
\ENDIF
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\noindent indexed by $1$, the variables $b_i$ and $v_j$ and denote by the vector $v_{b_i} \coloneqq (X_{b_i, v_1}, \dots, X_{b_i, v_d})$:
\begin{gather*}
\max \sum_{i = 1}^k X_{1, b_i} \\
X_{1, b_i} = X_{b_i, b_i} \\
X_{1,1} = 1 \\
\sum_{j = 1}^d X_{v_j, v_j} = 1 \\
\inp{v_{b_i}}{Z_i - x} \geq X_{b_i,b_i}r \ \forall i \in [k]\\
X \succcurlyeq 0 \tag{\textbf{MT}} \label{eq:mt}
\end{gather*}
Similar to the polynomial optimization~\ref{eq:mte}, this optimization problem is also parameterized by a vector $x \in \mb{R}^d$, $r > 0$ and a matrix $\bm{Z} \in \mb{R}^{k \times d}$. We refer to solutions of this program as $(X, m) = MT (x,r,\bm{Z})$ with $m$ denoting the optimal value and $X$ denoting the optimal solution.
The main contribution of our paper is in showing that the solutions to the relaxed optimization problem~\ref{eq:mte} can be used to improve the mean estimate similar to those of \ref{eq:mt}.
\subsection{Algorithm}
\label{sec:algorelax}
To efficiently estimate the mean, we instantiate Algorithm~\ref{alg:meste} to use solutions of \ref{eq:mt} instead of \ref{eq:mte}. The new Distance Estimation and Gradient Estimation procedures are stated in Algorithms~\ref{alg:dest} and~\ref{alg:gest}.
As opposed to the polynomial optimization problem, solutions to the relaxation may not necessarily return a single vector $v$ but rather a semidefinite matrix which corresponds to the relaxation of $v$. This matrix may not uniquely determine a direction of improvement. We, therefore, parse the solution to isolate a provably good direction of improvement and use this to iteratively improve our estimate. It is noteworthy that the singular value decomposition does not provide a sign direction. Thankfully the correct orientation is easily ascertained using the data points.
To analyze the runtime of Algorithm~\ref{alg:meste} with Algorithms~\ref{alg:dest} and ~\ref{alg:gest}, we first note that the semidefinite relaxation has $O(k^2 + d^2)$ variables. However, by projecting all the data down to a subspace containing the $k$ bucket means, we may effectively reduce the number of variables to $O(k^2)$ with an $O(k^2d)$ time pre-processing step. Therefore, we are now left with $O(k^2)$ variables. The runtime of interior point methods for solving semidefinite programs with $O(k^2)$ variables and $O(k)$ constraints is $O(k^{3.5})$ (\cite{alizadeh1995interior}). Furthermore, a single call of the Distance Estimation procedure can be efficiently implemented using $\widetilde{O} (1)$ rounds of binary search on the parameter $r$. Therefore, the total cost of a single call to Algorithm~\ref{alg:dest} is $\widetilde{O} (k^{3.5})$. Similarly, the total cost of a call to Algorithm~\ref{alg:gest} is $\widetilde{O} (k^{3.5})$. Since the cost of each iteration is dominated by a single call of Algorithm~\ref{alg:dest} and \ref{alg:gest}, the total cost per iteration is $\widetilde{O} (k^{3.5})$. Since, we only run $\widetilde{O}(1)$ iterations, the total cost of the Algorithm~\ref{alg:meste} instantiated with Algorithms~\ref{alg:dest} and ~\ref{alg:gest} is $\widetilde{O} (k^{3.5} + k^2d)$.
\subsection{Analysis}
We now prove Theorem~\ref{thm:sgmest}. We follow the same lines as the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:sgmeste}, but with the added technical difficulties arising from the use of the semi-definite relaxation.
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Distance Estimation:} We show that the Distance Estimation step in Algorithm~\ref{alg:dest} provides an accurate estimate of the distance of the current point from the mean. See Section~\ref{sec:disest}.
\item \textbf{Gradient Estimation:} Next, we show that when $x$ is far away from the mean $\mu$, the vector $g$ output by Algorithm~\ref{alg:gest} is well aligned with the vector joining the current point $x$ to the mean $\mu$. See Section~\ref{sec:gradest}.
\item \textbf{Gradient Descent:} Combining the previous two steps, we prove that we eventually converge to a good approximation to the mean. See Section~\ref{sec:smTh}.
\end{enumerate}
The following assumption is required to prove the correctness of the Distance Estimation and Gradient Estimation steps:
\begin{assumption}
\label{as:relax}
For the bucket means, $\bm{Z} = (Z_1, \dots, Z_k)$, let $\mathcal{S}_r$ denote the set of feasible solutions for $MT (\mu, r, \bm{Z})$. Then, we have for all $r \geq 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}}$,
\begin{equation*}
\max_{X \in \mathcal{S}_r} \sum_{i = 1}^k X_{b_i,b_i} \leq \frac{k}{20}.
\end{equation*}
\end{assumption}
The above assumption is a strengthening of Assumption~\ref{as:exact} for the case where we use \ref{eq:mt} instead of \ref{eq:mte}. We use the following fact at several points in the subsequent analysis:
\begin{remark}
\label{rem:a21}
Note that Assumption~\ref{as:relax} implies Assumption~\ref{as:exact}.
\end{remark}
\subsubsection{Distance Estimation Step}
\label{sec:disest}
In this subsection, we analyze the Distance Estimation step from Algorithm~\ref{alg:dest}. We show that an accurate estimate of the distance of the current point from the mean can be found. We begin by stating a lemma that shows that a feasible solution for $MT(x,r,\bm{Z})$ can be converted to a feasible solution for $MT(\mu,300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}},\bm{Z})$ with a reduction in optimal value.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:conv}
Let us assume Assumption~\ref{as:relax}. Let $X \in \mb{R}^{(k + d + 1) \times (k + d + 1)}$ be a positive semi-definite matrix, symbolically indexed by $1$ and the variables $b_i$ and $v_j$. Moreover, suppose that $X$ satisfies:
\begin{equation*}
X_{1,1} = 1, \quad X_{b_i, b_i} = X_{1, b_i}, \quad \sum_{j = 1}^d X_{v_j, v_j} = 1, \quad \sum_{i = 1}^k X_{b_i, b_i} \geq 0.9k.
\end{equation*}
Then, there is a set of at least $0.85k$ indices $\mathcal{T}$ such that for all $i \in \mathcal{T}$:
\begin{equation*}
\inp{Z_i - \mu}{v_{b_i}} < X_{b_i, b_i} 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}},
\end{equation*}
and a set of at least $k / 3$ indices $\mathcal{R}$ such that for all $j \in \mathcal{R}$, we have $X_{b_j, b_j} \geq 0.85$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $r = 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}}$. We prove the lemma by contradition. Firstly, note that $X$ is infeasible for $MT(\mu, r, \bm{Z})$ as the optimal value for $MT(\mu,r,\bm{Z})$ is less than $k / 20$ (Assumption~\ref{as:relax}). Note that the only constraints of $MT(\mu,r,\bm{Z})$ that are violated by $X$ are constraints of the form:
\begin{equation*}
\inp{Z_i - \mu}{v_{b_i}} < X_{b_i, b_i} r.
\end{equation*}
Now, let $\mathcal{T}$ denote the set of indices for which the above inequality is violated. We can convert $X$ to a feasible solution for $MT(\mu, r, \bm{Z})$ by setting to $0$ the rows and columns corresponding to the indices in $\mathcal{T}$. Let $X^\prime$ be the matrix obtained by the above operation. We have from Assumption~\ref{as:relax}:
\begin{equation*}
0.05k \geq \sum_{i = 1}^k X^\prime_{b_i, b_i} = \sum_{i = 1}^k X_{b_i, b_i} - \sum_{i \in \mathcal{T}} X_{b_i, b_i} \geq 0.9k - \abs{\mathcal{T}},
\end{equation*}
where the last inequality follows from the fact that $X_{b_i, b_i} \leq 1$. By rearranging the above inequality, we get the first claim of the lemma.
For the second claim, let $\mathcal{R}$ denote the set of indices $j$ satisfying $X_{b_j, b_j} \geq 0.85$. We have:
\begin{equation*}
0.9k \leq \sum_{j = 1}^k X_{b_j, b_j} = \sum_{j \in \mathcal{R}} X_{b_j, b_j} + \sum_{j \notin \mathcal{R}} X_{b_j, b_j} \leq \abs{\mathcal{R}} + 0.85k - 0.85\abs{\mathcal{R}} \implies \frac{k}{3} \leq \abs{\mathcal{R}}.
\end{equation*}
This establishes the second claim of the lemma.
\end{proof}
The following lemma shows that if the distance between the mean $\mu$ and a point $x$ is small then the estimate returned by Algorithm~\ref{alg:dest} is also small.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:destg}
Suppose a point $x\in\mb{R}^d$ satisfies $\norm{x - \mu} \leq 6000\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}}$. Then, under Assumption~\ref{as:relax}, Algorithm~\ref{alg:dest} returns a value $d^\prime$ satisfying
\begin{equation*}
d^\prime \leq 7500\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $r^\prime = 7500\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}}$ and $r = 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}}$. Suppose that the optimal value of $MT(x,r^\prime,\bm{Z})$ is greater than $0.9k$ and let its optimal solution be $X$. Let $\mathcal{R}$ and $\mathcal{T}$ denote the two sets whose existence is guaranteed by Lemma~\ref{lem:conv}. From, the cardinalities of $\mathcal{R}$ and $\mathcal{T}$, we see that their intersection is not empty. For $j \in \mathcal{R} \cap \mathcal{T}$, we have:
\begin{equation*}
0.85r^\prime \leq \inp{Z_j - x}{v_{b_j}} = \inp{Z_j - \mu}{v_{b_j}} + \inp{\mu - x}{v_{b_j}} < r + \norm{x - \mu},
\end{equation*}
where the first inequality follows from the fact that $j \in \mathcal{R}$ and the fact that $X$ is feasible for $MT(x, r^\prime, \bm{Z})$ and the last inequality follows from the inclusion of $j$ in $\mathcal{T}$ and Cauchy-Schwarz.
By plugging in the bounds on $r^\prime$ and $r$, we get:
\begin{equation*}
\norm{x - \mu} > 6075 \lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}}.
\end{equation*}
This contradicts the assumption on $\norm{x - \mu}$ and concludes the proof of the lemma.
\end{proof}
The next lemma shows that the distance between the mean $\mu$ and a point $x$ can be accurately estimated as long as $x$ is sufficiently far from $\mu$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:dest}
Suppose a point $x$ satisfies $\tilde{d} = \norm{x - \mu} \geq 6000\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}}$. Then, under Assumption~\ref{as:relax}, Algorithm~\ref{alg:dest} returns a value $d^\prime$ satisfying:
\begin{equation*}
0.95\tilde{d} \leq d^\prime \leq 1.25\tilde{d}.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let us define the direction $\Delta$ to be the unit vector in the direction of $x - \mu$. From Assumption~\ref{as:exact} (which is implied by Assumption~\ref{as:relax}), the number of $Z_i$ satisfying $\inp{Z_i - \mu}{\Delta} \geq 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}}$ is less than $k / 20$. Therefore, we have that for at least $0.95k$ points:
\begin{equation*}
\inp{Z_i - x}{-\Delta} = \inp{x - \mu + \mu - Z_i}{\Delta} = \norm{x - \mu} - 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}} \geq 0.95\tilde{d}.
\end{equation*}
Along with the monotonicity\footnote{See Lemma~\ref{lem:mtmon} in Appendix~\ref{sec:aux}.} of $MT(x,r,\bm{Z})$ in $r$, this implies the lower bound.
For the upper bound, we show that the optimal value of $MT(x,1.25\tilde{d},\bm{Z})$ is less than $0.9k$. For the sake of contradiction, suppose that this optimal value is greater than $0.9k$. Let $X$ be a feasible solution of $MT(x, 1.25\tilde{d}, \bm{Z})$ that achieves $0.9k$. Let $\mathcal{R}$ and $\mathcal{T}$ be the two sets whose existence is guaranteed by Lemma~\ref{lem:conv} and $j$ be an element in their intersection. We have for $j$:
\begin{align*}
0.85 (1.25\tilde{d}) &\leq X_{b_j,b_j} 1.25\tilde{d}\leq \inp{Z_j - x}{v_{b_j}} = \inp{Z_j - \mu}{v_{b_j}} \!+\! \inp{\mu - x}{v_{b_j}} \\
&< X_{b_j, b_j} 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}} \!+\! \norm{\mu \!-\! x}
\!=\! X_{b_j, b_j}300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}} \!+\! \tilde{d},
\end{align*}
where the first inequality follows from the inclusion of $j$ in $\mathcal{R}$ and the last inequality follows from the inclusion of $j$ in $\mathcal{T}$ and Cauchy-Schwarz.
By re-arranging the above inequality, we get:
\begin{equation*}
X_{b_j, b_j} > (1.0625\tilde{d} - \tilde{d})\Big(300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}}\Big)^{-1} > 1,
\end{equation*}
which is a contradiction. Therefore, we get from the monotonicity of $MT(x,r,\bm{Z})$ (see Lemma~\ref{lem:mtmon}), that $d^\prime \leq 1.25\tilde{d}$ and this concludes the proof of the lemma.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{Gradient Estimation Step}\label{sec:gradest}
In this section, we analyze the Gradient Estimation step of the algorithm. We show that an approximate gradient can be found as long as the current point $x$ is not too close to the mean $\mu$.
The following lemma shows that we obtain a non-trivial estimate of the gradient in Algorithm~\ref{alg:gest}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:gest}
Suppose a point $x$ satisfies $\norm{x - \mu} \geq 6000\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}}$ and let $\Delta$ be the unit vector along $\mu - x$. Then under Assumption~\ref{as:relax}, Algorithm~\ref{alg:gest} returns a vector $g$ satisfying:
\begin{equation*}
\inp{g}{\Delta} \geq \frac{1}{15}.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
In the running of Algorithm~\ref{alg:gest}, let $X$ denote the solution of $MT(x,d^*,\bm{Z})$. We begin by factorizing the solution $X$ into $UU^\top$ with the rows of $U$ denoted by $u_1$, $u_{b_1}, \dots, u_{b_k}$ and $u_{v_1}, \dots, u_{v_d}$. We also define the matrix $U_v \!=\! (u_{v_1}, \dots, u_{v_d})$ in $\mb{R}^{(k + d + 1) \times d}$. From the constraints in \ref{eq:mt}, we~have:
\begin{equation*}
X_{b_i, b_i} = \norm{u_{b_i}}^2 \leq 1 \implies \norm{u_{b_i}} \leq 1,\quad \sum_{j = 1}^d X_{v_j, v_j} = \sum_{j = 1}^d \norm{u_{v_j}}^2 = \norm{U_v}_F^2 = 1 \implies \norm{U_v}_F = 1.
\end{equation*}
Let $\mathcal{R}$ and $\mathcal{T}$ denote the sets defined in Lemma~\ref{lem:conv}. Let $j \in \mathcal{T} \cap \mathcal{R}$. By noting that $v_{b_j} = u_{b_j}^\top U_v$, we have for $j$:
\begin{equation*}
0.85d^* \leq \inp{Z_j - \mu}{v_{b_j}} + \inp{\mu - x}{v_{b_j}} \leq X_{b_j, b_j} 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}} + u_{b_j}^\top U_v (\mu - x),
\end{equation*}
where the first inequality follows from the inclusion of $j$ in $\mathcal{R}$ and the second from its inclusion in $\mathcal{T}$. We get by rearranging the above equation and using our bound on $d^*$ from Lemma~\ref{lem:dest}:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:aboveeq}
0.80 \norm{\mu - x} \leq 0.85d^* \leq X_{b_j, b_j} 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}} + u_{b_j}^\top U_v (\mu - x).
\end{equation}
By rearranging \eq{aboveeq}, using Cauchy-Schwarz, $\norm{u_{b_i}} \leq 1$ and the assumption on $\norm{x - \mu}$:
\begin{equation*}
\norm{U_v (\mu - x)} \geq u_{b_j}^\top U_v (\mu - x) \geq 0.75 \norm{\mu - x}.
\end{equation*}
We finally get that:
\begin{equation*}
\norm{U_v \Delta} \geq 0.75.
\end{equation*}
Now, we have:
\begin{equation*}
1 = \norm{U_v}_F^2 = \norm{U_v \mathcal{P}_\Delta}_F^2 + \norm{U_v \mathcal{P}^\perp_\Delta}_F^2 \geq \norm{U_v \mathcal{P}^\perp_\Delta}_F^2 + (0.75)^2 \implies \norm{U_v \mathcal{P}^\perp_\Delta}_F \leq 0.67.
\end{equation*}
Let $y$ be the top singular vector of $X_v$. Note that $X_v = U_v^\top U_v$ and $y$ is also the top right singular vector of $U_v$. We have that:
\begin{equation*}
0.75 \leq \norm{U_v y} \leq \norm{U_v\mathcal{P}_\Delta y} + \norm{U_v\mathcal{P}^\perp_\Delta y} \leq \norm{\mathcal{P}_\Delta y} + \norm{U_v\mathcal{P}^\perp_\Delta}_F \leq \norm{\mathcal{P}_\Delta y} + 0.67.
\end{equation*}
This means that we have:
\begin{equation*}
\abs{\inp{y}{\Delta}} \geq \frac{1}{15}.
\end{equation*}
Note that the algorithm returns either $y$ or $-y$. Firstly, consider the case where $\inp{y}{\Delta} > 0$. From Assumption~\ref{as:exact} (implied by Assumption~\ref{as:relax}), we have for at least $0.95k$ points:
\begin{equation*}
\inp{Z_i - \mu}{y} \leq 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}}.
\end{equation*}
Therefore, we have for $0.95k$ points:
\begin{align*}
\!\!\inp{Z_i - x}{y}\! &=\! \inp{Z_i - \mu}{y} + \inp{\mu - x}{y} \\
&\geq\! - 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}} +\frac{6000\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}}}{15} > 0.
\end{align*}
This means that in the case where $\inp{y}{\Delta} > 0$, we return $y$ which satisfies $\inp{\mu - x}{y} > 0$. This implies the lemma in this case. The case where $\inp{y}{\Delta} < 0$ is similar with $-y$ used instead of $y$. This concludes the proof of the lemma.
\end{proof}
\subsubsection{Gradient Descent Step}
\label{sec:smTh}
The following lemma guarantees that Assumption~\ref{as:relax} holds with high probability and is used analogously to Corollary~\ref{cor:dconce} in the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:sgmeste}:
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:mnConc}
Let $\bm{Y} = (Y_1, \dots, Y_k) \in \mb{R}^{k \times d}$ be $k$ i.i.d.~random vectors with mean $\mu$ and covariance $\Lambda$ and let $\mathcal{S}$ denote the set of feasible solutions of $MT(\mu, r, \bm{Y})$. Then, we have for $r \geq 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Lambda/k} + \sqrt{\norm{\Lambda}}}$ and $k \geq 3200 \log 1 / \delta$:
\begin{equation*}
\max_{X \in \mathcal{S}} \sum_{i = 1}^k X_{b_i, b_i} \leq \frac{k}{20},
\end{equation*}
with probability at least $1 - \delta$.
\end{lemma}
The proof of the lemma is an application of standard empirical process theory and concentration inequalities (\cite{lugosi2017sub,hopkins2018sub}) and is proven in Appendix~\ref{sec:proofcon}.
The rest of the proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:sgmest} follows the same lines as that of Theorem~\ref{thm:sgmeste} and is postponed to Appendix~\ref{sec:proofsmth}.
\section{Auxiliary lemma}
\label{sec:aux}
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:mtmon}
For any $\bm{Z} \in \mb{R}^{k \times d}$ and $x \in \mb{R}^d$, the optimal value of $MT(x,r,\bm{Z})$ is monotonically non-increasing in $r$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
The lemma follows trivially from the fact that a feasible solution $X$ of $MT(x,r,\bm{Z})$ is also a feasible solution for $MT(x,r^\prime,\bm{Z})$ for $r^\prime \leq r$.
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Lemma~\ref{lem:mnConc}}
\label{sec:proofcon}
We first show that the optimal value of the semi-definite program \ref{eq:mt} satisfies a bounded-difference condition with respect to the $Z_i$'s.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:conc}
Let $\bm{Y} = (Y_1, \dots, Y_k)$ be any set of $k$ vectors in $\mb{R}^d$. Now, let $\bm{Y}^\prime = (Y_1, \dots, Y_i^\prime, \dots, Y_k)$ be the same set of $k$ vectors with the $i^{th}$ vector replaced by $Y_i^\prime\in \mb{R}^d$. If $m$ and $m^\prime$ are the optimal values of $MT(x,r,\bm{Y})$ and $MT(x,r,\bm{Y}^\prime)$, we have:
\begin{equation*}
\abs{m - m^\prime} \leq 1
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Firstly, assume that $X$ is a feasible solution to $MT(x,r,\bm{Y})$. Now, let us define $X^\prime$ as:
\begin{equation*}
X^\prime_{i,j} = \begin{cases}
X_{i,j} & \text{ if $i,j \neq b_i$} \\
0 &\text{otherwise}
\end{cases}
\end{equation*}
That is $X^\prime$ is equal to $X$ except with the row and column corresponding to $b_i$ being set to $0$. We see that $X^\prime$ forms a feasible solution to $MT(x,r,\bm{Y}^\prime)$. Therefore, we have that:
\begin{equation*}
\sum_{j = 1}^k X_{b_j, b_j} = \sum_{j = 1, j\neq i}^k X^\prime_{b_j, b_j} + X_{b_i, b_i} \leq \sum_{j = 1, j\neq i}^k X^\prime_{b_j, b_j} + 1 \leq m^\prime + 1
\end{equation*}
where the bound $X_{b_i,b_i} \leq 1$ follows from the fact that the $2\times 2$ sub-matrix of $X$ formed by the rows and columns indexed by $1$ and $b_i$ is positive semidefinite and the constraint that $X_{b_i, b_i} = X_{1, b_i}$. Since the above series of equalities holds for all feasible solutions $X$ of $MT(x,r,\bm{Y})$, we get:
\begin{equation*}
m \leq m^\prime + 1.
\end{equation*}
Through a similar argument, we also conclude that $m^\prime \leq m + 1$. Putting the above two inequalities together, we get the required conclusion.
\end{proof}
For the next few lemmas, we are concerned with the case where $x = \mu$. Since we already know that the optimal SDP value satisfies the bounded differences condition, we need to verify that the expectation is small. As a first step towards this, we define the 2-to-1 norm of a matrix $M$.
\begin{definition}
The 2-to-1 norm of $M \in \mb{R}^{n \times d}$ is defined as
\begin{equation*}
\normtto{M} = \max_{\substack{\norm{v} = 1 \\ \sigma_i \in \{\pm 1\}}} \sigma^\top M v = \max_{\norm{v} = 1} \norm{Mv}_1
\end{equation*}
\end{definition}
We consider the classical semidefinite programming relaxation of the 2-to-1 norm. To start with, we will define a matrix $X \in \mb{R}^{(n + d + 1) \times (n + d + 1)}$ with the rows and columns indexed by $1$ and the elements $\sigma_i$ and $v_j$. The semidefinite programming relaxation is defined as follows:
\begin{gather*}
\max \sum_{i, j} M_{i,j} X_{\sigma_i, v_j} \\
X_{1,1} = 1\\
\sum_{j = 1}^d X_{v_j,v_j} = 1 \\
X_{\sigma_i,\sigma_i} = 1 \\
X \succcurlyeq 0 \tag{TOR} \label{eq:tor}
\end{gather*}
We now state a theorem of Nesterov as stated in (\cite{hopkins2018sub}):
\begin{theorem}{(\cite{nesterov1998semidefinite})}
\label{thm:contr}
There is a constant $K_{2\rightarrow 1} = \sqrt{\pi/2} \leq 2$ such that the optimal value, $m$, of the semidefinite programming relaxation~\ref{eq:tor} satisfies:
\begin{equation*}
m \leq K_{2\rightarrow 1} \normtto{M}.
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
In the next step, we will bound the expected 2-to-1 norm of the random matrix $Z$. To do this, we begin by stating the famous Ledoux-Talagrand Contraction Theorem (\cite{ledoux1991probability}).
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:ledtal}
Let $X_1, \dots, X_n \in \mb{R}^d$ be i.i.d.~random vectors, $\mathcal{F}$ be a class of real-valued functions on $\mb{R}^d$ and $\sigma_i, \dots, \sigma_n$ be independent Rademacher random variables. If $\phi: \mb{R} \rightarrow \mb{R}$ is an $L$-Lipschitz function with $\phi(0) = 0$, then:
\begin{equation*}
\mathbb{E} \sup_{f \in \mathcal{F}} \sum_{i = 1}^n \sigma_i \phi(f(X_i)) \leq L\cdot \mb{E} \sup_{f \in \mathcal{F}} \sum_{i = 1}^{n} \sigma_i f(X_i).
\end{equation*}
\end{theorem}
We are now ready to bound the expected 2-to-1 norm of the random matrix $Z$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:tto}
Let $\bm{Y} = (Y_1, \dots, Y_n) \in \mb{R}^{n\times d}$ be a set of $n$ i.i.d.~random vectors such that $\mb{E} [Y_i] = 0$ and $\mb{E} [Y_i Y_i^\top] = \Lambda$. Then, we have:
\begin{equation*}
\mb{E} \normtto{\bm{Y}} \leq 2 \sqrt{n\Tr \Lambda} + n \norm{\Lambda}^{1/2}.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Denoting by $Y$ and $Y_i^\prime$ random vectors that are independently and identically distributed as $Y_i$ and by $\sigma_i$ independent Rademacher random variables, we have:
\begin{align*}
\mb{E} [\normtto{\bm{Y}}] &= \mb{E} \lsrs{\max_{\norm{v} = 1}\sum_{i = 1}^n \abs{\inp{Y_i}{v}}} = \mb{E} \lsrs{\max_{\norm{v} = 1}\sum_{i = 1}^n \abs{\inp{Y_i}{v}} + \mb{E} \abs{\inp{v}{Y_i}} - \mb{E} \abs{\inp{v}{Y_i}}}\\
&\leq \mb{E} \lsrs{\max_{\norm{v} = 1} \sum_{i = 1}^n \abs{\inp{Y_i}{v}} - \mb{E} \abs{\inp{Y_i^\prime}{v}}} + n \max_{\norm{v} = 1}\mb{E} [\abs{\inp{v}{Y}}] \\
&\leq \mb{E} \lsrs{\max_{\norm{v} = 1} \sum_{i = 1}^n \sigma_i (\abs{\inp{Y_i}{v}} - \abs{\inp{Y_i^\prime}{v}})} + n \max_{\norm{v} = 1} \mb{E} \lsrs{\abs{\inp{v}{Y}}}.
\end{align*}
Now, we have for the second term:
\begin{equation*}
\max_{\norm{v} = 1}\mb{E} [\abs{\inp{v}{Y}}] \leq \max_{\norm{v} = 1} \sqrt{\mb{E} \inp{v}{Y}^2} \leq \norm{\Lambda}^{1/2}.
\end{equation*}
For the first term, we get via a standard symmetrization argument:
\begin{align*}
\mb{E} \lsrs{\max_{\norm{v} = 1} \sum_{i = 1}^n \sigma_i (\abs{\inp{Y_i}{v}} - \abs{\inp{Y_i^\prime}{v}})} & \leq \mb{E} \lsrs{\max_{\norm{v} = 1} \sum_{i = 1}^n \sigma_i \abs{\inp{Y_i}{v}}} + \mb{E}\lsrs{\max_{\norm{v} = 1}\sum_{i = 1}^n-\sigma_i\abs{\inp{Y_i^\prime}{v}}} \\
&= 2 \mb{E} \lsrs{\max_{\norm{v} = 1} \sum_{i = 1}^n \sigma_i\abs{\inp{v}{Y_i}}} \leq 2 \mb{E} \lsrs{\max_{\norm{v} = 1} \sum_{i = 1}^n \sigma_i\inp{v}{Y_i}} \\
&= 2 \mb{E} \lsrs{\norm*{\sum_{i = 1}^n \sigma_i Y_i}} \leq 2 \lprp{\mb{E} \lsrs{\norm*{\sum_{i = 1}^n \sigma_i Y_i}^2}}^{1/2} \\
&= 2 \lprp{\mb{E} \sum_{1 \leq i,j \leq n} \sigma_i \sigma_j \inp{Y_i}{Y_j}}^{1/2} = 2\sqrt{n\Tr \Lambda},
\end{align*}
where the second inequality follows from the Ledoux-Talagrand Contraction Principle (Theorem~\ref{thm:ledtal})
By putting the above two bounds together, we get the lemma.
\end{proof}
We now bound the expected value of $MT(\mu,r,\bm{Y})$ by relating it to $\normtto{\bm{Y}}$.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:exp}
Let $\bm{Y} = (Y_1, \dots, Y_k) \in \mb{R}^{k\times d}$ be a collection of $k$ i.i.d.~random vectors with mean $\mu$ and covariance $\Lambda$. Now, denoting by $\mathcal{S}$ the set of feasible solutions for $MT(\mu,r,\bm{Y})$, we have:
\begin{equation*}
\mb{E} \max_{x \in \mathcal{S}} \sum_{i = 1}^k X_{1, b_i} \leq \frac{1}{2r} \lprp{5 \sqrt{k \Tr \Lambda} + 2k \norm{\Lambda}^{1/2}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Firstly, let $X$ be a feasible solution for $MT(\mu, r, \bm{Y})$. We construct a new matrix $W$ which is indexed by $\sigma_i$ and $v_j$ as opposed to $b_i$ and $v_j$ for $X$:
\begin{gather*}
W_{\sigma_i, \sigma_j} = 4X_{b_i, b_j} - 2 X_{1, b_i} - 2 X_{1, b_j} + 1,\quad W_{v_i, v_j} = X_{v_i, v_j},\quad W_{1,1} = 1, \\
W_{1, v_i} = X_{1, v_i}, \quad W_{1, b_i} = 2X_{1, b_i} - 1, \quad W_{v_i, b_j} = 2X_{v_i, b_j} - X_{1, v_i}.
\end{gather*}
We prove that $Y$ is a feasible solution to the SDP relaxation~\ref{eq:tor} of $\bm{Y} - \mu$. We see that:
\begin{equation*}
W_{\sigma_i, \sigma_i} = 1 \text{ and } \sum_{i = 1}^{d} W_{v_i, v_i} = 1.
\end{equation*}
Then, we simply need to verify that $Y$ is PSD. Let $w \in \mb{R}^{k + d + 1}$ indexed by $1$, $\sigma_i$ and $v_j$. We construct from $w$ a new vector $w^\prime$, indexed by $1$, $b_i$ and $v_j$ and defined as follows:
\begin{equation*}
w^\prime_{1} = w_{1} - \sum_{i = 1}^k w_{\sigma_i}, \quad w^\prime_{b_i} = 2 w_{\sigma_i}, \quad w^\prime_{v_j} = w_{v_j}.
\end{equation*}
With $w^\prime$ defined as above, we have the following equality:
\begin{equation*}
w^\top W w = (w^\prime)^\top X w^\prime \geq 0.
\end{equation*}
Since the above condition holds for all $w \in \mb{R}^{k + d + 1}$, we get that $Y \succcurlyeq 0$. Therefore, we conclude that $Y$ is a feasible solution to the SDP relaxation~\ref{eq:tor} of $\bm{Y} - \mu$.
We bound the expected value of $MT(\mu,r,\bm{Y})$ as follows, denoting by $v_{b_i}$ the vector $(X_{b_i, v_1}, \dots, X_{b_i, v_d})$ and by $v$ the vector $(X_{1, v_1}, \dots, X_{1, v_d})$:
\begin{align*}
\mb{E} \max_{X \in \mathcal{S}} \sum_{i = 1}^k X_{1, b_i} &= \mb{E} \max_{X \in \mathcal{S}} \sum_{i = 1}^k X_{b_i, b_i} \leq \frac{1}{r}\mb{E} \max_{X \in \mathcal{S}} \sum_{i = 1}^k \inp{v_{b_i}}{Y_i - \mu} \\
&= \frac{1}{2r} \mb{E} \max_{X \in S}\Big[ \sum_{i = 1}^k \inp{2v_{b_i} - v}{Y_i - \mu} + \sum_{i = 1}^k \inp{v}{Y_i - \mu}\Big] \\
&\leq \frac{1}{2r} \lprp{\mb{E} \max_{X \in S} \sum_{i = 1}^k \inp{2v_{b_i} - v}{Y_i - \mu} + \mb{E} \max_{X \in \mathcal{S}} \sum_{i = 1}^k \inp{v}{Y_i - \mu}}.
\end{align*}
We note that from the fact that $X$ is PSD, we have that (from the fact that the $2\times 2$ submatrix indexed by $v_i$ and $b_j$ is PSD):
\begin{equation*}
X^2_{v_i,b_j} \leq X_{v_i, v_i} X_{b_j, b_j} \leq X_{v_i, v_i} \implies \norm{v_{b_j}}^2= \sum_{i = 1}^d X^2_{v_i, b_j} \leq \sum_{i = 1}^d X_{v_i, v_i} = 1.
\end{equation*}
Therefore, we get for the second term in the above equation:
\begin{equation*}
\mb{E} \max_{X \in \mathcal{S}} \sum_{i = 1}^{k} \inp{v}{Y_i - \mu} \leq \mb{E} \norm*{\sum_{i = 1}^{k} Y_i - \mu} \leq \lprp{\mb{E} \norm*{\sum_{i = 1}^{k} Y_i - \mu}^2}^{1/2} = (k \Tr \Lambda)^{1/2}.
\end{equation*}
We bound the first term using the following series of inequalities where $Y$ is constructed from $X$ as described above:
\begin{align*}
\mb{E} \max_{x \in \mathcal{S}} \sum_{i = 1}^k \inp{2v_{b_i} - v}{Y_i - \mu} &= \mb{E} \max_{x \in \mathcal{S}} \sum_{i = 1}^k \sum_{j = 1}^d (Y_i - \mu)_j W_{\sigma_i, v_j} = \mb{E} \max_{x \in \mathcal{S}} \sum_{i = 1}^k \sum_{j = 1}^d (\bm{Y}_{i, j} - \mu_j) W_{\sigma_i, v_j} \\
&\leq 2 \mb{E} \normtto{\bm{Y} - \bm{1}\mu^\top} \leq 4 \sqrt{k \Tr \Lambda} + 2 k \norm{\Lambda}^{1/2},
\end{align*}
where the first inequality follows from Theorem~\ref{thm:contr} and the second inequality follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:tto}. By combining the above three inequalities, we finally get:
\begin{equation*}
\mb{E} \max_{x \in \mathcal{S}} \sum_{i = 1}^k X_{1, b_i} \leq \frac{1}{2r} \lprp{5 \sqrt{k \Tr \Lambda} + 2 k \norm{\Lambda}^{1/2}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
We are now able to prove Lemma~\ref{lem:mnConc}.
\begin{proof}[Lemma~\ref{lem:mnConc}]
From Lemma~\ref{lem:exp}, we see that:
\begin{equation*}
\mb{E} \max_{X \in \mathcal{S}} \sum_{i = 1}^k X_{b_i, b_i} \leq \frac{k}{40}.
\end{equation*}
Now from Lemma~\ref{lem:conc} and an application of the bounded difference inequality (see, for example, Theorem~6.2 in \cite{boucheron2013concentration}), with probability at least $1 - \delta$:
\begin{equation*}
\max_{X \in \mathcal{S}} \sum_{i = 1}^k X_{b_i, b_i} \leq \frac{k}{20}.
\end{equation*}
\end{proof}
\section{Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:sgmest}}
\label{sec:proofsmth}
Let $\mathcal{G} = \{x: \norm{x - \mu} \leq 6000\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}} \}$. Also, we assume that Assumption~\ref{as:relax} holds. We prove the theorem differentiating between two cases:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[] \textbf{Case 1: } None of the iterates $\xt{t}$ fall into the set $\mathcal{G}$. In this case, we have from Lemma~\ref{lem:dest} that:
\begin{equation}
\label{eqn:dbo}
0.95 \norm{\xt{t} - \mu} \leq \dt{t} \leq 1.25 \norm{\xt{t} - \mu}
\end{equation}
Now, we get:
\begin{align*}
\norm{\xt{t + 1} - \mu}^2 &= \norm{\xt{t} - \mu}^2 - 2\frac{\dt{t}}{20}\inp{\gt{t}}{\mu - \xt{t}} + \frac{\dt{t}^2}{400} \leq \norm{\xt{t} - \mu}^2 - \frac{\dt{t}\norm{\mu - \xt{t}}}{150} + \frac{\dt{t}^2}{400} \\
&\leq \norm{\xt{t} - \mu}^2 - \dt{t} \lprp{\frac{\norm{\mu - \xt{t}}}{150} - \frac{\dt{t}}{400}} \leq \lprp{1 - \frac{1}{500}} \norm{\xt{t} - \mu}^2.
\end{align*}
where the first inequality follows from Lemma~\ref{lem:gest} and the last inequality follows by substituting the lower bound on $\dt{t}$ in the first term and the upper bound on $\dt{t}$ in the second term (Equation \eqref{eqn:dbo}).
By an iterated application of the above inequality, we get the required result.
\item[] \textbf{Case 2: } One of the iterates $\xt{t}$ falls into the set $\mathcal{G}$. If the algorithm returns an element from $\mathcal{G}$, the theorem is trivially true. From Lemma~\ref{lem:destg}, we have for this iterate $\xt{t}\in \mathcal{G}$ that:
\begin{equation*}
\dt{t} \leq 7500\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}}.
\end{equation*}
Therefore, we have at the completion of the algorithm a value $d^* \leq 7500\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}}$ together with $x^*$ lying outside $\mathcal{G}$. Thus, we finally have from Lemma~\ref{lem:dest}:
\begin{equation*}
0.95\norm{x^* - \mu} \leq 7500\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}} \implies \norm{x^* - \mu} \leq 8000\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma / n} + \sqrt{k \norm{\Sigma} / n}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{enumerate}
By Lemma~\ref{lem:mnConc}, Assumption~\ref{as:relax} holds with probability at least $1-\delta$ and therefore, the conclusions from Case 1 and Case 2 hold with probability $1-\delta$.
Substituting the value of $k$, we obtain
\begin{align*}
\norm{x^* - \mu} &\leq \max\lprp{\epsilon, 8000\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma / n} + \sqrt{k \norm{\Sigma} / n}}} \\
&\leq \max\lprp{\epsilon, 480000 \lprp{\sqrt{\frac{\Tr \Sigma}{n}} + \sqrt{\frac{\norm{\Sigma}\log 1 / \delta}{n}}}},
\end{align*}
with probability at least $1 - \delta$.
This concludes the proof of the theorem.
\qed
\end{document}
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we proposed a computationally efficient estimator for the mean of a random vector which obtains the statistically optimal performance. This estimator has a significantly faster runtime together with a simpler analysis than previous works. Our algorithm is based on a descent method, where a current estimate of the mean is iteratively improved.
Considering the extension to M-estimation procedures~(\cite{brownlees2015, HsuSab16,lugosi2018risk}) is a promising direction for further research, with as first step, the particular example of linear regression with heavy tailed noise and covariates~(\cite{audibert2011}).
\section{Introduction}
Estimating the mean of a population given a finite sample is arguably the most fundamental statistical estimation problem.
Despite the broad applicability and the fundamental nature of this problem, an estimator achieving the optimal statistical rate has only been discovered recently. However the optimal computational complexity of such an estimator is not well-understood.
In this paper, we are interested in obtaining high confidence estimates of the mean in the simple setting where only the existence of the covariance of the distribution is assumed.
That is, we would like to find the smallest $r_\delta$ such that given samples $X_1, \dots, X_n$ from a distribution $\mathcal{D}$ with mean $\mu$ our estimator $\hat{X}$ satisfies:
\begin{equation*}
\mb{P} \lbrb{\norm{\hat{X} - \mu} \geq r_\delta} \leq \delta.
\end{equation*}
To understand the inherent statistical limit of this problem, let us consider the simplified setting where the covariance is the identity. The most natural estimator for the mean of the population is the sample mean $\bar{X}=\frac{1}{n}\sum_{i=1}^nX_i$. From the Central Limit Theorem, the distribution of $\bar{X}$ satisfies $\sqrt{n} (\bar{X}\!-\!\mu)\!\overset{D}{\rightarrow}\! \mathcal{N} (0, I)$, and assuming this conclusion holds for any $n$ allows an $r_\delta$~satisfying
\begin{equation*}
r_\delta = O\lprp{\sqrt{\frac{d}{n}} + \sqrt{\frac{\log 1 / \delta}{n}}}.
\end{equation*}
\cite{catoni2012challenging} shows that this $r_\delta$ is the optimal statistical performance achievable under such mild assumptions. However, the above confidence interval only holds true asymptotically when the number of samples goes to infinity or when the distribution is sub-Gaussian. For finite sample results with a heavy-tailed distribution, applying Chebyshev's inequality to the empirical mean gives only
\begin{equation*}
r_\delta = \Omega\lprp{\sqrt{\frac{d}{n\delta}}}.
\end{equation*}
The above bound is weaker than the one obtained by the Central Limit Theorem in two ways, the dependence on the failure probability $\delta$ is polynomial in $1 / \delta$ instead of logarithmic and the term depending on $\delta$ is multiplied by the dimensionality $d$ as opposed to being part of a smaller additive term. Unfortunately, \cite{catoni2012challenging} also shows the above result is tight. That is, for any $n, \delta$, there exists a distribution $\mathcal{D}_{n, \delta}$ for which the bound guaranteed by Chebyshev's inequality is optimal.
The poor performance of the empirical mean is due to its sensitivity to large outliers that occur naturally as part of the sample. The median-of-means framework was devised as a means of circumventing such difficulties. It was independently developed in the one dimensional case by \cite{NemYud83,jerrum1986random,alon1999space} and was later extended to the multivariate case by~\cite{HsuSab16,lerasle2011robust,Min18}. As part of this framework, the samples are first divided into $k$ batches and the mean of the samples is computed within each batch to obtain $k$ estimates $Z_1, \dots, Z_k$. Each of these has mean $\mu$ and variance $\frac{k}{n}I$. The empirical mean is simply the mean of these $k$ estimates, which is sensitive to outliers. The median-of-means estimator
instead is the geometric median of the $k$ estimates, which has greater tolerance to outliers. The success of the median-of-means estimator is due to the fact that it relies on only a fraction of estimates $Z_i$ being close to the mean as opposed to all the estimates being close. \cite{Min18} shows this gives an improved value of $r_\delta$ as follows:
\begin{equation*}
r_\delta = O\lprp{\sqrt{\frac{d \log 1 / \delta}{n}}}.
\end{equation*}
The confidence interval guaranteed by the median-of-means estimator is better than the one for the empirical mean by improving the dependence on $1 / \delta$, but it is still poorer than we might expect from the Central Limit Theorem. Subsequent work attempting to bridge this gap achieves better rates than those guaranteed by the median-of-means but with stronger assumptions on the data generating distribution\footnote{A rate of $O\big(\sqrt{d / n} + \sqrt{\log (\frac{\log d}{\delta}) / n}\big)$ is achieved under a fourth moment assumption on the distribution.}~(\cite{joly2017}).
The question of whether it was statistically feasible to obtain confidence intervals of the form guaranteed by the Central Limit Theorem was finally resolved by \cite{lugosi2017sub}. They devised an improved estimator, based on the median-of-means framework, called the median-of-means tournament, which achieves CLT-like confidence intervals. While the median-of-means estimator relies on the concentration of the number of $Z_i$ close to the mean in Euclidean norm, the median-of-means tournament relies on the fact that along every direction $v$, the number of $Z_i$ close to the projection of the mean concentrates. The freedom to choose a different set of $Z_i$ for each direction allow one to obtain a much smaller confidence interval than the one for the median-of-means estimator. In subsequent work, following the PAC-Bayesian approach of \cite{catoni2012challenging}, \cite{catoni2017dimension} proposed a soft-truncation based estimator which obtains CLT-like confidence intervals provided one has access to estimates of the trace and spectral norm of the covariance matrix.
However, it is not known whether the estimators from \cite{lugosi2017sub,catoni2017dimension} are computationally feasible, as there are no known polynomial time algorithms to compute them. In contrast, the median-of-means and empirical mean can be computed in nearly-linear time (\cite{cohen2016}). To alleviate this computational intractability, \cite{catoni2018dimension} proposed an efficient polynomial time estimator which achieves optimal statistical performance up to second order terms, assuming the existence of higher order moments. The question of computational tractability was subsequently resolved by \cite{hopkins2018sub}, who showed that an algorithm based on a sum-of-squares relaxation of the median-of-means tournament estimator achieves the statistically optimal CLT-like confidence intervals. However, the runtime of this algorithm is exorbitantly large\footnote{Assuming standard runtimes of the Interior Point method for semidefinite programming~(\cite{alizadeh1995interior})} ($O\lprp{n^{24}}$).
In this paper, we propose a new algorithm with a reduced runtime---$O(n^4+n^2 d)$---and a significantly simpler analysis. Our algorithm is a descent-based method that iteratively improves an estimate of the mean. The main challenge of such an approach is to estimate the descent direction. To this end, we crucially leverage the structure of the solutions to semidefinite programming relaxations of polynomial optimization problems designed to test whether a estimate is close to the mean. Our main contributions are twofold; we first show how exact solutions to the polynomial optimization problem furnish suitable descent directions and that such descent directions can also be efficiently extracted from relaxations of such problems and secondly, we show that these descent directions can be used in a descent style algorithm for mean estimation.
Our paper is organized as follow: in Section~\ref{sec:mnRes}, we present our main result, then in Section~\ref{sec:intuition}, as a warm-up, we devise a descent style algorithm for the case where we are given exact solutions to the polynomial optimization problems mentioned previously and prove that this algorithm achieves optimal statistical efficiency. This sets the stage for Section~\ref{sec:efficient}, where we present our main algorithm based on semidefinite relaxations of the previously defined polynomial optimization problems, leading to computationally efficient sub-Gaussian mean estimation.
\section{Warm-up}
\label{sec:intuition}
We present in this section a simple descent based algorithm. This algorithm is computationally inefficient but achieves the same guarantees of Theorem~\ref{thm:sgmest} with a much simpler analysis which nevertheless illustrates the main ideas behind the algorithm and proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:sgmest}.
\subsection{Intuition}
\label{sec:mte}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.5]
\node (x) at (-10, 0) [circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt]{};
\node [below=0.1cm of x] {$x$};
\node (mu) at (5, 0) [circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt]{};
\node [below=0.1cm of mu] {$\mu$};
\node at (2.6918, 3.7240) [blue,circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt]{};
\node at ( 0.8021, 2.4757) [blue,circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt]{};
\node at (8.7730, 4.1369) [blue,circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt]{};
\node at (-0.3608, -3.1745) [blue,circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt]{};
\node at ( 9.8048, -1.4058) [blue,circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt]{};
\node at ( 5.6202, -0.8174) [blue,circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt]{};
\node at (9.1835, 3.2953) [blue,circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt]{};
\node at (-4.8045, -0.8336) [blue,circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt]{};
\node at ( 4.0115, 2.1046) [blue,circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt]{};
\node at (1.2392, -3.6) [blue,circle,fill,inner sep=1.5pt]{};
\draw[-latex,thick] (-10,0) -- node[below] {$\hat{\delta}$} (5,0);
\draw[thick] (-1,4.5) -- (1,-4);
\draw[-latex,thick] (-10,0) -- node[above] {$v$} (-0.4,1.92);
\draw[fill=red,opacity=0.3] (-1,4.5) -- (10,4.5) -- (10,-4) -- (1,-4) -- cycle;
\end{tikzpicture}
\vspace{-.5em}
\caption{ The direction $v$ solution to MTE{} is well aligned with the vector joining the current estimate $x$ to the true mean $\mu$.}
\vspace{-1.5em}
\label{fig:int}
\end{figure}
We provide some intuition for our procedure, which iteratively improves an estimate of the mean. We first consider the simpler problem of testing whether a given point is close to the mean. We draw our inspiration from the main technical insight of \cite{lugosi2017sub}, who show that along any direction, most of the bucket means, $Z_i$, are close to the mean, $\mu$. Thus, to test whether a point, $x$, is far from the mean, it is sufficient to check whether there exists a direction where most of the $Z_i$ are far away from $x$ along that direction. This is formally expressed in the following polynomial optimization problem:
\vspace{-.7em}
\begin{gather*}
\max \sum_{i = 1}^{k} b_i \\
b_i^2 = b_i \\
\norm{v}^2 = 1 \\
b_i \inp{v}{Z_i - x} \geq b_i^2 r \quad \forall i \in [k] \label{eq:mte} \tag{\textbf{MTE}}
\end{gather*}
This polynomial problem over the set of variables $b_1, \dots, b_k$ and $v_1, \dots, v_d$ is parameterized by $r > 0$, the current estimate $x \in \mb{R}^d$ and the bucket means $\bm{Z} \in \mb{R}^{k\times d}$. Its polynomial constraints are encoding the number of $Z_i$ beyond a distance $r$ from $x$ when projected along a direction $v$.
Intuitively, this program tries to find a direction $v$ so as to maximize the number of $Z_i$ beyond a distance $r$ from $x$ along that direction. Here, we know from (\cite{lugosi2017sub}) that for an appropriate choice of $r$, along all directions $v$, a large fraction of the $Z_i$ are close to the mean. Formally, for all directions $v$, $\abs{\{i: \abs{\inp{Z_i - \mu}{v}} \leq r\}} \geq 0.9k$ (see Corollary~\ref{cor:dconce}
). Therefore this optimization problem has a large value when $x$ is far from the mean and can be used to certify this.
Strikingly, the direction $v$ returned by the solution of the above problem also contains information about the location of the mean when $r$ is chosen appropriately, which enables improvement of the quality of the current estimate. As illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:int}, the direction returned by this optimization problem is strongly correlated with the vector joining the current point $x$ to the mean~$\mu$.
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Mean Estimation}
\label{alg:meste}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE \textbf{Input}: Data Points $\bm{X} \in \mb{R}^{n\times d}$, Target Confidence $\delta$, Number of Iterations $T$, Stepsize $\gamma$
\STATE $k \leftarrow 3200 \log 1 / \delta$
\STATE Split data points into $k$ bins with bin $\mathcal{B}_i$ consisting of the points $X_{(i - 1)\frac{n}{k} + 1}, \dots, X_{i\frac{n}{k}}$
\STATE $Z_i \leftarrow \text{Mean}(\mathcal{B}_i)\ \forall\ i \in [k]$ and $\bm{Z} \leftarrow (Z_1, \dots, Z_k)$
\STATE $x^*, \xt{0} \leftarrow \bm{0}$ and $d^*, \dt{0} \leftarrow \infty$
\FOR{$t = 0:T$}
\STATE $\dt{t} \leftarrow \text{Distance Estimation}(\bm{Z}, \xt{t})$
\STATE $\gt{t} \leftarrow \text{Gradient Estimation}(\bm{Z}, \xt{t})$
\IF {$\dt{t} < d^*$}
\STATE $x^* \leftarrow \xt{t}$
\STATE $d^* \leftarrow \dt{t}$
\ENDIF
\STATE $\xt{t + 1} \leftarrow \xt{t} + \gamma \dt{t}\gt{t}$
\ENDFOR
\STATE \textbf{Return: } $x^*$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\vspace{-.5cm}
\noindent
\begin{minipage}[H]{.49\textwidth}
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Distance Estimation}
\label{alg:deste}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE \textbf{Input}: Data Points $\bm{Z} \in \mb{R}^{k\times d}$, Current point $x$
\STATE $d^* = \argmax_{r > 0} MTE(x,r,\bm{Z}) \geq 0.9 k$
\STATE \textbf{Return: } $d^*$\newline
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\vspace{.5cm}
\end{minipage}
\hfill \vspace{-.5cm}
\begin{minipage}[H]{.49\textwidth}
\begin{algorithm}[H]
\caption{Gradient Estimation}
\label{alg:geste}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE \textbf{Input}: Data Points $\bm{Z} \in \mb{R}^{k\times d}$, Current point $x$
\STATE $d^*$ = Distance Estimation$(\bm{Z}, x)$
\STATE $(b, g) = MTE(x,d^*,\bm{Z})$
\STATE \textbf{Return: }$g$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\vspace{.5cm}
\end{minipage}
Therefore, moving a small distance along the vector $v$ should intuitively take us closer to the mean. Given solutions to the polynomial optimization problem \ref{eq:mte}, we may iteratively improve our estimate until no further change is necessary.
\subsection{Algorithm}
\label{sec:alge}
In this section we put the intuition provided previously into practice and propose a procedure that estimates the mean in the ideal situation where \ref{eq:mte} can be exactly solved (the method is formally described in Algorithm~\ref{alg:meste}):
\begin{enumerate}
\item First, following the median of means framework, the samples $X_i$ are divided into $k$ buckets and the mean of the samples within each bucket is computed as $Z_i=\frac{k}{n}\sum_{j=(i-1)n/k}^{in/k} X_j$.
\item Second, the estimate of the mean is iteratively updated using a descent approach, based on the solution of \ref{eq:mte}. As mentioned in Section~\ref{sec:mte}, we need to run \ref{eq:mte} with an appropriate choice of $r$ for the solution $v$ to be correlated with the direction $x-\mu$. In the Distance Estimation step of our algorithm, we estimate a suitable choice of $r$ (see Algorithm~\ref{alg:deste}). This value of $r$ is subsequently used in the Gradient Estimation step, to obtain an appropriate descent direction $g$ (see Algorithm~\ref{alg:geste}).
\end{enumerate}
From this point on, we refer to the solution of polynomial equations~\ref{eq:mte} as $(b, v) = MTE(x,r,\bm{Z})$.
\subsection{Analysis warm-up}
In this simplified setting, we provide an analysis of our method and show that it obtains the same guarantees as those presented in Theorem~\ref{thm:sgmest}. This is formally expressed in the following theorem for Algorithm~\ref{alg:meste} instantiated with Algorithms~\ref{alg:deste} and~\ref{alg:geste}.
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:sgmeste}
Let $\bm{X} = (X_1, \dots, X_n) \in \mb{R}^{n \times d}$ be $n$ i.i.d.~random vectors with mean $\mu$ and covariance $\Sigma$. Then Algorithm~\ref{alg:meste} instantiated with Algorithms~\ref{alg:deste} and~\ref{alg:geste} and run with inputs $\bm{X}$, target confidence $\delta$, stepsize $\gamma=1/4$ and number of iterations $T = 50 \log \norm{\mu} / \epsilon$ returns a vector $x^*$ satisfying:
\begin{equation*}
\norm{x^* - \mu} \leq \max\lprp{\epsilon, 108000 \lprp{\sqrt{\frac{\Tr \Sigma}{n}} + \sqrt{\frac{\norm{\Sigma}\log 1 / \delta}{n}}}},
\end{equation*}
with probability at least $1 - \delta$.
\end{theorem}
The main steps involved in the proof are the following:
\begin{enumerate}
\item \textbf{Distance Estimation:} We show that the Distance Estimation step in Algorithm~\ref{alg:deste} provides an accurate estimate of the distance of the current point from the mean. See Lemma~\ref{lem:deste}.
\item \textbf{Gradient Estimation:} Next, we show that when $x$ is far away from the mean $\mu$, the vector $g$ obtained by solving ~\ref{eq:mte} in Algorithm~\ref{alg:geste} is well aligned with the vector joining the current point $x$ to the mean $\mu$. See Lemma~\ref{lem:geste}.
\item \textbf{Gradient Descent:} Combining the previous two steps, we prove that we eventually converge to a good approximation to the mean.
\end{enumerate}
In the proofs of our lemmas relating to the correctness of the Distance Estimation and the Gradient Estimation steps, we make use of the following assumption:
\begin{assumption}
\label{as:exact}
For the bucket means, $\bm{Z} = (Z_1, \dots, Z_k)$, we have:
\begin{equation*}
\forall v \in \mb{R}^{d}, \norm{v} = 1\;\Rightarrow \abs*{\{i: \inp{Z_i - \mu}{v} \geq 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{k\norm{\Sigma} / n}}\}} \leq 0.05k
\end{equation*}
\end{assumption}
The assumption is a formalization of the insight of (\cite{lugosi2017sub}), which shows that along all directions, $v$, most of the bucket means are within a small radius of the true mean, $\mu$, with high probability\footnote{This will be made precise in Corollary~\ref{cor:dconce}.}.
First, we prove that the \textbf{Distance Estimation} step defined in Algorithm~\ref{alg:deste} is correct.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:deste}
Under Assumption~\ref{as:exact}, for all $t \in \{0, \dots, T\}$ in the running of Algorihm~\ref{alg:meste}, $\dt{t}$ satisfies:
\begin{equation*}
\big\vert \dt{t}-\norm{\xt{t} - \mu}\big\vert \leq 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{\norm{\Sigma}k/n}}.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $r^* = 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{\norm{\Sigma}k/n}}$. We first prove the lower bound $\norm{\xt{t} - \mu}-r^*\leq \dt{t}$. We may assume that $\norm{\xt{t} - \mu} > r^*$, as the alternate case is trivially true. For $r = \norm{\xt{t} - \mu} - r^*$, we can simply pick the vector $v = \Delta$ where $\Delta$ is the unit vector in the direction of $\mu - \xt{t}$. Under Assumption~\ref{as:exact}, we have that for at least $0.95k$ points:
\begin{equation*}
\inp{Z_i - \xt{t}}{v} = \inp{Z_i - \mu}{v} + \inp{\mu - \xt{t}}{v} \geq \norm{\xt{t} - \mu} - r^* = r.
\end{equation*}
This implies the lower bound holds in the case where $\norm{\xt{t} - \mu} > r$.
For the upper bound $\dt{t}\leq \norm{\xt{t} - \mu}+r^* $, suppose, for the sake of contradiction, there is a value of $r >\norm{\xt{t} - \mu}+r^*$ for which the optimal value of $MTE(\xt{t},r,\bm{Z})$ is greater than $0.9k$. Let $v$ be the solution of $MTE(\xt{t},r,\bm{Z})$. This means that for $0.9k$ of the $Z_i$, we have:
\begin{equation*}
\inp{Z_i - \mu}{v} = \inp{Z_i - \xt{t}}{v} + \inp{\xt{t} - \mu}{v} \geq r - \norm{\xt{t} - \mu} > r^*.
\end{equation*}
This contradicts Assumption~\ref{as:exact} and proves the upper bound.
\end{proof}
Next, we prove the correctness of the \textbf{Gradient Estimation} step from Algorithm~\ref{alg:geste}.
\begin{lemma}
\label{lem:geste}
In the running of Algorithm~\ref{alg:meste}, let us assume $\xt{t}$ satisfies:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:assummu}
\norm{\mu - \xt{t}} \geq 1200\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{\norm{\Sigma}k/n}},
\end{equation}
and let $\Delta$ denote the unit vector in the direction of $\mu - \xt{t}$. Then, under Assumption~\ref{as:exact}, we have that:
\begin{equation*}
\inp{\vt{t}}{\Delta} \geq \frac{1}{2}.
\end{equation*}
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $r^* = 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{\norm{\Sigma}k/n}}$. We have, from the definition of $\dt{t}$, that for $0.9k$ of the $Z_i$, \mbox{$\inp{Z_i - \xt{t}}{\vt{t}} \geq \dt{t}$}.
We also have, under Assumption~\ref{as:exact}, that
$
\inp{Z_i - \mu}{\vt{t}} \leq r^*
$ for $0.95k$ of the $Z_i$.
From the pigeonhole principle, there exists a $Z_j$ which satisfies both those inequalities. Therefore, for that $Z_j$, the lower bound from Lemma~\ref{lem:deste} implies
\begin{equation*}
\norm{\mu - \xt{t}} - r^* \leq \dt{t} \leq \inp{Z_j - \xt{t}}{\vt{t}} = \inp{Z_j - \mu}{\vt{t}} + \inp{\mu - \xt{t}}{\vt{t}} \leq r^* + \norm{\mu - \xt{t}}\inp{\Delta}{\vt{t}}.
\end{equation*}
By rearranging the above inequality and using the assumption on $\norm{\mu - \xt{t}}$ in \eq{assummu},
we get the required conclusion.
\end{proof}
To control the probability that Assumption~\ref{as:exact} holds, we assume the correctness of the following corollary of Lemma~\ref{lem:mnConc}, formalizing the insight of (\cite{lugosi2017sub}):
\begin{corollary}
\label{cor:dconce}
Let $\bm{Y} = (Y_1, \dots, Y_k) \in \mb{R}^{k \times d}$ be $k$ i.i.d.~random vectors with mean $\mu$ and covariance $\Lambda$. Furthermore, assume $k \geq 3200 \log 1 / \delta$. Then we have for all $v\in \mb{R^d}$ such that $\Vert v\Vert=1$:
\begin{equation*}
\abs*{\{i: \inp{Y_i - \mu}{v} \geq 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Lambda/k} + \sqrt{\norm{\Lambda}}}\}} \leq 0.05k{}
\end{equation*}
{}
with probability at least $1 - \delta$.
\end{corollary}
By instantiating Corollary~\ref{cor:dconce} with the $Y_i = Z_i$, we see that Assumption~\ref{as:exact} holds with high probability.
Finally, we put the results of Lemma~\ref{lem:deste}, Lemma~\ref{lem:geste} and Corollary~\ref{cor:dconce} together to prove Theorem~\ref{thm:sgmeste}.
\begin{proof}[Proof of Theorem~\ref{thm:sgmeste}]
Assume first that Assumption~\ref{as:exact} holds. Let $r^* = 1200\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{\norm{\Sigma}k/n}}$. To start with, let us define the set ${\mathcal{G} = \{x: \norm{x - \mu} \leq r^*\}}$. We prove the theorem in two cases:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[] \textbf{Case 1: } None of the iterates $x_t$ lie in $\mathcal{G}$. In this case, note that by Lemma~\ref{lem:deste} and the definition of $r^*$, we have:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:dbe}
\frac{3}{4} \norm{\xt{t} - \mu} \leq \dt{t} \leq \frac{5}{4} \norm{\xt{t} - \mu}.
\end{equation}
Moreover, we have by the definition of the update rule of $x_t$ in Algorithm~\ref{alg:meste}:
\begin{align*}
\norm{\xt{t + 1} - \mu}^2 &= \norm{\xt{t} - \mu}^2 + \frac{1}{2} \dt{t} \inp{\xt{t} - \mu}{\vt{t}} + \frac{\dt{t}^2}{16} \leq \norm{\xt{t} - \mu}^2 - \frac{\dt{t} \norm{\xt{t} - \mu}}{4} + \frac{\dt{t}^2}{16} \\
&\leq \norm{\xt{t} - \mu}^2 - \frac{3}{16} \norm{\xt{t} - \mu}^2 + \frac{25}{256} \norm{\xt{t} - \mu}^2 \leq \frac{23}{25} \norm{\xt{t} - \mu}^2,
\end{align*}
where we have used Lemma~\ref{lem:geste} for the first inequality and the inequalities in \eq{dbe} for the second inequality. By iteratively applying the above inequality, we get the conclusion of the theorem in this case.
\item[] \textbf{Case 2: } At least one of the iterates $\xt{t}$ lies in $\mathcal{G}$. Therefore, we have from Lemma~\ref{lem:deste}:
\begin{equation*}
\dt{t} \leq 1500\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{\norm{\Sigma}k/n}}.
\end{equation*}
We also have at the completion of the algorithm, from another application of Lemma~\ref{lem:deste}:
\begin{equation*}
\norm{x^* - \mu} - 300\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{\norm{\Sigma}k/n}} \leq d^* \leq \dt{t} \leq 1500\lprp{\sqrt{\Tr \Sigma/n} + \sqrt{\norm{\Sigma}k/n}}.
\end{equation*}
By re-arranging the above inequality, we get the desired result.
\end{enumerate}
By Corollary~\ref{cor:dconce}, Assumption~\ref{as:exact} holds with probability at least $1-\delta$ and therefore, the conclusions from Case 1 and Case 2 hold with probability $1-\delta$.
\end{proof}
Bearing in mind that the polynomial optimization problem \ref{eq:mte} is non-convex, we consider a convex relaxation in the following section.
\section{Main result}
\label{sec:mnRes}
Formally, our main result\footnote{The constants are explicit but we believe sub-optimal.} is as follows:
\begin{theorem}
\label{thm:sgmest}
Let $\bm{X} = (X_1, \dots, X_n) \in \mb{R}^{n \times d}$ be $n$ i.i.d.~random vectors with mean $\mu$ and covariance $\Sigma$. Then Algorithm~\ref{alg:meste} instantiated with Algorithms~\ref{alg:dest} and~\ref{alg:gest} and run with inputs $\bm{X}$, target confidence $\delta$, stepsize $\gamma=1/20$ and number of iterations $T = 1000 \log \norm{\mu} / \epsilon$ returns a vector $x^*$ satisfying:
\begin{equation*}
\norm{x^* - \mu} \leq \max\lprp{\epsilon, 480000 \lprp{\sqrt{\frac{\Tr \Sigma}{n}} + \sqrt{\frac{\norm{\Sigma}\log 1 / \delta}{n}}}},
\end{equation*}
with probability at least $1 - \delta$.
\end{theorem}
We can make the following comments:
\begin{itemize}
\item Our estimator is both statistically optimal and computationally efficient. It achieves sub-Gaussian performance under minimal conditions on the distribution, and its runtime is \break \mbox{$O(n^4+n^2d)$}. See Section~\ref{sec:algorelax} for details.
\item The dependence of the number of iterations, $T$, on $\norm{\mu}$ can be avoided by initializing the algorithm with the median-of-means estimate. In this case, we can instead use $T = 1000 \log d$ and obtain the same guarantees, avoiding any dependence on the knowledge of $\norm{\mu}, \Tr(\Sigma), \norm{\Sigma}$.
\item The estimator depends on the confidence level $\delta$. \cite{devroye2016sub} propose an estimator which works for a whole range of $\delta$ but for a restricted class of distributions.
\item Our result does not explicitly depend on the dimension $d$ and our algorithm can be extended to a Hilbert space by working within the finite dimensional subspace containing the data points.
\end{itemize}
|
\section{Introduction}
Considerable research effort is being devoted to the development of microbubbles (MBs) with a therapeutic payload. A number of strategies have been developed to improve delivery of these agents, including targeting ligands, image guided acoustic release~\cite{Escoffre2013a}, sonoporation~\cite{McLaughlan2013}, magnetic targeting~\cite{Owen2015} and ultrasonic trapping with acoustic radiation force (ARF)~\cite{Raiton2012,Freear2013}. The aim of this study is to simultaneously image and trap MBs by using ARF with the ability of manipulating trapped MBs to increase the MB concentration at the region of interest inside blood vessels~\cite{Nie2018}.
Numerous biomedical applications use ARF including manipulation of cells in suspension, assessing viscoelastic properties of biological tissues, ablation therapy monitoring, targeted drug and gene delivery, molecular imaging, acoustical tweezers, and ultrasound-mediated thrombolysis~\cite{Sarvazyan2010,Xie2009}. The effect of primary and secondary radiation force on MBs are well studied~\cite{Leighton1994,Dayton1997,Doinikov1999a}. Effects of Bjerknes forces on MBs has already been evaluated and an acoustic trap was generated with two single element ultrasonic transducers~\cite{Yamakoshi2001}. This study investigates a new approach using a single array transducer for ultrasonically trapping MBs to increase the population at a desired location in a vessel phantom. The intended benefit of the ultrasonic trap is the increased efficacy in targeted drug delivery due to increased MB concentration around the region of interest. High frame rate ($>$ 1 kHz) plane wave imaging was used for monitoring the trapped and flowing MBs, where the imaging and the trapping sequences were interlaced. Working principle of the ultrasonic trap was demonstrated in a vessel phantom using SonoVue microbubbles.
\section{Materials and Methods}
The working principle of the ultrasonic trap is illustrated in Fig.~\ref{fig:Ultrasonic_Trap}. Trapping occurs at the low pressure region located along 0~mm lateral axis tightly wedged between two high pressure regions. The asymmetric trapping beam generates a weaker acoustic radiation force at the inlet (around -5 to -2 mm on lateral axis) and a stronger force at the outlet (around 1 to 5 mm on lateral axis) of the ultrasonic trap. This asymmetric shape facilitates MB entrance into the trap and allow for the pulsatile nature of flow.
\begin{figure*}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 160mm]{Ultrasonic_Trap_Pressure_meas_all.pdf}
\caption{Figure shows the (blue) estimated and (red) measured pressure radiated from the transducer at 35~mm depth. A pressure null along 0~mm lateral axis is created for all excitation methods. (Top-left) Estimated pressure for two equal amplitude out of phase plane waves. (Top-right) Estimated pressure for two equal amplitude out of phase plane waves with apodization. (Bottom-left) Estimated and measured pressure for two out of phase asymmetric plane waves with apodization. This is the used method for ultrasonic trapping. (Bottom-right) Estimated pressure for two equal amplitude out of phase focused beams. This was the previously used method for ultrasonic trapping. }
\label{fig:Ultrasonic_Trap_Pressure_meas_all}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 80mm]{Ultrasonic_Trap.pdf}
\caption{Illustration of the ultrasonic trap with an asymmetrical pressure field. Trapping region is located along 0~mm lateral axis. }
\label{fig:Ultrasonic_Trap}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Acoustic Radiation Force}
The physical explanation of the ultrasonic trap is the acoustic radiation force acting on MBs. The ARF is generated due to the variation in the density of energy and momentum of the propagating waves~\cite{Sarvazyan2010}. A sudden pressure drop because of absorption, scattering or reflection can create such a force. For a travelling plane wave, the primary radiation force $F_1$ acting on a MB much smaller than the wavelength can be defined as
\begin{equation}
F_{1} = - \left\langle V(t) \nabla P \right\rangle
\end{equation}
where $ \left\langle \right\rangle$ indicates time average, $V(t)$ is the MB volume, and $ \nabla P$ is the spatial pressure gradient. The primary radiation force for a MB with a resonant frequency $\omega_0$ can be expressed as~\cite{Dayton1997}
\begin{equation}
F_{1}=\frac{2\pi \,P^2 \,D \,R_0}{ \rho\,c\, \omega \,T} \frac{2\beta_{tot} / \omega}{((\omega_0 / \omega)^2 - 1)^2 + (2\beta_{tot} / \omega)^2}
\label{eq:prf}
\end{equation}
where $F_1$ drops with increasing driving frequency $\omega=2\pi f$.
Secondary radiation force originates from the pressure gradients in the re-radiated ultrasonic field from pulsating MBs~\cite{Harput2011}. The expansion and contraction of a MB generate a force that can attract or repel other MBs. This mutual interaction between the oscillating MBs can form stable clusters. The secondary radiation force can be expressed as~\cite{Dayton1997}
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:linear_model}
F_{2} = - \frac{2 \pi \,\rho }{9 \,d^{2}} (P \,\omega)^{2} \,R_{1}^3 R_{2}^3 \, \epsilon_{1} \epsilon_{2}
\end{equation}
Unlike primary radiation force, the secondary radiation force increases with increasing frequency. Therefore, an excitation frequency of 7 MHz, which is at the higher end of the transducer's bandwidth, was chosen to expedite MB aggregation. Another benefit of choosing a higher frequency is the smaller trap size and improved localization, where the trapping gap reduces with increasing frequency.
\subsection{Ultrasonic Trap}
The ultrasonic trap was generated by using the Leeds Ultrasound Array Research Platform 2 (UARP II) with capability of arbitrary excitation waveform control and ultra-fast image capture~\cite{Cowell2013,Smith2012,Smith2013a}. A 128 element linear medical imaging transducer (Prosonic, L3-8/40EP) was virtually divided into two sub apertures of 64 elements. This transducer was connected to the UARP II and an ultrasound pulse sequence was applied to each aperture with opposite phase polarity. The beams destructively interfere along the central axis of the transducer creating a pressure null that generates an acoustic trapping force on flowing MBs.
The design process of the ultrasonic trap is explained step by step in Fig.~\ref{fig:Ultrasonic_Trap_Pressure_meas_all} and compared with a similar acoustic trap generated by using focused beams. First, two sinusoidal tone bursts were transmitted with a central frequency of 7 MHz and duration of 500~$\mu$s from each aperture with opposite phase polarity. Fig.~\ref{fig:Ultrasonic_Trap_Pressure_meas_all}(Top-left) shows the estimated pressure radiated from the transducer at 35~mm depth. Two equal, out of phase, plane wave fields create a pressure null along 0~mm that can trap MBs. Assume MBs flowing in a blood vessel from negative to positive lateral direction as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Ultrasonic_Trap}. Drawback of this beam profile is the equally significant pressure gradients at centre of the trap and at -20~mm lateral axis, which prevents MBs from entering the trap. In order to reduce the pressure gradients located at -20~mm and +20~mm, a cosine shaped apodization window was applied over the array. Fig.~\ref{fig:Ultrasonic_Trap_Pressure_meas_all}(Top-right) shows the estimated pressure after applying apodization at the outer edges of the array. The resulting beam profile does not accommodate steep sided pressure gradients outside the trapping region.
To further facilitate MB entrance to the trap, the intensity of the beam on the left aperture was reduced through the application of pulse width modulation~\cite{Smith2013a} and by keeping the apodization at the outer edges of the array, therefore generating a smooth beam shape with a weaker ARF at the inlet of the trap. Fig.~\ref{fig:Ultrasonic_Trap_Pressure_meas_all}(Bottom-left) shows the estimated beam profile at 35~mm depth. Pressure measurement performed at 35 mm depth in water with a differential membrane hydrophone matches with the predicted beam profile. Fig.~\ref{fig:Ultrasonic_Trap_Pressure_meas_all}(Bottom-right) shows the estimated pressure for a focused beam with opposite polarity. Again, the drawback of this beam profile is the equally significant pressure gradient around -3~mm, blocking MBs before entering the trap. Also both the inlet and the outlet of the trap have the same pressure gradient, which does not allow easy entrance into the trapping region.
\section{Results and Discussion}
Trapping and imaging sequences required two different beam profiles and signal durations that must be interleaved to achieve both. However with arterial blood velocity that can easily reach to 1 m/s, time spent gathering an imaging frame must be kept to a minimum. Linear imaging with a typical frame rate of 25 Hz requires 40 ms to acquire one frame, where MBs can travel 40 mm during the imaging sequence without the trapping beam. Some commercial systems can reach frame rates as high as 200 Hz while sector scan, however in 5 ms MBs can still travel 5 mm and flow out of the trapping region. By employing plane waves a frame rate of 10 kHz is achievable, where each frame acquisition requires 100~$\mu$s. During this time period without the trap, MBs can travel 100~$\mu$m, which is still within the trapping region. Therefore, the use of plane wave imaging is necessary while imaging and trapping MBs in arterial blood flow.
While performing the experiments, a syringe pump was driven with a flow rate of 80 mL/min to flow the diluted MB solution through the vessel inside the ultrasound phantom. Flow phantom was manufactured as described in \cite{Harput2013a}. The attenuation in tissue mimicking material was measured as $0.32$~dB/cm/MHz at 7~MHz, which reduced the peak negative pressure to 450~kPa with a MI of 0.17 inside the vessel at 35~mm depth. SonoVue microbubbles were diluted with deionized water by 1:500 to achieve similar concentrations to those observed in the human body.
The flow rate of $Q=80$ mL/min corresponds to a mean fluid velocity of $V_{\rm mean}=140$ mm/s in flow phantom with a $d=3.5$~mm vessel, where maximum MB velocity can reach up to 280 mm/s. For such flow conditions in a Newtonian fluid, the wall shear rate $ \gamma = 8 V_{\rm mean} / d$ is expected to be 320~s$^{-1}$.
During the visualisation and trapping of SonoVue MB in the flow phantom, plane wave imaging was used with a frame rate of 1 kHz. Although the UARP II system is capable of imaging at 10 kHz and above, it was not necessary due to slow flow rate inside the flow phantom. During the 1~ms imaging cycle and hence without the trap, MBs can travel up to 0.28~mm, while still remaining within the trapping region. In either trapping or imaging mode the whole 128 elements of the array was employed to ensure optimal trapping control and the highest quality images.
A speckle tracking algorithm was used to detect the trapped MBs (green dots) and flowing MBs (coloured arrows) within the flow phantom as shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:Trap_velocity_profile}~\cite{Nie2016}. The MBs travelling with a velocity lower than 5~mm/s are considered to be trapped for a flow rate of 80~mL/min. All MBs are affected differently by the ARF. For example, two MBs excited above or below their resonance frequencies will result in an attractive force, while if one is below and the other is above resonance, the net force will be repulsive. However, the resonance frequency of an aggregated MB decreases and they all eventually start attracting each other after the initial aggregation onset.
Some off-resonance MBs can still escape the ultrasonic trap, however the velocity of the MBs drops significantly after the trapping region due to the strong ARF. The density of the trapped MBs are the highest around back vessel wall due to the residual primary radiation. When a big MB cluster is formed, the drag force acting against the MBs increases. Although the drag force eventually beats the trapping force for a large cluster of MB, because of the golf-ball shape, a trapped MB cluster size can reach up to 10-20~$\mu$m that corresponds to hundreds of MBs. When the trapping sequence was stopped, the trapped MBs disperse and normal contrast agent flow returns.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width = 88mm]{Trap_velocity_profile.pdf}
\caption{Velocity profile of MBs overlaid on B-mode image captured with 1 kHz frame rate. Trapped MBs are represented with green dots (0-5~mm/s) and flowing MBs are represented with coloured arrows according to their speed and trajectories. }
\label{fig:Trap_velocity_profile}
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusions}
This study showed the viability of using acoustic radiation force to form an ultrasonic MB trap in a tissue mimicking phantom. The trapping force was created by generating spatial pressure variations with predesigned ultrasound beam patterns using a linear array imaging transducer. A custom designed asymmetric and apodized beam profile was developed which can retain MBs in the trapping zone and is resilient to pulsatile clinical flow rates. MB monitoring was performed with the same transducer utilizing high frame rate plane wave imaging, interlaced with the trapping sequence. Through the generation of a trapping force directly opposing the flow, the ultrasonic trap was able to halt MBs subject to wall shear rates of up to 320~s$^{-1}$ at a mechanical index of 0.17.
For drug loaded MBs, ultrasonic trapping can potentially increase the drug volume at a particular location while continuously monitoring with high speed plane wave imaging. Although, it is hard to differentiate between tissue and trapped stationary MBs with flow imaging methods, various signal processing techniques such as bispectral analysis can be employed to achieve this separation~\cite{Harput2012}. Further work will focus on electronically shifting the trapping region to manipulate MBs, quantifying the cluster size and identify the location of trapped MBs with ultrasound imaging, and destruction of the MB clusters.
\section*{Acknowledgment}
The authors gratefully acknowledge funding from the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council (UK) via grant no. EP/K030159/1, EP/I000623/1 and the Leverhulme fellowship (ECF-2013-247).
\newpage
|
\section{Introduction and Related Work}
\section{Introduction and Related Work}
Term graph rewriting goes back to
Wadsworth \cite{Wadsworth-1971}, who proposed it as an efficient implementation
mechanism for the $\lambda$-calculus.
This aspect has remained dominant in the term graph literature;
for example, Rose \cite{Rose-1993}
defines an operational semantics of a lazy functional programming
language
via term graph rewriting;
Ariola, Klop and Plump \cite{Ariola-Klop-Plump-2000} study confluence of
term graph rewriting using bisimilarity.
When justifying term graph rewriting as a correct implementation
technique (for, in particular, functional programming),
most of the literature approaches this from the relationship with term
rewriting.
For example,
when Plump \cite{Plump-2002} writes about ``Essentials of Term Graph Rewriting'',
soundness and completeness are considered only with respect to term
rewriting.
Kennaway \textsl{et al.\null{}}{} \cite{Kennaway-Klop-Sleep-deVries-1993c,Kennaway-Klop-Sleep-deVries-1994}
define a notion of simulation to prove adequacy of
term graph rewriting for finite and rational term rewriting.
\medskip
When attempting to employ traditional categorial approaches to graph rewriting,
the so-called ``algebraic approach'', to term graph rewriting,
two main problems arise: First, categories of ``standard'' term graph
homomorphisms typically do not have all pushouts,
since unification translates into pushouts,
and second, the interface graphs needed both for the double-pushout (DPO)
approach and for the single-pushout approach (to capture the domain of
morphisms) are typically not term graphs,
but some kind of ``term graphs with holes''.
Term graph rewriting is therefore a niche of graph transformation
that has pioneered exploration of formalisms
where pushout squares are generalised in some way,
in particular by using different morphisms in the horizontal and
vertical directions of the standard DPO drawing.
For example,
Banach \cite{Banach-1993}
defines ``DACTL'' term graph rewriting using a modified opfibration, and
Kahl \cite{Kahl-1996,Kahl-1997b} uses both fibrations and opfibrations to define rewriting of
term graphs with variable binding.
A different approach to using separate classes of horizontal and
vertical morphisms for term graph rewriting has been proposed by
Duval \textsl{et al.\null{}}{} \cite{Duval-Echahed-Prost-2009},
who are using a specific rule concept as morphisms
in the horizontal direction in their ``heterogeneous pushout approach''.
More recently, motivated by
attributed graphs,
which share some characteristics with term graphs,
Habel and Plump \cite{Habel-Plump-2012} propose
``{$\mathcal{M},\mathcal{N}$}-adhesive transformation systems''
as one general framework to accommodate different classes of morphisms
in the horizontal and vertical directions of the double-pushout setting.
\medbreak
Corradini and Gadducci \cite{Corradini-Gadducci-1999-APTG,Corradini-Gadducci-2002b}
opened up a new way of investigating term graphs
by defining gs-monoidal categories
as a variant of Lawvere theories \cite{Lawvere-1963}.
Gs-monoidal categories are an intermediate concept between
symmetric monoidal categories and cartesian (monoidal) categories;
the only difference with the latter is that,
the ``duplicator'' transformation $\nabla$
producing diagonal maps $\nabla_{A} : A \mathop{\rightarrow} A \otimes A$
and the ``terminator'' transformation $!$ with components
$!_{A} : A \mathop{\rightarrow} \bbbone$
are both \emph{not} assumed to be natural transformations
(that is, for a morphism $F : A \mathop{\rightarrow} B$,
the equations $F \,\,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\, \nabla_{B} = \nabla_{A} \,\,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\, (F \otimes F)$
and $F \,\,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\, !_{B} = !_{A}$ do \emph{not} necessarily hold.).
Corradini and Gadducci demonstrate in
\cite{Corradini-Gadducci-1999-APTG}
that taking natural numbers as objects
and term graphs with $m$ inputs and $n$ outputs as morphisms from object $m$
to object $n$
produces a free gs-monoidal category,
and thus they automatically obtain a functorial semantics for term graphs
in arbitrary gs-monoidal categories, which include
all Cartesian categories, and so in particular also $\mbox{\emph{Set\/}}$.
Continuing this line of work,
Corradini and Gadducci obtain
semantics preservation for
a low-level definition of ``ranked dag rewriting''
and involving ``contexts'' analogous to the contexts of term
rewriting
\cite{Corradini-Gadducci-1997,Corradini-Gadducci-1999-cyclic}.
Finally, in \cite{Corradini-Gadducci-2005} they show a quasi-adhesive category of term
graphs, but emphasise that adhesive categorial rewriting in that
category does not quite match term graph rewriting.
They mention in their conclusion that a possible alternative is
to perform the DPO on a super-category of hypergraphs;
this is essentially the approach we are elaborating here.
As an example consider \Figref{Fig_example-DPO-rewriting}, showing the application of a rule
corresponding to the term rule
$\ (x_1 + x_2) - x_2 \;\longrightarrow\; x_1\ $
to rewrite a term graph corresponding to
$\ y_1 + ((y_2 + y_3) - y_3) \times y_4\ $
to $\ y_1 + y_2 \times y_4$.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\ignore{
\vrule height10ex width0pt depth0pt
\DIAGV{210}
{\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.71,viewport=80 507 168 726,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/example-DPO-rewriting_v1}}\ L\kern-0.7em}
\n {\War{\Phi}} \n
{\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.71,viewport=260 507 337 726,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/example-DPO-rewriting_v1}}\ G\kern-1em}
\n {\Ear{\Psi}} \n
{\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.71,viewport=446 507 509 726,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/example-DPO-rewriting_v1}}\ R\kern-1em}
\diag
\vrule height13ex width0pt depth0pt
\DIAGV{70}
{\Sar{M_1}} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {\Sar{\Chi}} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {\Sar{M_2}}
\diag
\vrule height23ex width0pt depth0pt
\DIAGV{210}
{\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.71,viewport=63 77 194 426,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/example-DPO-rewriting_v1}}\ A\kern-0.8em}
\n {\War{\Xi}} \n
{\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.71,viewport=233 77 359
426,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/example-DPO-rewriting_v1}}\ H\kern-1em}
\n {\Ear{\Omega}} \n
\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.71,viewport=396 77 523 426,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/example-DPO-rewriting_v1}}\ B\kern-0.5em}
\diag
\vrule height22ex width0pt depth0pt
\vrule height9.9ex width0pt depth0pt
\DIAGV{190}
{\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.48,viewport=87 565 173 806,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/example-DPO-rewriting}}\ L\kern-0.7em}
\n {\thicklines\War{\Phi}} \n
{\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.48,viewport=292 565 372 806,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/example-DPO-rewriting}}\ G\kern-1em}
\n {\thicklines\Ear{\Psi}} \n
{\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.48,viewport=486 565 574 806,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/example-DPO-rewriting}}\ R\kern-1em}
\diag
\vrule height7.5ex width0pt depth0pt
\DIAGV{63}
{\Sar{M_1}} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {\Sar{\Chi}} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {\Sar{M_2}}
\diag
\vrule height14ex width0pt depth0pt
\DIAGV{190}
{\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.48,viewport=54 97 201 467,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/example-DPO-rewriting}}\ A\kern-0.8em}
\n {\thicklines\War{\Xi}} \n
{\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.48,viewport=250 97 395 467,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/example-DPO-rewriting}}\ H\kern-1em}
\n {\thicklines\Ear{\Omega}} \n
\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.48,viewport=440 97 583 467,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/example-DPO-rewriting}}\ B\kern-0.5em}
\diag
\vrule height15.5ex width0pt depth0pt
\caption{Example term graph rewriting step}\Figlabel{Fig_example-DPO-rewriting}
\end{figure}
\medbreak
In \sectref{gsMonCat} we provide details about term graphs and how we
draw them, and the definition of gs-monoidal categories
with explanations how term graphs populate that concept.
In \sectref{TGR-DPO} we present the adaptations we use to obtain a
DPO-based definition of term graph transformation,
and in \sectref{SemPreserve} we sketch the proof that such
transformation steps are semantics-preserving
if the rule sides are semantically equivalent.
\section{Background: Term Graphs and GS-Monoidal Categories}\sectlabel{gsMonCat}
We are using the ``jungle'' view of term graphs, which goes back to
Hoffmann and Plump \cite{Hoffmann-Plump-1991}
and Corradini and Rossi \cite{Corradini-Rossi-1991},
since this is the view used by the gs-monoidal semantics,
where nodes translate into objects and (hyper-)edges into morphisms.
We assume a set $\mathcal{L}$ of \emph{edge labels} together with an
function
$\ensuremath{\Varid{arity}} : \mathcal{L} \mathop{\rightarrow} \NN$
prescribing for each label the number of inputs the corresponding
edges take. We write $\Fin{k} \defeq \{ i : \NN \with i < k\}$
for the set containing the first $k$ natural numbers,
and will use this in particular for the set of graph input nodes.
\begin{Def}\Deflabel{DHG}\Deflabel{TG}
The set of \emph{directed hypergraph graphs with $m$ inputs and $n$ outputs}
will be denoted by $\DHG{m}{n}$.
An element of $\DHG{m}{n}$ is
a tuple $(\mathcal{I}, \mathcal{E}, \ensuremath{\Varid{eLabel}}, \ensuremath{\Varid{eOut}}, \ensuremath{\Varid{eIn}}, \ensuremath{\Varid{gOut}})$
consisting of two sets,
\begin{itemize}
\item a set $\mathcal{I}$ of \emph{inner nodes},
from which we construct the set $\mathcal{N} = \Fin{m} \uplus \mathcal{I}$
of \emph{nodes} as disjoint union of the set
$\Fin{m}$ of \emph{graph input nodes} and the set $\mathcal{I}$ of inner nodes,
\item a set $\mathcal{E}$ of \emph{(hyper-)edges},
\end{itemize}
and four functions,
\begin{itemize}
\item $\ensuremath{\Varid{eLabel}} : \mathcal{E} \mathop{\rightarrow} \mathcal{L}$ assigning each edge a label,
\item $\ensuremath{\Varid{eOut}} : \mathcal{E} \mathop{\rightarrow} \mathcal{I}$ assigning each edge a single
\emph{edge output node}, which has to be an inner node,
\item $\ensuremath{\Varid{eIn}} : \mathcal{E} \mathop{\rightarrow} \mathcal{N}^*$ assigning each
edge a sequence of \emph{edge input nodes},
which needs to have as its length the arity of the edge's label,
that is, $\forall e : \mathcal{E} \spot \ensuremath{\Varid{arity}} (\ensuremath{\Varid{eLabel}}(e)) = \ensuremath{\Varid{length}}(\ensuremath{\Varid{eIn}}(e))$, and
\item $\ensuremath{\Varid{gOut}} : \Fin{n} \mathop{\rightarrow} \mathcal{N}$ assigning each output position
a node.
\end{itemize}
A \emph{term graph} is an acyclic directed hypergraph where $\ensuremath{\Varid{eOut}}$ is
bijective;
we write $\TG{m}{n}$ for the set of term graphs with $m$ inputs and $n$ outputs.
\qed
\end{Def}
When drawing such hypergraphs and term graphs, we start with the inputs on top
and proceed down to the outputs,
drawing nodes as bullets, and (hyper-)edges as labelled boxes
connected to nodes via (implicitly ordered) input-tentacles and
exactly one output-tentacle.
(Although edges with multiple outputs have uses
for example in the code graphs of
\cite{Kahl-Anand-Carette-2005,Anand-Kahl-2009b},
most of the literature, including all the cited work by Corradini and
Gadducci, only considers single-output operations (edges),
so we also do this here.)
Graph input nodes are declared by attaching a triangle pointing to the
input node --- input nodes are necessarily distinct, and cannot be
output nodes of edges.
Graph input nodes are frequently called ``variable nodes'',
and translated into distinct variables for a term reading.
Graph output nodes (in the literature frequently referred to as
``roots'')
are declared by attaching a triangle pointing away
from them --- any node can be used as a graph output any number of
times.
A graph with multiple graph outputs is interpreted as
standing for a tuple of terms:
The left box in the following drawing depicts a term graph (from $\TG{2}{1}$)
corresponding to the term
\linebreak
``$(x_1 + x_2) * x_2$'',
while the term graph (from $\TG{2}{2}$) in the right box corresponds
to the pair of terms
$``((x_1 + x_2) * x_2, (x_1 + x_2) * x_2)$''
(or, if $\ensuremath{\Keyword{let}}$-definitions are available,
$``\ensuremath{\Keyword{let}}\ z = (x_1 + x_2) * x_2\ \ensuremath{\Keyword{in}}\ (z, z)$''):
\medskip
\centerline{%
\fbox{\vrule height22.5ex width0pt depth1ex\kern0.9ex\CGpic{sixX}\kern0.9ex}
\kern8em
\fbox{\vrule height22.5ex width0pt depth1ex\kern0.9ex\CGpic{sixX2}\kern0.9ex}}
\kern1ex
\noindent
Term graphs
with sequential composition ($\,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,$) and parallel composition ($\otimes$)
form a gs-monoidal category
according to Corradini and Gadducci \cite{Corradini-Gadducci-1999-APTG}:
The objects are the natural numbers
(interpreted as numbers of nodes in the graph input interface,
respectively graph output interface),
and term graphs with $m$ inputs and $n$ outputs
are morphisms from $m$ to $n$.
\begin{Def}\Deflabel{ssmc}\Deflabel{gs-monoidal}
For a \emph{category}
$(\ensuremath{\Conid{Obj}}, \ensuremath{\Conid{Mor}}, \ensuremath{\Varid{src}}, \ensuremath{\Varid{trg}}, \RELid, \RELcomp)$,
we write $f : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \objB$
instead of $\ensuremath{\Varid{src}}(f) = \objA \;\land\linebreak \ensuremath{\Varid{trg}}(f) = \objB$;
composition of two morphisms
$f : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \objB$ and
$g : \objB \mathop{\rightarrow} \objC$ is written ``$f \RELcomp g$'',
and the identity for object $\objA$ is $\RELid_{\objA}$.
A \emph{symmetric strict monoidal category} \cite{MacLane-1971}
( \catC_{0}, \otimes, \triv, \mathbb{X} )$
consists of a category $\catC_{0}$,
a strictly associative monoidal bifunctor $\otimes$
with $\triv$ as its strict unit,
and a transformation $\mathbb{X}$
that associates with every two objects $\objA$ and $\objB$
an arrow $\mathbb{X}_{\objA,\objB} : \objA \otimes \objB \mathop{\rightarrow} \objB \otimes \objA$
with
$\mathbb{X}_{\triv,\triv} = \RELid_{\triv}$
and:
\smallskip
\strut\hfill$%
(F \otimes G) \RELcomp \mathbb{X}_{\objC,\objD} =
\mathbb{X}_{\objA,\objB} \RELcomp (G \otimes F)
\enskip,\quad\hfill
\mathbb{X}_{\objA,\objB} \RELcomp \mathbb{X}_{\objB,\objA} =
\RELid_{\objA} \otimes \RELid_{\objB}
\enskip,\quad\hfil
\mathbb{X}_{\objA\otimes\objB,\objC} =
(\RELid_{\objA} \otimes \mathbb{X}_{\objB,\objC}) \RELcomp
(\mathbb{X}_{\objA,\objC} \otimes \RELid_{\objB})
\enskip.
$\hfil
\smallskip
\noindent
( \catC_{0}, \otimes, \triv, \mathbb{X}, \Nabla, ! )$
is a {\em strict gs-monoidal category} iff
$( \catC_{0}, \otimes, \triv, \mathbb{X} )$
is a symmetric strict monoidal category, and
\begin{itemize}
\item
$!$ associates with every object $\objA$ of $\catC_{0}$
an arrow $!_{\objA} : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \triv$, and
\item $\Nabla$ associates with every object $\objA$ of $\catC_{0}$
an arrow $\NablaU{\objA} : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \objA \otimes \objA$,
such that:
\end{itemize}
\BCM
\def1.3{1.3}
\begin{array}[b]{l}
\NablaU{\objA} \RELcomp (\RELid_{\objA} \otimes \NablaU{\objA})
\sepA{=}
\NablaU{\objA} \RELcomp (\NablaU{\objA} \otimes \RELid_{\objA})
\qquad
\qquad
\NablaU{\objA} \RELcomp \exchU{\objA,\objA}
\sepA{=}
\NablaU{\objA}
\qquad
\qquad
\NablaU{\objA} \RELcomp (\RELid_{\objA} \otimes !_{\objA})
\sepA{=}
\RELid_{\objA}
\\
\NablaU{\objA \otimes \objB} \RELcomp
(\RELid_{\objA} \otimes \exchU{\objB,\objA} \otimes \RELid_{\objB})
\sepA{=}
\NablaU{\objA} \otimes \NablaU{\objB}
\qquad
\qquad
!_{\objA \otimes \objB}
\sepA{=}
!_{\objA} \otimes !_{\objB}
\qquad
\qquad
\RELid_{\triv} = !_{\triv} = \NablaU{\triv}
\ECMAQ
\end{Def}
\ignore
The definition of gs-monoidal categories places them between
symmetric monoidal categories and cartesian (monoidal) categories;
the only difference with the latter is that,
the ``duplicator'' transformation $\nabla$
producing diagonal maps $\nabla_{A} : A \mathop{\rightarrow} A \otimes A$
and the ``terminator'' transformation $!$ with components
$!_{A} : A \mathop{\rightarrow} \bbbone$
are both \emph{not} assumed to be natural transformations
(that is, for a morphism $F : A \mathop{\rightarrow} B$,
the equations $F \,\,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\, \nabla_{B} = \nabla_{A} \,\,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\, (F \otimes F)$
and $F \,\,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\, !_{B} = !_{A}$ do \emph{not} necessarily hold.).
\smallskip
\noindent
For term graphs, the lack of naturality of the ``terminator''
transformation $!$
means that \emph{garbage}
(nodes from which no output is reachable) makes a difference,
such as between the two graphs to the left below,
and the lack of naturality of the ``duplicator'' transformation $\nabla$ means that
\emph{sharing} (use of nodes in more than one consumer r\^ole,
that is, as inputs for edges or as graph outputs)
makes a difference,
such as between the two graphs to the right below.
(The words ``garbage'' and ``sharing'' motivate the name ``gs-monoidal''.)
\kern2ex
\noindent
\strut\hfill
\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=1,viewport=75 40 99 168,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/naturalityViolated}
\hfill
\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=1,viewport=136 40 159 168,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/naturalityViolated}
\hfill
\hfill
\hfill
\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=1,viewport=17 40 39 168,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/naturalityViolated}
\hfill
\hfill
\hfill
\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=1,viewport=194 40 247 168,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/naturalityViolated}
\hfill
\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=1,viewport=287 40 338 168,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/naturalityViolated}
\hfill\strut
\\[1.2ex]
\strut\hfill
$\kern0.7em !_A\kern0.7em$
\hfill
$F \ \,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\ !_B$
\hfill
\hfill
\hfill
$\kern0.7em F\kern0.7em$
\hfill
\hfill
\hfill
$\kern1.2em F \ \,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\ \nabla_B\kern1.2em $
\hfill
$\nabla_A \ \,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\ (F \otimes F)\kern-0.5em$
\hfill\strut
\kern2ex
\noindent
Corradini and Gadducci \cite{Corradini-Gadducci-1999-APTG} show furthermore
that the term graphs
over a given signature
are arrows of the gs-monoidal category
freely generated by that signature;
therefore, there always
exists a unique functor
from the gs-monoidal category of term graphs
to any gs-monoidal category.
This induces a functorial semantics for term graphs
in any gs-monoidal category.
(This will frequently be some (cartesian) category of sets,
with some set $\CalV$ chosen as set of \emph{values} ``at a node'';
a term graph with $m$ inputs and $n$ outputs
then has a function of type $\CalV^m \rightarrow \CalV^n$
as semantics.
For code generation applications,
one may construct non-cartesian gs-monoidal semantics categories
where morphisms contain information about resource usage,
such as number of instructions.)
\section{Adapted DPO for Term Graph Rewriting}\sectlabel{TGR-DPO}
We will use the naming of graphs and morphisms used in \Figref{DPO}
for double-square diagrams in the shape of double pushouts.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\kern-0.5ex
\DIAGV{65}
{L} \n {\War{\Phi}} \n {G} \n {\Ear{\Psi}} \n {R}
\nn
{\Sar{M_{\mathrm{1}}}} \n {} \n {\Sar{X}} \n {} \n {\saR{M_{\mathrm{2}}}}
\nn
{A} \n {\thicklines\War{\Xi}} \n {H} \n {\thicklines\Ear{\Omega}} \n {B}
\diag
\kern-1ex
\caption{Naming of objects and morphism in ``DPO-shape'' diagrams}\Figlabel{DPO}
\end{figure}
\smallskip
\noindent
The example term graph transformation step
in our adapted DPO approach
shown in \Figref{Fig_example-DPO-rewriting} in the introduction
in effect closely corresponds to the more low-level
definitions of term graph transformation dominant in the literature:
the ``host graph'' (or ``context graph'') $H$
can be thought of as obtained from
the ``application graph'' $A$
by deleting all edges and inner nodes of $A$
which have a pre-image in $L$,
but no pre-image (via $\Phi \,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\, M_1$) in $G$,
and the ``result graph'' $B$ is obtained from $H$
by ``gluing in'' the right-hand side $R$.
The gluing graph $G$ and the host graph $H$
are obviously not jungles, since they have nodes
that are neither graph input nodes nor edge output nodes,
but they still are directed hypergraphs (DHGs)
in the sense of \Defref{DHG}.
Both for DHGs and for term graphs
we distinguish \emph{matchings},
which preserve edge labelling and incidence structure,
from \emph{homomorphisms}, which in addition preserve
also graph input and output structure:
\begin{Def}
A \emph{DHG matching} $\Phi = (\Phi_{\mathcal{N}}, \Phi_{\mathcal{E}})$
from $G_1 : \DHG{m_1}{n_1}$ to $G_2 : \DHG{m_2}{n_2}$
consists of two functions $\Phi_{\mathcal{N}} : \mathcal{N}_1 \mathop{\rightarrow} \mathcal{N}_2$
and $\Phi_{\mathcal{E}} : \mathcal{E}_1 \mathop{\rightarrow} \mathcal{E}_2$
satisfying:
\smallskip
\strut\hfill
$\ensuremath{\Varid{eOut}}_2 \circ \Phi_{\mathcal{E}} = \Phi_{\mathcal{N}} \circ \ensuremath{\Varid{eOut}}_1\enskip,$
\hfill
$\ensuremath{\Varid{eLabel}}_2 \circ \Phi_{\mathcal{E}} = \ensuremath{\Varid{eLabel}}_1\enskip,$
\hfill and
\hfill
$\ensuremath{\Varid{eIn}}_2 \circ \Phi_{\mathcal{E}} = \ensuremath{\Varid{map}}\ \Phi_{\mathcal{N}} \circ \ensuremath{\Varid{eIn}}_1$.
\smallskip
\noindent
A \emph{DHG homomorphism} $\Phi = (\Phi_{\mathcal{I}}, \Phi_{\mathcal{E}})$
from $G_1 : \DHG{m}{n}$ to $G_2 : \DHG{m}{n}$
consists of two functions $\Phi_{\mathcal{I}} : \mathcal{I}_1 \mathop{\rightarrow} \mathcal{I}_2$
and $\Phi_{\mathcal{E}} : \mathcal{E}_1 \mathop{\rightarrow} \mathcal{E}_2$
such that defining
$\Phi_{\mathcal{N}} \defeq Id_{\Fin{m}} \uplus \Phi_{\mathcal{I}}$
turns $(\Phi_{\mathcal{N}}, \Phi_{\mathcal{E}})$
into a matching from $G_1$ to $G_2$
and additionally satisfies
\ $\ensuremath{\Varid{gOut}}_2 = \Phi_{\mathcal{N}} \circ \ensuremath{\Varid{gOut}}_1$.
If $G_1$ and $G_2$ are term graphs, then a matching (respectively
homomorphism)
$\Phi$ from $G_1$ to $G_2$ is called a \emph{term graph matching}
(respectively \emph{term graph homomorphism}).
\qed
\end{Def}
\smallskip
The diagram in \Figref{Fig_example-DPO-rewriting} is then a double pushout
in the category of DHG matchings, satisfying the following additional
requirements:
\begin{Def}A DPO diagram in the category of DHG matchings of the shape
of \Figref{DPO}
is called a \emph{TG-DPO} iff:
\begin{itemize}
\item $M_1$ and $M_2$ are term graph matchings
(which implies that $L$, $R$, $A$, and $B$ all are term graphs),
\item $\Phi$, $\Psi$, $\Xi$, $\Omega$ are DHG homomorphisms.
\qed
\end{itemize}
\end{Def}
\smallskip
\noindent
Superficially, this arrangement looks similar to that of the
$\CalM,\CalN$-adhesive categories of Habel and Plump
\cite{Habel-Plump-2012} ---
we would use DHG homomorphisms for $\CalM$
and term graph matchings for $\CalN$.
However, several of the conditions of $\CalM,\CalN$-adhesive
categories fail to hold for this setting.
The existence of a pushout complement in the category of DHG matchings
is subject to the gluing condition as usual ---
both dangling and identification conflicts can occur.
If the rule $L \Bkar{\Phi} G \Ar{\Psi} R$ consists of
DHG homomorphisms, both the pushout complement construction for the
left square and the pushout construction for the right square will
yield DHG matchings $\Xi$ and $\Omega$ that also respect the graph
interface, and therefore are DHG homomorphisms.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.42\columnwidth}
\centering
\vrule height7ex width0pt depth0pt
\DIAGV{150}
{\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.85,viewport=22 218 44 344,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/R-DPO-Conflict}}\ G\kern-1em}
\n {\thicklines\Ear{\Psi}} \n
{\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.85,viewport=156 218 181 344,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/R-DPO-Conflict}}\ R\kern-1em}
\diag
\vrule height7ex width0pt depth0pt
\DIAGV{50}
{\Sar{\Chi}} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {\Sar{M_2}}
\diag
\vrule height7ex width0pt depth0pt
\DIAGV{150}
{\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.85,viewport=22 29 44 154,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/R-DPO-Conflict}}\ H\kern-1em}
\n {\thicklines\Ear{\Omega}} \n
\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.85,viewport=137 29 202 154,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/R-DPO-Conflict}}\ B\kern-0.5em}
\diag
\vrule height8ex width0pt depth0pt
\caption{RHS edge conflict}\Figlabel{Fig_R-DPO-Conflict}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.48\columnwidth}
\centering
\vrule height7ex width0pt depth0pt
\DIAGV{150}
{\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.96,viewport=25 227 80 339,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/notMonicMatchingGH}}\ G\kern-1em}
\n {\thicklines\Ear{\Psi}} \n
{\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.96,viewport=133 227 188 339,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/notMonicMatchingGH}}\ R\kern-1em}
\diag
\vrule height7ex width0pt depth0pt
\DIAGV{50}
{\Sar{\Chi}} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {\Sar{M_2}}
\diag
\vrule height7ex width0pt depth0pt
\DIAGV{150}
{\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.96,viewport=25 33 80 146,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/notMonicMatchingGH}}\ H\kern-1em}
\n {\thicklines\Ear{\Omega}} \n
\fbox{\includegraphics[scale=0.96,viewport=133 33 188 146,clip]{Yuhang/Graphs/notMonicMatchingGH}}\ B\kern-1em}
\diag
\vrule height8ex width0pt depth0pt
\caption{Non-injective host matching}\Figlabel{Fig_notMonicMatchingGH}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\noindent
For the right square of the DPO diagram,
we finally have to ensure that $B$ is a term graph,
which is not trivial.
First, the situation shown in
\Figref{Fig_R-DPO-Conflict} would lead to $B$ not being a term graph ---
however, since the $\Phi$-image of node $a$ in $L$
has to be either an input node or the output of an edge,
such a situation cannot occur
at least when the rule LHS $\Phi$ is injective.
(If the image of $a$ is an input node,
then, with $\Phi$ preserving the graph interface,
it cannot be injective.
If the image of $a$ is the output node of an edge in $L$,
then the image in $A$ of that edge needs to be also the image
of the $S$-edge in $H$, which contradicts the left-hand pushout.)
Second, also the example DHG matching pushout in
\Figref{Fig_notMonicMatchingGH}
fails to produce a term graph $B$ --- this situation can be avoided
by restricting the matching $M_1$ to be injective.
(In effect, both constraints together correspond to the restriction to
the ``regular monos'' of \cite[Prop.~4.3]{Corradini-Gadducci-2005}.)
Since the right-hand side $\Psi$ of the rule is a DHG homomorphism,
it is automatically injective on input nodes;
non-injectivity of $\Psi$ therefore can only force identifications that are also
``permissible'' for the host graph,
so we do not need to restrict $\Psi$ to be injective,
which would be highly unwelcome for term graph rewriting.
Therefore, DPOs in the DHG matching category can be used to
rewrite term graphs with rules with injective left-hand sides,
using only injective matchings (which takes care of the identification
part of the gluing condition):
\begin{The}\Thelabel{TG-DPO}
Given a term graph rewriting rule $L \Bkar{\Phi} G \Ar{\Psi} R$
where $L$ and $R$ are term graphs and $\Phi$ and $\Psi$ are
DHG homomorphisms, with $\Phi$ injective,
and given further an injective term graph matching $L \Ar{M_1} A$,
then this setting can be completed to a TG-DPO
if the dangling condition holds for $M_1$.
\qed
\end{The}
\smallskip
The fact that $\Phi$ is injective
implies that the output nodes of $L$ are disjoint from the input
nodes;
we call such a term graph \emph{solid}.
\section{Semantics Preservation of DPO-Transformation of Term Graphs}\sectlabel{SemPreserve}
While the fact that term graphs form a free gs-monoidal category
gives us semantics of term graphs,
it does not give us semantics of DHGs such as the gluing and host
graphs in most typical rewriting steps.
Rather than trying to artificially obtain some semantics for DHGs
``with holes'', we will transfer the necessary information ``across
the host graph $H$'' at the DHG level.
A starting point could be the decomposition of term graphs
into gs-monoidal expressions as described in
\cite{Corradini-Gadducci-1999-APTG}.
However, instead of extending this expression type
into a type of contexts by including ``placeholders''
as proposed in \cite{Corradini-Gadducci-2002b},
we define contexts at the level of graphs:
\begin{Def}\Deflabel{context}
An \emph{$m,n$-context $(k, A_1, A_2)$ for an $i,j$-parameter} consists of:
\begin{itemize}
\item an \emph{internal interface} object $k$,
\item a \emph{top part} term graph $A_1 : \TG{m}{i + k}$, and
\item a \emph{bottom part} term graph $A_2 : \TG{j + k}{n}$.
\qed
\end{itemize}
\end{Def}
\medskip
\noindent
In the following,
we continue to use ``$\,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,$'' as sequential composition operator for term graphs,
and ``$\otimes$'' for parallel composition.
Furthermore, ``$\RELid_{k}$'' denotes the \emph{identity}
term graph with $k$ inputs that are also its outputs, in the same
sequence.
The empty DHG with $i$ inputs, and with $j$ distinct output nodes that
are disjoint from the input nodes is written ``$\bot_{i,j}$'';
for the sub-category of DHG \emph{homomorphisms}
restricted to DHGs with $i$ inputs and $j$ outputs,
$\bot_{i,j}$ is the initial object.
\begin{Def}\Deflabel{ImageContextFor}
An $m,n$-context $(k, A_1, A_2)$ for an $i,j$-parameter is called an
\emph{image context for} an injective term graph matching $M_1 : L \mathop{\rightarrow} A$
starting from term graph $L : \TG{i}{j}$
iff $\ A \;\cong\; A_1 \,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\, (L \, \otimes\, \RELid_{k}) \,\,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\, \, A_2\ $
and the nodes and edges of $L$ in that expression precisely constitute
the image of $M_1$ in $A$.
\qed
\end{Def}
By ensuring that there is no ``side entrance'' from within the
application graph $A$
into the image of the LHS $L$, the dangling condition is crucial for the
following result:
\begin{Lem}
Assume a solid term graph $\ L : \TG{i}{j}\ $ to be given,
and let $\ \Phi : \bot_{i,j} \mathop{\rightarrow} L\ $ be
the (necessarily-injective) DHG homomorphism from $\bot_{i,j}$ to $L$.
If $\ A : \TG{m}{n}\ $ is a term graph
and $\ M_1 : L \mathop{\rightarrow} A\ $ is an injective term graph matching
that together with $\Phi$ satisfies the dangling condition,
then there is an image context $(k, A_1, A_2)$ for $M_1$.
\qed
\end{Lem}
Such a context can be calculated in several different ways
from the reachability in $A$,
for example by collecting all edges into $A_1$ that are reachable from
the input nodes of $A$ via paths that do not touch the image
of $L$ under $M_1$. The difference $\ (A - A_1) - L\ $ would then induce $A_2$.
\medskip
\def\Ginput{\scalebox{0.8}[1]{\textsf{input}}}%
\def\Goutput{\scalebox{0.8}[1]{\textsf{output}}}%
\def\Gcolimit{\scalebox{0.8}[1]{\textsf{COLIMIT}}}%
Sequential and parallel composition in the gs-monoidal category
of term graphs (as morphisms)
can be obtained as colimits in the category of DHG matchings.
In the following diagram we denote the coproduct injections as $\iota$ and $\kappa$;
for a $X : \DHG{m}{n}$ we use $\Ginput : \RELid_{m} \mathop{\rightarrow} X$
as the DHG matching mapping $\RELid_{m}$ identically to the input
nodes of $X$, and analogously $\Goutput : \RELid_{n} \mathop{\rightarrow} X$.
The lower-left box below contains the diagram that has
as its colimit the application graph $A$,
factored into the context $(k, A_1, A_2)$ and an image of the
left-hand side $L$ as
$A\; \cong\; A_1\ \,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\ (L\ \otimes\ \RELid_{k})\ \,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\ A_2$.
\medskip
\noindent
\begin{minipage}{\columnwidth}
\DIAGV{67}
{L} \n {} \n {} \n {\thicklines\Warv{\Phi}{200}} \n {} \n {} \n
{\bot_{i,j}} \n {} \n {} \n {\thicklines\Earv{\Psi}{200}} \n {} \n {} \n {R}
\nn
{\Nbiar{\Gcolimit}{}}
\n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n
{\Nbiar{\Gcolimit}{}}
\n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n
{\Nbiar{\Gcolimit}{}}
\diag
\kern0.3ex
\strut\hfill
\fbox{\begin{minipage}[c]{0.18\columnwidth}
\DIAGV{60}
{\RELid_{i}}
\nn
{\Sar{\Ginput}}
\nn
{L}
\nn
{\Nar{\Goutput}}
\nn
{\RELid_{j}}
\diag
\end{minipage}}
\hfill
$\Bkar{\displaystyle\Phi'}$
\hfill
\fbox{\begin{minipage}[c]{0.18\columnwidth}
\DIAGV{60}
{\RELid_{i}}
\nn
{}
\nn
{}
\nn
{}
\nn
{\RELid_{j}}
\diag
\end{minipage}}
\hfill
$\Ar{\displaystyle\Psi'}$
\hfill
\fbox{\begin{minipage}[c]{0.18\columnwidth}
\DIAGV{60}
{\RELid_{i}}
\nn
{\Sar{\Ginput}}
\nn
{R}
\nn
{\Nar{\Goutput}}
\nn
{\RELid_{j}}
\diag
\end{minipage}}
\hfill
\strut
\\[-1.4ex]
\DIAGV{67}
{\Sar{M_1'}}
\n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n
{\Sar{\Chi'}}
\n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n
{\Sar{M_2'}}
\diag
\kern1ex
\strut\hfill
\fbox{\begin{minipage}[c]{0.23\columnwidth}
\DIAGV{60}
{} \n {} \n {A_1}
\nn
{} \n {} \n {\Nar{\Goutput}}
\nn
{\RELid_{i}} \n {\Ear{\iota}} \n {\RELid_{i + k}}
\nn
{\Sar{\Ginput}} \n {} \n {\Nar{\kappa}}
\nn
{L} \n {} \n {\RELid_{k}}
\nn
{\Nar{\Goutput}} \n {} \n {\Sar{\kappa}}
\nn
{\RELid_{j}} \n {\Ear{\iota}} \n {\RELid_{j + k}}
\nn
{} \n {} \n {\Sar{\Ginput}}
\nn
{} \n {} \n {A_2}
\diag
\end{minipage}}
\hfill
$\Bkar{\displaystyle\Xi'}$
\hfill
\fbox{\begin{minipage}[c]{0.23\columnwidth}
\DIAGV{60}
{} \n {} \n {A_1}
\nn
{} \n {} \n {\Nar{\Goutput}}
\nn
{\RELid_{i}} \n {\Ear{\iota}} \n {\RELid_{i + k}}
\nn
{} \n {} \n {\Nar{\kappa}}
\nn
{} \n {} \n {\RELid_{k}}
\nn
{} \n {} \n {\Sar{\kappa}}
\nn
{\RELid_{j}} \n {\Ear{\iota}} \n {\RELid_{j + k}}
\nn
{} \n {} \n {\Sar{\Ginput}}
\nn
{} \n {} \n {A_2}
\diag
\end{minipage}}
\hfill
$\Ar{\displaystyle\Omega'}$
\hfill
\fbox{\begin{minipage}[c]{0.23\columnwidth}
\DIAGV{60}
{} \n {} \n {A_1}
\nn
{} \n {} \n {\Nar{\Goutput}}
\nn
{\RELid_{i}} \n {\Ear{\iota}} \n {\RELid_{i + k}}
\nn
{\Sar{\Ginput}} \n {} \n {\Nar{\kappa}}
\nn
{R} \n {} \n {\RELid_{k}}
\nn
{\Nar{\Goutput}} \n {} \n {\Sar{\kappa}}
\nn
{\RELid_{j}} \n {\Ear{\iota}} \n {\RELid_{j + k}}
\nn
{} \n {} \n {\Sar{\Ginput}}
\nn
{} \n {} \n {A_2}
\diag
\end{minipage}}
\hfill
\strut
\\[-1.8ex]
\DIAGV{67}
{\Sbiar{\Gcolimit}{}}
\n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n
{\Sbiar{\Gcolimit}{}}
\n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n {} \n
{\Sbiar{\Gcolimit}{}}
\nn
{A} \n {} \n {} \n {\thicklines\Warv{\Xi}{200}} \n {} \n {} \n
{H} \n {} \n {} \n {\thicklines\Earv{\Omega}{200}} \n {} \n {} \n {B}
\diag
\end{minipage}
\bigskip
\noindent
The key observation is now that
for a redex with $\bot$ as gluing graph
and injective rule LHS $\Phi$ and injective matching $M_1$
satisfying the gluing condition,
the DPO derivation step in the category of DHG matchings
can be factored over a completely standard DPO diagram
in a category of diagrams over the
category of DHG matchings,
as indicated in the
nested diagram above.
The double-square diagram in the middle there \textbf{is a double pushout}
in the category of diagrams over the category of DHG matchings
with \emph{rigid diagram homomorphisms},
which we define to be diagram homomorphisms that have only identity
morphisms as components,
or, in other words, that are node- and edge-label preserving graph
homomorphisms between the underlying node- and edge-labelled graphs
of the diagrams.
A key ingredient for this factoring to work is the restriction of the gluing
graph to a ``pure interface'' $\bot_{i,j}$,
so that it does not need to occur ``in the place of $L$''.
It is crucial that this place is empty in the gluing and host diagrams,
since otherwise we would not have rigid diagram homomorphisms horizontally.
As a result, since \textbf{the $\ensuremath{\Conid{COLIMIT}}$ functor preserves pushouts},
the context decomposition carries over to the result $B$
of the original DPO rewrite step, and we have:
$$
B \quad\cong\quad A_1\ \,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\ (R\ \otimes\ \RELid_{k})\ \,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\ A_2
$$
All this together proves:
\medskip
\begin{The}\Thelabel{ContextPreservation}
Let a DHG homomorphism span $L \Bkar{\Phi} \bot_{i,j} \Ar{\Psi} R$
be given where $L$ and $R$ are term graphs.
If $A : \TG{m}{n}$ is a term graph,
$\ M_1 : L \mathop{\rightarrow} A\ $ is an injective term graph matching
that together with $\Phi$ satisfies the dangling condition,
and $(k, A_1, A_2)$ is an image context for $M_1$,
then the result graph $B$ of the induced DPO in the category of DHG
matchings
is isomorphic to $\ A_1\ \,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\ (R\ \otimes\ \RELid_{k})\ \,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\ A_2\,$,
that is, the same $(k, A_1, A_2)$ is also an image context for the morphism
$\ M_2 : R \mathop{\rightarrow} B\ $ resulting from the DPO.
\qed
\end{The}
\medskip
Note that this result is independent of the choice of image context
for $M_1$.
(Unlike for \Theref{TG-DPO}, we did not need to restrict $\Phi$ to be
injective here. Injectivity of $M_1$ however is needed for the ``image
context for'' statements according to \Defref{ImageContextFor},
and ultimately for making $M_1'$ a rigid diagram homomorphism.)
\medskip
\let\RELcomp=\origRELcomp
Let us now assume a semantics to be chosen,
that is, some gs-monoidal category (e.g., $\mbox{\emph{Set\/}}$),
and one of its objects $\CalV$ as interpretation of $1$.
We will use ``$\RELcomp$'' as sequential composition
and ``$\times$'' as parallel (that is, monoidal) composition in the
semantics category.
For a term graph $J : \TG{m}{n}$, we write $\sem{J}_{m,n}$
for its semantics, which is a morphism from $\CalV^m$ to $\CalV^n$.
In other words, we denote the morphism component of the semantics
functor with $\sem{\_}$; since this is a gs-monoidal functor,
we have in particular
$\sem{J_1\ \,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\ J_2} = \sem{J_1}\ \RELcomp\ \sem{J_2}$
and
$\sem{J_1\ \otimes\ J_2} = \sem{J_1}\ \times\ \sem{J_2}$.
\smallskip
Under the assumption that the rule $L \Bkar{} \bot_{i,j} \Ar{} R$ is semantics preserving,
that is,
$\sem{L}_{i,j} = \sem{R}_{i.j}$,
we therefore easily obtain semantics preservation of the rewrite result:
$$\renewcommand{1.3}{1.3}\begin{array}{rcl}
\sem{A}_{m,n}
&=&
\sem{A_1\ \,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\ (L\ \otimes\ \RELid_{k})\ \,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\ A_2}_{m,n}
\\ &=&
\sem{A_1}_{m,i+k}\ \RELcomp\ (\sem{L}_{i,j}\ \times\ \sem{\RELid_{k}}_{k,k})\ \RELcomp\ \sem{A_2}_{j+k,n}
\\ &=&
\sem{A_1}_{m,i+k}\ \RELcomp\ (\sem{R}_{i,j}\ \times\ \sem{\RELid_{k}}_{k,k})\ \RELcomp\ \sem{A_2}_{j+k,n}
\\ &=&
\sem{A_1\ \,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\ (R\ \otimes\ \RELid_{k})\ \,{\scriptstyle\fatsemi}\,\ A_2}_{m,n}
\\ &=&
\sem{B}_{m,n}
\end{array}
$$
\medskip
For rules with $\bot_{i,j}$ as gluing graph,
this,
together with \Theref{ContextPreservation}, allows us to extend
\Theref{TG-DPO}
with semantics preservation:
\begin{The}
If a term graph rewrite rule formulated as a span
$\ L \Bkar{\Phi} \bot_{i,j} \Ar{\Psi} R\ $
of DHG homomorphisms with term graphs $L,\ R : \TG{i}{j}$,
and with injective $\Phi$,
is applied via an injective term graph matching $M_1$
to an application term graph $\ A : \TG{m}{n}$,
where $M_1$ together with $\Phi$ satisfies the dangling condition,
then the diagram
\DIAGV{65}
{L} \n {\War{\Phi}} \n {\bot_{i,j}} \n {\Ear{\Psi}} \n {R}
\nn
{\Sar{M_{\mathrm{1}}}}
\nn
{A}
\diag
can be completed to a TG-DPO
\DIAGV{65}
{L} \n {\War{\Phi}} \n {\bot_{i,j}} \n {\Ear{\Psi}} \n {R}
\nn
{\Sar{M_{\mathrm{1}}}} \n {} \n {\Sar{X}} \n {} \n {\saR{M_{\mathrm{2}}}}
\nn
{A} \n {\thicklines\War{\Xi}} \n {H} \n {\thicklines\Ear{\Omega}} \n {B}
\diag
\smallskip
\noindent
and for any gs-monoidal semantics functor
$\sem{\_}$
for which the rule is semantics-preserving, that is,
\hbox{$\sem{L}_{i,j} = \sem{R}_{i.j}$,}
the resulting TG-DPO rewrite is also semantics-preserving, that is,
$\sem{A}_{m,n} = \sem{B}_{m,n}$.
\qed
\end{The}
\ignore{
\section{GS-Monoidal Categories of Jungle Term Graphs}
\edcomm{WK}{Taken from \cite{Kahl-Anand-Carette-2005}.}
Term graphs are usually represented
by graphs where nodes are labelled with function symbols
and edges connect function calls with their arguments
\cite{Sleep-Plasmeijer-vanEekelen-1993}.
An alternative representation was
introduced with the name of \emph{jungle}
by Hoffmann and Plump \cite{Hoffmann-Plump-1988}
for the purpose of efficient implementation of term rewriting systems
(it is called ``term graph'' in \cite{Plump-1999}).
A \emph{jungle} is a directed hypergraph
where nodes are only labelled with type information (if applicable),
function names are hyperedge labels,
each hyperedge has a sequence of input tentacles and
exactly one output tentacle,
and for each node,
there is at most one hyperedge
that has its output tentacle incident with that node.
For representing our declarative assembly code fragments,
we use a generalisation of the jungle concept,
corresponding to \Stefanescu{}'s ``flow graphs'' \cite{Stefanescu-2000}:
\begin{Def}\Deflabel{CodeGraph}
A \emph{code graph} $G = (\mathcal{N},\mathcal{E},\cgIn,\cgOut,\cgSrc,\cgTrg,\cgELab)$
over an edge label set $\ELab$
consists of
\begin{itemize}
\item a set $\mathcal{N}$ of \emph{nodes}
and a set $\mathcal{E}$ of \emph{hyperedges} (or \emph{edges}),
\item two node sequences $\cgIn, \cgOut : \mathcal{N}^*$
containing the \emph{input nodes} and \emph{output nodes} of the code graph,
\item two functions $\cgSrc, \cgTrg : \mathcal{E} \mathop{\rightarrow} \mathcal{N}^*$
assigning each hyperedge the sequence of its \emph{source nodes}
and \emph{target nodes}
respectively, and
\item a function $\cgELab : \mathcal{E} \mathop{\rightarrow} \ELab$
assigning each hyperedge its \emph{edge label},
where the label has to be compatible with the numbers of source and
target nodes of the edge.
\qed
\end{itemize}
\end{Def}
We now summarise the theory of our code graphs,
which is essentially a reformulation of
\Stefanescu{}'s data-flow network algebra,
in the language of category theory.
In particular, we use the gs-monoidal categories
proposed by Corradini and Gadducci
for modelling acyclic term graphs \cite{Corradini-Gadducci-1999-APTG}.
The following definition serves mainly to introduce our notation:
\begin{Def}
A \emph{category} ${\categ{C}}$
is a tuple $(\ensuremath{\Conid{Obj}}, \ensuremath{\Conid{Mor}}, \ensuremath{\Varid{src}}, \ensuremath{\Varid{trg}}, \RELid, \RELcomp)$
with the following constituents:
\begin{itemize}
\item $\ensuremath{\Conid{Obj}}$ is a collection of \emph{objects}.
\item $\ensuremath{\Conid{Mor}}$ is a collection of \emph{arrows} or \emph{morphisms}.
\item $\ensuremath{\Varid{src}}$ (resp.~$\ensuremath{\Varid{trg}}$) maps each morphism
to its source (resp.~target) object.
We write ``$f : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \objB$''
for ``$f \in \ensuremath{\Conid{Mor}} \land \ensuremath{\Varid{src}}(f) = \objA \land \ensuremath{\Varid{trg}}(f) = \objB$''.
The collection of all morphisms $f$ of category $\categ{C}$
with $f : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \objB$
is denoted as $\CThom{\categ{C}}{\objA}{\objB}$ and also called a \emph{homset}.
\item ``$\RELcomp$'' is the binary \emph{composition} operator,
and composition of two morphisms $f : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \objB$ and
$g : \objB' \mathop{\rightarrow} \objC$ is defined iff $\objB = \objB'$,
and then $(f \RELcomp g) : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \objC$;
composition is associative.
\item $\RELid$ associates with every object $\objA$ a morphism $\RELid_{\objA}$
which is both a right and left unit for composition.
\QED
\end{itemize}
\end{Def}
\ignore{
\begin{Not}
For a \emph{category}
${\categ{C}} = (\ensuremath{\Conid{Obj}}_{\categ{C}}, \ensuremath{\Conid{Mor}}_{\categ{C}}, \ensuremath{\Varid{src}}, \ensuremath{\Varid{trg}}, \RELid, \RELcomp)$,
we write $f : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \objB$
instead of $\ensuremath{\Varid{src}}(f) = \objA \land \ensuremath{\Varid{trg}}(f) = \objB$;
composition of
$f : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \objB$ and
$g : \objB \mathop{\rightarrow} \objC$ is written $f \RELcomp g$;
and the identity for object $\objA$ is $\RELid_{\objA}$.
\qed
\end{Not}
The objects of the untyped code graph category
over a set of edge labels $\ELab$
are natural numbers;
in the typed case we would have sequences of types.
A morphism from $m$ to $n$ is a code graph with $m$ input nodes
and $n$ output nodes
(more precisely, it is an isomorphism class of code graphs,
since node and edge identities do not matter).
Composition $F \RELcomp G$ ``glues'' together
the output nodes of $F$ with the respective input nodes of $G$.
The identity on $n$ consists only of $n$ input nodes which are also,
in the same sequence, output nodes, and no edges.
A \emph{primitive} code graph
is a code graph that corresponds to a single operation,
i.e., a code graph with a single edge
where each node is the target of exactly one tentacle,
and the target node sequence of the edge coincides with the
output node sequence of the graph,
and the source sequence with the input sequence.
\begin{Def}\Deflabel{ssmc}
A \emph{symmetric strict monoidal category}
$\categ{C} = ( \catC_{0}, \otimes, \triv, \mathbb{X} )$
consists of a category $\catC_{0}$,
a strictly associative monoidal bifunctor $\otimes$
with $\triv$ as its strict unit,
and a transformation $\mathbb{X}$
that associates with every two objects $\objA$ and $\objB$
an arrow $\mathbb{X}_{\objA,\objB} : \objA \otimes \objB \mathop{\rightarrow} \objB \otimes \objA$
with:
\BCM
\begin{array}[b]{rcl@{\hskip1em}rcl}
(F \otimes G) \RELcomp \mathbb{X}_{\objC,\objD} &=&
\mathbb{X}_{\objA,\objB} \RELcomp (G \otimes F)
\enskip,&
\mathbb{X}_{\objA,\objB} \RELcomp \mathbb{X}_{\objB,\objA} &=&
\RELid_{\objA} \otimes \RELid_{\objB}
\enskip,\\[.3ex]
\mathbb{X}_{\objA\otimes\objB,\objC} &=&
(\RELid_{\objA} \otimes \mathbb{X}_{\objB,\objC}) \RELcomp
(\mathbb{X}_{\objA,\objC} \otimes \RELid_{\objB})
\enskip,&
\mathbb{X}_{\triv,\triv} &=& \RELid_{\triv}
\enskip.
\ECMAQ
\unskip
\end{Def}
\noindent
For code graphs, $\triv$ is the number 0 and
$\otimes$ on objects is addition.
On morphisms, $\otimes$ forms the disjoint union of code graphs,
concatenating the input and output node sequences.
$\mathbb{X}_{m,n}$ differs from $\RELid_{m + n}$
only in the fact that the two parts of the output node sequence are swapped.
\ignore{
\begin{Def}\Deflabel{gs-monoidal}
$\categ{C} = ( \catC_{0}, \otimes, \triv, \mathbb{X}, \Nabla, ! )$
is a {\em strict gs-monoidal category} iff
\begin{itemize}
\item $( \catC_{0}, \otimes, \triv, \mathbb{X} )$
is a symmetric strict monoidal category, and
\item $!$ associates with every object $\objA$ of $\catC_{0}$
an arrow $!_{\objA} : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \triv$, and
\item $\Nabla$ associates with every object $\objA$ of $\catC_{0}$
an arrow $\NablaU{\objA} : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \objA \otimes \objA$,
\end{itemize}
such that $\RELid_{\triv} = !_{\triv} = \NablaU{\triv}$,
and the following axioms hold:
\BCM
\def1.3{1.3}
\begin{array}[b]{l}
\NablaU{\objA} \RELcomp (\RELid_{\objA} \otimes \NablaU{\objA})
\sepA{=}
\NablaU{\objA} \RELcomp (\NablaU{\objA} \otimes \RELid_{\objA})
\qquad
\NablaU{\objA} \RELcomp \exchU{\objA,\objA}
\sepA{=}
\NablaU{\objA}
\qquad
\NablaU{\objA} \RELcomp (\RELid_{\objA} \otimes !_{\objA})
\sepA{=}
\RELid_{\objA}
\\
\NablaU{\objA \otimes \objB} \RELcomp
(\RELid_{\objA} \otimes \exchU{\objB,\objA} \otimes \RELid_{\objB})
\sepA{=}
\NablaU{\objA} \otimes \NablaU{\objB}
\qquad
\qquad
!_{\objA \otimes \objB}
\sepA{=}
!_{\objA} \otimes !_{\objB}
\ECMAQ
\end{Def}
\begin{Def}\Deflabel{g-monoidal}
$\categ{C} = ( \catC_{0}, \otimes, \triv, \mathbb{X}, ! )$
is a {\em strict g-monoidal category} iff
\begin{itemize}
\item $( \catC_{0}, \otimes, \triv, \mathbb{X} )$
is a symmetric strict monoidal category, and
\item $!$ associates with every object $\objA$ of $\catC_{0}$
an arrow $!_{\objA} : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \triv$,
\end{itemize}
such that $\RELid_{\triv} = !_{\triv}$,
and \emph{monoidality of termination} holds:
\BM
!_{\objA \otimes \objB}
\sepA{=}
!_{\objA} \otimes !_{\objB}
\EMQ
\end{Def}
\noindent
For code graphs,
$!_n$ differs from $\RELid_n$
only in the fact that the output node sequence is empty.
The ``g'' of ``g-monoidal'' stands for ``garbage'':
all edges of code graph $G : m \mathop{\rightarrow} n$
are backward-garbage in $G \RELcomp !_n$.
Note that $!_n$ itself is garbage free, coherent, and lean, and
therefore solid and even executable.
\begin{Def}\Deflabel{s-monoidal}
$\categ{C} = ( \catC_{0}, \otimes, \triv, \mathbb{X}, \Nabla )$
is a {\em strict s-monoidal category} $\categ{C}$ iff
\begin{itemize}
\item $( \catC_{0}, \otimes, \triv, \mathbb{X} )$
is a symmetric strict monoidal category, and
\item $\Nabla$ associates with every object $\objA$ of $\catC_{0}$
an arrow $\NablaU{\objA} : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \objA \otimes \objA$,
\end{itemize}
such that $\RELid_{\triv} = \NablaU{\triv}$,
and the \emph{coherence} axioms
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{associativity of duplication}:
\BM
\NablaU{\objA} \RELcomp (\RELid_{\objA} \otimes \NablaU{\objA})
\sepA{=}
\NablaU{\objA} \RELcomp (\NablaU{\objA} \otimes \RELid_{\objA})
\EM,
\item \emph{commutativity of duplication}:
\BM
\NablaU{\objA} \RELcomp \exchU{\objA,\objA}
\sepA{=}
\NablaU{\objA}
\EM
\end{itemize}
and the \emph{monoidality} axiom
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{monoidality of duplication}:
\BM
\NablaU{\objA \otimes \objB} \RELcomp
(\RELid_{\objA} \otimes \exchU{\objB,\objA} \otimes \RELid_{\objB})
\sepA{=}
\NablaU{\objA} \otimes \NablaU{\objB}
\EM
\end{itemize}
are satisfied.
\qed
\end{Def}
For code graphs,
$\Nabla_{n}$ differs from $\RELid_{n}$
only in the fact that the output node sequence is
\ignore{
and in
$\Nabla_{\objA}$, the output node sequence is
the concatenation of the input node sequence with itself.
The ``s'' of ``s-monoidal'' stands for ``sharing:
every input of $\Nabla_k \RELcomp (F \otimes G)$ is shared by $F : k \mathop{\rightarrow} m$
and $G : k \mathop{\rightarrow} n$.
\begin{Def}\Deflabel{gs-monoidal}
$\categ{C} = ( \catC_{0}, \otimes, \triv, \mathbb{X}, \Nabla, ! )$
is a {\em strict gs-monoidal category} iff
\begin{itemize}
\item $( \catC_{0}, \otimes, \triv, \mathbb{X}, ! )$
is a strict g-monoidal category, and
\item $( \catC_{0}, \otimes, \triv, \mathbb{X}, \Nabla )$
is a strict s-monoidal category,
\end{itemize}
such that the \emph{coherence} axiom
\begin{itemize}
\item \emph{right-inverse of duplication} holds:
\BM
\NablaU{\objA} \RELcomp (\RELid_{\objA} \otimes !_{\objA})
\sepA{=}
\RELid_{\objA}
\EMQ
\end{itemize}
\ignore{
A {\em gs-monoidal functor}
$( F, \phi, \phi_e ) : \categ{C} \rightarrow \categ{C}'$ is a
symmetric monoidal functor (that is, a functor $F$ equipped with two natural
isomorphisms $\phi_e: F(e) \rightarrow e'$ and \
$\phi: F(\objA \otimes \objB) \rightarrow F(a) \otimes' F(b)$)
such that $F(!_{\objA}) ; \phi_e = !_{F(a)}$ and $F(\NablaU{\objA}) ; \phi =
\NablaU{F(a)}$;
it is {\em strict} if $\phi$ and $\phi_e$ are identities.
The category of small strict gs-monoidal categories and their strict
functors is denoted by {\bf GSM-Cat}.
\end{Def}
\noindent
Code graphs (and term graphs) over a fixed edge label set
form a gs-monoidal category, but not a \emph{cartesian} category,
where in addition $!$ and $\Nabla$ are \emph{natural} transformations,
i.e., for all $F : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \objB$
we have
$F \RELcomp !_{\objB} = !_{\objA}$
and
\hbox{$F \RELcomp \NablaU{\objB} = \NablaU{\objA} \RELcomp (F \otimes F)$.}
\ignore{
\begin{Def}\Deflabel{cartesian}
A {\em strict cartesian category} $\categ{C}$
is a strict gs-monoidal category
$( \catC_{0}, \otimes, \triv, \mathbb{X}, \Nabla, ! )$,
where
\begin{itemize}
\item $!$ is a natural transformation from the identity functor to the
constant-$\triv$ functor,
i.e., $F \RELcomp !_{\objB} = !_{\objA}$ for all $F : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \objB$,
and
\item $\Nabla$ is a natural transformation from the identity functor to
$\otimes$,
i.e., $F \RELcomp \NablaU{\objB} = \NablaU{\objA} \RELcomp (F \otimes F)$
for all $F : \objA \mathop{\rightarrow} \objB$
\qed
\end{itemize}
\end{Def}
To see how these naturality conditions are violated,
the five jungles in the following drawing
can be obtained as, in this sequence,
$F : 1 \mathop{\rightarrow} 1$,
$!_1$,
$F \RELcomp !_1$,
$F \RELcomp \Nabla_1$,
and
$\Nabla_1 \RELcomp (F \otimes F)$:
\phantom{.}\hfill
\CGpic{gF}\hfill
\CGpicO{bang}{bb=35 -143 95 147}\hfill
\CGpicO{gFbang}{bb=35 -45 95 245}\hfill
\CGpic{gFdup}\hfill
\CGpic{dup_gF}\hfill
\phantom{.}
\smallskip
\noindent
(It is easy to see that we obtain naturality of termination
if we consider
equivalence classes of code graphs up to garbage collection.)
\ignore{
\section{Modelling Term Graphs using ``Dependent Objects''}\sectlabel{TG}
\edcomm{WK}{Refer to \citep{Kahl-2011_AgdaTG}.}
\edcomm{WK}{The following material is unchanged from the MSFP 2018 submission.}
\noindent
Term graphs are ``expression trees with sharing (and possibly cycles)'';
following \citet{Hoffmann-Plump-1991} and
\citet{Corradini-Rossi-1991},
we consider term graphs as a kind of directed hypergraphs (``jungles''),
where the operation labels are attached to the hyperedges.
For simplicity, we will not formalise any requirement of acyclicity,
nor of bijective correspondence between hyperedges and non-variable nodes.
However, we do want to enforce that each edge $e$ has an arity,
and that the label of $e$ is taken from a label set for that arity,
and that the arity is the number of argument nodes (``source nodes'') for this edge.
Our first formalisation of this uses a dependent sum construction:
In general, the dependent sum type $(\sum x : X \ \bullet\ T\ x)$
is the type of pairs $(x, y)$ where $x$ is of type $X$ and $y$ is of
type $T\ x$, which means that the \emph{type} of $y$ depends on
the \emph{value} of $x$.
The first function symbol $\Fct{trg}$ of $\mathsf{sigTG_1}$
maps each edge to its result (``target'') node;
the second function symbol maps each edge to a dependently-typed
triple $(n, q, a)$ consisting of the arity $n$, the edge label $q$ of
type $\ELab\ n$, and the array $a$ of argument nodes, of type
$\ensuremath{\Conid{Vec}}\ \Sort{N}\ n$ (which we expect to be implemented in structure
$G$ by $\ensuremath{\Conid{Array}}\ \Sort{N}_G\ n$):
\BD
\mathsf{sigTG_1}
\defeq
\begin{array}[t]{ll}
\langle & \mbox{\textbf{sorts: }} \Sort{N}, \Sort{E}
\\
{} & \mbox{\textbf{ops: }} \begin{array}[t]{l}
\Fct{trg} : \Sort{E} \mathop{\rightarrow} \Sort{N}
\\ \Fct{eInfo} : \Sort{E} \mathop{\rightarrow} \sum \ n : \mathbb{N}\ \bullet\ \ELab\ n \times \ensuremath{\Conid{Vec}}\ \Sort{N}\ n
\kern1em\rangle
\end{array}
\end{array}
\ED
\medbreak
\noindent
A nicer formulation is possible using \emph{dependent function types}
--- in general, the type ``$(x : X) \mathop{\rightarrow} T\ x$'' is the type of
functions
that map each argument $x$ of type $X$ to a result of type $T\ x$,
that is, not only the value of the result depends on the value of the
argument,
but also the \emph{type} of the result depends on the \emph{value} of
the argument.
Using such dependent function types,
we can split the triple type of $\Fct{eInfo}$ similar to the splitting
mentioned at the beginning of this section, which however split a
type of non-dependent pairs.
Here, while introducing
separate function symbols for arity, label, and source node
array of edges,
we also have to turn the types of the latter two function symbols
into dependent function types:
\BD
\mathsf{sigTG_2}
\defeq
\begin{array}[t]{ll}
\langle & \mbox{\textbf{sorts: }} \Sort{N}, \Sort{E}
\\
{} & \mbox{\textbf{ops: }} \begin{array}[t]{l}
\Fct{trg} : \Sort{E} \mathop{\rightarrow} \Sort{N}
\\ \Fct{arity} : \Sort{E} \mathop{\rightarrow} \mathbb{N}
\\ \Fct{lab} : (e : \Sort{E}) \mathop{\rightarrow} \ELab \ (\Fct{arity}\ e)
\\ \Fct{src} : (e : \Sort{E}) \mathop{\rightarrow} \ensuremath{\Conid{Vec}}\ \Sort{N}\ (\Fct{arity}\ e)
\kern1em\rangle
\end{array}
\end{array}
\ED
\noindent
For implementation in the setting of \sectref{VecSG},
this setup does not present significant problems:
For a $\mathsf{sigTG_2}$-structure $G$,
the interpretation $\Fct{lab}_G$ can be implemented by an array of type
$$
\ensuremath{\Conid{Array}}\ (\sum n : \mathbb{N} \ \bullet\ \ELab \ n)\ (\#\ \Sort{E}_G)
\enskip,
$$
where $\#\ \Sort{E}_G$ stands for the cardinality of the carrier set
of $\Sort{E}$ in $G$.
Such structures will then be subject to the datatype invariant
that the images of $\Fct{lab}$ conform with those
of $\Fct{arity}$, and analogous for $\Fct{src}$.
(Presence of this datatype invariant makes it possible
to implement $(\sum n : \mathbb{N} \ \bullet\ \ELab \ n)$ as an untagged
union type, which makes the correspondence with
$\mathsf{sigTG_1}$-structures more direct.)
\section{Conclusion and Outlook}
By considering a straight-forward adaptation of the DPO approach to
term graph rewriting,
we obtained an easily-understandable concept of rule application.
By lifting this adapted DPO into a standard DPO of diagrams,
we have been able to transfer the context decomposition
from the left-hand side to the right-hand side, obviating the need to consider
any semantics for general DHGs such as $\bot_{i,j}$.
As result, we obtained a semantics preservation theorem
that will be an important tool
in the generation of verified code optimisation tools
employing rule-based transformation of data-flow graphs,
as outlined for example in \cite{Kahl-2014_Mouldable}.
We originally started in
\cite{Kahl-2011_AgdaTG}
to formalise term graphs essentially as defined in
\sectref{gsMonCat} in the dependently-typed programming language
and proof assistant Agda \cite{Norell-2007}.
The current status of this project
\cite{Kahl-2017_RATH-Agda-2.2,Zhao-2018_TGR1}
includes term graph decomposition
and a proof for its correctness,
which essentially constitutes a machine-checked proof of the
result of Corradini and Gadducci
\cite{Corradini-Gadducci-1999-APTG}
that term graphs form a free gs-monoidal category.
As next steps, we plan to extend this development
to cover also the results of the current paper,
that is, definedness and semantics preservation of TG-DPO rewriting
steps, and then to use this as a verified implementation
of semantics-preserving term graph rewriting.
\bibliographystyle{eptcsalphaini}
\input TGR.bbl
\end{document}
|
\section{Introduction}\label{sec:intro}
The proliferation of wide-field optical detectors has led to a plethora of
imaging catalogs in the past two decades. Separating unresolved point
sources (i.e., stars and quasi-stellar objects [QSOs]) from photometrically
extended sources (i.e., galaxies) is one of the most challenging and
important steps in the extraction of astronomical information from these
imaging catalogs. For faint sources especially, performing this task well
accelerates our progress in understanding the Universe (e.g.,
\citealt{Sevilla18}). Separating resolved and unresolved sources allows us
to investigate the nature of dark matter by: (i) tracing structure in the
Milky Way halo (e.g., \citealt{Belokurov06}), (ii) measuring galaxy-galaxy
correlation functions (e.g., \citealt{Ross11, Ho15}), and (iii) detecting
the weak lensing signal from cosmic shear \citep{Soumagnac15}. Complete, and
pure, catalogs of galaxies can be used to assess the the geometry of the
Universe \citep{Yasuda01} and the theory of galaxy formation (e.g.,
\citealt{Loveday12, Moorman15}). Finally, for time-domain surveys,
point-source catalogs enable an immediate classification for all newly
discovered variable phenomena as being either Galatic or extragalactic in
origin (e.g., \citealt{Berger12,Miller17}).
Given the many applications for separating point sources from
galaxies, we turn our attention to the Pan-STARRS1 (PS1) 3$\pi$ survey
\citep{Chambers16}, whose $\sim$3$\times 10^{9}$ source catalog provides a
felicitous data set.
The 1.8\,m PS1 telescope is equipped with a wide-field ($\sim$7\,deg$^2$)
1.4 gigapixel camera and is located at Haleakala Observatory in Hawaii
\citep{Hodapp04}. PS1 primarily uses five broadband filters,
$g_{\mathrm{P1}}$, $r_{\mathrm{P1}}$, $i_{\mathrm{P1}}$, $z_{\mathrm{P1}}$,
and $y_{\mathrm{P1}}$ (hereafter $grizy_{\mathrm{P1}}$). The PS1 3$\pi$
survey scanned the entire visible sky ($\delta > -30^\circ$) $\sim$60 times
in the five filters over a 4\,yr time span \citep{Chambers16}. This
repeated imaging was used to create deep stacks \citep{Magnier16a}, with a
typical 5$\sigma$ depth of $\sim$23.2\,mag and a median seeing of
$1.19\arcsec$ in the $r$-band \citep{Tonry12, Schlafly12, Chambers16}. The
first PS1 data release (DR1) provides flux and pixel-based shape
measurements for $>$3 billion sources \citep{Flewelling16}.
Our aim is to develop a large, deep catalog of resolved and unresolved
sources using PS1 data.\footnote{Throughout this paper, we interchangably
use the term star to mean unresolved point source, which includes both stars
and QSOs, while the term galaxy refers to resolved, extended sources.} The
catalog is general purpose and can serve many different science goals,
however, our immediate goal is to support the real-time search for
transients in the Zwicky Transient Facility (ZTF; \citealt{Bellm:18:ZTF}).
Previously, a similar catalog was developed using Palomar Transient Factory
(PTF) data \citep{Miller17}.
The PTF point-source catalog was developed using \texttt{SExtractor}
\citep{bertin96} flux and shape measurements made on deep stacks of PTF
images. Stars and galaxies were separated using a machine learning
methodology built on the random forest (RF) algorithm \citep{Breiman01}.
Briefly, supervised machine learning methods build a non-parametric mapping
between \textit{features}, measured properties, and \textit{labels}, the
target classification, via a training set. The training set contains sources
for which the labels are already known, facilitating the construction of a
features to labels mapping. Following this training, the machine learning
model can produce predictions on new observations where the labels are
unknown.
The PTF point-source catalog was constructed to support the real-time search
for electromagetic counterparts to gravitational wave events. Given that
these events are expected to be very rare (e.g., \citealt{Scolnic18}), the
figure of merit (FoM) for the PTF model was defined as the true positive
rate (corresponding to the fraction of point sources that are correctly
classified) at a fixed false positive rate (fraction of resolved sources that
are misclassified) equal to 0.005 \citep{Miller17}. Maximizing the FoM will
reject as many point sources as possible, while still ensuring that nearly
every extragalactic transient ($\sim$99.5\%) remains in the candidate
stream. While the PTF point-source catalog includes $\sim$1.7$\times 10^8$
objects, the PS1 database includes an order of magnitude more sources.
A resolved--unresolved separation model built on PS1 data will produce
dramatic improvements over the PTF catalog. PS1 observations are deeper,
feature better seeing, and include 5 filters (the PTF catalog was built with
observations in a single filter, $R_\mathrm{PTF}$). Additionally, one of the
12 CCDs in the PTF camera did not work \citep{Law09}, meaning $\sim$8\% of
the $\delta > -30^\circ$ sky has no PTF classifications.
Here, we construct a new morphological classification model using PS1 DR1
data in conjunction with a new machine learning methodology. The model is
trained using \textit{Hubble Space Telescope} observations, which should
provide an improvement over the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS;
\citealt{York00}) spectroscopic training set used in \citet{Miller17}. As in
\citet{Miller17}, we use the RF algorithm to separate point sources and
extended sources and we optimize our model to maximize the same FoM. Our new
PS1 model outperforms alternatives and has already been incorporated into
the ZTF real-time pipeline.
Alongside this paper, we have released our open-source analysis, and queries
to recreate the data utilized in this study. These are available online at
\url{https://github.com/adamamiller/PS1_star_galaxy}. The final ZTF--PS1 catalog
created during this study is available as a High Level Science Product via
the Mikulski Archive for Space Telescopes (MAST) at \dataset[doi:10.17909/t9-xjrf-7g34]{http://dx.doi.org/10.17909/t9-xjrf-7g34}.\footnote{\url{https://archive.stsci.edu/prepds/ps1-psc/}}
\section{Model Data}\label{sec:model_data}
Data for the resolved--unresolved model were obtained from the PS1 casjobs
server.\footnote{\url{http://mastweb.stsci.edu/ps1casjobs/home.aspx}} The
PS1 database provides flux measurements via aperture photometry,
point-spread-function (PSF) photometry, and \citet{Kron80}
photometry.\footnote{A subset of bright sources ($i < 21\,\mathrm{mag}$)
outside the Galactic plane have additional photometric measurements, e.g.,
exponential or \citet{Sersic63} profiles, in the \textit{StackModelFitExp}
and \textit{StackModelFitSer} tables, respectively. We ignore these
measurements for this study as they are not available for all sources.}
These flux measurements are produced by PS1 in 3 different ways. The mean
brightness measured on the individual PS1 frames is reported in the
\textit{MeanObject} table, the mean brightness measured via
forced-PSF/aperture photometry on the individual PS1 frames is reported in
the \textit{ForcedMeanObject} table, and finally, the brightness measured on
the full-depth stacked PS1 images is reported in the
\textit{StackObjectThin} table. The \textit{StackObjectAttributes} table
further supplements these tables with point-source object shape
measurements, which prove useful for identifying unresolved sources.
Ultimately, see \S\ref{sec:simple_model}, we use flux measurements from the
\textit{StackObjectThin} table and shape measurements from the
\textit{StackObjectAttributes} table to build our models.
\subsection{The \textit{HST} Training Set} \label{sec:hst_train}
A fundamental challenge in the construction of any supervised machine learning
model is the curation of a high-fidelity training set. A subset of the data
that requires classification must have known labels so the machine can learn
the proper mapping between features and labels. The superior image quality of
the \textit{Hubble Space Telescope} (\textit{HST}) provides exceptionally
accurate morphological classifications, making it an ideal source of a training
set for lower quality ground-based imaging (e.g., \citealt{Lupton01}). The
downside of \textit{HST} is that the field of view is relatively small, so it
is difficult to construct a large and diverse training set suitable for
predictions over the entire sky.
We use the largest contiguous area imaged by \textit{HST}, the 1.64\,deg$^2$
COSMOS field, to construct a training set for our models. Morphological
classifications of \textit{HST} COSMOS sources are provided in
\citet{Leauthaud07}. \citeauthor{Leauthaud07} demonstrate reliable
classifications to $\sim$25\,mag, which is significantly deeper than the
faintest sources detected by PS1. We identify counterparts in the PS1 and
\textit{HST} data by performing a spatial crossmatch between the two catalogs
using a 1\arcsec\ radius.\footnote{This matching radius is the same employed
by PS1 to associate individual detections in the \textit{MeanObject} table
with detections in the \textit{StackObjectAttributes} table.} We further
excluded sources from the \citet{Leauthaud07} catalog with
$\texttt{MAG\_AUTO} > 25$\,mag, as these sources are too faint to be detected
by PS1, meaning their crossmatch counterparts are likely spurious. Following
this procedure, we find that there are 87,431 sources in the
\citet{Leauthaud07} catalog with PS1 counterparts. Of these, 80,974 are
unique in that there is a one-to-one correspondence between \textit{HST}
source and a single PS1 \texttt{ObjID}. The training set is further reduced
to 75,927 once our detection criteria are applied (see
\S\ref{sec:simple_model}), and, of those, only 47,093 have
$\texttt{nDetections} \ge 1$ in the PS1 database (hereafter, the \textit{HST}
training set).\footnote{$\texttt{nDetections}$ refers to the number of
detections in individual PS1 exposures. Thus, \textit{StackObjectThin} souces
can have $\texttt{nDetections}$ = 0 if they are only detected in the PS1
stack images.}
\subsection{The SDSS Training Set}\label{sec:sdss}
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=7.2in]{./ColorMagDiagram.pdf}
%
\caption{ PS1 color-magnitude diagrams for \textit{left}: $10^6$ randomly
selected PS1 sources, \textit{center}: the \textit{HST} training set, and
\textit{right}: the SDSS training set. The primary panels show a
two-dimensional (2D) Gaussian kernel density estimate (KDE) of the
probability density function (PDF) of each subset of sources in the
$r_\mathrm{PS1}$ vs.\ $g_\mathrm{PS1} - r_\mathrm{PS1}$ plane. The shown
contour levels extend from 0.9 to 0.1 in 0.1 intervals. To the top and
right of the primary panels are marginalized 1D KDEs of the PDF for the
$g_\mathrm{PS1} - r_\mathrm{PS1}$ color and $r_\mathrm{PS1}$ brightness,
respectively. Kron aperture measurements from the \textit{StackObjectThin}
table are used to estimate each of the PDFs. }
%
\label{fig:cmd}
\end{figure*}
The SDSS spectroscopic catalog classifies everything it observes as either a
star, galaxy, or quasi-stellar object (QSO). Using a $1\arcsec$ cross-match
radius, we find 3,834,627 sources with SDSS optical spectra have PS1
counterparts (hereafter, the SDSS training set). Thus, with an orders of
magnitude larger training set, and spectroscopic classifications that should
be both pristine and superior to mophological clsasifications, one might
expect the SDSS training set to be optimal for training the machine learning
model. However, as noted in \citet{Miller17}, the SDSS spectroscopic
targeting algorithms were highly biased, and as a result these sources prove
challenging as a training set.
Color-magnitude diagrams (CMDs) of the \textit{HST} and SDSS training sets
are compared to a random selection of $10^6$ sources from the PS1 database in
Figure~\ref{fig:cmd}. It is clear from Figure~\ref{fig:cmd} that the SDSS
training set is completely different from typical sources in PS1 and that
there are few SDSS sources in the highest density regions of the PS1 CMD.
Given the stark mismatch between typical PS1 sources and the SDSS training
set, we adopt the \textit{HST} training set for the development of our model.
We retain the SDSS training set as an independent test set to assess the
accuracy of the model following construction.
\section{Model Features}\label{sec:model_features}
In addition to developing a training set, we must select features to use as
an input for the model. As noted in \S\ref{sec:model_data}, the PS1 database
provides flux and shape measurements in each of the $grizy_\mathrm{PS1}$
filters. Adopting each of these measurements as features for the model
presents a significant problem: missing data. There are relatively few
sources in the PS1 database that are detected in all 5 filters. Typically,
to cope with missing data one can either (i) remove sources detected in
fewer than 5 filters, or (ii) assign some value, via either imputation
(e.g., \citealt{Miller17}) or the use of a dummy variable, to the missing
data. Given that the vast majority of PS1 sources are faint and are not
detected in all 5 filters, neither of these possiblities is attractive for
our present purposes.
Rather than use the raw features from the database, we engineer a series of ``white flux'' features that combine the relevant measurements across all filters in which a source is detected. In a given filter, a source is detected if the $\mathtt{PSFFlux}_f$, $\mathtt{KronFlux}_f$,
and $\mathtt{ApFlux}_f$\footnote{These flux measurements are taken from the \textit{StackObjectAttributes} table in the PS1 database. The aperture flux is measured using an ``optimal'' aperture radius based on the local PSF, and corrected based on the wings of the PSF to provide a total flux (for point sources). The Kron flux is measured inside 2.5 times the first radial moment, which is expected to miss up to $\sim$10\% of the total light from galaxies \citep{Magnier16b}.}
are \textit{all $> 0$}, where the $f$ subscript refers to a specific filter. The ``white flux'' feature is then created as:
\begin{equation}
\mathtt{white[Feat]} = \frac{\sum_f^{f = grizy_\mathrm{PS1}} w_f \, \mathtt{Feat}_f \, \mathrm{det}_f}{\sum_f^{f = grizy_\mathrm{PS1}} w_f},
\end{equation}
where the sum is over the 5 PS1 filters, \texttt{Feat} is the feature from the \textit{StackObjectAttributes} table, $\mathrm{det}_f = 1$ if the source is detected in the $f$ filter, as defined above, or $\mathrm{det}_f = 0$ if not detected, and $w_f$ is the weight assigned to each filter:
\begin{equation}
w_f = \left(\frac{\mathtt{KronFlux}_f}{\mathtt{KronFluxErr}_f}\right)^2,
\end{equation}
equivalent to signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) squared in the given filter.
Ultimately, the ``white flux'' features correspond to a weighted mean, with weights equal to the square of the SNR \citep{Bevington03}.
Our final model includes 11 ``white flux'' features to separate resolved and unresolved sources. The database features include: \texttt{PSFFlux},\footnote{For the
\texttt{PSFFlux} feature $w_f =
(\mathtt{PSFFlux}_f/\mathtt{PSFFluxErr}_f)^2$.} \texttt{KronFlux},
\texttt{ApFlux},\footnote{For the \texttt{ApFlux} feature $w_f =
(\mathtt{PSFFlux}_f/\mathtt{PSFFluxErr}_f)^2$.}
\texttt{ExtNSigma},
\texttt{KronRad}, \texttt{psfChiSq}, \texttt{psfLikelihood},
\texttt{momentYY}, \texttt{momentXY}, \texttt{momentXX}, and
\texttt{momentRH}.\footnote{Prior to their ``white flux'' calculation the
shape features (\texttt{KronRad}, \texttt{momentYY}, \texttt{momentXY},
\texttt{momentXX}, and \texttt{momentRH}) are normalized by the seeing in the
respective bandpass, which we define as the \texttt{psfMajorFWHM} and
\texttt{psfMinorFWHM} added in quadrature. \texttt{KronRad} has units of
arcsec, \texttt{momentRH} has units of arcsec$^{0.5}$, and the remaining
shape features have units of arcsec$^{2}$. They are each normalized by
dividing by the seeing raised to the appropriate power. } The remaining
features in the database were either uninformative or would bias the model,
such as R.A.\ and Dec.\ (see e.g., \citealt{Richards12a}). We do not directly
include \texttt{whitePSFFlux}, \texttt{whiteKronFlux}, and
\texttt{whiteApFlux} in the model. We found that the inclusion of these
features resulted in a bias whereby all sources brighter than $\sim$16\,mag
were automatically classified as point sources. Instead, we include the ratio of the
different flux measures: \texttt{whitePSFKronRatio} =
\texttt{whitePSFFlux}/\texttt{whiteKronFlux}, \texttt{whitePSFApRatio} =
\texttt{whitePSFFlux}/\texttt{whiteApFlux}, as well as a third feature
\texttt{whitePSFKronDist} (see \S\ref{sec:simple_model}).
As we previously alluded to, the primary benefit of the ``white flux''
features is that they can be calculated for every source in PS1 thus
allowing each to be compared on common ground. Furthermore, the SNR for the
``white flux'' features is greater than the SNR for the equivalent feature
in a single filter. The downside of these features is that for some sources,
especially at the bright end, color information is lost. While a blue source
and red source with identical \texttt{whitePSFFlux} values are intrinsically
very different, the ``white flux'' features obscure that information for the
classifier. Ultimately, we tested models using the ``white flux'' features
with and without additional color features and found that they are
statistically equivalent when tested with the \textit{HST} training set.
The direct use of color information as model features would require
reddening corrections for all PS1 sources. Not only is this a daunting task,
but accurate corrections would require a priori knowledge as to which
sources are Galactic and which are extragalactic (e.g., \citealt{Green15}).
The PS1 catalog is being developed precisely to answer this question.
Furthermore, the pencil beam sample from the \textit{HST} training set
traces a narrow range of dust columns, so the application of a model
including color information without reddening corrections would lead to
biased classifications \citep{Sevilla18}, particularly in regions of high
reddening (e.g., the Galactic plane). We conclude that the benefits of the
``white flux'' features, which eliminate the need for reddening corrections,
outweigh any losses from the exclusion of color information.
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=5.75in]{./whiteFeatures.pdf}
\caption{
The primary square panels show Gaussian KDEs of the PDF for each of the
``white flux'' features as a function of \texttt{whiteKronMag}
($=-2.5\log_{10}[\mathtt{whiteKronFlux}/3631]$) for all sources in the
\textit{HST} training set. Unresolved point sources (labeled stars) are
shown via the red-purple contours, while resolved, extended objects
(labeled galaxies) are shown via blue-green contours. The shown contour
levels extend from 0.9 to 0.1 in 0.1 intervals. To the right of each
primary panel is a marginalized 1D KDE of the PDF for the individual
features, where the amplitudes of the KDEs have been normalized by the
relative number of point sources and extended objects. The clear overlap
between faint resolved and unresolved sources suggests that a machine
learning model may provide significant improvement over the PS1 and simple
models.}
%
\label{fig:features}
\end{figure*}
The distribution of ``white flux'' features for point sources and extended objects in the
\textit{HST} training set is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:features}
(\texttt{whitePSFKronDist} is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:psfkrondist}). As
might be expected, it is clear from Figure~\ref{fig:features} that point
sources and extended objects are easily separated at the bright end
($\lesssim 20$\,mag), but there is significant overlap in the featurespace
between the two populations at the faint end ($\sim$23\,mag). Machine
learning algorithms are capable of capturing non-linear behavior in
multidimentional data sets, which will prove especially useful for the
sources under consideration in the PS1 data set.
\section{Model Construction}
\subsection{The PS1 Baseline Model}\label{sec:ps1_model}
To establish a baseline for the performance of our resolved--unresolved
separation models we adopt the classification criteria in the PS1
documentation, namely sources with
$$ \mathtt{iPSFMag} - \mathtt{iKronMag}
> 0.05\;\mathrm{mag},$$
are classified as
galaxies.\footnote{\url{https://outerspace.stsci.edu/display/PANSTARRS/How+to
+separate+stars+and+galaxies}} The documentation notes that this
classification can be performed using photometry from any of the
\textit{MeanObject}, \textit{ForcedMeanObject}, or \textit{StackObjectThin}
tables. The PS1 documentation further notes that this basic cut does not
perform well for sources with $i \gtrsim 21\,\mathrm{mag}$, which
constitutes the majority of sources detected by PS1, and motivates us to
develop alternative models. We use the performance of the $\mathtt{iPSFMag}
- \mathtt{iKronMag} > 0.05\;\mathrm{mag}$ model (hereafter, the PS1 model)
as a baseline to compare to the models discussed below.
\subsection{Simple Model}\label{sec:simple_model}
While our ultimate goal is to build a machine learning model to identify
point sources (\S\ref{sec:rf_model}), we first construct a straightforward
model. This model is inspired by the SDSS \texttt{photo} pipeline
\citep{Lupton01}, and combines the flux in each of the 5 PS1 filters to
improve the SNR relative to any individual band. In addition to being easy
to interpret, this model (hereafter, the simple model), which utilizes the
difference between the PSF flux and the Kron-aperture flux for
classification, serves as an additional baseline to test the need for a more
complicated machine learning model.
It stands to reason that a model built on all five PS1 filters should
outperform a model constructed from a single filter. To that end, we examine
the \texttt{whitePSFKronRatio} (equivalent to $\mathtt{whitePSFMag} -
\mathtt{whiteKronMag}$) to discriminate between resolved and unresolved
sources. The upper left panel of Figure~\ref{fig:features} shows that
sources with $\mathtt{whitePSFKronRatio} \gtrsim 1$ are very likely point sources. A single hard cut on \texttt{whitePSFKronRatio}, similar to the SDSS
\texttt{photo} pipeline or the PS1 model, removes any sense of confidence in
the corresponding classification. For example, a source with
$\mathtt{whitePSFKronRatio} = 1.1$ and $\mathtt{whiteKronMag} \approx
17\,\mathrm{mag}$ is far more likely to be a point source than a source with the
same \texttt{whitePSFKronRatio} value but $\mathtt{whiteKronMag} \approx
23\,\mathrm{mag}$ (see Figure~\ref{fig:features}).
To address this issue of classification confidence, we measure the
orthogonal distance from a line ($\mathtt{whitePSFFlux} = a\times
\mathtt{whiteKronFlux}$) for all sources in the
$\mathtt{whitePSFFlux}$--$\mathtt{whiteKronFlux}$ plane to define the simple model:
\begin{multline}
\mathtt{whitePSFKronDist}(a) = \\
\frac{\mathtt{whitePSFFlux} - a\times\mathtt{whiteKronFlux}}{ \sqrt{1 + a^2}},
\label{eqn:psfkrondist}
\end{multline}
where $a$ is the slope of the line. For $a \approx 1$, which is similar to a
hard cut with $\mathtt{whitePSFKronRatio} = a$, bright point sources will
have large, positive values of \texttt{whitePSFKronDist}, while bright
extended objects will have large, negative values of
\texttt{whitePSFKronDist}. Simultaneously, faint sources, which are more
difficult to classify owing to the lower SNR, will have small values of
\texttt{whitePSFKronDist}. The simple model allows us to produce a rank
ordered classification, which in turn allows us to evaluate the optimal
classification threshold for the separation of resolved and unresolved
sources (see \S\ref{sec:comp_hst}).
The optimal value for $a$ is determined via $k$-fold cross validation
(CV).\footnote{In $k$-fold CV, $1/k$ of the training set is withheld during
model construction, and the remaining $1-1/k$ fraction of the training set is
used to predict the classification of the withheld data. This
procedure is repeated $k$ times, with every training set source
being withheld exactly once, so that predictions are made for each source in
the training set enabling a measurement of the FoM.} We adopt identical
procedures to optimize both the simple model and the machine learning model
(see \S\ref{sec:rf_model}). We employ the use of an inner and outter CV
loop, both of which have $k = 10$ folds. In the outter CV loop, the training
set is split into 10 separate partitions, each iteratively withheld from the
training. For each partition in the outter CV loop, an inner 10-fold CV is
applied to the remaining $\sim$90\% of the training set to determine the
optimal model parameters. Predictions on the sources withheld in the outter
loop are made with the optimal model from the inner loop to provide model
predictions for every source in the training set. We adopt final, optimal
tuning parameters from the mean of the values determined in the inner CV.
For the simple model, we employ a grid search over $a$ in the inner CV loops
to maximize the FoM and thereby determine the optimal value of $a$.
Initially, a wide grid from 0 to 2 was searched, followed by a fine grid
search over $a$ from 0.75 to 1.25 with step size = 0.0025. The average
optimal $a$ from the inner loops, and hence final model value, is 0.91375,
with sample standard deviation $\sim$0.01. From this procedure, we find that
for the simple model the $\mathrm{FoM} = 0.62 \pm 0.02$, where the
uncertainty is estimated from the scatter in the outter CV
folds.\footnote{We find that PS1 flux measurements from the
\textit{StackObjectThin} table produce a higher FoM for the simple model
than flux measurements from the \textit{MeanObject} and
\textit{ForcedMeanObject} tables. Thus, we adopt \textit{StackObjectThin}
fluxes for both the simple model and the machine learning model, as noted in
\S\ref{sec:model_data}.}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.35in]{./whitePSFKronDist.pdf}
%
\caption{ The distribution of $\mathtt{whitePSFKronDist}$ values for
\textit{HST} training set point sources (labeled stars) and extended
objects (labeled galaxies) as a function of \texttt{whiteKronMag}. The
colors and contours are the same as Figure~\ref{fig:features}. The
horizontal dashed line shows the optimal threshold
($\mathtt{whitePSFKronDist} \ge 9.2 \times 10^{-7}$) for
resolved--unresolved classification. The upper-right inset shows a
zoom-out highlighting the stark difference between stars and galaxies at
the bright end. }
%
\label{fig:psfkrondist}
\end{figure}
The distribution of $\mathtt{whitePSFKronDist}(a=0.91375)$ is shown for the
\textit{HST} training set in Figure~\ref{fig:psfkrondist}.
$\mathtt{whitePSFKronDist}$ provides an excellent discriminant between
bright ($\lesssim 20\,\mathrm{mag}$) point sources and extended objects. We
further find that adopting a point source classification threshold of
$\mathtt{whitePSFKronDist} \ge 9.2 \times 10^{-7}$ produces a classification
accuracy of $\sim$91\%.
\subsection{Random Forest Model}\label{sec:rf_model}
\subsubsection{The Random Forest Algorithm}\label{sec:rf_alg}
Based on its success in previous astronomical applications (e.g.,
\citealt{Richards12a, Huppenkothen17, Brink13, Wright15, Goldstein15}),
including morphological classification (e.g., \citealt{Vasconcellos11,Miller17}),
we adopt the RF algorithm \citep{Breiman01} for our machine learning model.
In fact, following the comparison of several different algorithms it was
recently found that ensemble tree-based methods, such as RF, perform best
when separating stars and galaxies \citep{Sevilla18}. In future work, we
will consider alternative ensemble methods (such as adaptive boosting;
\citealt{Freund97}), which is found to slightly outperform RF for
similar problems \citep{Sevilla18}.
Briefly, RF is built on decision tree models \citep{Quinlan93} that utilize
bagging \citep{Breiman96}, wherein bootstrap samples of the training set are
used to train each of the $N_{\mathrm{tree}}$ individual trees. Within the
individual trees, only $m_{\mathrm{try}}$ randomly selected features are
used to separate sources at each node, and nodes cannot be further split if
there are fewer than \texttt{nodesize} sources in the node. The randomness
introduced by both bagging and the use of $m_{\mathrm{try}}$ features
reduces the variance of RF predicitions relative to single decision tree
models. Final RF classifications are determined via a majority vote from
each of the $N_{\mathrm{tree}}$ individual trees. Thus, RF models are
capable of producing low-variance, low-bias predictions. We utilize the
\texttt{Python scikit-learn} implementation of the RF algorithm
\citep{Pedregosa12} in this study.
\subsubsection{Feature Selection}
While the RF algorithm is relatively insensitive to correlated and/or
weak/uninformative features (e.g., \citealt{Richards12a}), we nevertheless
investigate if removing features from our feature set improves the model
performance.\footnote{For example, we find a strong correlation between
\texttt{whiteExtNSigma} and \texttt{whitepsfLikelihood} (Pearson correlation
coefficient $r = 0.85$), which can potentially lead to overfitting.} We do
this via forward and backward feature selection \citep{Guyon03}. Forward and
backward feature selection involve the iterative addition or removal of
features from the model, respectively. Like \citet{Richards12a}, we rank
order the features for either addition or subtraction based on their
RF-determined importance \citep{Breiman02}. This method shows
\texttt{whitePSFKronDist} to be the most important feature, and we find that
removing features does not improve the CV FoM. We therefore include all 11
``white flux'' features from \S\ref{sec:model_features} in the final RF
model.
\subsubsection{Optimizing the Model Tuning Parameters}
As noted in \S\ref{sec:simple_model}, we optimize the RF model tuning
parameters via an outter and inner 10-fold CV procedure. We perform a grid
search over $N_{\mathrm{tree}}$, $m_{\mathrm{try}}$ and \texttt{nodesize},
and find that the FoM for the \textit{HST} training set is maximized with
$N_{\mathrm{tree}} = 400$, $m_{\mathrm{try}} = 4$, and $\mathtt{nodesize} =
2$. The final model FoM is not strongly sensitive to the choice of these
parameters: changing any of the optimal parameters by a factor of $\sim$2
does not decrease the optimal CV FoM, $\sim$0.71, by more than the scatter
measured from the individual folds, $\sim$0.02. Finally, while a detailed
comparison is presented in \S\ref{sec:comp_hst}, we note that the RF model
significantly outperforms the simple model based on the CV FoM.
\section{Classification Performance}
\subsection{PS1, Simple, and RF Model Comparison}\label{sec:comp_hst}
We assess the relative performance of the RF model by comparing it to both
the PS1 and simple models. To do so, we select the subset of sources from
the \textit{HST} training set that have $\mathrm{det}_{i_\mathrm{PS1}} = 1$
(the PS1 model cannot classify sources that are not detected in the
$i_\mathrm{PS1}$ band), which results in 40,098 sources.
Figure~\ref{fig:cvroc_hst} shows that the RF model and simple model provide
substantial improvements over the PS1 model, with $\sim$10,000\% and
$\sim$9,200\% respective increases in the FoM relative to the PS1 model. We
additionally show Receiver Operating Characteristic (ROC) curves for the 3
models in Figure~\ref{fig:cvroc_hst}. ROC curves show how the true positive
rate (TPR)\footnote{$\mathrm{TPR} = \mathrm{TP}/(\mathrm{TP} +
\mathrm{FP})$, where TP is the total number of true positive classifications
and FP is the number of false positives.} and false positive rate
(FPR)\footnote{$\mathrm{FPR} = \mathrm{FP}/(\mathrm{FP}+\mathrm{TN})$, where
TN is the number of true negatives.} vary as a function of classification
threshold. As a reminder, point sources are considered the positive class in
this study. To construct ROC curves for the simple and PS1 models we vary
the classification thresholds from $\mathtt{whitePSFKronDist} = 4.24\times
10^{-3}$ to $-16.23\times10^{-3}$ and $\mathtt{iPSFMag} - \mathtt{iKronMag}
= 5.10\;\mathrm{mag}$ to $-2.81\;\mathrm{mag}$, respectively.
Figure~\ref{fig:cvroc_hst} highlights the strength of the simple model
approach: by using a metric that essentially captures both the difference
between the PSF and Kron flux measurements \textit{and} the SNR, the simple
model produces much higher TPR at low FPR than the PS1 model, which does not
capture information about the SNR.
Summary statistics showing the superior performance of the RF model relative
to the simple and PS1 models are presented in Table~\ref{tbl:hst_cv}. These
statistics include the FoM, the overall classification accuracy, and the
integrated area under the ROC curve (ROC AUC) of the 3 models as evaluted on
the subset of \textit{HST} training set sources with $i_\mathrm{PS1}$
detections. We use 10-fold CV to measure the summary statistics, with
identical folds for each model. Strictly speaking, this CV procedure is only
needed for the RF model, which needs to be re-trained for every fold, but
testing the simple and PS1 models on the individual folds provides an
estimate in the scatter of the final reported metrics. From
Table~\ref{tbl:hst_cv} it is clear that the RF model greatly outperforms the
simple and PS1 models.
\begin{deluxetable}{cccc}
\tablecolumns{4}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablecaption{ CV Results for the \textit{HST} Training Set \label{tbl:hst_cv}}
\tablehead{
\colhead{model} & \colhead{FoM} & \colhead{Accuracy} & \colhead{ROC AUC}
}
\startdata
RF & {\bf 0.707} $\pm$ 0.036 & {\bf 0.932} $\pm$ 0.003 & {\bf 0.973} $\pm$ 0.002 \\
simple & 0.657 $\pm$ 0.020 & 0.916 $\pm$ 0.003 & 0.937 $\pm$ 0.004 \\
PS1 & 0.007 $\pm$ 0.003 & 0.810 $\pm$ 0.006 & 0.851 $\pm$ 0.006 \\
\enddata
\tablecomments{Uncertainties represent the sample standard deviation for the 10 individual folds used in CV. For each metric, the model with the best performance is shown in bold.}
\end{deluxetable}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.35in]{./CV_ROC_HST.pdf}
%
\caption{ ROC curves comparing the relative performance of the PS1,
simple, and RF models as tested by the subset of \textit{HST} training set
sources with $i_\mathrm{PS1}$ detections. The thick, solid slate gray, green,
and purple lines show the ROC curves for the PS1, simple, and RF models,
respectively. The light, thin lines show the ROC curves for the individual
CV folds. The inset on the right shows a zoom in around FPR = 0.005, shown
as a dotted vertical line, corresponding to the FoM (the PS1 model is not
shown in the inset, because it has very low FoM). }
%
\label{fig:cvroc_hst}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.35in]{./CV_Accuracy_HST.pdf}
\caption{Model accuracy as a function of \texttt{whiteKronMag} evaluated
on the subset of \textit{HST} training set sources with $i_\mathrm{PS1}$
detections. Accuracy curves for the PS1, simple and RF models are shown as
slate gray pentagons, green triangles, and purple circles, respectively.
The bin widths are 0.5\,mag, and the error bars represent the 68\%
interval from bootstrap resampling. Additionally, a Gaussian KDE of the
PDF for the $i_\mathrm{PS1}$-detection subset of \textit{HST} training
set, as well as the point sources (labeled stars) and extended objects
(labeled galaxies) in the same subset is shown in the shaded gray, red,
and green regions, respectively. The amplitude of the star and galaxy PDFs
have been normalized by their relative ratio compared to the full
$i_\mathrm{PS1}$-band subset.}
%
\label{fig:cvacc_hst}
\end{figure}
The classification accuracy for each model as a function of
\texttt{whiteKronMag} is shown in 0.5\,mag bins in
Figure~\ref{fig:cvacc_hst}. The accuracies are estimated via 10-fold CV (see
above) and the uncertainties represent the inter-68\% interval from
100 bootstrap samples within each bin.
The classification thresholds for the RF, simple, and PS1 models are 0.5,
$9.2 \times 10^{-7}$, and 0.05, respectively. Again, the RF and simple
models provide a significant improvement over the PS1 model. The PS1 model
provides classification accuracies $\gtrsim$90\% for sources with
$\mathtt{whiteKronMag} \lesssim 21\,\mathrm{mag}$, but precipitously
declines for fainter sources. The RF and simple models have similar curves
with the RF model performing slightly better, as is to be expected given
that the RF model uses 10 additional features beyond
\texttt{whitePSFKronDist}.
\subsection{Model Evaluation via an Independent Test Set}
\begin{deluxetable}{cccc}
\tablecolumns{4}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablecaption{SDSS Test Set Metrics\label{tbl:sdss_per}}
\tablehead{
\colhead{model} & \colhead{FoM} & \colhead{Accuracy\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{ROC AUC}
}
\startdata
RF & \textbf{0.843} $\pm$ 0.001 & 0.9625 $\pm$ 0.0001 & \textbf{0.98713} $\pm$ 0.00007 \\
simple & 0.798 $\pm$ 0.002 & 0.9557 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.98503 $\pm$ 0.00008 \\
PS1 & 0.290 $\pm$ 0.004 & 0.9612 $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.98411 $\pm$ 0.00007 \\
SDSS & 0.777 $\pm$ 0.003 & \textbf{0.9713} $\pm$ 0.0001 & 0.98660 $\pm$ 0.00008 \\
\enddata
\tablecomments{Uncertainties represent the sample standard deviation for 100 bootstrap samples of the SDSS test set. For each metric, the model with the best performance is shown in bold.}
\tablenotetext{a}{Classification accuracies are evaluated using classification cuts of $0.5$, $9.2 \times 10^{-7}$, $0.05$, and $0.145$ for the RF, simple, PS1, and SDSS models, respectively.}
\end{deluxetable}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.35in]{./ROC_curves_log_inset2.pdf}
\caption{ROC curves comparing the relative performance of the SDSS (orange
dot-dashed line), PS1 (slate grey dashed line), simple (green dotted
line), and RF (solid purple) models as tested by the SDSS test set. Note
that the FPR is shown on a logarithmic scale. The vertical dotted line
shows $\mathrm{FPR} = 0.005$, corresponding to the FoM. The inset shows a
zoom in around the region where the ROC curves cross (see text for further
details). The black and red stars show the FPR and TPR if adopting the PS1
model and SDSS \textit{photo} classification cuts, respectively. The RF
model delivers the highest FoM.}
%
\label{fig:roc_sdss}
\end{figure}
While CV on the \textit{HST} training set shows that the RF model
outperforms the alternatives, here, we test each of the previous models with
the SDSS training set, which provides an independent set of $\sim$3.8$\times
10^6$ sources with high-confidence labels. Additionally, the use of SDSS
spectra allows us to compare our new models to the classifications from the
SDSS \texttt{photo} pipeline, hereafter the SDSS model, which soundly
outperformed the PTF point source classification model \citep{Miller17}. We
create an ROC curve for the SDSS model by thresholding on the ratio of PSF
flux to \texttt{cmodel} flux measured in the SDSS images (see
\citealt{Miller17} for more details).
To compare the 4 models, we evaluate the performance of each model on the
subset of SDSS training set sources that have $i_\mathrm{PS1}$ detections
(to compare with the PS1 model) and SDSS \texttt{photo} classifications (to
compare with the SDSS model). We further exclude QSOs with $z < 1$ (=
133,856 sources; QSOs are typically considered point sources but low-$z$
QSOs can have resolved host galaxies; see \citealt{Miller17}), and galaxies
with $z < 10^{-4}$ (= 13,261 sources; such low $z$ is only expected in the
local group meaning most of these classifications are likely spurious). In
total, this subsample (hereafter the SDSS test set) includes 3,592,940
sources from the SDSS training set.
ROC curves for the RF, simple, PS1, and SDSS models, as measured by the SDSS
test set, are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:roc_sdss}. The FoM for the PS1,
simple, and RF models is higher as tested by SDSS spectroscopic sources
because the SDSS training set contains brighter, higher SNR (and hence
easier to classify) sources. As before, we find that the FoM for the RF
model is superior to the alternatives. Interestingly, we also find that the
ROC curves cross, and that the SDSS model provides the largest TPR for
$\mathrm{FPR} \gtrsim 0.015$. That the RF and SDSS curves cross suggests
that there may be regimes where the SDSS \texttt{photo} classifications are
superior to the RF model. Below, we argue that a bias in the SDSS training
set is amplified by a bias in the SDSS \texttt{photo} classification, which
is why these curves cross.
\begin{figure*}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=6.2in]{./SDSS_acc_mag.pdf}
%
\caption{ Model accuracy for the RF (purple circles), simple (green
triangles), PS1 (slate gray pentagons), and SDSS (orange squares) models
as a function of \texttt{whiteKronMag} evaluated on the SDSS test set. The
bin widths are 0.5\,mag, and the error bars represent the central 68\%
interval from bootstrap resampling within each bin.
%
\textit{Top}: Model accuracy curves for the SDSS test set. This panel also
shows a Gaussian KDE of the PDF for the SDSS test set, as well as the
point sources (labeled stars) and extended objects (labeled galaxies) in
the SDSS test set in the shaded gray, red, and green regions,
respectively. The amplitude of the point source and extended object PDFs
have been normalized by their relative fraction of the full test set.
%
\textit{Middle}: SDSS test set accuracy curves for individual point
sources and extended objects, equivalent to the TPR and TNR, respectively,
as classified by the RF and SDSS models (the simple and PS1 models are not
shown for clarity). Note -- all 3 panels have the same bin centers, though
here the markers are slightly offset for clarity. The SDSS model
classifies faint point sources correctly, but has poor performance on
faint extended objects, while the opposite is true for the RF model.
%
\textit{Bottom}: The accuracy curves for all 4 models following the
bootstrap procedure (described in the text) to correct for the SDSS test
set bias whereby point sources outnumber extended objects at
$\mathtt{whiteKronMag} \gtrsim 20.5\,\mathrm{mag}$. The PDFs shown in this
panel are derived from KDEs of the \textit{HST} training set (as in
Figure~\ref{fig:cvacc_hst}). After correcting for the SDSS test set number
count bias, the RF and simple models produce more accurate classifications
of faint sources than the SDSS and PS1 models.}
%
\label{fig:acc_sdss}
\end{figure*}
Accuracy curves for each of the 4 models, as evaluated on the SDSS test set,
is shown in the top panel of Figure~\ref{fig:acc_sdss}. The RF, simple, and
SDSS models all provide near-perfect ($\ge 97.5$\%) accuracy down to
\texttt{whiteKronMag} $\approx 20\,\mathrm{mag}$. The PS1 model is similar,
though has a noticably worse performance for the brightest
(\texttt{whiteKronMag} $\lesssim 14.5\,\mathrm{mag}$) sources. For sources
with $\mathtt{whiteKronMag} > 21\,\mathrm{mag}$, the SDSS and PS1 models
provide far more accurate classifications than the RF and simple models. In
this faint regime, the SDSS test set is dominated by point sources (top
panel, Figure~\ref{fig:acc_sdss}). This is counter to what is observed in
nature (at high galactic latitudes), as extended object number counts exceed
those of point sources around $r \gtrsim 20\,\mathrm{mag}$ (e.g.,
\citealt{Yasuda01,Shanks15}). This bias in the SDSS test set is due to the
SDSS targeting proclivity for luminous red galaxies (LRGs) at $z \approx
0.5$ (e.g., \citealt{Eisenstein01}) and faint $z \approx 2.7$ QSOs (e.g.,
\citealt{Ross12}).\footnote{For the SDSS test set, the peak in the extended
object PDF at $\mathtt{whiteKronMag} \approx 19.75\,\mathrm{mag}$ is
dominated by LRGs, while the population of faint ($\mathtt{whiteKronMag} >
21\,\mathrm{mag}$) point sources is dominated by QSOs.}
In addition to this bias in the SDSS test set, the SDSS (and PS1) model are
biased towards classifying faint resolved sources as unresolved. This is due
to the hard cut on a single value of the PSF to \texttt{cModel} (or
\texttt{Kron} for PS1) flux ratio. The reason for this can easily be seen in
the top left panel of Figure~\ref{fig:features}, where a classification cut
at $\mathtt{whitePSFKronRatio} = 0.875$ (equivalent to the SDSS cut)
correctly identifies nearly all of the point sources, but does a
particularly bad job with the faintest extended objects. At low SNR the
large scatter in flux ratio measurements results in many misclassifications.
We show further evidence for this classification bias in the middle panel of
Figure~\ref{fig:acc_sdss}, which shows the accuracy with which individual
extended sources and point sources in the SDSS test set are
classified\footnote{This is equivalent to showing the true negative rate
(TNR = TN/[TN + FP]) and TPR, respectively.} by the RF and SDSS models
(curves for the simple and PS1 models show similar trends as the RF and SDSS
models, respectively, but are omitted for clarity). For faint
($\mathtt{whitePSFKronRatio} > 21\,\mathrm{mag}$) sources, the SDSS model
performs well on point sources ($\mathrm{TPR} \gtrsim 0.9$) and poorly on
extended sources ($\mathrm{TNR} \approx 0.5$). The opposite is true for the
RF model, with $\mathrm{TNR} \gtrsim 0.8$ and a TPR that declines to
$\sim$0.2 for the faintest SDSS test set sources. Thus, for faint sources
the RF model is slightly biased towards resolved object classifications,
however, this bias is in line with what is observed in nature. These
classification biases, taken together with the SDSS test set bias towards
point sources at the faint end, explain why the accuracy curves for the SDSS
(and PS1) model outperform the RF (and simple) model (and also why their ROC
curves cross in Figure~\ref{fig:roc_sdss}).
The bottom panel of Figure~\ref{fig:acc_sdss} shows that after correcting
for the number counts bias in the SDSS test set, the RF and simple models
greatly outperform the SDSS and PS1 models. We correct for the number count
bias via bootstrap resampling, whereby we select a subset of point sources
and extended objects from the SDSS test set to match the ratio of point
sources to extended objects in the \textit{HST} training set. The
\textit{HST} training set, which is selected photometrically, should serve
as a far better approximation for the relative number counts of point
sources and extended objects at high-Galactic latitudes than the SDSS test
set. The bootstrap occurs in bins of width 0.5\,mag from
\texttt{whiteKronmag} = 15\,mag to 23.5\,mag, and we select 100 bootstrap
samples within each bin. In each bin the size of the bootstrap sample is set
by the underrepresented class within the SDSS test set. For example, if the
\textit{HST} training set has an unresolved--resolved number ratio of 0.6
and in the same bin the SDSS test set has 1000 point sources and 4000
extended objects, then 1000 point sources and 1667 extended objects will be
selected in each bootstrap sample. Similarly, for an unresolved--resolved
number ratio of 0.25 in a bin with 800 point sources and 1000 extended
objects, then 250 point sources and 1000 extended objects will be selected.
Correcting for the number counts bias in the SDSS test set reveals some
interesting trends: as was the case prior to correction all 4 models perform
similarly well for bright (\texttt{whiteKronMag} $\lesssim
20\,\mathrm{mag}$) sources. However, for fainter sources the RF and simple
models significantly outperform the SDSS and PS1 models. The bottom panel of
Figure~\ref{fig:acc_sdss} also shows a kink at \texttt{whiteKronMag}
$\approx 19.75\,\mathrm{mag}$. As first explained in \citet{Miller17}, this
kink is due to blended, faint red stars that were targeted as candidate
LRGs. Thus, spectra show these sources to be stellar, while they appear
extended in imaging data. Finally, we conclude that for source distributions
similar to what is observed in nature, the RF model outperforms the
alternatives discussed here in both the FoM and the overall accuracy.
\section{The PS1 Catalog Deployed: Integration in ZTF}
\label{sec:ztf}
\subsection{The Zwicky Transient Facility}
While we have developed a general model to identify point sources, the
resulting RF classifications have been specifically deployed in the Zwicky
Transient Facility\footnote{\url{http://www.ztf.caltech.edu/}} (ZTF;
\citealt{Bellm:18:ZTF, Dekany:18:ZTF}) real-time pipeline
\citep{Masci:18:ZTF}. Briefly, ZTF is the next-generation Palomar
time-domain survey, which succeeds PTF \citep{Rau09, Law09} and the
intermediate Palomar Transient Factory (iPTF; \citealt{Kulkarni13}). ZTF,
with its 47\,deg$^2$ field of view, can scan at a rate $\sim$15$\times$
faster than PTF/iPTF ($>3{,}750\,\deg^2\,\mathrm{hr}^{-1}$) to a depth of
$R_\mathrm{ZTF} \approx 20.4$\,mag ($5\sigma$). ZTF will observe the entire
sky with $\delta > -30^{\circ}$ $\sim$300 times per year, with publicly
distributed alerts on newly observed positional or flux variability released
in near real time \citep{Patterson:18:ZTF}.\footnote{See: \url{https://ztf.uw.edu/alerts/public/} for real-time alerts.}
\subsection{Integration in the ZTF Alert Stream}
An initial, and pressing, question for filtering the ZTF alert stream, is:
does the newly identified variable have a Galactic or extragalactic origin?
Hence the need for a resolved--unresolved model, and in particular, one that
is deeper than typical ZTF observations (to identify faint stars flaring
above the ZTF detection limit). While ZTF will address many science
objectives (e.g., \citealt{Graham:18:ZTF}), a primary motivation is the
search for fast transients, especially kilonovae (KNe), the result of
merging binary neutron stars. If the proximity and sky location of a KN is
favorable, these events can be detected via gravitational waves (e.g.,
GW\,170817, see \citealt{Abbott17} and references therein). The search for
KNe is plagued by significant foreground contamination in the form of
stellar flares and/or orbital modulation (e.g., \citealt{Kulkarni06,
Berger12, Kasliwal16}). Our PS1 RF model enables the systematic removal of
faint stars from extragalactic candidate lists, and our adopted FoM ensures
that nearly every galaxy ($\sim$99.5\%) is searched for candidate KNe.
Newly discovered ZTF candidates are associated with the 3 nearest PS1
counterparts within 30\arcsec\ in the real-time alert packets
\citep{Masci:18:ZTF}. Counterparts are selected from ZTF calibration
sources, which includes all PS1 \textit{MeanObject} table sources with
$\mathtt{nDetections} \ge 3$. Thus, to create the ZTF--PS1 point source
catalog we selected sources from the \textit{StackObjectAttributes} table
with $\mathtt{nDetections} \ge 3$, and merged these classifications with the
ZTF calibration sources. Ultimately, non-unique sources (i.e., if a single
\texttt{objID} corresponds to multiple rows with \texttt{primaryDetection} =
1) are excluded from the classification catalog.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.35in]{./ZTF_PS1_cat_hist.pdf}
%
\caption{ The distribution of RF classification score for all sources in
the ZTF--PS1 point source catalog. Note that the number counts are shown on
a log scale. The vertical dotted line shows the FoM-optimized
classification threshold, sources to the right of the line are classified
as point sources. The full catalog is shown in blue, while Galactic plane
sources ($|b| < 15^{\circ}$) are shown in orange, and high galactic
latitude sources ($|b| > 50^{\circ}$) are shown in grey. Ambiguous
classifications ($0.2 \lesssim \mathrm{RF\;score} \lesssim 0.8$) in the
catalog are dominated by sources in the Galactic plane.}
%
\label{fig:ztf_hist}
\end{figure}
In total, there are 1,484,281,394 PS1 sources with RF
classifications.\footnote{An additional 8,520,167 sources with
significant parallax or proper motion have $\mathrm{RF\;score} = 1$ in the
ZTF database (see \S\ref{sec:gaia}).} A histogram showing the distribution
of the final RF classifications is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:ztf_hist}. The
thresholds appropriate for identifying point-source counterparts to the ZTF
candidates are reported in Table~\ref{tbl:fpr} (note that these thresholds
apply to $\mathtt{nDetections} \ge 3$ sources). Of the $\sim$1.5$\times
10^{9}$ sources in the ZTF--PS1 catalog, 734,476,355 ($\sim$50\%) are
classified as point sources using the FoM-optimized classification threshold of 0.83.
\begin{deluxetable*}{lcc|lccccc}
\tablecolumns{9}
\tablewidth{0pt}
\tablecaption{Classification thresholds for the ZTF--PS1 Catalog.
\label{tbl:fpr}}
\tablehead{
\colhead{Selection criteria} & \colhead{$N$\tablenotemark{a}} & \colhead{Accuracy\tablenotemark{b}} & \colhead{FPR} & \colhead{0.005} & \colhead{0.01} & \colhead{0.02} & \colhead{0.05} & \colhead{0.1}
}
\startdata
\multirow{2}{*}{All sources} & \multirow{2}{*}{35,007} & \multirow{2}{*}{$93.9\pm0.1$\%} & TPR & $0.734\,^{+0.012}_{-0.014}$ & $0.792\,^{+0.010}_{-0.009}$ & $0.843\,^{+0.008}_{-0.008}$ & $0.904\,^{+0.005}_{-0.005}$ & $0.947\,^{+0.004}_{-0.004}$ \\
\multicolumn{1}{l}{} & & & Threshold & $0.829\,^{+0.018}_{-0.010}$ & $0.724\,^{+0.016}_{-0.014}$ & $0.597\,^{+0.014}_{-0.010}$ & $0.397\,^{+0.008}_{-0.006}$ & $0.224\,^{+0.006}_{-0.004}$
\\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{$\mathtt{rKronMag} < 21$} & \multirow{2}{*}{13,570} & \multirow{2}{*}{$98.0\pm0.1$\%} &
TPR & $0.797\,^{+0.146}_{-0.101}$ & $0.964\,^{+0.007}_{-0.014}$ & $0.980\,^{+0.003}_{-0.004}$ & $0.989\,^{+0.003}_{-0.002}$ & $0.995\,^{+0.002}_{-0.001}$ \\
& & & Threshold & $0.970\,^{+0.015}_{-0.043}$ & $0.645\,^{+0.115}_{-0.041}$ & $0.406\,^{+0.048}_{-0.014}$ & $0.170\,^{+0.018}_{-0.011}$ & $0.069\,^{+0.006}_{-0.003}$ \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{$\mathtt{rKronMag} < 20$} & \multirow{2}{*}{6,956}& \multirow{2}{*}{$99.0\pm0.1$\%} &
TPR & $0.697\,^{+0.197}_{-0.219}$ & $0.954\,^{+0.038}_{-0.082}$ & $0.994\,^{+0.002}_{-0.002}$ & $0.997\,^{+0.002}_{-0.002}$ & $0.998\,^{+0.001}_{-0.001}$ \\
& & & Threshold & $0.993\,^{+0.005}_{-0.015}$ & $0.923\,^{+0.052}_{-0.328}$ & $0.339\,^{+0.082}_{-0.050}$ & $0.132\,^{+0.036}_{-0.021}$ & $0.047\,^{+0.006}_{-0.005}$
\enddata
\tablecomments{10-fold CV is performed on the entire \textit{HST} training set, but the metrics reported here include only sources that satisfy the selection criteria defined by the first column and $\mathtt{nDetections} \ge 3$. The reported uncertainties represent the central 90\% interval from 100 bootstrap resamples of the training set.}
\tablenotetext{a}{Number of \textit{HST} training set sources within the selected subset.}
\tablenotetext{b}{Classification accuracies are reported relative to a $\mathrm{RF \; score} = 0.5$ classification threshold.}
\end{deluxetable*}
Figure~\ref{fig:ztf_hist} additionally shows that most of the point sources
in the catalog are located in the Galactic plane, most of the
(high-confidence) extended objects are outside the plane, and
(unsurprisingly) that classification is more challenging in regions of high
stellar density. At high galactic latitudes ($|b| > 50^{\circ}$), where the
distribution of sources is similar to the \textit{HST} training set, sources
are well segregated (RF score $\approx$0 or 1), with very few ambiguous
classifications ($0.2 \lesssim \mathrm{RF\;score} \lesssim 0.8$). The
Galactic plane region ($|b| < 15^{\circ}$) dominates the ambiguous
classifications in the ZTF--PS1 point source catalog. We attribute this to a
lack of reliable training data in high-stellar-density regions, and
significantly more blending, which results in point sources appearing
extended. Thus, identifying stellar sources in the Galactic plane likely
requires a lower threshold than the FoM-optimized classification value. The
final tuning of the resolved--unresolved classification thresholds is a
critical early step in the filtering of ZTF candidates (e.g.,
\citealt{Kasliwal:18:ZTF}), which is necessary to optimize follow-up of
newly discovered transients.
\subsection{Verifying, and Updating, the Catalog with \textit{Gaia}}
\label{sec:gaia}
The \textit{Gaia} satellite \citep{Gaia-Collaboration16} is currently
conducting an all-sky survey that provides unprecedented astrometric
accuracy in measuring the positions, parallaxes, and proper motions of
$\sim$1.3 billion sources (\citealt{Gaia-Collaboration18}; an additional
$\sim$0.3 billion sources have just position measurements). The
\textit{Gaia} selection function is biased against resolved galaxies
\citep{Gaia-Collaboration16}, so it cannot provide a symmetric test of the
ZTF--PS1 catalog. Nevertheless, \textit{Gaia} has identified hundreds of
millions of stars that can be used to test our classifications.
Given that \textit{Gaia} does not classify the sources it detects as either
resolved or unresolved, we test the ZTF--PS1 catalog by selecting a pure
sample of \textit{Gaia} stars based on high-significance parallax, $\varpi$,
and proper motion, $\mu$, measurements.\footnote{Given the large distances,
\textit{Gaia} will measure low SNR $\varpi$ and $\mu$ for extragalactic
(i.e., extended) sources.} We define the $\varpi$ significance as
$\varpi$/$\sigma_\varpi$ (called \texttt{parallax\_over\_error} in the
\textit{Gaia} database). We obtain the total proper motion $\mu$ by adding
the proper motion in Right Ascension $\mu_{\alpha\ast}$ and Declination
$\mu_{\delta}$ (\texttt{pmra} and \texttt{pmdec} in the database,
respectively) in quadrature. The uncertainty in the total proper motion,
$\sigma_\mu$, is calculated via the proper motion uncertainties in Right
Ascension, $\sigma_{\mu_{\alpha\ast}}$, and Declination,
$\sigma_{\mu_{\delta}}$, while accounting for the correlation coefficient
between $\mu_{\alpha\ast}$ and $\mu_{\delta}$,
$\rho(\mu_{\alpha\ast}\mu_{\delta})$:
$$ \sigma_\mu^2 = \frac{\mu_{\alpha\ast}^2}{\mu^2}\sigma_{\mu_{\alpha\ast}}^2 +
\frac{\mu_{\delta}^2}{\mu^2}\sigma_{\mu_{\delta}}^2 +
2\frac{\mu_{\alpha\ast}\mu_{\delta}}{\mu^2} \rho(\mu_{\alpha\ast}\mu_{\delta})
\sigma_{\mu_{\alpha\ast}}\sigma_{\mu_{\delta}}.$$
The proper motion signficance is then defined as $\mu/\sigma_\mu$.
To determine the threshold for ``high significance'' in $\varpi$ and $\mu$
we use faint stars and activate galactic nuclei (AGN), respectively. In
\citet{Lindegren18}, a sample of $\sim$5.5$\times10^{5}$ AGN with
\textit{Gaia} observations were identified, and the cosmological distances
to these sources mean they should have extremely small parallaxes and proper
motions. We find that 99.997\% of these AGN have $\mu$ significance $<
5.62$, and the highest $\mu$ significance in the entire AGN sample is
$\sim$7.42. Thus, we apply a conservative cut of 7.5 on $\mu$ significance
to select a pure set of stars with little contamination from extended,
extragalactic objects.
The AGN sample is not sufficient for defining a cut on $\varpi$ significance,
because \citet{Lindegren18} require $\varpi$/$\sigma_\varpi < 5$. Instead,
we use the 20,568,254 \textit{Gaia} sources with $\varpi$ and $\mu$
measurments, $20.5\,\mathrm{mag} \le G \le 21\,\mathrm{mag}$, where $G$ is
the mean brightness measured by \textit{Gaia} in the $G$ filter, and that
pass the cuts defined by Eqn.~(C.1) and (C.2) in \citet{Lindegren18}. These
cuts are designed to remove low-confidence parallax measurements in regions
of high stellar density. The low SNR detections for these \textit{Gaia}
sources provide an estimate of the scatter of the parallax significance, as
they are too faint for high-significance detections.\footnote{The typical
uncertainty on parallax for sources this faint is $\sigma_\varpi \approx
2$\,mas \citep{Lindegren18}. While some of these $\sim$2$\times10^7$ sources
may be at a distance $<$500\,pc away, that will not be true for the vast
majority, and thus they will not have significant parallax measurements.}
Looking at the full distribution of parallax significance for these faint
sources we find that 99.997\% have parallax significance $< 7.94$. Again, we
apply a conservative cut of parallax significance $\ge$8 to select bonafide
stars from the \textit{Gaia} data.
\begin{figure}[htb]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3.3in]{./Gaia_PS1_pm_hist.pdf}
%
\caption{
The distribution of RF classification score for sources in the ZTF--PS1
star--galaxy catalog selected as high-probability stars from \textit{Gaia}
due to their significant proper motion (see text for further details).
Note that the number counts are shown on a log scale. The vertical dotted
line shows the FoM-optimized classification threshold, sources to the
right of the line are classified as stars. The full catalog is shown in
blue, while Galactic plane sources ($|b| < 10^{\circ}$) are shown in
orange, and high galactic latitude sources ($|b| > 30^{\circ}$) are shown
in grey. Less than 0.25\% of these stars have $\mathrm{RF\;score} \lesssim
0.5$.
}
%
\label{fig:gaia}
\end{figure}
Using the existing crossmatch between \textit{Gaia} and PS1,\footnote{See
\citet{Marrese17} for details on \textit{Gaia} crossmatching external
catalogs. There are 810,359,898 \textit{Gaia} sources crossmatched with PS1,
see:
\url{https://gea.esac.esa.int/archive/documentation//GDR2/Catalogue_consolidation/chap_cu9val_cu9val/ssec_cu9xma/sssec_cu9xma_extcat.html}
.} we have identified 38,764,553 and 234,176,264 high-confidence stars that
pass the cuts defined by Eqn.~(C.1) and (C.2) in \citet{Lindegren18} and
have parallax significance $\ge 8$ or proper motion significance $\ge 7.5$,
respectively. Of these, 35,599,830 and 225,682,755 have respective
counterparts in the ZTF--PS1 catalog (the respective differences of
3,164,723 and 8,493,509 correspond to sources with either 0 or $>$1 entries
in the PS1 \textit{StackObjectThin} table). For the proper motion selected
stars, we show the distribution of RF classification scores for these
stellar objects in Figure~\ref{fig:gaia}. It is clear from
Figure~\ref{fig:gaia} that the vast majority of stars are classified
correctly. Half of the stars selected via proper motion have
$\mathrm{RF\;score}\ge 0.99$, while 98.1\% have $\mathrm{RF\;score}\ge
0.83$, the FoM classification threshold, and 99.75\% have
$\mathrm{RF\;score}\ge 0.5$, the traditional binary classification
threshold. The percentages are even higher for the parallax-selected sample.
These calssification results are significantly better than those reported in
Table~\ref{tbl:fpr}, which makes sense given that this high significance
\textit{Gaia} sample is much brighter than the sources in the \textit{HST}
training set (median brightness $G = 18.0\,\mathrm{mag}$, 95$^\mathrm{th}$
percentile brightness $G = 19.7\,\mathrm{mag}$). Nevertheless, we conclude
that the \textit{Gaia} data confirms that our method does an excellent job
of identifying point sources.
Finally, the 8,520,167 sources selected by either the parallax or proper
motion cuts described above that do not have counterparts in the ZTF--PS1
catalog are assigned an RF classification score of 1 in the ZTF database.
Thus, new transient candidates with positions consistent with these sources
will be flagged as likely stars.
\section{Summary and Conclusions}
We have presented the development of a large ($\sim$1.5$\times 10^{9}$),
deep ($m \lesssim 23.5\,\mathrm{mag}$) catalog of point sources and extended
objects based on PS1 data. We classify these sources using a machine
learning framework built on a RF model. The RF model is trained using 47,093
PS1 sources with \textit{HST} COSMOS morphological classifications.
To construct the RF model, we introduced ``white flux'' features, which
correspond to a weighted mean of the relevant features over the
$grizy_{\mathrm {PS1}}$ filters in which a source is detected. The ``white
flux'' features allow us to classify all PS1 sources, irrespective of the
filters in which the source was detected or the line-of-sight reddenning.
One of these newly created features, \texttt{whitePSFKronDist}, is useful on
its own for separating stars and galaxies. Unlike a hard cut on the PSF and
Kron flux ratio, as is employed by the SDSS and PS1 models,
\texttt{whitePSFKronDist} retains knowledge of the SNR and therefore can
provide higher confidence classifications. From \texttt{whitePSFKronDist} we
created the simple model, which does a good job of separating point sources
and extended objects. Ultimately, the 11 ``white flux'' features, used in
combination with the RF algorithm, provide the best classification of PS1
sources.
CV on the \textit{HST} training set shows that the RF (FoM$ = 0.71$) and
simple (FoM$ = 0.657$) models greatly outperform the PS1 (FoM$ = 0.007$)
model. For faint sources ($\mathtt{whiteKronMag} > 20$\,mag) the PS1 model
misclassifies many extended objects as point sources, while both the simple
and RF models provide overall classification accuracies $\gtrsim 85$\% as
faint as $\mathtt{whiteKronMag} = 23$\,mag.
We find that when evaluated with the SDSS test set, the SDSS and PS1 models
provide more accurate classifications than the RF and simple models,
especially for faint ($\mathtt{whiteKronMag} \gtrsim 21$\,mag) sources. This
reversal, relative to the \textit{HST} training set results, can be
attributed to a bias in the SDSS test set and the SDSS classification model.
In the SDSS test set point sources outnumber galaxies at the faint end,
which is counter to what is observed (at high galactic latitudes).
Furthermore, the SDSS and PS1 models, which utilize a hard cut on flux
ratios, are likely to classify low SNR sources as point sources. Together,
these effects amplify the perceived performance of the SDSS and PS1 models.
Using a bootstrap resampling procedure, we correct for the relative number
counts bias in the SDSS test set, and find that the RF and simple models
outperform the SDSS and PS1 models, both in terms of FoM and overall
accuracy. Thus, of the 4 models considered in this study the RF model is
superior to all others.
We have deployed the RF model in support of the ZTF real-time pipeline,
resulting in the classification of $\sim$1.5$\times 10^{9}$ sources. The
catalog is dominated by point sources in the vicinity of the Galactic plane,
though we find that there are more extended objects than point sources at
high galactic latitudes, as is expected at the depth of PS1. ZTF is
currently producing public alerts for newly discovered variability, and the
ZTF--PS1 catalog is essential for removing the numerous foreground of
stellar flares, false positives in the search for fast transients and KNe,
from the extragalactic alert stream. The final ZTF--PS1 catalog is available
at MAST via
\dataset[doi:10.17909/t9-xjrf-7g34]{http://dx.doi.org/10.17909/t9-xjrf-7g34}.
Moving forward, future data releases and additional scrutiny of
\textit{Gaia} data will significantly increase the fidelity of the PS1
resolved--unresolved classification model. The \textit{HST} training set has
very few bright sources and no sources at low Galactic latitudes, leading to
less confident classifications in these regions (see
Figure~\ref{fig:ztf_hist}). As a space-based observatory, \textit{Gaia} will
resolve many stellar blends in the Galactic plane and identify millions of
stars brighter than 16\,mag. Many of the ambiguous classifications in the
ZTF--PS1 catalog (see \S\ref{sec:ztf}) will be directly identified as stars
due to their high proper motions and parallaxes (similar to the analysis in
\ref{sec:gaia}, though future \textit{Gaia} observations will lead to even
better precision). As previously noted, \textit{Gaia} does not downlink
measurements for extended sources. Thus, while \textit{Gaia} would allow us
to increase the size of our training set by many orders of magnitude, it
would also introduce a significant class imbalance. Correcting for the lack
of galaxies would require new approaches beyond those described here. It
should also be noted that \textit{Gaia} alone is not sufficient for our
purposes, as it only detects sources with $G \lesssim 21$\,mag, which does
not include the faint, flaring stars that we expect to be the primary false
positive in the search for fast transients. Nevertheless, our ability to now
merge several $\sim$all-sky surveys provides unprecedented power in the
classification of astronomical sources. This power is particularly important
for improving the scientific output and follow-up efficiency of time-domain
surveys.
\acknowledgements
This work would not have been possible without the public release of the
PS1, SDSS, and \textit{Gaia} data. We are particularly grateful to the MAST
PS1 team for answering several inquiries regarding the PS1 data, and
especially B.~Shiao, who helped us navigate the PS1 database. We thank
M.~Graham and A.~Mahabal for early conversations regarding the training of
the RF model, and B.~Bue for a discussion about cross validation strategies.
Y.T.\ is funded by JSPS KAKENHI Grant Numbers JP16J05742. Y.T.\ studied as a
Global Relay of Observatories Watching Transients Happen (GROWTH) intern at
Caltech during the summer and fall of 2017. GROWTH is funded by the National
Science Foundation under Partnerships for International Research and
Education Grant No 1545949. A.A.M.\ is funded by the Large Synoptic Survey
Telescope Corporation in support of the Data Science Fellowship Program.
Based in part on software developed as a part of the Zwicky Transient Facility project, a scientific collaboration among the California Institute of Technology, the Oskar Klein Centre, the Weizmann Institute of Science, the Joint Space-Science Institute (via the University of Maryland, College Park), the University of Washington, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron, the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, and the TANGO Program of the University System of Taiwan. Further support for ZTF is provided by the U.S. National Science Foundation under Grant No. AST-1440341.
\facility{PS1, Sloan}
\software{\texttt{astropy} \citep{Astropy-Collaboration13},
\texttt{scipy} \citep{Jones01},
\texttt{matplotlib} \citep{Hunter07},
\texttt{pandas} \citep{McKinney10},
\texttt{scikit-learn} \citep{Pedregosa12}}
|
\section{Introduction}
BERT \cite{devlin2018bert}, the latest refinement of a series of neural models that make heavy use of pretraining \cite{N18-1202,radford2018improving}, has led to impressive gains in many natural language processing tasks, ranging from sentence classification to question answering to sequence labeling.
Most relevant to our task, \citet{nogueira2019passage} showed impressive gains in using BERT for query-based passage reranking.
In this demonstration, we integrate BERT with the open-source Anserini IR toolkit to create BERTserini, an end-to-end open-domain question answering (QA) system.
Unlike most QA or reading comprehension models, which are best described as rerankers or extractors since they assume as input relatively small amounts of text (an article, top $k$ sentences or passages, etc.), our system operates directly on a large corpus of Wikipedia articles.
We integrate best practices from the information retrieval community with BERT to produce an end-to-end system, and experiments on a standard benchmark test collection show large improvements over previous work.
Our results show that fine-tuning pretrained BERT with SQuAD~\cite{D16-1264} is sufficient to achieve high accuracy in identifying answer spans.
The simplicity of this design is one major feature of our architecture.
We have deployed BERTserini as a chatbot that users can interact with on diverse platforms, from laptops to mobile phones.
\section{Background and Related Work}
While the origins of question answering date back to the 1960s, the modern formulation can be traced to the Text Retrieval Conferences (TRECs) in the late 1990s~\cite{Voorhees_Tice_TREC8}.
With roots in information retrieval, it was generally envisioned that a QA system would comprise pipeline stages that select increasingly finer-grained segments of text~\cite{Tellex_etal_SIGIR2003}:\ document retrieval to identify relevant documents from a large corpus, followed by passage ranking to identify text segments that contain answers, and finally answer extraction to identify the answer spans.
As NLP researchers became increasingly interested in QA, they placed greater emphasis on the later stages of the pipeline to emphasize various aspects of linguistic analysis.
Information retrieval techniques receded into the background and became altogether ignored.
Most popular QA benchmark datasets today---for example, TrecQA~\cite{Yao13answerextraction}, WikiQA~\cite{yang2015wikiqa}, and MSMARCO~\cite{nguyen2016ms}---are best characterized as answer selection tasks.
That is, the system is given the question as well as a candidate list of sentences to choose from.
Of course, those candidates have to come from {\it somewhere}, but their source lies outside the problem formulation.
Similarly, reading comprehension datasets such as SQuAD~\cite{D16-1264} eschew retrieval entirely, since there is only a single document from which to extract answers.
In contrast, what we refer to as ``end-to-end'' question answering begins with a large corpus of documents.
Since it is impractical to apply inference exhaustively to all documents in a corpus with current models (mostly based on neural networks), this formulation necessarily requires some type of term-based retrieval technique to restrict the input text under consideration---and hence an architecture quite like the pipelined systems from over a decade ago.
Recently, there has been a resurgence of interest in this task, the most notable of which is Dr.QA~\citep{P17-1171}.
Other recent papers have examined the role of retrieval in this end-to-end formulation~\citep{wang2017r,D18-1055,D18-1053}, some of which have, in essence, rediscovered ideas from the late 1990s and early 2000s.
For a wide range of applications, researchers have recently demonstrated the effectiveness of neural models that have been pretrained on a language modeling task~\cite{N18-1202,radford2018improving}; BERT~\cite{devlin2018bert} is the latest refinement of this idea.
Our work tackles end-to-end question answering by combining BERT with Anserini, an IR toolkit built on top of the popular open-source Lucene search engine.
Anserini~\cite{Yang_etal_SIGIR2017,Yang_etal_JDIQ2018} represents recent efforts by researchers to bring academic IR into better alignment with the practice of building real-world search applications, where Lucene has become the {\it de facto} platform used in industry.
Through an emphasis on rigorous software engineering and regression testing for replicability, Anserini codifies IR best practices today.
Recently, \citet{Lin_SIGIRForum2018} showed that a well-tuned Anserini implementation of a query expansion model proposed over a decade ago still beats two recent neural models for document ranking.
Thus, BERT and Anserini represent solid foundations on which to build an end-to-end question answering system.
\section{System Architecture}
The architecture of BERTserini is shown in Figure~\ref{fig:framework} and is comprised of two main modules, the Anserini retriever and the BERT reader.
The retriever is responsible for selecting segments of text that contain the answer, which is then passed to the reader to identify an answer span.
To facilitate comparisons to previous work, we use the same Wikipedia corpus described in~\citet{P17-1171} (from Dec.\ 2016) comprising 5.08M articles.
In what follows, we describe each module in turn.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3in]{architecture.pdf}
\caption{Architecture of BERTserini.}
\label{fig:framework}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Anserini Retriever}
For simplicity, we adopted a single-stage retriever that directly identifies segments of text from Wikipedia to pass to the BERT reader---as opposed to a multi-stage retriever that first retrieves documents and then ranks passages within.
However, to increase flexibility, we experimented with different granularities of text at indexing time:
\smallskip \noindent \textbf{Article}:\ The 5.08M Wikipedia articles are directly indexed; that is, an article is the unit of retrieval.
\smallskip \noindent \textbf{Paragraph}:\ The corpus is pre-segmented into 29.5M paragraphs and indexed, where each paragraph is treated as a ``document'' (i.e., the unit of retrieval).
\smallskip \noindent \textbf{Sentence}:\ The corpus is pre-segmented into 79.5M sentences and indexed, where each sentence is treated as a ``document''.
\smallskip \noindent At inference time, we retrieve $k$ text segments (one of the above conditions) using the question as a ``bag of words'' query.
We use a post-v0.3.0 branch of Anserini,\footnote{\url{http://anserini.io/}} with BM25 as the ranking function (Anserini's default parameters).
\subsection{BERT Reader}
Text segments from the retriever are passed to the BERT reader.
We use the model in \citet{devlin2018bert}, but with one important difference:\ to allow comparison and aggregation of results from different segments, we remove the final softmax layer over different answer spans; cf.~\cite{P18-1078}.
Our BERT reader is based on Google's reference implementation\footnote{\url{https://github.com/google-research/bert}} (TensorFlow 1.12.0).
For training, we begin with the BERT-Base model (uncased, 12-layer, 768-hidden, 12-heads, 110M parameters) and then fine tune the model on the training set of SQuAD (v1.1).
All inputs to the reader are padded to 384 tokens; the learning rate is set to $3 \times 10^{-5}$ and all other defaults settings are used.
At inference time, for retrieved articles, we apply the BERT reader paragraph by paragraph.
For retrieved paragraphs, we apply inference over the entire paragraph.
For retrieved sentences, we apply inference over the entire sentence.
In all cases, the reader selects the best text span and provides a score.
We then combine the reader score with the retriever score via linear interpolation:
\begin{align*}
S = (1- \mu) \cdot S_{\textrm{Anserini}} + \mu \cdot S_{\textrm{BERT}}
\end{align*}
where $\mu \in [0,1]$ is a hyperparameter.
We tune $\mu$ on 1000 randomly-selected question-answer pairs from the SQuAD training set, considering all values in tenth increments.
\section{Experimental Results}
\begin{table}[t]
\centering\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{lccc}
\toprule
Model & EM & F1 & R \\
\midrule
Dr.QA \cite{P17-1171} & 27.1 & - & 77.8 \\
Dr.QA + Fine-tune & 28.4 & - & - \\
Dr.QA + Multitask & 29.8 & - & - \\
$\text{R}^3$ \cite{wang2017r} & 29.1 & 37.5 & - \\
\citet{D18-1055} & 29.8 & - & - \\
Par. R. \cite{D18-1053} & 28.5 & - & 83.1 \\
Par. R. + Answer Agg. & 28.9 & - & - \\
Par. R. + Full Agg. & 30.2 & - & - \\
\textsc{Minimal}~\cite{P18-1160} & 34.7 & 42.5 & 64.0 \\
\midrule
BERTserini (Article, $k=5$) & 19.1 & 25.9 & 63.1 \\
BERTserini (Paragraph, $k=29$) & 36.6 & 44.0 & 75.0 \\
BERTserini (Sentence, $k=78$) & 34.0 & 41.0 & 67.5 \\
\midrule
BERTserini (Paragraph, $k=100$) & \textbf{38.6} & \textbf{46.1} & \textbf{85.8} \\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}}
\caption{Results on $\text{SQuAD}$ development questions.}
\label{table:main}
\end{table}
We adopt exactly the same evaluation methodology as \citet{P17-1171}, which was also used in subsequent work.
Test questions come from the development set of SQuAD; since our answers come from different texts, we only evaluate with respect to the SQuAD answer spans (i.e., the passage context is ignored).
Our evaluation metrics are also the same as \citet{P17-1171}:\ exact match (EM) score and F1 score (at the token level).
In addition, we compute recall (R), the fraction of questions for which the correct answer appears in {\it any} retrieved segment; this is what \citet{P17-1171} call the document retrieval results.
Note that this recall is {\it not} the same as the token-level recall component in the F1 score.
Our main results are shown in Table \ref{table:main}, where we report metrics with different Anserini retrieval conditions (article, paragraphs, and sentences).
We compare article retrieval at $k=5$, paragraph retrieval at $k=29$, and sentence retrieval at $k=78$.
The article setting matches the retrieval condition in \citet{P17-1171}.
The values of $k$ for the paragraph and sentence conditions are selected so that the reader considers approximately the same amount of text:\ each paragraph contains 2.7 sentences on average, and each article contains 5.8 paragraphs on average.
The table also copies results from previous work for comparison.
We see that article retrieval underperforms paragraph retrieval by a large margin:\ the reason, we believe, is that articles are long and contain many non-relevant sentences that serve as distractors to the BERT reader.
Sentences perform reasonably but not as well as paragraphs because they often lack the context for the reader to identify the answer span.
Paragraphs seem to represent a ``sweet spot'', yielding a large improvement in exact match score over previous results.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\begin{tikzpicture
\begin{axis}[
width=1.0\columnwidth,
height=0.8\columnwidth,
legend cell align=left,
legend style={at={(1, -0.1)},anchor=south east,font=\scriptsize},
mark options={mark size=3},
font=\scriptsize,
xmin=0, xmax=100,
ymin=0, ymax=1,
xtick={10, 20, 30, 40, 50, 60, 70, 80, 90, 100},
ytick={0,0.1, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4, 0.5, 0.6, 0.7, 0.8, 0.9, 1},
legend pos=south east,
xmajorgrids=true,
ymajorgrids=true,
xlabel style={yshift=1ex},
xlabel=$k$,
ylabel=Metric,
ylabel style={yshift=-3ex}
] legend entries={Recall,
Top k EM,
Top 1 EM},
]
\addplot[mark=x,g-blue, mark options={scale=0.7}] plot coordinates {
(1, 0.408)(2, 0.504)(3, 0.558)(4, 0.593)(5, 0.619)(6, 0.64)(7, 0.658)(8,
0.67)(9, 0.683)(10, 0.692)(11, 0.701)(12, 0.708)(13, 0.716)(14, 0.724)(15,
0.731)(16, 0.736)(17, 0.741)(18, 0.746)(19, 0.751)(20, 0.756)(21, 0.76)(22,
0.763)(23, 0.767)(24, 0.77)(25, 0.773)(26, 0.776)(27, 0.778)(28, 0.781)(29,
0.784)(30, 0.787)(31, 0.788)(32, 0.791)(33, 0.793)(34, 0.796)(35, 0.797)(36,
0.8)(37, 0.802)(38, 0.803)(39, 0.805)(40, 0.806)(41, 0.808)(42, 0.809)(43,
0.81)(44, 0.811)(45, 0.813)(46, 0.814)(47, 0.815)(48, 0.816)(49, 0.817)(50,
0.819)(51, 0.82)(52, 0.822)(53, 0.823)(54, 0.825)(55, 0.826)(56, 0.827)(57,
0.828)(58, 0.829)(59, 0.831)(60, 0.832)(61, 0.832)(62, 0.833)(63, 0.835)(64,
0.836)(65, 0.836)(66, 0.836)(67, 0.838)(68, 0.839)(69, 0.839)(70, 0.84)(71,
0.841)(72, 0.841)(73, 0.842)(74, 0.842)(75, 0.843)(76, 0.844)(77, 0.844)(78,
0.845)(79, 0.846)(80, 0.846)(81, 0.847)(82, 0.847)(83, 0.848)(84, 0.849)(85,
0.849)(86, 0.85)(87, 0.851)(88, 0.851)(89, 0.852)(90, 0.852)(91, 0.853)(92,
0.853)(93, 0.854)(94, 0.855)(95, 0.855)(96, 0.856)(97, 0.856)(98, 0.858)(99,
0.858)(100, 0.859)
};
\addlegendentry{Recall}
\addplot[mark=+,g-red, mark options={scale=0.7}] plot coordinates {
(1, 0.369)(2, 0.449)(3, 0.489)(4, 0.515)(5, 0.535)(6, 0.55)(7, 0.562)(8,
0.571)(9, 0.579)(10, 0.586)(11, 0.592)(12, 0.597)(13, 0.602)(14, 0.606)(15,
0.611)(16, 0.614)(17, 0.617)(18, 0.62)(19, 0.623)(20, 0.626)(21, 0.628)(22,
0.629)(23, 0.631)(24, 0.633)(25, 0.635)(26, 0.638)(27, 0.639)(28, 0.64)(29,
0.642)(30, 0.643)(31, 0.645)(32, 0.646)(33, 0.647)(34, 0.647)(35, 0.649)(36,
0.65)(37, 0.65)(38, 0.651)(39, 0.652)(40, 0.652)(41, 0.653)(42, 0.655)(43,
0.656)(44, 0.656)(45, 0.657)(46, 0.657)(47, 0.658)(48, 0.658)(49, 0.659)(50,
0.66)(51, 0.66)(52, 0.66)(53, 0.66)(54, 0.661)(55, 0.661)(56, 0.662)(57,
0.662)(58, 0.663)(59, 0.663)(60, 0.663)(61, 0.664)(62, 0.664)(63, 0.665)(64,
0.665)(65, 0.666)(66, 0.666)(67, 0.666)(68, 0.666)(69, 0.666)(70, 0.667)(71,
0.667)(72, 0.667)(73, 0.667)(74, 0.668)(75, 0.668)(76, 0.668)(77, 0.668)(78,
0.668)(79, 0.669)(80, 0.669)(81, 0.669)(82, 0.669)(83, 0.669)(84, 0.669)(85,
0.67)(86, 0.67)(87, 0.67)(88, 0.67)(89, 0.67)(90, 0.67)(91, 0.67)(92, 0.671)(93,
0.671)(94, 0.671)(95, 0.671)(96, 0.671)(97, 0.671)(98, 0.671)(99, 0.671)(100,
0.671)
};
\addlegendentry{Top $k$ EM}
\addplot[mark=*,g-purple, mark options={scale=0.5}] plot coordinates {
(1, 0.271)(2, 0.312)(3, 0.33)(4, 0.339)(5, 0.347)(6, 0.351)(7, 0.354)(8,
0.356)(9, 0.358)(10, 0.359)(11, 0.36)(12, 0.362)(13, 0.364)(14, 0.365)(15,
0.365)(16, 0.366)(17, 0.367)(18, 0.366)(19, 0.366)(20, 0.366)(21, 0.367)(22,
0.367)(23, 0.368)(24, 0.369)(25, 0.369)(26, 0.369)(27, 0.369)(28, 0.369)(29,
0.369)(30, 0.369)(31, 0.369)(32, 0.369)(33, 0.369)(34, 0.369)(35, 0.369)(36,
0.37)(37, 0.37)(38, 0.37)(39, 0.37)(40, 0.37)(41, 0.37)(42, 0.37)(43, 0.37)(44,
0.37)(45, 0.37)(46, 0.37)(47, 0.37)(48, 0.37)(49, 0.37)(50, 0.37)(51, 0.37)(52,
0.37)(53, 0.371)(54, 0.37)(55, 0.37)(56, 0.37)(57, 0.37)(58, 0.37)(59, 0.37)(60,
0.37)(61, 0.37)(62, 0.37)(63, 0.369)(64, 0.37)(65, 0.37)(66, 0.37)(67,
0.369)(68, 0.369)(69, 0.369)(70, 0.369)(71, 0.369)(72, 0.369)(73, 0.369)(74,
0.369)(75, 0.369)(76, 0.369)(77, 0.369)(78, 0.369)(79, 0.369)(80, 0.369)(81,
0.369)(82, 0.369)(83, 0.369)(84, 0.369)(85, 0.369)(86, 0.369)(87, 0.369)(88,
0.369)(89, 0.369)(90, 0.369)(91, 0.369)(92, 0.37)(93, 0.37)(94, 0.37)(95,
0.37)(96, 0.37)(97, 0.37)(98, 0.369)(99, 0.369)(100, 0.368)
};
\addlegendentry{Top 1 EM}
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture}
\caption{Model effectiveness with different numbers of retrieved paragraphs.}
\label{fig:pk}
\end{figure}
Our next experiment examined the effects of varying $k$, the number of text segments considered by the BERT reader.
Here, we focus only on the paragraph condition, with $\mu=0.5$ (the value learned via cross validation).
Figure~\ref{fig:pk} plots three metrics with respect to $k$:\ recall, top $k$ exact match, and top exact match.
Recall measures the fraction of questions for which the correct answer appears in {\it any} retrieved segment, exactly as in Table~\ref{table:main}.
Top $k$ exact match represents a lenient condition where the system receives credit for a correctly-identified span in {\it any} retrieved segment.
Finally, top exact match is evaluated with respect to the top-scoring span, comparable to the results reported in Table~\ref{table:main}.
Scores for the paragraph condition at $k=100$ are also reported in the table:\
we note that the exact match score is substantially higher than the previously-published best result that we are aware of.
We see that, as expected, scores increase with larger $k$ values.
However, the top exact match score doesn't appear to increase much after around $k = 10$.
The top $k$ exact match score continues growing a bit longer but also reaches saturation.
Recall appears to continue increasing all the way up to $k=100$, albeit more slowly as $k$ increases.
This means that the BERT reader is unable to take advantage of these additional answer passages that appear in the candidate pool.
These curves also provide a failure analysis:
The top recall curve (in blue) represents the upper bound with the current Anserini retriever.
At $k=100$, it is able to return at least one relevant paragraph around 86\% of the time, and thus we can conclude that passage retrieval does not appear to be the bottleneck in overall effectiveness in the current implementation.
The gap between the top blue recall curve and the top $k$ exact match curve (in red) quantifies the room for improvement with the BERT reader; these represent cases in which the reader did not identify the correct answer in {\it any} paragraph.
Finally, the gap between the red curve and the bottom top exact match curve (in purple) represents cases where BERT {\it did} identify the correct answer, but not as the top-scoring span.
This gap can be characterized as failures in scoring or score aggregation, and it seems to be the biggest area for improvement---suggesting that our current approach (weighted interpolation between the BERT and Anserini scores) is insufficient.
We are exploring reranking models that are capable of integrating more relevance signals.
One final caveat:\ this error analysis is based on the SQuAD ground truth.
Although our answers might not match the SQuAD answer spans, they may nevertheless be acceptable (for example, different answers to time-dependent questions).
In future work we plan on manually examining a sample of the errors to produce a more accurate classification of the failures.
\begin{figure}[t]
\vspace{0.15cm}
\centering\includegraphics[width=3in]{bot.pdf}
\caption{A screenshot of BERTserini in RSVP.ai's chatbot interface. These samples from SQuAD illustrate the range of questions that the system can answer.}
\label{fig:demo}
\end{figure}
\section{Demonstration}
We have deployed BERTserini as a chatbot that users can interact with in two different ways:\ a Slackbot and RSVP.ai's intelligent platform that allows businesses to construct natural dialogue services easily and quickly.
However, both use the same backend services.
A screenshot of the RSVP.ai chat platform is shown in Figure \ref{fig:demo}.
The current interface uses the paragraph indexing condition, but we return only the sentence containing the answer identified by the BERT reader.
The answer span is highlighted in the response~\cite{Lin_etal_CHI2003}.
In the screenshot we can see the diversity of questions that BERTserini can handle---different types of named entities as well as queries whose answers are not noun phrases.
One important consideration in an operational system is the latency of the responses.
Informed by the analysis in Figure~\ref{fig:pk}, in our demonstration system we set $k=10$ under the paragraph condition.
While this does not give us the maximum possible accuracy, it represents a good cost/quality tradeoff.
To quantify processing time, we randomly selected 100 questions from SQuAD and recorded average latencies; measurements were taken on a machine with an Intel Xeon E5-2620 v4 CPU (2.10GHz) and a Tesla P40 GPU.
Anserini retrieval (on the CPU) averages 0.5s per question, while BERT processing time (on the GPU) averages 0.18s per question.
\section{Conclusion}
We introduce BERTserini, our end-to-end open-domain question answering system that integrates BERT and the Anserini IR toolkit.
With a simple two-stage pipeline architecture, we are able to achieve large improvements over previous systems.
Error analysis points to room for improvement in retrieval, answer extraction, and answer aggregation---all of which represent ongoing efforts.
In addition, we are also interested in expanding the multilingual capabilities of our system.
|
\section{Introduction}
The past decade has seen an explosion in time domain astronomy driven by the availability of new instruments and facilities dedicated to repeated observations of large areas of sky. A number of surveys, e.g., Catalina Real-Time Survey
(CRTS; \citealt{Drake2009}),
Palomar Transient Factory (PTF/iPTF; \citealt{Law:09:PTFOverview}),
Panoramic Survey Telescope and Rapid Response System (Pan-STARRS or PS; \citealt{Kaiser2004}),
All Sky Automated Survey for SuperNovae (ASAS-SN; \citealt{Shappee2014}),
The Asteroid Terrestrial-impact Last Alert System (ATLAS; \citealt{Tonry2018}), have opened up the exploration of temporal behavior from Solar System objects to variable stars in the Galaxy to relativistic explosions across the universe. They have each employed differing modes of operation, e.g., the number of repeat visits to the same region of sky per night, inter-nightly cadence, choice of filters, etc., in addition to the varying capabilities of camera, telescope, and site to probe the potential discovery space.
The Zwicky Transient Facility (ZTF) consists of a wide-field imager on the
Palomar 48-inch Oschin (Schmidt) telescope and an integral field unit spectrograph (IFUS)
on the Palomar 60-inch telescope
optimized for spectral classification of relatively bright ($<19\,$mag) explosive transients. The former likely represents the height of what can be achieved with a single 1-meter class survey telescope. The resulting transients and variables will be bright enough that followup can be undertaken for well-defined samples by the existing suite of larger telescopes.
ZTF operates in a rich landscape of optical time domain surveys. ASAS-SN is a long term project dedicated to surveying the entire night sky. It consists of telescopes in both hemispheres and at a number of longitudes and is well positioned to survey the entire night sky to about 18.5\,mag each night. PS-1 has
already delivered the definitive photometric catalog and deep reference imaging for the northern sky. PS-1 is now largely dedicated to the study of Near-Earth Asteroids (NEOs). ATLAS visits a significant portion of the night sky every two nights, to about 19.5\,mag. Although ATLAS is also tuned for investigating near-earth asteroids, it is reporting transients and publishing light curves for variable stars.
ZTF is undertaking a number of of different surveys (with cadence ranging from minutes to days).
Its primary strength is its combination of depth and areal survey speed \citep{2016PASP..128h4501B}, which enable it to identify transients at earlier times relative to ASAS-SN and ATLAS while covering a large fraction of the accessible night sky. Its productivity in the discovery of transients is enhanced by the availability of dedicated spectroscopic followup to provide routine classification.
The IFUS on the robotic 60-inch telescope can undertake, without human
intervention, nearly a dozen spectral
classification observations per night. Finally,
ZTF has been designed to be a stepping stone for LSST
for transient (and variable) object astronomy. In particular, real time
alerts\footnote{We use the LSST definition of an alert: a 5$\sigma$ change
in RA, Declination or flux, with respect to the reference sky. The resulting alert stream provides a comprehensive, real-time inventory of everything ZTF knows about the changing night sky, including not just transients but also variable stars and solar system objects.} are being
issued to brokers to enable community use of the data and to develop infrastructure for the LSST era. Although the main focus of ZTF (given its name) may initially appear to be transient science, it will also contribute to our knowledge and understanding of optical phenomena in both real time and archival behaviors.
In this paper, we describe the science objectives that motivated the ZTF project. These are defined around particular areas of interest and we present here the expected outcomes and science deliverables of each: the physics of supernovae (SNe) and relativistic explosions (sec. 3), multi-messenger astrophysics (sec. 4), cosmological distances from Type Ia SNe (sec. 5), cosmology with gravitationally lensed SNe (sec. 6), active galactic nuclei (AGN) and tidal disruption events (TDEs) (sec. 7), Galactic science (sec. 8), small Solar System bodies (sec. 9), and astroinformatics and astrostatistics (sec. 10).
The following papers discuss performance and sub-systems in detail:
\citet{tmp_Bellm:18:Overview} give a general overview of the ZTF system.
\citet{tmp_Dekany:18:ZTFObservingSystem} provide an in-depth description of the design of the observing system.
\citet{tmp_Bellm:18:ZTFScheduler} discuss the ZTF surveys and scheduler.
\citet{tmp_Masci:18:ZTFDataSystem} detail the ZTF data system.
\citet{tmp_Patterson:18:ZTFAlertDistribution} present the alert distribution system employed by ZTF.
\citet{tmp_Mahabal:18:ZTFMachineLearning} discuss several applications of machine learning used by ZTF.
\citet{tmp_Tachibana:18:PS1StarGalaxy} present a new star/galaxy classifier developed for ZTF from the Pan-STARRS DR1 catalog \citep{Chambers:16:PS1,Flewelling:16:PS1db}.
\citet{tmp_Kasliwal:18:GROWTHMarshal} describe a web-based interface used by the ZTF collaboration to identify, track, and follow up transients of interest.
\section{The Zwicky Transient Facility}
ZTF employs a new 576 megapixel camera \citep{Dekany2016} with a 47\,deg$^2$ field of view on the Samuel Oschin 48" Schmidt telescope (P48) at Palomar Observatory. It can observe 3760 deg$^2$ per hour to a $5 \sigma$ detection limit of 20.5\,mag in {\it $r$} (with a 30\,s exposure).
The data processing pipelines are managed by IPAC \citep{tmp_Masci:18:ZTFDataSystem} with different
branches for single epoch images and catalogs, image subtraction, and moving objects. Alerts from difference images generated using the ZOGY algorithm \citep{Zackay:16:ZOGY} are produced within 20 minutes of the raw image being taken with the ZTF instrument and distributed using the Kafka system \citep{tmp_Patterson:18:ZTFAlertDistribution} operated by the University of Washington. These data packets contain thumbnails of the discovery, reference, and difference images as well as a 30-day light curve history for an alert.
Due to its funding profile, ZTF operates a unique observing strategy: 40\% of the time is for public surveys, 40\% for partnership observations, and the remaining 20\% for Caltech programs. For the public surveys \citep{tmp_Bellm:18:ZTFScheduler}, the entire visible sky from Palomar is observed in $g$ and $r$ every three nights and the visible Galactic Plane ($|b| < 7^\circ$) covered in $g$ and $r$ every night. Alerts from the public survey data are issued in real time. However, images and catalogs remain embargoed to all parties until public data releases (the first is scheduled for Spring 2019 and thereafter every semester).
ZTF is issuing of order one million alerts per night.
Note that other next generation surveys can also produce alerts at this scale but do not currently make them public.
The 3-year duration of the project also means that about 1 billion sources will be observed about one thousand times. The final table of all individual source detections will thus be a trillion row catalog. ZTF can be regarded to be a precursor to LSST, operating at roughly the 10\% scale (see Table~\ref{table1} for further comparisons between ZTF, LSST, and other surveys).
\begin{table*}
\centering
\caption{A comparison between ZTF, LSST, and other next generation surveys in terms of scale.}
\label{table1}
\begin{tabular}{lccccc}
\hline
Category & ATLAS & ASAS-SN & Pan-STARRS & ZTF & LSST \\
\hline
Number of total sources & - & $1 \times 10^8$ & $1 \times 10^{10}$ & $1 \times 10^9$ & $37 \times 10^9$ \\
Number of total detections & $1 \times 10^{12}$ & $1 \times 10^{11}$ & $1 \times 10^{11}$ & $1 \times 10^{12}$ & $37 \times 10^{12}$ \\
Annual visits per source & 1000$^c$ & 180$^d$ & 60$^e$ & 300$^a$ & 100$^b$ \\
Number of pixels & $1 \times 10^8$ & $4 \times 10^6$ (x 4) & $1 \times 10^9$ & $6 \times 10^8$ & $3.2 \times 10^9$ \\
CCD surface area (cm$^2$) & 90 & 9 & 1415 & 1320 & 3200 \\
Field of view (deg$^2$) & 30 & 4.5 & 7 & 47 & 9 \\
Hourly survey rate (deg$^2$) & 3000 & 960 & - & 3760 & 1000 \\
$5 \sigma$ detection limit in $r$ & 19.3 & 17.3 & 21.5 & 20.5 & 24.7 \\
Nightly alert rate & - & - & - & $1 \times 10^6$ & $1 \times 10^7$ \\
Nightly data rate (TB) & 0.15 & - & - & 1.4 & 15 \\
Telescope (m) & 0.5 & $4 \times 0.14$ & 1.8 & 1.2 & 6.5 \\
No. of telescopes & 2 (6) & 5 & 2 & 1 & 1 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
$^a$ - in 3 filters; $^b$ - in 6 filters; $^c$ - in 2 filters; $^d$ - in 2 filters; $^e$ - in 5 filters
\end{table*}
A major motivation of ZTF was the detection and study of infant explosions.To this end, ZTF also has a dedicated follow-up capability in the form of the Spectral Energy Distribution Machine (SEDM) on the Palomar 60'' telescope \citep{Blagorodnova18}. This combines a low resolution (R $\sim$ 100) integral field unit (IFU) spectrograph with a multi-band $(ugri)$ photometer and is optimized for classification and high observing efficiency. Sources detected by ZTF can be (automatically) submitted to the SEDM observing queue for swift observation. Below we discuss each of the main science areas that ZTF is expected to explore. As with other surveys in the past, we also anticipate that the wealth of new data provided by ZTF will enable serendipitous discoveries of new classes of rare events (e.g.,\ AT2018cow/ATLAS18qqn).
\section{Physics of supernovae and relativistic explosions}
Supernovae will be the major class of non-moving transients detected by ZTF and the expected rates across the range of different types of supernova support a number of systematic studies into these phenomena.
\subsection{The quest and study of infant supernova explosions}
\label{sec:InfantSN}
One of the boutique surveys carried out by ZTF is high cadence (6 times a night) observations of
two thousand square degrees of the sky. This survey with good depth (20.5\,mag) and good cadence was designed explicitly to find young SNe and undertake rapid follow up studies. For massive star explosions, very early photometry from the ground and from space, available only for a handful of serendipitously observed events so far (e.g., \citealt{Campana06,AMS08,Gezari08,Garnavich16,Bersten18}) probes the early physics of explosion shock breakout and cooling (see \citealt{Waxman17} for a recent review). For massive star explosions, early photometry (especially if it includes space UV data, e.g., \citealt{Ofek10,Gezari08,Yaron17,Ganot16,Rubin17}) provides powerful constraints on the nature of the progenitor and the parameters of explosion (e.g., its energy per unit mass, \citealt{Rubin16}).
For Type Ia SNe, early photometry, especially in the UV, is a powerful probe for the existence of a possible mass-donor companion to the exploding white dwarf \citep{Kasen10}. Initial reports about a handful of events (e.g., \citealt{Cao15,GH17}) motivate further exploration of this approach. Together, early photometric studies of both core-collapse and Type Ia SNe motivate a strong synergistic program combining ZTF data with rapid response {\it Swift} UV observations.
Discovery of SNe within 24 hours of explosion, enabled by the ZTF discovery, coupled with the ability to rapidly
trigger the SEDM and other follow-up resources, would allow Target of Opportunity (ToO) spectroscopy
of young SNe within hours of explosion. As shown by initial results using this ``flash spectroscopy'' technique on iPTF triggers (e.g., \citealt{AGY+14,Khazov16,Yaron17}), analysis of such early spectra of massive star explosions allows us to extract unique information about the distribution of circumstellar material (CSM) around exploding stars. The composition of such material, measured from emission line intensities, provides a direct measurement of the surface composition of the supernova progenitor as it was prior to explosion, while the spatial distribution of the CSM, revealed by the transient nature of the emission lines, provides a record of the stellar mass loss just prior to explosion, with potentially critical clues about the SN explosion mechanism \citep{AGY+14,Yaron17}. Temporal evolution of the emission lines within a night \citep{Yaron17} provides a measurement of the temporal evolution of the temperature in the emitting material, a valuable constraint on shock and interaction physics. Mapping the properties of flash-spectroscopy-revealed CSM across the range of SN types (Fig.~\ref{Figflash}) is a key goal of ZTF.
\begin{figure}
\vspace{-3cm}
\hspace*{-1cm}\includegraphics[width=10.5cm]{Figflash.pdf}
\vspace{-3.5cm}
\caption{A collection of flash spectra from iPTF, showing the differing composition of the CSM around core-collapse SNe.}
\label{Figflash}
\end{figure}
\subsection{New insights into interacting supernovae}
\label{sec:InteratingSNe}
Type IIn supernovae are SNe whose spectra show bright and narrow ($\lesssim 2000$\,km\,s$^{-1}$) Balmer emission lines \citep{Schlegel2006,Filippenko1997,Gal-Yam2017}. Rather than a signature of the explosion itself, this spectral specificity is presumably the result of the interaction between the fast ejecta and a low-velocity, dense, hydrogen-rich, circumstellar medium that surrounded the star before it exploded. During the last decade, the physical picture governing SN IIn explosions and the wider family of ``interacting'' SNe -- SNe whose radiation can be partially or completely accounted for by the ejecta crashing into a dense surrounding medium -- has aroused a lot of interest.
SNe IIn are presumably powered (at least partially) by the conversion of the ejecta kinetic energy into luminosity. This is a broad family of objects, with a wide variety of CSM masses ranging
from $\gtrsim10$\,M$_{\odot}$ (e.g., \citealt{Ofek2014}) to $0.01-0.1$\,M$_{\odot}$\,y$^{-1}$ (e.g., \citealt{Kiewe2012}).
Such low-mass CSM events evolved faster, and are less luminous compared with high-mass CSM events (Ofek et al. 2014b).
At the low-CSM mass, the IIn class is likely related to the flash spectroscopy SN events which have estimated CSM masses of the order of $\sim10^{-3}$\,M$_{\odot}$ (e.g., \citealt{Gal-Yam2014,Yaron2017}), which are confined to the close vicinity of the progenitor star. ZTF will provide a unique insight into these objects.
Type IIn Balmer narrow lines may
persist for days (``flash spectroscopy'', \citealt{Gal-Yam2014,Khazov2016,Yaron2017}, weeks (e.g., SN 1998S, \citealt{Li1998,Fassia2000,Fassia2001}; SN 2005gl, \citealt{Gal-Yam2007}; SN 2010mc \citealt{Ofek2013a}; PTF\,12glz \citealt{Soumagnac2018}), or years (e.g., SN 1988Z, \citealt{Danziger1991,Stathakis1991,Turatto1993,VanDyk1993,Chugai1994,Fabian1996,Aretxaga1999, Williams2002,Schlegel2006,Smith2017}; SN 2010jl \citealt{Patat2011,Stoll2011,Gall2014,Ofek2014}). With its cadence and continuous coverage, ZTF will allow the study of the early and late photometric and spectral properties of interacting SNe and reveal the complete spectral evolution of these events. This will allow the investigation of the various physical scenarios leading to the presence of interaction signatures in the spectrum of SNe.
ZTF has the potential to identify and followup hundreds of Type IIn SN. This will further lead to characterization of their CSM masses (e.g., Kiewe et al. 2012, Ofek et al. 2014c), probing their ejecta shock velocities which is a probe of the internal explosion mechanism (e.g., Ofek et al. 2014c),
and CSM geometry via the spectral and light curve evolution (e.g., Soumagnac et al. 2018).
Furthermore, ZTF will give new insights into the precursors of SNe IIn.
In recent years it has become clear that a large fraction of SN progenitors show outbursts accompanied by large mass ejections (e.g., $\gtrsim 10^{-3}$\,M$_{\odot}$)
months to years prior to the terminal explosion of the star as a SN. In some cases, there are direct observations of such prior luminous outbursts (e.g., \citealt{Foley2007, Pastorello2007, Mauerhan2012,Prieto2013,Corsi2014,Fraser2013,Ofek2013a, Ofek2013c, Ofek2014b, Ofek2016,Strotjohann2015,Nyholm2017}) and in other cases we detect high excitation emission lines, presumably due to the presence of massive circumstellar material around the SN progenitor (e.g., \cite{Gal-Yam2014,Khazov2016,Yaron2017}). These observations suggest that the final evolution of massive stars is not well understood, as such eruptions do not occur in standard stellar evolution codes. This may be important for a better understanding of the SN explosion mechanism as these final stages determine the initial conditions to explosion simulations (e.g., \citealt{Arnett2011,Quataert2012,Shiode2014,Fuller2017,Fuller2018}). ZTF will cover the locations of multiple SNe IIn multiple times prior to the actual explosions, and will thus allow to better study the precursors of SNe IIn. The public survey, with its all-sky footprint and uniform cadence ($g$ and $r$ band every three nights) will be particularly well suited to perform such study.
\subsection{Superluminous supernovae}
\label{sec:secSLSN}
Superluminous supernovae (SLSNe) are a rare class of transients with peak luminosities 10--100 times higher than ordinary core-collapse and Type Ia SNe, and total radiated energies in excess of $10^{51}$~erg (see e.g., \citealt{gal12} for a review). Their enormous energies cannot be explained by standard supernova models, and their progenitors and energy sources are still debated. Suggestions include either a central energy source (such as magnetar spin-down; \citealt{kb10,woo10}), strong interaction with dense CSM converting kinetic energy to radiation \citep{wbh07,ci11,sbn+16}, or the pair-instability explosion of a very massive star \citep{brs67,gmo+09}.
ZTF will make progress in SLSN science in multiple ways. First, while more than 100 SLSNe from many different surveys have been reported to date (e.g., \citealt{dgr+17} (PTF), \citealt{lcb+18} (PS1)), fundamental population properties such as the SLSN rate are still only poorly constrained \citep{qya+13,msr+14,pss+17}. ZTF's combination of sky coverage and cadence is ideal for selecting a large sample of SLSNe in a systematic fashion, and thus determining population properties. More generally, increasing the sample of SLSNe with well-determined explosion dates and rise times, as well as color information also on the rise, is important for constraining the progenitors and energy sources of SLSNe, since the rise time encodes information about the diffusion timescale and hence the progenitor mass. For slowly-declining SLSNe, the rise time is the main discriminator between pair-instability and central-engine models (e.g., \citealt{nsj+13, lcb+16}).
Finally, ZTF's capability to study young SNe (sec.~\ref{sec:InfantSN}) extends to studying the early phases of SLSNe. Some SLSNe show a precursor ``bump'' on the rise, with typical timescales of $\sim 10$~days \citep{lcd+12,nsj+15,ssd+16}. It has been suggested that this feature is ubiquitous \citep{ns16}, but the presence of such a bump is poorly constrained due to a lack of well-sampled early time data in the majority of SLSNe. Understanding the physical nature of this precursor emission, and more generally what it implies for the explosion mechanism and extended structure of the progenitor star, holds great promise in shedding light on these enigmatic explosions.
While the light curve of the precursor can be recovered from ZTF data, securing spectra of the precursor requires detecting SLSNe before their light curve rises for several tens of days and before their luminosity exceeds $-21$ mag. SLSN host galaxies could be very useful in identifying infant SLSNe. SLSNe are preferentially found in star-forming dwarf galaxies with stellar masses of $<10^{10}~M_\odot$ and metallicities of $<0.4$ solar metallicity \citep{Lunnan2014a, Leloudas2015a, Perley2016a, Schulze2018a}, whereas ordinary core-collapse SNe are found in more evolved galaxies \citep[e.g.][]{Kelly2012a}. To illustrate this better, we display in Fig. \ref{fig:slsn} a subsample of 500 core-collapse SN host galaxies from PTF and iPTF surveys with detected hosts in $r'$ and $i'$ band (for details see Schulze et al. in prep.), 53 H-poor and 16 H-rich SLSNe from \citet{Schulze2018a} and galaxies from the UltraVISTA survey \citep{McCracken2012a}. SLSNe are found in a part of the parameter space that is sparsely populated by galaxies in general. Moreover, the average host of H-poor/-rich SLSNe is 0.2/0.15~mag bluer than that of a regular core-collapse supernova (at lower redshift). Hence, host galaxy properties could be a valuable diagnostic to select infant SLSNe in real-time.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{SLSN_colours_pdf_full.pdf}
\caption{$r'-i'$ colour distribution of 500 PTF/iPTF core-collapse SN host galaxies, SLSN host galaxies and galaxies from the UltraVISTA survey. The top panel shows the cumulative distribution for all samples at $z<0.7$. SLSN hosts are found in a part of the parameter space that is sparsely populated by galaxies, in general. The average host of an H-poor/-rich SLSN is 0.2/0.15~mag bluer than that of a regular core-collapse SN. Hence, host galaxy properties could be used to identify infant SLSNe in the ZTF alert stream. Figure adapted from Schulze et al., in prep.}
\label{fig:slsn}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Exploring the diversity of relativistic explosions}
In the final collapse and explosion of a massive star,
$>$10$^{51}$ erg of kinetic energy are liberated
as the iron core collapses to a neutron star or a black hole, driving a spherical shock that unbinds the star (a supernova). A small subset ($\sim$0.1\%) of these explosions exhibit even more extreme behavior: a relativistic bipolar jet is launched, drills through the envelope, and escapes to interstellar space. The jet produces a long-duration gamma-ray burst (GRB) lasting several seconds, and its collision with the circumstellar medium (CSM) produces an ``afterglow'' that radiates across the electromagnetic spectrum for days to months \citep{Rees1992MNRAS}.
To date, $\sim20$ SNe have been spectroscopically confirmed in association with GRBs,
beginning with the coincident discovery of GRB\,980425 and SN\,1998bw at $d = 40\,$Mpc \citep{Galama1998,Kulkarni1998},
All GRB-SNe have had envelopes stripped of hydrogen and helium (Type Ic) and high measured photospheric velocities ($\gtrsim 20,000$\,km s$^{-1}$). These ``broad-lined" (BL) Ic SNe constitute $\sim 1\%$ of the local core-collapse rate,
and their association with GRBs has led to the suggestion that GRBs and at least some Ic-BL SNe arise from a single explosion mechanism \citep{Barnes2017,Sobacchi2017}.
A major focus of scientific investigation over the past 20 years has been to understand the connections between these energetic Ic-BL supernovae with successful, observed jets and ordinary (non-relativistic) SNe without them. A minimum prerequisite for the launch of a jet is the formation of a ``central engine'' from the collapsing core: a highly magnetized neutron star or rapidly-accreting black hole. But even if such an engine forms, a number of other conditions must also be met for us to observe the jet as a GRB. First, the jet must be nearly baryon-free (else the available energy is insufficient to accelerate the ejecta to ultra-relativistic velocities), and gamma-ray emission will be stifled by pair-production. Next, the jet must successfully escape the star without being smothered by the stellar envelope. Finally, the jet must be directed at Earth.
If any of these conditions are not met, a variety of different empirical phenomena are predicted:
\noindent \textbf{(a)} A jet with too many baryons ($>10^{-4}\,M_\odot$) is known as a \textbf{dirty fireball}. Given the energy budget of the explosion it can attain only a moderate Lorentz factor ($\Gamma$ $\sim$ 5--10). So, while it successfully escapes the star and should produce a luminous afterglow, it will not produce \emph{significant} high-energy emission and thus not trigger gamma-ray instruments \citep{Dermer1999}.
\noindent \textbf{(b)} A jet which fails to escape the stellar envelope is sometimes termed a \textbf{choked jet} or a failed jet \citep{Meszaros2001}. However, the jet energy may be transferred into a shock wave that propagates through the star and breaks out at the surface: this may produce a low-luminosity gamma-ray burst (LLGRB) \citep{Bromberg2011,Nakar2015} and a Type Ic-BL SN.
\noindent \textbf{(c)} In most cases, the viewing angle exceeds the jet half-opening angle.
Such an \textbf{off-axis jet} (clean or dirty) that escapes the star will result in an \textbf{orphan afterglow} \citep{Rhoads1997}. The relativistic beaming of such an event means that there will be suppressed (or a lack of) observed gamma-ray emission. The afterglow will brighten as the shock slows and the relativistic beaming cone widens to include Earth (e.g., \citealt{vanEerten2010}).
A census of these phenomena is required to quantify key physical processes in core-collapse SNe and their connection to relativistic transients. How many SNe actually produce central engines? Why do ``classical" GRB jets accelerate only a tiny fraction of their mass: is the fractional mass fundamental to the phenomenon, or the tip of the iceberg of a wider range of jet phenomena? In particular, do LLGRBs result from jets getting choked within the star? And, finally, how accurate is our understanding of beaming in GRBs?
We are addressing this area via three surveys.
The partnership moderate cadence survey (sec. \ref{sec:InfantSN}) is well suited to find
rapidly fading afterglows. In fact, the moderate cadence survey was based on the success of
a pilot project undertaken with PTF (which resulted in a cosmological afterglow candidate, PTF11agg; \citealt{Cenko2013}).
A nightly cadence survey, another boutique survey, is squarely aimed at LLGRB and LLGRB-like SNe such as SN\,2006aj \citep{Soderberg2006} and iPTF\,16asu \citep{Whitesides2017} as well as orphan afterglows. We have undertaken archival analysis of iPTF data and devised excellent
filters to reject false positives for these two surveys (M dwarfs and dwarf novae; \citealt{Ho2018}).
Finally, the public all-sky three-night survey will result in SEDM classifications of 500 SNe per semester, of which a few percent will be Ic/BL SNe.
\begin{figure}[htbp]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=3in]{PTF11agg.png}
\caption{\small
Light curves from the candidate on-axis dirty fireball PTF11agg and the low-luminosity GRB\,060218 / Ic-BL SN\,2006aj.
The rapid decay of PTF11agg is attributed to on-axis fading afterglow. The rise and fade of of SN\,2006aj at early times is likely due to shock cooling emission of SN ejecta.
}
\label{fig:PTF11agg}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Rare transients in the local universe}
The luminosity gap between novae and supernovae has recently been populated with a variety of faint and fast evolving transients in the local universe \citep{Kasliwal2012b}.
PTF/iPTF, with its untargeted wide-field search and committed spectral classifications
with the Palomar 200-inch and SEDM (peaking at 700 classifications per year) resulted
in several interesting transients including rapidly evolving Type Ic SNe like SN 2010X and iPTF 14gqr (\citealt{Kasliwal2010}; \citealt{De2018}; see also SN 2005ek; \citealt{Drout2013}), and significantly increased the samples size of calcium-rich gap transients \citep{Perets2010,Kasliwal2012a}. However, the physical nature of these explosions remains largely debated as their faint and fast evolving light curves (and hence low ejecta mass) point to very low mass progenitors unlike the population of Type Ia and core-collapse SNe. Suggested progenitor channels include tidal disruptions of low mass white dwarfs by a neutron star or black hole \citep{Sell2015}, He shell detonations on the surface of white dwarfs \citep{Bildsten2007} or core-collapse explosions of highly stripped massive stars \citep{Kleiser2014, Tauris2013}. Yet, the small number of confirmed events leaves considerable uncertainty about the intrinsic properties of these intriguing transients.
ZTF, with its order of magnitude improvement in survey speed over PTF, will be a powerful tool to discover large samples of these faint and fast evolving explosions in the local Universe. This will aid not only in understanding the distribution of the intrinsic properties of this population (e.g., ejecta masses, explosion energies and peak luminosities) but also shed light on their progenitors via their host environments. For instance, the old and remote environments of the class of Ca-rich gap transients (a total of eight confirmed events thus far) suggest their association with a very old progenitor population that has traveled far away from their host galaxies, consistent with progenitors arising from old white dwarf binary systems (\citealt{Lunnan2017}; see also \citealt{De2018}). On the other hand, the star forming host galaxies of the fast Type Ic SNe like SN 2010X and SN 2005ek are consistent with white dwarf progenitors as well as core-collapse explosions of ``ultra-stripped'' massive stars \citep{Moriya2017}.
The number of false positives is significantly reduced by the requirement that candidates
be in the apparent proximity of galaxies with $z<0.05$. The resulting spectroscopic
load (for classification) then becomes manageable with the resources available to the
ZTF partnership (e.g.,\ Palomar 200-inch, Nordic Optical Telescope, Liverpool Telescope and
peer-reviewed Gemini allocations).
Early follow-up allows one to directly constrain the pre-explosion properties of the progenitor star. Such techniques have already been demonstrated to be a powerful probe of the nature of the progenitor in the case of Type Ia \citep{Nugent2011} and core-collapse SNe \citep{Yaron17}, and will be important for shedding light on the progenitors of these rare transients. Finally, ZTF will also be important in constraining the rates of these transients (which are otherwise poorly constrained due to the small number of events) that likely have important effects on the chemical evolution of the universe \citep{Mulchaey2014}.
Current estimates of the rate of Ca-rich gap transients that include the survey efficiencies of PTF suggest that their rates are nearly half of the Type Ia supernova rate. This indicates that ZTF is expected to find more than 20 such events per year \citep{Frohmaier2018}. Rate constraints will also benefit from such events initially detected by on-going time domain surveys.
\subsection{A larger sample of stripped envelope supernovae, and their host galaxies}\label{sec:SESN}
The stripped envelope supernovae (SE~SNe) samples currently available in the literature are mainly targeted (i.e., 34 SE SNe in \citealt{Taddia18a}, CSP), and non-homogenous (i.e. collections by \citealt{Cano13}, \citealt{Lyman16}, and \citealt{Prentice16}), or rather small (i.e., 20 SNe in \citealt{Taddia15}, SDSS II).
ZTF will allow us to build a large, homogeneous SE~SN sample. Its untargeted nature will diminish the bias toward metal-rich SN host galaxies, as it will enable finding SE~SNe also in low-luminosity and low-metallicity galaxies.
With this sample, the main scientific questions are related to understanding the nature of the progenitor stars of SE~SNe.
By modeling the light curves of our SE~SNe sample we aim to determine the range of the SN explosion parameters. Beside the semi-analytic Arnett model \citep{Arnett82}, we can make use of more sophisticated hydrodynamical codes, such as HYDE \citep{Ergon15} and SNEC \citep{Morozova15}, to estimate the explosion parameters.
We know from the literature that most SE~SNe have relatively narrow light curves, suggesting moderate to low ejecta mass (order of 2-4 M$_\odot$). However, with iPTF we initiated a sample study of light curves, identifying a number of unusual SE~SNe.
For example, we discovered a dozen SE~SNe with broad light curves that might have massive progenitors, e.g., iPTF15dtg \citep{Taddia16} and PTF11mnb \citep{Taddia18b}, and/or alternative powering mechanisms (e.g., magnetar). We also studied iPTF14gqr, a SN with a much narrower light curve than average, very likely arising from an ultra-stripped progenitor \citealt{De2018}.
We expect to considerably increase the size of these samples with the forthcoming ZTF data. To increase the sample size is particularly important for these rare SNe, which we have hitherto followed only in a few cases. The stellar Initial Mass Function is steep, and to sample the most massive progenitors simply requires a large number of events.
With ZTF we will be able to discover these SNe routinely, and we aim to follow them up to classify them and to characterize their light curve shapes.
With iPTF we also discovered and investigated the unusual presence of early light curve excesses in some SNe Type Ic.
This is compatible with the presence of an extended envelope (tens to hundreds of solar radii) around their progenitor stars (e.g., \citealt{Taddia16}). With the higher cadence of ZTF, we aim to routinely study these early emission excesses,
to get a better constraint on the progenitor radius of SE~SNe.
ZTF will also provide more early color information ($g$ and $r$ band from P48) of the SN emission. This will allow us to build bolometric light curves and temperature profiles at early epochs, which provide information on the degree of $^{56}$Ni mixing in the SN ejecta.
In summary, with ZTF we aim to observe a substantial sample of SE~SNe with tight pre-explosion limits, pre-maximum coverage and multiband light curves over a range of host galaxy properties.
\subsection{Failed supernova shock breakouts}
Core collapse of a massive star may result in a ``failed'' SN, where the core promptly forms a black hole after the accretion shock fails to explode the star. While this fate has long been suggested for very high mass stars at low metallicity, there is mounting evidence that failed SNe may also occur in red supergiants (RSGs) with solar metallicity. First, there is a dearth of $>$$18~M_{\odot}$ RSG SN progenitors---the ``missing RSG problem'' \citep{Kochanek08,Smartt09,Horiuchi14,Smartt15}.
Also, a significant fraction of core-collapses resulting in failed SNe naturally explains the gap between the neutron star and black hole mass distributions \citep{Kochanek14}.
The most dramatic evidence is the disappearance of a $10^{5.3}~L_{\odot}$ RSG \citep{Gerke15,Adams17} discovered by an ongoing survey monitoring a million RSGs in nearby galaxies with deep optical imaging \citep{Kochanek08}.
Searching for disappearing core collapse progenitors is observationally expensive and cannot feasibly be scaled up enough to tightly constrain the rates and progenitor properties.
Moreover, with this approach candidates are only identified months (or years) after core collapse, making detailed observations of the event and its immediate aftermath impossible.
However, the disappearance of the progenitor is not the only possible signature of these events. Models predict that even if the energy released by the core collapse of a RSG fails to result in a SN, the loss of gravitational binding energy from the neutrino emission may result in a low-velocity ($\sim$$100~\mathrm{km}~\mathrm{s}^{-1}$) ejection of the weakly-bound hydrogen envelope \citep{Nadezhin80,Lovegrove13}, giving rise to a faint ($\sim$$10^{6}~L_{\odot}$) but long-lived (months -- years) recombination powered transient \citep{Lovegrove13,Fernandez18}.
Though the temporal sampling is coarse, the observations of the failed SN candidate reveal a several month long transient consistent with this prediction \citep{Adams17}. Given the likely low rate of failed SNe, this type of transient is too faint to be discovered with supernova surveys, but with the ZTF the shock breakout associated with these events could be discovered for the first time, triggering spectroscopic follow-up and a search for the subsequent fainter recombination-powered transient.
Although the shock breakouts of normal SNe are very short (seconds to hours) and radiate primarily in the UV and X-rays, the shock breakout from the low-energy, neutrino-mediated shock of a failed SN is predicted to have a duration of a few days and be thermalized to a temperature of $\sim$$10^{4}$ K, with a luminosity of $\sim$$10^{7}~L_{\odot}$ \citep{Piro13,Lovegrove17,Fernandez18}.
Observations of both the shock breakout and the subsequent recombination phases would provide a unique confirmation that a failed SN has occurred. The shock breakout luminosity, temperature, and duration together with the luminosity and duration of the subsequent recombination powered transient can constrain the progenitor radius, the explosion energy, and the ejected mass.
Though the expected ZTF discovery rate of failed SN shock breakouts is low, this approach represents the only feasible way to promptly discover and observe the birth of a new black hole from stellar core-collapse for the very first time. The only false positives are novae (which, due to their luminosity function, are limited to galaxies no further than 10\,Mpc). ZTF is well suited to this project given its depth.
\subsection{Bright Transient Survey}
Two science drivers motivated the Bright Transient Survey (BTS).
First, one of the approaches for finding electromagnetic (EM) counterparts to
neutron star mergers is to target galaxies in the localization constraints
(including redshift) provided by the gravitational wave (GW) facilities
(e.g., \citealt{Gehrels16}). However, the quantitative efficiency of this method requires the knowledge of the redshift completeness fraction (RCF) of these
catalogs. We measure RCF using SNe as markers of galaxies (regardless of their
luminosity).
Preliminary estimates of the RCF find that $\sim$75\% of $z < 0.03$ galaxies are cataloged, based on observations of $m_\mathrm{peak} < 17\,\mathrm{mag}$ SNe from the ASAS-SN survey \citep{Kulkarni18}.
Next, there is widespread recognition of increased precision for
Ia SN cosmology at low redshift, $z<0.15$ (and discussed in great
detail in sec.\ \ref{sec:SNIa}). To satisfy these two projects
a significant fraction of SEDM has been set aside to spectrally classify
bright transients ($\lesssim 19$\,mag) with the expectation of completeness to
$18.5$\,mag. Such bright transients will not only be found by the ZTF public survey but also by ASAS-SN, ATLAS and PS. We plan to publish a yearly catalog spelling in detail observational conditions so that the sample can be used to compute reliable rates. With the data in hand it appears that we are on course to classify 500 bright transients every semester.
\section{Multi-messenger Astrophysics}
Multi-messenger astrophysics is a growing methodology in astronomy and to this end
we have built-in Target-of-Opportunity (TOO) capability.
Multi-messenger astrophysics has three science objectives: (i) identifying electromagnetic (EM) counterparts to neutrino triggers from IceCube; (ii) identifying afterglows to short hard gamma-ray bursts from the {\it Fermi} satellite; and (iii) identifying electromagnetic counterparts to gravitational wave (GW) triggers from LIGO/Virgo.
\subsection{Identifying electromagnetic counterparts to neutrinos}
The IceCube Neutrino Observatory has discovered a diffuse flux of high-energy neutrinos~\citep{Aartsen:2015knd, Aartsen:2013jdh}. However, until recently no compelling evidence for spatial or temporal clustering of events had been identified and the origin of the neutrinos was unknown~\citep{Aartsen:2016oji,2015ApJ...807...46A}. The consistency of the spatial distribution with an isotropic flux points to a predominantly extragalactic origin for the neutrinos. Multi-messenger studies are key to identifying the neutrino sources, through detection of their EM counterparts. ZTF's all-sky coverage and high cadence will play a crucial role in detecting potential optical counterparts to astrophysical neutrinos, such as flaring blazars, choked-jet supernovae~\citep{Senno:2015tsn}, CSM-interacting SNe~\citep{Murase:2010cu, Zirakashvili:2015mua}, and tidal disruption events~\citep{2017PhRvD..95l3001L}. Our goal is to identify the neutrino sources through two complementary approaches:
Firstly, a target of opportunity (ToO) program will select the most promising astrophysical neutrino candidates in real-time~\citep{Aartsen:2016lmt} from IceCube, and trigger rapid follow-up observations with ZTF to target fast-evolving transients (such as GRB afterglows). ZTF's ToO marshal will enable prompt collection of early photometry. These observations, in combination with upper limits provided by the regular all-sky survey, will allow tight constraints to be placed on the explosion time of GRBs or choked-jet SNe. Such temporal constraints are crucial to establish the causal connection between the neutrino and the potential optical counterpart. The effectiveness of ToO follow-up in identifying possible optical counterparts is already well-established.
One interesting candidate, SN PS16cgx, was found during the Pan-STARRS optical follow-up of the first publicly released high-energy neutrino alert \citep{2016GCN..19381...1S}. With a tentative classification as a broad-lined Type Ic, the object could belong to the rare class of objects that is also associated with long GRBs, and hence a potential neutrino source.
Another follow-up of a more recent high-energy neutrino event revealed a spatially coincident blazar, TXS\,0506+056, which was found by {\it Fermi}-LAT to be in flaring state~\citep{IceCube:2018dnn}. The coincidence triggered further multi-wavelength follow-up, leading to the discovery of very-high-energy gamma-ray emission by MAGIC. Study of archival optical data revealed a rise of $\sim0.5$ mag in V-band over the preceding 50 days. Those findings are consistent with Fermi blazars contributing $<10\%$ to the diffuse neutrino flux~\citep{2018arXiv180704748M}.
Secondly, while only a handful of the highest-energy neutrinos, with a $>50\%$ chance to be of astrophysical origin ($\sim 10$ per year), are suitable for the ToO program, there are many more detected neutrinos that could also have optical counterparts. We can utilize ZTF's all-sky survey to access these lower-energy cosmic neutrinos, which are buried in a background of atmospheric neutrinos. With an all-sky real-time search, in which we correlate all optical transients found by ZTF with all neutrino candidates detected by IceCube, we will target potential optical transient counterparts (e.g. SNe, TDEs) accounting for position, time and neutrino energy. In particular, an online stream of approximately $100$ neutrinos per day will be cross-matched with all detected ZTF transients during each night of observation. Positive correlations will trigger a dedicated follow up campaign for potential optical transient counterparts which will also enable us to acquire a
complete flux-limited catalog (to 20th mag) of classified sources as potential neutrino counterparts. IceCube's most sensitive sky region [the Northern sky]~\citep{Aartsen:2016oji} is excellently matched by ZTF's coverage of the Northern sky.
The discovery of the origin of high-energy neutrinos would be a breakthrough for the emerging field of neutrino astronomy, and would furthermore reveal the much sought-after sources of high-energy cosmic rays.
More specifically, the detection of neutrinos from choked-jet SNe would offer a direct window to the internal dynamics of those sources. It would constrain the composition, energetics and Lorentz boost
factor of relativistic outflows leaving the collapsing star, and resolve the currently
uncertain emission mechanism for GRBs. Deciphering the processes in the cores of collapsing stars hidden from electromagnetic observations is one of neutrino astronomy's key science goals.
\subsection{Identifying afterglows to short hard gamma-ray bursts}
The recent discovery of broadband electromagnetic radiation associated with gravitational waves from a binary neutron star merger \citep{Abbott+2017a} has ushered in a new era of multi-messenger astrophysics. One of the more unexpected results from this discovery was the detection of a low-luminosity short gamma-ray burst (GRB\,170817A; \citealt{Goldstein+2017}) just 1.7\,s after the binary neutron star (BNS) merger. With $E_{\gamma,\mathrm{iso}} \approx 3 \times 10^{46}$\,erg \citep{Abbott+2017b}, GRB\,170817A is 3--4 orders of magnitude less energetic than all previous short GRBs with secure redshift measurements.
The explanation for this low-luminosity gamma-ray emission remains hotly debated. One possibility is that an ultra-relativistic jet was launched following the binary neutron star merger, but our viewing angle is slightly off-axis (though still within the envelope) of a ``structured jet'' \citep{Abbott+2017b}. As a result, the gamma-ray luminosity we observe is significantly reduced, but some other observer in the Universe would have seen a classical short GRB following the binary neutron star merger. Alternatively, the gamma-ray emission may have been powered by a (quasi-)spherical, mildly relativistic outflow. Such emission may arise naturally from the ``cocoon'' formed when a jet fails to penetrate the neutron-rich material dynamically ejected prior to the merger \citep{Kasliwal+2017,Gottlieb+2017}.
Regardless of the origin, it is clear that the gamma-ray emission from a NS merger can be observed from outside the narrow opening angle of the ultra-relativistic jets of classical (i.e., high $E_{\gamma,\mathrm{iso}}$) short GRBs. Thus, low-luminosity short GRBs may offer a new means to identify the r-process kilonovae following neutron star mergers, independent of any gravitational wave trigger.
No short-duration GRBs have been conclusively identified within 200\,Mpc (the horizon distance for BNS mergers from Advanced LIGO at design sensitivity) to date, despite dozens of robust host associations from the well-localized \textit{Swift} sample (e.g., \citealt{Berger2014}). But the Gamma-Ray Burst Monitor (GBM; \citealt{Meegan+2009}) on-board the \textit{Fermi} satellite triggers on $\approx 4 \times$ more short-duration GRBs per year than \textit{Swift} (with even more detected via ground-based pipelines; \citealt{Briggs+2017}). Few (if any) of these GBM short-duration GRBs are followed up with optical facilities \citep[see e.g.,][]{Golkhou2018ApJ}, due primarily to their coarse localizations from several hundred up to $\sim 1000$\,deg$^{2}$.
With the large field-of-view and automated transient identification pipeline of ZTF, we will follow a sample of short-duration GRBs from the \textit{Fermi}-GBM to search for kilonova counterparts. While most such GRBs will be at distances $\gg 100$\,Mpc (the approximate distance out to which the GBM could detect GRB\,170817A; \citealt{Abbott+2017b}), within this volume the rate of BNS mergers is $\approx 6$\,yr$^{-1}$ \citep{Abbott+2017a}. If all BNS mergers have a $\gamma$-ray signal of comparable luminosity to GRB\,170817A (as may be expected in cocoon models), ZTF will be capable of finding several counterparts per year, even before the next LIGO and Virgo observing run begins. For those more distant events, ZTF will be sensitive to the bright but rapidly fading afterglow emission, allowing robust host association and redshift and offset measurements.
\subsection{Identifying electromagnetic counterparts to gravitational wave transients}
Pinpointing EM counterparts to neutron star mergers has the potential to unlock a wide range of new astrophysics, as illustrated by GW170817. For instance, detailed photometry and spectroscopy coupled with reliable rate estimates
will quantify how prolific a site of r-process nucleosynthesis they are and whether they can explain the observed Solar abundance of heavy elements \citep[e.g.,][]{Drout2017,Kasliwal+2017,Kasen+2017,2018arXiv180101141H}. EM counterparts are crucial to reliable measurements of the Hubble constant \citep{Schutz86,2017Natur.551...85A} which is still a topic of interest \citep{2018arXiv180410655R}. Neutron star mergers are also unique laboratories to study jet physics \citep[e.g.,][]{2018MNRAS.tmp.1056L,2017ApJ...850L..24G,2017arXiv171203237L,2018arXiv180305892G,2018MNRAS.tmp.1009N}
especially the wide-angle mildly relativistic cocoon breakout seen in GW170817 \citep{Hallinan+18,Mooley+18,Dobie+18,2018arXiv180502870A,Troja+18}.
With its combination of mapping speed and depth, ZTF is well poised to identify EM counterparts given its location at Palomar Observatory (facilitating prompt response), although we note that there are other facilities which may be more optimal for this purpose. Based on pessimistic models for optical emission \citet{Ghosh+17} worked to optimize the followup strategy, distributing observations to cover the gravitational-wave error region (which could be $1000\,\,{\rm deg}^2$, depending on the number of detectors involved; \citealt{Singer+14}) and showed that ZTF should be able to detect a significant fraction of sources in the upcoming third GW observing run. Given how bright the early-time emission was from GW170817 \citep[e.g.,][]{Drout2017,Kasliwal+2017,Arcavi+17,Nicholl+17} we may even be able to see a significant fraction with shorter observations, but we are baselining our plans to
be able to detect counterparts $10\times$ fainter than GW170817 at 120\,Mpc.
\section{Cosmological distances from Type Ia supernovae}\label{sec:SNIa}
The use of Type Ia supernovae as distance indicators led to the
discovery of the accelerating
Universe \citep{1998AJ....116.1009R,1999ApJ...517..565P}, attributed to
the existence of a new cosmic component dubbed ``dark energy''
\citep[see][for a review]{2011ARNPS..61..251G}. Perhaps the ``simplest'' explanation for dark energy is the one introduced already by Einstein, the
cosmological constant, $\Lambda$. Whereas $\Lambda$ would seem to
correspond conceptually to the vacuum energy density expected from
quantum field theory, the measured value of $\rho_{\rm DE}$ is at
least 60 orders of magnitude too small, rendering the association
extremely uncertain. Given the current lack of theoretical
understanding, the quantity used to parameterize the nature of dark
energy (DE) is the dimensionless equation of state parameter, built by
the ratio of the pressure to energy density of the dark energy
cosmological fluid, $w= p_{\rm DE}/\rho_{\rm DE}c^2$, which for the
vacuum energy associated with $\Lambda$ becomes $w=-1$. Using the most
recent SN~Ia compilations in \cite{2014A&A...568A..22B}
and \cite{2017arXiv171000845S} in combination with CMB and BAO data,
attempts have been made to explore alternative dark energy
models. While Einstein's $\Lambda$ in a flat Universe is favored by
the current observations, several competing models based on
well-founded physics remain
unchallenged \citep{2017JCAP...07..040D}. It has since long been
recognised that the low redshift anchoring SN~Ia sample is crucial to
discern between dark energy
models \citep{2001A&A...380....6G,2014A&A...572A..80A}. Besides the
limited statistics, the diverse origin, filter sets and lack of
precise calibration makes the current low-$z$ SN~Ia sample the main
contributor to the systematic uncertainties of the estimates of the
dark energy equation of state \citep{2017arXiv171000845S,
2018MNRAS.475..193F}. The ZTF public survey, in combination with a
partnership $i$-band four-day cadence of 6700 deg$^2$ is expected to
yield nearly 2000 spectroscopically identified SNe~Ia (Feindt et al
{\em in prep.}) over three years, with a sub-percent absolute
calibration with a redshift distribution shown in Fig.~\ref{fig:SNIaz}
and median peak magnitudes of 18.26~mag and 18.32~mag in g- and r-band
respectively. The ZTF survey can provide a complete and unbiased
SN~Ia sample for $z < 0.1$.
With the ZTF plans of spectroscopic follow-up and management of the
follow-up sample, this should be a multi-band, well sampled
spectroscopically confirmed, un-biased and close to complete data set,
with well understood selection properties. The data set will be ideal
for studying the supernova population, for example, exploring the
effect of the local host environment on standardization of supernovae
that have been found in other studies \citep[see][and references
therein]{2017arXiv170607697R}.
ZTF, along with other surveys discovering high rates of SNe~Ia, such as ATLAS, PanSTARRS and ASAS-SN, or the Foundation effort \citep{2018MNRAS.475..193F}, aiming at building up multi-color
lightcurves for many hundred SNe Ia, are providing the critical anchoring samples for cosmology. The ZTF survey offers specific advantages related to the
understanding of systematic effects that need to be controlled to make major progress in precision cosmology with SNe~Ia, e.g. corrections for selection effects like Malmquist bias.
These require a knowledge of the underlying supernova population
(rates, luminosity functions, and galaxy occupation distributions)
conditioned on \citep[possibly local;][]{2018arXiv180603849R} host galaxy properties. The difficulties related to the sampling of SNe from different host galaxy populations at low-$z$ compared to the high-$z$ counterparts can be appreciated in Fig.~2 in \citet{2018arXiv181109286J}, showing significant differences between the low and high redshift host galaxy stellar mass.
Thanks to the better depth than ,e.g., ASAS-SN and ATLAS, the ZTF SNIa lighcurves are sampled over longer time, both before and after peak, and thus better suited for detailed comparisons with high-$z$ samples from LSST and WFIRST, a critical aspect of checks for possible demographic changes in the populations of SNe used for distance measurements.
Furthermore, the extremely early SN detection, averaging at 13 days
prior to lightcurve maximum, can be used to study the evolution of
color excess, and thereby constrain the location of dust clouds
dimming the SN light, a crucial aspect in the understanding of the
color corrections needed to standardize SNe~Ia for cosmological
distance estimations \citep{2018MNRAS.473.1918B,2018arXiv180309749B}. The ZTF SN Ia sample will also shed light into
the impact of dimming by dust in the intergalactic
medium \citep{Goobar:2018smm}, an effect currently not included in the
cosmological fits with SNe Ia. ZTF will thus provide an excellent
anchoring sample with which to quantify the key systematic
uncertainties that will limit future high-$z$ surveys from LSST and
WFIRST. Similarly, ZTF will provide an independent SN Ia sample to
measure the Hubble constant, H$_0$, where a nearly 4$\sigma$ tension
has been claimed between the local measurements of the expansion rate
based on SNe~Ia calibrated with Cepheids
\citep{2016ApJ...826...56R,2018ApJ...855..136R,2018arXiv180410655R} and the value derived from
{\em Planck} measurements of the angle subtended by the sound horizon
as observed in CMB temperature fluctuations
\citep{2016A&A...594A..13P}. Finally, thanks to the large effort on spectroscopic follow-up of both Type Ia and core collapse
supernovae, these data will serve as training samples for
classification of future and ongoing surveys continuing to hold legacy
value for future deeper surveys, even after the completion of ZTF.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{hist_z_cosmo_Ia_salt2_all.pdf}
\caption{Redshift distribution of the 2000 expected SN~Ia cosmology spectroscopic sample, where the upper redshift limit $z=0.1$ is chosen to mitigate the impact from Malmquist bias. Only supernovae discovered >10 days prior to lightcurve maximum are included.}
\label{fig:SNIaz}
\end{figure}
The measured redshift of galaxies is given by the combined effects of
cosmological expansion and the peculiar motion induced by the
surrounding gravitational potential. The Type Ia supernovae detected
by ZTF fall into a key distance range where the standardized
luminosity can be used to determine the cosmological distance without
significant dependence on cosmological parameters, while the volume of
the universe is sufficient to produce large samples of supernovae
every year. Such a large sample can then be used to constrain the
correlations between the peculiar velocities in order to study the
structure of the local universe. To first order, this can be done by
measuring the large mode of correlation, a velocity dipole or bulk
flow, which can test whether the nearby distribution of galaxies and
clusters matches our expectation
(e.g.,\ \citealt{2013A&A...560A..90F}). Additionally, the correlation
across all scales can also be used to directly measure the local
growth factor of structure more precisely than has been done before
(e.g.,\ \citealt{2017MNRAS.471.3135H}). This will directly test recent
claims of deviations between the measured structure of the nearby
Universe and the $\Lambda$CDM predictions derived from the {\em
Planck} CMB map \citep{2017MNRAS.465.1454H, 2017MNRAS.471.4412K}. The
ZTF SN Ia peculiar velocity sample will populate the northern
hemisphere in a way that current and future \citep[e.g., TAIPAN and
WALLABY,][]{2017PASA...34...47D} southern galaxy peculiar velocity
samples do not. The much more precise distances derived from SNe mean
that the few thousand ZTF SNe would provide similar statistical
constraints as the many times larger galaxy
samples \citep{2014MNRAS.445.4267K,2017ApJ...847..128H}. More
importantly, the small SN Ia intrinsic dispersion fraction of distance
estimate errors means that the potential for systematic uncertainties
is much reduced \citep{2013MNRAS.432L..90B, 2013A&A...560A..66R,
2018arXiv180101834N}. A further key advantage of the ZTF SN peculiar
velocity sample will be the small and well understood Malmquist bias.
\section{Cosmology with gravitationally lensed supernovae}
One of the foundations of Einstein's theory of General Relativity is that matter curves the
surrounding spacetime. For the rare cases of nearly perfect alignment between an astronomical
source, an intervening massive object, and the observer, multiple images of a single source can
be seen by the observer, a phenomenon known as strong gravitational lensing.
Gravitationally lensed supernovae (gLSNe), and in particular lensed SNe~Ia, have the potential to directly constrain the expansion rate of the universe through the time delay between images \citep{1964MNRAS.128..307R} due to their well-known light curve shapes.
Time-delay measurements can also
provide powerful leverage for the studies of dark energy in complementary ways to those from
standard supernova cosmology, BAO, CMB and weak lensing \citep{2011PhRvD..84l3529L}.
Although many strongly lensed galaxies and quasars have been detected to date, finding this special configuration for supernovae has proved extremely difficult: only two multiply-imaged supernovae have been discovered to date \citep{2017Sci...356..291G, 2016ApJ...831..205K}.
Recently we have overcome these discovery challenges through a novel method to discern gLSNe~Ia in wide-field optical surveys \citep{2017ApJ...834L...5G}. We consider the strong gravitational lensing of SNe~Ia by quiescent (E/S0) galaxies, which have three properties that are useful to identify strongly lensed SNe~Ia. First, normal SNe~Ia are the brightest type of supernovae that have ever been observed to occur in quiescent galaxies. Second, the absolute magnitudes of normal SNe~Ia in quiescent galaxies are remarkably homogeneous, even without correcting for their colors or light curve shapes. Finally, due to the sharp 4000 angstrom break in their spectra, quiescent galaxies tend to provide accurate photometric redshifts from large-scale multi-color galaxy surveys such as the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, DECaLS and in the future LSST. A high-cadence, wide-field imaging survey can leverage these facts to systematically search for strongly lensed SNe~Ia in the following way. Given the photometric redshift, compute the absolute brightness of the SN in the quiescent galaxy and if it is brighter than the normal population of SNe~Ia which should occur there, it is likely a background SN Ia being lensed by the quiescent galaxy. This method has been refined even further to include not only the brightness of the supernova, but the shape of the light curve given the photometric redshift \citep{2018ApJ...855...22G}.
An important property of this search technique is that it does not require the ability to resolve the lensed images to perform discovery. Once lensed SN Ia candidates are identified, they can be confirmed using high-resolution imaging, e.g., Laser Guide Star Adaptive Optics or
space-based imaging such as {\em HST} or, in the future, by the James Webb Space Telescope (\textit{JWST})
and the Wide Field Infrared Space Telescope (\textit{WFIRST}).
Given the nominal ZTF survey design coupled with stacking the proprietary data over a ten-day baseline, the detailed Monte Carlo simulations of \cite{2018arXiv180910147G} show that we would find $\sim$8.6 gLSNe (of all types) per year, of which approximately 1.2 are Type Ia, 2.8 are Type IIP, 0.3 are Type IIL, 0.4 are Type Ib/c, 0.2 are SN 1991T-like, and at least 3.8 are Type IIn, consistent with the calculations of \cite{2011PASP..123...58T} for gLSNe Ia in the ATLAS survey.
Some examples of these simulated systems are shown in Figure \ref{fig:glsne}.
These lens systems comprise both doubles and quad systems (like iPTF16geu; \citealt{2017Sci...356..291G}) in a ratio of 2:1 due to the nature of the discovery mechanism.
The discovered gLSNe have a median $z_s=0.8$, $z_l=0.35$, $\mu_\mathrm{tot}=30$, $\Delta t_\mathrm{max}= 10$ days, $\min(\theta)= 0.25^{\prime\prime}$, and $N_\mathrm{img} = 4$.
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{ztf-crop.pdf}
\caption{Noiseless $6^{\prime\prime}\times6^{\prime\prime}$ composite $gri$ images of 6 simulated gLSNe, their lens galaxies, and their lensed host galaxies, ``detected'' by ZTF in the simulations of \cite{2018arXiv180910147G}.
Each image is ``taken'' exactly one night after the transient is detected as a gLSN candidate based on a light curve fit to the simulated ZTF data.
The FWHM of the seeing on the images is $0.1^{\prime\prime}$, and the pixel scale is $0.04^{\prime\prime}$, identical to that of the UVIS channel of the Wide Field Camera 3 (WFC3) on \textit{HST}.
}
\label{fig:glsne}
\end{figure}
\section{AGN and TDEs}
Whilst searches for supernovae and similar explosive phenomena tend to avoid the cores of resolvable galaxies and nuclear-dominated sources, these are the sites of a variety of astrophysical phenomena that relate to the physics of accretion disks and interactions with (super)massive black holes.
\subsection{Tidal disruption events}
A class of transients associated with the nuclei of galaxies is tidal disruption events. A TDE occurs when a star wanders close enough to a central massive black hole (MBH) to be shredded apart by tidal forces \citep{Lidskii1979, Rees1988}. A luminous flare is observable when this distance of approach, the tidal disruption radius, is outside the event horizon of the MBH. These events are rare, with a volumetric rate a factor of 100 smaller than for SNe, with a per galaxy event rate of only $10^{-4}$ yr$^{-1}$ \citep{Velzen2018}. The rise-time of a TDE is of particular importance, since it scales as $M_{\rm BH}^{1/2}$ \citep{Lodato2009, Guillochon2013}, and can be used as a probe for dormant MBHs otherwise unobservable in distant galaxies. However, there are only about a dozen TDEs with well-sampled light curves in the literature (see review by \citep{Hung2017}), and only a few with pre-peak light curves. After peak, the bolometric luminosity is expected to follow the fallback rate of the bound stellar debris, which declines as a t$^{-5/3}$ power-law \citep{Rees1988, Phinney1989,Evans1989}.
From a systematic study of nuclear transients from iPTF, we expect a yield of $4^{+5}_{-3}$ TDEs per month in the ZTF public Northern Sky Survey \citep{Hung2018} (see Figure \ref{FigTDEs}). Of these TDEs, we expect $\sim 20\%$ to have peak magnitudes $< 19$ mag, bright enough for classification with SEDM, and discovered on the rise to peak. The selection of TDE candidates will greatly benefit from the $g-r$ color measured by ZTF with $g$ and $r$ observations on the same night, and the measurement of the relative offset of the transient to the host galaxy in the reference image. TDEs are bluer and have less color evolution than SNe \citep{Velzen2011, Hung2018}, and the majority of AGN can be removed from catalog matches and previous variability history. Spectroscopic follow-up and UV and X-ray follow-up imaging will be used for classification purposes. TDEs are characterized by broad helium and/or hydrogen emission lines, a blue, UV-bright continuum, and soft X-ray emission. A large sample of well-sampled $g$ and $r$ TDE light curves from ZTF, in particular those with a pre-peak discovery, will be critical for mapping the properties of the TDEs to their host galaxy properties and central black hole demographics.
\begin{figure}
\vspace{0cm}
\hspace*{-1cm}\includegraphics[width=12.5cm]{FigTDEs_v3.pdf}
\vspace{-2cm}
\caption{Cumulative discovery rate of tidal disruption events as a function of time, with the onset of new surveys labeled. Note the dramatic predicted jump in discovery rate from $\sim 2$ TDEs per year, to $\sim 10$ bright, early TDE discoveries by ZTF with SEDM spectroscopic classification per year.}
\label{FigTDEs}
\end{figure}
The rate of TDEs depends on the rate at which stars are scattered into the ``loss cone'' of the MBH, the region of phase space for which a star's orbit passes within the tidal disruption radius, and is a sensitive probe of the nuclear stellar structure of galaxies \citep{StonevanVelzen2016}. The TDE rate can also be an important probe of MBH demographics, with a potential dependence on the mass of the MBH \citep{Wang2004}, the presence of a binary MBH \citep{Chen2011} or recoiling coalesced MBH \citep{Stone2011}, and the MBH occupation fraction \citep{StoneMetzger2016}. With a statistically significant sample of TDEs from ZTF, we can measure the rates of TDEs as a function of black hole mass and host galaxy type, and look for these theoretically predicted dependencies.
\subsection{Active galactic nuclei}
Variability is a ubiquitous property of unobscured active galactic nuclei. In particular, \citet{Sesar2007} showed that $> 90\%$ of type 1 quasars showed optical variability above a level of 2\% in the 290 deg$^{2}$ SDSS Stripe 82 survey on a timescale of several years. Scaling up to the area of the ZTF public survey, which has a comparable depth of $r \sim 20.5$ mag, we should detect $\sim$ half a million variable AGN. About 1 in 10,000 of these fall into the category of extreme variable AGN \citep{Graham2017} showing significant flaring activity over months to years or other distinct patterns of variability. These may be related to stellar phenomena in the accretion disk or gravitational microlensing.
With its large survey volume, ZTF will also have the capability to catch AGN in the act of ``changing look'' from a narrow-line (type 2) to a broad-line (type 1) spectrum \citep{Shappee2014, LaMassa2015} and vice versa. With iPTF, we were able to use the detection of a nuclear transient in an SDSS LINER galaxy to trigger follow-up optical spectroscopy and \textsl{Swift} UV and X-ray imaging to reveal that the galaxy had transformed into a broad-line quasar in $< 1$ yr \citep{Gezari2017}. The rate of changing-look AGN (CLAGN) is not yet well constrained; however, from a pilot study of spectroscopic follow-up of nuclear transients in iPTF from type 2 AGN, we expect $\sim 10$ per year with ZTF. Constraining the turn-on/turnoff timescale for CLAGN is important for constraining the mechanism responsible for their spectral transformation.
One of the challenges in detecting these types of events is that the detection timescale from difference imaging can be several months into the phenomenon -- the day-to-day variability is gradual and so it takes quite some time before the change has become significant enough relative to a reference image to be detected. Fortunately, decade baseline archives of AGN variability over most of the sky are now available, e.g., CRTS \citep{Drake2009}, PTF \citep{Law:09:PTFOverview}, and ATLAS \citep{Tonry2018}, so that the historical behavior of the sources ZTF will see can be characterized and modeled, although the optimal way to combine data from multiple surveys to maximize the information content still needs to be determined. The expected variability can then be predicted, either for a given night or over a particular timeframe, and compared with what is observed. In this way, significant changes from the forecast variability can be identified more quickly and earlier follow-up of the activity, be it changing-look, flaring or something else, triggered. Our models suggest that we can track $\sim 50$ AGN per year in this manner, giving valuable insights into accretion disk mechanics.
\section{Stellar variability}
Variable stars show up in very different flavors ranging from ultra-short period objects like pulsating white dwarfs or ultracompact binaries with periods as short as minutes up to objects with periods of months to years like Cepheid or Mira variables. Over the last two decades many surveys have increased our knowledge in variable stars significantly. These surveys include the Optical Gravitational Lensing Experiment (OGLE; e.g. \citealt{sos15}), CRTS \citep{Drake2009}, PTF \citep{Law:09:PTFOverview}, the Vista Variables in the Via Lactea (VVV; \citealt{saito12}), ASAS-SN, \citep{Shappee2014}) and most recently ATLAS \citep{2018arXiv180402132H}.
In the transient sky we expect phenomena including: outbursts of young stellar objects, M-star flares, and Nova/dwarf nova eruptions. Archival light curves will allow us to study pulsating and rotating stars as well as compact binaries. Down to a limiting magnitude of 20.5 -- 21 with a median FWHM of $\approx2$arcsec, ZTF will provide one of the best data sets for time-domain astronomy in the Northern hemisphere at low Galactic latitudes, with a median of about $\approx$150 epochs per year at a cadence of minutes to days.
The paradigm of star formation now explicitly includes the concept of episodic accretion. Stars are thought to accumulate some fraction of their mass in the initial spherical infall stage, some fraction during early-stage disk accretion that is punctuated by periods of elevated accretion, and finally the last remaining few to 10\% of their final mass during the optically visible stage of pre-main sequence evolution, which is characterized by mostly low disk accretion rates but also by infrequent bursts. Among the bursts, the most extreme type, called FU Ori events, last decades to perhaps centuries, and involve a thermal or a (gravo-) magneto-rotational instability in the inner $\sim$1 AU of the disk. Bursts with smaller amplitude and shorter duration (months to year-long), called EX Lup type events, may be related to instabilities associated with the interaction region between the disk and the stellar magnetosphere. Outside of the bursts, during routine low-state accretion phases, young star photometric variability occurs with amplitudes between about 2-20\% and on time scales of 1-2 days, with quite diverse light curve shapes. Recent space-based work with CoRoT, MOST, and K2 have illuminated heterogeneity, but also the patterns, characterizing the low-state accretion in young stars. However, the discovery and study of the more rare EX Lup and FU Ori events, including secure determination of their occurrence rates, remains the domain of wide-field, moderate-cadence, long duration photometric surveys like ZTF.
(Ultra)compact binaries are a rare class of binary systems with periods below a few hours (detached or semi-detached), consisting of at least one compact object. The study of (ultra)compact binaries is important to our understanding of such diverse areas as supernova Type Ia progenitors and binary evolution, and they are predicted to be the strongest gravitational wave sources in the LISA band. Because (ultra)compact binaries show up in light curves with variations on timescales of the orbital period (e.g., due to eclipses or tidal deformation of the components), ZTF is well suited to identify (ultra)compact binaries in a homogeneous way. We expect that the majority of the periodic objects will be typical pulsating stars like Delta Scuti pulsators. The key will be to find the needle in the haystack and select the (ultra)compact systems from the bulk of pulsating stars. A combination of color-selection, proper motions and distances will allow us to distinguish between the bulk of pulsators with potential (ultra)compact binaries, like double white dwarfs, cataclysmic variables (CVs) or hot subdwarf binaries. Among the most numerous CVs will be the large amplitude eruptions of the oldest, lowest mass transfer dwarf novae, allowing a study of the CV graveyard. The large number ($\approx$1000s) of expected (ultra)compact binaries discovered by ZTF will allow us to provide an empirical space density for different types of compact post-common envelope binaries in the Galaxy. The expected large sample will challenge common envelope and binary evolution theories (e.g., predicted vs. observed orbital period and component mass distributions).
Multicolor light curves of eclipsing binary stars allow us to study their stellar parameters in great detail. The duration, depth and shape of the eclipses allows us to determine the relative stellar radii and temperature ratio. We will systematically search the ZTF light curves for eclipsing systems, and use the ZTF $g$, $r$, and $i$ light curves, combined with colors and distances, to determine the system parameters of all eclipsing binaries observed by ZTF. The size of the sample allows us to systematically study the populations of different binary stars. Specifically, we can measure the space density and properties of binary systems that experienced stable or unstable mass transfer. The eclipsing binary sample should also contain rare eclipsing systems. Examples are EL CVn binary stars, eclipsing brown dwarfs, and eclipsing WD systems. In addition, ZTF data also allows us to detect or set an upper limit to the rate of planets around white dwarfs \citep{Agol2011} and large planets around M-dwarf stars \citep[e.g.][]{Bayliss2018}.
Be stars are extreme rotating main-sequence objects that at least once show $H\alpha$ emission line in the spectrum. Moreover, they are also known as photometric variables. In a sample of 289 Be stars, \citet{hubert1998} reported that nearly half of them show some photometric variability and, based on the Hipparcos catalog \citep{1997ESASP1200.....E}, an almost entire sample of early Be stars are variables. A diversity of variability can be found among the Be stars, including non-radial pulsation, intermediate periodicity, long-term variation, semi-regular outburst and outburst variation \citep{2017AJ....153..252L}. The origin of these variabilities, or so-called the Be phenomenon, remains elusive. One possible mechanism is the instability of the accretion disk \citep{rivinius2013}. However, the main challenge in the Be phenomenon is their wide variety of variabilities which required high cadence sampling rate with monitoring over years. Therefore, most studies of Be phenomenon are on the bright end ($r < 13.5$~mag). Given its combination of ultra wide-field, high cadence and multi-year observations, ZTF provides an opportunity to investigate the Be phenomenon for faint Be stars ($r > 13.5$~mag), especially those found by IPHAS \citep{2015MNRAS.446..274R}, as well as the recent Be candidates selected by PTF \citep{Yu2018} and LAMOST \citep{2015RAA....15.1325L}.
\section{Small Solar System bodies}
Small Solar System bodies are remnants of the formation stage of the Solar System. They encompass all comets and asteroids, Trojans, Centaurs, near-Earth objects (NEOs) and trans-Neptunian objects. Studies of small bodies contribute to the understanding of several fundamental questions in planetary science, such as the composition of the proto-planetary disk, the evolutionary history of the Solar System, as well as the transportation and distribution of water and organic materials in the Solar System. Time domain studies of small bodies include their discovery, behavior monitoring, and the detection and rapid follow-up of transient events. The advent of all-sky surveys such as Pan-STARRS, the Catalina Sky Survey, LINEAR, and NEAT have resulted in more small body discoveries at increasingly larger distances from the Sun \citep{Galache2015, Meech2017}. Among current surveys (c.f. \citep{Jedicke2015}), the Zwicky Transient Facility will provide a combination of broad and fast coverage. It will also serve as a precursor to small body observation with LSST \citep{Schwamb2018}, testing the piggyback mode of NEO discovery and operations of mini-surveys.
\subsection{Discovery}
Survey and discovery of NEOs is the critical first step for hazard assessment as well as scientific research. The cumulative efforts of the past few decades have discovered $>95\%$ of kilometer-sized NEOs; however, it is estimated that the coverage of smaller NEOs is less than $10\%$ complete below 200 meters and less than $2\%$ complete below 100 meters \citep[e.g.][]{2015aste.book..795J}. Events like the 2013 Chelyabinsk impact \citep{2013Natur.503..238B} clearly demonstrated the hazard posed by small asteroids. Such asteroids are typically faint and only become visible when they approach the Earth, at which time the ``trailing loss'' effect begins to occur \citep[e.g.][]{2015Icar..257..302H}. The trailing loss presents a challenge for conventional moving object detection algorithms which are tuned to detect point-like sources. For a typical NEO geocentric velocity of 20~km s$^{-1}$, a survey resolution of 1~arcsec, and an exposure time of 30~s, the geocentric distance that trailing loss starts to become significant is about 0.1~AU.
Part of the ZTF NEO discovery effort will be built on the exploratory research done by \citet{2017PASP..129c4402W}, who developed and optimized a pipeline for the detection of trailed NEOs in real-time PTF images. This pipeline is being optimized to enable effective real-time detection of trailed NEOs in ZTF images. ZTF has also deployed a pipeline dedicated to the detection of point-like moving objects \citep{2017PASP..129a4002M} in order to cover the non-trailed moving objects.
The ZTF NEO discovery effort is mainly piggybacked to other surveys, with the exception of the Twilight Survey, a mini-survey that is designed to repeatedly survey the regions with small solar elongation. The goal is to explore interesting phenomena that happen inside the Earth's orbit, including various Sun-approaching comets \citep[e.g.][]{2010AJ....139..926K, 2014ApJ...796...83Y, 2015ApJ...813...73H}; the asteroid population that is predicted to be thermally disrupted \citep{2016Natur.530..303G}; the poorly understood population of Earth Trojans and temporarily-captured natural satellites \citep{Connors2011,Bolin2014}, and NEOs approaching the Earth from the direction of the Sun like the Chelyabinsk event .
All astrometric measurements of trailed and non-trailed moving objects will be submitted to the Minor Planet Center (MPC) in the new Astrometry Data Exchange Standard (ADES) format\footnote{\url{https://minorplanetcenter.net/iau/info/ADES.html}}. The MPC will serve as the liaison for international follow-up observers. ZTF will use its self-follow-up mode on the P48 system to confirm both ZTF-discovered NEOs and to participate in clearing the MPC's NEO Confirmation Page.
\subsection{Characterization}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=\columnwidth]{comet_transmission.pdf}
\caption{Using filter imaging ZTF will be able to monitor the gas and dust content of cometary comae. Here we show the transmission of the ZTF $g$ (green, left), $r$ (red, center), and $i$ (purple, right) filters, superimposed on the spectrum of gas-rich comet 122P/De Vico \citep{Cochran2002}. The $g$ filter contains the emission of C$_2$ molecules, whereas the other filters are mostly free of cometary emission lines. The signal in the $r$ and $i$ filters will come mostly from sunlight reflected by dust surrounding the nucleus.}
\label{CometSpectrum}
\end{figure}
Cometary activity varies with heliocentric distance. Upon approach to the sun, the temperature of the surface and immediate subsurface is raised, causing ices to sublimate, depending on their proximity to the surface and composition \citep{Meech2004, Prialnik2004}. Therefore, a comet's coma may change composition as it orbits the sun. In addition, the seasonal context of the nucleus affects which surface areas receive sunlight, and provides another means for coma variability. Variations of coma brightness (i.e., activity) and color (i.e., composition) thus provides a means of exploring heterogeneities of comet nuclei. We predict that ZTF can detect at least 30 comets per night (V < 21), and many of those comets will be observable for periods longer than a year. Depending on sky conditions, comet brightness, and background, we anticipate a photometric accuracy of 0.1 mag.
Our photometry methods allow us to use ZTF to systematically produce accurate comet light curves. As is shown in Fig.~\ref{CometSpectrum}, images acquired in different filters can be used as a diagnostic of the comet's dust-to-gas ratio over time; the $g$ filter contains bright emission lines of C$_2$ molecules, whereas the $r$ and $i$ bandpasses are mostly free of cometary emission features and thus sample sunlight reflected by dust in the coma.
Asteroid light curves can be used to measure several fundamental properties for asteroids, such as shape, spin status and taxonomy. The statistics of asteroid rotations can help to understand how their evolution is affected by mutual collisions, gravitational perturbations of planets, and the YORP effect. Phase functions can be used to determine asteroid taxonomy. Combining rotation period and taxonomy, we are also able to study the spin-rate limits for different type asteroids, which is a proxy of asteroid bulk density \citep{Chang2015}. We expect to collect $\sim$100,000 asteroid light curves per year from which we will be able to derive rotation periods and phase functions.
Most asteroids are gravitationally bounded aggregations (`rubble-piles'). It is thought that rubble-pile asteroids cannot have rotation periods less than a critical limit, (i.e., the 2.2-hr spin-rate limit \citep{Harris1996}) or they will disintegrate. However, it has been found that a small number of asteroids have rotation periods shorter than this limit, implying that they may have different structure from the average asteroid. PTF has discovered 3 of the 6 super-fast rotators (SFRs) known to date \citep[][and the references therein]{Chang2017,Waszczak2015}. However, the detection rate is still too low to place a meaningful constraint to the SFR population. With its large sky coverage, ZTF can improve our knowledge to the SFR population.
The binarity of asteroids probes the Solar System collisional evolution
\citep[e.g.][]{Pravec2010} and measures the dynamical mass of asteroids.
A possible method for searching for binary asteroids and measuring their mass
is via looking for astrometric variations from a pure Keplerian orbit.
This method is currently being tested on PTF data (Polishook \& Ofek, in prep.).
Given the large number of asteroid images we expect to acquire with ZTF,
this simple method may enable us to find most binary asteroids (and Kuiper Belt Objects) in
the Solar System.
\subsection{Transient Events}
The systematic, high-cadence monitoring of small Solar System bodies will provide a baseline that allows ZTF to find transient events such as cometary outbursts and fragmentation events \citep{Ye2015,Ishiguro2016}, collisions between asteroids \citep{Snodgrass2010, Bodewits2011}, unexpected or irregular activity in asteroids \citep{Jewitt2012, Waszczak2013, 2017AJ....153..207Y} and Centaurs \citep{Jewitt2009}. The cadence of the ZTF observations will allow us to evaluate the frequency of these events. The early discovery of such transient events enables rapid follow-up observations which are critical for the characterization of these events, because the ejected material quickly sublimates or dissipates away.
\section{Astroinformatics \& Astrostatistics}
ZTF is well positioned to enable the fields of astroinformatics and astrostatistics make significant strides through the development and testing of novel computational and statistical methodologies related to large data sets.
These new algorithms and techniques will not only be useful for analyzing ZTF data, but will also provide a ready-to-use analysis toolkit for data from future surveys like LSST. Indeed, the anticipation of ZTF data has already led to the development of new data-processing pipelines by {\it IPAC} \citep{tmp_Masci:18:ZTFDataSystem} and the implementation of the Kafka system \citep{tmp_Patterson:18:ZTFAlertDistribution}.
ZTF data will necessitate new statistical methodologies and machine learning algorithms specifically designed for astronomy and astrophysics. In particular, methods for time series analysis and populations studies that allow testing and comparison of physical models are needed. Additionally, reliable classification algorithms will be needed to properly perform scientific inference. Finally, model comparisons using modern statistical methods will be fundamental in ruling out physical models in light of complex ZTF data.
As large data sets from projects such as ATLAS, ASAS-SN, CRTS, Gaia, JWST, LSST, Pan-STARSS, etc. continue to become available into the 2020s and 2030s, there will be a demand for statistical and computational methodologies which not only handle large amounts of data but also extract the most information possible. ZTF is unique in that, combined with its follow-up network, it will provide one of the first opportunities to develop and test methods for large datasets that have significant temporal information.
\subsection{Population Studies}
ZTF will discover many faint and fast-evolving transients, allowing a search for subpopulations and tests of proposed physical mechanisms behind these phenomena (Section~\ref{sec:SESN}). ZTF will also provide us with an unbiased and complete sample of SNe Ia within $z<0.1$, which in turn will allow us to investigate the effects of host environments (Section~\ref{sec:SNIa}). In both of these cases, studying the population of light curve data is key to identifying patterns and subpopulations. Thus, modern cluster-finding algorithms for time series data are needed to analyze the light curves of these transients.
Methods for time series clustering exist in other research areas such as statistics, finance, medicine, and economics, but not all of these new methods have made it to astronomy \citep[for a review of time series clustering methods, see][]{TSclustering2015}. Recurring challenges for time series clustering methods include how to deal with missing data and the reliance on mathematical distance measures. Recently, new methods have been proposed that overcome these challenges \citep[e.g.][]{Wang2006} and these could be useful for the analysis of ZTF light curve population studies. At the same time, astronomical time series of transient sources bring new challenges to the table--- for example, uncertainties in distance to the source and how to account for reddening due to dust.
The curve data sets of specific populations (such as SE~SNe and SNe~Ia) will present an opportunity for astroinformatics and astrostatistics to bring in methods from other research areas to make discoveries, and to build upon and tailor these techniques for astronomy.
\subsection{Classification}
Classification of one form or another will lie at the heart of solving many of the ZTF science cases. The sheer number of sources and alerts from ZTF will necessitate reliable classification tasks with little human intervention. Over the past twenty years or so, the proliferation of algorithms in the field now called machine learning has led to the creation of a powerful toolbox of methods that can perform classification in a large variety of different contexts. The challenge here lies in the structure of both the problems to be addressed and the data itself.
In some instances, correctly predicting the source or alert type may be all that is required, but the ultimate goal of most classification tasks in the context of ZTF is scientific inference. For example, when classes of sources are identified with the goal of performing the population studies mentioned above, biases within the classified data set must be carefully assessed and propagated through to the inference stage. Achieving the latter is not always straightforward with many of the newer deep learning methods, although recent developments related to (local) interpretability \citep[e.g.][]{ribeiro2016should,2016arXiv160605685K} and probabilistic machine learning \citep[e.g.][]{tran2016edward,ghahramani2015probabilistic} may be able to either shed light on these biases or incorporate them directly into the subsequent modelling tasks.
In contrast to data sources often considered in machine learning contexts, the data derived from the ZTF survey will be very heterogeneous, unevenly sampled, and subject to occasionally catastrophic outliers. Moreover, the data will include variable uncertainties. Recent work shows a range of different approaches for dealing with such issues. Promising results are found through methods such as recurrent neural networks \citep{naul2018recurrent}, convolutional neural networks trained on two-dimensional representations of light curves \citep{2017arXiv170906257M}, and the use of deep neural networks for phenomenological discovery of variable star classes \citep{2018arXiv180402132H}.
The peculiarities of the ZTF data --- combined with the requirement to classify sources and subsequently perform inference --- implies that standard techniques may not deliver the performance necessary to answer the scientific questions in this paper.
However, these constraints also present an opportunity to develop new classification methods that can be carried forward to future surveys that share the same challenges.
In addition to the real-bogus separation covered in \citet{tmp_Mahabal:18:ZTFMachineLearning},
we identify three objectives for classification with ZTF data: classification for follow-up, classification for scientific inference, and finding the unexpected. Each objective presents its own challenges. Below, we show where recent research from other domains could be usefully applied to ZTF data or where new methods must be developed to overcome these challenges.
With a projected one million alerts per night, ZTF will produce a large number of transients. Because observing time is scarce and expensive, there is significant impetus to optimize which sources should be followed up with other facilities, and how soon they should be observed in order to maximize scientific output. Any algorithm must be capable of dealing with a continuously changing data set on top of the heterogeneity mentioned above, and be able to update predictions almost on-the-fly, for example as part of an alert brokering system \citep[e.g. ANTARES:][]{narayan2018machine}. There are a wealth of methods related to Active Learning (i.e. learning with feedback; \citealt{2018arXiv180403765I,8285192,7929964,7372134}) and Online Learning (i.e. learning from evolving data streams; \citealt{aggarwal2007data,Nguyen2015}) that can be tested with ZTF in order to both enable follow-up studies as well as prepare for future surveys.
These approaches may be combined with other techniques \citep[e.g. probabilistic forecasting techniques, see][for an example]{kuznetsov2015learning} in order to estimate when a future follow-up observation should be taken. Only by optimizing the information gathered about the source can competing models be rigorously tested. Owing to the data volume, methods deployed on clusters, GPUs, and other multi-processing hardware will find increasing use (e.g. \cite{2015arXiv151202831G,8285225}).
As mentioned above, many science cases rely heavily on identifying a complete subset of the relevant source type (e.g. for SN Ia cosmology, see also Section \ref{sec:SNIa}). A key challenge in identifying a complete subset with machine learning is the dearth of complete, applicable training data sets for which the truth is known. One option is to simulate data sets for a given instrument, but the correctness of the derived prediction depends crucially on the assumption that the simulated training data matches the real test data exactly. Many algorithms, especially more modern deep learning frameworks, tend to be extremely vulnerable to mismatches between training and test data \citep[e.g.][]{evtimov2017robust}. Recent advances in the field of transfer learning may make it possible to use training data sets generated with other surveys and use the information in them to generate accurate classifications for ZTF sources \citep{aswolinskiy2017unsupervised,2017arXiv170607446G}.
In addition, the field of probabilistic machine learning has recently received much attention from within the computer science community. Different domains have seen an emergence of time series methods within a probabilistic framework, within machine learning (e.g. to model motion capture data \citep{2018arXiv180206765A}, housing prices \citep{2017arXiv170709380G} or homelessness \citep{ren2017}). These methods align well with the science goals of ZTF, and will allow for direct propagation of uncertainties and biases into the resulting astronomical inferences.
However, even with transfer learning, there might not exist a complete, unbiased training data set for ZTF, in which case unsupervised methods (see below) may present a better solution.
Serendipity has traditionally been a strong component of astronomical discovery, especially when the instrument in question opens up a new part of parameter space. In addition, some science cases have no strong prior on the number or types of classes. Much of the work within the machine learning community has focused on supervised machine learning. However, finding the unknown with traditional supervised methods is exceedingly difficult. Here, new approaches to unsupervised machine learning may help us discover unknown transients and new source classes. In particular, the recent development of methods for the classification of sparse, irregularly sampled time series based on Gaussian Processes \citep[e.g.][]{li2016scalable,ghassemi2015multivariate}, deep learning \citep[e.g.][]{lipton2016directly,che2018recurrent} and time series clustering have shown promise across multiple domains.
\section{Summary}
In this paper we have summarized the main science drivers that led to the
Zwicky Transient Facility (ZTF) consisting of a 47\,deg$^2$ imager on the Palomar 1.2-m Oschin (Schmidt) telescope and a low resolution spectrometer (the Spectral Energy Distribution Machine or SEDM) on the Palomar 60-inch telescope. From cometary outbursts and asteroid collisions to infant SNe and failed GRB jets, from Be stars and ultracompact binaries to interactions with (supermassive) black holes, populations of transient and variable astrophysical sources can now be studied in great detail. Although comprehensive, this list is not exhaustive and the ZTF public alert stream offers the community ample opportunity to make their own discoveries.
The rates of potential discoveries -- supernovae and asteroids every night, a changing-look AGN every week, a TDE every month, a gravitationally-lensed SN every quarter, and maybe a few unexpected transients a year -- with each easily followed-up spectroscopically by a 5--10 m class telescope (and smaller for photometry) take us into the new territory of deciding each night what the most interesting sources currently are and whether the previous night's sources still merit continued attention. This problem will become acute once even more powerful facilities come online, in particular, LSST. Even with our considerable follow up resources we are not in a position to follow {\it all} transients identified with ZTF. We call this problem the conundrum of abundance.
To start with abundance is good, particularly for astronomy that depends primarily on
photometric data. For instance, consider the search for rare types of variable stars (e.g.,
double degenerates with very short periods). The larger the data set, the higher the chance
of discovery. Large data sets also allow the extraction of huge samples of ordinary phenomena
(e.g., RR Lyrae stars) and large samples could lead to identification of finer sub-classes.
The conundrum of abundance is a problem for transient object science in which follow-up
is needed.\footnote{For well behaved transients such as Type Ia, a purely photometric
approach using photometric redshifts for host galaxies is certainly feasible.} A million alerts per night ensures that the sky is always saturated
with follow-up targets (from NEOs to TDEs), enabling us to select and focus on the ones most likely to yield the highest value results (depending on a group's area of interest).
The solution is to sharply define science
programs that can be undertaken with existing facilities. This would mean
designing filters that efficiently find desired transients whilst suppressing
false positives. In fact, in this respect, we have already achieved good performance in the area of SLSNe, TDEs and relativistic transients. Bright transients will
always remain interesting. Given the success of the SEDM we advocate similar
low resolution spectrographs for 2-m class telescopes.
Finally, the night sky is finite in extent and with multiple facilities scanning the same regions every night, there is clearly scope for synergies to optimize scientific discovery. A key component of this has to be adequate community infrastructure and coordination to support the real-time distribution, characterization, and classification of million of alerts per night from surveys (let alone followup observations of interesting sources), as well as systematic searches of archives of billions of time series. ZTF is clearly a pathfinder for some of this and coordinated efforts across surveys drawing on it will create the basis for LSST and other time domain surveys of the next decade and beyond.
\acknowledgments
Based on observations obtained with the Samuel Oschin 48-inch Telescope and the 60-inch Telescope at the Palomar Observatory as part of the Zwicky Transient Facility project, a scientific collaboration among the California Institute of Technology, the Oskar Klein Centre, the Weizmann Institute of Science, the University of Maryland, the University of Washington, Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron, the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee, and the TANGO Program of the University System of Taiwan. Further support is provided by the U.S.\ National Science Foundation under Grant No.\ AST-1440341.
J.~Sollerman acknowledges support from the Knut and Alice Wallenberg Foundation.
E.~Ofek is grateful for support by a grant from the Israeli Ministry of Science, ISF, Minerva, BSF, BSF transformative program, and the I-CORE Program of the Planning and Budgeting Committee and The Israel Science Foundation (grant No 1829/12).
A.~Gal-Yam is supported by the EU via ERC grant No. 725161, the Quantum Universe I-Core program, the ISF, the BSF Transformative program and by a Kimmel award.
S.~Gezari is supported in part by NSF CAREER grant 1454816 and NSF AAG grant 1616566.
C.-K.~Chang, W.-H.~Ip, C.-D.~Lee, Z.-Y.~Lin, C.-C.~Ngeow and P.-C.~Yu thank the funding from Ministry of Science and Technology (Taiwan) under grant 104-2923-M-008-004-MY5, 104-2112-M-008-014-MY3, 105-2112-M-008-002-MY3, 106-2811-M-008-081 and 106-2112-M-008-007.
M. Bulla and A. Goobar acknowledge support from the Swedish Research Council (Vetenskapsr\aa det) and the Swedish National Space Board.
E. Bellm, B. Bolin, A. Connolly, V. Z. Golkhou, D. Huppenkothen, Z. Ivezi\'{c}, L. Jones, M. Juric, and M. Patterson
acknowledge support from the University of Washington College of Arts and Sciences, Department of Astronomy, and the DIRAC Institute. University of Washington's DIRAC Institute is supported through generous gifts from the Charles and Lisa Simonyi Fund for Arts and Sciences, and the Washington Research Foundation. M.~Juric and A.~Connolly acknowledge the support of the Washington Research Foundation Data Science Term Chair fund, and the UW Provost's Initiative in Data-Intensive Discovery.
E. Bellm, A. Connolly, Z. Ivezi\'{c}, L. Jones, M. Juric, and M. Patterson
acknowledge support from the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope, which is supported in part by the National Science Foundation through
Cooperative Agreement 1258333 managed by the Association of Universities for Research in Astronomy
(AURA), and the Department of Energy under Contract No. DE-AC02-76SF00515 with the SLAC National
Accelerator Laboratory. Additional LSST funding comes from private donations, grants to universities,
and in-kind support from LSSTC Institutional Members.
B.T. Bolin acknowledges funding for the Asteroid Institute program provided by B612 Foundation, W.K. Bowes Jr. Foundation, P. Rawls Family Fund and two anonymous donors in addition to general support from the B612 Founding Circle.
M.T. Soumagnac acknowledges support by a grant from IMOS/ISA, the Ilan Ramon fellowship from the Israel Ministry of Science and Technology and the Benoziyo center for Astrophysics at the Weizmann Institute of Science.
A.A.\ Miller is funded by the Large Synoptic Survey Telescope Corporation in support of
the Data Science Fellowship Program.
J.~Bauer, T.~Farnham, and M.~Kelley gratefully acknowledge the NASA/University of Maryland/MPC Augmentation through the NASA Planetary Data System Cooperative Agreement NNX16AB16A.
M. M. Kasliwal and Q.-Z. Ye acknowledge support by the GROWTH (Global Relay of Observatories Watching Transients Happen) project funded by the National Science Foundation PIRE (Partnership in International Research and Education) program under Grant No 1545949.
A.~A.\ Mahabal acknowledges support from the following grants: NSF AST-1749235, NSF-1640818 and NASA 16-ADAP16-0232.
M. W. Coughlin is supported by the David and Ellen Lee Postdoctoral Fellowship at the California Institute of Technology.
S. Ghosh acknowledges the NSF Award PHY-1607585.
M. Rigault acknowledges funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement no. 759194 - USNAC).
\facilities{PO:1.2m, PO:1.5m}
\bibliographystyle{yahapj}
|
\section{Introduction}
As our knowledge of complex processes\rmed{(biological, engineering, physical)} increases, to conduct their work domain experts rely often on the use of \emph{models}, i.e., abstract representations of entities and relationships within a specific domain or process.
They have to manipulate these sometimes complex models for their daily work to reach insights, make decisions, and plan future projects.
For example, agronomic engineers who want to propose\rmed{precise, but} robust wheat fertilisation strategies to farmers, need to account for the wheat growth process and how it is affected by soil and weather conditions.
To do this, they manipulate existing wheat growth model
~\cite{brisson1998,jeuffroy1999}
that help them explore how, for example, a late fertilisation impacts wheat yield and quality, and whether the outcome changes depending on weather conditions.
\rmed{In the agronomy domain, a number of established wheat growth models exist that can enable this investigation(e.g.,~\cite{brisson1998,jeuffroy1999}). However, }
To effectively manipulate such models, domain experts currently face three key challenges pertaining to: the \emph{multiple competing objectives} experts have to handle, the \emph{complex exploration space} they need to navigate through, and the \emph{multiple expertise} required for model understanding.
First, \addf{domain} experts have to deal with \emph{trade-offs}. Their work often attempts to
reconcile multiple competing objectives in a single investigation~\cite{sedlmair2014}. For instance, agronomic engineers look for fertalisation strategies that on the one hand maximise yield, and on the other hand reduce the amount of supplied fertilisers, and the nitrogen loss\rmed{to the environment
~\cite{ravier2018,cui2010}.
Second, \addf{domain} experts often resort to model simulations to explore trade-offs
that
can
generate complex outcomes.
\rmed{However, the}
The results of such simulations are huge numerical data files which are \emph{difficult to explore} manually. Yet, finding robust
solutions cannot be done automatically, since resolving conflicts between multiple criteria necessitates subjective human judgement~\cite{sedlmair2014}. For example, agronomic engineers use their expertise to specify the acceptable threshold for wheat quality\rmed{(e.g., in terms of percentage of protein content)}, and how much delay farmers would tolerate before they can supply fertilisers.
Third, understanding the model intricacies is challenging, even for domain experts.
Such models are often written by third parties \addf{(modelling experts or other domain experts)},\rmed{ are complex,} and require extensive technical knowledge to understand
\rmed{Domain experts also have to \emph{align} their mental models of
the domain\rmed{domain},
with numerical model assumptions and predictions.}
This challenge can be amplified when \addf{domain} experts are only specialists in part of the underlying process.
For example,
one agronomic
engineer may be an expert in fertilisation strategies for\rmed{a local} one environment, but does not fully understand the impact of climate on other geographical regions.
Given the \emph{complexity} of \rmed{both}
the modelled process, the model intricacies and the exploration space, it is rare for a single \addf{domain} expert to \emph{fully} comprehend all those aspects in depth.
Previous work with domain experts from agronomy~\cite{boukhelifa2017interactive},
highlights the lack of accessible setups and visual support tools to manipulate complex models and trade-off spaces. This observation may well apply to other domains where complex data and model spaces are analysed~\cite{boukhelifa2017workers}\rmed{ by non-professional data scientists
~\cite{boukhelifa2017workers}}.\rmed{ In particular, there is need for
support tools to enable model-based investigation by multiple domain experts, without having to go through the steep learning curve of writing a model or fully understanding an existing one.}
\rmed{Our long term goal is to build such\rmed{ visual support} tools, but before doing that}
Before building such\rmed{ visual} support tools,
we need to \emph{understand how domain experts explore models, including their trade-off spaces}
We propose a simple setup for model exploration, and a user study that adopts it, in order to better understand how multiple domain experts explore complex models. Our user study is based on two model use-cases~\cite{mouret2015,jeuffroy1999}\rmed{, one for a wheat-crop model~\cite{jeuffroy1999}, and another for a wine fermentation model~\cite{mouret2015}}. Each use-case consists of two case studies of real scenarios explored by
experts.\rmed{The study focuses on how multiple experts perform trade-off analysis tasks during model exploration, and on the links between insights and expertise.}
Our method (\autoref{fig:method}) consists of first conducting a Multi-objective Optimisation (MO)
to reduce the model exploration space. This results in a multi-dimensional \emph{Pareto Front}, which is explored visually using a scatterplot matrix (SPLOM) and linked 2D views\rmed{presented}
on a shared interactive surface (\autoref{fig:study_setup}). In each use-case, we recruited participants with \addf{different
expertise}, covering the study domain\rmed{(biological processes)}, the numerical model, the simulation and optimisation, and the Pareto front visualization. Such a setup
ensures\rmed{was carried out to ensure}
that the various types of insights and expertise are aligned, and
facilitates
the validation of the findings from different perspectives~\cite{Chuang2012}.
We contribute: \rmed{The contributions of this paper are the following:}
(1) A simple setup that facilitates the visual exploration and validation of complex models by synchronising expertise from the study domain, modelling, optimisation and visualization.
(2) An observational study using the setup, that inspects the role of expertise in insight generation during model-exploration and trade-off analysis. \add{Our results revealed iterative analysis approaches with branching scenarios.}
\hrem{(2) An observational study using the setup, that inspects the role of expertise in insight generation during model-exploration and trade-off analysis, and that revealed different exploration strategies and multi-storyline approaches adopted by the experts. }
\add{We identified analysis scenarios where \addf{multiple types of} experts examine together new and refined research questions and hypotheses (\emph{new}, \emph{refine}, \emph{alternative}, \emph{compare}), and other scenarios where \addf{they} \hrem{experts} learn to appropriate the tool and setup (\emph{initial}), and attempt to recap and establish common ground (\emph{storytelling})}. And (3) design recommendations for \hrem{SPLOM-based trade-off analysis} \add{collaborative model exploration} systems.
\section{Related Work}
\add{The nature of sensemaking activities and the cognitive processes involved have been the subject of established work~\cite{pirolli2005,klein2007}, with recent studies focusing on how groups establish common ground~\cite{clark1991grounding,convertino2008,willett2011,gergle2013}, uncover hidden knowledge~\cite{convertino2009,goyal2016}, and engage with large analyses~\cite{feinberg2017,kery2018,passi2017,passi:2018,pine2015}. In terms of general sensemaking, the data-frame model \cite{klein2007} describes several key macrocogintive processes relevant to our own investigation, including connecting data to a frame (an explanation reflecting person's compiled experience), reframing, elaborating, questioning and comparing frames. The more recent work detail additional behavioural and analytical processes observed in collaborative settings.}
\add{Our work is orthogonal, focusing on the role of expertise.
\rmed{Research has looked at \emph{insight} and \emph{expertise} in relation to human performance and interactive systems. }\add{In terms of analysis methods, }our work is similar to ~\cite{guo2016} who performed an insight-based user study to understand how analysts reach insight during visual exploration.\rmed{ We contribute to this body of work a user study that examines the } Our focus, however, is on collaborative model exploration, in particular for trade-off analysis.
\subsection{Insight and Expertise}
Insight is considered the goal of visualization~\cite{card1999}. However, there is no consensus on the exact meaning of the term. North~\cite{north2006} focuses on the key \emph{characteristics} of insight, which are complexity, depth, quality, unexpectedness and relevance. \fix{In contrast, }Chang et al.~\cite{chang2009} distinguish spontaneous insight from the insight traditionally described in visualization, which they describe is about \emph{knowledge-building} and \emph{model-confirmation}, and where schematic structures, such as a mental model, are important to find patterns as well as to infer them. \fix{Furthermore,} Pousman et al.~\cite{pousman2007} explore the notion of multiple \emph{types} of insights for a broad range of user groups and describe analytic, awareness, social and reflective insights. Considering insight as a \emph{process} rather than the end result, Yi et al.~\cite{yi2008} describe four key processes of how people reach insight: provide overview, adjust, detect pattern, and match mental model.
\rmed{In cognitive sciences, the spontaneous nature of insight discovery, or the \emph{aha-moment}, is often emphasised~\cite{bowden2005}. Insight is described as \quotes{the process by which a problem solver suddenly moves from a state of not knowing how to solve a problem to a state of knowing how to solve it}~\cite{mai2004}.}
\rmed{Kunios et al.~\cite{kounios2014} describe other characteristics of insight such as the emotional response, and breaking from an impasse or a mental block. They stress that insight can be defined differently depending on which combination of features one selects.}
\rmed{Insightful problem solving and deliberate analytical reasoning may be associated with different patterns of (resting-state) brain activity~\cite{kounios2014}. }
We follow Saraiya et al.'s~\cite{saraiya2005insight} definition of insight as \quotes{an individual observation about the data by the participant, a unit of discovery}.\rmed{This type of insight is more analytical, according to Pousman's et al.~\cite{pousman2007}: \quotes{analytic insights come from exploratory analysis, extrapolation, and consist in the large or small eureka moments where a body of data comes into focus for a user}.} The insights discussed in this paper are the result of \emph{confronting} single or multiple expertise with data and model artefacts. In terms of key characteristics, similar to Kounios et al.~\cite{kounios2014}, we consider insight any deep realisation, whether it happens suddenly or not
Another type of knowledge that we are interested in in this study is \emph{expertise}. Expertise is broadly defined as highly-specialised domain-specific knowledge~\cite{chi2014nature}.
\rmed{For visualization and human-computer interaction, expertise relates to human performance in areas such as tasks analysis, learning and training, interface design, and cognitive modelling~\cite{farrington2006}.}
It can be in the form of \emph{tacit} knowledge, defined as knowledge that cannot be explicitly stated or transferred to other people~\cite{polanyi2009}; or it can be\rmed{There exists a different type of expertise,} more~\emph{declarative} or \emph{procedural}. This type of expertise can be articulated linguistically~\cite{farrington2006} and, thus, may be captured using think-aloud protocols, interviews and questionnaires.
Glaser and Chi~\cite{chi2014nature} describe key characteristics of experts across domains. For instance,
experts\rmed{ across domains}
typically take a long time analysing a problem qualitatively before attempting to solve it. During this \emph{incubation period}, they try to comprehend the situation, build a mental presentation of its core elements, and review the problem from different angles before attempting to implement a solution~\cite{paige1966,skovholt2004}.
We are interested in insight generation during \add{collaborative model exploration
and the role of explicit expertise in this context. We consider expertise \hrem{as }the background knowledge that allows domain experts to reach new and deeper insights from interacting with the model representation. \rmed{One can hypothesise that the more knowledge experts have in a
domain, the more insights they can potentially generate. However, Fisher et al.~\cite{fisher2016curse} found that~\quotes{expertise can increase confidence in the ability to explain a wide variety of phenomena}, leading to what is known in the literature as the \emph{curse of expertise}. This occurs when \quotes{more knowledge leads to mis-calibrated explanatory insight}. We aim to calibrate this phenomena by involving multiple experts in a single exploration sessions.}
\subsection{Model Exploration
Model exploration is an iterative process of discovery and refinement, which consists of examining the entities and relationships that underpin models. It can be carried out by the model builders themselves (\emph{model producers}), or by the problem owners who use such models to study a specific domain or process (\emph{model consumers}). The exploration can be manual, automatic or semi-automatic. Manual exploration consists of experimenting with different
input parameters and any constraints to launch model simulations.
Often this is a trial and error process~\cite{sedlmair2014}.
Automatic exploration relies on algorithms, such as from genetic or evolutionary computation, to systematically explore the model search space. Semi-automatic approaches take into account human feedback to steer the exploration.
The outcome of model exploration is often \emph{insight} that informs model design and implementation, or improves our understanding of the modelled phenomena.
\rmed{Most model simulation experiments
focus on\rmed{revolve around}
parameter space exploration~\cite{reuillon2013,sedlmair2014}, where the goal is to \emph{understand} the link between model input and output. Understanding the parameter space is important to \emph{test} and \emph{validate} model predictions against experts intuitions or a known ground-truth.
It ultimately enables users to \emph{steer} the
computational processes towards desirable areas of the search space~\cite{mulder1998}.}
\rmed{In a recent survey, Sedlmair et al.~\cite{sedlmair2014} classified strategies to explore model parameter spaces into four main categories: informed trial and error, local-to-global, global-to-local, and steering. Furthermore, through a structured analysis of the visualization literature, they compiled a list of six exploration tasks: (1) \emph{optimisation}: to find the best parameter combination given some objectives; (2) \emph{partitioning}: to discover the different types of possible model behaviours (3) \emph{fitting}: to determine input parameters that best describe some measured data; (4) \emph{outliers}: to detect special output cases; (5) \emph{uncertainty}: to judge the reliability of model output; and (6) \emph{sensitivity}: to test the effect of input changes on the output.}
Our aim is to \emph{understand} how \rmed{domain} experts explore model parameter spaces in the presence of conflicting criteria.\rmed{(or objectives).} \rmed{We focus on user-model interactions and the exploration strategies that multiple types of experts adopt to manage trade-offs between competing objectives.}\rmed{Moreover, we
study exploration strategies for an already optimised search space, rather than the exploration of the full model parameter space. }To the best of our knowledge, there are no user studies documenting how experts explore simulation model trade-off spaces using a collaborative setup that unites model consumers \addf{(study domain experts)} and producers \addf{(modelling experts)}.
\subsection{Trade-off Analysis \add{and Pareto Optimality}}
We call trade-off analysis the type of analysis users perform\hrem{, with the aid of interactive tools, \nb{Correction, not just with interactive tools}} to reach optimal decisions in the presence of multiple conflicting model objectives. \add{Conflicting objectives, or criteria, are typical when exploring alternative options in many domains including agronomy. Cost is typically one of the main criteria (e.g., financial and environmental cost of supplying fertilisers), together with some measures of desired quantity or quality (e.g., wheat yield and protein content).} \add{An approach to identify \quotes{good} solutions to multiple objective problems is \hrem{with }Pareto optimality~\cite{LopezJaimes2009,kung1975}. This technique produces a diverse set of compromise points between conflicting objectives.
Within these points, there exists a set of non-dominated points called the Pareto Front (PF)~\cite{kung1975}, where no objective can be improved without sacrificing at least one other objective. \add{During trade-off analysis,} decision makers \hrem{ As such, it is up to humans to }select which PF solutions work best according to their expertise and preferences}.
Visualizing \add{and exploring the PF is an important step in multi-criteria decision making~\cite{tuvsar2015}. However,} representing this set for more than three objectives\hrem{ has long been a significant challenge for MO problems} is challenging~\cite{tuvsar2015,ibrahim2016,boukhelifa2018}\rmed{,boukhelifa2018}.
\rmed{A number of visualization techniques exist to present Pareto sets to humans, where the goal is to facilitate the exploration of alternative solutions and assist decision making. }
Tu{\v{s}}ar and Filipi{\v{c}}~\cite{tuvsar2015} provide a comprehensive review of visualization techniques for Pareto front approximations in evolutionary MO, including among others scatterplot matrices, \rmed{bubble charts, radial coordinate plots, }
parallel coordinates, \rmed{heatmaps, Sammon mapping, self organising maps,}
principal component analysis, \rmed{isomaps,}
and their own technique called prosection.
\begin{comment}
Although most of these techniques come from the multidimensional visualization domain, the authors argue that the visualization of Pareto front approximations has different requirements from visualization of other multidimensional data. They describe a set of \emph{additional} tasks that visual analysis of MO results need to support~\cite{knowles2008}, including
the need to assess conflicts and trade-offs between objectives and to select preferred solutions.
\rmed{explore the set of alternatives; estimate the location, range, and shape of the Pareto front; assess conflicts and trade-offs between objectives; select preferred solutions; monitor the progress or convergence of an optimisation run; and assess the relative performance of different multi-objective algorithms. }
Most visualisation tools appear to support a subset of those tasks, although trade-off analysis becomes increasingly difficult as the number of objectives grows~\cite{ibrahim2016}.
\end{comment}
The scatterplot matrix technique shows all the bivariate projections of the solution space, presented in a table. This is considered to be an intuitive approach~\cite{tuvsar2015}, albeit not very scalable since decision makers cannot see all dominance relationships at once. In our study we consider small multi-objective problems, of up to eight objectives, and we use a large display to overcome the problem of screen space.
\section{Exploration Approach and Setup}
\label{exploration-approach}
To support
multiple experts explore complex models, we
combine:
data pre-processing, a visualization tool running on a physical setup\rmed{ that supports collaboration},
and a coverage of multiple expertise.
\vspace{-3pt}
\paragraph{Data Preprocessing.} The types of complex models we are dealing with\rmed{(e.g., the agronomy model of wheat fertilisation)} are often explored through simulations.
\rmed{Domain experts run multiple versions of these simulations using different input parameters, often numerical (e.g.,
geographical region, temporal window in the process to introduce the fertiliser, amount of fertiliser)
Depending on the complexity of the model, the number of input and output parameters can be large (often exceeding 20-30 dimensions in the cases of experts involved in our study).}Depending on their research questions, experts may run hundreds or even thousands such simulations, by altering the input parameters, resulting in possibly thousands of alternative simulation results\rmed{(data points)} that they wish to explore.
\rmed{For instance, after specifying the input parameters of interest and their ranges,
one wheat agronomic engineer run over 300k simulations. In the case of wine fermentation, a multi-objective algorithm sampled the search space over 1k\rmed{\nb{Cristian, correct? OK by CT.}} iterations.} Visualising the relationships between input and output parameters could help experts make sense of their data, but visually exploring such large datasets can be daunting.
In an attempt to make the problem more tractable and easier to visualise, we rely on the observation that experts are often interested in reconciling multiple competing objectives~\cite{sedlmair2014}\rmed{ (\emph{trade-offs})}.
\rmed{An important aspect of their work is to understand and reconcile multiple competing objectives~\cite{sedlmair2014}, often in a single exploration.
For instance, our agronomic engineer searches for fertilisation strategies that maximise yield and reduce the amount of supplied fertilisers\rmed{(two competing goals)}~\cite{ravier2018,cui2010}.}
\rmed{Based on this observation,}We adopt a pre-processing step of calculating the Pareto front~\cite{kung1975} of the simulation results, i.e., identify the list of \emph{non-dominated} data points (simulations) that are possible solutions to the \rmed{multi-objective optimisation} MO problem.\rmed{To compute this set of optimal solutions we require (i) a list of criteria to optimise (e.g., fertiliser amount, crop yield), and (ii) and optimisation algorithm to compute the Pareto front.}
The criteria to optimise are specified \emph{a-priori} by the domain experts. To generate the Pareto front data, we used the state-of-the-art algorithm in MO optimisation NSGA-II~\cite{deb2002} when we had access to the model source code (wine use-case). In the absence of the latter, we used a classical MO algorithm~\cite{woodruff2013} as a simple filter applied to the simulation files data (wheat use-case).
\rmed{
Before the exploration session,
an optimisation expert held a brief interview with domain and model experts to discuss the objectives they want to optimise and the parameters they want to explore. We explain in the user study details of our contact with experts prior to the exploration session.
We recommended
they
limit their optimisation objectives and parameters to around 20. In practice this range is roughly the limit of both what multi-objective optimisation algorithms can efficiently handle~\cite{ishibuchi2008}, and what our SPLOM system can visualise.
We collected their criteria and simulation results prior to the
sessions.
We note that the definition of what criteria to optimise may be an iterative process.}
\rmed{
The next part is to run the optimisation algorithm to compute the Pareto front. The best MO optimisation algorithm to use is not a straightforward decision. Depending on, for example, the preference articulation stage (a-priori, a-posteriori or no preference articulation), and the availability of model source code and computational resources,
different algorithms are more appropriate~\cite{marler2004}~\nb{cristian: is this correct?}\nb{CT= "What are preferences in this case? Domain experts specified decision variables and their bounds, objectives, constraintS. OK?"}.
We used the state-of-the-art algorithm in MO optimisation NSGA-II~\cite{deb2002} when we had direct access to the model source code (wine model use-case)\rmed{and domain experts to specify their optimisation preferences}. In the absence of the source code, we used a classical multi-objective optimisation algorithm~\cite{woodruff2013} as a simple filter applied to the simulation files data (wheat model use-case).}
\vspace{-3pt}
\paragraph{Visualization Platform and Physical Setup}
To visualise the Pareto front data points\rmed{(simulations)}, we used a
SPOLM-based tool~\cite{elmqvist2008rolling,Boukhelifa:2013} that has been successfully used to explore multi-dimensional data. Scatterplot visulizations are often used to show relationships between two dimensions
or characterise distributions of data points~\cite{rensink2010,dimara2018},
and thus are appropriate for visualising relationships between objectives (to show trade-offs).
Our tool has a SPLOM, and allows multiple query selections (differentiated by colour) to help experts narrow their search space to important parameters
~\cite{tuvsar2015}. The system also provides a \add{bookmark} history of past query selections and a means to store \quotes{favourite} views and queries.
Finally,
experts can
enter new combined dimensions manually through a mathematical formula field, or to evolve them automatically. Previous work has shown that allowing experts to test new dimensions is important to the exploration of model trade-offs \cite{Boukhelifa:2013}.
Given that we are targeting a joint exploration between multiple experts, we\rmed{ wanted to} provide a physical setup that could foster collaboration \cite{Isenberg2013}. As such, we instrument a room with a shared touch-enabled display that host the main visualization.\rmed{, and that could be seen by all experts.}
\paragraph{Expertise Diversity and Stages.}
From our experience in the domains of agronomy and food process engineering, there are three types of expertise that appear at \emph{multiple stages} in research related to complex processes~\cite{perrot2016}\rmed{perrot2011,}. Domain expertise\rmed{(e.g., expertise on the biological process)} usually comes first and informs the next stage, the modelling process. Modelling expertise comes next, and communication between experts of these two stages can be tight, especially when models are first developed. It is also common for optimisation expertise to follow, for example, for parameter estimation and tunning~\cite{motta2013}. Optimisation experts often have to work closely with model builders and domain experts to understand model input and output, and to specify pertinent optimisation criteria and constraints.
\rmed{What is important to note is that}
This three-way collaboration is \emph{iterative}, and currently appears to be carried out in an ad-hoc asynchronous manner. Importantly, a single expert rarely understands all stages\rmed{. In our use-cases for instance, only one participant had expertise in the domain, the model and the optimisation } (\autoref{tab-participants}).
Our approach interjects another stage of expertise, that of interactive visualization.\rmed{, to facilitate collaboration between the various experts, and to aid the exploration of model trade-off spaces.} By bringing the four expertise together in a \emph{synchronous} fashion, we hope that our experts\rmed{, through the use of a visual analysis system,} will not only gain insights that can generate new research on the biological processes\rmed{(feeding back to the domain expertise)}, but also help form hypotheses about the modelling, optimisation and visualization processes. \rmed{Furthermore,}
\rmed{By confronting the various expertise \rmed{involved in the exploration use-cases,}
we hope to ensure that any insights reached in the exploration are validated by all expertise perspectives~\cite{Chuang:2012}.}
\rmed{Recruitment of such a diverse group of expertise can appear challenging. Nevertheless, we found through our interviews with experts during recruitment, that they themselves often know who the complementary experts are, and they are often already in contact (e.g., the optimisation expert with the wine fermentation domain experts).
\begin{comment}
\rmed{
\paragraph{Physical Setup.}
Given that we are targeting a joint exploration between multiple experts, we wanted to provide a physical setup that could foster collaboration \cite{Isenberg2013}.
As such, we instrumented a room with a shared touch-enabled display that hosted the main visualization, and that could be seen by all experts. Participants were seated around the shared surface, and a drawing board and a flipchart were available in case they wanted to take any hand-written notes outside the tool.
In addition, participants were asked to bring their own laptops, where we installed the same exploration software in order for them to perform a training task
(\autoref{fig:study_setup}).}
\end{comment}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=.95\linewidth]{figures/SPLOM_tool_top.jpg}
\includegraphics[width=.95\linewidth]{figures/study_setup2.jpg}
\vspace{-6pt}
\caption{Study setup. (Top) \hrem{close-up of the shared display with the}\add{Screenshot of the SPLOM tool\hrem{running} with the matrix on the left and the main scatterplot on the right}. (Bottom): broad\hrem{er} view of the room, showing individual laptops and flipchart.
Figure \hrem{captured during} \add{relates to }\hrem{the first} case study \hrem{of the wine model }CS1a.}
\label{fig:study_setup}
\vspace{-10pt}
\end{figure}
\section{Study Design}
\label{sec-design}
We conducted an observational study to understand how multiple types of experts explore models using the SPLOM-based visualization tool described in~\autoref{exploration-approach}, when they are considering multi-criteria trade-offs. The goal of the study was to investigate the following research questions:
\begin{list}{[Q\arabic{rcounter}]}{\usecounter{rcounter}}
\item what \emph{strategies} domain experts adopt to explore trade-offs during model exploration.
\item how \emph{insight} is reached during trade-off analysis.
\item how domain experts \emph{interpret} findings from the visualization through model abstraction and optimisation.
\item what role the different \emph{expertise} play in this context.
\end{list}
\subsection{Participants}
\paragraph{Expertise.} \rmed{In total, }We had 12 participants (five female) including four co-authors of this paper (optimisation and visualization experts). The mean age was 44.5 years.\rmed{ Seven participants self-identified as experts in the problem domain
\rmed{microbiological engineering, bio/process and food engineering, physicochemistry, oenology, and agronomy.}}
\rmed{Six
were experts in the model we
used to generate the corresponding Pareto front, five were optimisation experts, and four were experts in the visualization tool.} In terms of \emph{expertise overlap}, most participants had double expertise (8 participants), in particular domain-model expertise (5 participants) due to long term usage of the model \stat{mean 4.6 years}. One participant had three types of expertise domain-model-optimisation (\autoref{tab-participants}).
{Domain expertise ranged from 3--30 years \stat{mean 14.4}, 1--14 years for the models \stat{mean 4.2}, and 2--10 years for optimisation \stat{mean 5.4}. Apart from the visualization and optimisation experts (co-authors of this paper), only one domain expert had prior experience \fix{with
the tool used in the study.}
All were researchers with titles such as lecturer, professor, \add{permanent} researcher or research engineer. One participant was a final year PhD student.
\vspace{-5pt}
\paragraph{Recruitment.} Participants were\rmed{all} recruited from an agronomy research centre in \add{INRA} and collaborating institutions.
The recruitment procedure drew on previous collaborations between the authors and the different participants, or between participants. However, these collaborations had not previously united all of the expertise covered in this study.
\begin{table}[]
\centering \Small
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2.0pt}
\begin{tabular}{llccccc} \hline
\textbf{P\#} & \textbf{Field} & \textbf{UC} & \textbf{Domain} & \textbf{Model} & \textbf{Opti} & \textbf{Vis} \\\hline
1 & Microbiological engineering & 1 & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & & \\
2 & Bioprocess engineering & 1 & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & \\
3 & Physicochemistry & 1 & & & & \\
4 & Microbiological engineering & 1 & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & & \\
5 & Bioprocess engineering & 1 & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & & & \\
6 & Oenology & 1 & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & & \\
7 & Process engineering & 1 & & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & \\
8 & Agronomy & 2 & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & & \\
9 & Food engineering & 2 & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & & & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; \\
10 & Optimisation & 1, 2 & & & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; \\
11 & Optimisation & 1, 2 & & & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; \\
12 & Visualization & 1, 2 & & & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; & \tikz\fill[scale=0.3](0,.35) -- (.25,0) -- (1,.7) -- (.25,.15) -- cycle; \\\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Study participants for the wine\rmed{fermentation} use-case UC1 and wheat\rmed{fertalisation} use-case UC2, their field of work, and expertise in the study domain, the model, the optimisation procedure and the\rmed{SPLOM} visualization tool used in the study.}
\label{tab-participants}
\vspace{-8mm}
\end{table}
\subsection{Study Procedure and Apparatus}
Prior to the study, an optimisation expert held a brief
interview with domain and model experts
to discuss the objectives they want to optimise and the parameters they would like to explore. They then
calculated the Pareto fronts.
The actual study was carried out in two sessions, that we call \emph{use-cases} based on the research area of the domain and model experts. In the first \emph{use-case}, a wine fermentation model was explored, and in the second a wheat-crop model. Each use-case was run in two parts (a and b), on two different days, that we refer to as \emph{case studies}\rmed{(e.g. CS1a for the first part of the first use-case).}. Each part lasted on average\rmed{2 hours and 3} 123 minutes, and a different Pareto front for the same model was explored. We made sure all types of expertise were present.
There was no overlap of participants between the two use-cases, other than the visualization and optimisation expertise.
\rmed{We used the same study setup for all exploration sessions. }Participants were seated around a\rmed{shared} touch-enabled surface, and\rmed{ a drawing board and} a flip-chart was available in case they wanted to take any\rmed{ hand-written} notes outside the tool. \rmed{In addition, p}Participants were asked to bring their own laptops, where we installed the same exploration software in order for them to perform a training task\rmed{, but also to use them for personal exploration if needed} (\autoref{fig:study_setup}). The study took place in one research institute hosting a 3M Multi-Touch, 65" UHD-4K display.\rmed{The visualization software run on a Windows machine with Intel(R) Core(TM) i-5 processor (3.5 GHZ, 16 GB RAM).}
At the beginning of each\rmed{domain} use-case we\rmed{ first} introduced the tool, then we asked participants to perform a \textbf{training task}~\cite{Boukhelifa:2013}.\rmed{ This task was formulated as a game
\cite{Boukhelifa:2013}.
The goal was to ensure that all our participants were able to operate the visualization tool}\rmed{, and make use of its main functionalities}\rmed{ including query creation, brushing and linking, and the aggregation of dimensions.} The next part of the study consisted of an \textbf{open exploration task} using a Pareto front dataset that was prepared beforehand. Participants were encouraged to \emph{re-discover} what they knew about their data before \emph{searching} for new insights~\cite{Boukhelifa:2013}.
\rmed{Throughout the four case studies, }We asked participants to think aloud and verbalise their thoughts. A study facilitator\rmed{ (at least one author)} was present to answer experts' questions and discuss their findings. In some occasions, the facilitator asked participants to explain the insights they found and
to clarify whether these were new or confirmations of known findings. The sessions were video recorded and user interactions with the visualization tool were logged. After the study,\rmed{all} participants filled in a short questionnaire to collect demographic information\rmed{ and self-assessment of their expertise for the domain, the model, the optimisation and the visualization. Expertise}, and to self-assess their own expertise (using a 5-point Likert scale, and number of years in practice). We considered participants experts if they selected \quotes{3} or above as their expertise score.\rmed{ Only one expert gave ratings lower than 3 for all expertise types.}
\subsection{Models and Pareto Fronts Datasets}
In both use-cases, we used an optimisation algorithm to create a Pareto front that combines objectives (dimensions to optimise) and other parameters$^1$\footnote{1. In the visualization tool both objectives and parameters are simple data dimensions.}~(\autoref{tab-models-pfs}). Domain experts in the first use-case sought to maximise wine aroma (three esters), and minimise undesired compounds (higher alcohols) and the energy required to control the fermentation in red (CS1a) and white (CS1b) wine.
In the first case study of the wheat use-case (CS2a), domain experts searched for interesting wheat crop fertilisation strategies that maximise yield, protein content and minimise nitrogen loss to the environment. A second Pareto front was generated in the last case study (CS2b) as domain experts wanted this time to find fertilisation strategies that maximise yield and minimise nitrogen dose and loss. We note that the results of CS2a helped create the new Pareto front for the subsequent case study (CS2b), as domain experts identified new research questions that take into account a new set of objectives.
\begin{comment}
For the first use-case, experts explored two different Pareto fronts of the same model~\cite{mouret2015}, one for white wine and the second one for red wine (\autoref{fig:sc_seq}, CS1a and CS1b).\rmed{ These Pareto fronts correspond to the same model but with two different configurations of the wine fermentation model}\rmed{\nb{Cristian, is this correct?}\nb{CT=No, the model bas the same. The bounds on the decision variables and the constraints were different.}} Each Pareto front consisted of \emph{eight} objectives and \emph{six} parameters\rmed{\nb{CT: parameter=decision variable?}}, and contained 1000 data points.
Domain experts in this use-case sought to maximise
wine aroma (three esters), and minimise undesired compounds (higher alcohols) and the energy required to control the fermentation.\rmed{ (expressed in three other objectives: total energy consumed, peak power requirement and fermentation time)}
\rmed{\nb{Cristian, is this correct?}.
\nb{CT=sought to maximise desired wine aroma production (corresponding to three esters as objectives) and minimse undesired aroma compounds (higher alcohols) and the energy required to control the fermentation (expressed in three other objectives: total energy consumed, peak power requirement and fermentation time).}}
Domain experts wanted to explore those objectives in relation to parameters, for instance the initial nitrogen and the temperature profile at various time steps.
For the second use-case, an initial Pareto front was generated with three objectives and 15 parameters. This time, domain experts sought to find interesting wheat crop fertilisation strategies that maximise yield, protein content and minimise nitrogen loss to the environment. This Pareto front contained 64 data points (\autoref{fig:sc_seq}, CS2a). A second Pareto front was generated for the fourth case study (\autoref{fig:sc_seq}, CS2-b). It contained three objectives, 19 dimensions and 13601 data points. Here, domain experts wanted to find fertilisation strategies to maximise yield and minimise nitrogen dose and loss. We note that the results of CS2a helped create the new Pareto front for the subsequent case study (CS2b), as domain experts identified new research questions that take into account a new set of objectives.\rmed{ The fertilisation strategies correspond to the amount of nitrogen added at six different timesteps (expressed as $N_{0}$ to $N_{6}$ dimensions in the data).}
\end{comment}
\begin{table}[]
\centering \Small
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{2.0pt}
\begin{tabular}{llccc}\hline
\textbf{Case Study} & \textbf{Model} & \textbf{\#Objectives} & \textbf{\#Parameters} & \textbf{\#Points} \\\hline
CS1a & Wine (red)~\cite{mouret2015} & 8 & 6 & 1000 \\
CS1b & Wine (white)~\cite{mouret2015} & 8 & 6 & 1000 \\
CS2a & Wheat~\cite{jeuffroy1999}& 3 & 15 & 64 \\
CS2b & Wheat~\cite{jeuffroy1999} & 3 & 19 & 13601 \\\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Models and Pareto fronts datasets.\rmed{ used in the study, per case study session.}}
\label{tab-models-pfs}
\vspace{-8mm}
\end{table}
\vspace{-3pt}
\subsection{Data Collection and Video Coding Events Identified}
\label{sec:data-collection}
The data we collected consists of 494 minutes of video recordings,\rmed{automatically generate} log file
, and\rmed{ the } observational notes\rmed{ we took during the exploration sessions}. Video annotation was carried out using an annotation software (\emph{chronoviz.com}) in two main \emph{iterative} passes. In the \textbf{first pass}, two authors independently watched one hour of\rmed{ the first case study video} CS1a, and using an initial coding scheme, coded the video as a sequence of discrete events.
The two evaluators then met to compare codes and resolve conflicts and inconsistencies.\rmed{ This resulted in the refinement of the initial annotation scheme and the addition of further categories and objects as described below}
In the \textbf{second phase},\rmed{one of the initial coders and another} two evaluator\rmed{ then} used this scheme to annotate the rest of the videos.\rmed{Each time, one coder annotated the whole video, and a second annotated a calibration window (from 20 to 40 minutes). This time frame was selected based on the observation that the initial 20 minutes of each case study video tends to focus on how the Pareto front was generated and on tool exploration method, rather than on tasks directly related to trade-off analysis.} After coding each video, the two evaluators met to discuss annotation codes and resolve any new conflicts.\rmed{ This process was repeated for the remaining three case study videos.} The inter-rater reliability scores for the four case studies video coding were: 77.19\%, 88.63\%, 86.36\%, and 87.09\%. \rmed{respectively. \ab{An alternative measure is Cohen's kappa, to do only if time ...}}
\paragraph{\textbf{Events.}} A coded \emph{event} is\rmed{defined as an interesting observation with regards to our study research questions (Q1--4),}
characterised by a \emph{start time}, \emph{type}, \emph{actor}, and \emph{object}.
\rmed{We decided not to code event duration as this is hard to specify accurately, especially in a collaborative context.} The \emph{type} of the event was assigned from an initial annotation scheme related to our research questions, and
agreed upon prior to coding. It had three coarse categories: Human-Human Interaction, Insight, and Expertise.
An event is further characterised by an \emph{actor}, referring to the type of expertise used by the participant who triggered the event: i.e. domain, model, optimisation or visualization expertise (\autoref{tab-participants}).
By event \emph{object}, we mean the point of focus of the event. Each event is assigned to a single category type, and is associated with a single actor and object.
The final annotation scheme contains six \emph{main categories}
\begin{list}{\labelitemi}{\leftmargin=0cm
\item \textbf{Human-Human Interaction (HHI), 31.59\%}:
\rmed{any }discussions between participants about\rmed{ any of } the event objects listed below.
\item \textbf{Human-Computer Interaction (HCI), 41.32\%}:\rmed{ all} user interactions with the tool\rmed{ including SPLOM cell selections, lasso selections, and query creation. }\rmed{and interactions with the favourites album.}. We also coded whether a dimension is aggregated\rmed{(i.e. a combined dimension)} and whether it was an optimisation objective.
\item \textbf{Human-Paper Interaction (HPI), 2.56\%}:\rmed{describes } events where participants wrote down notes during the exploration\rmed{used the flip-chart or the board to write side notes during the exploration}.
\item \textbf{Insight, 13.84\%}: a surprising or unexpected finding about the objects below,
\rmed{Similar to~\cite{saraiya2005insight}, the notion of insight also includes}including new research questions and hypothesis (11.35\% of all insights). We \rmed{further break this category into two parts:} also distinguish between \emph{new} (80.78\%) and \emph{update} (19.22\%) insights.\rmed{to denote new findings, and confirmed or updated insights respectively.}
\item \textbf{Expertise, 9.76\%}:
explicitly expressed knowledge related to the domain, model, optimisation or visualization.
\item \textbf{Action, 0.9\%}: \rmed{action }plans that go beyond the current exploration, \rmed{, often as a consequence of new findings. For instance}e.g., plans to carry out a new biological experiments.\rmed{or to generate a new Pareto front.}
\end{list}
Three of the main categories (Human-Human Interaction, Insight and Expertise), operate on the following \emph{seven objects}
\begin{list}{\labelitemi}{\leftmargin=0em}
\item \textbf{Alignment, 6.23\%}: \rmed{anything relating to }how well or not the observed patterns or findings relate to, or align with, existing knowledge in the domain, the model, the optimisation and visualization.
\item \textbf{Correlation, 11.44\%}: relationships or dependencies between data dimensions.
\item\textbf{Criteria, 21.09\%}: specification of data dimensions or combination of dimensions to use as a search criteria, to better answer a research question. \rmed{Experts use }Search criteria were created in the visualization tool using coloured lasso selections
\item \textbf{Dimension, 6.45\%}:\rmed{ observations linked to the importance of a dimension, in general, with regards to the underlying phenomena or observed pattern.} events related to data dimensions, e.g.,\rmed{the weights of a dimension in a search criteria or a combined dimension, dimension range, and constraints on dimension.} weights of combined dimensions and threshold values.
\item \textbf{Exploration Method, 19.57\%}: strategy used to explore the data or the model expressed in a non-technical way.
\item \textbf{Tool, 17.35\%}: technical details related to the
tool.
\item \textbf{Trajectory, 17.84\%}: exploration of the trajectory of one or more parameters/objectives, and their temporal evolution.\rmed{, and the interpretation of its meaning.}
\end{list}
\paragraph{\textbf{Scenarios.}} While coding, we noticed that the exploration was structured in what appears to be\rmed{independent scenarios or } linked mini-stories, often with logical \emph{transitions}.\rmed{ We were interested in characterising those scenarios and their transitions.} In a \textbf{follow-up coding pass}, \rmed{two evaluators independently watched all case study videos, and } we marked the beginning of new scenarios, and their transition objects\rmed{Again, the coders met to discuss notes and resolved conflicts.} (\statnp{inter-rater reliability = 94.44\%}).
We categorised the 70 identified scenarios into
six types
\begin{list}{\labelitemi}{\leftmargin=0em}
\item \textbf{Initial, 4/70}:
preliminary exploration, often with the aim to explain or verify the dimensions of the Pareto front data set, and to try out the\rmed{general} tool functionalities.
\item \textbf{New, 17/70}:
exploration that attempts to answer a new research question or hypothesis that is different from the previous scenario.
\item \textbf{Refine, 30/70}:
refinement from a previous research question or hypothesis, e.g.,\rmed{ by adding or } modifying existing search criteria.
\item \textbf{Compare, 7/70}:
\rmed{exploration that explicitly compares} contrasting current and previous scenarios, e.g., in terms of generated insights.
\item \textbf{Alternative, 3/70}:
branching out from a previous research question or hypothesis to explore an alternative exploration path, e.g., focusing on different exploration objects.
\item \textbf{Storytelling, 9/70}:
re-cap scenarios to share findings, interpret results and summarise the exploration steps.
\end{list}
In total, we generated 3307 events, 1686 for the first use-case and 1621 for the second use-case.\rmed{In the scenario video coding pass, w} We identified 70 scenarios, 39 in the first use-case and 31 in the second. The mean duration of a scenario is $\approx$ 7 minutes (\statnp{min=1m}, \statnp{max= 25m}), and contains on average 47 events (\statnp{min=5}, \statnp{max=133}).
\section{Analysis of Video Segments
\label{sec:analysis}
Our analysis is based on 70 trade-off exploration scenarios we identified during data collection. We carried out \emph{three} types of analysis to answer our
research questions,
focusing on patterns and strategies of trade-off exploration [Q1], insight generation [Q2], and the role of expertise in this context, in particular for \fix{the} alignment of findings [Q3,Q4].
We also provide a qualitative overview of participants' subjective feedback on the exploration pipeline and the visualization tool.\rmed{use of our SPLOM-based visualization tool for trade-off analysis.} \rmed{Participant comments are translated from the original language, and are shown between quotes.}
\begin{figure*}[t!]
\centering
\begin{adjustbox}{minipage=\linewidth,scale=1.2}
\includegraphics[trim=0cm 15cm 5cm 0cm, clip, width=.5\linewidth]{figures/al_files/annotation_lines_final_cat.pdf}
\includegraphics[trim=0cm 15cm 5cm 0cm, clip, width=.5\linewidth]{figures/al_files/annotation_lines_final_obj.pdf}
\end{adjustbox}
\vspace*{-4mm}
\caption{\add{[left]} Scenarios of case study CS1a per category type. Chips\rmed{marked} with "$\cdot$" indicate \rmed{that the visualization included }views with combined dimensions, "$\_$"\rmed{indicates} for views with objectives, "$?$" for hypothesis \& research question insights.\rmed{Note that event chips do not indicate the duration of events. } Branching\rmed{ scenarios are} is indicated with a vertical\rmed{ black} line, e.g. between S5 and S11. \add{[right]} Scenarios of case study CS1a per object type. Complete scenarios can be found in supplementary material.
}
\vspace*{-2mm}
\label{fig:scenarios_cat_o_view}
\end{figure*
\subsection{Scenarios and Trade-off exploration [Q1]}
\subsubsection{Method}
To analyse our results we took a top down approach. We first looked at scenarios and how they relate to the exploration.
We created a visualization of \emph{scenario sequences} per case study session (\autoref{fig:sc_seq}), where each coloured chip corresponds to one identified scenario.
The duration of the scenario is not encoded. To analyse the details of the scenarios themselves, we created two interactive visualizations of \emph{event sequences}. In the first visualization, coloured chips correspond to an event category type (\autoref{fig:scenarios_cat_o_view}-left),
and in the second, to an exploration object type (\autoref{fig:scenarios_cat_o_view}-right).
Each chip line (\emph{annotation line}), corresponds to one scenario. Scenarios are ordered chronologically, from top to bottom
\begin{figure}[h]
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{figures/scenarios_seq.png}
\vspace{-20pt}
\caption{Trade-off analysis scenarios by case study: CS1a,b for the wine use-case, and CS2a,b for the wheat use-case.}
\label{fig:sc_seq}
\vspace{-10pt}
\end{figure
\rmed{For the \emph{categories annotation lines}, we colour-coded the six main event categories in~\autoref{sec:data-collection}.\rmed{,and we further split the insight category into: \emph{new} and \emph{update} insights.}
By hovering over coloured chip in the annotation line, more information is revealed about the event including its object type and event start time. Furthermore, for the HCI event category, we indicate events operating on a combined aggregated dimension with a dot, and the objectives dimensions with a black underline.
The \emph{objects annotation lines} provide a similar view on the data, but from the perspective of the explored objects. Hovering over chips in the object annotation lines reveals the main category of that event. Both visualizations allow filtering by event categories or objects.}
\subsubsection{Overall Exploration and Collaboration Patterns}\label{sec:collab-patterns}
\rmed{In this section we report on the overall exploration and collaboration patterns we observed from the visual analysis of the case study sessions (\autoref{fig:sc_seq}), the videos themselves and our observational notes.}
The visual analysis of scenarios in \autoref{fig:sc_seq} allowed us to make \emph{three} main observations on the exploration patterns:
\indent $1.$ All study sessions start with an initial scenario where experts appropriate the visualization tool to explore their own datasets.
\rmed{They tend to first}Here, they spend time analysing the problem qualitatively, building a mental map of the situation~\cite{chi2014nature}, before selecting an optimal solution from a
set of alternatives.
\indent $2.$ We looked at frequency and order of scenario types. \emph{Refine} and \emph{New} are the most common types of scenarios (\statnp{43\%} and \statnp{24\%} scenarios respectively), and they occur at any time during the exploration.
They both can follow as well as precede any other scenario type, except for the initial scenarios. This probably implies that the iterative nature of trade-off exploration is primarily due to the interleaving of \emph{new} and \emph{refined} hypotheses and research questions.
It is interesting to note the difference between the two use-cases at the early stages of exploration (between $S1-S5$). There appears to be more \emph{exploration} for the first use-case illustrated by the contiguous blocks of \emph{new} scenarios (CS1a and CS1b), in contrast to the juxtaposed \emph{refine} scenarios in the second use-case (CS2a and CS2b), denoting more \emph{exploitation} behaviour. These two facets of exploration were also observed in previous exploratory visualization studies~\cite{Boukhelifa:2013}, and may correspond to how many research questions and directions participants had at the outset of the exploration. Additionally, the number of participants in the first use-case was higher, which might have led to the generation of many, perhaps diverging, hypotheses regarding the exploration objects. In the second use-case, there were less participants which may explain the more focused exploration.
\rmed{\paragraph{3.}Most sessions (3 out of 4) finish with a refinement scenario. This is likely because experts are trying to drill down on some of their most important findings or insights. Looking more closely at the end of the exploration sessions, we noticed that most penultimate scenarios are a comparison (3 out of 4). This is likely because experts are trying to see if they can validate old insights or reach new ones using a different exploration method (CS1b-S14), or by following a new trajectory
(CS1b-S23, CS2a-S7).
More generally, comparison scenarios tend to occur towards the later stages of the exploration, often to shed a different light on the insights reached so far.\nb{Candidate for removal}.}
\rmed{\paragraph{4.}}
\indent $3.$ The longer the exploration session, the more storytelling scenarios there are. Storytelling helps experts recap their findings before they continue their exploration. With more experts participating in the exploration (CS1a, CS1b), recaps are done periodically, presumably to \add{build common ground~\cite{carroll2006} and} ensure that everyone is on the same page.
In smaller groups (CS2a, CS2b), recaps are concentrated at the end of the session.
We noticed that some scenarios reference earlier parts of the exploration, in a \emph{branch-out} fashion. As a result, we augmented the category and object annotation visualizations with \emph{jump-lines} linking the two scenarios in question.\rmed{This is the case, for instance in session CS1a-S11, which is a refinement of CS1a-S5 (\autoref{fig:scenarios_cat_o_view}-left). Initially, domain experts created a new search criteria based on a combined dimension they entered manually. In subsequent scenarios they refined this criteria and tuned their exploration method. In CS1a-S11 they returned to the original search criteria to drill down to the individual data points behind the selection.} Back referencing scenarios\rmed{,or jump-lines,} exist in our dataset but they are hard to extract. We show in \autoref{fig:scenarios_cat_o_view}\rmed{ \autoref{fig:scenarios_cat_o_view}-right} one instance where this occurs, to illustrate the iterative and non-linear nature of trade-off exploration and sense-making~\cite{pirolli2005}
When it comes to the setup,
although we used a multi-touch interactive surface throughout the study, predominantly a single domain expert
led most of the interaction in each case study session. The rest of the participants discussed seated or standing, but refrained from interacting. This finding is supported by other studies on collaboration around interactive displays~\cite{rogers2004,tong2017h}.\rmed{Furthermore, the fact that all participants did not have prior experience in exploring data on a large interactive surface, may explain why they adopted the traditional set-up of a presentation or a seminar.} We note that although most participants did not interact directly with the display, they were however actively involved in the exploration. For example, they proposed new research questions, requested to see particular views or to refine existing criteria. We also observed at least two instances in UC1 where domain experts explored the Pareto front in their own laptops.
\vspace{-4pt}
\subsubsection{\rmed{Varying }Complexity of Analysis Scenarios}
The exploration scenarios identified vary in \emph{complexity}, which we characterise with two measures: number of events and scenario duration.
In terms of average number of events per scenario type, \emph{Compare} scenarios had the most number of events \stats{74}{51},
followed by \emph{Alternative} \stats{68}{59},
\emph{Initial} \stats{59}{22},
\emph{New} \stats{47}{28},
\emph{Refine} \stats{44}{26},
and finally \emph{Storytelling} \stats{26}{32}.
With the exception of \emph{Initial} and \emph{Storytelling} scenarios, overall the average time spent on each scenario type (in minutes) appears to be related to the average number of events in that scenario type: \emph{Compare} \stats{10.28m}{6.75},
\emph{Alternative} \stats{9m}{8.1},
\emph{Storytelling} \stats{7.33m}{8.15},
\emph{New} \stats{6.58m}{5},
\emph{Initial} \stats{6.25m}{3.59},
and \emph{Refine} \stats{5.9m}{3.74}.
Indeed we found that scenario duration and event count were strongly correlated \stat{Pearson's r(68) = 0.77, p $<$ 0.001}. Thus, in the next sections, to facilitate comparison between scenarios, we use scenario duration
to normalise our results when reporting findings per and across scenario type (i.e., report frequency of events per minute).
\rmed{
\emph{Initial} and \emph{Storytelling} scenarios are particular. In early stages of exploration, there are many brief interactions with the tool in order to understand its functionality \stat{HCI=26.69\%}. Much of the discussions \stat{HHI=33.47\%} are centred around the tool and the exploration method (\statnp{53.16\%} of discussed objects), with little explicit examination of objects related to the problem domain such as trajectories \stat{5\%} or dimensions \stat{7\%}. During \emph{storytelling}, experts mostly discuss during these times \stat{HHI=47.08\%} and the exploration using the tool is limited to the replay of previous explorations \stat{HCI=31.66\%}
}
We note that \emph{Compare} and \emph{Alternative} scenarios (10/70 scenarios), although rare,
appear to be more demanding than the rest, based on our two complexity measures with on average more events and longer durations.
\subsubsection{Search-Space Exploration Strategies}
\label{subsubsec:search-space}
Another way to characterise trade-off exploration strategies is to look at the types of scatterplots experts viewed. We delineate these strategies based on two orthogonal dimension properties: the \emph{granularity} of the projection axis for the viewed dimensions (single or aggregated), and dimension \emph{importance}.
\rmed{(objectives and other parameters}
\rmed{(primary or secondary).}\rmed{, depending on the priority experts assign to the criteria).}
\rmed{Out of the 1367 HCI events in our annotation dataset, we coded all events that resulted in a change of the scatterplot view (i.e., selection of a SPLOM cell, the history manager or from the favourites album).
These view change events correspond to \rmed{The scatterplot viewing data corresponds to}
\statnp{54.13\%} of the total HCI events.}
\vspace{4pt}
\indent $1.$
\emph{Dimension Granularity:} Although the SPLOM-based approach used in this study favours 2-by-2 viewing of dimensions,\rmed{experts used the aggregation functionality of our tool to help them explore their multi-dimensional Pareto fronts and combine dimensions simultaneously.\rmed{The scatterplot viewing data shows that }} experts consulted views having single dimension axes as much as they did for views having combined dimensions (\statnp{50\%} of views). However, the use of combined dimensions varied across the four case studies
\stat{CS1a=11.62\%, CS1b=73.51\%, session CS2a=8.37\%, CS2b=6.48\%}. This is probably related to experts' research questions, and how far they reached in exploring the initial 2-by-2 search space.
In the first use-case, domain experts made extensive use of combined dimensions (in 34/39 scenarios), in particular in CS1b.\rmed{Aggregating made sense for the application domain,} Indeed, a wine fermentation recipe can be described as a linear combination of ratios of the various constituent aromas.
In the second use-case,\rmed{experts were interested in exploring how a selection of optimal points (with respect to yield, nitrogen dose and loss) behave when looking at the details of a fertilisation trajectory (S8,19,29).
Here, } experts preferred to explore fertalisation trajectories two steps at a time before aggregating.\rmed{, which they saw as something interesting:
\rmed{\quotes{\emph{it helps to project more dimensions, not exactly in 3D, but on N with more dimensions...what would be interesting is to see at the same time when we select the dose we are going to supply, to see what iNN level we are covering.}}\Part{8}.}
We note that
experts rarely consulted views where both axes show combined dimensions (\statnp{2.97\%} of viewed plots).
This finding confirms results from a previous study~\cite{Boukhelifa:2013}, where domain experts prefer plotting aggregated dimensions against the original ones, to ground new insights. Moreover, experts never created nor consulted views with combined dimensions in the initial exploration stages, rather, they explored the original search space before attempting to aggregate
\vspace{4pt}
\indent $2.$
\emph{Dimension Importance: }
Most of the time, experts viewed scatterplots with at least one axis having one or more objectives (\statnp{63.10\%} of viewed plots).
Overall, this indicates the importance of objectives in trade-off exploration, to make sure that subsequent data selections and filtering are optimal. However, this viewing rate varied per case study session
\stat{CS1a=80.86\%, CS1b=99.31\%, CS2a=40.81\%, CS2b=12.36\%}.
The choice of consulted dimension type (objective or parameter)
likely varies depending on the research questions experts want to explore, and the chosen exploration strategy.
From our study notes and the storytelling scenarios, we observed that in the first use-case, experts predominantly used the objective space to \emph{drive}\rmed{ or guide their} the exploration.
This strategy consists of first aggregating important objectives and then exploring the remaining dimensions in relation to that.\rmed{, hence the regular consultation of views having an objective dimension (denoted by an underscore line in \autoref{fig:scenarios_cat_o_view}-left).} An inverse strategy, used in the second use-case, consists of first finding
ideal values for some parameters,
and occasionally checking where this selection lies in the objectives spac
, resulting in adjustments to the
parameter
values.
In the presence of multiple objectives and parameters, experts created numerous criteria that they appear to \emph{prioritise}\rmed{and assign to them various degrees of importance.}. For instance, in the wine model use-case:\rmed{For example, the aroma criterion for the wine use-case consists of three objectives, and is considered more important than the cost criteria (another combined dimension of three energy objectives).
During a storytelling scenario of the wine use-case, a domain expert reflected on the strategy they took to explore the data:}
\quotes{\emph{you start with the most important [aroma criteria], you select large, and then using your secondary criteria [cost criteria] you refine the selections}}) \Part{5}.\rmed{ For the wheat use-case, domain experts wanted to optimise the \quotes{loss} objective (primary criteria), more than they cared to always reach perfect yield (secondary criteria).
\rmed{We note that data dimensions that are regarded more important, are often explored first. But the notion of importance may change across the different analysis scenarios, depending on participants' research questions and directions.}
Regardless of whether the exploration is guided\rmed{primarily} by the objectives or by the parameters of the model, experts reached insights \stat{CS1a=56, CS1b=159, CS2a=87, CS2b=156 times} and aligned findings \stat{CS1a=37, CS1b=23, CS2a=23, CS2b=32 times}, indicating that both exploration strategies are valid.
\subsection{How Insight is Reached and Validated [Q2]}
We analysed how insight is reached during trade-off analysis, by looking at the scenarios and the objects of those insights, as well as the sequence of events that led to the insight.
\vspace{4pt}
\indent
\emph{Insights by Scenario and Object Types: }
\rmed{Overall, i}Insights reached during the exploration sessions were mostly related to \emph{trajectories} \stat{42.57\%} and \emph{correlations} \stat{25.32\%}. This can be explained by the nature of the datasets explored in this study and the types of research questions our experts were interested in.
\rmed{\ab{check why?} Surprisingly, }\emph{Initial} scenarios generated more insights \stats{2.45}{1.92} (re-discovery of known findings), followed by \emph{Refine} \stats{1.59}{1.06} and \emph{Compare} \stats{1.56}{1.08}, then \emph{New} \stats{1.11}{0.53}, \emph{Alternative} \stats{1}{0.28} and finally \emph{Storytelling} \stats{0.34}{0.16}.
\rmed{Due the nature of the modelled processes, a lot of the insights reached are about trajectories (e.g. \emph{Refine}:\statnp{56.06\%}, \emph{Compare}:\statnp{46.15\%}) }
\rmed{
The insights reached in \emph{Initial} scenarios are largely focused on correlations \stat{39.02\%} and trajectories \stat{24.39\%}, which are again tightly related to the research questions our experts set out to explore.\rmed{The correlation part was focused on finding and verifying relationships between primary and secondary criteria. The trajectories correspond to the wheat fertilisation supplies over time, and sequences of temperature profiles for wine fermentation. None of those insights are related to the visualization tool since our participants were still discovering its functionalities.} \emph{Refine} and \emph{Compare} insights are also largely about trajectories (\statnp{56.06\%} and \statnp{46.15\%}\rmed{of the total number of insights respectively}).
\rmed{For the remaining scenario types, insights were predominantly in the form of facts and findings about the various exploration objects. }For \emph{refine} and \emph{compare} scenarios, on average, most insights were about trajectories \stat{0.62 insight pm and 0.5 insight pm respectively}.
Most insights of \emph{new} scenarios were about correlations \stat{0.37 insight pm}, and for \emph{alternative} scenarios, most insights were about criteria \stat{0.29 insight pm}.
}
The few insights reached in the \emph{Storytelling} scenarios are mostly about the exploration method \stat{43.75\%}. This type of insight came from comparing methods experts previously used to analyse model simulation results (e.g., statistical analysis, experts decision rules), and the visual exploration proposed in this study. Not surprisingly, more than any other scenario type, a third of storytelling insights were in the form of a research question or a hypothesis\rmed{ to investigate in future explorations or in real biological experiments}\rmed{, based on the discussions
that took place in the previous scenarios }.
These types of insights were overall
less common, and varied between \statnp{9.09\%} and \statnp{13.59\%} of insights per scenario type
\rmed{All scenario types had predominantly more \emph{new} insights generated than \emph{update} ones (\emph{New} \stats{9.17}{7.61}; \emph{Update} \stats{2.15}{1.51}).
This result is unexpected for the initial scenarios, as the study instructions encouraged participants to first verify what they already know in their data, before trying to find new insights. We note, however, that the relatively low rate of update insights could be due to the fact that our participants had not explored the Pareto front dataset prior to this study, and thus these indeed were new findings. However, it could also be due to a limitation of our study since it is difficult to separate new and update insights solely based on video sequences. In the absence of experts comments about the novelty of the finding, we coded such insights as new.}
\vspace{4pt}
\indent
\emph{Insights and Event Sequences: }
To extract event sequence patterns,\rmed{we made a first pass on the annotation data where} we removed repeated consecutive event categories from the annotation data.\rmed{ We did this per categories and exploration objects.} For instance, an event sequence HCI-HHI-HHI-HPI becomes HCI-HHI-HPI.\rmed{, Tool-Tool-Method becomes Tool-Method.}
We then counted the occurrences of each \emph{two} subsequent events, and normalised each count by the maximum frequency value. The results are shown in the transition matrix in \autoref{fig:sequence_cat}\rmed{and \autoref{fig:sequence_object}}.\rmed{We note that our observations about the typical or most frequent event sequences do not imply a causality, but merely a temporal association.}
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.6\linewidth]{figures/matrix_2_sequences_cat-2.jpeg}
\vspace*{-4mm}
\caption{A transition matrix of event sequences per exploration \emph{categories}. Events in rows precede events in columns, numbers and colour indicate frequency of transition. Here the most frequent sequence is HCI-HHI. }
\label{fig:sequence_cat}
\vspace*{-5mm}
\end{figure}
\rmed{
\begin{figure}[t]
\includegraphics[width=0.7\linewidth]{figures/matrix_2_sequences_o.jpeg}
\caption{A transition matrix of event sequences per exploration objects. Events in rows precede events in columns. Here the most frequent sequence is Criteria-Tool..
}
\label{fig:sequence_object} \nb{candidate for removal}
\end{figure}
}
\rmed{In terms of \emph{categories} (\autoref{fig:sequence_cat}), w}We found that the most frequent event sequences were HCI-HHI and HHI-HCI. Indeed, participants discussed their intentions, thoughts and findings as they interacted with our tool. Surprisingly, the least frequent sequences related to the \emph{insight} category (excluding Action and HPI) were Expertise-Insight (and vice versa). Rarely insight came just from articulating expertise. Rather, insight was most frequently reached after HCI or HHI events, whereas \emph{expertise} was most frequently followed by HCI or HHI (equally).
\rmed{Moreover, insights can be followed by note taking. This can be seen visually in~\autoref{fig:scenarios_cat_o_view}-left.
Some detailed exploration (e.g. of trajectories) requires extensive note-taking during insight generation (e.g. to record parameters and their values).} \rmed{We can see this in CS1a-S18,20,21,22,24.
\rmed{These findings may indicate the different nature of expertise and insight in the context of trade-off analysis.
\rmed{
For the analysis of event sequences by exploration \emph{objects}, we found that the most frequent event patterns involve the following objects: \emph{criteria}, \emph{tool} and \emph{exploration method}. It appears that observations on these objects are closely related. For example, it may be that criteria selection influences the choice of exploration method, or that discussions on the exploration method often leads to experts exchanging on what search criteria to create in order to enable this exploration. More notably, discussions related to various search criteria (in the form of expertise, insight or HHI) are often followed by tool events, perhaps to discuss how to specify the criteria using the SPLOM-based visualization tool.\nb{candidate for removal + figure 5, sequences by objects.}
}
\rmed{
\emph{Trajectory} events are most frequently followed by criteria discussions. For example, at various occasions in the second use-case, domain experts started the exploration from an ideal trajectory, from which they made partial selections (i.e., search criteria). They then verified the correspondences between those selections and the remaining trajectory steps, as well as the objectives. \emph{Correlation} events are more frequently followed by discussions on an exploration method to validate the correlation, or by a search criteria, more likely to drill down to the details of that correlation. Finally, \emph{Alignment} events occur more frequently after discussions on the exploration method. Our experts often had to align what they found from the visualization, with what they knew from their domain. Often the discussions related to \emph{Alignment} covered the provenance of the Pareto front data
\nb{candidate for removal.}
}
\subsection{Expertise [Q3,Q4]
We illustrate through participants' quotes\footnote{\fix{All participants' quotes are translated from French.}} how expertise plays an important role during model exploration, particularly in: \rmed{. It is particularly important in } (i) identifying outliers and discrepancies, (ii) informing various types of decisions, and (iii) validating insights.
\Part{8}, for instance, was able to quickly identify and explain an outlier, where wheat yield was unusually high: \quotes{\emph{I think it is a point for one year where there was a very favourable climate at the end of the cycle}}. On the other hand, she expressed uncertainty with respect to model predictions of a certain variable:
\quotes{\emph{I do not trust the protein content level, wheat at 27\% of protein content, it is not something we see everyday!}}.
Domain expertise helped inform various types of decisions \rmed{related to dimensions, } such as which dimensions to aggregate in a search criteria and which to exclude: \quotes{\emph{then there is EAOH, and the famous higher alcohol which are precursors, which we need to have the least possible amount of, because it serves nothing from an aromatic point of view.}} \Part{5}. Similarly for \Part{8}: \quotes{\emph{in fact TP [protein content] does not need to be here [as objective], I just don't want it to be less than 11.5 ... for me personally losses [one objective] is more important than the other objectives}}.
\rmed{Expertise can inform how participants decide to explore the model search space and the steps they take to do that: \quotes{\emph{in fact, in my head, since I have a notion of the trajectory of the [plant's] nutrition, I have this idea, it goes in the sense of the trajectory ... So, I start at N1.}} \Part{8}. The same domain expert also made suggestions to improve the optimisation procedure based on her expertise: \quotes{\emph{you have to be careful, such that you have at least one simulation with TP $>$ 11.5\% per year. Otherwise you will remove years, because TP is not at 11.5\% not because the fertilisation strategy was not good, but because the climate did not allow it}}.}
\rmed{The explicit knowledge provided by various experts facilitates the interpretation of insights and contributes to their validation.\rmed{For example, \Part{8} found a correlation insight linking protein content to year, which she was able to confirm based on her expertise: \quotes{\emph{Yes because maximising TP is dependent on the year}}. }}
A deeper validation of insights is reached when \emph{multiple expertise} are synchronised. Typically, observations in one part of the exploration framework, often the visualization, are aligned with existing expertise about the remaining steps of the exploration pipeline\rmed{ (optimisation, modelling and the study domain)}. For example, a correlation insight was found in the first use-case where two objectives (EH and EO) appear to be highly correlated. One optimisation expert raised a warning about this finding: \quotes{\emph{from the optimisation point of view they\rmed{ [EH and EO]} are correlated, but afterwards, we do not know}} \Part{7}. A modelling expert then confirmed that the observed correlation between the two objectives also exists in the model, and thus adding to the validity of this finding: \quotes{\emph{because these are the combinations I have found in order to reduce the model}}\Part{1}. Finally, a domain expert adds that this correlation also exists in the physical sense: \quotes{\emph{besides being correlated in the Pareto front and the model, EH and EO are also correlated in the metabolic sense}} \Part{5}. The same expert expressed the added value of the visualization in realising the nature of this correlation: \quotes{\emph{This [the correlation] we already have in the model, we see it experimentally, but here in the Pareto front it is a disaster\rmed{[too complex]}
... You do not have a simple correlation between an alcohol and its ester}}\Part{5}. \rmed{A more general comment followed from the visualization expert advising participants on how to read the scatterplots given our exploration framework: \quotes{\emph{All that you know about the model, you will be able to find here. However, other things you find here [in the visualization], could also be interesting}}.}
\subsection{Subjective User Feedback}
\label{sec:subjective}
\begin{comment}
We extracted and analysed\rmed{qualitatively} the annotations of all events dealing with \emph{Tool} or \emph{Exploration Method} objects\rmed{, and we looked at our general observational notes } to compile a list of \emph{potential} triggers and barriers~\cite{mackay1991} to developing interactive model exploration and trade-off analysis tools:\rmed{We organise these in terms of how multiple experts appear to reason about their problem domain through the different abstractions introduced by our analysis framework (i.e., the modelling, optimisation and visualization), and observations related to the actual usage of the SPLOM-based tool in the specific context of model trade-off analysis.}
\end{comment}
\indent
\emph{1. Reasoning about the world through multiple abstractions: }
Our participants liked the visual style of model exploration and how the framework helped generate complex new insights: \quotes{\emph{\rmed{the way I see it [the main result of the exploration], is that}we made a first exploration filter that made it possible to arrive at this decision tree, it's not negligible}} \Part{9}. Participants appreciated the ability to explore \emph{alternatives} within an already optimised space. For example,
\rmed{Another finding, this time for the wine use-case,}the wine experts found two distinct fermentation strategies that led to the same aromatic composition through different temperature management strategies: \quotes{\emph{this is very interesting ..., my aim is not necessarily to reach the max of aromas,\rmed{say 0.75 of the different aromas,} either I use 0.4 which is my max\rmed{[for the initial nitrogen N0]}, or use 0.2-0.25. The result product is the same even though the nitrogen quantity is different}} \Part{5}.\rmed{ The same participant added: \quotes{\emph{it is a real super intelligent exploration ... this type of exploration is complicated, we cannot do it without EvoGraphDice [the tool]}}.}
However, there were some issues related to the interpretation of the visualizations\rmed{, expressed by the domain experts}: \quotes{\emph{it is strange that I do not have other points [for that year], ah no, because it is already optimised}} \Part{8}. Another domain expert added: \quotes{\emph{what is not clear from me is ... we reason in relation to what we know in terms of what is correlated to what\rmed{ [from experiments]}, but here in the Pareto front, there could be things that are very correlated, which may not be correlated [in reality or in the model]. This could be disturbing in terms of reasoning}} \Part{4}. This participant suggested overlaying the Pareto front points on the simulation data\rmed{(e.g. using a different colour)} as a reminder that these are optimised points.
\rmed{Another issue was related to the non-assisted manner in which participants currently explored the trade-off space, which made the exploration sometimes cumbersome: \quotes{\emph{these decision rules\rmed{[values for the nitrogen fertalisation trajectory]}, it's too heavy! ... What disturbs me, having the same [fertalisation] trajectory for wheat with very low iNN level and one with correct iNN level, is very strange... it does not respect the physiology of the plant}} \Part{8}. This domain expert would have liked to more \emph{systematically} exploit the expertise that she previously formalised and tested, for example, to eliminate a number of non-viable fertalisation strategies.}
\vspace{5pt}
\indent
\emph{2. Using SPLOM-based tools to explore model trade-offs: }
\rmed{Our participants liked the gradual selections and filtering of data across the 2D views: \quotes{\emph{for me, what I also like, is to be able to make chained selections [brushing and linking]}} \Part{8}. Their expertise was important in creating meaningful search criteria that helped them reach optimal solutions to their optimisation problems. In particular, they appreciated the tools' lasso selections, and the brushing and linking of views, which helped them prioritise their filters, and thus manage conflicts between the competing objectives: \quotes{\emph{what we did in terms of coloured selections, it is also a way to do the prioritisation of criteria}} \Part{5}. As described earlier (\autoref{subsubsec:search-space}), participants may prioritise dimensions differently depending on the analysis scenario, which can imply that any explicit support for chained filtering and prioritisation needs to be flexible and adapts to changing research questions and directions during the exploration.
\rmed{In terms of missing tool functionalities that may have limited the trade-off exploration in this study, the most important ones were related to the search criteria and lasso selections, aggregation of dimensions, sensemaking of the exploration process, and the dynamic linking of the various stages of our exploration framework.}
We identified \emph{four} main areas where the exploration tool may be improved based on participants comments and interactions. \textbf{(1)}\rmed{although multiple participants helped define each search criteria dimensions, as well as the size and location of the corresponding lasso selections, our tool does not directly support the collaborative editing of search criteria and lasso selections. Moreover, accuracy is an important factor to consider here, as our participants tended to start with large selections based on the primary dimensions, but then fine tune as they progressed in the exploration.} our tool lacked
\rmed{support for fine touch-based lasso selections \rmed{on the tactile display}, and}
ways to import search criteria to other exploration sessions. \rmed{Moreover, for each use-case, participants explored multiple Pareto fronts, generated from the same models. Participants were interested in applying the same selections and search criteria to different Pareto fronts, but currently our visualization tool does not allow for exporting or importing work from one exploration session to another.}
\textbf{(2)} The text based dimension editor and detailed lasso selection were difficult to operate on the tactile surface.\rmed{, thus this event was the most time consuming of all HCI events. }
\textbf{(3)} Although a history of past selections and current queries are provided in our tool, participants often felt lost during the exploration\rmed{Particularly for longer analysis scenarios, participants struggled to make sense of their their coloured selections, and how they arrived to a particular view or search criteria }: \quotes{\emph{what was the basis of the reflection here? In fact, we seem to go faster than we have time to note down}}~\Part{6}.
Our participants resorted to note-taking and storytelling to overcome this issue, but this was not sufficient. \textbf{(4)} The different components of our exploration framework are currently not linked dynamically. \rmed{Thus, if domain experts want to}Adding new objectives requires the optimisation procedure to be launched off-line, the results are then uploaded to the visualization tool.\rmed{Given the intensive calculations required to generate each Pareto front, this linking needs to consider the progressive viewing of intermediate results~\cite{zgraggen2017}.}
\vspace{-5pt}
\section{Discussion and Summary of Findings
\label{sec:summary}
\add{To the best of our knowledge, there are no other studies that looked at collaborative model exploration in real-world settings. In terms of results, we found similar processes to those described in general sensemaking literature~\cite{klein2007,pirolli2005}. Our contribution here, however, is in identifying why these processes tend to occur (e.g., storytelling to recap), and when they occur (e.g., storytelling periodically for large groups, or at the end of big chunks of exploration for smaller groups). Alignment is a particular process to model exploration, also described in~\cite{Chuang2012}. However, our work considers more complex models, multiple computational stages and co-located expertise.} We discuss next \emph{seven} key findings from our study, relating them to our initial research questions, \add{and comment on the applicability of our methods to other domains}:
\vspace{3pt}
\indent
\emph
{\add{1.} Exploration as Multiple Linked Analysis Scenarios} [Q1]
\label{sec:summary_scenarios}
We observed
that\rmed{the patterns in how our study participants explored and collaborated. The}
exploration is split into\hrem{ several}
mini-exploration scenarios. Trade-off analysis starts with a preliminary exploration often leading to a focused research question. The remainder of the exploration is characterised by the non-linear interleaving of new and refined hypotheses and research questions~\cite{pirolli2005}, operating on a variety of exploration objects. \add{Those scenarios denote a shift in the research questions and hypotheses set out by experts, which often result in change of focus in the model or data space. A parallel can be drawn between our approach and the data-frame model described in~\cite{klein2007}. For instance, their \quotes{reframing} maps to our new scenario, and \quotes{elaborating the frame} to our refine scenario. In our case, however, re-framing revealed itself to happen specifically when participants shift their research questions and hypotheses. Furthermore, we provide a more fine grained analysis of the exploration, by crossing high level categories of interest (e.g., insight, expertise), with exploration objects (correlation, exploration method).}
\vspace{3pt}
\indent
\emph
{\add{2.} Heterogeneous Analysis Scenarios} [Q1]
\label{sec:summary_scenarios_nature}
Analysis scenarios vary in length and complexity. Most of the exploration relates to refining research questions. Scenarios where experts actively compared or followed alternative exploration paths\rmed{to consider trade-offs,} were rare, tended to be longer and had more interaction events\rmed{ (as they delve into details about one scenario, or reach an impasse in another)}.
While the absolute length of scenarios differs, their duration and event count were strongly correlated.
\vspace{3pt}
\indent
\emph
{\add{3.} Storytelling \add{as a Grounding Process}} [Q1,Q3
\label{sec:summary_storytelling}
Participants engaged in the storytelling of their past exploration~\cite{riche2018data,tong2018storytelling},~\add{both in terms of gained knowledge, and the processes used to reveal the various insights~\cite{clark1991grounding,convertino2008}. This grounding phenomena helps groups with multiple expertise to establish a basis for working together across differences, and makes the sensemaking process through model and algorithmic abstractions more transparent~\cite{goyal2016,passi2017}}.
\rmed{but at various rates that seem appropriate to their collaboration style and set-up. }{}
\fix{In our study}, storytelling scenarios are mostly discussion-based,
but happen likely for different purposes. \rmed{happening periodically, but likely for different purposes.}
Large groups re-cap periodically to bring everyone up to speed. For smaller groups, storytelling tends to occur towards the end of the exploration, to summarise and prepare for the next session.
\rmed{In both cases, the longer the exploration session, the more the storytelling.}
\vspace{3pt}
\indent
\emph
{\add{4.} Two Key Strategies for Trade-off Analysis} [Q1]
\label{sec:summary_strategies}
Domain experts create multiple search criteria that they then prioritise.
Objective dimensions are important to guide the exploration when used in the \emph{initial} search criteria, or to validate
parameter criteria choices and selections a \emph{posteriori}. The first strategy seems more appropriate for model exploration scenarios where there are known or hypothesised connections between primary and secondary dimensions\rmed{(e.g. UC1 on the wine model)}, or when analysts are very familiar with the space, and so they are more likely to experiment. The second case seems more appropriate for under-explored models\rmed{(e.g. UC2 on the wheat model)} when experts are still trying to understand the model behaviour.\rmed{, which is likely to result in the creation of a new Pareto front.}
In both cases, however, insight is reached, making both exploration strategies valid.
\vspace{3pt}
\indent
\emph
{\add{5.} The Importance of Aggregating Dimensions} [Q1]
\label{sec:summary_aggregation}
Our analysis of the search space exploration strategies showed the importance of aggregating dimensions.
SPLOM-based tools project data
two dimensions at a time, whereas our participants were examining trade-offs between at least five objectives. The degree to which experts used dimension aggregation varied between
sessions depending on
their knowledge
about the non-aggregated search space.
\vspace{3pt}
\indent
\emph
{\add{6.} Multiple Pathways to Insight} [Q2]
\label{sec:summary_insight}
Our \rmed{analysis of how insight is generated shows that our}
interactive model exploration framework allowed the generation of new insights and the confirmation of old findings.
Similar to the tasks described by Yi et al.~\cite{yi2008}, our participants provided re-caps of their exploration (provide overview), continuously refined their exploration (adjust), discovered interesting relationships between data dimensions (detect pattern), and aligned different types of findings (mental model). We found that insight is reached in all scenario types including initial ones, and is often in the form of new surprising findings. In the context of our study, those insights were mostly about trajectories and correlations. An unexpected finding was that insights can also be reached during storytelling,
mostly about expanding previous discussions and forming hypotheses and actions for future biological experiments. This highlights the importance of supporting storytelling in model exploration.\rmed{ We also found that scenario refinements can lead to new insights, which means that even \quotes{failed} scenarios (in terms of new insights) can be revisited and become more successful.}
\vspace{3pt}
\indent
\emph
{\add{7.} The Indirect Link Between Expertise and Insight} [Q2,4]
\label{sec:summary_expertise_insight}
\rmed{During the exploration, our study participants demonstrated a deeper understanding of their respective domains, and appear to perceive a large amount of meaningful patterns or chunks of organised knowledge ~\cite{chi2014nature}. Their}Expertise appears to lead to insight and also to follow from it (e.g., to explain and validate findings), although in both cases not directly but with interleaving discussions and human-computer interaction events. Expertise was important in identifying outliers and discrepancies, informing various types of decisions (related to both analysis findings and exploration method), and validating insights.
In our study, synchronising multiple expertise seems to provide deeper insights and validation of findings, and increase model understanding and confidence in the results, although more studies are needed to confirm our intuitions.
\rmed{\subsubsection{Lack of Dedicated Tools for Trade-off Analysis}
Our participants appreciated the visual style of model exploration and how the framework helped them generate complex new insights. However, reasoning with an optimised parameter space was not very intuitive. Even though experts explored a reduced search space, they expressed a need for assistance to guide their exploration and navigation.
Participants were quickly able to adopt the SPLOM-based visualization tool to perform trade-off analysis tasks, but it appears to lack key functionalities specifically tailored to Pareto front analysis tasks such as the ones described in~\cite{tuvsar2015}.
In particular, there is need to support the creation and management of multiple search criteria, aggregation of dimensions, sensemaking of the exploration process, and the dynamic linking of the various stages of the exploration framework.\rmed{(e.g. interactive optimisation of model simulation results).}}
\vspace{-3pt}
\rmed{\subsubsection{\add{8.} Applicability \rmed{of our approach }to other domains}}
\subsubsection{\add{8.} Broader Applicability}
\label{sec:summary_gen}
\add{Our hypothesis-centred approach to characterise our exploration scenarios is well suited to how our domain experts conduct their research in agronomy. However, the approach can generalise to any domain with large input and output simulation spaces that considers trade-offs (e.g., finance, urban planning), and where the human investigation relies on what-if scenarios (e.g., intelligence analysis). Furthermore, our coded exploration objects (with the exception of \quotes{tool} that is SPLOM specific) apply to general data exploration with multiple expertise and can be a basis for future analysis. Finally, our model exploration framework can use any multi-dimensional visualization tool. \rmed{, even though the \quotes{tool} exploration objects we coded are specific to SPLOM exploration.}
}
\vspace{-8pt}
\section{Recommendations for Design}
Collaborative frameworks such as ours resembles participatory design approaches,\rmed{, for the purpose of model building, tuning and exploration.} where the presence of multiple expertise may improve the collective understanding of the modelled processes~\cite{boukhelifa2017workers}.
The importance of involving different types of expertise during model-based exploration for decision making, and having people who can speak the language of multiple experts, has also been documented~\cite{simon2015bridging}. Improving model understanding may have societal implications such as encouraging model-driven debate and discussions~\cite{von2010designing}. Our \add{study} findings\add{, and participants' subjective feedback (indicated below by \textsuperscript{$\dagger$}{})}, suggest several ways that \add{collaborative} model exploration may be enhanced to better support \add{sensemaking during} trade-off analysis:
\vspace{5pt}
\indent
\emph
{Methodology: } The think-aloud protocol used in this study allowed us to observe knowledge articulated by our participants, either as new findings (insight), or existing knowledge (expertise). Other methods for externalising or articulating \add{hidden} knowledge needs to be investigated~\cite{mccurdy2018framework}\hrem{, especially for tacit knowledge}\add{, particularly for collaborative settings}. \hrem{Also,}\add{The} externalised knowledge may then be exploited to augment the underlying data and models~\cite{baudrit2010towards}. \hrem{These methods need to distinguish between newly gained and existing knowledge.} \add{More generally, however, the distinction between expertise and insight}\hrem{Such a distinction} may inform the design of knowledge-assisted visual analytics tools, and can help refine insight-based evaluation of visualization systems.
\vspace{5pt}
\indent
\emph
{\add{Making Sense of the Exploration Process: }}
\add{During the storytelling scenarios we identified, participants relied mostly on their own memory, the notes they took and the bookmark facility of our SPLOM tool, to reflect and share their own understanding of the main insights found \add{\textbf{(section 6.3)}}. However, they reported that this was not sufficient to make accurate reflections about their exploration processes (\textbf{\autoref{sec:subjective}\textsuperscript{$\dagger$}{}}).
Better support for sensemaking of the exploration process itself is needed, in particular, to reveal the hypothesis-driven approach experts took during their analyses \add{\textbf{(section 6.1)}}. This can be achieved by providing ways to visualise the exploration history and \fix{to} mark scenario stops and transitions, particularly for scenario comparison or alternatives \add{\textbf{(section 6.2)}}, and by allowing experts to record exploration values and the different types of insights reached \add{\textbf{(section 6.6)}}.
}
\vspace{5pt}
\indent
\emph
{Trade-off Exploration Tools \& Setups: }\rmed{ Based on our findings (\autoref{sec:summary}), and participants' feedback indicated by (\textsuperscript{$\dagger$}{}) below, }\rmed{ We make the following design recommendations for trade-off analysis tools:}We recommend that
trade-off analysis tools should:
\textbf{(a)} Support the creation of multiple search criteria, and help users keep track of their provenance and priority over time \add{(\textbf{section 6.4})};
\textbf{(b)} Allow\rmed{interactive} dimension aggregation\add{, and default combined dimensions, such as the results of principal component analysis \textbf{(section 6.5)}};
\textbf{(c)} Allow the dynamic regeneration of Pareto fronts\add{\textbf{\textsuperscript{$\dagger$}{}}};
and \textbf{(d)} Allow multiple linked exploration setups, where people can create \emph{private} instances and explore alternatives individually, before sharing results with others \add{(\textbf{section 5.Q1})}.
\section{Study Limitations}
Our study focuses on biological applications, although we believe many of our findings generalise to other domains. We acknowledge \hrem{two }\add{four} main limitations of our study. \emph{First},\rmed{the 12 study participants formed two user groups corresponding to the wine and wheat use-cases. I} it is hard to realise a collaborative setup that unites multiple types of expertise, or to repeat the process in a distributed fashion. The two use-cases happened at eight-months interval because we needed to prepare the different stages of the pipeline. \rmed{(coordinate before hands on model, parameters of the multi-objective optimisation, the visualization set-up).}\rmed{In practice, the availability of multiple expertise at the same time was a blocking factor for having more groups for the study.}\rmed{Despite of this, the study observations and findings are rich.}\emph{Second}, although experts reached insights during their exploration\rmed{ of the model trade-off spaces}, it is hard to validate those findings from the biological sense. Those insights, however, allowed them\rmed{ to verify old findings, and} to prepare new research questions and future experiments.\rmed{ \emph{Third}, it has already been acknowledged that conducting an insight-based user study is both difficult and time-consuming. In particular, the complexity of video coding and insight validation grows with the number of participants~\cite{guo2016}.}
\add{\emph{Third}, given that we are working with real experts and their problems, we did not control for expertise. Our method does not rely on expertise overlap. However, we noticed that our experts had gained new types of expertise over time, e.g., a domain expert became model expert after working with the model over a number of years. In the absence of expertise overlap and previous collaborations, we expect longer exploration sessions to introduce the various expertise and establish common ground. \emph{Fourth}, in terms of screen size, the large screen facilitates the display of high-dimensional datasets for groups of experts. If a smaller size screen is used, the visualization tool would need to allow for workspace awareness, and may lead to different results.}
\section{Conclusions}
We presented a multi-stage model exploration framework that unites multiple expertise, and a user study that adopts it. The focus of the study was on model-trade-off exploration, and on the link between insight and expertise during trade-off analysis. Our findings highlight a rich multi-storyline approach experts adopt during exploration\add{, where they constructively combine diverse expertise to resolve conflicts between competing objectives, and reach new insights.}
\add{More work is needed to better understand collective as well as individual experts' role in generating insight in the different analysis sub-scenarios identified in our work (such as compare or storytelling), and how the different experts interact with the tool. These studies can help improve our understanding \hrem{of the human and collaborative aspects of work with large datasets, as well as } of the role of human expertise and its interplay with visual analytics in building common ground and externalising hidden knowledge.} \hrem{More work is needed to create visual analytics tools that assist various types of experts when working with complex models.}
\bibliographystyle{ACM-Reference-Format}
|
\section{Introduction}
Titan has a dense atmosphere, composed of $\mathrm{N_2}$ and $\mathrm{CH_4}$, and many trace gases such as hydrocarbons (e.g. $\mathrm{C_2H_6}$, $\mathrm{C_2H_2}$) and nitriles (e.g. $\mathrm{HCN}$, $\mathrm{HC_3N}$) produced by its rich photochemistry. Like Earth, Titan has a stratosphere, located between 50~km ($\sim 100$~mbar) and 400~km ($\sim 0.01$~mbar), characterized by the increase of its temperature with altitude because of the absorption of incoming sunlight by methane and hazes. Titan's atmosphere undergoes strong variations of insolation, due to its obliquity ($26.7^{\circ}$) and to the eccentricity of Saturn's orbit around the Sun (0.0565). \\
The Cassini spacecraft monitored Titan's atmosphere during 13 years (from 2004 to 2017), from northern winter to summer solstice. Its data are a unique opportunity to study the seasonal evolution of its stratosphere, especially with mid-IR observations from Cassini/CIRS (Composite InfraRed Spectrometer, \citet{Flasar2004}). They showed that at pressures lower than 5~mbar, the stratosphere exhibits strong seasonal variations of temperature and composition related to changes in atmospheric dynamics and radiative processes. For instance, during northern winter (2004-2008), high northern latitudes were enriched in photochemical products such as HCN or $\mathrm{C_4H_2}$, while there was a "hot spot" in the upper stratosphere and mesosphere (0.1 - 0.001~mbar, \citet{Achterberg2008, Coustenis2007, Teanby2007b,Vinatier2007}). These observations were interpreted as evidence of subsidence above the North pole during winter, which is a part of the pole-to-pole atmospheric circulation cell predicted for solstices by Titan GCMs (Global Climate Models, \citet{Lora2015,Lebonnois2012a,Newman2011}). These models also predict that the circulation pattern should reverse around equinoxes, via a transitional state with two equator-to-pole cells. These changes began to affect the South pole in 2010, when measurements showed that pressures inferior to 0.03~mbar exhibited an enrichment in gases such as HCN or $\mathrm{C_2H_2}$, which propagated downward during autumn, consistent with the apparition of a new circulation cell with subsidence above the South pole \citep{Teanby2017,Vinatier2015}.\\
Some uncertainties remain about the seasonal evolution of the lower part of the stratosphere, i.e. at pressures from 5~mbar (120~km) to 100~mbar (tropopause, 50~km). Different estimates of radiative timescales have been calculated for this region. In \citet{Strobel2010}, the radiative timescales in this region vary from 0.2 Titan years at 5~mbar to 2.5 Titan years at 100~mbar. This means that the lower stratosphere should be the transition zone from parts of the atmosphere which are sensitive to seasonal insolation variations, to parts of the atmosphere which are not. In contrast, in the radiative-dynamical model of \citet{Bezard2018}, radiative timescales are between 0.02 Titan year at 5~mbar and 0.26 Titan year at 100~mbar, implying that this whole region should exhibit a response to the seasonal cycle.\\
From northern winter to equinox, CIRS mid-IR observations showed that temperature variations were lower than 5~K between 5~mbar and 10~mbar \citep{Bampasidis2012,Achterberg2011}. Temporal variations intensified after spring equinox, as \citet{Coustenis2016} measured a cooling by 16~K and an increase in gases abundances at $70^{\circ}$S from 2010 to 2014, at 10~mbar, associated with the autumn subsidence above the South pole. \citet{Sylvestre2018} showed that this subsidence affects pressure levels as low as 15~mbar as they measured strong enrichments in $\mathrm{C_2N_2}$, $\mathrm{C_3H_4}$, and $\mathrm{C_4H_2}$~at high southern latitudes from 2012 to 2016 with CIRS far-IR observations. However, we have little information on temperatures and their seasonal evolution for pressures greater than 10~mbar. Temperatures from the surface to 0.1~mbar can be measured by Cassini radio-occultations, but the published profiles were measured mainly in 2006 and 2007 \citep{SchinderFlasarMaroufEtAl2011,Schinder2012}, so they provide little information on seasonal variations of temperature. \\
In this study, we analyse all the available far-IR Cassini/CIRS observations to probe temperatures from 6~mbar to 25~mbar, and measure the seasonal variations of lower stratospheric temperatures. As these data were acquired throughout the Cassini mission from 2004 to 2017, and cover the whole latitude range, they provide a unique overview of the thermal evolution of the lower stratosphere from northern winter to summer solstice, and a better understanding of the radiative and dynamical processes at play in this part of Titan's atmosphere.\\
\section{Data analysis}
\subsection{Observations}
We measure lower stratospheric temperatures using Cassini/CIRS \citep{Flasar2004} spectra. CIRS is a thermal infrared spectrometer with three focal planes operating in three different spectral domains: 10 - 600$~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$ (17 - 1000$~\mathrm{\mu m}$) for FP1, 600 - 1100$~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$ (9 - 17 $~\mathrm{\mu m}$) for FP3, and 1100 - 1400$~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$ (7 - 9$~\mathrm{\mu m}$) for FP4. FP1 has a single circular detector with an angular field of view of 3.9~mrad, which has an approximately Gaussian spatial response with a FWHM of 2.5 mrad. FP3 and FP4 are each composed of a linear array of ten detectors. Each of these detectors has an angular field of view of 0.273~mrad. \\
In this study, we use FP1 far-IR observations, where nadir spectra are measured at a resolution of 0.5$~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$, in "sit-and-stare" geometry (i.e the FP1 detector probes the same latitude and longitude during the whole duration of the acquisition). In this type of observation, the average spatial field of view is 20$^\circ$ in latitude. An acquisition lasts between 1h30 and 4h30, allowing the recording of 100 to 330 spectra. The spectra from the same acquisition are averaged together, which increases the S/N by a factor $\sqrt{N}$ (where N is the number of spectra). As a result, we obtain an average spectrum where the rotational lines of $\mathrm{CH_4}$~(between 70$~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$ and 170$~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$) are resolved and can be used to retrieve Titan's lower stratospheric temperature. An example averaged spectrum is shown in Fig. \ref{fig_spec}.\\
We analysed all the available observations with the characteristics mentioned above. As shown in table \ref{table_obs}, this type of nadir far-IR observation has been performed throughout the Cassini mission (from 2004 to 2017), at all latitudes. Hence, the analysis of this dataset enables us to get an overview of Titan's lower stratosphere and its seasonal evolution.\\
\begin{figure}[!h]
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{Spectra_89N_0703}
\caption{Example of average spectrum measured with the FP1 detector of Cassini/CIRS (in black) and its fit by NEMESIS (in red). The measured spectrum was obtained after averaging 106 spectra observed at $89^{\circ}$N in March 2007. The rotational lines of $\mathrm{CH_4}$~are used to retrieve stratospheric temperature. The "haystack" feature is visible only at high latitudes during autumn and winter. }
\label{fig_spec}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Retrieval method}
We follow the same method as \citet{Sylvestre2018}. We use the portion of the spectrum between 70~$\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$ and 400~$\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$, where the main spectral features are: the ten rotational lines of $\mathrm{CH_4}$~(between 70$~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$ and 170$~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$), the $\mathrm{C_4H_2}$~band at $220~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$, the $\mathrm{C_2N_2}$~band at $234~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$, and the $\mathrm{C_3H_4}$~band at $327~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$ (see Fig. \ref{fig_spec}). The continuum emission comes from the collisions between the three main components of Titan's atmosphere (N$_2$, $\mathrm{CH_4}$, and H$_2$), and from the spectral contributions of the hazes. \\
We retrieve the temperature profile using the constrained non-linear inversion code NEMESIS \citep{Irwin2008}. We define a reference atmosphere, which takes into account the abundances of the main constituents of Titan's atmosphere measured by Cassini/CIRS \citep{Coustenis2016,Nixon2012,Cottini2012,Teanby2009}, Cassini/VIMS \citep{Maltagliati2015}, ALMA \citep{Molter2016} and Huygens/GCMS\citep{Niemann2010}. We also consider the haze distribution and properties measured in previous studies with Cassini/CIRS \citep{deKok2007,deKok2010b,Vinatier2012}, and Huygens/GCMS \citep{Tomasko2008b}. We consider four types of hazes, following \citet{deKok2007}: hazes 0 ($70~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$ to $400~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$), A (centred at $140~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$), B (centred at $220~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$) and C (centred at $190~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$). For the spectra measured at high northern and southern latitudes during autumn and winter, we add an offset from 1 to $3~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$ to the nominal haze B cross-sections between 190~$\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$ and 240~$\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$, as in \citet{Sylvestre2018}. This modification improves the fit of the continuum in the "haystack" which is a strong emission feature between 190~$\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$ and 240~$\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$ (see Fig. \ref{fig_spec}) seen at high latitudes during autumn and winter (e.g. in \citet{Coustenis1999, deKok2007, Anderson2012, Jennings2012, Jennings2015}). The variation of the offset allows us to take into account the evolution of the shape of this feature throughout autumn and winter. The composition of our reference atmosphere and the spectroscopic parameters adopted for its constituents are fully detailed in \citet{Sylvestre2018}.\\
We retrieve the temperature profile and scale factors applied to the \textit{a priori} profiles of $\mathrm{C_2N_2}$, $\mathrm{C_4H_2}$, $\mathrm{C_3H_4}$, and hazes 0, A, B and C, from the spectra using the constrained non-linear inversion code NEMESIS \citep{Irwin2008}. This code generates synthetic spectra from the reference atmosphere. At each iteration, the difference between the synthetic and the measured spectra is used to modify the profile of the retrieved variables, and minimise a cost function, in order to find the best fit for the measured spectrum. \\
The sensitivity of the spectra to the temperature can be measured with the inversion kernels for the temperature (defined as $K_{ij}~=~\frac{\partial I_i}{\partial T_j}$, where $I_i$ is the radiance measured at wavenumber $w_i$, and $T_j$ the temperature at pressure level $p_j$) for several wavenumbers. The contribution of the methane lines to the temperature measurement can be isolated by defining their own inversion kernels $K^{CH_4}_{ij}$ as follows:
\begin{equation}
K^{CH_4}_{ij} = K_{ij} - K^{cont}_{ij}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $K^{cont}_{ij}$ is the inversion kernel of the continuum for the same wavenumber. Figure \ref{fig_cf} shows $K^{CH_4}_{ij}$ for three of the rotational methane lines in the left panel, and the comparison between the sum of the 10 $K^{CH_4}_{ij}$ (for the 10 rotational $\mathrm{CH_4}$~lines) and inversion kernels for the continuum ($K^{cont}_{ij}$ at the wavenumbers of the $\mathrm{CH_4}$~lines and $K_{ij}$ outside of the $\mathrm{CH_4}$~lines) in the right panel. The $\mathrm{CH_4}$~lines allow us to measure lower stratospheric temperatures generally between 6~mbar and 25~mbar, with a maximal sensitivity at 15~mbar. The continuum emission mainly probes temperatures at higher pressures, around the tropopause and in the troposphere. The continuum emission mostly originates from the $\mathrm{N_2}$-$\mathrm{N_2}$ and $\mathrm{N_2}$-$\mathrm{CH_4}$~collisions induced absorption with some contribution from the hazes, for which we have limited constraints. However, Fig. \ref{fig_cf} shows that the continuum emission comes from pressure levels located several scale heights below the region probed by the $\mathrm{CH_4}$~lines, so the lack of constraints on the hazes and tropospheric temperatures does not affect the lower stratospheric temperatures which are the main focus of this study.\\
\begin{figure}[!h]
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{CF_72N_0704_v2}
\caption{Sensitivity of temperature measurements at $72^{\circ}N$ in April 2007. \textit{Left panel}: Normalised inversion kernels $K^{CH_4}_{ij}$ in three of the $\mathrm{CH_4}$~rotational lines. \textit{Right panel:} Comparison between the inversion kernels in the continuum ($K^{cont}_{ij}$ for three of the $\mathrm{CH_4}$~lines in dot-dashed lines, and $K_{ij}$ for other wavenumbers in the continuum in dashed lines) and the sum of the inversion kernels $K^{CH_4}_{ij}$ of the $\mathrm{CH_4}$~rotational lines. $\mathrm{CH_4}$~rotational lines dominate the temperature retrievals in the lower stratosphere, generally from 6 to 25~mbar (and up to 35~mbar, depending on the datasets). The continuum emission probes temperatures at pressures higher than 50~mbar, mainly in the troposphere.}
\label{fig_cf}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Error sources}
The main error sources in our temperature retrievals are the measurement noise and the uncertainties related to the retrieval process such as forward modelling errors or the smoothing of the temperature profile. The total error on the temperature retrieval is estimated by NEMESIS and is in the order of 2~K from 6~mbar to 25~mbar.\\
The other possible error source is the uncertainty on $\mathrm{CH_4}$~abundance, as \citet{Lellouch2014} showed that it can vary from 1\% to 1.5\% at 15 mbar. We performed additional temperature retrievals on several datasets, in order to assess the effects of these variations on the temperature retrievals. First, we selected datasets for which $\mathrm{CH_4}$~abundance was measured by \citet{Lellouch2014}. In Figure \ref{fig_TCH4}, we show examples of these tests for two of these datasets: $52^{\circ}$N in May 2007 and $15^{\circ}$S in October 2006, for which \citet{Lellouch2014} measured respective $\mathrm{CH_4}$~abundances of $q_{CH_4} = 1.20 \pm 0.15\%$ and $q_{CH_4} = 0.95 \pm 0.08 \%$ (the nominal value for our retrievals is $q_{CH_4} = 1.48 \pm 0.09\%$ from \citet{Niemann2010}). At $52^{\circ}$N, the temperature profile obtained with the methane abundance from \citet{Lellouch2014} does not differ by more than 4~K from the nominal temperature profile. At 15 mbar (where the sensitivity to temperature is maximal in our retrievals), the difference of temperature between these two profiles is 2~K. Even a $\mathrm{CH_4}$~volume mixing ratio as low as 1\% yields a temperature only 4~K warmer than the nominal temperature at 15~mbar. At $15^{\circ}$S, the difference of temperature between the nominal retrieval and the retrieval with the methane abundance retrieved by \citet{Lellouch2014} ($q_{CH_4}=0.95\%$), is approximately 9~K on the whole pressure range.\\
We performed additional temperature retrievals using CIRS FP4 nadir spectra measured at the same times and latitudes as the two datasets shown in Figure \ref{fig_TCH4}. In FP4 nadir spectra, the methane band $\nu_4$ is visible between $1200~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$ and $1360~\mathrm{cm^{-1}}$. This spectral feature allows us to probe temperature between 0.1~mbar and 10~mbar, whereas methane rotational lines in the CIRS FP1 nadir spectra generally probe temperature between 6~mbar and 25~mbar. Temperature can thus be measured with both types of retrievals from 6~mbar to 10~mbar. We performed FP4 temperature retrievals with the nominal methane abundance and the abundances measured by \citet{Lellouch2014}, as shown in Figure \ref{fig_TCH4}. FP4 temperature retrievals seem less sensitive to changes in the methane volume mixing ratio, as they yield a maximal temperature difference of 3~K at $52^{\circ}$N , and 4~K at $15^{\circ}$S between 6~mbar and 10~mbar. In both cases, FP1 and FP4 temperature retrievals are in better agreement in their common pressure range when the nominal methane abundance ($q_{CH_4}=1.48\%$) is used for both retrievals. This suggests that $q_{CH_4}=1.48\%$ is the best choice, at least in the pressure range covered by both types of temperature retrievals (from 6~mbar to 10 mbar). Changing the abundance of $\mathrm{CH_4}$~in the whole stratosphere seems to induce an error on the temperature measurements between 6~mbar and 10 mbar (up to 9~K at $15^{\circ}$S), which probably affects the temperature at 15~mbar in the FP1 retrievals, because of the vertical resolution of nadir retrievals (represented by the width of the inversion kernels in Fig. \ref{fig_cf}). Consequently, assessing the effects of $\mathrm{CH_4}$~abundance variations on temperature at 15~mbar by changing $q_{CH_4}$ in the whole stratosphere seems to be a very unfavourable test, and the uncertainties on temperature determined by this method are probably overestimated for the FP1 temperature retrievals. Overall, when retrieving temperature from CIRS FP1 nadir spectra with $q_{CH_4}=1\%$ for datasets spanning different times and latitudes, we found temperatures warmer than our nominal temperatures by 2~K to 10~K at 15~mbar, with an average of 5~K. In \cite{Lellouch2014}, authors found that temperature changes by 4-5 K on the whole pressure range when varying $q_{CH_4}$ at $15^{\circ}$S, but they determined temperatures using FP4 nadir and limb data, which do not probe the 15 mbar pressure level.\\
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{Temperature_profiles_52N_0705}\\
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{Temperature_profiles_15S_0610}\\
\caption{Temperature profiles from CIRS FP1 and FP4 nadir observations at $52^{\circ}$N in May 2007 (top panel) and $15^{\circ}$S in October 2006 (bottom panel), retrieved with the methane abundances measured by \citet{Niemann2010} (nominal value in this study) and \citet{Lellouch2014}. In both cases, the nominal value from \citet{Niemann2010} yields a better agreement between the two types of observations.}
\label{fig_TCH4}
\end{figure}
\section{Results}
\label{sect_res}
\begin{figure}[!hp]
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{carte_2d_6mbar_v2}\\
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{carte_2d_15mbar_v2}
\caption{Evolution of temperatures at 6~mbar (120~km) and 15~mbar (85~km) from northern winter (2004) to summer (2017). The length of the markers shows the average size of the field of view of the CIRS FP1 detector. Temperatures exhibit similar strong seasonal changes at both pressure levels, especially at the poles.}
\label{fig_ev_saiso}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{var_saiso_GCM}
\caption{Meridional distribution of temperatures at 6~mbar (120~km) and 15~mbar (85~km), for three different seasons: late northern winter (2007, blue triangles), mid-spring (2013, green circles), and near summer solstice (from July 2016 to September 2017, red diamonds). The plain lines are the meridional distributions given by GCM simulations at comparable seasons (see section \ref{sect_discu}). In both observations and model the meridional gradient of temperatures evolves from one season to another at both pressure levels.}
\label{fig_var_saiso}
\end{figure}
Figures \ref{fig_ev_saiso} and \ref{fig_var_saiso} show the temperatures measured with Cassini/CIRS far-IR nadir data at 6~mbar (minimal pressure probed by the CIRS far-IR nadir observations) and 15~mbar (pressure level where these observations are the most sensitive). Figure \ref{fig_ev_saiso} maps the seasonal evolution of temperatures throughout the Cassini mission (from 2004 to 2017, i.e. from mid-northern winter to early summer), while Figure \ref{fig_var_saiso} is focused on the evolution of the meridional gradient of temperature from one season to another. In both figures, both pressure levels exhibit significant seasonal variations of temperature and follow similar trends. Maximal temperatures are reached near the equator in 2005 (152~K at 6~mbar, 130~K at 15~mbar, at $18^{\circ}$S, at $L_S=300^{\circ}$), while the minimal temperatures are reached at high southern latitudes in autumn (123~K at 6~mbar, 106~K at 15~mbar at $70^{\circ}$S in 2016, at $L_S=79^{\circ}$).\\
The maximal seasonal variations of temperature are located at the poles for both pressure levels. At high northern latitudes ($60^\circ$N - $90^\circ$N), at 15~mbar, the temperature increased overall from winter to summer solstice. For instance at $70^{\circ}$N, temperature increased by 10~K from January 2007 to September 2017. At 6~mbar, temperatures at $60^{\circ}$N stayed approximately constant from winter to spring, whereas latitudes poleward from $70^{\circ}$N warmed up. At $85^{\circ}$N, the temperature increased continuously from 125~K in March 2007 to 142~K in September 2017.\\
In the meantime, at high southern latitudes ($60^\circ$S - $90^\circ$S), at 6~mbar and 15~mbar, temperatures strongly decreased from southern summer (2007) to late autumn (2016). It is the largest seasonal temperature change we measured in the lower stratosphere. At $70^{\circ}$S, temperature decreased by 24~K at 6~mbar and by 19~K at 15~mbar between January 2007 and June 2016. This decrease seems to be followed by a temperature increase toward winter solstice. At $70^{\circ}$S, temperatures varied by $+8$~K at 6~mbar from June 2016 to April 2017. Temperatures at high southern latitudes began to evolve in November 2010 at 6~mbar, and 2 years later (in August 2012) at 15~mbar.\\
Other latitudes experience moderate seasonal temperature variations. At low latitudes (between $30^{\circ}$N and $30^{\circ}$S), temperature decreased overall from 2004 to 2017 at both pressure levels. For instance, at the equator, at 6~mbar temperature decreased by 6~K from 2006 to 2016. At mid-southern latitudes, temperatures stayed constant from summer (2005) to mid-autumn (June 2012 at 6~mbar, and May 2013 at 15~mbar), then they decreased by approximately 10~K from 2012-2013 to 2016. At mid-northern latitudes temperatures increased overall from winter to spring. At $50^{\circ}$N, temperature increased from 139~K to 144~K from 2005 to 2014. In Figure \ref{fig_var_saiso}, at 6~mbar and 15~mbar, the meridional temperature gradient evolves from one season to another. During late northern winter, temperatures were approximately constant from $70^{\circ}$S to $30^{\circ}$N, and then decreased toward the North pole. In mid-spring, temperatures were decreasing from equator to poles. Near the summer solstice, at 15~mbar, the meridional temperature gradient reversed compared to winter (summer temperatures constant in northern and low southern latitudes then decreasing toward the South Pole), while at 6~mbar, temperatures globally decrease from the equator to the South pole and $70^{\circ}$N, then increase slightly between $70^{\circ}$N and $90^{\circ}$N. At 15~mbar, most of these changes in the shape of the temperature distribution occur because of the temperature variations poleward from $60^{\circ}$. At 6~mbar, temperature variations occur mostly in the southern hemisphere at latitudes higher than $40^{\circ}$S, and near the North pole at latitudes higher than $70^{\circ}$N.\\
\begin{figure}[!h]
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{temp_profiles}
\caption{Temperature variations in the lower stratosphere during the Cassini mission for different latitudes. The blue profiles were measured during northern winter (in 2007). The red profiles were measured in late northern spring (in 2017 for $85^{\circ}$N, in 2016 for the other latitudes). The seasonal temperature variations are observed at most latitudes, and on the whole probed pressure range.}
\label{fig_grad_saiso_vert}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig_grad_saiso_vert} shows the first and the last temperature profiles measured with CIRS nadir far-IR data, for several latitudes. As in Fig. \ref{fig_ev_saiso}, the maximal temperature variations are measured at high southern latitudes for all pressure levels. At $70^{\circ}$S, the temperature decreased by 25~K at 10~mbar. Below 10~mbar the seasonal temperature difference decreases rapidly with increasing pressure until it reaches 10~K at 25~mbar, whereas it is nearly constant between 5~mbar and 10~mbar. $85^{\circ}$N also exhibits a decrease of the seasonal temperature gradient below the 10~mbar pressure level, although it is less pronounced than near the South pole. At $45^{\circ}$S, the temperature decreased by approximately 10~K from 2007 to 2016, over the whole probed pressure range. At the equator, the temperature varies by -5~K from 2005 to 2016 at 6~mbar and the amplitude of this variation seems to decrease slightly with increasing pressure until it becomes negligible at 25~mbar. However the amplitude of these variations is in the same range as the uncertainty on temperature due to potential $\mathrm{CH_4}$~variations. \\
\section{Discussion}
\label{sect_discu}
\subsection{Comparison with previous results}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{comp_prev_studies_v5}
\caption{Comparison of nadir FP1 temperatures with previous studies.
\textit{Top left panel:} Comparison between CIRS nadir FP1 (triangles) and CIRS nadir FP4 temperatures at 6~mbar (circles, \citet{Bampasidis2012}[1], and \citet{Coustenis2016}[2]) in 2010 (cyan) and 2014 (purple).
\textit{Right panel:} Comparison between temperature profiles from CIRS nadir FP1 observations (thick solid lines), CIRS nadir FP4 observations (thin dot-dashed lines, \citet{Coustenis2016}[2]), and Cassini radio-occultation (thin dashed line, \citet{SchinderFlasarMaroufEtAl2011}[3]). Our results are in good agreement with CIRS FP4 temperatures, but diverge somewhat from radio-occultation profiles with increasing pressure.
\textit{Bottom left panel:} Comparison between temperatures at 15~mbar from our CIRS FP1 nadir measurements (magenta triangles), Cassini radio-occultations in 2006 and 2007 (cyan circles, \citet{SchinderFlasarMaroufEtAl2011,Schinder2012}, [3], [4]), and the Huygens/HASI measurement in 2005 (yellow diamond, \citet{Fulchignoni2005}, [5]).The dashed magenta line shows the potential effect of the $\mathrm{CH_4}$~variations observed by \citet{Lellouch2014}. If we take into account this effect, the agreement between our data, the radio-occultations and the HASI measurements is good.}
\label{fig_prev_studies}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig_prev_studies} shows a comparison between our results and previous studies where temperatures have been measured in the lower stratosphere at similar epochs, latitudes and pressure levels. In the top left and right panels, our temperature measurements are compared to results from CIRS FP4 nadir observations \citep{Bampasidis2012, Coustenis2016} which probe mainly the 0.1-10~mbar pressure range. In the top left panel, the temperatures measured at 6~mbar by these two types of observations are in good agreement for the two considered epochs (2009-2010 and 2014). We obtain similar meridional gradients with both types of observations, even if FP4 temperatures are obtained from averages of spectra over bins of $10^{\circ}$ of latitudes (except at $70^{\circ}$N and $70^{\circ}$S where the bins are $20^{\circ}$ wide in latitude), whereas the average size in latitude of the field of view of the FP1 detector is $20^{\circ}$. It thus seems than the wider latitudinal size of the FP1 field of view has little effect on our temperature measurements. In the right panel, our temperature profiles are compared to two profiles measured by \citet{Coustenis2016} using CIRS FP4 nadir observations (at $50^{\circ}$S in April 2010, and at $70^{\circ}$S in June 2012), and with Cassini radio-occultations measurements from \citet{SchinderFlasarMaroufEtAl2011,Schinder2012}, which probe the atmosphere from the surface to 0.1~mbar (0 - 300~km). CIRS FP1 and FP4 temperature profiles are in good averall agreement. The profile we measured at $28^{\circ}$S in February 2006 and the corresponding radio-occultation profile are within error bars for pressures lower than 13~mbar, then the difference between them increases up to 8~K at 25~mbar. The bottom left panel of Fig. \ref{fig_prev_studies} shows the radio-occultation temperatures in 2006 and 2007 compared to CIRS nadir FP1 temperatures at 15~mbar, where their sensitivity to the temperature is maximal. Although, the radio-occultations temperatures are systematically higher than the CIRS temperatures by 2~K to 6~K, they follow the same meridional trend. CIRS FP1 temperatures at the equator are also lower than the temperature measured by the HASI instrument at 15~mbar during Huygens descent in Titan's atmosphere in 2005. If we take into account the effect of the spatial variations of $\mathrm{CH_4}$~at 15~mbar observed by \citet{Lellouch2014} by decreasing the $\mathrm{CH_4}$~abundance to 1\% (the lower limit in \citet{Lellouch2014}) in the CIRS FP1 temperature measurements (dashed line in the middle panel of Fig. \ref{fig_prev_studies}), the agreement between the three types of observations is good in the southern hemisphere. The differences between radio-occultations, HASI and CIRS temperatures might also be explained by the difference of vertical resolution. Indeed nadir observations have a vertical resolution in the order of 50~km while radio-occultations and HASI observations have respective vertical resolutions of 1~km and 200~m around 15~mbar.\\
\subsection{Effects of Saturn's eccentricity}
\begin{figure}[!h]
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{eccentricity_equator_free_T0}
\caption{Temporal evolution of Titan's lower stratospheric temperatures at the equator ($5^{\circ}$N - $5^{\circ}$S) at 6~mbar (left panel) and 15~mbar (right panel), compared with a simple model of the evolution of the temperature as a function of the distance between Titan and the Sun (green line). The reduced $\chi^2$ between this model and the observations is 0.95 at 6~mbar and 1.07 at 15~mbar. The amplitude of the temperature variations at Titan's equator throughout the Cassini mission can be explained by the effect of Saturn's eccentricity.}
\label{fig_eccentricity}
\end{figure}
Because of Saturn's orbital eccentricity of 0.0565, the distance between Titan and the Sun varies enough to affect significantly the insolation. For instance, throughout the Cassini mission, the solar flux received at the equator has decreased by 19\% because of the eccentricity. We make a simple model of the evolution of the temperature $T$ at the equator as a function of the distance between Titan and the Sun. In this model we assume that the temperature $T$ at the considered pressure level and at a given time depends only on the absorbed solar flux $F$ and we neglect the radiative exchanges between atmospheric layers:
\begin{equation}
\epsilon \sigma T^4 = F
\end{equation}
\noindent where $\epsilon$ is the emissivity of the atmosphere at this pressure level, and $\sigma$ the Stefan-Boltzmann constant. $T$ can thus be defined as a function of the distance $d$ between Titan and the Sun:
\begin{equation}
T^4 = \frac{\alpha L_{\odot}}{16\epsilon\sigma\pi d^2}
\label{eq_T_dist}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $L_\odot$ is the solar power, and $\alpha$ the absorptivity of the atmosphere. If we choose a reference temperature $T_0$ where Titan is at a distance $d_0$ from the Sun, a relation similar to (\ref{eq_T_dist}) can be written for $T_0$. If we assume $\epsilon$ and $\alpha$ to be constant, $T$ can then be written as:
\begin{equation}
T = T_0 \sqrt{\frac{d_0}{d}}
\end{equation}
Figure \ref{fig_eccentricity} shows a comparison between this model and the temperatures measured between $5^{\circ}$N and $5^{\circ}$S from 2006 to 2016, at 6~mbar and 15~mbar. We choose $T_0$ as the temperature at the beginning of the observations (December 2005/January 2006) which provides the best fit between our model and the observations while being consistent with the observations at the same epoch ($T_0=151.7$~K at 6~mbar, and $T_0=129$~K at 15~mbar). At 6~mbar, we measure a temperature decrease from 2006 to 2016. This is similar to what has been measured at 4~mbar by \citet{Bezard2018} with CIRS mid-IR observations, whereas their radiative-dynamical model predicts a small temperature maximum around the northern spring equinox (2009). At 15~mbar, equatorial temperatures are mostly constant from 2005 to 2016, with a marginal decrease in 2016. Our model predicts temperature variations of 8~K at 6~mbar and 7~K at 15~mbar from 2006 to 2016. Both predictions are consistent with the measurements and with radiative timescales shorter than one Titan year at 6~mbar and 15~mbar, as in \citet{Bezard2018} where they are respectively equal to 0.024~Titan year and 0.06~Titan year. At both pressure levels, the model captures the magnitude of the temperature change, but does not fully match its timing or shape (especially in 2012-2014), implying that a more sophisticated model is needed. The remaining differences between our model and the temperature measurements could be decreased by adding a temporal lag to our model (2-3~years at 6~mbar and 3-4~years at 15~mbar), but the error bars on the temperature measurements are too large to constrain the lag to a value statistically distinct from zero. Even with this potential lag, the agreement between the model and the temperatures measured at 6~mbar shows that the amplitude of the temporal evolution throughout the Cassini mission may be explained by the effects of Saturn's eccentricity. At 15~mbar, given the error bars and the lack of further far-IR temperature measurements at the equator in 2016 and 2017, it remains difficult to draw a definitive conclusion about the influence of Saturn's eccentricity at this pressure level.\\
\subsection{Implication for radiative and dynamical processes of the lower stratosphere}
In Section \ref{sect_res}, we showed that in the lower stratosphere, the seasonal evolution of the temperature is maximal at high latitudes, especially at the South Pole. At 15~mbar, the strong cooling of high southern latitudes started in 2012, simultaneously with the increase in $\mathrm{C_2N_2}$, $\mathrm{C_4H_2}$, and $\mathrm{C_3H_4}$~abundances measured at the same latitudes and pressure-level in \citet{Sylvestre2018}. We also show that this cooling affects the atmosphere at least down to the 25~mbar pressure level (altitude of 70~km). The enrichment of the gases and cooling are consistent with the onset of a subsidence above the South Pole during autumn, as predicted by GCMs \citep{Newman2011, Lebonnois2012a}, and inferred from previous CIRS observations at higher altitudes \citep{Teanby2012, Vinatier2015, Coustenis2016}. As Titan's atmospheric circulation transitions from two equator-to-poles cells (with upwelling above the equator and subsidence above the poles) to a single pole-to-pole cell (with a descending branch above South Pole), this subsidence drags downward photochemical species created at higher altitudes toward the lower stratosphere. \citet{Teanby2017} showed that enrichment in trace gases may be so strong that their cooling effect combined with the insolation decrease may exceed the adiabatic heating between 0.3~mbar and 10~mbar (100 - 250~km). Our observations show that this phenomena may be at play down as deep as 25~mbar.\\
We compare retrieved temperature fields with results of simulations from IPSL 3D-GCM \citep{Lebonnois2012a} with an updated radiative transfer scheme \citep{Vatantd'Ollone2017} now based on a flexible \textit{correlated-k} method and up-to-date gas spectroscopic data \citep{Rothman2013}. It does not take into account the radiative feedback of the enrichment in hazes and trace gases in the polar regions, but it nevertheless appears that there is a good agreement in terms of seasonal cycle between the model and the observations. As shown in Figure \ref{fig_var_saiso}, at 6~mbar meridional distributions and values of temperatures in the model match well the observations. It can be pointed out that in both model and observations there is a noticeable asymmetry between high southern latitudes where the temperature decreases rapidly from the equinox to winter, and high northern latitudes which evolve more slowly from winter to summer. For instance, in both CIRS data and model, between 2007 and 2013 at 6~mbar and $70^{\circ}$N the atmosphere has warmed by only about 2~K, while in the meantime at $70^{\circ}$S it has cooled by about 10-15~K. This is consistent with an increase of radiative timescales at high northern latitudes (due to lower temperatures, \citet{Achterberg2011}) which would remain cold for approximately one season even after the return of sunlight. Figure \ref{fig_map_temp_gcm70N} shows the temporal evolution of the temperature at $70^{\circ}$N over one Titan year in the lower stratosphere in the GCM simulations and also emphasizes this asymmetry between the ingress and egress of winter at high latitudes. In Figure \ref{fig_var_saiso}, at 15~mbar modeled temperatures underestimate the observations by roughly 5-10~K, certainly due to a lack of infrared coolers such as clouds condensates \citep{Jennings2015}. However, observations and simulations exhibit similar meridional temperature gradients for the three studied epochs, and similar seasonal temperature evolution. For instance, in 2016-2017 we measured a temperature gradient of -11~K between the North and South Pole, whereas GCM simulations predict a temperature gradient of -12~K. At $70^{\circ}$S, temperature decreases by 10~K between 2007 and 2016-2017 in the GCM and in our observations. Besides, at 15~mbar, the seasonal behaviour remains the same as at 6~mbar, although more damped. Indeed comparison with GCM results also supports the idea that the seasonal effects due to the variations of insolation are damped with increasing depth in the lower stratosphere and ultimately muted below 25 mbar, as displayed in Figure \ref{fig_map_temp_gcm70N}. At lower altitudes the seasonal cycle of temperature at high latitudes is even inverted with temperatures increasing in the winter and decreasing in summer. Indeed at these altitudes, due to the radiative timescales exceeding one Titan year, temperature is no more sensitive to the seasonal variations of solar forcing, but to the interplay of ascending and descending large scale vertical motions of the pole-to-pole cell, inducing respectively adiabatic heating above winter pole and cooling above summer pole, as previously discussed in \citet{Lebonnois2012a}.
Further analysis of simulations – not presented here - also show that after 2016, temperatures at high southern latitudes began to slightly increase again at 6~mbar, which is consistent with observations, whereas at 15~mbar no change in the trend is observed, certainly due to a phase shift of the seasonal cycle between the two altitudes induced by the difference of radiative timescales, which is also illustrated in Figure \ref{fig_map_temp_gcm70N}. \\
\begin{figure}[!h]
\includegraphics[width=1\columnwidth]{Map_Temperature_70N}
\caption{Seasonal evolution of Titan's lower stratospheric temperatures modeled by the IPSL 3D-GCM at 70$^{\circ}$N - between 5~mbar and 50~mbar, starting at northern spring equinox. In the pressure range probed by the CIRS far-IR observations (from 6~mbar to 25~mbar), there is a strong asymmetry between the rapid temperature changes after autumn equinox ($L_S = 180^{\circ}$) and the slow evolution of the thermal structure after spring equinox ($L_S = 0^{\circ}$). }
\label{fig_map_temp_gcm70N}
\end{figure}
We also show in Figure \ref{fig_grad_saiso_vert} that at high southern latitudes, from 6 to 10~mbar seasonal temperature variations are approximately constant with pressure and can be larger than 10~K, whereas they decrease with increasing pressure below 10~mbar. This transition at 10~mbar may be caused by the increase of radiative timescales in the lower stratosphere. \citet{Strobel2010} estimated that the radiative timescale increases from one Titan season at 6~mbar to half a Titan year at 12~mbar. It can thus be expected that this region should be a transition zone between regions of the atmosphere where the atmospheric response to the seasonal insolation variations is significant and comes with little lag, to regions of the atmosphere where they are negligible. However, this transition should be observable at other latitudes such as $45^{\circ}$S, whereas Figure \ref{fig_grad_saiso_vert} shows a seasonal gradient constant with pressure at this latitude. Furthermore, in \citet{Bezard2018}, the authors show that the method used to estimate radiative timescales in \citet{Strobel2010} tends to overestimate them, and that in their model radiative timescales are less than a Titan season down to the 35~mbar pressure level, which is more consistent with the seasonal variations measured at $45^{\circ}$S.\\
The 10~mbar transition can also be caused by the interplay between photochemical, radiative and dynamical processes at high latitudes. Indeed, as photochemical species are transported downward by the subsidence above the autumn/winter pole, build up and cool strongly the lower atmosphere, the condensation level of species such as HCN, $\mathrm{HC_3N}$, $\mathrm{C_4H_2}$ or $\mathrm{C_6H_6}$ may be shifted upward, toward the 10~mbar level. Hence, below this pressure level, the volume mixing ratios of these gases would rapidly decrease, along with their cooling effect. Many observations, especially during the Cassini mission showed that during winter and autumn, polar regions host clouds composed of ices of photochemical species. For instance, the "haystack" feature showed in Fig. \ref{fig_spec} has been studied at both poles in \citet{Coustenis1999,Jennings2012,Jennings2015}, and is attributed to a mixture of condensates, possibly of nitrile origin. Moreover, HCN ice has been measured in the southern polar cloud observed by \citet{deKok2014} with Cassini/VIMS observations. $\mathrm{C_6H_6}$ ice has also been detected by \citet{Vinatier2018} in CIRS observations of the South Pole. The condensation curve for $\mathrm{C_4H_2}$~in \citet{Barth2017} is also consistent with the formation of $\mathrm{C_4H_2}$~ice around 10~mbar with the temperatures we measured at $70^{\circ}$S in 2016. These organic ices may also have a cooling effect themselves as \citet{Bezard2018} showed that at 9~mbar, the nitrile haze measured by \citet{Anderson2011} contributes to the cooling with an intensity comparable to the contribution of gases such as $\mathrm{C_2H_2}$ and $\mathrm{C_2H_6}$. \\
\section{Conclusion}
In this paper, we analysed all the available nadir far-IR CIRS observations to measure Titan's lower stratospheric temperatures (6~mbar - 25~mbar) throughout the 13 years of the Cassini mission, from northern winter to summer solstice. In this pressure range, significant temperature changes occur from one season to another. Temperatures evolve moderately at low and mid-latitudes (less than 10~K between 6 and 15~mbar). At the equator, at 6~mbar we measure a temperature decrease mostly due to Saturn's eccentricity. Seasonal temperature changes are maximal at high latitudes, especially in the southern hemisphere where they reach up to -19~K at $70^{\circ}$S between summer (2007) and late autumn (2016) at 15~mbar. The strong seasonal evolution of high southern latitudes is due to a complex interplay between photochemistry, atmospheric dynamics with the downwelling above the autumn/winter poles, radiative processes with a large contribution of the gases transported toward the lower stratosphere, and possibly condensation due to the cold autumn polar temperatures and strong enrichments in trace gases.\\
Recent GCM simulations show a good agreement with the observed seasonal variations in this pressure range, even though these simulations do not include coupling with variations of opacity sources. In particular at high latitudes, the fast decrease of temperatures when entering winter and slower increase when getting into summer is well reproduced in these simulations.
\section*{Acknowledgements}
This research was funded by the UK Sciences and Technology Facilities Research council (grant number ST/MOO7715/1) and the Cassini project. JVO and SL acknowledge support from the Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES). GCM simulations have been performed thanks to computation facilities provided by the Grand Équipement National de Calcul Intensif (GENCI) on the \textit{Occigen/CINES} cluster (allocation A0040110391).
This research made use of Astropy, a community-developed core Python package for Astronomy \citep{2013A&A...558A..33A}, and matplotlib, a Python library for publication quality graphics \citep{Hunter:2007}
\section*{Appendix. Cassini/CIRS Datasets analysed in this study} %
\onecolumn
\begin{longtable}[!h]{lcccc}
\caption{\label{table_obs}Far-IR CIRS datasets presented in this study. N stands for the number of spectra measured during the acquisition. FOV is the field of view. The asterisk denotes datasets where two different latitudes were observed. }\\
\hline
\hline
Observations & Date & N & Latitude ($^{\circ}$N) & FOV ($^{\circ}$)\\
\hline
CIRS\_00BTI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 12 Dec. 2004 & 224 & 16.4 & 20.3\\
CIRS\_003TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 15 Feb. 2005 & 180 & -18.7 & 18.5\\
CIRS\_005TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 31 Mar. 2005 & 241 & -41.1 & 25.7\\
CIRS\_005TI\_FIRNADCMP003\_PRIME & 01 Apr. 2005 & 240 & 47.8 & 28.5\\
CIRS\_006TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 16 Apr. 2005 & 178 & 54.7 & 29.9\\
CIRS\_009TI\_COMPMAP002\_PRIME & 06 Jun. 2005 & 184 & -89.7 & 21.1\\
CIRS\_013TI\_FIRNADCMP003\_PRIME & 21 Aug. 2005 & 192 & 30.1 & 15.5\\
CIRS\_013TI\_FIRNADCMP004\_PRIME & 22 Aug. 2005 & 248 & -53.7 & 25.0\\
CIRS\_017TI\_FIRNADCMP003\_PRIME & 28 Oct. 2005 & 119 & 20.1 & 19.8\\
CIRS\_019TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 26 Dec. 2005 & 124 & -0.0 & 17.6\\
CIRS\_020TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 14 Jan. 2006 & 107 & 19.5 & 19.7\\
CIRS\_021TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 27 Feb. 2006 & 213 & -30.2 & 22.5\\
CIRS\_022TI\_FIRNADCMP003\_PRIME & 18 Mar. 2006 & 401 & -0.4 & 18.4\\
CIRS\_022TI\_FIRNADCMP008\_PRIME & 19 Mar. 2006 & 83 & 25.3 & 24.1\\
CIRS\_023TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 01 May 2006 & 215 & -35.0 & 27.8\\
CIRS\_024TI\_FIRNADCMP003\_PRIME & 19 May 2006 & 350 & -15.5 & 21.6\\
CIRS\_025TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 02 Jul. 2006 & 307 & 25.1 & 21.7\\
CIRS\_025TI\_FIRNADCMP003\_PRIME & 01 Jul. 2006 & 190 & 39.7 & 25.6\\
CIRS\_028TI\_FIRNADCMP003\_PRIME & 07 Sep. 2006 & 350 & 29.7 & 19.7\\
CIRS\_029TI\_FIRNADCMP003\_PRIME & 23 Sep. 2006 & 312 & 9.5 & 19.4\\
CIRS\_030TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 10 Oct. 2006 & 340 & -59.1 & 23.4\\
CIRS\_030TI\_FIRNADCMP003\_PRIME & 09 Oct. 2006 & 286 & 33.9 & 19.9\\
CIRS\_031TI\_COMPMAP001\_VIMS & 25 Oct. 2006 & 160 & -14.5 & 16.3\\
CIRS\_036TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 28 Dec. 2006 & 136 & -89.1 & 12.6\\
CIRS\_036TI\_FIRNADCMP003\_PRIME & 27 Dec. 2006 & 321 & 78.6 & 21.0\\
CIRS\_037TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 12 Jan. 2007 & 161 & 75.2 & 19.1\\
CIRS\_037TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 13 Jan. 2007 & 107 & -70.3 & 20.6\\
CIRS\_038TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 28 Jan. 2007 & 254 & 86.3 & 16.7\\
CIRS\_038TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 29 Jan. 2007 & 254 & -39.7 & 22.0\\
CIRS\_039TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 22 Feb. 2007 & 23 & 69.9 & 21.2\\
CIRS\_040TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 09 Mar. 2007 & 159 & -49.2 & 21.1\\
CIRS\_040TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 10 Mar. 2007 & 109 & 88.8 & 13.3\\
CIRS\_041TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 26 Mar. 2007 & 102 & 61.2 & 19.3\\
CIRS\_042TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 10 Apr. 2007 & 103 & -60.8 & 26.0\\
CIRS\_042TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 11 Apr. 2007 & 272 & 71.5 & 22.6\\
CIRS\_043TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 26 Apr. 2007 & 263 & -51.4 & 24.7\\
CIRS\_043TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 27 Apr. 2007 & 104 & 77.1 & 20.0\\
CIRS\_044TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 13 May 2007 & 104 & -0.5 & 18.8\\
CIRS\_045TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 28 May 2007 & 231 & -22.3 & 22.6\\
CIRS\_045TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 29 May 2007 & 346 & 52.4 & 29.5\\
CIRS\_046TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 13 Jun. 2007 & 60 & 17.6 & 28.6\\
CIRS\_046TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 14 Jun. 2007 & 102 & -20.8 & 19.0\\
CIRS\_047TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 29 Jun. 2007 & 204 & 9.8 & 23.2\\
CIRS\_047TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 30 Jun. 2007 & 238 & 20.1 & 23.7\\
CIRS\_048TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 18 Jul. 2007 & 96 & -34.8 & 31.4\\
CIRS\_048TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 19 Jul. 2007 & 260 & 49.5 & 35.8\\
CIRS\_050TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 01 Oct. 2007 & 144 & -10.1 & 23.8\\
CIRS\_050TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 02 Oct. 2007 & 106 & 29.9 & 19.7\\
CIRS\_052TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 19 Nov. 2007 & 272 & 40.3 & 26.5\\
CIRS\_053TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 04 Dec. 2007 & 223 & -40.2 & 25.8\\
CIRS\_053TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 05 Dec. 2007 & 102 & 59.4 & 28.3\\
CIRS\_054TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 21 Dec. 2007 & 107 & 60.4 & 21.1\\
CIRS\_055TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 05 Jan. 2008 & 190 & 18.7 & 30.5\\
CIRS\_055TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 06 Jan. 2008 & 284 & 44.6 & 22.2\\
CIRS\_059TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 22 Feb. 2008 & 172 & -24.9 & 20.7\\
CIRS\_059TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 23 Feb. 2008 & 98 & 17.1 & 20.0\\
CIRS\_062TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 25 Mar. 2008 & 115 & 59.3 & 17.1\\
CIRS\_067TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 12 May 2008 & 286 & 29.5 & 21.0\\
CIRS\_069TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 27 May 2008 & 112 & -44.6 & 27.3\\
CIRS\_069TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 28 May 2008 & 112 & 9.5 & 19.3\\
CIRS\_093TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 20 Nov. 2008 & 161 & 43.7 & 21.1\\
CIRS\_095TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 05 Dec. 2008 & 213 & -14.0 & 20.7\\
CIRS\_097TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 20 Dec. 2008 & 231 & -10.9 & 23.7\\
CIRS\_106TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 26 Mar. 2009 & 165 & -60.3 & 19.2\\
CIRS\_107TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 27 Mar. 2009 & 164 & 33.5 & 30.4\\
CIRS\_110TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 06 May 2009 & 282 & -68.1 & 25.7\\
CIRS\_111TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 22 May 2009 & 168 & -27.1 & 23.1\\
CIRS\_112TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 06 Jun. 2009 & 218 & 48.7 & 21.0\\
CIRS\_112TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 07 Jun. 2009 & 274 & -58.9 & 20.2\\
CIRS\_114TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 09 Jul. 2009 & 164 & -71.4 & 25.4\\
CIRS\_115TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 24 Jul. 2009 & 146 & 50.7 & 20.1\\
CIRS\_119TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 12 Oct. 2009 & 166 & 0.4 & 18.3\\
CIRS\_122TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 11 Dec. 2009 & 212 & 39.8 & 24.7\\
CIRS\_123TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 28 Dec. 2009 & 186 & -46.1 & 22.3\\
CIRS\_124TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 13 Jan. 2010 & 272 & -1.2 & 19.0\\
CIRS\_125TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 28 Jan. 2010 & 156 & 39.9 & 27.5\\
CIRS\_125TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 29 Jan. 2010 & 280 & -44.9 & 27.3\\
CIRS\_129TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 05 Apr. 2010 & 119 & -45.1 & 28.2\\
CIRS\_131TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 19 May 2010 & 188 & -30.0 & 22.1\\
CIRS\_131TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 20 May 2010 & 229 & -19.8 & 21.5\\
CIRS\_132TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 05 Jun. 2010 & 167 & 49.4 & 27.4\\
CIRS\_133TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 20 Jun. 2010 & 187 & -49.7 & 36.1\\
CIRS\_134TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 06 Jul. 2010 & 251 & -10.0 & 20.0\\
CIRS\_138TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 24 Sep. 2010 & 190 & -30.1 & 21.2\\
CIRS\_139TI\_COMPMAP001\_PRIME* & 14 Oct. 2010 & 132 & -70.9 & 20.6\\
CIRS\_139TI\_COMPMAP001\_PRIME* & 14 Oct. 2010 & 108 & -53.8 & 16.7\\
CIRS\_148TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 08 May 2011 & 200 & -10.0 & 18.3\\
CIRS\_153TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 11 Sep. 2011 & 227 & 9.9 & 19.0\\
CIRS\_158TI\_FIRNADCMP501\_PRIME & 13 Dec. 2011 & 369 & -29.9 & 24.7\\
CIRS\_159TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 02 Jan. 2012 & 275 & -42.2 & 23.7\\
CIRS\_160TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 29 Jan. 2012 & 322 & -40.0 & 21.7\\
CIRS\_160TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 30 Jan. 2012 & 280 & -0.2 & 18.3\\
CIRS\_161TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 18 Feb. 2012 & 121 & 9.9 & 18.4\\
CIRS\_161TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 19 Feb. 2012 & 89 & -15.0 & 17.3\\
CIRS\_166TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 22 May 2012 & 318 & -19.9 & 19.9\\
CIRS\_167TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 07 Jun. 2012 & 293 & -45.4 & 21.7\\
CIRS\_169TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 24 Jul. 2012 & 258 & -9.7 & 20.7\\
CIRS\_172TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 26 Sep. 2012 & 282 & 44.9 & 18.5\\
CIRS\_172TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 26 Sep. 2012 & 270 & -70.4 & 23.2\\
CIRS\_174TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 13 Nov. 2012 & 298 & -71.8 & 21.8\\
CIRS\_175TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 29 Nov. 2012 & 299 & -59.9 & 19.3\\
CIRS\_185TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 05 Apr. 2013 & 244 & 15.0 & 20.1\\
CIRS\_185TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 06 Apr. 2013 & 303 & -88.9 & 16.8\\
CIRS\_190TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 23 May 2013 & 224 & -0.2 & 25.6\\
CIRS\_190TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 24 May 2013 & 298 & -45.0 & 20.0\\
CIRS\_194TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 10 Jul. 2013 & 186 & 30.0 & 19.7\\
CIRS\_195TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 25 Jul. 2013 & 186 & 19.6 & 24.5\\
CIRS\_197TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 11 Sep. 2013 & 330 & 60.5 & 19.4\\
CIRS\_198TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 13 Oct. 2013 & 187 & 88.9 & 8.7\\
CIRS\_198TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 14 Oct. 2013 & 306 & -69.8 & 24.0\\
CIRS\_199TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 30 Nov. 2013 & 329 & 68.4 & 23.9\\
CIRS\_200TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 01 Jan. 2014 & 187 & 49.9 & 19.6\\
CIRS\_200TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 02 Jan. 2014 & 210 & -59.8 & 21.3\\
CIRS\_201TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 02 Feb. 2014 & 329 & 19.9 & 26.8\\
CIRS\_201TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 03 Feb. 2014 & 234 & -39.6 & 20.9\\
CIRS\_203TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 07 Apr. 2014 & 187 & 75.0 & 18.0\\
CIRS\_203TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 07 Apr. 2014 & 239 & 0.5 & 27.5\\
CIRS\_204TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 18 May 2014 & 199 & 0.4 & 27.0\\
CIRS\_205TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 18 Jun. 2014 & 144 & -45.1 & 20.5\\
CIRS\_205TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 18 Jun. 2014 & 161 & 30.3 & 19.1\\
CIRS\_206TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 19 Jul. 2014 & 181 & -50.3 & 17.8\\
CIRS\_206TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 20 Jul. 2014 & 161 & 30.6 & 18.4\\
CIRS\_207TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 20 Aug. 2014 & 179 & -70.0 & 17.8\\
CIRS\_207TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 21 Aug. 2014 & 163 & 79.7 & 17.6\\
CIRS\_208TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 21 Sep. 2014 & 329 & -80.0 & 15.6\\
CIRS\_208TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 22 Sep. 2014 & 175 & 60.5 & 17.8\\
CIRS\_209TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 23 Oct. 2014 & 181 & -35.2 & 17.7\\
CIRS\_209TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 24 Oct. 2014 & 233 & 50.5 & 18.5\\
CIRS\_210TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 10 Dec. 2014 & 329 & -70.3 & 25.2\\
CIRS\_210TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 11 Dec. 2014 & 237 & -19.6 & 27.6\\
CIRS\_211TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 11 Jan. 2015 & 225 & 19.6 & 25.0\\
CIRS\_211TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 12 Jan. 2015 & 258 & 40.0 & 19.3\\
CIRS\_212TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 13 Feb. 2015 & 257 & -40.0 & 30.1\\
CIRS\_213TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 16 Mar. 2015 & 187 & -31.6 & 19.6\\
CIRS\_213TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 16 Mar. 2015 & 258 & 23.4 & 20.5\\
CIRS\_215TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 07 May 2015 & 250 & -50.0 & 31.0\\
CIRS\_215TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 08 May 2015 & 232 & -30.0 & 21.7\\
CIRS\_218TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 06 Jul. 2015 & 249 & -20.0 & 19.9\\
CIRS\_218TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 07 Jul. 2015 & 232 & -40.0 & 25.2\\
CIRS\_222TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 28 Sep. 2015 & 125 & 30.0 & 21.7\\
CIRS\_222TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 29 Sep. 2015 & 233 & -0.1 & 18.6\\
CIRS\_230TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 15 Jan. 2016 & 282 & -15.0 & 19.5\\
CIRS\_231TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 31 Jan. 2016 & 254 & 15.0 & 19.6\\
CIRS\_231TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 01 Feb. 2016 & 236 & 0.4 & 18.9\\
CIRS\_232TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 16 Feb. 2016 & 249 & -50.2 & 24.5\\
CIRS\_232TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 17 Feb. 2016 & 92 & -19.8 & 21.5\\
CIRS\_234TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 04 Apr. 2016 & 328 & 19.8 & 24.7\\
CIRS\_235TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 06 May 2016 & 163 & -60.0 & 19.7\\
CIRS\_235TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 07 May 2016 & 221 & 15.7 & 20.1\\
CIRS\_236TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 07 Jun. 2016 & 88 & -70.5 & 20.5\\
CIRS\_236TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 07 Jun. 2016 & 238 & 60.8 & 20.0\\
CIRS\_238TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 25 Jul. 2016 & 220 & 15.4 & 20.5\\
CIRS\_248TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 13 Nov. 2016 & 185 & -88.9 & 18.3\\
CIRS\_248TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 14 Nov. 2016 & 186 & 30.3 & 17.4\\
CIRS\_250TI\_FIRNADCMP002\_PRIME & 30 Nov. 2016 & 219 & -19.8 & 28.4\\
CIRS\_259TI\_COMPMAP001\_PIE & 01 Feb. 2017 & 302 & -69.0 & 20.6\\
CIRS\_270TI\_FIRNADCMP001\_PRIME & 21 Apr. 2017 & 166 & -74.7 & 25.4\\
CIRS\_283TI\_COMPMAP001\_PRIME* & 10 Jul. 2017 & 114 & 60.0 & 26.5\\
CIRS\_283TI\_COMPMAP001\_PRIME* & 10 Jul. 2017 & 134 & 67.5 & 24.7\\
CIRS\_287TI\_COMPMAP001\_PIE & 11 Aug. 2017 & 305 & 88.9 & 9.3\\
CIRS\_288TI\_COMPMAP002\_PIE & 11 Aug. 2017 & 269 & 66.7 & 23.7\\
CIRS\_292TI\_COMPMAP001\_PRIME & 12 Sep. 2017 & 192 & 70.4 & 19.2\\
\hline
\end{longtable}
\twocolumn
\section*{References}
\bibliographystyle{elsarticle-harv}
|
\section{Introduction}
The control and manipulation of microwave signals with atoms is undergoing a renaissance in the scientific world, moving beyond traditional applications such as providing the definition of the second~\cite{Bandi2012a,Pellaton2012,Petremand2012,Bandi2014}, towards precision metrology in direct-current (DC)~\cite{Sun2018a} and alternating current (AC)~\cite{Horsley2016} magnetometers, and novel applications for quantum information processing, such as microwave-to-optical transduction of qubits~\cite{Hafezi2012,Kiffner2016,Adwaith2019}.
These two examples highlight two different ways atoms are used: first, as a measurement tool to detect the fields; and second, as the interaction medium through which the fields are manipulated. Both cases demand an intimate understanding of the microwave-to-atom coupling, and a way to measure it precisely and with a large signal-to-noise ratio.
Very generally, an oscillating electromagnetic field with a frequency near the resonance of a two-level system periodically drives population transfer between levels, in a process commonly known as Rabi oscillation. In the presence of relaxation between these levels (due to one or more of many possible decoherence mechanisms), the steady-state populations tend towards a constant value. In contrast, these steady-state populations oscillate when the phase of the oscillating field is modulated at a frequency $\omega_{\rm m}$, and the amplitude of the population oscillations is enhanced when $\omega_{\rm m}$ is equal to the Rabi frequency, $\Omega_{\rm R}$. This phenomenon, known as ``Rabi resonance''~\cite{Cappeller1985,Camparo1998,Camparo1998a}, can be used to find the the system's Rabi frequency and, correspondingly, the power of the oscillating field at the position of the atom(s).
In analogy to standard candles in astronomy, the Rabi-flopping atoms respond to AC and DC fields in exactly the same way in all laboratories, making them ``atomic candles''~\cite{Camparo1998a,Coffer2002} for
electromagnetic power standards.
This technique has also attracted significant interest for its applications for AC~magnetometry inside MW cavities~\cite{Sun2017a,Sun2018a}, MW wave guides~\cite{Kinoshita2009,Kinoshita2011,Kinoshita2013}, and in free space~\cite{Swan-Wood2001,Sun2018a,Liu2018,Shi2018,Kinoshita2017}. Applying static magnetic fields~\cite{Sun2017a} and using multispecies vapor cells~\cite{Sun2018a} adds frequency tunability and expands the operational bandwidth of this technique.
In previous work, the Rabi resonance was analyzed and measured only in the small-signal regime, where a sufficiently small modulation depth permits an approximate analytic solution to the Maxwell-Bloch equations for the populations. These population oscillations, which have frequency components at $\omega_{\rm m}$ and $2\omega_{\rm m}$, can be described analytically, including an amplitude that depends on $\omega_{\rm m}$. Here, we explore the atomic candle technique beyond the small-signal approximation both numerically and experimentally. Using large-deviation phase modulation on the $\rm MW$ field, we observe higher-order spectral features whose characteristics and scaling behave differently than the first and second harmonics. In this work, we focus our attention on the component oscillating at $4\omega_{\rm m}$, namely, the fourth harmonic, and discuss how it may be used to extend the atomic candle technique.
\section{Theory: Rabi oscillations with a phase-modulated driving field}
As we explore higher order Rabi resonances theoretically, we will consider the two-level system used in our experiments [Fig.~\ref{fig:6}], which is comprised of two Zeeman states in different hyperfine levels of an alkali metal, which are described by the total angular momentum $F$ and projections $m_F$. For this two-level system, separated by energy $\hbar \omega_0$, the levels can be coupled by a non-zero matrix element for magnetic dipole transitions, $V_{12} = \bra{2}\hat{\boldsymbol{\mu}}\cdot\mathbf{B}_{0}\ket{1}$, where $\hat{\boldsymbol{\mu}}$ is the magnetic dipole operator, and $\ket{1}$ and $\ket{2}$ represent the two levels. Here, the AC driving field $\mathbf{B}(t)={B}_0\mathbf{e}_{B0}\cos\omega t$ is described by the peak field $\mathbf{B}_{0} = {B}_0\mathbf{e}_{B0}$, with AC-field amplitude ${B}_0$ and direction $\mathbf{e}_{B0}$. When the AC field is resonant ($\omega = \omega_0$), the population oscillates at the Rabi frequency
$\Omega_{\rm R}= V_{12}/\hbar$.
When the detuning $\delta = \omega - \omega_0$ is non-zero, the oscillations occur at the generalized Rabi frequency is
$\Omega=\sqrt{\Omega_{\rm R}^2 + \delta^2}$.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[]{FIG6.pdf}
\caption{Schematic of phase-modulated microwave signals applied and measured in an atomic system, as used in experimental demonstrations. After optical molasses $^{87}$Rb atoms are optically pumped into $F=1$ state transparent for a probe light, resonant with $F=2\rightarrow F'=2$ transition. Change in the $F=2$ population due to microwave field is monitored in real time as a change in transmission signal of the probe light.}
\label{fig:6}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
In the presence of decoherence or damping, the oscillatory behavior of the two-level system damps out and the system equilibrates to a steady population ratio (e.g., equal populations for a strong resonant AC field and small damping). These dynamics are well-described by the Maxwell-Bloch equations~\cite{Noh2010}.
A phase-modulated oscillating field changes these dynamics. Here, we consider the case where a time-dependent phase $\theta(t)$ modulates the AC field: $\mathbf{B}(t)={B}_0\mathbf{e}_{B0}\cos\left[\omega t + \theta(t)\right]$. In this case, the standard Maxwell-Bloch equations can be modified to include additional time-dependent terms:
\begin{align}
\dot{u}&=[\delta+\dot{\theta}(t)]v-\Gamma_2u,\label{eq:OBE2u}\\
\dot{v}&=-[\delta+\dot{\theta}(t)]u+\Omega_{\rm R}w-\Gamma_2v,\label{eq:OBE2v}\\
\dot{w}&=-\Omega_{\rm R}v-\Gamma_1[w+1],
\label{eq:OBE2w}
\end{align}
where $u$ and $v$ are the in- and out-of-phase coherences [$u =2 \rm Re(\rho_{12})$ and $v = 2\rm Im(\rho_{12})$] and $w = \rho_{22}-\rho_{11}$ is the population difference between levels, and where $\rho$ is the usual $2\times 2$ density matrix of the two-level system ($\rho_{11}$ is the ground-state population and $\rho_{22}$ is the excited-state population). In the loss terms, $\Gamma_1$ and $\Gamma_2$ represent longitudinal and transverse damping rates, respectively. We consider the case where the AC field is modulated about a constant phase offset $\theta_0$ with frequency $\omega_{\rm m}$, modulation depth $m$, and offset phase $\phi_{\rm m}$:
\begin{align}
\theta(t)=\theta_0+ m\sin(\omega_{\rm m}t+\phi_{\rm m}).
\label{eq:phase_modulation}
\end{align}
We explore the numerical solutions of Eqs.~\ref{eq:OBE2u}-\ref{eq:OBE2w} to find the time-dependent coherences and population dynamics under a variety of parameters. In particular, we are interested in the excited state population $\rho_{22} = (w+1)/2$ in the steady-state regime ($\Gamma_1t\gg1$), which is found to oscillate, even long after the damping times associated with $\Gamma_1$ and $\Gamma_2$ [FIG.~\ref{fig:1}].
Below, we have a closer look at the time dependence of the steady-state populations of the ground and excited states, which is directly related to a measurable quantity: the absorption of light from one of these levels to an optically excitable third level.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[]{FIG1.pdf}
\caption{Ground state population of a two-level system as a function of time in case of a phase-modulated coupling (solid line). The simulation is made for modulation depth $m=1$,
Rabi frequency $\Omega_{\rm R}=2\omega_{\rm m}$, longitudinal and transverse relaxation rates $\Gamma_1=0.8\omega_{\rm m}$ and $\Gamma_2=0.4\omega_{\rm m}$, respectively, carrier frequency detuning $\delta=\omega_{\rm m}$, where $\omega_{\rm m}$ is the modulation frequency.
Dashed curve corresponds to steady-state solution without modulation. Inset: spectrum of the steady-state oscillations in the ground state population for $\delta=0.1\omega_{\rm m}$ (blue solid) and $\delta=0$ (red dashed), obtained using the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT).}
\label{fig:1}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Small-modulation approximation}
Treating the modulation term as a perturbation allows us to assume that in the steady-state regime the parameters describing the atomic state evolve around their unmodulated steady-state values $u_0,~v_0,~\rho_{22,0}$:
\begin{align*}
\rho_{22}(t)=\rho_{22,0}+\rho_{22,\rm m}(t),\\
v(t) = v_0+v_{\rm m}(t),\\
u(t) = u_0+u_{\rm m}(t),
\end{align*}
where $\rho_{22,\rm m}, v_{\rm m}, u_{\rm m}$ describe the evolution due to the phase modulation.
FIG.~\ref{fig:1} shows that in the case of a weak modulation, the steady-state ground-state population $\rho_{11}(t)$ oscillates around its unmodulated value.
Indeed, it can be shown~\cite{Coffer2002} that in this case the excited-state population evolution is described by
\begin{align*}
\ddot{\rho}_{22,\rm m}+\Gamma_1\dot{\rho}_{22,\rm m}+&\Omega_{\rm R}^2\rho_{22,\rm m}=\\&2\Omega_{\rm R}\Gamma_2v_{\rm m}+2\Omega_{\rm R}(\delta+\dot{\theta})u_{\rm m}+u_0\Omega_{\rm R}\dot{\theta},
\end{align*}
which is a damped harmonic oscillator equation, where the driving is due to coherence between the levels ($v_{\rm m}$~and~$u_{\rm m}$) and phase modulation $\dot{\theta}$.
For small modulations ($m<\sqrt{2\Gamma_1/\omega_{\rm m}}$ ) and low decoherence ($\Gamma_2\ll\omega_{\rm m}$), known as the small-signal approximation, the steady-state solution for the excited state population has been found analytically~\cite{Coffer2002}. The population dynamics in this regime are represented by the first two harmonics of $\omega_{\rm m}$, and the excited-state dynamics with respect to its unperturbed value may be expressed as
\begin{align}
\rho_{22,m}(t)=P_1\sin(\omega_{\rm m}t+\phi_1)+P_2\sin(2\omega_{\rm m}t+\phi_2),
\label{eq:alpha_resonance}
\end{align}
with amplitudes
\begin{align}
P_1&=\frac{\tfrac{m}{2}\omega_{\rm m}\Omega_{\rm R}^2\delta}{\left[\Gamma_2^2+\delta^2+\frac{\Gamma_2}{\Gamma_1}\Omega_{\rm R}^2\right]\sqrt{\left(\omega_{\rm m}^2-\Omega_{\rm R}^2\right)^2+\Gamma_1^2\omega_{\rm m}^2}},\\
P_2&=\frac{\left(\tfrac{m}{2}\right)^2\omega_{\rm m}\Omega_{\rm R}^2\Gamma_2}{\left[\Gamma_2^2+\delta^2+\frac{\Gamma_2}{\Gamma_1}\Omega_{\rm R}^2\right]\sqrt{\left(\omega_{\rm m}^2-4\Omega_{\rm R}^2\right)^2+4\Gamma_1^2\omega_{\rm m}^2}}.
\label{eq:beta_resonance}
\end{align}
The main feature of these solutions is that the amplitudes $P_1(\omega_{\rm m},\Omega_{\rm R})$ and $P_2(\omega_{\rm m},\Omega_{\rm R})$ peak when the frequency of the corresponding harmonic is resonant with the Rabi frequency, $\omega_{\rm m} = \Omega_{\rm R}$ and $2\omega_{\rm m} = \Omega_{\rm R}$, respectively, which are known as the $\alpha$ and $\beta$ Rabi resonances. Experimentally, scanning the modulation frequency $\omega_{\rm m}$ in search of this peak provides a tool for measuring $\Omega_{\rm R}$ and, thus, the power of the driving field, since $\Omega_{\rm R} \propto B_0^2$~\cite{Sun2018a}. In addition, the amplitude of the first harmonic disappears at zero-carrier-detuning, $\delta = 0$ ($P_1\propto \delta$). By tuning the carrier frequency $\omega$ to field-sensitive transitions~\cite{Sun2018a}, this dependence provides a means by which to measure static magnetic fields.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[]{FIG2.pdf}
\caption{Excited state population of a two-level system as a function of time in case of a phase-modulated coupling (solid line) with $m=6$~rad,
$\Omega_{\rm R}=1.5\omega_{\rm m}$, $\Gamma_1=0.8\omega_{\rm m}$, $\Gamma_2=0.4\omega_{\rm m}$, $\delta=0$.
Dashed line corresponds to steady-state solution without modulation. Inset: spectrum of the steady-state oscillations in the excited state population for $\delta=\omega_{\rm m}$ (blue solid) and $\delta=0$ (red dashed).}
\label{fig:oscillations_simulation_large}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
The inset of FIG.~\ref{fig:1} compares the spectra of the steady-state $\rho_{11}$, simulated for $\delta=0$ and $\delta=0.1\omega_m$. As is expected, the first harmonic vanishes at zero-carrier-detuning. In the simulation, the magnitudes of the decoherence rates are comparable with the modulation frequency, which violates the small-signal approximation and leads to additional oscillations at third and fourth harmonics, even though their amplitudes are a few orders of magnitude smaller than~$P_1$~and~$P_2$.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[]{FIG3.pdf}
\caption{(a) and (b): Rabi resonances for amplitudes of $2^{\rm nd}$ (P$_{2}$) and $4^{\rm th}$ (P$_{4}$) harmonics for $m=0.25$~rad and $m=2$~rad, respectively. The amplitude of the $4^{\rm th}$ harmonic is scaled for better visibility, as indicated. At higher $m$ peaks shift with respect to their original positions $\Omega_{R}=2\omega_{\rm}$ and $\Omega_{R}=4\omega_{\rm}$, which indicated by $\Delta_2$ and $\Delta_4$, respectively. (c) Shifts of the Rabi resonance peaks with respect to their weak-modulation positions as a function of the modulation index. Simulation is made for $\Gamma_1=2\Gamma_2=0.08\omega_{\rm m}$ and $\delta=0$. }
\label{fig:3}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Large modulation: Numerical analysis}
\label{sec:large modulation}
A general solution of the phase-modulated oscillatory dynamics of a two-level system, with arbitrary phase- and amplitude-modulation, was obtained in Ref.~\cite{Alekseev1992}.
Still, there is no simple analytical expression for the case where the phase is modulated according to Eq.~\ref{eq:phase_modulation}.
Numerical simulations of the large-modulation condition [FIG.~\ref{fig:oscillations_simulation_large}] show that the steady-state ground-state population has a periodic solution, but, unlike in the small-modulation case, its average is shifted from the unmodulated value and its spectrum consists of many harmonics at multiples of $\omega_{\rm m}$:
\begin{align*}
\rho_{11}(t)=\sum_nP_n\sin(n\omega_mt+\phi_n),
\end{align*}
where $n$ can be any positive integer and $\phi_n$ is the phase of the response.
As might be expected from small-signal theory, the relative height of the spectral consituents $P_n$ depends on $m, \omega_{\rm m}, \Omega_{\rm R}, \Gamma_{1,2}$ and $\delta$. In the case when $\delta=0$, all \emph{odd} components disappear, which is consistent with the analytical small signal solutions (Eq.~\ref{eq:alpha_resonance}). However, compared to the small signal solution, the large-modulation dynamics include additional spectral peaks, and thus more (correlated) information from which to extract the field calibration,
providing more options for extracting the final results.
Next, we evaluate the response of the excited-state population when the carrier frequency is equal to the frequency of the transition between the ground and excited states (i.e., $\delta = 0$), which is the regime of practical interest. Here, the ground state population's response to phase modulation includes only the even harmonics of $\omega_{\rm m}$ and we study, in particular, the second and fourth harmonics for different values of the modulation index~$m$. We are interested only in the steady-state response, where $\Gamma_1t_1\gg 1$ and any ``normal'' Rabi oscillations would have damped out.
To extract values of the spectral amplitudes $P_n$ of the steady-state ground-state population signal $\rho_{11}(t)$ from our numerical simulations, we consider both the in- and out-of-phase responses of the signal at frequency $n\omega_{\rm m}$:
\begin{align*}
a_n=\dfrac{1}{N}\sum_{k=1}^N\rho_{11}(t_k)\sin n\omega_{\rm m}t_k,\\
b_n=\dfrac{1}{N}\sum_{k=1}^N\rho_{11}(t_k)\cos n\omega_{\rm m}t_k,
\end{align*}
where
the $t_k$ represent the evenly-spaced discrete time points, and the index $k$ runs over all time indices. This
approach to the analysis provides the amplitudes of the components at each harmonic of the modulation frequency $\omega_{\rm m}$, and the overall overall amplitude is given by $P_n=2\sqrt{a_n^2+b_n^2}$.
This analysis relies on the fact that $a_n$~and~$b_n$ approach zero as $N$ approaches infinity for any frequency other than the reference frequency (i.e., $\omega\neq n\omega_{\rm m}$). In the case when $N$ is finite, the contribution from these unwanted frequencies can be significant, so we filter them out in the frequency domain using Fast Fourier transform and its inverse. To reduce the contribution of the numerical artifacts due to finite duration of the analyzed signal, we apply a Hamming window to $\rho_{11}(t)$ before calculating $a_n$~and~$b_n$.
\subsubsection{Rabi resonance: low decoherence rate}
Figure~\ref{fig:3}(a) shows the simulated amplitude response for the second and fourth harmonics as a function of the Rabi frequency with fixed $\omega_{\rm m}$ and $\Gamma_1, \Gamma_2\ll \omega_{\rm m}$. In agreement with Eq.~\ref{eq:beta_resonance}, the amplitude $P_2$ of the second harmonic peaks when $\Omega_{\rm R}=2\omega_{\rm m}$.
The fourth harmonic has two resonances: at $\Omega_{\rm R} = 2\omega_{\rm m}$ and $\Omega_{\rm R} = 4\omega_{\rm m}$. The latter peak is similar to the frequency response of a damped harmonic oscillator whose natural frequency is $\Omega_{\rm R}$ and is driven harmonically at $4\omega_{\rm m}$. In contrast, the resonant behavior of the second and fourth harmonics in the case of large phase modulation deviates from this small signal approximation, as seen in FIG.~\ref{fig:3}(b). Both harmonics' resonance peaks shift toward smaller values of $\Omega_{\rm R}/\omega_{\rm m}$, but the shift of $P_2$'s peak (i.e., $\Delta_2$) is much more significant than that of $P_4$ (i.e., $\Delta_4$). Additionally, its shape changes drastically, including an increase in the linewidth. The value of this shift as a function of $m$ is shown in FIG.~\ref{fig:3}(c), which indicates that the fourth-harmonic Rabi resonance is more stable against variation of the modulation depth.
Furthermore, the height $P_{4,\rm r}$ of the fourth-harmonic Rabi-resonance peak corresponding to $\Omega_{R}=4\omega_{\rm m}$ scales as $m^4$, compared to quadratic ($m^2$) dependence of the second harmonic's peak value $P_{2,\rm r}$ [FIG.~\ref{fig:4}] (note that the quadratic behavior also fails at large $m$, indicating that Eq.~\ref{eq:beta_resonance} is no longer valid). Therefore, in the large-phase-modulation regime, $P_4$'s peak is comparable to $P_2$'s, and thus it becomes advantageous to use a fourth-harmonic atomic candle (4HAC), where the Rabi resonance of the fourth harmonic is used
\begin{figure}[t!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[]{FIG4.pdf}
\caption{Height of the Rabi resonance peaks of $2^{\rm nd}$ (blue squares) and $4^{\rm th}$ (red circles) as a function of modulation depth, determined from numerical simulation with $\Gamma_1=2\Gamma_2=0.08\omega_{\rm m}$ and $\delta=0$. The value for $4^{\rm th}$ harmonic ($P_{4,\rm r}$) is calculated for the right-hand peak on FIG~\ref{fig:3}(a-b), which corresponds to $\Omega_{\rm R}\approx4\omega_{\rm m}.$ Black dashed curves correspond to a quadratic and a quartic functions normalized to $P_{2,\rm r}(m=1)$ and $P_{4,\rm r}(m=1)$, respectively, to indicated the corresponding power dependence $P_{2,\rm r}$ and $P_{2,\rm r}$ at lower $m$. }
\label{fig:4}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection{Rabi resonance: high decoherence rate}
According to Eq.~\ref{eq:beta_resonance}, the width of $P_2$-peak should increase with increasing decoherence rates $\Gamma_{1,2}$. FIG.~\ref{fig:5} shows that this applies to both $P_4$-peaks as well, and when the decoherence rate is comparable to $\omega_{\rm m}$, these two peaks overlap. Even at small $m$, the $P_2$ peak's shape is different from a Lorentzian (as in FIG.~\ref{fig:3}), which indicates that Eq.~\ref{eq:beta_resonance} is no longer valid. For stronger modulation, line-broadening and asymmetry make both features unviable for practical applications.
\begin{figure}[h!]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[]{FIG5.pdf}
\caption{Rabi resonances for $2^{\rm d}$ and $4^{\rm th}$ harmonics in the case large decoherence. (a)~and~(b) correspond to $m=0.25$~rad and $m=6$~rad, respectively. Simulation is made for $\Gamma_1=2\Gamma_2=0.8\omega_{\rm m}$ and $\delta=0$. The amplitude of the $4^{\rm th}$ harmonic is scaled for better visibility.}
\label{fig:5}
\end{center}
\end{figure}
\section{Experiment}
\subsection{Experimental setup}
To verify the findings of our numerical calculations, we tested the fourth-harmonic atomic candle~(4HAC) technique using our cold-atom apparatus~[FIG.~\ref{fig:6}].
In our experiment we use a cloud of laser-cooled $^{87}$Rb atoms, which have undergone standard magneto-optical trapping, followed by an ``optical molasses'' step giving a 1-mm-wide cloud with typical atom number of $10^8$ and temperature of $70\ \mu$K. The atoms are optically pumped into $F=1$ ground state by switching off the repumping light 1~ms before the cooling and trapping beams are turned off and the atoms begin to expand in time-of-flight. Next, the cloud is illuminated by a travelling $\rm MW$ field emitted from an open-ended rectangular waveguide, whose phase is modulated periodically with frequency $\omega_{\rm m}$ using built-in functions of the $\rm MW$ source (SRS SG384). The near-resonant $\rm MW$ field (with carrier frequency $\omega/2\pi \approx 6.8~\GHz$) transfers the population between the ground states $F=1$ and $F=2$. This transfer is observed by monitoring the absorption of of a weak probe laser beam resonant with $F=2\rightarrow F'=2$ transition~[FIG.~\ref{fig:6}], which is proportional to the population of state $F=2$. Since the best signal is produced when both the optical and MW~fields are on resonance with the corresponding transitions, this technique is known as the double resonance~(DR)~\cite{Bandi2012a}. The transmission signal is measured by a high-sensitivity photodetector and recorded with an oscilloscope. During the laser trapping and cooling stages, the $\rm MW$ source is detuned by $\delta/2\pi = 100$~MHz from the hyperfine splitting, but during the DR~interrogation it is quickly brought back to resonance by mixing with an external 100~MHz radio-frequency signal. The $\rm MW$ signal is amplified by a separate amplifier, providing about $2$~W of power to the waveguide.
To measure the response of the atoms to the modulated microwave fields, and to test the 4HAC technique, we systematically varied the carrier detuning $\delta$ to find the resonant condition. Next, once resonance was found ($\delta = 0$), the phase-modulation frequency was varied to find the Rabi-resonance condition $\delta_{\rm m} = 0$. The time-dependent transmission of the resonant optical beam served as a measure of the population in the $F = 1$ ground state, and a frequency analysis of the transmission dynamics was performed numerically following the data acquisition.
\begin{figure*}[tb!]
\includegraphics[]{FIG7.pdf}
\caption{Typical DR~signal for Rabi oscillations as a function of time with a fit according to the model described in the text (red dashed line) and an FFT~spectrum of the tail of the signal (inset) for various parameters of the driving $\rm MW$ field. (a)~Unmodulated oscillations;
(b)~$\omega_{\rm m}/2\pi = 4$~kHz, $m = 2\pi$, $\delta/2\pi = 7$~kHz;
(c)~$\omega_{\rm m}/2\pi = 4$~kHz, $m = 2\pi$, $\delta\approx0$.
Axes in all insets have the same scaling. (b) shows that, in general, in case of a phase-modulated driving field the steady-state contains harmonics of the modulation frequency (4~kHz), compared to a flat spectrum in case of an unmodulated driving field. From (c), it is seen that the odd harmonics disappear when the carrier frequency of the driving field is resonant with the transition. The integer numbers next to peaks in the insets indicate harmonics of $\omega_{\rm m}$ the peaks correspond to. For clarity, only first $1.5$~ms of the DR is signal is shown. The probe's power is 46~$\mu$W.}
\label{fig:7}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Results and analysis}
\label{sec:Results and analysis}
Using large modulation depths, phase-modulated MW signals applied to our cold atomic samples revealed multi-harmonic nature of the steady oscillations beyond the small-signal regime.
FIG.~\ref{fig:7} shows the first $1.2$~ms of the measured transmission signals (total duration is $5$~ms) and derived spectra for three different conditions in our atomic candle experiments. First, we demonstrate ``pure'' Rabi oscillations [FIG.~\ref{fig:7}(a)] by applying a resonant but unmodulated $\rm MW$ field. The spectrum here is featureless. Next, when $\rm MW$-field is strongly modulated but detuned from the hyperfine transition ($m=2\pi$, $\delta \neq 0$), the population and thus the transmission signal have additional modulations [FIG.~\ref{fig:7}(b)], and the spectrum contains peaks at integer values of $\omega_{\rm m}$. Finally, when the carrier frequency is resonant ($\delta = 0$), the odd harmonics of the frequency of the phase modulation are suppressed in the transmission signal [FIG.~\ref{fig:7}(c)]. We observed that the amplitudes of the spectral components slightly varied from shot to shot under constant parameters of the \rm MW~field setup, and during some of the shots we do not see the total elimination of the odd harmonics. This might be due to noise in the response of the radio-frequency mixer, and for later analysis of the amplitudes we take average values over a few trials.
\begin{figure}[b!]
\includegraphics[]{FIG8.pdf}
\caption{Rabi resonance features of the second (red squares) and fourth (blues circles) harmonics for $m=2\pi, \delta=0$ and the probe's power of 46~$\mu$W. Each point and its error-bar correspond to an average and variance of $5$~values extracted from a tail of a DR~signal, respectively. (a)~Amplitudes were found by using a quadrature detection discussed in Section~\ref{sec:large modulation}. (b)~Amplitudes were found by fitting the DR~signal to a model described in Section~\ref{sec:Results and analysis}. Two vertical dashed lines correspond~to~$\omega_{m}=\Omega_{\rm R}/4$ and~$\omega_{m}=\Omega_{\rm R}/2$.}
\label{fig:8}
\end{figure}
Because our experiment allows us to record only a very limited number of oscillations in the time-domain, spectral analysis using numerical
FFTs does not yield a consistent set of results. Instead, we retrieve the spectral information by using the same numerical routine as in~Section~\ref{sec:large modulation}. For additional validation we fit the time-series of the transmission signal $f(t)$ to a model
\begin{align*}
f(t)&=\sqrt{A^2+(Bt)^2}+C_1e^{-\Gamma_1t}\\
&+C_2e^{-\Gamma_2t}\sin^2\left(\dfrac{\Omega_{R\rm }}{2}t+\phi\right)
+\sum_{n=1}^{6}P_n\sin(n\omega_mt+\phi_n),
\label{eq:fit}
\end{align*}
where the first term accounts for the loss of atoms due to interaction with the probe; the second term accounts for longitudinal damping; the third describes damped Rabi oscillations, and the final terms correspond population dynamics at the harmonics of the modulation frequency. In this model, $A,~B,~C_{1,2},~P_n,~\phi,~\phi_n$ are all fit parameters, where: $A$ represents the initial density of atoms at the position of the probe; $B$ is the rate of hole burning due to momentum kicks from the probe; $C_1$ and $C_2$ the amplitude of the transmission oscillations, which are proportional to the amplitude oscillations; $\phi$ and $\phi_{\rm n}$ represent the initial phase of the carrier and modulation frequencies at the start of the transmission measurement; and $P_n$ are the steady-state amplitudes of the population oscillation components that we are looking for in this atomic candle measurement.
To investigate practicability of the 4HAC, we analyzed the amplitudes of the second and fourth harmonics, $P_2$ and $P_4$ as a function of the modulation frequency $\omega_{\rm m}$ at a fixed $\rm MW$ power. (For these analyses, we use only the tail of the data, which corresponds to the steady-state regime.) FIG.~\ref{fig:8} shows that the amplitudes of both harmonics peak as $\omega_{\rm m}$ is scanned through $\Omega_{\rm R}/2 = 2\pi\times(3.8\pm0.3)$~kHz in a manner similar to FIG.~\ref{fig:5}(b), where $\Omega_{\rm R}$ was estimated from an analysis of a set of unmodulated signals. The uncertainty in $\Omega_{\rm R}$ is largely of the same origin as the uncertainties in the amplitudes (as was discussed before), since when the carrier-wave is not exactly on resonance with the transition, the oscillation response is at a higher frequency. By fitting a set of transmission data corresponding to unmodulated driving field, we estimate the decoherence rates in our experiment to be
$\Gamma_1=(2.0\pm0.1)\times10^4$~s$^{-1}$ and $\Gamma_2=(0.97\pm0.04)\times10^4$~s$^{-1}$.
Even though in this regime Rabi resonances are not practically useful, the qualitative behavior supports our model in numerical analysis.
\subsection{Experimental considerations}
In~\cite{Coffer2002} it was shown that increasing the probe's power leads to a broadening of the line shapes of the atomic-candle Rabi resonances. The absorption and subsequent spontaneous emission of a photon by the atom from the upper ground state contributes to the longitudinal relaxation, and thus $\Gamma_1$ is proportional to the absorption rate, which in turn is proportional to the probe's intensity.
In our experiment we can observe a similar effect, where by varying the power of the probe beam we can obtain qualitatively different oscillation patterns. FIG.~\ref{fig:9}~shows that increased probe's power leads to a higher decoherence rate and changing it by a factor of $10$ from $0.54\ \mu$W to $0.06\ \mu$W brings the system from highly-damped~[FIG.~\ref{fig:9}(a)] to underdamped~[FIG.~\ref{fig:9}(b)] oscillations. This is in a good qualitative agreement with our simulations, where the damped case corresponds to FIG.~\ref{fig:oscillations_simulation_large}, and a simulation of the underdamped case is shown~in~[FIG.~\ref{fig:9}(c)]. Since our simulation model is based on the atom as a two-level system and does not describe the absorption of the probe, it does not capture the monotonically increasing transmission over time that is experimentally observed in the case of the higher probe power. The fact that the average transmission level does not change significantly in the case of the smaller probe intensity indicates that the nonzero steady-state slope of the transmission signal is due to the hole-burning in the cloud rather than thermal expansion.
For our steady-state analysis, we want to work in a regime where the Rabi oscillations are damped.
Since in our case the interrogation time is limited, this can be achieved by using a higher probe power, corresponding to a strongly-damped regime. In addition, higher probe power gives a better signal~to~noise~ratio.
The main limitation in our experiment was the short interrogation time, limited by thermal expansion of the atomic cloud and interaction with the probe beam, which was ``burning'' a hole in the cloud. In addition, we observed slight discrepancies between several successive measurement of the DR~signal at constant $\rm MW$~field parameters, which are probably due to fluctuations in the turn-on time of the field. These should not be an issue in the real-world configurations, such as vapor cells, where interaction with the buffer gas keeps the atoms in place, or in cold atoms whose interrogation time is increased by adding a trapping potential, e.g., an optical dipole trap. Another issue is that, due to the geometry of our experiment, it is hard to select a specific Zeeman transition by applying a bias magnetic field with a particular direction with respect to the polarization of the $\rm MW$ field. Again, in vapor-cell applications this problem usually is not present.
\begin{figure*}[h]
\includegraphics[]{FIG9.pdf}
\caption{(a-b): Influence of the probe's power on the double resonance signal in case of a phase-modulated (blue) and unmodulated (red) driving $\rm MW$~field. (a) Probe's power is $0.54\ \mu$W; (b) Probe's power is $0.06\ \mu$W; (c): numerical simulation of a two-level system evolution in the case of small damping corresponding to (b), with simulation parameters
$\Omega_{\rm R}=2\omega_{\rm m}$, $\Gamma_1=2\Gamma_2=0.02\omega_{\rm m}$.}
\label{fig:9}
\end{figure*}
\section{Concluding remarks}
In summary, using double-resonance measurements in cold atoms, we have shown that the steady-state populations of two-level atoms interacting with a phase-modulated microwave field oscillate at multiples of the modulation frequency. We have applied the Rabi resonance technique to cold atoms, and made the first observations of higher-order harmonics in any system. In the case when the carrier wave is exactly on resonance, we observe that only the even harmonics are present, which is confirmed by numerical solution of modified Maxwell-Bloch equations.
Finally, we find that it is experimentally advantageous to use large optical probe powers in these measurements to damp ``regular'' Rabi oscillations and observe only the response to the modulation.
These observations shed new light on the dynamics of a two-level system, which is currently a workhorse of many practical quantum information applications.
In addition, we have shown that the amplitude of the oscillations at $4\omega_{\rm m}$ has a resonance when $\omega_{\rm m}$ is varied. Our simulations show
that at weak modulation the fourth harmonic has two resonance peaks: when~$\Omega_{\rm R}=2\omega_{\rm m}$~and~$\Omega_{\rm R}=4\omega_{\rm m}$. The quartic dependence of the height of latter peak and its smaller linewidth compared to that of the Rabi $\beta$-resonance, making a possible alternative for atomic-candle applications in experiments with a weak absorption signal, e.g., in cold atoms.
By exploring in-depth the interactions between atoms and phase-modulated microwave fields, we have provided the foundations for a high signal-to-noise tool for measuring microwave fields, and thus the coupling to atomic systems. With the increasing use of 3D microwave cavities~\cite{Reagor2013,Souris2017a}, including with atomic systems~\cite{Adwaith2019}, atomic candle techniques can play an important role in calibrating the microwave field strengths for accurate measures of the coupling strength between the cavity field and, for instance, a microwave qubit~\cite{Grezes2014,Lachance-Quirion2017,Reed2017}. These calibrations will be especially important for techniques that rely on precise timing, such as pulse-area-based quantum memories~\cite{Lvovsky2009,Grezes2016,Saglamyurek2018} and quantum transduction protocols~\cite{Hafezi2012,Mcgee2013,Andrews2015,Kiffner2016}.
\begin{acknowledgements}
This work was generously supported by the University of Alberta; the Faculty of Science; the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC); Alberta Innovates; the Canada Foundation for Innovation (CFI), the Canadian Institute for Advanced Research (CIFAR), and the Canada Research Chairs (CRC) Program. We thank Taras Hrushevskyi, Erhan Saglamyurek and Benjamin Smith for their help with the experimental setup, and thank the Davis lab for the loan of their photodetector.
\end{acknowledgements}
|
\section{Introduction}
Protostars are formed as a result of the gravitational collapse of cold ($\sim10$~K) molecular cloud cores \citep{mckee2007}. As the contracting gas should have finite angular momentum, circumstellar disks form as natural byproducts. Since the protostellar evolution is largely controlled by accretion through the disks \citep{matt2005,tomida2017}, it is important to reveal the star-disk interaction to understand the protostellar growth history.
Since the star formation takes place in a cold environment, it had been considered that deeply embedded protostars such as Class-0 and -I objects are irrelevant to high-energy processes. However, X-ray observations revealed that Class-I protostars emit hard X-rays associated with very hot ($\sim 10^8$~K) plasma \citep{koyama1996}. Such powerful explosions in hard X-rays are called protostellar flares.
Protostellar flares release huge energy ($\sim 10^{34-37}$~erg in the X-ray radiation. The actual released magnetic energy should be much larger) within a time scale of $10^{4-5}$~s \citep{tsuboi2000,montmerle2000,imanishi2003}.
Statistical studies show that the X-ray detection rate of Class-0/I objects are generally high \citep[$40-60$~\%][]{imanishi2001, getman2007, gudel2007, prisinzano2008, pillitteri2010}, indicating that explosive events ubiquitously occur even just after the birth of protostars. Observations of more evolved (Class-II/III) objects reported that class-III objects produce larger flares than class-II objects, which suggests that the accretion interrupts the energy build-up for flares \citep{getman2008b}. However, actively accreting class-I objects are as bright as class-III objects in the X-ray \citep{pillitteri2010}. This fact motivates us to consider a different mechanism in protostars.
Protostellar flares have been considered as a scale-up version of solar flares. A solar flare is an explosive phenomenon in which the accumulated magnetic energy is violently released by magnetic reconnection \citep{priest2002,benz2008,shibata2016,takasao2016a}. Since solar flares release a fraction of the magnetic energy stored above sunspots with a field strength of a few kG, the flare energy can be estimated as
\begin{align}
E_{\rm flare} &\approx f \frac{B_{\rm spot}^2 L_{\rm spot}^3}{8\pi} \nonumber \\
& \approx 10^{32}~{\rm erg}\left ( \frac{f}{0.1}\right) \left( \frac{B_{\rm spot}}{1000~{\rm G}}\right)^2 \left( \frac{L_{\rm spot}}{0.04 R_\odot}\right)^3,
\end{align}
where $B_{\rm spot}$ is the field strength of sunspots and $f$ is the fraction of magnetic energy that can be released as flare energy \citep{shibata2013}. $E_{\rm flare}\approx 10^{32}$~erg is the energy of the largest solar flare ever observed, and the size $L_{\rm spot}$, defined as the square-root of the total area of sunspots, is consistent with observations by \citet{sammis2000}. Since solar flares occur in the corona, it is meaningful to write the energy with the coronal quantities. Considering that the coronal field strength is smaller than the photospheric value due to expansion, we get
\begin{align}
E_{\rm flare} \approx 10^{32}~{\rm erg}\left( \frac{f}{0.1}\right) \left( \frac{B}{300~{\rm G}}\right)^2 \left( \frac{L_{\rm flare}}{0.1 R_\odot}\right)^3.
\end{align}
Although the result depends on the coronal field strength, this relation suggests that the size of the largest flare is roughly 10\% of the solar radius and this is supported by observations.
We note that X-ray observations can only measure a small fraction of the total released energy \citep[e.g.][]{benz2008,emslie2012}. For instance, \citet{emslie2012} suggest that only $\sim 1~$\% of the total released energy is radiated in X-rays. Although there are uncertainties, the fact from solar observations is that the total released energy should be one or more orders of magnitude larger than the energy in X-rays. Therefore, the total released energy of protostellar flares should be larger than $10^{34-37}$~ergs.
We repeat the above estimation for protostellar flares. The huge flare energy suggests that either strong magnetic fields and/or a large spatial scale are required. The maximum field strength should be at most a few kG even for protostars, otherwise the magnetic field cannot be confined by the gas pressure around the stellar surface \citep[for direct measurements of kG fields for classical T-Tauri stars, see e.g.][]{donati2009}.
Therefore, the field strength at the footpoints will be comparable to the sunspots, and protostellar flares should have a very large spatial scale to release the observed flare energy:
\begin{align}
E_{\rm flare} \approx 10^{37}~{\rm erg} \left( \frac{f}{0.1}\right)\left( \frac{B}{300~{\rm G}}\right)^2 \left( \frac{L_{\rm flare}}{5 R_\odot}\right)^3.
\end{align}
Since the typical radius of protostars is a few solar radii \citep{baraffe2009,hosokawa2011}, this estimate indicates that the size of protostellar flares is comparable to or larger than the stellar radius. Mechanisms for the energy build-up at such very large scales remain unresolved.
The energy build-up in the case of solar flares is as follows.
Magnetic fields first emerge from the solar interior to form sunspots. Then, sunspots show shearing and/or rotating motions, shearing up coronal magnetic loops \citep{takasao2015b}.
This energy build-up may not be expected in the case of protostellar flares, because the spatial scale is larger than the stellar radius and therefore both of the footpoints of magnetic loops may not be anchored by the stellar surface.
What makes the difference between the Sun and a protostar? One crucial factor is the existence of accretion disks.
The large spatial scale suggests that protostellar flares are associated with the dynamical interaction between the protostar and a circumstellar disk. The dynamical evolution of systems in which a protostar has a strong dipolar magnetosphere threading the disk has been investigated \citep{ghosh1979a, koenigl1991,camenzind1990,shu1994,matt2005,ferreira2006}. In this configuration, magnetic loops of the magnetosphere are wound up by the rotating disk (i.e. rotational or gravitational energy of the disk is efficiently converted into magnetic energy). As the twist accumulates, magnetic loops expand to form an electric current sheet inside the loops \citep{lynden-bell1994,lovelace1995}. Magnetic reconnection eventually takes place in the current sheet, and rapidly releases the magnetic energy stored at a scale larger than the stellar radius. Although one end of the foot-points is anchored in the disk, this energy build-up by shear is similar to the case of solar flares. \citet{hayashi1996} investigated the magnetospheric model in detail using a two-dimensional magnetohydrodynamic (2D MHD) simulation \citep[see also][]{goodson1997,hirose1997,uzdensky2004,zanni2013}, and showed that magnetic reconnection naturally accounts for the formation of hot plasma. The accretion process of the star with a magnetosphere has also been studied \citep{miller1997,romanova2009a}. The condition for the magnetospheric accretion has been widely discussed \citep[e.g.][and references therein]{bessolaz2008}.
Although the magnetospheric model is promising, it is possible that actual protostars have no magnetospheres because vigorous disk accretion and strong disk magnetic fields in this phase can destroy the magnetosphere. For instance, if the inner disk has a poloidal magnetic field with the strength of 40~G, the total disk magnetic flux within $\sim 5R_{*}$ is enough to open up the closed stellar dipole fields with the strength of 1~kG through magnetic reconnection. Although there is a large uncertainty in the above estimation, an observation indicates the existence of kG fields there in a highly accreting young star \citep{donati2005}. A recent simulation by \citet{machida2019} shows the existence of strong ($>100$~G) poloidal magnetic fields around a protostar, although the simulation only investigates the very early phase of the star formation (until two thousand years after the birth of the protostar). The strong disk fields can be rapidly transported to the protostar by accretion near/above the disk surface \citep{beckwith2009, takasao2018}, which will also enhance the destruction of the stellar magnetosphere via reconnection. If protostars have no magnetospheres that interact with rotating disks, the energy build-up process in which field lines of the magnetospheres are twisted by the rotating disks will not operate. Does this mean that protostellar flares will not occur without magnetospheres? This is the central question of this paper. We investigated whether protostellar flares can occur in the absence of magnetosphere using a 3D MHD simulation. We report here that protostellar flares can occur even in such a case. This study discusses the relationship between the accretion process and the protostellar flares.
\section{Numerical Setup}
Our numerical setting (including method and initial and boundary conditions) is similar to that in our previous paper \citep{takasao2018}. The differences are 1. a resistivity is included to model reconnection, 2. the disk is magnetized more strongly, 3. the dual energy formalism (the time evolution of the internal energy is also solved) is used to avoid negative pressure in the low plasma $\beta$ regions \citep[e.g.][]{takasao2015b}, and 4. the inner boundary condition is modified. Here we briefly describe our model. For more detailed information, the reader is referred to our previous paper. We solve the 3D resistive MHD equations in a conservative form in spherical coordinates $(r,\theta,\phi)$ using Athena$++$ (J. Stone et al. in preparation). We include a simplified radiative cooling term for the disk material in the energy equation to sustain the initial disk temperature profile.
We include a resistivity to capture magnetic reconnection. Our resistivity $\eta_{\rm anom}$ is an anomalous resistivity which operates only in the regions with a large relative electron-ion drift velocity $v_{\rm drift}$ (proportional to the current density divided by the mass density) in order to spatially localize the resistivity and realize a fast reconnection \citep{ugai1992}. The functional form is $\eta_{\rm anom} = \eta_0 (v_{\rm drift}/v_{\rm cri}-1)$ in the region where $v_{\rm drift}>v_{\rm cri}$ and the density is 1,000 times smaller than that of the initial inner disk, otherwise $\eta_{\rm anom} = 0$. $v_{\rm cri}$ is the threshold for the drift velocity. We chose the constants $\eta_0$ and $v_{\rm cri}$ so that the current sheets are resolved with at least several meshes. Therefore, the resistivity does not operate in the disk.
The protostar is surrounded by a cold disk threaded by an hourglass-shaped poloidal magnetic field in the initial state. The protostellar mass and radius are $0.5M_\odot$ and $2R_\odot$, respectively. The Keplerian orbital period at the stellar radius is $\sim 0.46$~days. The ratio of the disk pressure scale height to the radius is about 0.14, as in our previous model. The initial plasma $\beta$, the ratio of the gas pressure to the magnetic pressure, on the equatorial plane is constant with radius and set to $10^2$. We expect that the inner part of the accretion disk is more strongly magnetized in the protostellar phase because a fossil magnetic field may still remain there \citep[e.g.][]{machida2019}. The initial disk field strength is approximately 100~G in the innermost region in this study. The initial midplane disk density is $10^{16}~$cm$^{-3}$ at the inner edge, and it decreases to approximately $10^{14}~$cm$^{-3}$ in 23~days after the simulation starts.
We adopt an outgoing boundary condition for the outer boundary. Our inner boundary is a rotating stellar surface which gradually absorbs the accreting mass. The inner boundary is controlled by the boundary condition plus a damping layer (a thin spherical shell around the actual inner boundary). The difference from our previous setting is that the values of the latitudinal and azimuthal components of magnetic fields in the ghost cells are set to zero to improve the numerical stability. The latitudinal component of the velocity is also set to zero in the ghost cells as in our previous paper. The protostar is rotating and the corotation radius is set to $3R_*$, where $R_*$ is the stellar radius, and the magnetic fields threading the stellar surface are also rotated at this velocity. We investigated the influence of the boundary condition by performing a set of 2D simulations with different boundary conditions (zero-value/reflecting boundaries for $v_\theta$ and free/radial-component-only boundaries for magnetic fields), and confirmed that protostellar flares occur in all the cases.
We adopt static mesh refinement to capture turbulence and magnetic reconnection around the disk. The simulation domain is $(0.9R_*, 0, 0)\le (r,\theta,\phi) < (30R_*,\pi,2\pi)$. The radial grid size is proportional to the radius to keep the ratio between the radial and longitudinal grid sizes. We resolve the simulation domain with $120 \times 120 \times 80$ grid cells at the root level (level 0). The refinement level increases toward the midplane of the inner disk. The maximum level is 2 ($r<6R_*$).
\section{Numerical Results}
Figure~\ref{fig:emag} shows the evolution of the magnetic energy around the protostar and the accretion rate. The time-averaged accretion rate is $\sim 3\times 10^{-7}~M_\odot~{\rm yr^{-1}}$. Within the distance of five stellar radii, the protostar stores magnetic energy of $\sim 10^{39}$~erg, which is sufficient to produce large protostellar flares. The plot indeed displays many events of sudden release of magnetic energy.
The initial sharp increase in the magnetic energy ($t<10$~days) is due to quick accumulation of magnetic flux from the disk.
Such efficient transport of magnetic flux is also found in our previous simulation \citep{takasao2018} and caused by a rapid accretion near and above the disk surface where the plasma $\beta$ is lower and the magnetic torque can transport angular momentum more efficiently than around the equatorial plane \citep{matsumoto1996,beckwith2009,zhu2018}. As discussed later, the energy accumulation after energy release events is also mediated in this manner. We observe fast funnel-accretion found in our previous paper \citep{takasao2018}.
\begin{figure}
\epsscale{1.3}
\plotone{hst_Emag_star_mdot_dottedline.eps}
\caption{Temporal evolution of the total magnetic energy integrated within the radius of $5R_*$ (solid) and the rate of mass accretion onto the protostar (dotted). The vertical dashed line indicates the timing of the flare shown in Figures~\ref{fig:flare3d} and \ref{fig:flare-midplane}.}\label{fig:emag}
\end{figure}
Figure~\ref{fig:flare3d} displays an example of the explosive events which occurred at $t\sim 68$~days. We find a hot ($\sim10^{7}$~K) plasma ejection from the protostar with a velocity of $\sim$450~km~s$^{-1}$ (yellow-colored region). A portion of the reconnection outflow is refracted along the reconnected fields to form a hot bipolar outflow. We observe many explosions like this event and interpret them as protostellar flares. The averaged energy conversion efficiency is approximately $L_{\rm flare}\sim 0.1 \dot{E}_{\rm grav}$, where $L_{\rm flare}$ and $\dot{E}_{\rm grav}=-GM_* \dot{M}/R_*$ are the time-averaged flare luminosity and the energy release rate by accretion, respectively.
\begin{figure*}
\epsscale{1}
\plotone{Flare3D_dim_twoviews_step146.eps}
\caption{3D images of a protostellar flare which occurred at $t\sim68$~days. The protostellar surface is colored by the value of the radial component of magnetic fields. In the left panel (side view), the density is shown by the poloidal slice. The blue isosurface in the right panel (top view) indicates the density of $3\times10^{-11}$~g~cm$^{-3}$. A hot plasma ejection is indicated by the isosurface of the temperature (yellow, the temperature is $\sim 5\times 10^{6}$~K). Reconnected magnetic field lines are colored by orange, while the stellar and disk field lines are by yellow and purple, respectively. Arrows denote velocity vectors.}\label{fig:flare3d}
\end{figure*}
Protostellar flares are driven by magnetic reconnection in a way similar to solar flares. The hot ejecta seen in Figure~\ref{fig:flare3d} is a manifestation of magnetic reconnection.
Protostellar flares are so powerful that they significantly affect the disk. Figure~\ref{fig:flare-midplane} displays the disk structure at the equatorial plane at two successive times. The protostellar flare in Figure~\ref{fig:flare3d} appears as a tenuous hot void in this figure (see the region indicated by the dashed curves in the left panel). The void corresponds to a cross-section of the bundle of reconnected magnetic fields. The void carries strong magnetic fields away (orange-colored field lines in Figure~\ref{fig:flare3d}), removing large-scale poloidal fields from the protostar. This is why the plasma $\beta$ in the void is much lower than unity. The density is small because the reconnected field lines come from the tenuous protostellar corona.
The magnetic fields in the void diffuse out as time progresses because of the magnetic interchange instability. The right panel of Figure~\ref{fig:flare-midplane} shows the result 0.8~days after the time in the right panel. We can find that finger-like structures are developing in the void (indicated by arrows), which are manifestation of the instability. The instability can appear only in regions where the Lorentz force is operating significantly against gravity \citep{stehle2001}. In fact, in the ejecta the plasma $\beta$ is much smaller than unity, and the magnetic energy density is larger than the gravitational energy density (indicated by the ratio of the Alfv\'en speed to the local Keplerian velocity, the bottom right panel). We also confirmed that the instability condition is satisfied by checking the gradient of the magnetic field strength divided by the surface density. The accretion is initially driven by magneto-rotational instability \citep[MRI][]{balbus1991}, but MRI is suppressed later due to strong magnetization. The accretion rate around the protostar seems to be sustained by a combination of the magnetic interchange instability and the disk outflow (not shown here).
\begin{figure*}
\epsscale{1.0}
\plotone{Midplane-time69p1-69p9days-dim.eps}
\caption{The distributions of physical quantities at the midplane at two different times. Left: the density (top left), the temperature (top right), the plasma $\beta$ (bottom left), and the radial velocity normalized by the Keplerian velocity at the stellar surface (bottom right) at time $69.1$~days. The hot plasma ejection (indicated by the dashed curves) is driven by the protostellar flare shown in Figure~\ref{fig:flare3d}. Right: same as the left panels but at a later time of $69.9$~days. The bottom right panel shows the ratio of the Alfv\'en speed to the local Keplerian velocity. The arrows in the density and temperature maps indicate finger-like structures caused by the magnetic Rayleigh-Taylor instability. An animation of this figure is available. The sequence starts at time 65.8~days and ends at time 75.1~days (20 Keplerian orbital periods at the stellar surface).}\label{fig:flare-midplane}
\end{figure*}
Why do magnetic fields which accumulate around the protostar overflow into the disk? We describe the process with a schematic diagram in Figure~\ref{fig:flare-description}. The protostar acquires large-scale magnetic fields from the disk by accretion (stage~1). When the stellar magnetic fields become strong enough, the stellar fields expand toward the disk. Since the stellar rotation is slower than the Keplerian rotation in this study, the stellar fields remove the angular momentum of the disk gas and accelerate the disk surface accretion near the protostar (stage~2). Once the inner disk is cleared up, magnetic fields of the stellar north and south poles contact to reconnect around the equatorial plane, producing a flare (stage~3). In this way, a fraction of the stellar fields are removed and go into the disk.
We will describe why protostellar flares repeatedly occur. Although the flare drives an outgoing ejection, the ejection is spatially limited in the azimuthal direction (Figure~\ref{fig:flare-midplane}) and therefore the accretion continues. In addition, the magnetic fields ejected by reconnection are moving radially, and therefore they behave as an obstacle for surrounding rotating disk materials. Disk materials lose their angular momenta when interacting with the magnetic fields. The disk accretion is enhanced as a result (see the correlation between the magnetic energy and the accretion rate in Figure~\ref{fig:emag}). Thus, the inner density gap is filled up and the disk accretion can accumulate magnetic fields around the protostar again.
\begin{figure*}
\epsscale{1.1}
\plotone{flare-description03.eps}
\caption{Schematic diagram of the newly found mechanism of the protostellar flares.}\label{fig:flare-description}
\end{figure*}
We investigated the size of the influence region of the stellar fields. The stellar fields are confined in the polar regions by the sum of the gas and magnetic pressures of the disk \citep[see][]{takasao2018}, which means that the opening angle of the stellar magnetic funnel is determined by the pressure balance in the latitudinal direction. If the balance point reaches close to or inside the disk, the stellar fields have significant impact on the disk accretion. Figure~\ref{fig:balance-angle} shows the angle of the balance point, where the angle is measured from the equatorial plane. We also measured the disk opening angle numerically (see the caption in Figure~\ref{fig:balance-angle}). The figure shows that in this simulation (solid line, the initial plasma $\beta=10^2$) the balance point comes into or close to the disk within the radius of $1.5-2R_{*}$. Therefore, the stellar fields significantly affect the disk within this radius. In a weaker field case, on the other hand, the balance point is located well above the disk surface, and we do not observe strong flares.
\begin{figure}
\epsscale{1.}
\plotone{BalanceAngle02.eps}
\caption{Radial distribution of the angle of the pressure balance point. The angle is measured from the equatorial plane. The solid line denotes the result in the simulation of this study. For comparison, we also plot the result from the weaker field case in \citet{takasao2018} ($\beta=10^4$, dashed line). We also plot $2\tan^{-1}{(H_{\rm d}/R)}$ as an indication of the disk opening angle, where $H_{\rm d}$ is the width of the fitting Gaussian profile (dashed-dotted line). The fitting is performed at each radius up to the heights at which the density is 10\% of the midplane gas. Note that the initial disk opening angle is $\sim16^\circ$.}\label{fig:balance-angle}
\end{figure}
\section{Summary and Discussion}
We presented the results of a global 3D MHD simulation of protostellar flares under the assumption that the protostar does not have a magnetosphere initially. We found that protostellar flares repeatedly occur even in the absence of a stellar magnetosphere. The protostar accumulates huge magnetic energy by getting large-scale magnetic fields from the disk. The stored magnetic energy is released by magnetic reconnection to produce protostellar flares. A fraction of the stellar fields are removed as a result of reconnection.
Protostellar flares release a large amount of magnetic energy ($\sim 10^{38}$~ergs) because of their large spatial scale. When we consider the energy partition of flares, only a small fraction of this energy will be radiated in X-ray. If the energy conversion rate is 1\%, the flare energy observed in the simulation can account for protostellar flares with the energy of $\sim 10^{36}$~ergs estimated from X-ray observations.
We compare our ``flux removal model" with the magnetospheric model by \citet{hayashi1996}. In both models, the energy build-up and release are controlled by the surrounding disks, and flares can occur repeatedly to produce hot ejecta. However, some big differences can be found. In the magnetospheric model, flares are triggered when field lines of the magnetosphere are wound up by approximately one rotation \citep{lynden-bell1994}, but observations do not support this \citep{imanishi2001}. Reconnection occurs well above the disk, and therefore the disk is less affected by ejecta. In our model, the energy build-up is the magnetic field accumulation by accretion. The time interval between two successive flares (flare interval) is determined by the star-disk interaction and more than 10 orbital periods at the stellar surface. Reconnection happens around the midplane, and therefore largely disturbs the inner disk. Inhomogeneity in the azimuthal direction is also prominent because of the localized reconnection and the magnetic interchange instability in the ejecta. The accretion rate is not totally quenched by flare ejecta due to the inhomogeneity.
Protostellar flares occur with a typical period of approximately 20-30 orbital periods (or 10-15~days) in this study. This time scale is consistent with the idea that protostellar flares occur once the protostellar fields clear up the inner disk. The flare interval will be characterized by the timescale at which the inner disk is cleared up by the interaction between the stellar magnetic fields and the disk surface. From Figure~\ref{fig:balance-angle} the interaction is important within the radius of $\sim2R_*$. We define the accretion rate around the disk surfaces as $\dot{M}_{\rm surf} = 4\pi R \rho_{\rm surf} v_{\rm r}w$, where $\rho_{\rm surf}$ is the density around the disk surface and $w$ is a typical width of the disk surface accretion (here we take $w=H_{\rm p}$). Then the timescale $t_{\rm clear}$ is estimated as $M(R<2R_*)/\dot{M}\approx \pi R^2 \rho_{\rm mid} \cdot 2H_{\rm p} / 4\pi R \rho_{\rm surf} v_{\rm r} w = (1/2)(2\pi R/v_{\rm r})(\rho_{\rm mid}/\rho_{\rm surf})$. Our numerical simulation indicates that $2\pi R/v_{\rm r}\sim 5 t_{\rm K}$, and $\rho_{\rm mid}/\rho_{\rm surf}\sim 10$ at $R=2R_*$, where $t_{\rm K}$ is the Keplerian orbital period at $R_*$ ($\sim 0.46$~days). Therefore, we obtain that $t_{\rm clear}\sim 25 t_{\rm K}\sim 12~$days, which is consistent with the numerical result.
A significant amount of magnetic fields is carried to the protostar by accretion outside the disk body as commonly seen in many simulations \citep[e.g.][]{beckwith2009,suzuki2014,takasao2018}. As a result, the accretion flows around the protostar become essentially the same as so-called magnetically chocked accretion flows (MCAFs) \citep{mckinney2012b}. MCAFs are similar to the ``magnetically arrested disc" (MAD) flows \citep{narayan2003}, widely discussed in the context of black hole accretion and MRI is suppressed due to strong magnetization \citep{white2019}. \citet{mckinney2012b} report that the magnetic flux redistribution is mediated by the instabilities once magnetic flux has accumulated up to a saturation point. Here we emphasize the importance of magnetic reconnection. As shown in Figures~\ref{fig:flare-midplane} and \ref{fig:flare-description}, the magnetic flux removal via reconnection also leads to the redistribution. Protostellar flares will largely affect the disk magnetic field evolution in the innermost region. Reconnection similar to this but around a black hole is also discussed by \citet{komissarov2005}.
Less attention has been paid to the flaring activity in the context of the protostellar evolution. However, our results suggest that the disk material can be significantly heated up by protostellar flares before accreting onto the star, which may affect the stellar evolution through the change in the entropy carried into the protostar \citep[e.g.][]{hosokawa2011,kunitomo2017}. The heating may also contribute to the formation of chondrules which are believed to be the building blocks of planets \citep[see also][]{nakamoto2005}.
The magnetic flux removal will be important for the transition of the stellar magnetic structure; the stellar magnetic fields should be dominated by fossil, open poloidal fields in the protostellar phase. However, the magnetic fields of evolved stars like CTTSs are dominated by multipolar, dynamo-generated fields.
Our results indicate that protostellar flares can occur even before the stellar dynamo starts. Therefore, studying protostellar flares may enable us to probe the very initial state after the birth of protostars.
We will explore the impact on the star and planet formation in future.
\acknowledgments
We thank Drs. K. Shibata and S. Inutsuka for fruitful discussion. S.T. acknowledges support by the Research Fellowship of the Japan Society for the Promotion of Science (JSPS). This work was supported in part by JSPS KAKENHI grant No. 16J02063 (S.T.) and 17H01105 (T.K.S.). Numerical computations were carried out on the Cray XC50 at the Center for Computational Astrophysics, National Astronomical Observatory of Japan. Test calculations were carried out on the XC40 at the Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics in Kyoto University. This research was also supported by MEXT as ``Exploratory Challenge on Post-K computer" (Elucidation of the Birth of Exoplanets [Second Earth] and the Environmental Variations of Planets in the Solar System).
|
\section{Introduction\label{sec:intro}}
Very small dust grains, whose size is below 10 nm (hereafter referred to as nanoparticles), including Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs), play an important role in the evolution of the interstellar medium (ISM). \cite{2001ApJS..134..263W} and \cite{2013ApJ...766....8A} demonstrated that nanoparticles can control the heating process of gas, while other studies (e.g., \citealt{1956MNRAS.116..503M}, \citealt{2016MNRAS.460.2050Z}) found that nanoparticles can influence the dynamics of molecular clouds and star formation due to their dominant charge carrier in dense and low ionization molecular clouds.
PAHs and nanoparticles are expected to be abundant in shocked regions due to shattering of large grains via grain-grain collisions (e.g., \citealt{1994ApJ...431..321T}; \citealt{1994ApJ...433..797J}). Nevertheless, most of observations show the lack of strong PAH emission features in supernova remnants (\citealt{2009ApJ...693..713S}) and outflows of massive young stellar objects (YSOs) (\citealt{2006ApJ...645.1264S}) where shocks are present. It suggests that PAHs/nanoparticles are perhaps efficiently destroyed in the shocked regions.
For stationary magnetized shock models (\citealt{2015A&A...578A..63F}), \cite{2019ApJ...877...36H} found that the supersonic drift of charged nanoparticles relative to neutrals can rapidly spin nanoparticles up to suprathermal rotation. As a result, smallest nanoparticles ($a\lesssim 1$ nm) can be disrupted into tiny fragments when the centrifugal stress induced by grain rotation exceeds the maximum tensile strength of the grain material. This mechanism is found to be the most efficient in destroying nanoparticles in C-shocks compared to previously known mechanisms such as thermal sputtering and grain shattering (see \citealt{2019ApJ...877...36H} for details).
In the case of shocks driven by outflows from (YSOs) and young supernova remnants (SNRs), shocks cannot reach the steady stage because the required timescale is longer than the dynamical age of outflows and SNRs. For instance, the dynamical age of the BHR 71 bipolar outflow is $\sim 4000\,{\rm yr}$ (\citealt{2015A&A...575A..98G}), of the blue lobe of the L1157 outflow is $\sim 3000\,{\rm yr}$ (\citealt{1998A&A...333..287G}), of SNR N132D is $\sim 2500\,{\rm yr}$ (\citealt{2006ApJ...653..267T}) or SNR IC443 is $\sim 4000\,{\rm yr}$ (\citealt{2008A&A...485..777T}), while it requires $\sim 10^{4}\,{\rm yr}$ for the C-shock to reache the steady state. Therefore, it is necessary to account for non-stationary shocks (e.g., \citealt{2003MNRAS.341...70F}; \citealt{2004A&A...419..999G, 2006A&A...459..821G}; \citealt{2008A&A...490..695G, 2015A&A...575A..98G}).
\cite{1998MNRAS.295..672C} and \cite{2004A&A...427..147L, 2004A&A...427..157L} discovered that non-stationary shocks are composed of a magnetic precursor and a J-type tail, so-called CJ-shock (see Section \ref{sec:model}). The key difference of the J-shock from the C-shock stage is that the gas can be heated to higher temperatures, resulting in an enhanced rotation rate of nanoparticles compared to the C-shock stage in the absence of supersonic drift. As a result, we expect that rotational disruption is also efficient in J-shock tails even without supersonic neutral drift. The goal of this paper is to quantify the efficiency of rotational disruption and model microwave emission from spinning dust for CJ-shocks.
The paper is structured as follows. In Section \ref{sec:model}, We describe the profiles of gas temperature, velocities of neutral, ion, and charged nanoparticles in CJ-type shock model, which are specially computed in dense magnetized clouds conditions. Section \ref{sec:rot} is a brief description of the rotational dynamics of dust grains in CJ-shocks. The mechanism of rotational disruption, and therefore the minimum size of survival nanoparticles through the shock are presented in Section \ref{sec:disrupt}. In Section \ref{sec:spindust}, we calculate spinning dust emissivity and emission flux from nanoparticles in the CJ-shock regions. In Section \ref{sec:discuss}, we discuss the importance of extremely fast rotating nanoparticles on grain surface chemistry, and potential application for probing nanoparticles in shocks, as well as shock tracing. Section \ref{sec:sum} summarizes our main findings.
\section{Structures of non-stationary shocks}\label{sec:model}
\subsection{C-shock, J-shock and CJ-shock}
The existence of magnetic fields and the ionization fraction affect the shock structure. When the magnetic field is weak or the ionization fraction is large, the shocks behave like hydrodynamic one since all of its neutral and charged particle components have the same velocity, including an extra contribution of the magnetic pressure. Because shocks are faster than the signal speed (e.g., sound speed) in the pre-shock medium, the signal speed thus can not "feel" the shock wave before it arrives. The shock properties (e.g., temperature, velocity, density) then abruptly vary as a viscous discontinuity jump (the so-called J-type shock) across the shock front.
When the magnetic field is significant, it interacts directly with the charged component and slows it down, which makes the neutral and charged components have different velocities ($v_{n}> v_{i}$). If the ionization fraction is small, the speed of magnetosonic waves of the charged component $v_{m}$ is greater than the entrance shock speed. This forms a magnetic precursor upstream of the discontinuity, in which the charged and neutral fluids dynamically decouple. Thus, the neutral fluid is heated up and accelerated due to the consequent friction between the two fluids. The precursor size increases with increasing the magnetic field intensity, and hence the neutrals are compressed sooner before the arrival of the shock front. Eventually, the discontinuity disappears, and the shock properties now change continuously (the so-called C-type shock). In this case, the kinetic energy dissipates much more gradually because of the friction between the neutral and charged components, and the C-shock volume is therefore much larger.
For young C-type shocks (at early age), the shock is actually composed of a magnetic precursor and a J-type tail \cite{1998MNRAS.295..672C} (the so-called time-dependent CJ-type shock). \cite{2004A&A...427..157L} indicated that in the large compression case, which is appropriate in dense media, the J-type front in the young C-type shock is inserted when the flow time in the charged fluid is equal to the shock age. The J-type shock ends when the total neutral flow time across the J-type part reaches the age of the shock.
\subsection{CJ-Shock structures and physical parameters}
As in our previous work, we model non-stationary shock structure with different shocked parameters (see Table \ref{tab:ISM}) using the 1D MHD shock code, namely Paris-Durham \citep{2015A&A...578A..63F}. Note that the C-type shock reaches the steady state at a typical time about $t_{\,{\rm s}}=10^{6}\,{\rm yr}/(n_{\rm H}/10^{2}\,{\rm cm}^{-3})$ for the standard ISM with the scaled radiation field $G_0=1$ \citep{2004A&A...427..147L}. So, in order to take into account the effect of the finite shock age, we consider two different values of age: $10^{2}\,{\rm yr}$ and $10^{3}\,{\rm yr}$ for $n_{\rm H}=10^{4}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$, a ten times shorter for a density of $n_{\rm H}=10^{5}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$, and hundred times shorter for a density of $n_{\rm H}=10^{6}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$. The magnetic field strength is evaluated for $b=2$ (see \citealt{2019ApJ...877...36H} for an explanation of this choice).
Profiles of the gas temperature in non-stationary shocks are shown in Figures \ref{fig:profile_temp} for the different gas densities and shock ages. For a given dynamical age, shocks in a denser cloud sweep and compress the gas stronger and earlier than in a less dense cloud, such that the peak temperature of the shocked gas in the former is higher and increases much sooner than in the latter case. The shock age also influences the gas temperature. Indeed, as the shock gets older, the magnetic precursor grows larger, and the entrance shock speed into the J-shock front decreases due to ion-neutral collisions. As a result, the maximum temperature of the J-shock component decreases with the shock age. When the age equals to $t_{\,{\rm s}}$, the J-shock tail disappears, and the shock returns to a stationary C-shock (see the green dashed-dotted lines on the right panels).
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Shock Model Parameters}\label{tab:ISM}
\begin{tabular}{l l l l } \hline \hline \\
{\it Parameters} & {Model A} & {Model B} & {Model C}\cr
\hline\\
$v_{\rm s}$(km$\,$s$^{-1}$) &$5-30$ &$5-30$ &$5-30$\cr
$n_{\rm H}(\,{\rm cm}^{-3})$ & $10^{4}$ & $10^{5}$ & $10^{6}$\cr
$age(\,{\rm yr})$ & $10^{2},\,10^{3}$ & $10^{1},\,10^{2}$ & $10^{0},\,10^{1}$\cr
$T_{\rm gas}$(K)& 10 & 10 & 10 \cr
$T_{\rm d}$(K)& 10 & 10 & 10 \cr
$\chi$ &$0.01$ & 0.01 & 0.01\cr
$x_{\rm H}\equiv n({\rm H}^{+})/n_{{\rm H}}$ &$0$ &$0$ &$0$\cr
$x_{\rm M}\equiv n(\rm M^{+})/n_{{\rm H}}$ &$10^{-6}$ &$10^{-6}$ &$10^{-6}$\cr
$x_{\rm PAH}\equiv n(\rm PAH)/n_{{\rm H}}$ &$10^{-6}$ &$10^{-6}$ &$10^{-6}$\cr
$y=2n({\rm H}_{2})/n_{{\rm H}}$ & {$0.999$}\cr
$B(\mu G)=bn_{{\rm H}}^{1/2}$ & 200 & 632 & 2000\cr
\hline
\multicolumn{4}{l}{Here b=2 is assumed.}
\cr\cr
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfloat{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f1a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth]{f1b.pdf}
}\\
\subfloat{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f1c.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f1d.pdf}
}\\
\subfloat{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f1e.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.44\textwidth]{f1f.pdf}
}
\caption{Profiles of gas temperature for $\rm n_{{\rm H}}=10^{4}$ cm$^{-3}$, $\rm n_{{\rm H}}=10^{5}$ cm$^{-3}$, and $\rm n_{{\rm H}}=10^{6}$ cm$^{-3}$. Left panels: computed with three different shock velocities (shock age fixed). Right panels: computed with three different shock ages (shock velocity fixed). The maximum gas temperatures increases with $\rm v_{s}$ and decreases with $\rm age$.}
\label{fig:profile_temp}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Drifting velocities in C-shock component}
In the C-shock component, ions and charged grains are coupled to the magnetic field and move slower than neutrals, resulting in the drift of neutral gas relative to charged grains. Figure \ref{fig:CJshock-velo-old} shows the profiles of neutral and ions velocities, including the drift velocity $v_{\rm drift} = |v_{n}-v_{i}|$, and the dimensionless drifting parameter $s_{d}=v_{\rm drift}/v_{\rm th}$ with $v_{\rm th}$ the gas thermal velocity as functions of distance ($z$) for the different gas density, assuming a shock velocity $v_{\,{\rm s}}=30\,{\rm km}\,{\rm s}^{-1}$. In this component, $v_{\rm drift}$ exists and reaches the maximum value at the middle of its part. The corresponding value of $s_{d}$ increases rapidly with $z$ and then declines when the gas is heated to high temperatures. In the J-shock component, on the other hand, the drifting velocity is vanished because grains and neutrals move at the same velocity. For the same shock velocity and age, the shock length decreases with increasing the gas density as a result of faster radiative cooling.
Figure \ref{fig:CJshock-velo-young} shows the results for a younger shock age. The apparent difference is that the dimensionless drifting parameter $s_{d}$ is vanished much sooner because the J-shock part occurs earlier and dominates over the C-shock component. The shock length is also narrower due to the fast radiative cooling of J-shocks.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f2a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f2b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f2c.pdf}
\caption{Profiles of neutral velocity ($v_{n})$, ion and charged grains velocity ($v_{i}$), and their relative velocity ($v_{\rm drift})$ in the different CJ-shock models. Dashed line is the corresponding dimensionless drifting parameter $s_{d}=v_{\rm drift}/v_{\rm th}$, where $v_{\rm th}$ is the thermal gas velocity.}
\label{fig:CJshock-velo-old}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f3a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f3b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f3c.pdf}
\caption{Same as Figure \ref{fig:CJshock-velo-old} but for a younger shock age. The J-shock component dominates.}
\label{fig:CJshock-velo-young}
\end{figure}
\section{Rotational dynamics of dust grains in non-stationary shocks}\label{sec:rot}
\subsection{Rotational temperature and rate}
In shock regions, rotational dynamics of nanoparticles is controlled by collisions with gas atoms and molecules, supersonic neutral drift relative to charged grains, bombardment of ions, long-distant interaction with passing ions, and photon absorption and re-emission (see e.g., \citealt{2019ApJ...877...36H}). The rotational temperature of spinning nanoparticles is given by (\citealt{1998ApJ...508..157D}):
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{T_{\rm rot}}{T_{\rm gas}}=\frac{G}{F}\frac{2}{1 + [1+ (G/F^2)(20{\tau_{\rm H}}/3{\tau_{\rm ed}})]^{1/2}},\label{eq:Trot}
\ena
where ${\tau_{\rm H}}$ and ${\tau_{\rm ed}}$ are the characteristic damping times due to gas collisions and electric dipole emission, which are respectively defined as:
\begin{eqnarray}
&\tau_{{\rm H}}& \simeq 0.067 a_{-7} \left(\frac{T_{\rm gas}}{1000\ \rm K} \right)^{-1/2} \left(\frac{n_{{\rm H}}}{10^5 \rm cm^{-3}}\right)^{-1} \rm yr, \\
&\tau_{ed}& \simeq 225 \left[ \frac{a^7_{-7}}{3.8 \times (\beta/0.4D)}\right] \left(\frac{T_{\rm gas}}{1000\,{\rm K}}\right)^{-1} \rm yr,
\ena
where $a_{-7}=a/(10^{-7}\,{\rm cm})$ and $\mu$ is the dipole moment, $\beta$ the dipole moment per structure of grain, and $G$ and $F$ are the dimensionless coefficients which describe the total rotational excitation and damping, respectively.
The rotational damping and excitation of grains can arise from various processes, including collisions with neutral atoms, ions, distant interaction with ions (plasma drag), and infrared emission. Thus, the coefficients are denoted by $F_{j},G_{j}$ for $j=n,ion, p, IR$ (see \citealt{2019ApJ...877...36H}).
For the neutral-grain interaction, the damping and excitation coefficients $G_{n}$ and $F_{n}$ depend on thermal motion as well as drift motion of neutrals with respect to the grain, which depends on the grain charge state that fluctuates over time in the shock. As in \citealt{2019ApJ...877...36H}, we assume that dust grains in the shock can be statistically described by two populations of neutral and charged grains. The former population only interacts thermally with the neutrals, while the later population experience both thermal and drift motion (see Section \ref{sec:chargefluc} for an extended discussion). Therefore, the average coefficients are given by
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:F}
&F_{n}&= F_{n,sd=0} f_{Z}(Z=0) + \sum _{Z \neq 0} F_{n,sd \neq 0} f_{Z}(Z), \\ \label{eq:G}
&G_{n}&= G_{n,sd=0} f_{Z}(Z=0) + \sum _{Z \neq 0} G_{n,sd \neq 0} f_{Z}(Z).
\ena
The first terms of the coefficients are calculated for several processes as in \cite{1998ApJ...508..157D}, while the second term is the additional effect due to the neutral drift in shocks (see \citealt{2019ApJ...877...36H} for more details). For our calculations, we assume that the evaporation temperature of stuck atoms from the grain surface is equal to the gas temperature (i.e., $T_{ev}=T_{\rm gas}$). This choice is valid for dense regions of low radiation intensity where all active sites on the grain surface are quickly occupied by impinging atoms and molecules such that subsequent incoming species just bounce back upon collisions (see e.g., \citealt{2009MNRAS.395.1055A}).
Figure \ref{fig:FG_coeff_Cshock} shows an example of the rotational excitation and damping coefficients in the C-shock component of the CJ-shock, in which the supersonic drifting is $s_{d}\simeq5$. As expected, the excitation and rotational damping by neutral-grain drift, denoted by $G_{sd}$ and $F_{sd}$ are dominant. Obviously, $F_{sd}$ and $G_{sd}$ increase with increasing of the grain size due to the increase of the fraction of the negative charge states of grains (see Fig. 4 in \citealt{2019ApJ...877...36H}). The contribution from plasma drag, ion collisions, and IR emission is negligible. In this case, the dominance of the excitation by neutral-grain drift leads to suprathermal rotation of nanoparticles. On the other hand, Figure \ref{fig:FG_coeff_Jshock} shows the excitation and damping coefficients in the J-shock component of the CJ-shock, in which the neutral-grain drift is vanished. Therefore, rotational excitation and damping of grains are completely influenced by collisions with thermal gas.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f4a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f4b.pdf}
\caption{Damping and excitation coefficients from various interaction processes in the CJ-shock of $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{4}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$, $age=10^{3}\,{\rm yr}$ and $v_{s}=30\,{\rm km}\,{\rm s}^{-1}$ computed at location $z=10^{15}\,{\rm cm}$ (C-shock part). Collisional excitation ($G_{sd}$) and damping ($F_{sd}$) by supersonic neutral drift is dominant.}
\label{fig:FG_coeff_Cshock}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f5a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f5b.pdf}
\caption{Same as Figure \ref{fig:FG_coeff_Cshock} but computed at location $z=1.58\times 10^{16}\,{\rm cm}$ (J-shock tail). Excitation and damping by thermal collisions ($G_{n},F_{n}$) are dominant.}
\label{fig:FG_coeff_Jshock}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:Trot_a} shows the rotational temperature of spinning nanoparticles normalized to the gas temperature as a function of the grain size at four different locations in the shock. In the C-shock component, nanoparticles rotate suprathermal velocities due to supersonic drift velocity. The ratio of $T_{\rm rot}/T_{n}$ increases with the grain size and saturates dues to the increasing fraction of grains on the negative charge states \citep{2019ApJ...877...36H}. In the J-shock component, on contrary, nanoparticles rotate subthermally due to the dominance of thermal gas collisions.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f6a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f6b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f6c.pdf}
\caption{The variation of $T_{\rm rot}/T_{\rm n}$ vs. the grain size for $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{4}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$, v$_{s}$=30 km$\,$s$^{-1}$ and $age=10^{3}\,{\rm yr}$ (top panel), $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{5}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$, v$_{s}$=30 km$\,$s$^{-1}$ and $age=10^{2}\,{\rm yr}$ (middle panel), and for $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{6}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$, v$_{s}$=30 km$\,$s$^{-1}$ and $age=10^{1}\,{\rm yr}$ (bottom panel). Suprathermal rotation is observed at the locations of C-part (solid blue and dashed orange lines), while subthermal rotation is observed at the location of J-part (dotted red and dashed dotted green lines).}
\label{fig:Trot_a}
\end{figure}
The rotational rate of nanoparticles corresponding to the rotational temperature $\rm T_{rot}$ is:
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\omega_{\rm rot}}{2\pi}=\frac{1}{2\pi}\left(\frac{3kT_{\rm rot}}{I}\right)^{1/2}\,{\rm Hz},\label{eq:omega_Trot}
\ena
where $I=8\pi\rho a^{5}/15 $ is the inertial moment of grain of size $a$ with ${\rho}$ the bulk density of grain, and $k$ is the Boltzmann constant.
\subsection{Dynamic and disruption timescales} \label{sec:timescale}
To understand the efficiency of the grain rotational excitation by stochastic gas bombardment in the shock, we need to quantify this timescale in term of comparison with the timescale of grain flow.
The timescale to spin the grain at rest up to an angular momentum $J$ is:
\begin{eqnarray}
\tau_{\rm spin-up}=\frac{J^2}{(\Delta J)^2/\Delta t},
\ena
where $(\Delta J)^2/\Delta t$ is the increase of grain rotational energy per unit time. Here one can assume $J = I\omega_{T}$, with $\omega_{T}=(2kT_{\rm gas}/I)^{1/2}$ the thermal angular velocity.
As mentioned in Section \ref{sec:model}, the structure of the CJ-shock approximates a composition of the C-shock and J-shock components. In the C-shock component, in which charged grains move slower than neutrals, the spin-up time by neutral gas drift is equal to
\begin{eqnarray}
\tau_{\rm spin-up}^{C}&=&\frac{16\rho k T_{{\rm gas}} a}{15n_{{\rm H}} m_{{\rm H}} ^{2}v_{\rm drift}^{3}} \nonumber\\
&=&0.005a_{-7}\left(\frac{T_{{\rm gas}}}{10^{3}\,{\rm K}}\right)
\left(\frac{n_{{\rm H}}}{10^{5}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}}\right)^{-1}\nonumber\\
&&\times\left(\frac{10\,{\rm km}\,{\rm s}^{-1}}{v_{\rm drift}}\right)^{3}\,{\rm yr}.\label{eq:tspinup_C}
\ena
In the J-shock component, on the other hand, grains move with the same velocity as gas, the spin-up time is characterized by thermal collision, which yields:
\begin{eqnarray}
\tau_{\rm spin-up}^{J}&=&\frac{16\rho k T_{{\rm gas}} a}{15n_{{\rm H}} m_{{\rm H}} ^{2}v_{\rm th}^{3}} \nonumber\\
&\simeq &0.016a_{-7}\left(\frac{T_{{\rm gas}}}{10^{4}\,{\rm K}}\right)^{-1/2}
\left(\frac{n_{{\rm H}}}{10^{5}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}}\right)^{-1}\,{\rm yr}.\label{eq:tspinup_J}
\ena
The dynamical flow time of grains in the C-shock and J-shock components can be respectively estimated as
\begin{eqnarray}
\tau_{\rm flow}^{C}=\frac{L^C}{v_{\rm drift}}\simeq 30\left(\frac{L^C}{10^{15}\,{\rm cm}}\right)\left(\frac{10\,{\rm km} \,{\rm s}^{-1}}{v_{\rm drift}}\right)\rm yr,\label{eq:tflow_C}
\ena
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\tau_{\rm flow}^{J}=\frac{L^J}{v_{\rm gas}}\simeq 60\left(\frac{L^J}{10^{15}\,{\rm cm}}\right)\left(\frac{5\,{\rm km} \,{\rm s}^{-1}}{v_{\rm gas}}\right)\rm yr.\label{eq:tflow_J}
\ena
where $L^C$ and $L^J$ are the widths of C-shock and J-shock components (see Section \ref{sec:model}).
By comparing Equation (\ref{eq:tspinup_C}) with (\ref{eq:tflow_C}), one can see that the spin-up timescale by stochastic gas collisions is shorter than the time passing the dense C-shock structure for drift velocity $v_{\rm drift}> 1\,{\rm km}\,{\rm s}^{-1}$. Therefore, supersonic gas flow can rapidly spin up nanoparticles to suprathermal rotation in the C-shock component.
From Equation (\ref{eq:tspinup_J}) and (\ref{eq:tflow_J}) it follows that the spin-up timescale by thermal collisions is also shorter than the time passing the J-shock structure for a typical gas velocity of $5\,{\rm km}\,{\rm s}^{-1}$. Therefore, thermal gas collisions can rapidly spin up nanoparticles to thermal rotation in the J-shock component.
\section{Rotational disruption mechanism}\label{sec:disrupt} \label{sec:rotational_disruption}
\subsection{Rotational disruption}
In this section, we briefly describe the rotational disruption mechanism of nanoparticles in shocks (look \citealt{2019ApJ...877...36H} for details).
In shocks, nanoparticles can be excited to very fast rotations with the rate given by Equation (\ref{eq:omega_Trot}). When the grain rotation rate becomes sufficiently large such that the centrifugal stress ($S=\rho a\omega^{2}/4$) exceeds the maximum tensile strength of the grain material ($S_{\max}$), nanoparticles are disrupted instantaneously. The critical angular velocity for the disruption is obtained by setting $S\equiv S_{\max}$ (\citealt{Hoang:2018es}; \citealt{Hoang:2019da}):
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{\omega_{\rm cri}}{2\pi}=\frac{1}{\pi a}\left(\frac{S_{\rm max}}{\rho} \right)^{1/2}\,{\rm Hz}.~~~~\label{eq:omega_cri}
\ena
The exact value of $S_{\max}$ depends on the composition and internal structure of dust grains, which is unfortunately poorly known. Nevertheless, \cite{2018arXiv181208391H} suggested that the tensile strength and internal structure of dust can be constrained with observations of grain disruption in strong radiation fields such as near supernovae. Previously, \cite{1974ApJ...190....1B} and \cite{1979ApJ...231...77D} suggested that $S_{\max}\sim 10^{9}-10^{10}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ for polycrystalline bulk solid. Ideal materials, such as diamond can have $S_{\max}\ge 10^{11}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$, which is considered strongest material. We will consider several values of $S_{\max}=10^{9}-10^{11}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$, which are expected for nanoparticles. From now on, nanoparticles whose $S_{\max}\gtrsim 10^{10}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ are rendered to {\it strong materials}, and whose $S_{\max}<10^{10}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ are referred to {\it weak materials}.
Comparing Equations (\ref{eq:omega_Trot}) and (\ref{eq:omega_cri}), we can derive the critical rotational temperature required for grain disruption:
\begin{eqnarray}
T_{\rm rot}\ge 1.6\times10^{5}a_{-7}^{3}S_{\rm max,10}\,{\rm K},
\ena
where $S_{\rm max,10}=S_{\rm max}/10^{10}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$. It means that to destroy strong nanoparticles (e.g., $S_{\max}=10^{10}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$) of $a\lesssim 0.5$ nm, we need the rotational temperature of $T_{\rm rot}\sim 2\times 10^{4}\,{\rm K}$. But for weak materials, e.g., $S_{\max}=10^{9}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$, the disruption can occur at lower temperatures of $T_{\rm rot}\sim 2\times 10^{3}\,{\rm K}$.
\subsection{Grain disruption size} \label{sec:size_dist}
To obtain the disruption size of nanoparticles by centrifugal stress in the shock, we compute $\langle \omega^{2}\rangle^{1/2}\equiv \omega_{\rm rot}$ for a range of grain sizes and compare it with $\omega_{\rm cri}$.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f7a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f7b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f7c.pdf}
\caption{Angular velocity of nanoparticles computed at several positions in the shock as in Figure \ref{fig:Trot_a} in comparison with the disruption critical velocity, assuming the CJ-shocks with $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{4}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$, v$_{s}$=30 km$\,$s$^{-1}$ and $age=10^{3}\,{\rm yr}$ (top panel), with $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{5}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$, v$_{s}$=30 km$\,$s$^{-1}$ and $age=10^{2}\,{\rm yr}$ (middle panel), and with $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{6}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$, v$_{s}$=30 km$\,$s$^{-1}$ and $age=10^{1}\,{\rm yr}$ (bottom panel).}
\label{fig:omega_cri}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfloat{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f8a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f8aa.pdf}
}\\
\subfloat{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f8b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f8bb.pdf}
}\\
\subfloat{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f8c.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f8cc.pdf}
}
\caption{Grain disruption size of PAHs vs. the location in the shock of $v_s=30\,{\rm km}\,{\rm s}^{-1}$, assuming the different tensile strengths and $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{4}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ (top panel), $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{5}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ (middle panel) and $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{6}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ (bottom panel). For each gas density, the results for a younger shock are shown in the right hand side. The black vertical solid line is the J-shock front.}
\label{fig:a_cri}
\end{figure*}
Figure \ref{fig:omega_cri} illustrates the rotation rate $\langle\omega^{2}\rangle^{1/2}$ as a function of the grain size. The intersection between the rotation rate and the critical disruption rate $\omega_{\rm cri}$ determines the critical disruption size of nanoparticles, denoted by $a_{\rm disr}$ or $a_{\rm min}$. Larger nanoparticles ($a>a_{\rm disr}$) can survive the shock passage, but smaller nanoparticles of $a\lesssim 2$ nm are disrupted due to its faster rotation. The disruption is efficient in the C-shock component, which is representative in blue and orange lines, because of the suprathermal rotation of nanoparticles. For example, nanoparticles of $a< 0.5$ nm with $S_{\max}=10^{10}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ can be disrupted (Figure \ref{fig:omega_cri}, bottom panel). In the J-shock component, despite their thermal/subthermal rotation (i.e., $T_{{\rm rot}} \leq T_{{\rm gas}}$, see Figure \ref{fig:Trot_a}), nanoparticles can be still disrupted by centrifugal force due to high gas temperatures of $\simeq 10^{4}\,{\rm K}$ (see Section \ref{sec:model}), which is shown by green and red lines. However, the disruption effect in J-shocks is much less efficient than in C-shocks. In general, the efficiency of rotational disruption in the CJ-shock actually depends on the shock density, velocity, and age.
Figure \ref{fig:a_cri} illustrates the grain disruption size $a_{\rm min}$ as a function of $z$ for the different values of $S_{\rm max}$. The vertical black line represents for the location of the J-shock front. We see the same effect as reported in \cite{2019ApJ...877...36H} that strong nanoparticles can survive the shock passage (red dotted line), while weak nanoparticles can be destroyed (other colored lines). The disruption size increases for weaker materials (see blue, orange and green dotted lines). The apparent difference from \cite{2019ApJ...877...36H} is the existence of the disruption by thermal collisions in the J-shock component. The disruption mechanism is stronger in younger shocks (Figure \ref{fig:a_cri}, right panel) because the J-shock component dominates and induces higher gas temperature in this case (see Section \ref{sec:model}).
\section{Spinning dust emission from nanoparticles in non-stationary shocks}\label{sec:spindust}
Rapidly spinning nanoparticles that own permanent electric dipole moment is known to emit electric dipole radiation at microwave frequencies (\citealt{1998ApJ...508..157D}; \citealt{Hoang:2010jy}). In this section, we model the electric dipole emission from nanoparticles that survive the rotational disruption, whose smallest size a$_{\rm min}$ is determined by the disruption mechanism (see Section \ref{sec:rotational_disruption}). Here the net abundance of nanoparticles is assumed to be constant throughout the shock. Such an assumption is not implausible because grain shattering (see e.g, \citealt{2011A&A...527A.123G}) can reproduce nanoparticles to compensate for rotational disruption.
\subsection{Emission spectrum}
As introduced in \cite{2019ApJ...877...36H}, the rotational emissivity of nanoparticles weighted by H nucleon is:
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:jnu_w}
\frac{j_{\nu}(\mu, T_{\rm rot})}{n_{{\rm H}}}=\int_{a_{\min}}^{a_{\max}}j_{\nu}^{a}(\mu,T_{\rm rot})\frac{1}{n_{{\rm H}}} \frac{dn}{da} da,\label{eq:jem}
\ena
where $dn/da$ is grain size distribution of nanoparticles which is given by (\citealt{Li:2001p4761}):
\begin{eqnarray}
\frac{1}{n_H}\frac{dn_j}{da}=\frac{B_j}{a} \exp{ \left( -0.5 \left[ \frac{\log(a/a_{0,j})}{\sigma_{j}}\right]^{2}\right)}
\ena
with j stands for PAHs and silicate nanoparticles. The corresponding constant $B$, and the parameters $a_{0}$, $\sigma$ are adopted as in \cite{2019ApJ...877...36H}.
Above, $j_{\nu}^{a}(\mu, T_{\rm rot})$ is the emissivity from an individual spinning nanoparticle of size $a$ at $\rm T_{rot}$, which is statistically determined by
\begin{eqnarray}
j_{\nu}^{a}(\mu, T_{rot}) = \frac{1}{2}P(\omega,\mu)f_{MW}(\omega, T_{rot}),
\ena
where $P(\omega,\mu)$ is the emission power emitted by a rotating dipole moment $\mu$ at angular velocity $\omega$, and $f_{MW}$ is the Maxwellian distribution of angular velocity of a rotating grain at $T_{rot}$. Respectively, they are given as:
\begin{eqnarray}
P(\omega,\mu)& = &\frac{4}{9}\frac{\omega^4 \mu^2}{c^3} \\
f_{MW}(\omega,T_{rot})& =& \frac{4\pi}{(2\pi)^{3/2}} \frac{I^{3/2} \omega^2}{(k T_{rot})^{3/2}} \exp{\left( -\frac{I\omega^2}{2kT_{rot}} \right)}
\ena
with $c$ speed of light, dipole moment $\rm \mu \simeq 9.3 (\beta/0.4{\rm D}) a^{3/2}_{-7}{\rm D}$ for PAH particles and $\rm \mu \simeq 8.2(\beta/0.4{\rm D}) a^{3/2}_{-7}{\rm D}$ for nanosilicates. In this work, $\beta=0.4{\rm D}$ is adopted as a typical value.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f9a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f9b.pdf}
\caption{Rotational emission spectrum of spinning nanoparticles for n$_{{\rm H}}$=10$^{4}\,$cm$^{-3}$, v$_{s}$=30 km$\,$s$^{-1}$, and $age=10^{3}\,{\rm yr}$ computed at several positions in the shock with $S_{\rm max}=10^{9}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ (upper panel) and $S_{\rm max}=10^{10}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ (lower panel). Dust is considered of $90\%$ of PAHs and $10\%$ of silicates. Thermal dust emissivity is also shown for comparison (black dashed line).}
\label{fig:spindust_n4}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f10a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f10b.pdf}
\caption{Same as Figure \ref{fig:spindust_n4} but for n$_{{\rm H}}$=10$^{5}\,$cm$^{-3}$, v$_{s}$=30 km$\,$s$^{-1}$, and $age=10^{2}\,{\rm yr}$ computed at several positions in the shock with $S_{\rm max}=10^{9}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ (upper panel) and $S_{\rm max}=10^{10}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ (lower panel).}
\label{fig:spindust_n5}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f11a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f11b.pdf}
\caption{Same as Figure \ref{fig:spindust_n4} but for n$_{{\rm H}}$=10$^{6}\,$cm$^{-3}$, v$_{s}$=30 km$\,$s$^{-1}$, and $age=10\,{\rm yr}$ computed at several positions in the shock with $S_{\rm max}=10^{9}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ (upper panel) and $S_{\rm max}=10^{10}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ (lower panel).}
\label{fig:spindust_n6}
\end{figure}
Figure \ref{fig:spindust_n4} shows an example of the emission spectrum of spinning dust as a function of frequency computed at several locations $z$ in the shock as considered in Figure \ref{fig:omega_cri}. The dashed black dashed line shows the thermal dust emissivity from dust grains (see \citealt{Hoang:2018el}). For weak material (e.g., $S_{\rm max}=10^{9}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$), when the smallest grains are remarkably suppressed by rotational disruption, the rotational emissivity is much less than the thermal emission, but it is dominant over thermal dust at frequencies below $\nu<100 $GHz at most considered shock locations (upper panel). For stronger material (e.g., $S_{\rm max}=10^{10}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$), whose the smallest grains are not or unremarkable enhanced by rotational disruption (see Fig. \ref{fig:a_cri}, left panel), the rotational emissivity is much stronger and comparable with the thermal emission (lower panel). Figure \ref{fig:spindust_n5} and Figure \ref{fig:spindust_n6} illustrate the same phenomena but for denser shocked medium with $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{5}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ and $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{6}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$, respectively.
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfloat{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f12a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f12aa.pdf}
}\\
\subfloat{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f12b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f12bb.pdf}
}\\
\subfloat{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f12c.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f12cc.pdf}
}
\caption{Spectral flux of spinning dust emission for $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{4}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ (top panel), $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{5}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ (middle panel), and $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{6}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ (bottom panel). The right hand side represents for younger age. The spectral flux significantly decreases with increasing the pre-shock density and decreasing the shocked age. $S_{\max}=10^{9}\,$erg$\,$cm$^{-3}$ is assumed, and $D=100\,{\rm pc}$ is taken.}
\label{fig:flux_S9}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\centering
\subfloat{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f13a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f13aa.pdf}
}\\
\subfloat{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f13b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f13bb.pdf}
}\\
\subfloat{
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f13c.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f13cc.pdf}
}
\caption{Same as Figure \ref{fig:flux_S9} but for stronger materials with $S_{\max}=10^{10}\,$erg$\,$cm$^{-3}$. The spectral flux also decreases with increasing the pre-shock density and decreasing the shock age. However, the amplitude of the spectral flux of the strong materials is higher than of the weak materials.}
\label{fig:flux_S10}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Emission spectral flux}
Assuming a spherical geometry for the shocked region, the spectral flux of spinning dust emission from the shocked region is:
\begin{eqnarray}
F_{\nu}= \frac{4\pi}{D^{2}}\int_{z_{\min}}^{z_{\max}} z^{2} n_{{\rm H}}(z)\left(\frac{j_{\nu}}{n_{{\rm H}}}\right)dz,
\ena
where $D$ is the distance from observer to the shocked region of radius equal to the shock length (see Section \ref{sec:model}).
Figure \ref{fig:flux_S9} shows the spectral flux calculated with different shock velocities for three different CJ-shock models (see Table \ref{tab:ISM}), assuming the tensile strength $S_{\rm max}=10^{9}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$. From the top to the bottom, the emission flux is significantly decreased with increasing of density due to both the decrease of shocked volume (see Figures \ref{fig:profile_temp}) and the increase in the disruption size as the gas temperature in higher density is hotter than in lower density (see Section \ref{sec:model}). From the left to the right, the emission flux is also significantly decreased due to both the decrease of shocked volume and the increase of the rotational disruption as the gas temperature in the young CJ-shock is higher than in the older ones (see Section \ref{sec:model}). Furthermore, stronger shocks (i.e., higher shock velocity) induce stronger disruption effect, thus the peak frequency decreases due to the removal of smallest nanoparticles. The value of this peak is around $\sim$ 100 GHz.
Figure \ref{fig:flux_S10} shows the similar results but for stronger materials. For this case, since rotational disruption is less efficient, both the peak of the spectral flux and peak frequency are higher than the results shown in Figure \ref{fig:flux_S9} for weaker materials.
\section{Discussion}\label{sec:discuss}
\subsection{Rotational disruption of nanoparticles in J-shocks vs. C-shocks}
In shocked regions, two popular mechanisms that are previously known to destroy dust grains include sputtering and grain-grain collisions (\citealt{1996ApJ...469..740J}). \cite{2019ApJ...877...36H} proposed a new mechanism of destruction for very small grains (i.e., nanoparticles), so-called rotational disruption, which appears to be the fastest mechanism working in steady C-shock regions (see Table \ref{tab:destr}). The key points of this new mechanism are the followings: (i) the dominance of gas collisional excitation due to high gas density in shocks makes nanoparticles rotate thermally, which corresponds to high rotation rates due to high gas temperatures, (ii) the supersonic drift between neutrals and charged nanoparticles is then able to spin-up charged nanoparticles to suprathermal rotation. As a result, the centrifugal stress induced by extremely fast rotation can exceed the maximum tensile strength of grain materials, disrupting the nanoparticle into smaller fragments. We also found that weak grains are efficiently disrupted, while the strong ones are hardly destroyed.
In this paper, we extended our previous study for the non-stationary shocks, which are driven by outflows and young SNRs. This type of shocks is called CJ-shock because it approximately composes of the C-type and the J-type shocks. We found the same mechanism in the C-shock component of the CJ-shock as reported in \cite{2019ApJ...877...36H}. Nevertheless, nanoparticles, in the J-shock component of the CJ-shock, rotate thermal/subthermally because rotational excitation cannot overcome the rotational damping, leading to its rotational temperature equal/lower than the gas temperature. However, as J-shocks can heat gas up to very high temperatures, the grain rotational rate is thus still high enough to disrupt the smallest nanoparticles. We demonstrate that this process is also the most efficient mechanism to disrupt nanoparticles in the J-shock component (see Table \ref{tab:destr}). Note that spherical nanoparticles are assumed and rotational excitation is only considered by stochastic mechanical torques in this study. The efficiency of the disruption mechanism for the realistic, irregular shapes would be increased due to stronger mechanical torques (\citealt{2007ApJ...669L..77L}; \citealt{2018ApJ...852..129H}).
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Grain destruction in CJ-shocks}\label{tab:destr}
\begin{tabular}{ll} \hline\hline
{\it Mechanism} & {Timescales (yr)}\cr
\hline\\
& {\bf C-shock part}\cr
Rotational disruption & $0.5 a_{-7}^{4}n_{4}^{-1}v_{\rm drift,1}^{-3}S_{\rm max,10}$\cr
Thermal sputtering & $3.1\times 10^{3}a_{-7}n_{4}^{-1}T_{3}^{-1/2}({10^{-4}}/{Y_{\rm sp}})$\cr
Non-thermal sputtering & $2.4\times 10^{3}a_{-7}n_{4}^{-1}v_{\rm drift,1}^{-1}({10^{-4}}/{Y_{\rm sp}})$\cr
Grain-grain collision & $76a_{-5}n_{4}^{-1}v_{\rm drift,1}^{-1}$\cr
\cr
\hline
\cr
& {\bf J-shock part}\cr
Rotational disruption & $24 a_{-7}^{4}n_{4}^{-1}T_{3}^{-3/2}S_{\rm max,10}$\cr
Thermal sputtering & $3.1\times 10^{3}a_{-7}n_{4}^{-1}T_{3}^{-1/2}({10^{-4}}/{Y_{\rm sp}})$\cr
Grain-grain collision \footnote{In spite of moving with same velocity, grain-grain collision can occur because of turbulence. The turbulence velocity v$_{\rm gg}$ is about few $\rm km\,{\rm s}^{-1}$} & $76a_{-5}n_{4}^{-1}v_{\rm gg,1}^{-1}$\cr
\cr
\hline
\cr
\multicolumn{2}{l}{{\it Notes}:~$v_{\rm drift,1}=v_{\rm drift}/10\rm km\,{\rm s}^{-1}$}\cr
\multicolumn{2}{l}{$S_{\rm max,10}=S_{\max}/10^{10} \,{\rm erg} \,{\rm cm}^{-3}$}\cr
\multicolumn{2}{l}{$T_{3}=T_{{\rm gas}}/10^{3}\,{\rm K}$} \cr
\multicolumn{2}{l}{$v_{\rm gg,1} =v_{\rm gg}/10\rm km\,{\rm s}^{-1}$} \cr\cr
\hline\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Implications for mid-IR emission from shock regions}
As summarized in Table \ref{tab:destr}, rotational disruption is the most efficient mechanism to destroy smallest nanoparticles such as small PAHs ($a\lesssim 1$ nm) in shocks at low velocity (i.e., v$_{\,{\rm s}}<50\,{\rm km}\,{\rm s}^{-1}$), whereas sputtering is subdominant (see extended discussion in \citealt{2019ApJ...877...36H}). This rotational disruption effect can explain the lack of mid-IR PAH emission in most of SNRs (see \citealt{Kaneda:2011jd} for a review). On the other hand, nanoparticles of size $a\gtrsim 1$ nm can survive throughout the shock, which might reproduce the ubiquitous mid-IR emission features at $9\,{\mu \rm{m}}$ and $21\,{\mu \rm{m}}$ observed toward SNRs \citep{Rho:2018ee}. For instance, the authors can reproduce these mid-IR features by emission from hot dust grains of SiC and silica with size $a=10$nm, respectively.
\subsection{Constraining the shock velocity in dense regions with spinning dust}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f14a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f14b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f14c.pdf}
\caption{Peak emission flux as a function of the shock velocity for $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{4}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ (top), $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{5}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ (middle), and $n_{{\rm H}}=10^{6}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$ (bottom). Two values of shock ages and tensile strengths are considered. The peak flux increases rapidly with increasing $v_{\rm s}$ for strong materials (black lines).}
\label{fig:fluxmax_vs}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f15a.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f15b.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.45\textwidth]{f15c.pdf}
\caption{Peak emission frequency corresponding to Figure \ref{fig:fluxmax_vs}. Peak frequency tends to increase with $v_{s}$.}
\label{fig:omegamax_vs}
\end{figure}
Similar to a previous study \citep{2019ApJ...877...36H}, we propose a new technique to trace shocks, which uses continuum microwave emission from spinning dust beside the popular technique, i.e., observing molecular emission lines in outflows and young SNRs.
Figure \ref{fig:fluxmax_vs} shows the maximum flux (peak flux) of spinning dust emission as a function of the shock velocity for the different shock models and tensile strengths. For strong grain materials, the peak flux increases rapidly with the shock velocity due to increased drift velocity and gas temperature (black lines). For weaker grain materials, the peak flux first increases rapidly with $v_{s}$ and then slowly varies for high velocities of $v_{s}>15-20\,{\rm km}\,{\rm s}^{-1}$ where rotational disruption occurs to remove smallest nanopaticles (red lines). The peak flux in the older shock is higher than in the younger shock due to dominance of J-shock component in younger one.
Figure \ref{fig:omegamax_vs} shows the peak frequency corresponding to peak flux as a function of the shock velocity for the different shock models. For strong grain materials, the peak frequency increases with increasing shock velocity up to $v_{s}\sim 25\,{\rm km}\,{\rm s}^{-1}$ (black lines). For weaker grain materials, the peak frequency first increases rapidly with $v_{s}$ and then decreases slowly for higher velocities of $v_{s}>15-20\,{\rm km}\,{\rm s}^{-1}$ due to rotational disruption (red lines). The peak frequency of strong dust grains consequently longer than of the weak ones.
We note that the peak flux decreases while the peak frequency increases with increasing the gas density (see Figures \ref{fig:fluxmax_vs} and \ref{fig:omegamax_vs}) which arises from the fact that the shock length is narrower for higher gas density (see Figures \ref{fig:profile_temp}). The reason for this feature is particularly obvious at low velocities of $v_{s}< 15\,{\rm km}\,{\rm s}^{-1}$ where the spectral flux just only depends on the shock length, because the rotational disruption is ineffective at such low shock velocities.
\subsection{Tracing nanoparticles in shocks with spinning dust}
In shock regions, despite the fact PAHs and nanoparticles are thought to be abundant (\citealt{1996ApJ...469..740J}; \citealt{2011A&A...527A.123G}), there is no direct observations to support their formation mechanism. Possibly, we show that spinning dust comes out as a very strong emission in shock regions. In comparison with thermal dust emission, the spectral flux of spinning dust emission is dominant over at frequencies below $\sim 100$ GHz, as well as this emissivity is several orders of magnitude higher than thermal one when the rotational disruption is disregarded. Therefore, we can trace nanoparticles in outflows from young stellar objects using spinning dust. This technique can be unique because of the lack of optical/UV-photons to trigger mid-IR emission in dense medium, and would be tested by future radio observations with ALMA Band and ngVLA.
\subsection{Implication for grain chemistry: rotational desorption}
Icy grain mantles play a very important role in interstellar chemistry. Ice mantles catalyze chemical reactions at its surface, which allows for the formation of molecules. However, how newly formed molecules are returned to the gas from the ice mantle is not well understood. Several mechanisms have been proposed, including evaporation/sublimation, desorption (i.e., thermal, non-thermal, cosmic ray, chemical desorption), and sputtering (see, e.g., \citealt{2016A&A...585A..24M} and references therein). Here, we discuss a new mechanism that may be important for releasing molecules in shocks termed rotational desorption.
In shocks propagating through dense clouds, nanoparticles can be spun-up to suprathermal rotation, at rates $\omega \gtrsim 10^{11}\,{\rm s}^{-1}$ (see Figure \ref{fig:omega_cri}). For nanoparticles made of strong materials ($S_{\max}\gtrsim 10^{10}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$) which can withstand the rotational disruption, the centrifugal force acting on a molecule can exceed its binding force to the grain surface, resulting in the ejection of the molecule. Note that the ejection of individual molecules assumed here is appropriate for monolayer ices, which is plausible for nanoparticles. For large grains, the entire mantle can be disrupted into fragments followed by rapid evaporation of molecules from the fragments if the ice mantle is thick (\citealt{Hoang:2019td}) or the centrifugal force can assist the thermal sublimation via so-called ro-thermal desorption effect (\citealt{Hoang:2019wra}).
The centrifugal force acting on a molecule of mass $m$ when the nanoparticle rotates with an angular velocity $\omega_{rot}$ is:
\begin{eqnarray}
F_{cen}=m\omega_{rot}^{2}a,
\ena
where $\omega_{rot}$ is defined in Equation (\ref{eq:omega_Trot}).
The binding force of the molecule to the grain surface is estimated as:
\begin{eqnarray}
F_{bind}\sim \frac{\partial U}{\partial r}\sim \frac{U}{r},
\ena
where $U$ is the binding energy between the molecule and grain surface, and $r\sim 3\AA$ is the interaction distance between the molecule and the grain surface.
The molecule is ejected when and only when $F_{cen}\gtrsim F_{bind}$, which yields:
\begin{eqnarray}
a \lesssim 7.27 \left(\frac{m}{m_{CO}}\right)^{1/4} \left(\frac{T_{rot}}{10^{4} K}\right)^{1/4}\left(\frac{U}{300\,{\rm K}}\right)^{-1/4}\ \mbox{(\AA).}
\ena
The rotational temperature $T_{rot}$ varies with grain radius and its location in the shock. It is also different in the C-shock or J-shock component (see Fig. \ref{fig:Trot_a}). Regardless of all these details, however, the average value of $T_{rot}$ is order of $10^{4}\,{\rm K}$. The value of the binding energy $U$ of several molecules with an icy grain surface is listed in Table \ref{tab:rot_desorp}. Adopting all these quantities, we can estimate the critical grain size of which molecules can be desorbed due to centrifugal force. The results are shown in Table \ref{tab:rot_desorp}. For instance, the centrifugal force on a nanoparticle of size $a\leq 3.31\AA$ can be large enough to eject H$_2$, or that of size $a\leq 5.21\AA$ for N$_{2}$.
\begin{table}
\begin{center}
\caption{Critical grain size of rotational desorption for some molecules (\citealt{2016A&A...585A..24M}).}\label{tab:rot_desorp}
\begin{tabular}{lll} \hline\hline
{\it Molecules} & {$\rm U_{ice}\ (K)$} & {$\rm a_{critical}\ (\AA)$}\cr
\hline\\
$\rm H_{2}$ & 500 & 3.31\cr
$\rm OH$ & 4600 & 3.24\cr
$\rm H_{2}O$ & 4800 & 3.25\cr
$\rm CO$ & 1300 & 5.04\cr
$\rm CO_{2}$ & 2300 & 4.89\cr
$\rm CH_{3}O$ & 3700 & 3.98\cr
$\rm CH_{3}OH$ & 3700 & 4.01\cr
$\rm N_{2}$ & 1140 & 5.21\cr
\cr
\hline
\cr
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\subsection{Effects of charge fluctuations on grain rotation in CJ-shocks}\label{sec:chargefluc}
In the present paper, we have assumed that dust grains in the shock can be statistically described by two populations of neutral and charged grains as in \cite{2019ApJ...877...36H}. The neutral grains only experience rotational excitation by thermal collisions with the neutral gas, whereas the latter charged grains coupled to the magnetic field can experience excitation by supersonic drift of neutral atoms. The damping and excitation coefficients are then averaged by multiplying with the charge distribution $f(Z)$ that varies with the grain location in the shock (see Equations \ref{eq:F} and \ref{eq:G}). Note that a detailed treatment of grain rotational dynamics should take into the effect of charge fluctuations of grains in the shock, as previously studied by \cite{2007A&A...476..263G} for the translational dynamics. Therefore, we now consider to what extent our assumption can hold and the impact of charge fluctuations on our obtained results.
Let $\tau_{0}$ be the charging time, which is equivalent to the timescale on which the grain stays in the neutral charge state before being attached by an electron or an ion. When the shock speed is much larger than the sound speed (i.e, the March number $M\gg 1$), one has $T_e/m_e \approx T_i/m_i$ where $T_{e}$ and $T_{i}$ are electron and ion temperatures, which implies that electrons and ions move at the same speed (\citealt{2015A&A...579A..13V}). For a neutral grain, the Coulomb effect is absent, and the neutral-timescale can be roughly estimated as follows (see \citealt{1987ApJ...320..803D}):
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:tau_0}
\tau_0 &\simeq& \frac{1}{2\times s_e n(e) \pi a^{2} \left(8k_{B}T_e/\pi m_e\right)^{1/2}}\\ \nonumber
&\simeq& 2.3 \times a^{-2}_{-7} \left( \frac{T_e}{5\times 10^3 \,{\rm K}}\right)^{-1/2} \left[\frac{x(e)}{10^{-6}}\right]^{-1} \left(\frac{n_H}{10^4\,{\rm cm}^{-3}}\right)^{-1} \rm{yr}
\ena
where the sticking coefficient of electrons $s_e=0.5$ is assumed (see \citealt{2001ApJS..134..263W}; \citealt{2007A&A...476..263G}), $x(e)=n(e)/n_H$ is the abundance of electrons. Note that $T_e>T_n$ (see \citealt{1996MNRAS.280..447F}; \citealt{2004A&A...427..147L}).
The gas drag timescale is defined as the time required for the grain to loose its momentum, which is essentially the same as the time required to collide with the gas of the same grain mass. For completely inelastic gas-neutral grain collisions, the gas drag time is equal to
\begin{eqnarray} \label{eq:tau_drag}
\tau_{\rm drag} &\simeq& \frac{m_{grain}}{1.3\times m_{{\rm H}}n_{{\rm H}} \pi a^{2} v_{drift}} =\frac{\rho (4\pi a^{3}/3)}{1.3\times m_{{\rm H}}n_{{\rm H}} \pi a^{2} v_{drift}} \\ \nonumber
&\simeq& 0.22 \times a_{-7} \left(\frac{n_H}{10^4 \,{\rm cm}^{-3}}\right)^{-1} \left(\frac{v_{drift}}{20 \,{\rm km} \,{\rm s}^{-1}}\right)^{-1} \rm{yr}.
\ena
From Equation \ref{eq:tau_0} and Equation \ref{eq:tau_drag}, one can derive the grain size at which $\tau_{0}=\tau_{\rm drag}$ as follows
\begin{eqnarray}
a_0 = 2.2 \times \left(\frac{T_e}{5\times 10^3\,{\rm K}}\right)^{-1/6} \left[\frac{x(e)}{10^{-6}}\right]^{-1/3} \\ \nonumber \times \left(\frac{v_{drift}}{20\,{\rm km} \,{\rm s}^{-1}}\right)^{1/3} \rm{nm}.
\ena
Therefore, for very small grains of size $a<a_0$ with $\tau_0>\tau_{\rm drag}$, the charge states of dust grains hardly change before they are stopped by the gas drag force. For this regime, the average of the rotational damping and excitation coefficients ($F$ and $G$) over the charge distribution $f(Z)$ are valid. For larger grains of $a>a_0$ with $\tau_0<\tau_{\rm drag}$, on contrary, the charge state of grains change rapidly. In this regime, the grains with initially neutral charge state quickly become charged and then coupled to ions. Therefore, our assumption of two neutral and charged populations become inapplicable. Practically, our calculations show that $f(Z=0)$ is rather small for $a>2 nm\sim a_{0}$, such that the $F$ and $G$ coefficients computed with Equations (\ref{eq:F}) and (\ref{eq:G}) and consequently $T_{rot}/T_{n}$ (Figure \ref{fig:Trot_a}) become nearly flat for $a>a_{0}$. Moreover, the disruption sizes that we obtained with this approach is mostly below $\sim 2$ nm (see, e.g., Figure \ref{fig:a_cri}). As a result, we expect that switching from our two separate neutral and charged grain populations to the one grain population (i.e., neutral and charged grains are coupled) for $a>a_{0}$ would not considerably change our final results on $a_{\rm disr}$ and then spinning dust emissivity.
\section{Summary}\label{sec:sum}
We study rotational dynamics of nanoparticles in non-stationary shocks (namely CJ-shock) driven by outflows and supernova remnants in dense molecular clouds. Our principal results are summarized as follows:
\begin{itemize}
\item[1] For the first time, we study the rotation dynamics of dust grains in CJ-shocks driven by outflows from young stars and by young supernova remnants in dense clouds, which consist of the C-shock and J-shock components. In the C-shock part, nanoparticles can be rapidly spun-up to suprathermal rotation due to supersonic drift of neutral relative to charged nanoparticles. In contrast, in the J-shock part, nanoparticles subthermally rotate due to the lack of supersonic drift between neutral and charged grains.
\item[2] We show that, in both C-shock and J-shock components, smallest nanoparticles ($a<1$ nm) of weak materials (tensile strength $S_{\rm max}\lesssim 10^{9}\,{\rm erg}\,{\rm cm}^{-3}$) can be disrupted by centrifugal stress due to extremely fast rotation, which is caused by suprathermal rotation in the C-shock part and thermal rotation with enhanced gas temperatures in the J-shock part, respectively. However, strong materials (e.g., nanodiamonds) can withstand the rotational disruption in CJ-shocks of velocity $v_{s}\le 30\,{\rm km}\,{\rm s}^{-1}$.
\item[3] We compare the timescale of rotational disruption with other destruction mechanisms in CJ-shocks and find that rotational disruption is the most efficient mechanism. Hence, the minimum size of nanoparticles should be constrained by the rotational disruption rather than by thermal sputtering. This rotational mechanism might play an important role in dust destruction in shock regions.
\item[4] We model the microwave emission from spinning nanoparticles in CJ-shocks where their minimum size is determined by the rotational disruption. In the absence of rotational disruption, the peak frequency and emissivity are found to increase with increasing the shock velocity. In the presence of rotational disruption, the peak frequencies decrease with the shock velocity because of removal of smallest nanoparticles.
\item[5] We find a new way to eject molecules from surface of strong nanoparticles that can withstand rotational disruption, so-called rotational desorption, which is based on centrifugal force within extremely fast rotating nanoparticles in CJ-shocks.
\item[6] We propose that spinning dust emission could be a new technique to probe nanoparticles and shock velocities in outflows and supernova remnants.
\end{itemize}
\acknowledgments
We are grateful to the anonymous referees for useful comments that improved our paper. We would like to thank P. Lesaffre, A. Gusdorf, and V. Guillet for all helpful comments and discussions. This work was supported by the Basic Science Research Program through the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grants, funded by the Ministry of Education (2017R1D1A1B03035359) and the Korea government (MSIT) (2019R1A2C1087045).
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{intro}
\nocite{eht-paperI}
\nocite{eht-paperII}
\nocite{eht-paperIII}
\nocite{eht-paperIV}
\nocite{eht-paperV}
\nocite{eht-paperVI}
Very long baseline interferometry (VLBI) is an astronomical observing technique used to study radio sources at very high angular resolution, down to milli- and
micro-arcsecond scales.
Global VLBI uses a network of
radio telescopes as an interferometer to form
a virtually Earth-sized telescope.
The large distances between telescope sites impose the need of recording the radio wave signals and the use of independent and very precise
atomic clocks at individual
VLBI stations,
which allows a cross-correlation of the signals between all pairs of antennas
post facto.
The lack of real-time synchronization, the
typical sparsity of VLBI arrays, and the fact that the signals
received by each ground station are distorted by unique local atmospheric
conditions make the process of VLBI data calibration
especially challenging. At the correlation stage, these effects
are partially corrected for with a model of station locations, source positions,
the Earth orientation and atmosphere, tides, ocean loading, and relativistic
corrections for signal propagation \citep[see, e.g.,][]{Sovers1998,whitebook,bluebook}.
These models are never perfect, however, and
the data must be calibrated in a post-correlation stage to correct for residual errors.
All further references to calibration procedures in this manuscript implicitly refer to post-correlation calibration.
While the Astronomical Image Processing System
(AIPS) \citep[e.g.,][]{Greisen2003} has been the standard package to calibrate
radio-interferometric and VLBI datasets, its successor, the Common Astronomy
Software Application (CASA) \citep{McMullin2007} package
has become the main tool for the calibration and analysis of connected element radio-interferometric data in recent years.
Nevertheless, AIPS continued to be the standard package for VLBI data reduction because CASA was missing
a few key VLBI calibration functions, most notably, a fringe fitting task.
The missing functionalities have now been added to CASA
and the calibration framework has been augmented
by a global fringe fitting task through an initiative from the \href{https://blackholecam.org/}{BlackHoleCam} (BHC) \mbox{\citep{Goddi2017}} project
in collaboration with the Joint Institute for VLBI ERIC (JIVE) \citep{Bemmel2018}.
This task is based on the \mbox{\citet{Schwab1983}} algorithm and is similar to the FRING task in AIPS.
CASA presents some clear advantages over AIPS:
a) an intuitive IPython interface implies a low learning curve for the new ‘python generation' of radio astronomers \citep{Momcheva2015};
b) software and data structure are designed to facilitate batch processing, providing much more control and flexibility
for pipeline-based data processing compared to AIPS, even when combined with the ParselTongue python framework \citep{Kettenis2006},
and c) strong community support,
largely by the Atacama Large Millimeter/submillimeter Array (ALMA) \citep{Wootten2009}
plus Karl G. Jansky Very Large Array (VLA) \citep{Thompson1980} userbases,
ensures the development and maintenance of a healthy software,
with quick bug detection and adjustments to the most recent needs of the community.
Under these conditions, it is natural to expect that CASA will soon become the standard package for VLBI data processing as well.
While traditionally only raw data taken by a radio interferometer were delivered to the principle investigator (PI),
new-generation facilities such as ALMA provide raw data along with calibration tables obtained by running automated calibration pipelines.
Next-generation facilities such as the Square
Kilometre Array (SKA) \citep[e.g.,][]{Dewdney2009} will generate much larger raw data volumes and only
fully pipeline-calibrated datasets and images will be delivered to the PIs.
For VLBI experiments, the number of participating stations is typically much
smaller than for connected interferometers. This leads to much smaller datasets, so that it is feasible to pass all the data on to the PI for post-correlation
calibration. A notable exception is the European VLBI Network (EVN) \citep[e.g.,][]{Porcas2010},
which provides users with a set of pipeline-generated calibration files and diagnostics \citep{Reynolds2002}.
The main purpose of this pipeline is a quick assessment of the quality and characteristics
of a dataset.
Advances in data-recording rates and wide-field VLBI capabilities will make it increasingly difficult
to reduce VLBI data interactively on single personal machines in the near future.
This necessitates data-handling methods, where computing power scales with available hardware.
Data reduction pipelines are an attractive solution to this problem, as they promote
reproducibility of scientific results and circumvent difficulties of VLBI data reduction.
As a byproduct, this will also attract more astronomers to the field of VLBI.
We have developed a highly modular, message-passing interface (MPI)-parallelized, fully automated VLBI calibration pipeline based on CASA,
called the Radboud PIpeline for the Calibration of high Angular Resolution Data (\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}).\footnote{
The open-source \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} software is hosted on \url{https://bitbucket.org/M_Janssen/Picard}{}.
The pipeline is full dockerized (\url{https://www.docker.com}).}
The purpose of the pipeline is to provide science-ready data and thereby make VLBI more accessible to non-experts in the community.
It should be noted that VLBI data is prone to a large variety of data corruption effects.
Some of these effects cannot be remedied with calibration techniques and may escape the flagging
(removal of corrupted data) methods of \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}.
Depending on the severity of these effects and the required quality of the data for scientific analysis,
user interaction to address the data issues may be inevitable.
For these cases, the verbose diagnostics, tuneability, and interactive capabilities of \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} can be used to
obtain the required data quality.
\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} v1.0.0 is able to handle data from any VLBI array when the raw data are in FITS-IDI\footnote{
See \url{https://fits.gsfc.nasa.gov/registry/fitsidi/AIPSMEM114.PDF}
for a description of the FITS-IDI data format.}
or MeasurementSet (MS)\footnote{See
\url{https://casa.nrao.edu/Memos/229.html}
for a description of the current MeasurementSet format.} format.
So far, EVN, Very Long Baseline Array (VLBA) \mbox{\citep{Napier1994}},
Global Millimeter VLBI Array (GMVA) \citep{Krichbaum2006}, and Event Horizon Telescope
(EHT) \citep{eht-paperII} datasets have successfully been calibrated and imaged.
Phase-referencing and simple polarization calibration are supported. Future releases will be able to also handle spectral line observations.
CASA-based pipelines are already used for the reduction of ALMA and VLA data\footnote{See
\url{https://casa.nrao.edu/casadocs-devel/stable/pipeline}.}
and with \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}, a CASA-based VLBI pipeline is now available as well.
We describe the general CASA calibration scheme in Section~\ref{casacalib} and the structure of the \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} framework in
Section~\ref{picode}. A description of the pipeline calibration strategies follows in Section~\ref{picalib}. The implementation
of CASA-based automated imaging and self-calibration routines in \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} are specified in Section~\ref{imagscal}.
A verification of the pipeline based on VLBA data is presented in Section~\ref{verification}. Section~\ref{futurefeatures}
gives an overview of future features, and a concluding summary is given in Section~\ref{summary}.
\section{CASA calibration framework}
\label{casacalib}
CASA makes use of Jones matrices \citep{Jones1941} and the Hamaker-Bregman-Sault measurement equation \citep{Hamaker1996}
to calibrate full Stokes raw complex VLBI visibilities formed at the correlator.
In this framework, visibility measurements $\vec{\mathcal{V}}_{mn}(t, \nu)$ at a time $t$ and frequency $\nu$,
on a baseline $m$-$n$, can be represented in vector notation as
\begin{equation}
\vec{\mathcal{V}}_{mn} (t, \nu) =
\left\langle \,
\begin{pmatrix}
V_{ma} V_{na}^* \\
V_{ma} V_{nb}^* \\
V_{mb} V_{na}^* \\
V_{mb} V_{nb}^*
\end{pmatrix} \, \right\rangle \; .
\label{hms-vector}
\end{equation}
Here, $V_{xy}$ represents the measured complex voltages at station $x$ along signal path $y$,
the star denotes a complex conjugate, and the angle brackets indicate an integration over small
time and frequency bins at the correlator. For circular telescope feeds, for example, right circular polarization
(RCP) and left circular polarization (LCP) signals are measured by the $a$ and $b$ signal paths, respectively.
Therefore the four rows of $\vec{\mathcal{V}}_{mn}(t, \nu)$ would represent the RR, RL, LR, and LL correlations.
The voltages $V$ were recorded at a specific time $t$ and frequency $\nu$. Their dependence
on these quantities is not explicitly shown here for the sake of a simpler notation.
For the remainder of this work, the explicit time and frequency dependence of all visibility-related quantities are omitted.
Ideal, uncorrupted visibilities
$\vec{\mathcal{V}}_{mn}^\mathrm{true}$,
which would be obtained from a perfect measurement device,
are related to the measured visibilities
$\vec{\mathcal{V}}_{mn}^\mathrm{obs}$ through a $4\times4$ matrix $\mathcal{J}_{mn}$, which contains all accumulated
measurement corruptions on baseline $m$-$n$:
\begin{equation}
\label{mseq1}
\vec{\mathcal{V}}_{mn}^\mathrm{obs} = \mathcal{J}_{mn} \vec{\mathcal{V}}_{mn}^\mathrm{true} \;.
\end{equation}
Equation~\ref{mseq1} assumes that telescopes are linear measurement devices, therefore no higher-order
terms of $\mathcal{J}_{mn}$ are considered.
Examples of corruptions that factor into $\mathcal{J}_{mn}$ are antenna gain errors, antenna bandpasses, and
atmospheric phase distortions. We can denote the individual constituents of $\mathcal{J}_{mn}$ by $J_{mn}^k$,
where each index $k$ represents a different corruption effect. The order of $k$ should be equal
to the reverse order in which the corruptions occur along the signal path, that is, first the
instrumental effects introduced by the signal recording, then effects from the receiving
elements, and finally atmospheric signal corruptions.
The combined effect of all corruption effects
can be represented as
\begin{equation}
\mathcal{J}_{mn} = \prod_k J_{mn}^k \;.
\end{equation}
Only antenna-based corruption effects are typically removed in the calibration process, as
baseline-based effects have a much smaller magnitude and are more difficult to determine.
This means that $J_{mn}^k$ can be rewritten as $J_{m}^k \otimes \left(J_{n}^k\right)^*$,
where the $\otimes$ operator represents the tensor product.
These $J_{m}^k$ factors correspond to $2\times2$ Jones matrices.
Now, Equation~\ref{mseq1} can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{mseq2}
\vec{\mathcal{V}}_{mn}^\mathrm{obs} = \prod_k \left[ J_{m}^k \otimes \left(J_{n}^k\right)^* \right] \vec{\mathcal{V}}_{mn}^\mathrm{true} \;.
\end{equation}
CASA keeps the complex visibility data, together with auxiliary metadata (antennas, frequency setup,
system temperatures, etc.),
stored locally in a contained form: as binary tables that make up an MS.
The calibration philosophy is to perform incremental calibration based on the inverse of Equation~\ref{mseq2} with separate
tables for each corruption effect, containing the calibration solutions.
These calibration tables have the same structure
as the MS, are also stored as self-describing binary data, and are applied in Jones matrix form.
When solving for a new calibration, previous calibration solutions for other corruption effects can be
applied `on-the-fly', meaning that the data are calibrated while they are passed to the solver.
The new calibration solutions are therefore relative to the previous ones. Typically, the dominant
data corruption effects are calibrated out first. This can be an iterative
process if different corruption effects are not sufficiently independent.
If no good calibration solution can be obtained, a flagged solution will be written in
the calibration table. This generally happens when the S/N of the data is not sufficient to obtain
a reliable calibration. Applying flagged solutions to the MS will cause the corresponding data to be flagged.
The final goal of the calibration process is to obtain a close representation of $\vec{\mathcal{V}}_{mn}^\mathrm{true}$
by applying all calibration tables to the measured $\vec{\mathcal{V}}_{mn}^\mathrm{obs}$.
It should be noted that station-based calibration is generally an overdetermined problem: For $N$ antennas,
there are $N \left( N - 1 \right)/2$ baseline-based visibility measurements.
CASA keeps track of \textit{SIGMA} and \textit{WEIGHT} columns corresponding to the visibility data.
\textit{SIGMA} represents the noise within a frequency channel of width $\Delta \nu$
in a time bin $\Delta t$. For a single complex cross-correlation visibility data point, this noise is
given by
\begin{equation}
\label{sigma}
\sigma = \frac{1}{\sqrt{ 2 \Delta \nu \Delta t}} \;.
\end{equation}
CASA will take into account correlator weights when estimating $\sigma$.
For example, for data from the DiFX correlator \citep{Deller2007}, weights are determined based on the amount of valid data present
in each integration bin $\Delta t$ when initializing the \textit{SIGMA} column.
After this, \textit{SIGMA} will only be modified when data are averaged according to the changes
in $\Delta \nu$ and $\Delta t$.
The \textit{WEIGHT} column is used to weight data according to their quality when averaging within
certain bins.
The column is initialized based on the initial \textit{SIGMA} column as $\sigma^{-2}$ for each visibility.
After initialization, the product of all applied station-based gains
will modify the weights of the baseline-based visibilities.
For instance, high system temperature values
and channels that roll off at the edge of the bandpass will be down-weighted in this process.
For frequency-dependent weights, the CASA \textit{SIGMA\_SPECTRUM} and \textit{WEIGHT\_SPECTRUM}
columns are used.
The spectral setup of the MS data format consists of
spectral windows (spws) that are subdivided into frequency channels.
Channels are formed at the correlator and determine the
frequency resolution of the data.
Spectral windows correspond to distinct
frequency bands, equivalent to AIPS intermediate frequencies (IFs).
These frequency bands are usually formed by the heterodyne receivers of the telescopes when
the high-frequency sky signal is mixed with a local oscillator signal.
The resulting frequency down-conversion enables analog signal processing
\citep{Thompson1980}.
Data from different spectral windows
have usually passed through different electronics, therefore instrumental effects
must often be calibrated for each spw separately before
the data from the full observing bandwidth are combined.
\section{Code structure of \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}}
\label{picode}
\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} is a software package for the calibration and imaging of VLBI data based on
CASA. This section describes the most important features of the pipeline source code,
in particular, code philosophy (§\,\ref{code:philo}), input and output (§\,\ref{code:IO}),
handling of metadata (§\,\ref{subsec_meta}), interactive capabilities (§\,\ref{code:interactive}),
handling of data flag versions (§\,\ref{code:flag}), and the
MPI implementation (§\,\ref{code:mpi}).
\subsection{Code philosophy}
\label{code:philo}
The source code is written based on a few maxims:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Every parameter can be set in input files; nothing is hard coded. \vspace{0.05cm}
\item No parameter needs to be set by hand because of sensible or self-tuning default values. \vspace{0.05cm}
\item By default, every run of the pipeline is tracked closely with
very verbose diagnostic output. \vspace{0.05cm}
\item Every step of the pipeline can always be repeated effortlessly.
\end{enumerate}
This allows experienced users to tune the pipeline to their needs, while new users
will be able to use \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} to learn about the intricacies of VLBI data reduction.
Similarly, the pipeline can be used either for a quick-and-dirty analysis or
to obtain high-quality calibrated data ready for scientific analysis.
\subsection{Input and output}
\label{code:IO}
Input parameters are read in from simple configuration text files.
The raw input visibility data from the correlator can either be an MS or a set of FITS-IDI files,
which will be imported as MS into CASA with the \textit{importfitsidi} task.
Optional metadata files are read in when available as described in Section~\ref{subsec_meta}.
Additional command-line arguments can be used to enable the interactive mode, and to
select which pipeline steps are to be repeated when the user experiments
with different non-default calibration parameters (e.g., S/N cutoffs,
interpolation methods of solutions, and selection of calibrator sources).
Finally, a calibrated MS with user-defined spectral and time averaging is produced.
For backward comparability with older radio astronomy software packages, UVFITS files
will be created from the calibrated MS as well.\footnote{See
\url{ftp://ftp.aoc.nrao.edu/pub/software/aips/TEXT/PUBL/AIPSMEM117.PS}
for a description of the UVFITS file data format.}
\footnote{
It should be noted that the UVFITS files produced by CASA can currently not be read into AIPS.
This was tested with CASA version 5.4 and AIPS version 31DEC18. The issue is related to different
formatting conventions of the `AIPS AN' extension of the UVFITS file.
Difmap \citep{Shepherd1994} is able to read in the CASA UVFITS files without problems.}
\subsection{Metadata}
\label{subsec_meta}
A priori knowledge is crucial for the calibration of VLBI data.
\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} looks for the following files and reads them in automatically as metadata if they exist:
\begin{itemize}
\item Standard ANTAB\footnote{The ANTAB format is the current standard used for VLBI flux calibration.
See \url{http://www.aips.nrao.edu/cgi-bin/ZXHLP2.PL?ANTAB}
for more information.} files containing system temperatures ($T_\mathrm{sys}$) and station gains,
which are used for the amplitude calibration (Section~\ref{apcal_section}). Some correlators
will already attach a $T_\mathrm{sys}$ table to the raw visibility data themselves.
Otherwise, custom scripts are used to attach the ANTAB data to the visibilities.
\item Files containing the receiver temperature information of the stations, which increases
the accuracy of the correction for the signal attenuation caused by
the opacity of the Earth's troposphere. This additional opacity correction is recommended for
high-frequency observations that do not measure opacity-corrected $T_\mathrm{sys}$ values (Section~\ref{apcal_section}).
This is the case for the switched-noise calibration method of the VLBA, for example.
\item Weather tables from the antenna weather stations, which are only needed if an additional
opacity correction is to be performed. Usually, these tables are already attached to the
visibility data. If the weather information is only present in ASCII format, it will be
attached to the visibilities with custom scripts.
\item Files containing flagging instructions either in the native CASA format or the
AIPS-compliant UVFLG format. Files with flagging instructions are typically compiled
from observer logs of the stations and are handed to PIs together with the correlated data.
\item Files containing models of the observed sources. When available, these source models can
improve some calibration steps (e.g., fringe fitting).
Usually, no a priori source models are needed (Section~\ref{picalib}).
\item A file with the mount-type corrections of the stations when they are not correctly
specified in the MS or FITS-IDI files. The mount-types of a station are important for the
polarization calibration, specifically, the feed-rotation angle correction (Section~\ref{phasecal}).
The feed rotation describes the rotation of the orthogonal polarization receiving elements of a telescope
as seen from the sky.
\end{itemize}
The naming conventions for each of the files are described in the
online documentation.\footnote{\url{https://bitbucket.org/M_Janssen/picard/src/master/documentation}.}
\subsection{Interactivity capabilities}
\label{code:interactive}
For a typical VLBI dataset, the basic flagging mechanisms (Section~\ref{flagging})
and fringe non-detections (Appendix~\ref{ffbasics}) should take care of bad data.
For severely corrupted datasets, for example, with phase instabilities on very short timescales,
data dropouts, or unrecoverable correlation errors,
user-interaction is inevitable if a high-quality calibration is to be achieved.
In \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}, an interactive mode is enabled with a simple command-line flag.
In this mode, the software waits for user input to advance to the next step.
This allows for a careful inspection and refinement through manual flagging and/or
smoothing of calibration tables. Moreover, it is always possible to flag
poor visibilities that are responsible for erroneous calibration solutions and to quickly
repeat the calibration step. The pipeline provides an external module containing
functions for convenient post-processing of calibration tables. It
can be loaded into an interactive CASA session and be used in between
interactive steps.
\subsection{Flag versions}
\label{code:flag}
\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} keeps track of different flag versions of the visibility data in the MS
using the default lightweight CASA \texttt{.flagversions} extensions of the MS.
Three flagging journals are stored:
\begin{enumerate}
\item An initial blank flag version created immediately after the data have been loaded
for the first time.
\item A version with all a priori flags applied (Section~\ref{flagging}).
\item A final version after all calibration tables have been applied.
This version will include the a priori flags and flags based on failed
calibration solutions.
\end{enumerate}
These different flag versions are relevant when parts of the pipeline
are rerun for an optimization of calibration steps. The first version can be used
when starting from scratch with a new strategy, for instance, and the second version
can be used when only certain steps with a different set of
parameters are rerun.
The flag version can be specified at the start of a pipeline run.
\begin{figure*}[h!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{images/rPICARD_calib_flowchart.pdf}
\caption{Overview of the \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} calibration scheme.
CASA tasks used by the pipeline are written in italics.
In the orange block in the middle, distinctions are made based on
which sources are used to solve for the specific calibration tables
and to which sources these tables are applied.
Boxes with a solid border belong to calibration steps where
all sources were used to obtain solutions. Dashed borders mean
that only calibrators were used, and dotted borders correspond
to solutions obtained from the science targets only. The line style of the borders only describes the source selection;
an averaging of solutions from different sources is not implied.
Rectangular boxes indicate solutions that are applied to all
sources. Diamonds represent solutions applied to calibrators only,
circles are used when the solutions are applied to science targets only,
and trapezoids indicate intermediate calibration solutions that
are not applied to the data.
}
\label{calib_flowchart}
\end{figure*}
\subsection{MPI parallelization}
\label{code:mpi}
With the steadily increasing data-recording rates of VLBI arrays, it is necessary for
downstream calibration and analysis software packages to scale up with the available computing power, and in particular, to fully exploit the parallelism of modern multi-node, multi-core machines.
Within CASA, central processing unit (CPU) scalability is implemented through an MPI infrastructure.
The MS is partitioned into several sub-MSs that are virtually concatenated.
In \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}, the MS is subdivided across scans. In this way,
multiple workers can calibrate multiple scans simultaneously.
The most significant acceleration is achieved for the fringe fitting steps
(Section~\ref{phasecal}), where the least-squares globalization steps to go from
baseline-based fringes to station-based solutions require significant
CPU time, especially for large bandwidths. For other CASA tasks, which
are internally parallelized, shorter computing times are achieved as well.
The CASA MPI implementation is still being developed, which means that more and more
CASA tasks will be upgraded with an MPI functionality in the future.
In Appendix~\ref{mpibench}, we present a test case that demonstrates
the significance of the CPU scalability.
An optional input parameter can be set to control the memory usage of
the MPI servers: jobs will only be dispatched when enough memory is available.
This option is disabled by default because the memory monitoring and resource scheduling
will slightly decrease the performance of the pipeline. Moreover, there will be no
memory limitations for most VLBI datasets\footnote{Wide-field and very wide-bandwidth
VLBI observations may be exceptions.}
on systems with a reasonable ratio of CPU cores to random-access memory (RAM).
\section{\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} VLBI calibration procedures}
\label{picalib}
This section describes the calibration procedures employed by \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}.
In accordance with standard VLBI data reduction,
the user has to specify suitable calibrator sources for the different calibration steps
in the pipeline input files.
For the calibration of
the phase bandpass and other instrumental phase corruption effects, bright, compact,
flat-spectrum sources should be used. For phase-referencing,
a calibrator close to the science target on the sky is required. A linearly
polarized source tracked over a wide range of feed rotation angles is needed for
proper polarization calibration.
An overview of the overall calibration scheme is given in Fig.~\ref{calib_flowchart}.
The standard VLBI calibration techniques introduced in this section,
using ANTAB data and fringe fitting techniques, are referred to as model-agnostic
calibration to distinguish it from the model-dependent additional self-calibration introduced in Section~\ref{imagscal}.
This section presents flagging methods that are used by the pipeline to
remove poor visibilities in §\,\ref{flagging}.
§\,\ref{digicorr} describes the calibration for digitization effects,
§\,\ref{apcal_section} outlines the amplitude calibration,
§\,\ref{scalar-bpass} describes the amplitude bandpass correction,
§\,\ref{phasecal} presents the phase calibration framework,
and §\,\ref{polcalsect} outlines the methods used for
the polarization calibration.
Amplitude calibration steps are done first because they will adjust the data weights and
therefore guide the phase calibration solutions (Appendix~\ref{incrcalib_and_wt}).
\subsection{Flagging methods}
\label{flagging}
Poor data can severely inhibit the science return of VLBI data.
Some corruptions cannot be calibrated, and the affected data should be removed (flagged). Typically, these are data with a low S/N for
which no calibration can be obtained by bootstrapping from neighboring calibration solutions. Examples are data recorder failures
and edge channels without signal.
\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} has several independent steps to deal with data flagging:
\begin{enumerate}
\item Flags from the correlator are applied, which are typically
complied from station log files, which describe when telescopes are off-source.
For the pipeline, correlator flags can come attached to the FITS-IDI input files, or as separate files
either as AIPS-compliant UVFLG flags or as a file with flag commands in the CASA format. UVFLG flags are first converted
into the CASA flag format with custom scripts.
\item Edge-channels can be flagged if the spectral windows
in the data
are affected by a roll-off at the edges.
The user can specify the number of channels to be flagged. The default is to flag the first and last 5\% of channels.
\item Users can add their own flagging statements
based on data examinations as flagging files for easy bookkeeping.
\item Finally, experimental flagging algorithms have been implemented in \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}. These try to find
poor data based on outliers in autocorrelation spectra as a function of time and frequency
with respect to median amplitudes.
In the frequency space, an autocorrelation spectrum is formed by
averaging in time over scan durations. Outliers are identified if the running difference in autocorrelation amplitude across channels is
larger than the median difference across all channels by a user-defined fraction. This analysis is done on a
per scan, per antenna, per spectral window, and per parallel-hand correlation basis.
The purpose is to identify poor data that are due to dead frequency channels
and radio-frequency interference (RFI).
Along the time axis, the autocorrelation data are averaged across all channels and all spectral windows. Then, the median
autocorrelation amplitude is found and outliers are identified if the amplitude of an autocorrelation
data point differs from the median by more than a user-defined fraction.
This analysis is made for each parallel-hand correlation and
each station separately. The purpose is to identify poor data that are due to recorder issues or
antennas arriving late on source.
The derived flagging commands are compiled into flag tables and are applied to both the
auto- and cross-correlations.
These experimental flagging algorithms should be used with care as they have only been tested with
(and successfully applied to) EHT data.
\end{enumerate}
The flagging instructions from each step are written as ASCII CASA flag tables
and are applied to the data with the CASA \textit{flagdata} task prior to each
calibration step.
\subsection{Sampler corrections}
\label{digicorr}
The analog signals measured by each station are digitized and recorded for later cross-correlation to form visibilities.
Erroneous sampler thresholds from the signal digitization stage are determined with the \textit{accor} CASA task.
Correction factors $g^\mathrm{accor}$ are derived based on how much the autocorrelation spectrum of each station deviates from unity.\footnote{For some datasets, this
correction is not necessary: The SFXC correlator already applies this correction for EVN data, for example.}
\subsection{Amplitude calibration}
\label{apcal_section}
The digital sampling of the received signals at each station causes a loss of information about the amplitude of the electromagnetic waves.
The lack of calibrator sources with a `known' brightness prevents a scaling of the amplitudes on all baselines to recover the
correct source flux densities; typical VLBI sources are resolved and variable, and accurate time-dependent a priori source models
are not available.
Instead, the system equivalent flux densities (SEFDs) of all antennas can be used to perform the amplitude calibration. The SEFD of an
antenna is defined as the total noise power, that is, a source with a flux density equal to the SEFD would have an S/N
of unity. It can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{eq_sefd}
\mathrm{SEFD} = \frac{T_{\mathrm{sys}} e^{\tau}}{\mathrm{DPFU} \cdot \mathrm{gc}} \; .
\end{equation}
Here, $\mathrm{T_{sys}}$ is the system noise temperature in Kelvin and
the $\mathrm{DPFU}$ is the degrees per flux unit factor in Kelvin per Jansky (Jy).\footnote{
The Jansky unit is defined as $10^{-26}$ watts per square meter per hertz.} The $\mathrm{DPFU}$
describes the telescope gain at an optimal elevation, relating a measured temperature to a flux.
The \mbox{$\mathrm{gc}=\mathrm{gc}(\mathrm{elevation})$} variable describes the telescope
gain-elevation curve, which is a function normalized to
unity that takes into account the changing gain of the telescope due to non-atmospheric (e.g., gravitational deformation) elevation effects.
The $\tau$ factor is the atmospheric opacity, which attenuates the received signal.
A $e^{\tau}$ correction enters in the SEFD to represent the signal from above the atmosphere (before atmospheric attenuation).
In this way, source attenuation
will be accounted for in the amplitude calibration.
In the following, we describe how \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} solves for the $e^{\tau}$ atmospheric opacity correction factor.
The system noise temperature can generally be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{tsys}
T_\mathrm{sys} = T_\mathrm{rx} + T_\mathrm{sky} + T_\mathrm{spill} + T_\mathrm{bg} + T_\mathrm{loss} + T_\mathrm{source} \;,
\end{equation}
with $T_\mathrm{rx}$ the receiver temperature, $T_\mathrm{sky}$ the sky brightness temperature, $T_\mathrm{spill}$ the contribution from stray
radiation of the telescope surroundings, $T_\mathrm{bg}$ the cosmic microwave background and galactic background emissions,
$T_\mathrm{loss}$ the noise contribution from losses in the signal path, and $T_\mathrm{source}$ the
contribution from the source, which is usually smaller than the other noise temperatures.
Rewriting the sky brightness temperature in terms of the attenuated actual temperature of the atmosphere $T_\mathrm{atm}$ yields
\begin{equation}
\label{tsky}
T_\mathrm{sky} = \left( 1 - e^{-\tau} \right) T_\mathrm{atm} \; ,
\end{equation}
with $\tau = \tau_0 / \sin{(\mathrm{elevation})}$ the opacity at zenith $\tau_0$, corrected for the airmass at the elevation of the telescope, which is
given as $1/\sin{(\mathrm{elevation})}$. Using Equation~\ref{tsky}, the dominant terms of Equation~\ref{tsys} can be written as
\begin{equation}
\label{tsys2}
T_\mathrm{sys} \simeq T_\mathrm{rx} + \left( 1 - e^{-\tau} \right) T_\mathrm{atm} \; .
\end{equation}
The standard hot-load calibration method of high-frequency observatories will measure an opacity-corrected
system temperature $T_\mathrm{sys}^{*} \equiv T_\mathrm{sys} e^{\tau}$ directly \citep{Ulich1976},
while many other telescopes, such as the VLBA stations, will use a switched-noise method \citep[e.g.,][]{Oneil2002} that does not
correct for the atmospheric attenuation. For millimeter observations, where the signal attenuation is significant, \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} will solve for
$e^{\tau}$ for each opacity-uncorrected $T_\mathrm{sys}$ measurement, using Equation~\ref{tsys2}.
The receiver temperatures can either be inserted beforehand from a priori knowledge about the station frontend, or the pipeline will
estimate $T_\mathrm{rx}$ based on the fact that $T_\mathrm{sys}$ should converge to $T_\mathrm{rx}$ toward zero airmass. This
is done by fitting the lower envelope (to be robust against $\tau$ variations) of system temperature versus airmass,
exemplified in Fig.~\ref{tsysstar}.
This method was adopted from \citet{martividal2012}.
The other unknown in Equation~\ref{tsys2}, the atmospheric temperature corresponding to a system temperature measurement,
is estimated based on the \citet{Pardo2001} atmospheric model
implementation in CASA with input from local weather stations.
\begin{figure}[b]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.48\textwidth]{images/trx_fit_BR-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{System temperature from the Brewster VLBA station at 7mm on 04 June 2013 as a function
of airmass (given by $1/\sin{(\mathrm{elevation})}$) for the RCP and LCP receivers (red and blue open circles, respectively).
Overplotted are solid triangles from the
lowest $T_\mathrm{sys}$ values in each bin of 0.3 airmass size, which are used to determine the receiver temperature
by fitting a straight line to the lower $T_\mathrm{sys}$ envelope (formed by the binning).
Small $T_\mathrm{sys}$ variations induced by weather (e.g., the jump seen at an airmass of $\sim3$)
do not affect the fit.
}
\label{tsysstar}
\end{figure}
With these assumptions, \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} can determine $T_\mathrm{sys}^{*}$ for the SEFD calculations from each $T_\mathrm{sys}$ measurement.
Outlier values are removed by smoothed interpolation to make the fitting robust even in poor weather conditions.
It is possible to perform the additional opacity correction only for a subset of stations in the VLBI array.
Within CASA, polynomial gain curves from the ANTAB files are first multiplied by the DPFUs, then the square root is taken, and
finally, the polynomial coefficients are refit with respect to 90 degrees elevation instead of zero. In this way, VLA-type
gain curves are formed. These gain curves and the system temperatures are converted into standard CASA amplitude calibration tables
with the \textit{gencal} task.
On a baseline between stations $m$ and $n$, the amplitude calibration and sampler correction $J^\mathrm{accor}$ will adjust
visibility amplitude $\vec{\mathcal{V}}_{mn}^\mathrm{amp}$ as
\begin{equation}
\label{apcal}
\vec{\mathcal{V}}_{mn}^\mathrm{true,\,amp} = J^\mathrm{accor}_{m} \, J^\mathrm{accor}_{n} \sqrt{\mathrm{SEFD}_m \mathrm{SEFD}_n} \vec{\mathcal{V}}_{mn}^\mathrm{obs,\,amp} \; .
\end{equation}
\subsection{Scalar bandpass calibration}
\label{scalar-bpass}
The data from each spectral window pass through a bandpass filter.
These filters never have a perfectly rectangular passband, which \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} corrects for
by determining an accurate amplitude (scalar) bandpass calibration solutions
from the autocorrelations within each spectral window. The autocorrelations are formed by correlating the
signal of a station with itself, that his, they are the Fourier transform of the power spectrum and do not contain phase information.
Because their S/N is higher, a scalar bandpass solution can be computed
for each scan by averaging the data over the whole scan duration and taking
the square root of normalized per-channel amplitudes.
This is done with a custom python script using basic CASA tools.
The user should disable this step when the autocorrelations are affected by RFI.
In this case, the complex bandpass calibration (Section~\ref{bpass}) can be used to correct the amplitudes.
\subsection{Phase calibration}
\label{phasecal}
The large distances between telescopes in VLBI arrays mean that independent local
oscillators are required at the stations. The large distances also cause the signals to be corrupted by independent atmospheres.
When visibilities are formed at correlators, sophisticated models are used
to compute station and source positions and to align the wavefronts
from pairs of stations \citep[e.g.,][]{whitebook}.
However, the correlator models are never perfect, and residual phase corruptions will still be present
in the data. These are phase offsets, phase slopes with frequency (delays), and phase slopes with time (rates or fringe rates).
The principal task for any VLBI calibration software is to calibrate these errors
out with a fringe fitting process \citep[e.g.,][]{bluebook}, so that the data can be averaged in
time and frequency to facilitate imaging and model-fitting in the downstream analysis.
In practice, fringe fitting is used to correct for both instrumental and atmospheric effects.
Instrumental effects occur as data from different spectral windows pass through different signal paths,
causing phase and delay offsets between the spectral windows.
This can be modeled as a constant or slowly varying effect
over time, and can be solved for by fringe fitting each spectral window individually in single-band fringe fit steps.
The atmosphere causes time-varying phases, delays, and rates. Delays are typically stable over scans,
unless the signal path changes, for example, when clouds pass by.\footnote{
Gross fringe offsets are usually removed by a priori correlator models.
} Phases and rates, as they describe the change
in phase with time, can vary on timescales given by the atmospheric coherence time.
These coherence times are very short, $\mathcal{O}(\mathrm{seconds})$, for millimeter observations.
In the centimeter (cm) regime, the coherence times are $\mathcal{O}(\mathrm{minutes})$.
Atmospheric effects are taken out over wide
bandwidths to maximize the S/N, that is, data from multiple spectral windows are used in multi-band fringe fit steps.
\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} employs multiple fringe fitting steps using
the recently added \textit{fringefit} CASA task, which is based on the \citet{Schwab1983} algorithm.
First, optimal solution intervals for atmospheric effects are determined for the
calibrator sources (Section~\ref{solints}). For millimeter observations, these solution intervals are used
to perform a coherence calibration, where intra-scan phase and rate offsets are corrected
to increase the coherence times for the calibrator sources (Section~\ref{incrcoher}).
The next step is to correct for instrumental phase and delay offsets (Section~\ref{instrphdela}).
Then, residual atmospheric effects are corrected for the calibrator sources (Section~\ref{mbcal}),
which finalizes the fringe calibration for the calibrators.
If the S/N of the calibrator scans is good enough, corrections for the antenna phase bandpass
can be obtained (Section~\ref{bpass}).
With all instrumental effects taken out, the phases of the weaker science targets
are calibrated (Section~\ref{mbphsci}).
More details about fringe fitting in CASA are given in Appendix~\ref{ffbasics}.
It should be noted that all fringe fit solutions are obtained after the
geometric feed rotation angle phase evolution has been corrected (Appendix~\ref{mounttypes}).
\subsubsection{Finding the optimal solution intervals for the calibrator sources}
\label{solints}
\begin{figure}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{images/fringe_snr_vs_solint_LA--SC-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{images/fringe_snr_vs_solint_LA--NL-eps-converted-to.pdf}
\caption{Example plots of a fringe fit solution interval optimization search based on 7mm VLBA data (Section~\ref{verification}).
Los Alamos (LA) is chosen as the reference station for the scan shown. The blue points show the
FFT S/N as a function of solution interval, the horizontal red line indicates the S/N cutoff of 5 on each baseline,
and the vertical red line shows the
smallest solution interval of 72 seconds needed to reach the S/N cutoff on each baseline for this scan.
The top plot shows the baseline to the Saint Croix (SC) station, which has driven the solution interval
to higher values until a detection was made when we integrated for 72 seconds.
The bottom plot shows data from the same scan for the baseline to the North Liberty (NL)
station, where the source was detected for each solution interval, yielding the expected increase in S/N
with the square root of the solution interval.
}
\label{solintsearchplots}
\end{figure}
The solution interval on which the antenna-based corrections are performed is the essential parameter for the phase
calibration of VLBI data. The shortest timescales on which baseline phases vary are driven by the coherence times
of the atmospheres above the two stations. However, the S/N is often not sufficiently high for the fringe fitter to find solutions
on these short timescales. Therefore, the optimal fringe fit solution interval should be as close as possible to the phase
variation timescales while being high enough to allow for reliable fringe detections for all stations. It follows that
these intervals strongly depend on the observed source (flux density and structure), antenna sensitivity, weather, and the
observing frequency.
\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} determines phase calibration solution intervals
for each scan within an open search range, based on the observing frequency and array sensitivity. The
default search ranges are given in the online documentation.
The search algorithm uses the S/N from the fast Fourier transform (FFT) stage of the fringe fit process as a metric (Appendix~\ref{ffbasics}).
The FFTs are determined quickly\footnote{
FFTs are limited only by disk I/O, but the least-squares algorithm for a full global fringe fit requires significant CPU time.}
, and an S/N value of 5.5 can be taken as indicator for a solid detection.
The search stops at the smallest solution interval, where the median S/N on each baseline is above the detection threshold,
as shown in Fig.~\ref{solintsearchplots}.
Baselines where the S/N is below the detection threshold are discarded from the search.
In the millimeter regime, short solution intervals are used to calibrate for the atmosphere-induced phase fluctuations.
Here, it may be desirable to obtain fringe solutions for different antennas on different timescales. Typically, this becomes necessary
when some baselines are much more sensitive than others. In this case, fringe solutions
within the coherence time can be obtained for some stations, while much longer integration times may be necessary to obtain detections for
others. \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} solves this problem with a two-step search in two different ranges of fringe fit solution intervals. The first
search is made on short timescales, and for each scan, any antenna that does not detect the source is recorded.
In a subsequent search for detections in longer solution intervals, all scans with failed solutions
are again fringe fit.
Detections obtained in the smallest successful solution interval from this second search are used to replace the previously failed solutions.
The default search intervals are given in the online documentation.
The \textit{fringefit} task is used to perform the FFT over the full observing bandwidth for the solution interval search.
Even when instrumental phase and delay offsets are present in the data, the FFT will still have a
decent sensitivity. The optimal solution intervals are first determined for the bright calibrator sources.
These sources are always easily detected, and for high-frequency observations, it is beneficial to calibrate
for atmospheric effects before the calibrator data are used to solve for instrumental effects.
For the science targets, the solution interval search is conducted after all instrumental effects are
solved to obtain more detections in the low S/N regime.
\subsubsection{Coherence calibration for high-frequency observations}
\label{incrcoher}
The first step of fringe fitting typically solves for instrumental phase and delay offsets.
This single-band fringe fitting is made over
scan durations to maximize the S/N (Section~\ref{instrphdela}).
For high-frequency observations above 50\,GHz (e.g., for the EHT and GMVA), the short coherence times degrade the S/N
significantly over scan durations, which makes it more difficult to obtain robust instrumental calibration solutions.
To overcome this problem, \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} will first solve for phase and rate offsets
on optimized atmospheric calibration timescales that are determined with the method introduced in Sect~\ref{solints}
before the instrumental phase and delay calibration.
This coherence calibration will take out fast intra-scan phase rotations and thereby increase the phase coherence
within scans. With the improved coherence, better instrumental calibration solutions can be obtained.
The coherence calibration is made for the calibrators with the full bandwidth of the observation, that is,
using data from all spectral windows to maximize the S/N. No delay solutions are applied from this
fringe search; the atmosphere-induced multi-band delays are instead corrected in a later fringe search after the
instrumental phase and delay calibration.
In the cm regime, where the coherence times are much longer, the coherence calibration procedure is not necessary.
\subsubsection{Instrumental phase and delay calibration}
\label{instrphdela}
Depending on the front and back ends of the telescopes, different spectral windows can have different phase and delay offsets.
These data corruptions are mostly constant or vary on very long timescales, meaning that they can be taken out with
a few observations of bright calibrator sources by fringe fitting the data from each spectral window separately.
\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} will integrate over each scan of the brightest calibrators for this calibration step.
No distinct time-dependent phase drifts should occur for different spectral windows.
Consequently, rate solutions are obtained from the scan-based multi-band fringe fitting step (Section~\ref{mbcal}) and only phase and delay solutions from this instrumental calibration procedure are applied to the data; the single-band solutions for the rates are zeroed.
The instrumental phase and delay solutions are clipped with a high S/N cutoff of 10 by default,
to ensure a very low false-detection probability.
For most VLBI experiments, instrumental effects are sufficiently stable and \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} will
apply a single solution per spectral window and per station to an entire observation.
These solutions are determined for each station $m$ as follows:
\begin{enumerate}
\item For each scan $s$, the average fringe fit S/N across all $N_\mathrm{spw}$
spectral windows is computed as
\begin{equation}
\overline{\mathrm{S/N}}_m(s) = \frac{1}{N_\mathrm{spw}}\sum_{w=1}^{N_\mathrm{spw}} \mathcal{R}_m(s, w) \;,
\end{equation}
where $\mathcal{R}_m(s, w)$ denotes the fringe S/N of a specific spectral window $w$.
\item A single scan $s_\mathrm{max}$, with the highest $\overline{\mathrm{S/N}}_m$ is selected:
\begin{equation}
\overline{\mathrm{S/N}}_m(s_\mathrm{max}) \geq \overline{\mathrm{S/N}}_m(s) \; \forall s \;.
\end{equation}
\item The solutions from scan $s_\mathrm{max}$ for all spectral windows
are applied to the data. The solutions from all other scans are discarded.
\end{enumerate}
In some cases, small drifts can occur in the electronics for long observations, or equipment
along the signal path is restarted or replaced, which can cause sudden changes in the instrument.
In these cases, time-dependent instrumental
offsets will be present in the data. \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} is able handle these effects by keeping
the instrumental fringe solutions from all scans $s$ and antennas $m$ where \mbox{$\mathcal{R}_m(s, w) >10 \; \forall w$},
instead of using solutions from a single scan only (which is the default mode described above).
In this special mode, the time-dependent instrumental offsets are corrected by interpolating
the remaining fringe solutions across all scans. Linear interpolation is used for smooth drifts, while
abrupt changes are captured by a nearest-neighbor interpolation.
\subsubsection{Multi-band phase calibration of calibrator sources}
\label{mbcal}
After the instrumental phase and delay calibration, the visibility phases are coherent across spectral windows.
This allows for an integration over the whole frequency band for an increased S/N to calibrate atmospheric effects.
The solutions intervals are determined following the method introduced in Section~\ref{solints}.
A slightly lower S/N cutoff (around 5) can be employed for this global fringe fitting step compared to
the threshold on which the optimal solution intervals are based. This ensures that solutions on short timescales
are not flagged within scans when the S/N fluctuates around the chosen S/N cutoff for detections.
Delay and rate windows (not necessarily centered on zero)
can be used for the FFT fringe search to reduce the probability of false detection in the low S/N regime.
No windows are put in place by default because the sizes of reasonable search ranges are very different
for different observations. The user should inspect the fringe solutions obtained by \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}},{} and if
there are outliers, repeat the fringe fitting step with windows that exclude the misdetections
or flag the outliers in the calibration table.
Because the atmosphere-induced multi-band delays are continuous functions, the solutions can be smoothed
in time within scans to remove imperfect detections. First, delay solutions outside of the specified search windows are replaced
by the median delay solution value of the whole scan.\footnote{The starting point for the fringe fit globalization step
is constrained to lie within the search widows. However, solutions can wander outside of that range during
the unconstrained least-squares refinement.} Then, a median sliding window with a width of 60 seconds by default
is applied to the delay solutions, leaving the fast phase and rate solutions untouched. Depending on the stability of
the multi-band delays within scans, different smoothing times can be set in the input files.
To ensure constant phase offsets between the parallel-hand correlations of the different polarization signal
paths, the same rate solutions are applied to all polarizations. They are formed from the average rates of the
solutions from the individual polarizations, weighted by S/N.
The multi-band fringe fit is first made for the calibrator sources . This can be performed in a single pass
because the calibrators are easily detected, even on short timescales.
The weaker science targets are calibrated after the complex bandpass and instrumental polarization
effects have been corrected.
\subsubsection{Complex bandpass calibration}
\label{bpass}
When the calibrator source phase, rate, and delay offsets are calibrated, yielding coherent visibility phases in
frequency and time, the S/N should be high enough to solve for the complex bandpass.
While the scalar bandpass calibration (Section~\ref{scalar-bpass}) can only solve for amplitudes,
the complex bandpass calibration makes use of the cross-correlations and can therefore solve for amplitude and phase
variations introduced by the passband filter of each station within each spectral window.
\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} uses the CASA \textit{bandpass} task to solve for the complex bandpass.
Single solutions for each antenna, receiver, and spectral window over entire experiments are
obtained based on the combined data of all scans on the specified
bandpass calibrators. If the S/N is good enough, per-channel solutions can be obtained.
Otherwise, polynomials should be fitted. If a prior scalar bandpass calibration was done, the amplitude solutions
from the complex bandpass calibration are set to unity.
If the amplitudes are to be solved for here,
flat spectrum sources should be chosen as bandpass calibrators (this is especially important
for wide bandwidths) or an a priori source model encompassing
the frequency structure must be supplied to \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}.
If the S/N is too low or not enough data on bright calibrators are available, the complex bandpass
calibration should be skipped.
\subsubsection{Phase calibration of science targets}
\label{mbphsci}
\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} will solve for instrumental phase and delay offsets, the complex bandpass, and polarization leakage solutions (Section~\ref{polcalsect}).
After all these instrumental data corruptions are removed, the phases of the weaker science targets are calibrated.
In this step, all previous calibration tables are applied.
These are the sampler corrections, the amplitude calibration, the amplitude bandpass, the phase bandpass,
the instrumental phase and delay calibration, the polarization solutions, and calibrator multi-band fringe solutions in the case
of phase-referencing (Appendix~\ref{phrefastrom}).
Three different science target phase calibration paths are implemented in \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}:
\begin{enumerate}
\item If phase-referencing is disabled, a first multi-band fringe search is made over long
integration times to solve for the bulk rate and delay offsets with open search
windows for each scan. This will determine whether the source can be detected;
fringe non-detections will flag data.
Then, intra-scan atmospheric effects are
corrected for in a second multi-band fringe fit with narrow search windows following the
method presented in Section~\ref{mbcal}.
This is the default option for high-frequency observations.
\item If phase-referencing is enabled and no fringe search on the science targets
for residuals is to be done, phases, delays, and rates are calibrated
using only the phase-referencing calibrator solutions.
All valid data of the science targets will be kept.
This is the default option for low-frequency observations if the
science targets are very weak or for astrometry experiments.
\item If phase-referencing and a search for residuals on the science targets
are enabled, the calibration is done with the same two-step fringe fitting approach
as in option 1 while also applying phase-referencing calibrator solutions
on-the-fly. Here, very narrow search windows can be used.
The goal is to solve for residual phase, delay, and rate offsets
that are not captured by the phase-referencing.
This is the default option for non-astrometry experiments in the cm regime with
strong enough science targets.
\end{enumerate}
\subsection{Polarization calibration}
\label{polcalsect}
All calibration solutions described so far are obtained independently for the different polarization
signal paths (RCP and LCP for circular feeds).
To calibrate the cross-hand correlations, strong, polarized sources must be observed over a wide range of feed rotation angles.
This enables imaging of all four Stokes parameters. For circular feeds, the Stokes parameters for total intensity $I$,
linear polarization $Q$ and $U$, and circular polarization $V$, are formed as
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{stokes}
I & = & \frac{1}{2} \left( \mathrm{RR} + \mathrm{LL} \right) \\
Q & = &\frac{1}{2} \left( \mathrm{RL} + \mathrm{LR} \right) \\
U & = &\frac{i}{2} \left( \mathrm{LR} - \mathrm{RL} \right) \\
V & = &\frac{1}{2} \left( \mathrm{RR} - \mathrm{LL} \right) \; ,
\end{eqnarray}
with $i=\sqrt{-1}$.
Feed impurities are typically constant over experiments.
Therefore, constant solutions are obtained for the polarization
calibration by combining the data from all polarization calibrator scans.
The CASA \textit{gaincal} task with the type `KCROSS' setting is used to solve for
cross-hand delays and the \textit{polcal} task with the type `Xf' is used to solve
for cross-hand phases.
Depending on the S/N of the cross-hand visibilities on the polarization
calibrator sources and the instrumental polarization structure, cross-hand phases can either
be solved per spectral window, per individual frequency channel, or by binning groups of
frequency channels together within each spectral window. The cross-hand delays are always
solved per spectral window.
Both tasks determine solutions under the assumption of a
point source model with 100\% Stokes $Q$ flux here.
This assumption will affect
the absolute cross-hand phase that determines the electric vector position angle (EVPA)
orientation across the source: if the source is imaged,
adding an arbitrary phase will rotate the EVPA $\Phi$ of each linear polarization vector
by the same amount. The absolute EVPA
can be calibrated using connected-element interferometric or single-dish observations under the assumption
that the field orientation remains the same on VLBI scales.
The EVPA follows from the Stokes $Q$ and $U$ fluxes as
\begin{equation}
\label{evpa}
\Phi = \frac{1}{2}\tan^{-1}\left( \frac{U}{Q} \right)
.\end{equation}
Secondly, the leakage, or D-terms \citep{Conway1969},
between the two polarizations of each receiver are corrected.
Some power received for one polarization will leak into the signal path of the other one and vice versa,
causing additional amplitude and phase errors in the cross-hand visibilities.
Depending on the S/N and instrumental frequency response, \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} can obtain leakage solutions for the whole frequency band,
per spectral window, or per group of frequency channels within each spectral window.
It can be assumed that extragalactic synchrotron sources have a negligible fraction
of circular polarization\footnote{
For a typical observation that includes multiple calibrator sources, this assumption is easily tested.}
and that the parallel-hand correlations are perfectly calibrated, including corrections for the feed rotation angle $\chi$
of the stations (Appendix~\ref{mounttypes}).
In this case,
small D-terms that can be modeled by a first-order approximation
for circular feeds on the $m$-$n$ baseline can be written as \citep{Leppanen1995}
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{dterms}
\mathrm{RL}_{mn}^\mathrm{obs} & = & \mathrm{RL}_{mn}^\mathrm{true} + \left( D^R_m e^{2 i \chi_m} + \left(D^L_n\right)^* e^{2 i \chi_n} \right) I\\
\mathrm{LR}_{mn}^\mathrm{obs} & = & \mathrm{LR}_{mn}^\mathrm{true} + \left( D^L_m e^{-2 i \chi_m} + \left(D^R_n\right)^* e^{-2 i \chi_n} \right) I \; .
\end{eqnarray}
Here, $D$ are the leakage terms, with a superscript indicating the polarization, and subscript indicating the antenna.
The effect of the D-terms is a rotation in the complex plane by twice the feed rotation angle, which makes
this instrumental effect discernible from the true polarization of the source, which is usually constant during observations.
The complex D-terms are estimated with the CASA \textit{polcal} task.
An S/N-weighted average of the individual calibration solutions will be formed
when more than one polarization calibrator is used.
It should be noted that while the D-terms have to be determined after the calibration of cross-hand phase and delay offsets,
CASA will always apply the solved calibration tables in the signal path order, that is, leakage before instrumental delays
and phases.\footnote{Within CASA and \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}, iterative calibration solutions are easily obtained, which
allows for incremental corrections to the D-terms and cross-hand phase and delay offsets.
Normally, this is not necessary.}
This approach is similar to the AIPS PCAL task, and
it requires a good total intensity source model. However, for strongly resolved sources with varying polarization
structure along the different spatial components, \textit{polcal} will fail to determine accurate D-terms.
To address this issue, a task similar to AIPS LPCAL will be added to the pipeline in the future (Section \ref{futurefeatures}).
\subsection{Post-processing and application of calibration tables}
\label{calsolpostprocapp}
The solution tables obtained from each calibration steps described in this section
can be post-processed with user-defined median or mean filter smoothing,
and different options for time and frequency interpolation schemes offered by CASA
(nearest, linear, cubic, or spline) can be used for the application of the solutions.
The default linear interpolation should be the best option in most cases.
\subsection{Diagnostics}
\label{diagsect}
By default, \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} stores many diagnostics from every run in a dedicated folder within the working directory:
\begin{itemize}
\item Plots of calibration solutions from each calibration table. Where applicable, plots will be made on a per-source basis.
\item Solution interval searches as shown in Fig.~\ref{solintsearchplots}.
\item Receiver temperature fits as shown in Fig.~\ref{tsysstar}.
\item Plots of visibilities made with the jplotter\footnote{\url{https://github.com/haavee/jiveplot}.} software.
These plots can be made for the raw
visibilities and once again after applying the calibration solutions; a comparison of these plots serves as a good metric
for the performance of the pipeline. The visibility plots are made for a number of scans that are selected
from the start, middle, and end of the experiment based on the number of baselines present. The plots show
visibility phases and amplitudes, as a function of time (frequency averaged) and as a function of frequency (time averaged).
\item Lists of all applied flags and an overview of flagged data percentages per station.
\item Text files, which show fringe detections for all scans across the array.
\item CASA log files containing detailed information about every step of the pipeline.
\item Copies of the used command line arguments and configuration files.
\end{itemize}
These logging procedures, together with the use
of a single set of input files that determine the whole pipeline calibration process, makes the results fully reproducible.
Examples of diagnostic plots from a full calibration run are presented in Appendix~\ref{m87calib}.
\section{Imaging and self-calibration}
\label{imagscal}
\begin{figure*}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.85\textwidth]{images/rPICARD_image_flowchart.pdf}
\caption{Overview of the \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} imager performing \textit{tclean} and
self-calibration iterations.
CASA tasks used by the pipeline are written in italics,
and input parameters are written inside angle brackets.
The solutions from each self-calibration table are incremental
with respect to all previous solutions.
Interpolated values from good self-calibration results
are used instead of failed (flagged) solutions unless an
antenna is fully flagged.
Optionally, only phase self-calibration can be performed
or a single image can be made without any self-calibration.
Within each \textit{tclean} operation, the mask is updated between
CLEAN cycles, by CASA if `auto-multithresh' is enabled and/or
by the user in interactive mode.
}
\label{image_flowchart}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[h]
\centering
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.85\linewidth]{images/casa_radplots/radplot_L_amp_data.pdf}
\end{minipage
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.85\linewidth]{images/casa_radplots/radplot_L_phase_data.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.85\linewidth]{images/casa_radplots/radplot_L_amp_model.pdf}
\end{minipage
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.85\linewidth]{images/casa_radplots/radplot_L_phase_model.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.85\linewidth]{images/casa_radplots/radplot_L_amp_corrected.pdf}
\end{minipage
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.85\linewidth]{images/casa_radplots/radplot_L_phase_corrected.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{M87 amplitudes on the left and phases on the right as a function of baseline length (u-v distance),
color-coded by baselines.
The top panels show visibilities after the model-agnostic \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} calibration (before
self-calibration).
The middle panel presents the model data from the final image of the
imaging plus self-calibration cycles, shown in Fig.~\ref{m87imaging}.
The bottom panel depicts the data after the last round of self-calibration.
In the model-agnostic calibration,
anomalously high amplitudes are due to station gain errors;
the system temperature measurements of the Fort Davis and Owens Valley stations were doubtful.
Large residual phase trends are related to low S/N measurements, where long fringe fit solution intervals
are chosen by \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}. These amplitude and phase trends are both corrected for with the
iterative self-calibration.
}
\label{radplots}
\end{figure*}
The model-agnostic calibration described in Section~\ref{picalib} is typically done without a priori knowledge about
the source model. This limits the amplitude calibration to the measured SEFDs, which can have large
uncertainties. Values for the DPFUs and gain curves are affected by measurement errors, system temperature
variations during scans are often not captured, phasing efficiencies for phased interferometers
have uncertainties, and off-focus as well as off-pointing amplitude losses are not captured in most cases.
With the default assumption of a point source in the model-agnostic calibration, the phase calibration
will naturally steer baseline phases to the reference station toward zero (Appendix.~\ref{ffbasics}).
When the correct source model is known, the phases can be calibrated toward the true values and on shorter
(atmospheric) timescales.
The basic principle of self-calibration is to image the data to obtain a source model
and to use that model to derive station-based amplitude and phase gain solutions,
correcting for the aforementioned shortcomings in the model-agnostic calibration
\citep{Readhead1978, Pearson1984}.
For CLEAN-based imaging algorithms \citep{Hogbom1974}, this is often an iterative process.
As the source model improves by recovering weaker emission features, better
self-calibration solutions are obtained, which will in turn improve the
imaging. This process should converge to a final image after a finite number
of self-calibration iterations on increasingly shorter solution intervals.
It should be noted that phase self-calibration degrades the astrometric
accuracy of phase-referencing experiments.
Within \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}, imaging and self-calibration capabilities are added as an interactive feature.
It is a single module, independent from the rest of the pipeline, that can be used in an
interactive CASA session to image sources from any MS or UVFITS file.
The CASA \textit{tclean} function is used as an MPI-parallelized, multi-scale, multi-frequency synthesis
modern CLEAN imaging algorithm. The robustness scheme can be used to weight the data \citep{Briggs1995}.
The \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} imager will perform iterations of imaging and incremental phase plus amplitude self-calibration steps. The CASA \textit{gaincal} task is used for the self-calibration.
Fig.~\ref{image_flowchart} provides an overview of the algorithm steps, and the most important
input parameters are given in the online documentation.
To avoid cleaning too deeply and thereby picking up source components from the noise,
the maximum number of clean iterations is set to a low number for the first few
iterations. As the data improve with every self-calibration iteration, the
maximum number of clean iterations is gradually increased.
Additionally, the cleaning will stop earlier if the peak flux
of the residual image is lower than the theoretically achievable point-source sensitivity of the array
or (optionally) when a $3 \sigma_n$ stopping threshold has been reached, with $\sigma_n$ given as
1.4826 times the median absolute deviation in the residual image.
For the self-calibration, S/N cutoffs of 3 for the phases and 5 for the amplitudes are
employed to avoid corrupting the data
by an erroneous source model. Failed solutions are replaced by
interpolating over the good solutions, except for the final self-calibration
iteration. This ensures that data without sufficient
quality for self-calibration will be excluded from the final image.
First, the self-calibration is made for visibility phases,
normally starting with a a point-source model, which allows for a subsequent
time-averaging with reduced coherence losses and results in a better starting point of a bright component
at the phase center for the imaging.
Next, as the CLEAN model is constructed, a few phase-only self-calibration steps
are preformed on increasingly shorter solution intervals
to first recover the basic source structure.
Then, the self-calibration is used to adjust amplitude gains on
long timescales at first to avoid freezing-in uncertain source components.
These solution times are then lowered by a factor of 2 for every iteration as the model improves and
definite source components are obtained.
If necessary, data from certain u-v ranges can be excluded from the amplitude self-calibration,
for instance, long baselines with low S/N.
The imaging function can be run entirely interactively, where CLEAN boxes can
be placed and updated for each major cycle of each imaging iteration.
When a final set of CLEAN boxes is obtained, the algorithm can be set to
run automatically for all remaining iterations.
Alternatively, the imaging can be fully automated when a set of CLEAN masks is supplied
as input or when the \textit{tclean} auto-masking options are used.
This is done with the CASA `auto-multithresh' algorithm.
The auto-masking
algorithm will try to determine regions with real emission primarily based on noise statistics,
and side lobes in the image. A detailed description of the algorithm can be found online in the official CASA documentation.\footnote{
\url{https://casa.nrao.edu/casadocs-devel/stable/imaging/synthesis-imaging/masks-for-deconvolution}
}
The default auto-masking parameters set in \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} should produce reasonable masks for compact sources,
but if faint extended emission has to be recovered, the
conservative auto-masking approach may not be sufficient. In this case, parameter tweaking
or interactive user interaction on top of the auto-masking is required.
The image convergence is easily tracked because
plots of all self-calibration solutions, the model, the data after each self-calibration,
and the images (beam-convolved model plus residuals) of each cycle are made by default.
\section{Science test case: 7mm VLBA observations of the AGN jet in M87}
\label{verification}
As a demonstration of the \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} calibration and imaging capabilities, we
present here the results from an end-to-end processing of a
representative VLBI dataset. For this purpose, we have selected
continuum observations of the central AGN in M87
conducted with the VLBA at 7\,mm (43\,GHz).
The chosen dataset is an eight-hour-long track on M87, including
3C279 and OJ287 as calibrators, with a bandwidth
of 256\,MHz that was distributed over two spectral windows with 256 channels each
(PI: R. Craig Walker, project code: BW0106).
All VLBA stations participated in this experiment.
A description of the data calibration with \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} and AIPS (to create a benchmark dataset) is given in §\,\ref{7mmcalib}.
Imaging and self-calibration steps are descried in §\,\ref{7mmimagingandsc}, and
the imaging results are presented in §\,\ref{7mmresults}.
\subsection{Model-agnostic calibration}
\label{7mmcalib}
The data were blindly calibrated with \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} v1.0.0 in a single pass using the pipeline default
calibration parameters for high-frequency VLBA observations. A priori information
was used to flag poor data and to calibrate the amplitudes based on system temperatures,
DPFUs, and gain curves. Auto-correlations were used to
correct for erroneous sampler thresholds of station recorders and to
calibrate the amplitude bandpasses after edge channels were flagged.
Instrumental single-band delay and phase offsets together with phase bandpasses
were calibrated using the bright calibrators OJ287 and 3C279. Optimal solution
intervals for the fringe fit phase calibration were determined based on the S/N
of each scan.
Independently, the data were manually calibrated in AIPS, following the standard
recipe outlined in Appendix C of the AIPS cookbook.
In this process, fringe fitting was performed with a 30\,s timescale for all scans (the adaptive scan-based
solution interval tuning is a unique feature of \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}).
Overall, this integration time yields solid fringe detections while still capturing the atmospheric phase variations.
The AIPS calibrated visibilities serve as a benchmark dataset to cross-compare results between AIPS and CASA/\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}.
Appendix~\ref{m87calib} shows a selection of \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} calibration solutions from the
different pipeline steps together with AIPS calibration solutions for
a direct comparison.
\subsection{Self-calibration and imaging}
\label{7mmimagingandsc}
Both the \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} and AIPS calibrated datasets were imaged
with the \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} imager using the same default settings, self-calibration steps, and CLEAN windows (Section~\ref{imagscal}).
Initial phase self-calibration steps were made for 300\,s and 10\,s.
After this, the phases were continuously self-calibrated with 10\,s
solution intervals after each imaging iteration.
Only phase gain solutions with $\mathrm{S/N}>3$ were applied to the data.
The first step of amplitude self-calibration used a two-hour integration, which was lowered
by a factor of 2 for each imaging iteration.
The final amplitude self-calibration step was made on a 10\,s solution interval.
Only amplitude gain solutions with $\mathrm{S/N}>5$ were applied to the data.
Fig.~\ref{radplots} shows the effect of the self-calibration after the model-agnostic
calibration.
Before self-calibration,
amplitude and phase gain errors are clearly visible (Fig.~\ref{radplots}, upper panels)
and baseline phases
are partially steered toward zero because a point-source model was assumed for the fringe fitting (Fig.~\ref{radplots}, upper right panel).
Station-based gain solutions were applied to the data in several self-calibration iterations, which eventually converged to the best source model image (shown in Fig.~\ref{m87imaging}).
At the end of the self-calibration process, the
corrected visibilities closely matched the model visibilities (Fig.~\ref{radplots}, lower and middle panels). At uv-distances $>6M\lambda,$ the phases deviate from zero because of the spatial structure of the source.
Fig.~\ref{m87imaging_comparison} shows a direct comparison
of image reconstructions for the \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} and AIPS calibrated data.
The overall reconstructed jet structure and salient image features
described above are consistent in the two reconstructions.
Imaging the same data in Difmap showed no meaningful differences
with Fig.~\ref{m87imaging_comparison}.
\subsection{Results}
\label{7mmresults}
\begin{figure*}[h]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.85\linewidth]{images/jet_images/casa_robust.pdf}
\caption{CLEAN image reconstruction of the 7mm M87 jet from VLBA data using robust weighting of the data
($\mathrm{\textit{robust}} = 0.5$ in \textit{tclean}).
The data were calibrated and imaged with \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}.
The restoring beam (0.37\,x\,0.17\,mas at $-13.3^\circ$), representing the resolving power due to
the u-v coverage of the data, is shown in bottom left corner.
The color range displayed is $-10^{-4}\,\mathrm{Jy}/\mathrm{beam}$ to $0.7\,\mathrm{Jy}/\mathrm{beam}$.
Contours in mJy per beam are drawn for -1.8, 1.8, and 2.5, increasing by factors of $\sqrt{2}$
from there.
}
\label{m87imaging}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}[h]
\centering
\hspace{-0.6cm} (\small{a) cal:\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} \& im:\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} (natural)} \hspace{4.1cm} \small{(b) cal:AIPS \& im:\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} (natural)}
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.85\linewidth]{images/jet_images/casa_natural.pdf}
\end{minipage
\begin{minipage}[b]{0.5\linewidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=.85\linewidth]{images/jet_images/AIPS_tcleanrobust2.pdf}
\end{minipage}
\caption{Comparison of CLEAN image reconstructions of the 7mm M87 jet between
\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}-calibrated data in the left panel and
AIPS-calibrated data in the right panel.
Both images were produced with the \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} imager using natural weighting.
The restoring beam, color range, and contour levels are the same as
in Fig.~\ref{m87imaging} for the two images shown here.
}
\label{m87imaging_comparison}
\end{figure*}
Fig.~\ref{m87imaging} shows the fiducial image of the science target that was obtained after calibration and imaging with \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}.
The bright core of the radio jet in M87 is centered at zero offset in the image.
The western part of the jet is much brighter than the
eastern part. This one-sidedness can be explained by Doppler
boosting of a jet that is inclined with respect to the
line of sight: the approaching jet is brighter
than the receding counter-jet.
Moreover, the edges of the M87 jet are clearly
brighter than the central jet spine.
This is the result of a rotating sheath of material
that surrounds the jet spine.
The southern
jet arm follows an almost straight trajectory, while the track of the northern part of the jet
at first leaves the jet core at a large opening angle of $\sim50^\circ$ . At a right ascension offset of about
-1 mas, the upper jet arm bends into a recollimated trajectory that extends parallel to the southern arm as seen on larger scales.
The recollimation at that particular position
may be the result of a strong interaction between the jet and the ambient medium surrounding the jet.
This structure is also in accordance with earlier work \citep{Walker2018}.
A weak emission region is present toward the east of the radio core.
The brightness of this feature is about 0.05\,Jy, that is, 10\,\%
of the brightness of the approaching jet close to the radio core. When the weak extension is interpreted as
a counter-jet, a symmetrical flow profile would be constrained to about half
the speed of light for inclination angles $\lesssim 20^\circ$.
\section{Future features}
\label{futurefeatures}
Because \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} is built upon CASA, it will benefit from the steady CASA core developments.
Notably, these will include enhancements of the MS data structure,
updates of the calibration framework, extensions of the MPI implementation,
and imaging improvements.
The CASA fringe fitter will be able to fit for a dispersive delay for
low-frequency observations with large fractional bandwidths
in the future. This will be important for arrays such as \mbox{LOFAR} \citep{Haarlem2013} and the SKA.
While an exhaustive fringe search is already implemented in \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} (Appendix~\ref{ffbasics}),
we will also add a baseline-stacking capability to the \textit{fringefit} task itself.
Additional spectral line specific calibration routines are planned to
be included in the next release of \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}: A restriction of the bandpass
calibration to continuum calibrator sources, a compensation for time-variable
Doppler shifts after the bandpass calibration,
a delay calibration based
only on the continuum calibrators while rate solutions are determined
from the spectral line itself, and spectral line amplitude calibration
based on the auto-correlations and template spectra of lines.
For an improved polarization calibration, a new CASA task called \textit{polsolve}\footnote{
\url{https://code.launchpad.net/casa-poltools}.}
is currently under development and will be integrated into \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}.
This task is able to obtain full nonlinear solutions for the leakage
and more accurate D-terms for extended calibrator sources with varying polarization structure.
After a source has been imaged in total intensity, it will be possible to
decompose a CLEAN model into multiple compact regions
with sufficiently constant polarization structure. D-terms can be solved
for each region separately, and the median leakage will be applied
to the data.
The CASA \textit{tfcrop} algorithm will be explored for its capability to
automatically identify and flag data corrupted by RFI.
\section{Summary}
\label{summary}
We have presented \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}},{} a CASA-based data reduction pipeline for calibrating and imaging VLBI data.
\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} performs phase calibration using a global Schwab-Cotton fringe fit algorithm.
A robust assessment of the S/N for each scan
enables setting optimal fringe fit solution intervals
for different antennas to determine post-correlation phase, delay, and rate corrections.
The amplitude calibration is based on standard telescope metadata, and a robust algorithm can solve for atmospheric opacity attenuation in the high-frequency regime.
\mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} is agnostic about the details of VLBI data and can run without any user interaction, using self-tuning parameters. Its flexibility allows the user to calibrate VLBI data from different arrays, including high-frequency and low-sensitivity arrays.
Standard CASA tasks are used for imaging and self-calibration, and
fast computing times are achieved by MPI-based CPU scalability.
In order to illustrate
the calibration and imaging capabilities of \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{},
we selected a 7\,mm VLBA observation of the central radio source in the M87 galaxy as a representative VLBI experiment.
We successfully applied the full end-to-end pipeline to this dataset using default parameter settings and
produced science-ready results.
A qualitative comparison with results obtained from standard techniques with the classic VLBI software suites, AIPS and Difmap,
has shown excellent agreement with \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}.
This pipeline was used as one of the three independent
data reduction paths for 1.3\,mm EHT measurements taken during the April
2017 observations.
Calibrated data from \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{}, an AIPS-based reduction,
and the EHT-HOPS pipeline \citep{Blackburn2019} show a
high degree of consistency \citep{eht-paperIII}.
The calibrated measurements constitute the first scientific
data release of the EHT,
which was used to make the first image of a black hole shadow \citep{eht-paperI, eht-paperIV,eht-paperV,eht-paperVI}.\footnote{EHT data releases are available at \url{https://eventhorizontelescope.org/for-astronomers/data}.}
\begin{acknowledgements}
The authors thank Daan van Rossum for providing a flexible high-performance computing infrastructure
at Radboud University dedicated to CASA and \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} testing and development.
Furthermore, we wish to thank Jose L. G\'omez for helpful comments and discussions about using \textit{tclean}
with VLBI data. The optimal set of auto-masking parameters that he determined are now used as default setting
for the \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} imager.
We thank Harro Verkouter for adding new features to the jplotter program, which are improving
the data visualization capabilities of the pipeline.
This work benefited from extensive data consistency checks and useful discussions within the
Event Horizon Telescope consortium. We also thank Geoffrey C. Bower for helpful comments.
The \mbox{\texttt{rPICARD}}{} source code
makes extensive use of the NumPy \citep{numpy} and SciPy \citep{scipy} python packages.
This work is supported by the ERC Synergy Grant “BlackHoleCam: Imaging the Event Horizon of Black Holes” (Grant 610058). We thank the National Science Foundation (AST-1440254). This work was supported in part by the Black Hole Initiative at Harvard University, which is supported by a grant from the John Templeton Foundation.
\end{acknowledgements}
\bibliographystyle{aa}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:Intro}
LHCb has reported anomalies in the measured decay rates of the $B$ meson, which have been interpreted as hints of lepton flavour universality violation \cite{Aaij:2014pli,Aaij:2015esa}. The SM predicts equal rates for the processes $B\to K^{(*)} \mu^+\mu^-$ and $B\to K^{(*)} e^+e^-$, and it is customary to study the ratios of these branching ratios, defined as $R(K)$ and $R(K^*)$, since the dependencies on hadronic matrix elements (and associated uncertainties) cancel out \cite{Hiller:2003js}. The measurements of these hadronically clean observables deviate consistently (although perhaps with not enough statistical significance) from the SM prediction $R(K^{(*)})=1$ \cite{Bordone:2016gaq}. These hints are complemented by measurements of other observables that are more sensitive to hadronic physics. In particular, the differential branching fractions \cite{Wei:2009zv,Aaij:2014pli,Aaij:2015esa} and angular observables \cite{Khachatryan:2015isa,Abdesselam:2016llu,Lees:2015ymt,Sirunyan:2017dhj,Aaboud:2018krd,Wehle:2016yoi,Aaltonen:2011ja,Aaij:2015oid} associated to the processes $B\to \phi \mu^+\mu^-$ and $B\to K^{(*)} \mu^+\mu^-$ also deviate from the SM predictions. Interestingly, all the apparent anomalies involve the transition $b \rightarrow s\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$.
In order to account for these experimental results, one can modify the SM effective Hamiltonian, which involves penguin and box diagrams, by including one-loop contributions from new exotic particles. A full classification of the various particle combinations, considering different gauge representations, was presented in Refs.~\cite{Gripaios:2015gra,Arnan:2016cpy}. Among the different models, some featured neutral scalar or fermions that, if stable, could play the role of dark matter (DM)\footnote{An alternative to this one-loop solution is to consider $ Z^\prime$~\cite{Buras:2013qja,Gauld:2013qja} or leptoquark~\cite{Bauer:2015knc,Angelescu:2018tyl} tree-level contributions, see e.g., Ref.~\cite{Capdevila:2017bsm} and references therein. The DM problem has been addressed in the framework of these constructions \cite{Vicente:2018xbv}, see e.g., Refs.~\cite{Sierra:2015fma,Belanger:2015nma,Altmannshofer:2016jzy,Celis:2016ayl,Cline:2017lvv,Ko:2017yrd,Ellis:2017nrp,Baek:2017sew,Fuyuto:2017sys,Cox:2017rgn,Falkowski:2018dsl,Darme:2018hqg,Singirala:2018mio,Baek:2018aru,Kamada:2018kmi} for the $Z^\prime$, and Refs.~\cite{Hati:2018fzc,Choi:2018stw,Cline:2017aed,Varzielas:2015sno} for the leptoquark models.}. The first possibility was investigated in Ref.~\cite{Kawamura:2017ecz}, where it was found that the large new couplings required to reproduce the correct DM relic abundance induce sizeable 1-loop contributions to DM-nucleon scattering, leading to very strong limits from direct detection experiments. In addition, as reported by \cite{Bhattacharya:2015xha}, the Higgs portal coupling typically dominates over other new physics effects. The second possibility was addressed in Ref.~\cite{Cline:2017qqu}, where the fermionic dark matter field was accompanied by one additional scalar and one additional coloured fermion.
In this work, we consider a modification of the model of Ref.~\cite{Cline:2017qqu}. Namely, we will also assume a fermionic dark matter particle, but with two extra scalar fields, one of which has a colour charge. On top of this, we include the latest SM theoretical prediction for the mass difference in $B_{s}-$mixing \cite{DiLuzio:2017fdq}, which differs from the experimental observation by $1.8\,\sigma$. In order to reduce this tension and provide an explanation for the $B$ anomalies, complex couplings are needed, leading to new CP-violation sources, a scenario that has not been studied in the context of one-loop models so far. We explore the parameter space of this model, taking into account all the flavour observables, DM constraints, and LHC collider signatures.
This paper is organised as follows. In Section~\ref{sec:model}, we introduce the details of the particle physics model, address the constraints from the observed DM relic abundance and $B_{s}-$mixing and discuss the implications on the model's parameter space. In Section~\ref{sec:lhc}, we investigate the possibility of observing this scenario at the LHC, for which we take into account dijet and dimuon searches. We also include a projection of the potential reach of the High Luminosity phase of the LHC. Finally, in Section~\ref{sec:direct}, we compute the DM-nucleus scattering cross section and study current constraints and the future reach of direct DM detection experiments. The conclusions are presented in Section~\ref{sec:conclusions}.
\section{The model}
\label{sec:model}
In this article, we consider a model in which the DM particle is a Majorana fermion, $\chi$, with two extra scalar fields, $\phi_q$ and $\phi_l$, which couple to left-handed quarks and leptons, respectively\footnote{As we will comment in Section \ref{sec:direct}, the alternative construction with Dirac DM is ruled out mainly by experimental results from direct DM detection.}. The interactions between the new particles and the SM are described by the Lagrangian,
\begin{equation}
\pazocal{L}_{\text{int}}^{\text{NP}} = \lambda_{Q_i}\bar{Q}_{i}\phi_{q}P_{R}\chi + \lambda_{L_i}\bar{L}_{i}\phi_{l}P_{R}\chi + \rm{h.c.} \, ,
\label{eq:lagrangian}
\end{equation}
where $Q_i$ and $L_i$ denote the SM left-handed quark and lepton doublets of each generation, and $\lambda_{Q_i}$ and $\lambda_{L_i}$ are the corresponding new couplings. The quantum numbers for the new fields are summarised in Table~\ref{tab:quantum_numbers}. We impose a ${\cal Z}_2$ parity under which the SM fields are invariant, and which guarantees the stability of the DM candidate, as long as $m_{\phi_{q,l}} > m_{\chi}$. Upon rotation from the electroweak to the quark mass eigenbasis, the couplings $\lambda_{Q_i}$ are rotated in flavour space. Assuming that the electroweak and mass eigenbasis are aligned for the leptons and down-type quarks, the couplings to the up-type quarks are generated by the CKM rotation as follows:
\begin{equation}
\lambda_{Q_i}\bar{Q}_{i} \rightarrow \lambda_{Q_j}(\bar{u}_{L,i}V_{ij}, \bar{d}_{L,j}) \, .
\label{eq:rotation}
\end{equation}
From now on, we will denote the couplings in the mass eigenbasis with the corresponding quark or lepton label. These couplings are, in general, complex.
\begin{table}[t!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c||c|}
\hline
& $SU(3)$ & $SU(2)_{L}$ & $U(1)_{Y}$ & ${\cal Z}_2$ \\
\hline
\hline $\phi_{q}$ & $3$ & $2$ & $1/6$ & $-1$ \\
\hline $\phi_{l}$ & $1$ & $2$ & $-1/2$ & $-1$ \\
\hline $\chi$ & $1$ & $1$ & $0$ & $-1$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Quantum numbers of the new fields. We also indicate the charges under ${\cal Z}_2$.}
\label{tab:quantum_numbers}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.8]{plots-final/bsmumu_paper.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{One-loop diagram contribution from the new particles to the $b \rightarrow s\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ transitions.}
\label{fig:box}
\end{figure}
This model induces new physics contribution to flavour observables at the one loop level. In particular, a new box diagram appears for the $b \rightarrow s\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ transition, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:box}. These effects can be described using an effective field theory approach, thus parameterising the new contributions as corrections to the corresponding Wilson coefficients of the effective Hamiltonian,
\begin{equation}
\pazocal{H}_{\text{eff}}^{\mu^{+}\mu^{-}} = -\frac{4G_{F}}{\sqrt{2}}V_{tb}V_{ts}^{*}(C_{9}\pazocal{O}_{9} + C_{9}^{\prime}\pazocal{O}_{9}^{\prime} + C_{10}\pazocal{O}_{10} + C_{10}^{\prime}\pazocal{O}_{10}^{\prime}) + \text{h.c.} \, ,
\label{eq:hamiltonian}
\end{equation}
where the effective operators $\pazocal{O}_{9}$, $\pazocal{O}_{9}^{\prime}$, $\pazocal{O}_{10}$, $\pazocal{O}_{10}^{\prime}$ are defined as:
\begin{eqnarray}
\pazocal{O}_{9} &=& \frac{\alpha_{\text{em}}}{4\pi}(\bar{s}\gamma^{\mu}P_{L}b)(\bar{\mu}\gamma_{\mu}\mu) \, , \\
\pazocal{O}_{9}^{\prime} &=& \frac{\alpha_{\text{em}}}{4\pi}(\bar{s}\gamma^{\mu}P_{R}b)(\bar{\mu}\gamma_{\mu}\mu) \, ,\\
\pazocal{O}_{10} &=& \frac{\alpha_{\text{em}}}{4\pi}(\bar{s}\gamma^{\mu}P_{L}b)(\bar{\mu}\gamma_{\mu}\gamma_{5}\mu) \, , \\
\pazocal{O}_{10}^{\prime} &=& \frac{\alpha_{\text{em}}}{4\pi}(\bar{s}\gamma^{\mu}P_{R}b)(\bar{\mu}\gamma_{\mu}\gamma_{5}\mu) \, .
\end{eqnarray}
The Wilson coefficients $C_{9}$, $C_{9}^{\prime}$, $C_{10}$, $C_{10}^{\prime}$ contain both the SM and new physics (NP) contributions,
\begin{eqnarray}
C_{9} &=&C_{9}^{\text{SM}} + C_{9}^{\text{NP}} \, ,\nonumber \\
C_{10} &=& C_{10}^{\text{SM}} + C_{10}^{\text{NP}} \, ,
\label{eq:c9c10}
\end{eqnarray}
with the primed coefficients defined in an equivalent way.
Global fits \cite{Descotes-Genon:2015uva,Hurth:2016fbr,Capdevila:2017bsm,Altmannshofer:2017yso,DAmico:2017mtc,Hiller:2017bzc,Geng:2017svp,Ciuchini:2017mik,Alok:2017sui,Hurth:2017hxg} have been used to determine the new physics contribution to the Wilson coefficients in order to reproduce the observed experimental results. These fits favour $C_{9}^{\text{NP}} = -C_{10}^{\text{NP}}$, and suggest that no new physics is required for operators involving electrons or tau leptons. Motivated by these results, we assume negligible couplings to the first quark generation (i.e., $\lambda_{Q_1} = 0$) and to the first and third lepton generations (i.e., $\lambda_{e}=\lambda_{\tau}=0$). This provides an explanation for the $R_{K^{(*)}}$ anomalies, while relaxing the bounds from other searches.
Therefore, in total, we are left with six free parameters in this model, namely the masses of the three new particles ($m_{\chi}$, $m_{\phi_l}$, $m_{\phi_q}$), and the couplings to $b-$type quarks, $s-$type quarks, and leptons ($\lambda_b$, $\lambda_s$, $\lambda_\mu$).
It should be noted that the couplings $\lambda_{1}|\phi_{l}|^{2}|H|^{2}$ and $\lambda_{2}|\phi_{q}|^{2}|H|^{2}$ are allowed by gauge symmetry in the Lagrangian of Eq.~(\ref{eq:lagrangian}). However, they only lead to an overall shift to the masses of $\phi_{l}$ and $\phi_{q}$ after electroweak symmetry breaking since the couplings to the Higgs play no phenomenological role in the relevant range of $\phi_{l,q}$ masses. Likewise, the terms $\lambda_{3}|\phi_{l}H|^{2}$ and $\lambda_{4}|\phi_{q}H|^{2}$ are also allowed by gauge symmetry. They typically induce a small split in the masses of the neutral and charged components of the doublets $\phi_{l}$ and $\phi_{q}$ in the range of $\phi_{l,q}$ masses that survive the collider constraints. Finally, a term of the form $(\phi_{l}H)^{2}$ can lead to large contributions to neutrino masses at one loop, which forces the corresponding coupling to be extremely small \cite{Cline:2017qqu}. We will neglect these couplings in the following.
As mentioned in the Introduction, similar models have been discussed in the literature, featuring either scalar DM \cite{Kawamura:2017ecz,Chiang:2017zkh,Barman:2018jhz,Grinstein:2018fgb} or fermionic DM \cite{Cline:2017qqu}. Our model differs from that of Ref.~\cite{Cline:2017qqu} in that we have two extra scalar fields which couple to the lepton or quark sectors.
\subsection{Dark matter relic abundance}
\label{sec:relic}
In order for $\chi$ to be a viable DM candidate, it must reproduce the observed relic abundance, which can be inferred from Planck satellite data to be $\Omega h^2=0.1199\pm 0.0022$ \cite{Ade:2015xua}. The pair-annihilation proceeds through the two $t-$channel diagrams with $\phi_q$ and $\phi_l$, shown in Figure~\ref{fig:annihilation}.
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=0.82]{plots-final/relic_phiq.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=0.82]{plots-final/relic_phil.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{Tree-level contributions to the DM pair annihilation.}
\label{fig:annihilation}
\end{figure}
The stringent flavour constraints force the couplings to quarks to be much smaller than the couplings to leptons (muons and neutrinos), and the combination of flavour and collider bounds impose $m_{\phi_q}>m_{\phi_l}$, with coloured scalars generally above 1~TeV. Therefore DM annihilation into a $\mu^-\mu^+$ or $\nu_\mu \bar\nu_\mu$ pair is the dominant channel. The thermally-averaged annihilation cross section, $\langle\sigma v\rangle$, can be expressed as a plane wave expansion in terms of the dimensionless parameter $x=m_{\chi}/T$. For the case of a Majorana fermion, the zero-velocity term is helicity suppressed, and the leading contribution comes from the linear term in $1/x$ \cite{Chang:2014tea},
\begin{equation}
\langle\sigma v\rangle = 2 \frac{|\lambda_{\mu}|^{4}m_{\chi}^{2}\left(m_{\phi_{l}}^{4} + m_{\chi}^{4}\right)}{16\pi \left(m_{\phi_{l}}^{2} + m_{\chi}^{2}\right)^{4}} \, \frac{1}{x}\ ,
\label{eq:sigmav}
\end{equation}
where we have neglected the muon and the neutrino masses. In order to reproduce the correct relic abundance, we can now impose $\langle\sigma v\rangle = 2.2\times 10^{-26}$~cm$^3$~s$^{-1}$ (where $x\sim 20$ at freeze-out).
We will use this relation to fix $m_{\phi_l}$ as a function of the other parameters, thus effectively reducing by one the number of free parameters. Furthermore, due to the suppression of the velocity-independent term for $\langle\sigma v\rangle$, indirect detection bounds are not expected to constrain our model.
\subsection{$B_{s}-$mixing and other flavour constraints}
\label{sec:bsmixing}
This model introduces new couplings to the $s$ and $b$ quarks (and to the rest of the quarks by rotation of the CKM matrix). We must therefore incorporate constraints from $B$ meson physics.
The most relevant bounds are those that involve $b \rightarrow s\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ transitions. The new physics contribution to the Wilson coefficient comes from box and photon-penguin diagrams \cite{Gripaios:2015gra,Arnan:2016cpy}, $C_{9}^{\rm NP}=C_{9}^{\text{box}}+C_{9}^{\gamma}$, with\footnote{We have neglected the $Z$-penguin contribution to $C_{9}^{\text{NP}}$, since it is suppressed by $(m_{b}/m_{Z})^{2}$ and is subdominant compared to the photon exchange.}
\begin{eqnarray}
C_{9}^{\text{box}} &=& \frac{\sqrt{2}}{128\pi\alpha_{\text{em}}G_{F}m^{2}_{\psi}} \frac{\lambda_{s}\lambda_{b}^{*}}{V_{tb}V_{ts}^{*}} |\lambda_{\mu}|^{2} \left(F(x_{q},x_{l}) + 2G(x_{q},x_{l}) \right) \, ,\nonumber\\
C_{9}^{\gamma} &=& \frac{\sqrt{2}}{8G_{F}m^{2}_{\psi}} \frac{\lambda_{s}\lambda_{b}^{*}}{V_{tb}V_{ts}^{*}} F_{9}(x_{q}) \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where we have defined the dimensionless variables $x_{q} = m_{\phi_{q}}^{2} / m_{\chi}^{2}$ and $x_{l} = m_{\phi_{l}}^{2} / m_{\chi}^{2}$, and the loop functions are:
\begin{eqnarray}
F(x,y) &=& \frac{1}{(1-x)(1-y)} + \frac{x^{2}\log x}{(1-x)^{2}(x-y)} + \frac{y^{2}\log y}{(1-y)^{2}(y-x)} \, ,\nonumber\\
G(x,y) &=& \frac{1}{(1-x)(1-y)} + \frac{x\log x}{(1-x)^{2}(x-y)} + \frac{y\log y}{(1-y)^{2}(y-x)} \, ,\nonumber\\
F_{9}(x) &=& \frac{-2x^{3} + 9x^{2} - 18x + 6\log x + 11}{36(x-1)^{4}} \, .
\label{eq:fg}
\end{eqnarray}
The term $G(x_{q},x_{l})$ vanishes if $\chi$ is a Dirac particle.
In order to constrain the Wilson coefficients we use the first global fit that takes into account the possibility that $C_{9}$ and $C_{10}$ are complex \cite{Alok:2017jgr}. This is a natural scenario that arises when new CP-violation sources are introduced, and has not been studied in detail in the literature so far.
Likewise, the new physics contribution to $B_{s}-$mixing can be parameterised in terms of an effective Hamiltonian,
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3.2.1}
\pazocal{H}_{\text{eff}}^{b\bar{s}} = C_{B\bar{B}}^{\text{NP}} \, (\bar{s}_{\alpha}\gamma^{\mu}P_{L}b_{\alpha})(\bar{s}_{\beta}\gamma_{\mu}P_{L}b_{\beta}) \, ,
\end{equation}
where $\alpha$ and $\beta$ are colour indices. The new physics contribution to the Wilson coefficient is given by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:wilsonCBB}
C_{B\bar{B}}^{\text{NP}} = \frac{1}{128\pi^{2}m^{2}_{\psi}} (\lambda_{s}\lambda_{b}^{*})^{2} \left(F(x_{q},x_{q}) + 2G(x_{q},x_{q}) \right) \, ,
\end{equation}
where the loop functions $F$ and $G$ were already defined in Eq.~(\ref{eq:fg}).
In order to quantify the allowed magnitude of the Wilson coefficient $C_{B\bar{B}}^{\text{NP}}$, we follow the steps of \cite{DiLuzio:2017fdq} and introduce a complex parameter $\Delta$ in the following way:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:3.2.3}
\frac{M_{12}^{\text{SM}} + M_{12}^{\text{NP}}}{M_{12}^{\text{SM}}} \equiv |\Delta|e^{i\phi_{\Delta}} \, ,
\end{equation}
where $M_{12}^{\text{SM}}$ and $M_{12}^{\text{NP}}$ describe the SM and new physics contributions to $B_{s}-$mixing, and their values are given by the corresponding box diagrams. The complex phase, $\phi_{\Delta}$, quantifies the CP-violating effects introduced by the imaginary parts of the new couplings. We find:
\begin{eqnarray}
|\Delta| &=& \frac{\Delta M_{s}^{\text{exp}}}{\Delta M_{s}^{\text{SM}}} = \left|1+\frac{C_{B\bar{B}}^{\text{NP}}}{C_{B\bar{B}}^{\text{SM}}} \right| \, ,\nonumber\\
\phi_{\Delta} &=& \text{Arg} \left(1+\frac{C_{B\bar{B}}^{\text{NP}}}{C_{B\bar{B}}^{\text{SM}}} \right) \, ,
\label{eq:deltadef}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Delta M_{s}$ is the mass difference of the mass eigenstates of the $B_s$ meson.
The parameter $|\Delta|$ can be constrained using the most precise experimental measurement of $\Delta M_{s}$\cite{Amhis:2016xyh} and the last update on its theoretical prediction \cite{DiLuzio:2017fdq}, which show a $1.8 \sigma$ difference,
\begin{eqnarray}
\Delta M_{s}^{\text{exp}} &=& (17.757 \pm 0.021) \, \text{ps}^{-1} \, ,\nonumber\\
\Delta M_{s}^{\text{SM}} &=& (20.01 \pm 1.25) \, \text{ps}^{-1} \, .
\label{eq:deltams}
\end{eqnarray}
The dominant uncertainties in the calculation of $\Delta M_{s}^{\text{SM}}$ come from lattice predictions for the non-perturbative bag parameter, $\mathcal{B}$, and decay constant, $f_{B_{s}}$, and to a lesser extent from the uncertainty in the values of CKM elements. Both of these errors have been considerably reduced since the last theory update for the mass difference \cite{Artuso:2015swg}. The last average given by the lattice community \cite{Aoki:2016frl} gives significantly more precise values for $\mathcal{B}$ and $f_{B_{s}}$.
From these values, one can infer $|\Delta| = 0.887 \pm 0.055$, and using the data provided in Ref.~\cite{DiLuzio:2017fdq} we obtain $C_{B\bar{B}}^{\text{SM}} = 4.897 \times 10^{-5} \; {\mathrm{TeV}}^{-2} \,$. Using Eq. (\ref{eq:deltadef}) we find that the Wilson coefficient has to satisfy
\begin{equation}
\sqrt{\left(1 + \frac{\text{Re} \, C_{B\bar{B}}^{\text{NP}}}{C_{B\bar{B}}^{\text{SM}}} \right)^{2} + \left(\frac{\text{Im} \, C_{B\bar{B}}^{\text{NP}}}{C_{B\bar{B}}^{\text{SM}}} \right)^{2}} \in [0.777, 0.998] \quad (2\sigma) \, .
\label{eq:cbb}
\end{equation}
CP-violating effects are further constrained by the CP asymmetry of the golden mode $B_{s} \rightarrow J/\psi \, \phi$ \cite{Amhis:2016xyh},
\begin{equation}
A_{\text{CP}}^{\text{mix}}(B_{s} \rightarrow J/\psi \phi) = \sin(\phi_{\Delta} - 2\beta_{s}) \, = -0.021 \pm 0.031\ ,
\label{eq:acp}
\end{equation}
where $\beta_{s} = 0.01852 \pm 0.00032$\cite{Charles:2004jd}, and penguin contributions are neglected.
Using Eq.~(\ref{eq:deltadef}), this can be interpreted as an additional constraint on the real and imaginary parts of $C_{B\bar{B}}^{\text{NP}}$ (and in turn, on the real and imaginary parts of the couplings $\lambda_{s}\lambda_{b}^{*}$).
\begin{figure}[!t]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{plots-final/Re_Im_Majorana_10_1500_4.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{plots-final/Re_Im_Majorana_50_1500_4.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{plots-final/Re_Im_Majorana_150_1500_4.pdf}\\ \vspace*{4ex}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{plots-final/Re_Im_Majorana_10_2500_4.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{plots-final/Re_Im_Majorana_50_2500_4.pdf}
\includegraphics[scale=.4]{plots-final/Re_Im_Majorana_150_2500_4.pdf}
\end{center}
\caption{
The dark (light) green area is the $1\sigma$ ($2\sigma$) allowed region by $b \rightarrow s \mu^+ \mu^- $ observables in the $(\operatorname{Re}(\lambda_s \lambda_b^*), \operatorname{Im}(\lambda_s \lambda_b^*) )$ plane. Dark (light) blue regions correspond to $1\sigma \; (2\sigma)$ $B_s-$ mixing allowed regions. We take $\lambda_\mu = \sqrt{4\pi} $ and $m_{\phi_q} = 1.5 \, {\mathrm{TeV}}$ (top row), $2.5 \, {\mathrm{TeV}}$ (bottom row). The specific values of $m_\chi$, $m_{\phi_q}$ are given in the plot and $m_{\phi_l}$ is fixed to reproduce the measured DM relic abundance.
}
\label{fig:greensandblues1}
\end{figure}
In Figure~\ref{fig:greensandblues1}, the effect of all of these constraints on the real and imaginary parts of the couplings $\lambda_{s}\lambda_{b}^{*}$ for several benchmark points is shown. Regions that are allowed by $b \rightarrow s\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ observables and $B_{s}-$mixing (given by Eqs.~(\ref{eq:cbb}) and (\ref{eq:acp})) are shaded in green and blue, respectively. For illustrative purposes, the figure shows the constraints for multiple values of DM and mediator masses, while keeping $\lambda_\mu=\sqrt{4\pi}$ fixed. We remind the reader that the mass of $m_{\phi_l}$ is fixed so as to reproduce the correct relic density using Eq.~(\ref{eq:sigmav}).
As we can observe, in order to simultaneously satisfy both types of constraints, complex couplings are needed ($\text{Im}(\lambda_{s}\lambda_{b}^{*})\ne 0$). Also, as the mass of the dark matter particle and the mediators increase, both areas are more difficult to reconcile. In practise, this leads to an upper bound on the masses of the exotic new particles. The precise limit depends on the choice of couplings, which we will discuss in Section~\ref{sec:lhc}.
Finally, the new physics couplings to the up-type quarks are generated via CKM rotation,
\begin{eqnarray}
\lambda_{u} &=& V_{us}\lambda_{s} + V_{ub}\lambda_{b} \, , \nonumber\\
\lambda_{c} &=& V_{cs}\lambda_{s} + V_{cb}\lambda_{b} \, .
\label{eq:upcharmCKM}
\end{eqnarray}
These couplings generate a new physics contribution to $D^{0}-$mixing, and the Wilson coefficient $C_{D\bar{D}}^{\text{NP}}$ is obtained replacing $\lambda_{s}$ and $\lambda_{b}^{*}$ in Eq.~(\ref{eq:wilsonCBB}) by $\lambda_{u}$ and $\lambda_{c}^{*}$, respectively.
In contrast to $B_{s}-$mixing, there is no precise theory determination for the mass difference in the $D^{0}$ system. Therefore, in order to constrain the new physics contribution to $C_{D\bar{D}}$ we use the measured value of the mass difference in $D^{0}-$mixing. The experimental bound on the mixing diagram is given by \cite{Bona:2017kam}
\begin{equation}\label{eq:M12exp}
|M_{12}|_{D\bar{D}}^{\text{exp}} \in [0.6, 7.5] \times 10^{-3} \, \text{ps}^{-1} \quad (2\sigma) \, ,
\end{equation}
whereas the new physics contribution to $D^{0}-$mixing is described by
\begin{equation}\label{eq:M12lattice}
|M_{12}|_{D\bar{D}} = \frac{|C_{D\bar{D}}|}{2M_{D^{0}}}\langle{D^{0}}| \pazocal{O} |{\bar{D}^{0}}\rangle \, ,
\end{equation}
where $\pazocal{O}$ is a combination of operators containing all possible SM and new physics contributions to $D^{0}-$mixing. Using the last results from \cite{Bazavov:2017weg} we get the following bound on the Wilson coefficient:
\begin{equation}\label{eq:CDD}
|C_{D\bar{D}}^{\text{exp}}| \le 5.695 \times 10^{-8} \; {\mathrm{TeV}}^{-2} \quad (2\sigma) \, .
\end{equation}
Although this model induces new physics contributions to other flavour observables (such as $b \rightarrow s\gamma$, $b \rightarrow s\nu\bar{\nu}$ and effective $Z\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ and $Zq_{i}q_{j}$ couplings), their size is very small and does not produce significant deviations from current experimental searches.
\subsection{Benchmark scenarios}
\label{sec:benchmark}
All the new physics contributions to the observables described above depend on five independent parameters: the three masses of the new particles, $m_{\chi}$, $m_{\phi_{q}}$ and $m_{\phi_{l}}$, the product of the couplings $\lambda_{s}\lambda_{b}^{*}$ and the absolute value of the coupling $|\lambda_{\mu}|$.
The three masses only enter the Wilson coefficients through the factor $m_{\chi}^{-2}$ and the dimensionless loop functions. In addition, all the Wilson coefficients are proportional to $\lambda_{s}\lambda_{b}^{*}$ or $|\lambda_{\mu}|^{2}$ or both. In order to constrain our model, we consider two scenarios by fixing the value of $|\lambda_{\mu}|$. Then we scan over the mass parameters $m_{\chi}$ and $m_{\phi_{q}}$, with $m_{\phi_{l}}$ fixed by the requirement of reproducing the correct relic abundance, and check all the flavour observables described in Section \ref*{sec:bsmixing}. In this way, for any combination of masses and a fixed value of $|\lambda_{\mu}|$ we get a set of allowed values for $\lambda_{s}\lambda_{b}^{*}$.
We consider two hierarchies between $|\lambda_{s}|$ and $|\lambda_{b}|$ that lead to different constraints from $D^{0}-$mixing, and, ensuring that $\text{Im}(\lambda_s\lambda_b^*)\ne0$, we define the following benchmark scenarios:
\begin{minipage}{0.48\linewidth}
\begin{itemize}
\item[(A1)] $|\lambda_{\mu}| = 2$, with $\lambda_{b} = \lambda_{s}^*$;
\item[(A2)] $|\lambda_{\mu}| = 2$, with $\lambda_{b} = 4\lambda_{s}^*$;
\end{itemize}
\end{minipage}
\begin{minipage}{0.48\linewidth}
\begin{itemize}
\item[(B1)] $|\lambda_{\mu}| = \sqrt{4\pi}$, with $\lambda_{b} = \lambda_{s}^*$;
\item[(B2)] $|\lambda_{\mu}| = \sqrt{4\pi}$, with $\lambda_{b} = 4\lambda_{s}^*$,
\end{itemize}
\end{minipage}
\noindent
where $|\lambda_{\mu}| = \sqrt{4\pi}$ is the perturbative limit. After establishing a hierarchy between $|\lambda_{s}|$ and $|\lambda_{b}|$, we calculate their maximum and minimum allowed values from the corresponding maximum and minimum allowed values of $\lambda_{s}\lambda_{b}^{*}$. Scenarios with $|\lambda_{s}| > |\lambda_{b}|$ are excluded by $D^{0}-$mixing constraints. Likewise, as we will see in Section~\ref{sec:lhc}, smaller values of $\lambda_\mu$ are constrained by LHC bounds.
\section{LHC constraints and prospects for high-luminosity}
\label{sec:lhc}
In this section, we study the experimental signatures that this model would produce at the LHC. DM search strategies in both ATLAS and CMS involve analysing final states containing jets and leptons produced in association with a DM particle, identified from missing transverse energy. In this model, direct production of the coloured and leptonic scalar doublets $\phi_q$ and $\phi_l$, respectively, typically leads to such final states.
Let us first consider production processes that involve the coloured scalar, $\phi_q$. In this case, our model could lead to visible signals in final states with both $\text{monojet} \, / \, \text{dijet} + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\;$ signatures. When the new physics coupling $\lambda_q$ is smaller than the strong interaction coupling, $\alpha_{\text{QCD}}$, pure QCD processes constitute the main contribution to the cross section \cite{An:2013xka}. In this model, this implies that QCD diagrams dominate over those with new physics couplings. As a consequence, monojet searches for this model are less effective than dijet searches and we will concentrate on the latter. The $\text{dijet} + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\;$ processes are shown in Figure~\ref{fig:prod-colour}, where diagrams (a) correspond to the QCD contributions, and diagrams (b) and (c) involve new physics couplings. The main production channel is the pair production of the coloured scalar particles, that subsequently decays into a DM particle and a quark,
\begin{equation}
pp \to \phi_q\phi_q^* \, / \, \phi_q\phi_q \, / \, \phi_q^*\phi_q^* \to q q + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\; \; .
\end{equation}
In addition, the scalar doublet $\phi_q$ has the same quantum numbers as squarks in supersymmetric (SUSY) models. Therefore, the kinematics in its production and decay in diagrams (a) of Figure~\ref{fig:prod-colour} mimic those of squarks in SUSY models with decoupled gluinos. As a consequence, limits from ATLAS and CMS squark searches can be used to constrain the model.
One can also consider the pair production of the leptonic scalar, $\phi_l$. In this case, the production process is mediated by $W$ or $Z$ bosons and involves the electroweak coupling, as shown in Figure~\ref{fig:prod-ew}. The decays of $\phi_l$ lead to clean final states with one or two leptons and missing energy. Although flavour constraints require $\lambda_\mu \gg \lambda_q$, the cross section of this process is smaller than the production of the coloured mediator for similar mediator masses. However, since $m_{\phi_l}$ is fixed for every value of $m_{\chi}$ to reproduce the correct relic abundance, there are regions of the parameter space where both searches are complementary. We will here consider the process
\begin{equation}
pp \to \phi_l\phi_l^* \to \mu \mu / \mu \nu + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\; \; ,
\end{equation}
where the dimuon channel leads to the strongest constraints. As in the previous case, we can exploit the analogy between $\phi_l$ and sleptons to use the limits from slepton searches to constrain this model.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\renewcommand{\thesubfigure}{a1}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{.32\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{plots-final/production1.pdf}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{-10pt}
\renewcommand{\thesubfigure}{a2}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{.32\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{plots-final/production2.pdf}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{-10pt}
\renewcommand{\thesubfigure}{a3}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{.32\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{plots-final/production3.pdf}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{0pt}
\renewcommand{\thesubfigure}{a4}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.32\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{plots-final/production4.pdf}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{-10pt}
\renewcommand{\thesubfigure}{b}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.32\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{plots-final/production5.pdf}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{-10pt}
\renewcommand{\thesubfigure}{c1}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.32\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{plots-final/production6.pdf}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\vspace{0pt}
\renewcommand{\thesubfigure}{c2}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.32\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{plots-final/production7.pdf}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{-10pt}
\renewcommand{\thesubfigure}{c3}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.32\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{plots-final/production8.pdf}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{-10pt}
\renewcommand{\thesubfigure}{c4}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{0.32\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{plots-final/production9.pdf}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Diagrams for the pair production of the coloured scalar mediator, $\phi_q$, leading to $\text{dijet} + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\;$ signatures in the final state. Diagrams (a1)--(a4) are generated by purely QCD interactions, and diagrams (b), (c1)--(c4) are generated by DM t-channel exchange.}\label{fig:prod-colour}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\renewcommand{\thesubfigure}{d1}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{.32\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{plots-final/productionew2.pdf}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\hspace{0pt}
\renewcommand{\thesubfigure}{d2}
\begin{subfigure}[t]{.32\textwidth}
\centering
\includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{plots-final/productionew1.pdf}
\caption{}
\end{subfigure}
\caption{Diagrams for the pair production of the leptonic scalar mediator, $\phi_l$, leading to $\mu \mu / \mu \nu + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\;$ signatures in the final state.}\label{fig:prod-ew}
\end{figure}
\subsection{Simulation details}
We have implemented this model in \texttt{Feynrules~2.3}\cite{Alloul:2013bka}. The calculation of the matrix elements and the event generation is done using \texttt{MadGraph5\_aMC@NLO~2.6.3}\cite{Alwall:2014hca}. Production and decay of the new particles are considered independently using the narrow width approximation, as implemented in \texttt{MadSpin}\cite{Artoisenet:2012st}, which further accounts for spin correlations in decay chains\footnote{The narrow width approximation is not valid in benchmark points B1 and B2, for which we have taken interference effects into account. }. We then use \texttt{Pythia 8.235}\cite{Sjostrand:2014zea} to shower the parton-level events and we pass the output to \texttt{CheckMATE 2.0.26} \cite{Dercks:2016npn}, which compares the expected signal with supersymmetric searches at the LHC and derives an exclusion limit. As we have explained above, we can apply squark and slepton searches to constrain the coloured and leptonic mediator, respectively.
In order to describe initial and final state radiation and reproduce the correct jet structure precisely, we consider leading order (LO) production with parton shower matching and multijet merging when needed. The LO multijet merging techniques describe how parton shower emissions can be combined with full matrix element calculations to achieve a better accuracy in the description of the radiation spectrum. Using this technique, every jet is classified according to its $p_T$ and then compared to a hardness scale $Q_{\text cut}$. In this way, emissions above the hardness scale $Q_{\text cut}$ are described at LO accuracy using the corresponding matrix element calculation for an extra hard, wide-angle QCD emission in the final state, while emissions below this scale are defined as soft or collinear jets and the all-orders resummation description from the parton shower is preserved. Note that even though $\pazocal{O}(\alpha_s)$ corrections are included using this procedure, the calculation remains formally $\text{LO}+\text{LL}$ accurate after parton shower due to missing virtual corrections.
After hadronization, the showered events and the production cross sections are passed to \texttt{CheckMATE}. Each model point is tested against all the implemented experimental analyses to determine the optimal signal region. For this signal region, \texttt{CheckMATE} compares the simulated signal with the actual experimental observation and determines whether the model point is excluded at the $90\%$ confidence level.
\subsection{Results}
Constraints from LHC searches for the four benchmark points defined in Section~\ref{sec:benchmark} are presented in Figure~\ref{fig:lhc} on the $(m_{\chi},\,m_{\phi_q})$ plane, for all the points that satisfy the flavour constraints of Section~\ref{sec:bsmixing} and that reproduce the correct DM relic abundance. This figure shows the complementarity between the experimental limits obtained from the $pp \to jj + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\;$ and $pp \to \mu\mu + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\;$ searches. The experimental results used in our analysis are summarised in Table~\ref{tab:lhc_searches}. The colour code represents the average value of the coupling $|\lambda_b|$ in the region allowed by flavour constraints, defined as $|\lambda_b|_{\rm mean} = (|\lambda_b|_{\rm max} + |\lambda_b|_{\rm min}) / 2$, where $|\lambda_b|_{\rm max}$ and $|\lambda_b|_{\rm min}$ are the maximum and minimum allowed values respectively. The variation of our results when choosing either the minimum or maximum value for $|\lambda_b|$ has been checked and is insignificant.
Regarding the $pp \to jj + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\;$ search, the limits in every scenario show that for the lightest DM mass, coloured mediators with masses below $\sim$1~TeV are excluded. Even though heavier DM produces larger amounts of missing energy in final states, the cross section decreases rapidly with the $m_{\chi}$, leading to similar exclusion limits. It is interesting to note that exclusion limits are slightly stronger for the scenarios with $|\lambda_{b,t}| > |\lambda_{s,c}|$, where mediators with masses below $\sim$1.1~TeV are excluded. The reason for this is that final states with either top or bottom quarks are more sensitive to some experimental searches. The most stringent experimental search involves final states with at least two ($b \bar b$ production) or four ($t \bar t$ production) jets or exactly two leptons and missing energy \cite{Aaboud:2017rzf}. In particular, the most sensitive signal region is optimised to detect events featuring a DM particle produced in association with a $t \bar t$ pair, which decays fully hadronically.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{plots-final/testcollider_mpsi_gmu2_x1_uniform.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{plots-final/testcollider_mpsi_gmu4_x1_uniform.png}\\[2ex]
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{plots-final/testcollider_mpsi_gmu2_x4_uniform.png}
\includegraphics[width=0.49\linewidth]{plots-final/testcollider_mpsi_gmu4_x4_uniform.png}
\caption{LHC limits from the $pp \to jj + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\;$ (green) and $pp \to \mu\mu + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\;$ (blue) searches. On the left (right), results for the scenario with $|\lambda_\mu| = 2$ ($|\lambda_\mu| = \sqrt{4\pi}$) are presented. The figures in the upper panel correspond to $\lambda_b = \lambda_s^*$, while the bottom panel shows limits for $\lambda_b = 4\lambda_s^*$. The colour code represents the average value of the coupling $|\lambda_b|$ in the region allowed by flavour constraints, as defined in the text. Solid lines represent the current exclusion limits, whereas dashed ones correspond to the projected reach of the LHC High luminosity phase. }\label{fig:lhc}
\end{figure}
\vspace{10pt}
\begin{table}[t!]
\begin{center}
\begin{tabular}{|c|l|l|c|}
\hline
$\sqrt{s}$ & Search & Final state & $\pazocal{L}$ [fb$^{-1}$] \\
\hline
\hline
13 TeV & 1710.11412 \cite{Aaboud:2017rzf} & $t\bar t \, / \, b\bar b + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\;$ & 36.1 \\
& ATLAS-CONF-2017-039 \cite{ATLAS:2017uun} & $2l \, / \, 3l + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\;$ & 36.1 \\
\hline
\hline
14 TeV & atlas\_phys\_pub\_013\_011 \cite{ATL-PHYS-PUB-2013-011} & $t\bar t + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\;$ & 3000 \\
& atlas\_phys\_2014\_010\_hl\_3l \cite{ATL-PHYS-PUB-2014-010} & $2l \, / \, 3l + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\;$ & 3000 \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{List of experimental searches sensitive to our model, where $l$ denotes electron and muon. The third column describes the final state targeted by the analysis and the last column displays the total integrated luminosity. }
\label{tab:lhc_searches}
\end{center}
\end{table}
\vspace{-15pt}
Regarding the $pp \to \mu\mu + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\;$ search, the limits show that models with dark matter masses below approximately $ 30 \; {\mathrm{GeV}}$ are ruled out for $|\lambda_\mu| = 2$, with the exclusion limit going down to $\sim 13 \; {\mathrm{GeV}}$ for $|\lambda_\mu| = \sqrt{4\pi}$. This corresponds to mediator masses below $360 \; {\mathrm{GeV}}$ for $|\lambda_\mu| = 2$ and $410 \; {\mathrm{GeV}}$ for $|\lambda_\mu| = \sqrt{4\pi}$. The $pp \to \mu\mu + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\;$ cross section mainly depends on $m_{\phi_l}$, so the limits on $m_\chi$ can be understood through its relation with $m_{\phi_l}$ given by the DM relic condition (\ref{eq:sigmav}) for a particular value of $\lambda_\mu$. The most stringent search involves final states with $2l + 0 j$, $2l$ and at least $2$ jets, or $3l$ and missing energy \cite{ATLAS:2017uun}. In particular, the most sensitive signal region is characterised by $2l + 0j$ and a dilepton invariant mass $m_{ll} > 300 \; {\mathrm{GeV}}$, and it is optimised to target slepton pair production.
The most remarkable result is that LHC limits completely exclude the scenario with $|\lambda_\mu| = 2$ and $\lambda_b = \lambda_s^*$, as well as a sizeable region of the scenario with $\lambda_b = 4\lambda_s^*$ for the same $|\lambda_\mu|$. These constraints become weaker for larger values of $|\lambda_\mu|$ and, for the scenarios with $|\lambda_\mu| = \sqrt{4\pi}$, most of the parameter space is allowed. It is crucial to note that the limits coming from final states with jets and leptons are complementary to each other. While the former exclude regions of the parameter space with large $m_\chi$ and small $m_{\phi_q}$, the latter rule out models with very heavy mediator masses $m_{\phi_q}$ and light dark matter. Importantly, these limits are also complementary to the ones coming from direct detection, where dark matter masses below $12 \; {\mathrm{GeV}}$ lie below the neutrino floor. Therefore, it is fundamental to consider both approaches to explore the model.
It is worth mentioning that the small couplings required by flavour constraints lead to decay widths slightly below the QCD scale for $m_{\phi_q} \lesssim 370 \; {\mathrm{GeV}}$. Strictly speaking, this means that the computation of the decay width cannot be handled perturbatively and that the new particle $\phi_q$ may hadronize into bound states with SM quarks, analogous to R-hadrons \cite{FARRAR1978575}, before decaying. However, the typical width involved is $\Gamma_{\phi_q} \sim \pazocal{O}(10^{-2})-\pazocal{O}(10^{-3}) \; {\mathrm{GeV}}$, which means lifetimes of the order $\tau \sim 10^{-22} \; \text{s}$, so any potential bound state would decay promptly in the detector. This region of the parameter space is excluded by ATLAS and CMS R-hadron searches \cite{Aad:2013gva,CMS-PAS-EXO-16-004}.
We have also studied the limits that could be obtained with $3000 \; \text{fb}^{-1}$ of 14~TeV data once the LHC High Luminosity phase \cite{Apollinari:2017cqg} is completed. As we can observe in the plots, the main gain would come from the leptonic channels, which would allow to test a considerable amount of the model's parameter space. In particular, scenarios with $|\lambda_\mu| < 2$ would be completely excluded. The experimental searches giving the strongest exclusion limits target the same final states and are shown in the low panel of Table \ref{tab:lhc_searches}.
\section{Direct DM detection prospects}
\label{sec:direct}
Finally, in this section we discuss whether our model is expected to produce an observable response in direct detection experiments. We have calculated this response, by matching the model parameters to effective DM-nucleon interaction terms,
\begin{equation}
{\cal L}_{\text{int}}=\sum_{N} \sum_i c_i^{N}\mathcal{O}_i \overline{\chi} \chi \overline{N} N\ ,
\label{eq:eft}
\end{equation}
where $N$ is the corresponding nucleon, and $\mathcal{O}_i$ is the set of non-relativistic operators \cite{Fan:2010gt,Fitzpatrick:2012ix}. The values for the coefficients $c_i^N$ can be derived as the non-relativistic limit of the original interaction Lagrangian, and the differential rate can be computed using the corresponding nuclear form factors from Refs.~\cite{Fitzpatrick:2012ix,Anand:2013yka}, and for a given choice of the DM halo properties. We have adopted the so-called standard halo model~\cite{Drukier:1986tm} with local DM density $\rho_{\chi}=0.4\ \textrm{GeV/cm}^3$, a central velocity of $v_0=220\ \textrm{km s}^{-1}$, and a escape speed of $v_{\textrm{esc}}=544\ \textrm{km s}^{-1}$ to calculate the number of expected recoils in a specific experiment.
The leading tree-level DM-quark interactions are given by scalar ($\overline{\chi}\chi\overline{\psi}\psi$) and vector ($\overline{\chi}\gamma^{\mu}\chi\overline{\psi}\gamma_{\mu}\psi$) type interactions. The latter is the leading contribution to $\mathcal{O}_1$ for Dirac DM \cite{Ibarra:2015fqa}, but it vanishes in the case of Majorana DM. For scalar type interactions Majorana DM does not in general vanish, but with our models chiral structure, it does. With sub-dominant couplings to the first generation of quarks, and given that $m_{\phi_q}>m_{\phi_l}$, one-loop contributions to the DM-nucleon scattering cross sections will generally be larger than the tree level process. The loop contributions for a generic fermionic DM that involve the exchange of a photon can be classified as electric and magnetic dipoles ($\overline{\chi}i\sigma^{\mu\nu}\gamma^5\chi F_{\mu\nu}$ and $\overline{\chi}\sigma^{\mu\nu}\chi F_{\mu\nu}$, respectively), anapole ($\overline{\chi}\gamma^{\mu}\gamma^5\chi\partial^{\nu}F_{\mu\nu}$), and charge radius ($\overline{\chi}\gamma^{\mu}\chi\partial^{\nu}F_{\mu\nu}$). However, in the particular case of Majorana DM considered in this work, the magnetic dipole and charge radius effective couplings are forbidden by charge conjugation symmetry. Thus, the dominant one-loop interaction is the anapole moment \cite{Ho:2012bg}. When taking the non-relativistic limit, the anapole moment gives contributions to the $\mathcal{O}_8$ and $\mathcal{O}_9$ operators \cite{Gresham:2014vja,DelNobile:2018dfg}, which are velocity and momentum dependent. In terms of the fundamental parameters of the model, the corresponding couplings read
\begin{eqnarray}
c_8&=& 2 e \mathcal{A} Q_N\nonumber \, ,\\
c_9&=& - e \mathcal{A} g_N \, ,
\end{eqnarray}
where $e$ is the electron charge, $Q_N$ is the nucleon charge, and $g_N$ are the nucleon g-factors ($g_p=5.59$ and $g_n=3.83$). The effective coupling to the anapole interaction term, $\mathcal{A}$, reads \cite{Kopp:2014tsa}
\begin{eqnarray}
\mathcal{A} = -\frac{e\,|\lambda_\mu|^2}{96\pi^2m_{\chi}^2}
\left[
\frac32 \log\frac{\mu}{\epsilon}
- \frac{1+3\mu-3\epsilon}{\sqrt{(\mu-1-\epsilon)^2-4\epsilon}}
\arctanh{\left(\frac{\sqrt{(\mu-1-\epsilon)^2-4\epsilon}}{\mu-1+\epsilon}\right)}
\right]\ ,
\end{eqnarray}
with $\mu\equiv m_{\phi_l}^{2}/m_{\chi}^2$ and $\epsilon\equiv m_l^2/m_{\chi}^2$. The nuclear responses to the $\mathcal{O}_8$ and $\mathcal{O}_9$ operators are markedly weaker than that of $\mathcal{O}_1$, which implies that, in general, the scattering cross section is very small and beyond current experimental limits. Furthermore, because our DM particle interacts with the quark sector, it is not a priori clear that the spin-independent $\mathcal{O}_1$ and spin-dependent $\mathcal{O}_4$ arising from the so-called twist-2 operator \cite{Hisano:2010ct,Hisano:2015bma,jubbthesis} and the axial vector operator respectively are still negligible.
Given the range of DM masses that we consider in this study, the main constraint is due to Xenon1T results \cite{Aprile:2018dbl}, which we simulate using the prescription outlined in appendix A of Ref.~\cite{Kavanagh:2018xeh}, achieving good agreement. As we can see in Figure~\ref{fig:anapole}, the theoretical predictions for this model are beyond the reach of current experimental searches. We also show the reach of future direct detection experiments. The LZ detector, will employ 5.6 tons of liquid xenon with 1000 days exposure as outlined in \cite{Akerib:2015cja,Mount:2017qzi}. The DarkSide-20k experiment\cite{Aalseth:2017fik}, is an argon detector which will employ $20$ tons of fiducial mass for a duration of 10 years. We have assumed that the DarkSide collaboration will be able to achieve a threshold energy of $5$ keV, a reasonable assumption considering the results from DarkSide-50 \cite{Agnes:2018ves}. For reference we have also calculated the neutrino floor for anapole interactions in the $(\mathcal{A},\, m_{\chi})$ plane. We have used the prescription described in Ref.\,\cite{Billard:2013qya} and the expected neutrino fluxes from Refs.~\cite{Gaisser:2002jj,Battistoni:2005pd,Horiuchi:2008jz,Serenelli:2011py,2013arXiv1301.0365H,Gelmini:2018ogy}. It is clear that our model favourably lays in a region of parameter space that would be probed by a generation of experiments with multi-ton targets, that can probe near or even slightly beyond the neutrino floor. Spectral analysis with the neutrino background compounded with annual modulation data, could provide complete discrimination between model and the anapole moment which is both velocity and momentum dependent.
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\hspace*{-0.5cm}\includegraphics[width=0.53\textwidth]{plots-final/anapole_plot_noLHC.png}\hspace*{-0.3cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.53\textwidth]{plots-final/anapole_plot_LHC.png}
\caption{Theoretical predictions for the anapole coupling, $\mathcal{A}$, as a function of the DM mass, $m_{\chi}$ for the four benchmark points: A1 (red points), A2 (green), B1 (orange), and B2 (blue). For comparison, we show the current exclusion line by Xenon1T \cite{Aprile:2018dbl} and the predicted reach of LZ \cite{Akerib:2015cja,Mount:2017qzi} and DarkSide-20k \cite{Aalseth:2017fik}. The shaded area represents the neutrino floor. The plot on the right-hand side incorporates LHC constraints, explained in more detail in Section\,\ref{sec:lhc}.}
\label{fig:anapole}
\end{figure}
\begin{figure}[t!]
\centering
\hspace*{-0.3cm}\includegraphics[width=0.53\textwidth]{plots-final/c1_noLHC4.png}\hspace*{-0.5cm}
\includegraphics[width=0.53\textwidth]{plots-final/c1_LHC_4.png}
\caption{The same as in Figure~\ref{fig:anapole}, but for the spin-independent coupling, $c_1$, that originates from the twist-2 coupling.
}
\label{fig:twist2}
\end{figure}
For completeness, we have also calculated the effect on the total scattering cross section from aforementioned twist-2 operator and spin-dependent interaction. The former contribute to the spin-independent scattering cross section (operator ${\cal{O}}_1$) and can be sizeable if the new coupling to quarks is large or the colour mediator is very light. We have explicitly checked that once LHC constraints are included in the parameter space of the model, these terms are always subdominant to the anapole term discussed above. We represent in Figure~\ref{fig:twist2} the theoretical predictions for $c_1$ as a function of the DM mass from this contribution. For the spin-dependent interaction, we found that the predicted rate for our sampled parameter space is always sub-dominant.
Had we chosen to work with a Dirac fermion, the dipole and charge radius contributions should have been added. As it has been pointed out in Ref.~\cite{Ibarra:2015fqa}, the fairly large coupling to muons that is required to explain the flavour anomalies leads to effective DM couplings that are orders of magnitude higher than those coming from the tree level contribution, the most important being the charge-radius interaction. This we have checked, and in fact above $m_{\chi}\sim 10$ GeV, all our parameter points are excluded by Xenon1T. Below $m_{\chi}\sim 10$, the model is excluded by both LHC constraints and indirect detection bounds. Unlike in the Majorana case, the s-wave contribution to the thermal cross section $\langle\sigma v\rangle$ is no longer helicity suppressed and hence excluded \cite{Leane:2018kjk}.
Our results suggest that future multi-ton direct detection experiments, such as DarkSide \cite{Aalseth:2017fik}, would be able to probe this model in the mass range $m_{\chi}\sim 10-60$~GeV. It is very interesting to point out that many of the points in this DM mass range feature very heavy $\phi_q$ and therefore would be beyond the reach of collider searches. In a sense, future direct DM detection and the LHC complement each other to probe a large part of the model's parameter space.
\section{Conclusions}
\label{sec:conclusions}
In this article, we have studied a particle physics model that addresses the hints of lepton flavour universality violation observed by LHCb in $b \rightarrow s\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ transitions, and that provides a solution to the dark matter problem. The scenario that we have analysed incorporates two new scalar fields and a Majorana fermion that provide one-loop contributions to $B$ meson decays.
The Majorana fermion is stable and can reproduce the observed DM relic abundance. We have studied the effect of new physics in flavour observables, for which $B_{s}-$mixing and $b \rightarrow s\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ processes provide the most important constraints. In order to find an explanation for the $B$ anomalies and to reduce the $1.8\,\sigma$ tension between the predicted and measured mass difference in $B_{s}-$mixing, complex couplings are needed. We have used results from the first global fit that takes into account this possibility. The combination of flavour bounds and constraints on the DM relic abundance leads to upper limits on the masses of the exotic states, and in general points towards a rather light DM candidate (with a mass $m_{\chi}\lesssim 200$~GeV).
We have studied the signatures that this model would produce at the LHC. The dominant processes are the pair production of the coloured and leptonic scalars. For the former, the strongest exclusion limits are given by $\text{dijet} + E_{\rm T} \hspace{-1.2em}/\;\;$ searches. For the latter, the final states are very clean, containing $1$ or $2$ leptons and missing energy. Both searches are complementary and exclude different regions of the parameter space, setting lower bounds on DM and mediator masses. The high-luminosity phase improves bounds coming from both searches, with dilepton being the most pronounced. The collider constraints are weakened when the $\lambda_{\mu}$ parameter is pushed towards the perturbative limit.
Finally, we have investigated how DM direct detection experiments constrain this model. Given the range of DM masses that we consider in this study, the main constraint is due to Xenon1T results. The small new couplings required by flavour constraints means that one-loop contributions to the DM-nucleon scattering cross section are generally larger than the tree level process. In particular, the dominant loop induced interaction is the anapole moment. We have shown that this model is not excluded by current data and could be probed by the next generation of experiments with multi-ton targets in the mass range $m_{\chi}\sim 10-60$~GeV.
\vspace*{2ex}
\noindent
{\Large{\bf Acknowledgements}}
We would like to thank Alejandro Ibarra for useful discussions. DC and AC are grateful for the support from the Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC). DC acknowledges the partial support of the Centro de Excelencia Severo Ochoa Program through the IFT-UAM/CSIC Associate programme.
PMR and JMM acknowledge support from the Spanish Research Agency (Agencia Estatal de Investigaci\'on) through the contract FPA2016-78022-P and IFT Centro de Excelencia Severo Ochoa under grant SEV-2016-0597.
\bibliographystyle{JHEP-cerdeno}
|
\section{Introduction} \label{sect:intro}
Near-Earth object (NEO) population models have predicted the existence of numerous Sun-approaching asteroids \citep[e.g.][]{Bottke2002, Greenstreet2012}, but after a few decades of rigorous NEO search, few have been found. It has been proposed that thermally-driven ``super-catastrophic'' disruption is responsible for an efficient removal of asteroids that reach a few tenths of an au \citep{Granvik2016}, but such a disruption has not been directly observed.
Rather than catching an asteroid disruption in action, it may be easier to detect the end product of a disruption. A cloud of dust debris resulting from a complete disintegration continues to orbit the Sun on the orbit of the disintegrated asteroid. A range of different effects such as ejection velocity, planetary perturbations and radiation pressure gradually disperse the dust cloud, most noticeably along the orbit, forming a dust (meteoroid) ``stream'' \citep[c.f.][]{Olsson-Steel1987, Brown1998, Williams2004}. The stream continues to disperse over time, eventually blending into the interplanetary meteoroid background \citep[e.g.][]{Cremonese1997e}. Until its dispersal, the meteoroid stream can be detected as a meteor shower on the Earth, if it is on an Earth-crossing orbit and dense enough to stand out from the interplanetary meteoroid background.
Optical and radio meteor surveillance systems, that have been in operation over the past a few decades, have detected a handful of meteoroid streams on Sun-approaching orbits \citep[e.g.][]{Brown2008, Jenniskens2016a}. A few prominent streams, such as the well-known Geminid meteoroid stream, are easily detectable and have been studied for decades \citep[e.g.][and many others]{Denning1893, Plavec1950, Whipple1983, Jones2016, Hui2017, Ryabova2018}. However, most of the Sun-approaching streams are weakly active and have not received a lot of attention \citep{Ye2018}. Many of these streams do not have identifiable parents, raising questions about their formation mechanism.
Here, we present an investigation of the population of Sun-approaching meteoroid streams, with the goal being to critically examine the hypothesis that some (or most) of these streams were produced by thermally-driven disruptions of asteroids with small perihelion distances ($q$). The investigation is divided into two complementary parts: on one hand we will predict the number of small-$q$ meteoroid streams formed by thermally-driven disruptions by utilizing an NEO population model (\S~\ref{sect:model}); on the other hand we will examine the small-$q$ streams that are actually observed (\S~\ref{sect:known}). Results from these two parts will be compared to each other and discussed in \S~\ref{sect:disc}.
\section{Predicted Characteristics of Thermally-Driven Streams} \label{sect:model}
\subsection{Size of the Parent and the Detectability of the Resulting Meteoroid Streams\footnote{The Jupyter notebook that shows the calculation of the numbers mentioned in this section can be found \href{https://github.com/Yeqzids/near-sun-disruptions/blob/master/nb/stream_mass.ipynb}{here}.}} \label{sect:model:size}
Meteor showers are essentially local overdensities of meteor radiants; therefore, meteoroid streams that are detectable need to stand out against the interplanetary meteoroid background. Since the flux intensity of a stream is directly related to the production rate of the parent, a disrupting parent needs to be massive enough to produce enough dust to supply a detectable stream. Therefore, the first question is the critical parent size needed to produce a detectable stream.
Radar and optical techniques are the most widely used methods to detect meteors \citep{Jenniskens2017}, therefore, in this work, we focus on the regimes explored by these two techniques. The detection limit of typical meteor radars are in the range of $\sim10^{-3}$ to $10^{-2}~\mathrm{km^{-2}~hr^{-1}}$, appropriate to meteoroid sizes down to 1~mm \citep{Ye2016,Ye2016b}, while for typical video systems, $10^{-5}$ to $10^{-4}~\mathrm{km^{-2}~hr^{-1}}$, appropriate to meteoroid sizes down to 1~cm \citep{Jenniskens2016a,Jenniskens2016}. These two numbers translate to a Zenith Hourly Rate (ZHR) of $\lesssim1$ using the relation derived by \citet[][\S~10]{Koschack1990}, assuming a typical duration of stream activity of a couple days, collection area (i.e., the area of atmosphere that one system monitors) of $10^4~\mathrm{km^2}$, a typical meteoroid mass index of $\sim1.6$ \citep{Blaauw2011}, and system uptime to be 6~hr each day, which is in the same ballpark as the typical background flux observed by visual observers.
The mass of a meteoroid stream can be calculated following the derivation of \citet{Hughes1989}:
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:msmass}
M = \frac{f \pi t^2 V_\mathrm{E}^2 I \sin{^2\epsilon} V_\mathrm{H} P}{4 V_\mathrm{G}}
\end{equation}
\noindent where $f\sim10$ is a dimensionless factor that accounts for the shape of the stream \citep{McIntosh1988}, $t$ is the duration of the meteor shower at the Earth in seconds, $V_\mathrm{E}=29700~\mathrm{m~s^{-1}}$ is the orbital speed of the Earth, $I$ is the mass influx at the Earth in $\mathrm{kg~m^{-2}~s^{-1}}$, $\epsilon$ is the angle between the Earth's path and the orbit of the stream, $V_\mathrm{H}$, $V_\mathrm{G}$ is the heliocentric and geocentric speed of the meteoroids, respectively, and $P$ is the orbital period of the meteoroids in seconds. Recognizing that such a calculation is only to be taken at an order of magnitude level, we take $\sin{\epsilon} \sim 1$, $V_\mathrm{H}/V_\mathrm{G} \sim 1$, average meteoroid density of $2000~\mathrm{kg~m^{-3}}$ \citep{Rotundi2015}, and the flux and meteoroid sizes discussed above, we derive $M\sim10^{11}$~kg as the minimum mass of the progenitor that is needed for the detection of the resulting meteoroid stream by contemporary meteor-detection networks. This number corresponds to a progenitor diameter of $\sim0.5$~km \citep[assuming a density of $2000~\mathrm{kg~m^{-3}}$, c.f.][]{Carry2012}. The stream mass derived from different observations can differ by a factor of 10 from the mean \citep{Ryabova2017}, which translates to a factor of $\sim2$ in the uncertainty of the progenitor size.
\subsection{Rate of Thermally-Driven Disruptions} \label{sect:model-rate}
How often does thermally-driven disruption occur? With some necessary simplification of the problem, this can be estimated using an NEO population model. Here we use the \citet{Granvik2018} model which considered the effect of thermally-driven disruption of NEOs. We start from the predicted flux of NEOs from known sources of NEOs in the main asteroid belt, and then multiply these fluxes with the predicted likelihood that an asteroid from a specific region of the main asteroid belt would reach the critical heliocentric distance from the Sun \citep[0.058~au for km-sized asteroids, as derived by][]{Granvik2016}. Finally, we sum up the products to arrive at a total rate of thermal disruptions of $550\pm30\,\mathrm{Myr}^{-1}$, where the error accounts for uncertainties in the flux of NEOs from different parts of the asteroid belt.
The result of our calculation is summarized in Table~\ref{tbl:model-rate}. We observe two things: (1) asteroids from the inner main-belt region (Hungarias, Phocaeas, low-inclination $\nu_6$ objects) are more likely to become Sun-approachers; and (2) asteroids from the inner main-belt region also tend to spend a longer time as Sun-approachers compared to outer main-belt asteroids. A direct implication of these two features is that meteoroid streams from the inner belt should dominate the thermally-driven streams, while streams with semimajor axes $a$ compatible with an origin in the outer belt are statistically unlikely to be thermally-driven disrupted asteroids.
\begin{table*}
\begin{center}
\caption{Probabilities that asteroids from different escape regions in the asteroid belt end up on Sun-approaching orbits ($P_\mathrm{sungrazer}$) as well as timescale that they have $q<0.14$~au prior to disruption at $q=0.058$~au ($t_\mathrm{sungrazer}$). Escape regions with the format of $X$:$Y$J stand for $X$:$Y$ mean-motion resonance with Jupiter. \label{tbl:model-rate}}
\begin{tabular}{ccc}
\hline
Escape region & $P_\mathrm{sungrazer}$ & $t_\mathrm{sungrazer}$ \\
\hline
Hungaria & 78\% & 13000~yr \\
Phocaea & 89\% & 1400~yr \\
$\nu_6$ complex & 81\% & 13000~yr \\
3:1J complex & 74\% & 2800~yr \\
5:2J complex & 22\% & 1500~yr \\
2:1J complex & 22\% & 700~yr \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Distribution and Behavior of Thermally-Produced Streams} \label{sect:model:sim}
\subsubsection{Simulation Setup}
We randomly select 1\% (608 out of 60,727) of the test asteroids in the orbital integrations by \citet{Granvik2016} that have perihelion distances within the critical disruption distance of $q_\ast=0.058$~au, representing the population of thermally disrupting asteroids (Figure~\ref{fig:neo-model}). We note that the ($a,\sin{i}$) distribution covers the essential parts of the phase space whereas the ($a,e$) distribution is limited to orbits with small perihelion distances, as it should be. We then generate a total of 500 particles for each test asteroid at their respective perihelion point, mimicking the thermally-driven disintegration of asteroids. The size distribution of these particles follows a size range of $a \subseteq [5\times10^{-4}, 5\times10^{-2}]$~m, a meteoroid bulk density of $2000~\mathrm{km~m^{-3}}$, and a continuous size distribution of $\mathrm{d}N/\mathrm{d}a \propto a^{-q}$ where $q=3.6$ as suggested by telescopic observations \citep[e.g.][]{Fulle2004a, Ye2016a}.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./neo-model.pdf}
\caption{$a$, $e$ and $\sin{i}$ of the synthetic asteroids drawn from \citet{Granvik2016}'s NEO population model. The overdensities produced by 7:2J (which coincides with Hungaria, Phocaea, and $\nu_6$ at low inclinations) and 3:1J resonance are marked. The Jupyter notebook for this figure is available \href{https://github.com/Yeqzids/near-sun-disruptions/blob/master/nb/test_asteroids.ipynb}{here}. \label{fig:neo-model}}
\end{figure*}
We integrate these sub-particles for 10~kyr using the Bulirsch-Stoer integrator \citep{Stoer2013} embedded in a tailored MERCURY6 $N$-body simulator \citep{Chambers1999,Ye2016}. The code accounts for gravitational perturbations by major planets (Mercury through Neptune with the Earth-Moon system represented by a single point of mass), radiation pressure, Poynting-Robertson drag, as well as perihelion shift due to general relativity. The orbital elements of all test particles are recorded with a cadence of 1~yr. The animation in Figure~\ref{fig:stream-sim} depicts the formation, evolution and final dispersion of a meteoroid stream.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./stream-sim.pdf}
\caption{Disruption of four randomly selected synthetic asteroids, assuming dust ejection at gravitational escape speed of a km-sized body. The Sun is marked by a white cross. The Jupyter notebook for this figure/animation is available \href{https://github.com/Yeqzids/near-sun-disruptions/blob/master/nb/test_asteroids.ipynb}{here}. \label{fig:stream-sim}}
\end{figure*}
The simulation is run two times with different ejection model: the first one with \citet{Crifo1997}'s cometary ejection model\footnote{Readers may wonder about choosing \citet{Crifo1997}'s model over the \citet{Whipple1951}'s model. These two models are derived from different approaches but produced similar end results. As we will show in the following section, the choice of ejection model does not have significant impact on our conclusion, and is hence unimportant.}; and the second one with an ejection model that assumes gravitational escape ejection (i.e. eject at escape velocity). This is due to the poorly understood ejection scheme of a thermally-driven disruption, but it is reasonable to expect that the ejection speed should be somewhere between the one set by cometary model and the one set by gravitational escape model. Here we note that C/2015 D1 (SOHO), a Sun-approaching comet that disintegrated during its perihelion passage in early 2015 with excess thermal stress as the likely cause, showed morphology consistent with comet-like ejection \citep{Hui2015}; however, C/2015 D1 is of cometary origin and the lesson it provided may not be applicable to asteroids.
We also acknowledge that the information provided by 500 particles per test asteroid is somewhat limited, considering that many meteoroid stream simulations account for thousands of particles. We are mainly limited by the high computational cost of the simulation: the full simulation of 608 meteoroid streams over 10~kyrs with two sets of input parameters takes about 50 CPU years on a single 2.2~GHz AMD Opteron CPU, though with distributed computing we are able to complete our simulation within a few months. The exact numbers derived for each stream become less important as we collectively examine a large set of streams, which we believe is sufficient for deriving a broad, global picture of asteroid disruptions close to the Sun.
\subsubsection{Calculation of Stream Formation, Dispersion, and Visible Timescale}
Following the definition in our earlier work \citep{Ye2016}, we define the stream formation time as the time taken to the point that the standard deviation of the mean anomalies of the test particles reach $60^\circ$ (i.e. the $3\sigma$ limits cover the entire orbit if the distribution of mean anomalies is Gaussian), while the stream-dispersal timescale is defined as the time it takes for $50\%$ of the test particles to lose stream coherency. The stream coherency is defined using the \citet{Southworth1963}'s decoherence parameter ($D$), which is defined as:
\begin{equation}
D_{A, B}^2 = \left(q_B - q_A \right)^2 + \left( e_B - e_A \right)^2 + \left( 2\sin{ \frac{I}{2} } \right)^2 + \left[ \left(e_A + e_B \right) \sin{ \frac{\varPi}{2} } \right]^2
\end{equation}
where
\begin{equation}
I = \arccos{ \left[ \cos{i_A} \cos{i_B} + \sin{i_A} \sin{i_B} \cos{\left( \varOmega_A - \varOmega_B \right)} \right]}
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\varPi = \omega_A - \omega_B + 2 \arcsin{ \left( \cos{\frac{i_A+i_B}{2}} \sin{\frac{\varOmega_A-\varOmega_B}{2}} \sec{\frac{I}{2}} \right) }
\end{equation}
\noindent and the subscripts $A$ and $B$ refer to the two test particles being compared, $q$ is the perihelion distance in au, $e$ is the eccentricity, $i$ is the inclination, $\Omega$ is the longitude of ascending node, and $\omega$ is the argument of perihelion. The sign of the $\arcsin$ term in the equation for $\varPi$ switches over if $|\Omega_A-\Omega_B|>180^\circ$. We adopt an empirical cutoff of $D=0.1$ used by many of the past works \citep[e.g.][]{Drummond1981, Jopek1993}, noting that cutoffs found by more rigorous tests \citep[e.g.][]{Fu2005a, Moorhead2016} are not substantially different from $D=0.1$.
Streams cannot be detected unless they intercept the Earth's orbit, therefore we also need to calculate their ``visible time'' at Earth. A stream is considered to be ``visible'' if the spread of either or both of the heliocentric distances of their ascending/descending nodes encompass 1~au (Earth's average distance to the Sun) before it disperses. We then sum up the time that stream is visible to derive the ``visible timescale'' at the Earth.
\subsubsection{Results} \label{sect:model:result}
We find that results from different ejection models are not dramatically different: the ``cometary'' model predicts a median formation and dispersion timescale of $6\pm1$~yr and $170_{-130}^{+1500}$~yr, while the gravitational escape model predicts $8\pm1$~yr and $280_{-240}^{+2000}$~yr; both ejection models predict that $\sim75\%$ of the simulated streams will be visible at some point during their lifetime, for a median total time of $40_{-25}^{+140}$~yr\footnote{The Jupyter notebook for this calculation is available \href{https://github.com/Yeqzids/near-sun-disruptions/blob/master/nb/formation_and_dispersion_timescales.ipynb}{here}.}. (Error bars indicate $1\sigma$ probability interval.) The formation and dispersion timescales are significantly shorter than for typical (non-Sun-approaching) meteoroid streams, which take $400\pm80$~yr to form and $3000\pm300$~yr to disperse \citep{Ye2016}.
Figure~\ref{fig:time-a-tj} shows the dependence of various timescales to orbital elements $a$ and $T_\mathrm{J}$. No clear dependence is seen between the formation timescale and dynamical properties of the parent. The dispersion and visible timescales, on the other hand, show a clear dependence on whether the stream is on a Jupiter-approaching orbit (which can be measured by $T_\mathrm{J}$) or close to resonances. Streams that are dynamically decoupled from Jupiter (i.e. $T_\mathrm{J}>3$) are longer-lived than those that are not, except for the streams that originate from parents close to resonances (Hungaria, Phocaea, 7:2J, or 3:1J complex).
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./time-a-tj.pdf}
\caption{Different timescales of the simulated meteoroid streams as well as their dependence on $a$ and $T_\mathrm{J}$ of the streams. Distributions are drawn from the simulations that assume ejection at gravitational escape speed. The formation timescales (the two upper panels) look discrete as they are comparable to the output interval of the integration (1~yr). The Jupyter notebook for this figure is available \href{https://github.com/Yeqzids/near-sun-disruptions/blob/master/nb/timescales_a_tj.ipynb}{here}. \label{fig:time-a-tj}}
\end{figure*}
One key takeaway from Figure~\ref{fig:time-a-tj} is that thermally-produced meteoroid streams have very short visibility at the Earth, due to the fact that they are mostly shortly-lived and are dynamically quickly evolving. Given a typical visible timescale of $40$~yr, if we consider the disruption rate of km-sized NEOs that we derived in \S~\ref{sect:model-rate}, which is $\sim0.6$~kyr$^{-1}$, we can immediately see that the chance of seeing a thermally-produced meteoroid stream is close to zero.
\section{Known Sun-approaching Meteoroid Streams} \label{sect:known}
The official catalog of meteor showers is managed by the International Astronomical Union's Meteor Data Center \citep[IAUMDC;][]{Jopek2011,Jopek2014,Jopek2017}. Under the current rule of meteor shower nomenclature, a previously unreported stream will be added to the Working List of Meteor Showers, but will only be considered for ``established'' status when it is independently re-detected by other observers \citep{Jopek2014, Janches2018}. Promotion of status and assignment of official names is overseen by the IAU F1 Commission during the triennial General Assemblies (GA) meeting. Currently, the most recent version of the IAUMDC catalog was reviewed at GA meeting in August 2018 and dated 2018 November 9. This version has a total of 932 meteor showers with 112 of them considered to be established and will be used in the analysis in this work. Since showers on the Working List are to be considered provisional detections and thus subjected to removal if they cannot be confirmed, we will focus on the established showers for now.
Table~\ref{tbl:shr} lists all 22 established Sun-approaching meteoroid streams in the IAUMDC catalog that have perihelion distance $q<0.15$~au. A loose cutoff at 0.15~au is chosen because the Geminids/GEM\footnote{For readability, from now on we will use the IAUMDC three-letter code to refer to a shower. The full name of the shower is listed in Table~\ref{tbl:shr}.} stream, the prominent candidate for thermally-produced streams, has $q=0.14$~au. The 22 streams have the following characteristics:
\begin{enumerate}
\item 8 have $T_\mathrm{J}<2$ (i.e. compatible with orbits of Halley-type and long-period comets). Even though only one of them has a proposed parent body which is a comet \citep[KLE and C/1917 F1, c.f.][]{Veres2011,Neslusan2014}, they are most likely to be produced by comets based on their dynamical properties.
\item 4 have $2<T_\mathrm{J}<3$. This type of orbit is compatible with Jupiter-family comets and asteroidal interlopers \citep{Levison1994,Jewitt2015,Hsieh2016}. Among these showers, SDA has a proposed parent (the 96P/Machholz complex) that is considered to be rather definitive \citep[e.g.][]{Abedin2017,Abedin2018}.
\item 10 have $T_\mathrm{J}>3$ that are dynamically in the asteroid regime. The 96P/Machholz Complex is thought to be responsible for ARI \citep{Bruzzone2014,Abedin2017,Abedin2018}, a stream that is near the borderline of $T_\mathrm{J}=3$, while (3200) Phaethon and (155140) 2005 UD are widely believed to be the parents of the Geminids and Daytime Sextantids. IAUMDC lists 3 comets found by the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO) probe as likely parents for NOC, NZC and OCE, but no reference is provided and we cannot find any published papers that discussed these linkages; additionally, the orbits of these SOHO comets are poorly known due to the extremely short arc (less than a day for two of the comets, a week for the third), therefore the linkages are doubtful. In either case, there are 4--7 dynamically asteroidal streams that have no known parent bodies associated with them.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{table*}
\tiny
\begin{center}
\caption{Established showers in the IAUMDC database with $q<0.15$~au. Listed parameters are IAUMDC's three-letter code and name, solar longitude of peak activity, radiant in J2000 reference frame and geocentric speed at peak activity, orbital elements including $a$, $e$, $i$, and $T_\mathrm{J}$, the technique that detected the shower (O = optical, R = radar), the estimated age from \S~\ref{sect:known:age-estimate} (if available), and proposed parent body in the IAUMDC catalog. The data spreadsheet is available \href{https://github.com/Yeqzids/near-sun-disruptions/blob/master/data/streamfulldata_established.csv}{here} and a Jupyter notebook that used to prepare this table available \href{https://github.com/Yeqzids/near-sun-disruptions/blob/master/nb/shower_table_established.ipynb}{here}. \label{tbl:shr}}
\begin{tabular}{lccccccccccl}
\hline
IAUMDC code/name & $\lambda_\odot$ & \multicolumn{2}{c}{Radiant} & $V_\mathrm{G}$ & $a$ & $e$ & $i$ & $T_\mathrm{J}$ & Tech. & Est. age & Parent body \\
& & RA & Decl. & (km/s) & (au) & & & & & (kyr) & \\
\hline
AAN $\alpha$ Antliids & 313.1$^\circ$ & 160.7$^\circ$ & -11.9$^\circ$ & 43.9 & 2.4 & 0.94 & 62.7$^\circ$ & 2.5 & O+R & 4 & \\
ARI Daytime Arietids & 76.2$^\circ$ & 42.5$^\circ$ & +24.0$^\circ$ & 38.2 & 1.9 & 0.95 & 24.6$^\circ$ & 3.2 & O+R & 5 & 96P/Machholz complex \\
CTA $\chi$ Taurids & 220.5$^\circ$ & 63.1$^\circ$ & +25.4$^\circ$ & 41.6 & 4.9 & 0.98 & 13.7$^\circ$ & 1.4 & O+R & - & \\
DLT Daytime $\lambda$ Taurids & 85.5$^\circ$ & 56.7$^\circ$ & +11.5$^\circ$ & 36.4 & 1.6 & 0.93 & 23.2$^\circ$ & 3.7 & O+R & 5.5 & \\
DSX Daytime Sextantids & 186.7$^\circ$ & 155.0$^\circ$ & -1.6$^\circ$ & 31.8 & 1.1 & 0.86 & 22.5$^\circ$ & 5.1 & O+R & 6-7 & (155140) 2005 UD \\
EPG $\epsilon$ Pegasids & 108.6$^\circ$ & 329.9$^\circ$ & +14.5$^\circ$ & 28.6 & 0.7 & 0.78 & 49.7$^\circ$ & 7.3 & O+R & 6-9 & \\
EPR $\epsilon$ Perseids & 91.1$^\circ$ & 55.7$^\circ$ & +37.6$^\circ$ & 44.3 & 7.3 & 0.98 & 57.1$^\circ$ & 1.0 & O+R & - & \\
GEM Geminids & 261.6$^\circ$ & 113.0$^\circ$ & +32.3$^\circ$ & 34.5 & 1.4 & 0.90 & 23.5$^\circ$ & 4.2 & O+R & 6.5-7 & (3200) Phaethon \\
JLE January Leonids & 282.5$^\circ$ & 148.1$^\circ$ & +23.9$^\circ$ & 52.1 & 5.7 & 0.99 & 105.8$^\circ$ & 0.8 & O+R & - & \\
KLE Daytime $\kappa$ Leonids & 182.1$^\circ$ & 162.2$^\circ$ & +15.3$^\circ$ & 43.4 & 20.2 & 0.99 & 25.0$^\circ$ & 0.9 & R & - & C/1917 F1 (Mellish) \\
NDA Northern $\delta$ Aquariids & 140.6$^\circ$ & 345.6$^\circ$ & +1.0$^\circ$ & 39.2 & 2.2 & 0.96 & 22.0$^\circ$ & 2.8 & O+R & 4-5 & \\
NOC Northern Daytime $\omega$ Cetids & 46.6$^\circ$ & 5.7$^\circ$ & +17.6$^\circ$ & 34.9 & 1.3 & 0.91 & 38.1$^\circ$ & 4.7 & O+R\tablenotemark{a} & 6.5-7 & See note\tablenotemark{b} \\
NOO November Orionids & 245.9$^\circ$ & 89.1$^\circ$ & +15.4$^\circ$ & 43.1 & 11.2 & 0.99 & 36.2$^\circ$ & 0.8 & O+R & - & \\
NZC Northern June Aquilids & 99.1$^\circ$ & 308.4$^\circ$ & -5.1$^\circ$ & 37.8 & 1.7 & 0.93 & 38.8$^\circ$ & 3.4 & O+R & 6 & See note\tablenotemark{c} \\
OCE Southern Daytime $\omega$ Cetids & 46.4$^\circ$ & 20.7$^\circ$ & -5.6$^\circ$ & 36.7 & 1.6 & 0.92 & 35.1$^\circ$ & 3.5 & R & 6 & See note\tablenotemark{b} \\
PAU Piscis Austrinids & 131.2$^\circ$ & 350.2$^\circ$ & -22.1$^\circ$ & 44.0 & 4.4 & 0.97 & 58.6$^\circ$ & 1.5 & O+R & - & \\
SDA Southern $\delta$ Aquariids & 126.8$^\circ$ & 336.4$^\circ$ & -16.1$^\circ$ & 40.9 & 2.6 & 0.97 & 28.7$^\circ$ & 2.3 & O+R & 4 & 96P/Machholz complex \\
SSE $\sigma$ Serpentids & 275.5$^\circ$ & 243.5$^\circ$ & -1.7$^\circ$ & 43.5 & 2.7 & 0.93 & 62.1$^\circ$ & 2.4 & O+R & 4 & \\
SZC Southern June Aquilids & 88.2$^\circ$ & 307.3$^\circ$ & -31.4$^\circ$ & 37.0 & 1.4 & 0.93 & 41.9$^\circ$ & 4.2 & O+R & 3.5-7 & \\
THA November $\theta$ Aurigids & 240.5$^\circ$ & 92.3$^\circ$ & +34.7$^\circ$ & 33.1 & 1.1 & 0.89 & 26.4$^\circ$ & 5.0 & O+R & 4-8 & \\
XRI Daytime $\xi$ Orionids & 123.7$^\circ$ & 98.7$^\circ$ & +15.9$^\circ$ & 42.6 & 6.8 & 0.98 & 27.3$^\circ$ & 1.1 & R & - & \\
ZCA Daytime $\zeta$ Cancrids & 153.5$^\circ$ & 127.9$^\circ$ & +15.3$^\circ$ & 43.0 & 4.8 & 0.99 & 18.9$^\circ$ & 1.4 & R & - & \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{center}
\tablenotetext{a}{The IAUMDC catalog (version 2018 November 9) listed only radar detection of this shower, but optical detection has been reported by \citet{Jenniskens2018}.}
\tablenotetext{b}{The IAUMDC catalog gives C/2003 Q1 (SOHO) as a likely parent, but we find no published research that proposed or discussed this linkage. The orbit of C/2003 Q1 (SOHO) is based on extremely short arc (less than a day), therefore the linkage is questionable.}
\tablenotetext{c}{The IAUMDC catalog gives C/1997 H2 (SOHO) and C/2009 U10 (SOHO) as likely parents, but we find no published research that proposed or discussed this linkage. Orbits of these two comets are based on very short arcs (6 days for C/1997 H2, 1 day for C/2009 U10). The linkages are therefore questionable.}
\end{table*}
\subsection{Ages of Meteoroid Streams}
\subsubsection{Age-Width-$T_\mathrm{J}$ Map} \label{sect:age:map}
Aside from the orbit, which gives us an idea of the dynamical properties of a stream, another piece of useful information that we can get from meteor observations is the age of the stream. As noted in \S~\ref{sect:intro}, the stream age correlates to the dispersion of the stream, which can be measured through the width of the stream as the Earth travels through the orbital intersection, i.e., the duration of the shower activity. Although an accurate determination of the age requires knowledge of a number of poorly constrained parameters, such as how meteoroids are ejected as well as their physical and mechanical properties, and is therefore difficult if not impossible to carry out, a crude comparison between the observed shower width and dynamical models is usually sufficient to broadly constrain the age of a stream. This has been done for many meteoroid streams including Quadrantids, Perseids, Geminids and others \citep[e.g.][]{Williams1993,Brown1998, Ryabova1999,Abedin2018}.
However, this method requires \textit{a priori} knowledge of the orbit of the parent, since the dynamics of the stream and the parent evolve over time and are not fully correlated with each other. Most of the streams in Table~\ref{tbl:shr} do not have known parents and, as we have shown earlier, Sun-approaching streams evolve faster than typical meteoroid streams. Therefore we must seek a different path to achieve our goal.
Our solution is to reuse the $N$-body simulations completed in \S~\ref{sect:model} to map the dependence between age, stream width, and $T_\mathrm{J}$. $T_\mathrm{J}$ is one of the variables here since the perturbation from Jupiter is a dominant factor of the dynamical evolution of meteoroid streams. The major benefit of this method is that it bypasses the need to know the parent's orbit, since the set of possible orbits of the parent is already captured by the NEO population model.
We focus on the 14 $T_\mathrm{J}>2$ streams in Table~\ref{tbl:shr}, as we are most interested in the thermally-driven disruptions of asteroids and the NEO population model is not applicable to $T_\mathrm{J}<2$ objects. To generate the age-width-$T_\mathrm{J}$ map, we first determine the width of the stream and the mean $T_\mathrm{J}$ for each simulated stream at each time step. The stream width is defined as the $90\%$ width of the longitude of the ascending node ($\Omega$), the point where the particle passes the ecliptic plane (i.e. the plane of Earth's orbit). The $90\%$ percentile is used to reject the few random particles that might have been gravitationally scattered during the integration. Mean $T_\mathrm{J}$ is defined as the mean of the $T_\mathrm{J}$ values of all particles. We calculate the mean stream width and $T_\mathrm{J}$ for every time step until the stream has lost $50\%$ of the particles (due to solar impact or ejection from the Solar System) or the end of the integration has been reached. To increase the clarity of the map, we apply a Gaussian filter with $\sigma=3.0$ (an arbitrarily chosen number) to the derived age-width-$T_\mathrm{J}$ map to remove sharp gradients resulting from limited statistics.
The aforementioned procedure is applied to the simulation results obtained from both the cometary ejection model and the gravitational escape ejection model. The raw input as well as the final processed age-width-$T_\mathrm{J}$ map are shown in Figures~\ref{fig:age-width-tj-cmt} and \ref{fig:age-width-tj-grav}. Our primary goal here is to validate the accuracy of this map and use it to estimate the ages of the streams in Table~\ref{tbl:shr}, but prior to validation we do note the following general features of the map:
\begin{enumerate}
\item As expected, streams at higher $T_\mathrm{J}$ are generally longer-lived than those at lower $T_\mathrm{J}$.
\item Broadly speaking, there is a visible albeit not dramatic difference between the maps derived from cometary ejection model and gravitational escape ejection model, consistent with the numbers we derived in \S~\ref{sect:model}.
\item The raw inputs (the upper panel of each figure) show broken short segments: this is because some evolved streams have $>10\%$ particles scattered into very different orbits and therefore bloat the stream width. The stream width shrinks once these highly unstable particles are ejected from the Solar System.
\item The raw inputs also show appreciable scatters of age values across the $T_\mathrm{J}$-width space, which seems to undermine our method. However, we note that neither $T_\mathrm{J}$ nor stream width can be tightly constrained from observations, and that our goal is to identify broad ranges of evolutionary ages compatible with the observations. The validation, to be described below, confirms that our estimates are broadly consistent with the ones derived from stream-specific models. Therefore, the scattering is not of a concern for our purpose.
\item A small but non-negligible fraction of the streams have evolved from low $T_\mathrm{J}$ to high $T_\mathrm{J}$, which we will discuss later.
\end{enumerate}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./sim-width-tj-cmt.pdf}
\caption{Raw (top) and smoothed (bottom) age-width-$T_\mathrm{J}$ map using cometary ejection model. The Jupyter notebook for this figure is available \href{https://github.com/Yeqzids/near-sun-disruptions/blob/master/nb/age_map.ipynb}{here}. \label{fig:age-width-tj-cmt}}
\end{figure*}
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./sim-width-tj-grav.pdf}
\caption{Raw (top) and smoothed (bottom) age-width-$T_\mathrm{J}$ map using gravitational escape ejection model. The Jupyter notebook for this figure is available \href{https://github.com/Yeqzids/near-sun-disruptions/blob/master/nb/age_map.ipynb}{here}. \label{fig:age-width-tj-grav}}
\end{figure*}
Dynamics of several streams in Table~\ref{tbl:shr} have been previously studied by other researchers, providing an opportunity for a sanity check. These streams are marked in both figures: \citet{Abedin2017} and \citet{Abedin2018} reported the age of ARI, DLT, NDA and SDA (all originated from the 96P/Machholz complex) to be 10--20~kyr; various studies on GEM suggested an age of a few kyr \citep[c.f.][]{Nesluvsan2015}.
We mark the locations of ARI, DLT, NDA, SDA and GEM on Figures~\ref{fig:age-width-tj-cmt} and \ref{fig:age-width-tj-grav}, using the stream width used by the original research \citep[for GEM, we use the most recent visual data that has been used for some of the recent modeling work, c.f.][]{Arlt2006, Ryabova2016} and $T_\mathrm{J}$ calculated from the mean orbit provided by IAUMDC.
At the first glance, estimates using our map agree well on the age of the Geminids but underestimate the age of the 96P/Machholz streams. The main reason for that is that \citet{Abedin2017} and \citet{Abedin2018} assumed continuous ejection from 96P/Machholz, while we assume one-time ejection to mimic thermal disruption events. Assuming constant ejection rate and meteoroid delivery efficiency, the age derived from continuous ejection model should be twice as long as one-time ejection model, which suggests that our estimate is, in fact, in line with the numbers derived by \citet{Abedin2017} and \citet{Abedin2018}.
\subsubsection{Estimating the Age} \label{sect:known:age-estimate}
To estimate the age using the age-width-$T_\mathrm{J}$ map, we need the width and $T_\mathrm{J}$ of the stream. $T_\mathrm{J}$ can be readily calculated using the orbits provided by the IAUMDC catalog, but the stream width (i.e., the duration of the shower activity) is not directly provided. Therefore, we look at the original work that published these showers to obtain information on activity duration. For optical streams, the most recent measurements can be obtained from the Cameras for Allsky Meteor Surveillance (CAMS) composite shower look-up table. The most recent release of the table is version 2018-1, which can be accessed at \url{http://cams.seti.org/FDL/data/CAMS-ShowerLookUpTable-v2018-01.txt} \citep{Jenniskens2018}. For radar streams, we use the catalog compiled by \citet{Brown2010}, which is based on the meteor orbits measured by the Canadian Meteor Orbit Radar (CMOR), the largest dataset of its kind.
We then overlay the \{width, $T_\mathrm{J}$\} points of the stream-of-interest on the age-width-$T_\mathrm{J}$ map, shown as Figure~\ref{fig:shr-age}. From now on we will stick to the map generated by the gravitational escape ejection model, since it is not essentially different from the one generated by the cometary ejection model, and is more plausible for thermally-driven activity. The map suggests that all these streams have an age of a couple kyr, but as the sanity check by using the 96P/Machholz streams discussed above has shown, these age estimates are somewhat dependent on how the particles are ejected. This will be discussed in greater detail in \S~\ref{sect:known:bias}.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./shr-age.pdf}
\caption{Sun-approaching streams with $T_\mathrm{J}>2$ on age-width-$T_\mathrm{J}$ map, assuming ejection at gravitational escape speed. To assist viewing, optical/radar data of the same stream is connected with thin lines. Note that OCE has no optical detection. The Jupyter notebook for this figure is available \href{https://github.com/Yeqzids/near-sun-disruptions/blob/master/nb/age_map.ipynb}{here}. \label{fig:shr-age}}
\end{figure*}
One curious finding is the disagreement on the width of the same stream between optical and radar data: the difference can get up to a factor of 10 in extreme cases (e.g., THA). We note that the GEM optical measurement obtained from the CAMS shower look-up table is also about 7 times wider than earlier measurements shown in \citet{Ryabova2016}. There are two explanations for the difference: uncertainty in the determination of the start and end time of meteor showers may be the culprit \citep[e.g.][\S~4]{Brown2008}, or, the fact that optical and radar systems are sensitive to different size regime of meteoroids. It is difficult to determine which one is more important or if they are equally important. For the latter explanation, there are known examples where the meteoroid size distribution varies across a stream \citep{Campbell-Brown2006a, Ye2014}. Fortunately, the difference does not make a dramatic impact on the age estimates. Even for streams with optical-radar width of a factor of 10, the difference between the resulting age estimates is only up to a factor of 2.
To conclude, even after considering different modes of ejection (instantaneous vs. continuous ejection) and the uncertainty in stream width, the ages of the streams in Table~\ref{tbl:shr} are on the order of a few kyrs with uncertainties likely within a factor of $\sim2$.
\subsection{Possible Biases and Implication} \label{sect:known:bias}
If we compare the derived ages with the dispersion timescale derived in \S~\ref{sect:model:result}, we immediately note that the estimated ages are consistently on the longer side of the predicted dispersion timescale. So where are the young streams?
One plausible explanation is that our consideration of ``established'' showers introduce a bias against young, short-duration, and therefore hard-to-confirm streams. According to Figures~\ref{fig:age-width-tj-cmt} and~\ref{fig:age-width-tj-grav}, streams younger than $\sim1$~kyr are active for less than about a day, and are thus difficult to detect and confirm unless they are strong.
Could the IAUMDC Working List contain some of the young showers? We examine the Working List and plot any qualified showers to the age-width-$T_\mathrm{J}$ map (Figure~\ref{fig:shr-age-working}). There are a few candidates, such as APG ($3^\circ$), DRG ($3^\circ$), TOP ($4^\circ$), and KCT ($5^\circ$), alongside with many low $T_\mathrm{J}$ streams that are only seen by optical systems. It is difficult to say how many short-duration streams we have missed, but the possibility of bias is real. The deployment of optical and radar network across the world \citep[e.g.][]{Janches2015,Pokorny2017, Jenniskens2018, Li2018} will increase the temporal coverage and orbit statistics and enhance our understanding of young streams.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./shr-age-working.pdf}
\caption{Same as Figure~\ref{fig:shr-age}, but showing Working List showers. All of these showers have only either radar or optical detections. The Jupyter notebook for this figure is available \href{https://github.com/Yeqzids/near-sun-disruptions/blob/master/nb/age_map.ipynb}{here}. \label{fig:shr-age-working}}
\end{figure*}
Another possibility is that these streams are trapped in resonances and are therefore somewhat immune against dispersion. To test this hypothesis, we plot the semimajor axes of the streams over Figure~\ref{fig:time-a-tj}, with the results shown in Figure~\ref{fig:time-a-tj-known}. We do not find clear concentrations near the 7:2J and 3:1J resonances; in fact, as indicated by the distribution of $T_\mathrm{J}$, about half of these streams are decoupled from Jupiter so that they are immune to the perturbation from Jupiter. On a separate note, this is also consistent with the finding in \S~\ref{sect:model-rate}, that objects from the inner parts of the asteroid belt are more likely to thermally disrupt than those from the outer asteroid belt.
\begin{figure*}
\includegraphics[width=\textwidth]{./time-a-tj-known.pdf}
\caption{Same as Figure~\ref{fig:time-a-tj} but with the estimated age of known streams overlaid. When applicable, extended lines over Y-axis show the difference between radar-based estimates and optical-based estimates. The Jupyter notebook for this figure is available \href{https://github.com/Yeqzids/near-sun-disruptions/blob/master/nb/timescales_established.ipynb}{here}. \label{fig:time-a-tj-known}}
\end{figure*}
\section{Discussion} \label{sect:disc}
If we compare the model prediction made in \S~\ref{sect:model} to the observations presented in \S~\ref{sect:known}, a clear disagreement is revealed: the model predicts that the likelihood of detecting any thermally-driven stream at the Earth is (visible timescale at the Earth) $\times$ (likelihood of being visible at the Earth) $\times$ (rate of disruption). By plugging in the numbers derived in \S~\ref{sect:model-rate} and~\ref{sect:model:result}, this will be $40$~yr $\times 75\% \times 0.6~\mathrm{kyr^{-1}}=0.02$, or 1 in 50. However, observations have revealed a dozen Sun-approaching streams that are dynamically compatible with asteroids and have no known parents. If all these streams were produced by thermally-driven disruptions, it would require a disruption rate of (number of streams) $\div$ (visible timescale at the Earth) $\div$ (likelihood of being visible at the Earth), or $10\div40\div75\%$~yr$~=300~\mathrm{kyr^{-1}}$, which is $\sim500$ times higher than model prediction. Even if we exclusively focus on the streams with $T_\mathrm{J}>3$, which have a visible probability of $90\%$ and a median visible timescale of $600$~yr\footnote{Details of the calculation can be found in the Jupyter notebook, available \href{https://github.com/Yeqzids/near-sun-disruptions/blob/master/nb/tj_gt_3_streams.ipynb}{here}.}, the likelihood of detection is $600$~yr $\times 90\% \times 0.6~\mathrm{kyr^{-1}}=0.3$. Such a disagreement clearly implies a problem with the assumptions, and the problem may be:
\begin{enumerate}
\item an underestimation of the rate of thermally-driven disruptions from the NEO population model;
\item contamination from sources other than thermally-driven disruption; or
\item a different ejection regime than assumed in our model.
\end{enumerate}
Some educated guesses of the properties of the (ex-)parents may provide clues. Equation~\ref{eq:msmass} shows that the stream mass is proportional to the square of the duration of activity, and it is the deterministic variable for the total stream mass, as (for short-period streams) contributions from other variables are not significant. In the highly idealized example that we discussed in \S~\ref{sect:model:size}, a complete disruption of a 500~m, $10^{11}$~kg asteroid will produce a shower that lasts 5~days. A shower that lasts 10 times longer (more in line with the results in Figure~\ref{fig:shr-age}) would require a 100 times more massive parent (i.e. $10^{13}$~kg in mass), or 2~km in size. For streams that are produced as a result of cometary activity instead of complete disruptions, the parents are larger in size: a close comparison might be the streams that were produced by the 10-km-diameter comet 1P/Halley ($\eta$ Aquarids and Orionids), which is collectively $3\times10^{13}$~kg in mass \citep{Hughes1989}, although we acknowledge that smaller comets could also be responsible for massive streams if they are sufficiently active.
\subsection{Underestimation from the NEO Population Model}
Underestimation from the \citet{Granvik2016} model would imply that the number of thermally-driven disruptions of km-sized bodies over the past $\sim10$~kyr is 1--2 orders of magnitudes more frequent than what \citet{Granvik2016} model predicts. However, \citet{Granvik2016}'s model does otherwise agree well with the observed NEO population, and other models based on a similar modeling approach also show good agreement with the observational data \citep[e.g.][]{Bottke2002, Greenstreet2012}. Therefore, this scenario seems unlikely.
\subsection{Contamination of Streams Produced by Other Mechanisms} \label{disc:comets}
Most known meteoroid streams are produced by comets and therefore one could speculate that Sun-approaching comets may have supplied some of the streams in Table~\ref{tbl:shr}. Compared to thermally-driven disruptions of asteroids, that will convert the entire mass into a meteoroid stream, comets are more ``sustainable'' and only deposit a fraction of its mass to the meteoroid stream as they orbit the Sun (unless they disrupt), and therefore need to be larger in size. However, the streams produced by comets will also be longer-lived since they will be continuously replenished. Especially comets in the Lidov-Kozai resonance like 96P/Machholz will periodically return to low-$q$ zone \citep{Levison2014}, and they can therefore potentially maintain a stream for a very long time.
However, half of the streams in Table~\ref{tbl:shr} are dynamically asteroidal. This scenario also results a large number of comets that is not supported by observations: using the numbers derived in \S~\ref{sect:model:result}, we crudely estimate that a stream has $40/170$--$40/280$ or 1 in 7 to 1 in 4 chance of being detectable at any time, meaning that (statistically speaking) 4--7 comets are needed to produce one detectable stream.
Another potential source of contamination comes from the streams produced at ordinary distances from the Sun that migrate into low-$q$ orbits due to Lidov-Kozai mechanism and Poynting-Robertson drag, as noted by \citet{Wiegert2008}. They found that such process can occur over a timescale of a couple kyr, which is in the range of the ages we derived for the Sun-approaching streams. However, the same study also noted that particles of different sizes have different responses this process: smaller particles are more sensitive to Poynting-Robert drag while larger particles are largely immune, which implies that these ``immigrants'' should largely be only detectable in radio wavelengths, a prediction that is incompatible with observations.
\subsection{Prolonged Disruption Phase} \label{disc:prolonged}
For the case of the Machholz complex which we discussed in \S~\ref{sect:age:map}, we see that estimates by instantaneous ejection model can underestimate the age of continuously replenished streams by a factor of several. The latter streams are also longer-lived since their cores will be replenished and will stay compact over time. Asteroids that have completely disintegrated will no longer be able to replenish their streams; however, if their disruption phase span over multiple orbits, they will be able to maintain their streams longer than what our instantaneous model predicts.
In order to maintain 10 Sun-approaching streams, the visible timescale of each stream would need to be $10/0.6/75\%~\mathrm{kyr^{-1}}=22$~kyr, which is 500 times longer than the prediction made for instantaneous ejection. Assuming the relation between visible timescale and dispersion timescale is fixed, each parent would need to ``shepherd'' its stream over a 10--20~kyr timescale. The timescale shifts to the shorter end if there are fewer streams to maintain: for 1 stream the timescale becomes as short as 1--2~kyr.
Besides meteor observations, another observational implication of the ``prolonged-disruption'' theory is this: instead of a gigantic, one-time near-Sun explosion event that happens once every $\sim2$~kyr, observers are more likely to see a handful Sun-approaching asteroids that will only release a fraction of its mass, and therefore only mildly brighten during their perihelion passages. Existing observational evidence is consistent with this theory: in the past several decades, a couple of periodic Sun-approaching objects have been discovered by the Solar and Heliospheric Observatory (SOHO). These objects are all designated as comets since most objects detected at such distances are sun-grazing comets \citep{Knight2010}, even though most, if not all these periodic objects never display any coma or tail. Here we note that objects are only detectable by SOHO when they get to $V=8$ or brighter, since the limiting magnitude of SOHO is about $V=8$. Therefore, these SOHO ``comets'' must either be very large, or are actively producing dust. However, these SOHO ``comets'' have never been detected by ground-based NEO surveys which are sensitive down to $V=21$ \citep{Jedicke2015}, which suggests that they are no larger than typical NEOs detected by surveys ($\sim0.1$ to a few km in sizes). This also suggests that these objects are apparently inactive when away from perihelion even though they are inside the sublimation distance of water ice, the dominant volatile species in comets, seemingly implying that these are asteroids. In fact, dedicated observations of one such objects, 322P/SOHO, have shown characteristics consistent with asteroids \citep{Knight2016}.
Figure~\ref{fig:soho} shows the orbital distribution of all known objects with $q<0.2$~au and $T_\mathrm{J}>2$, with objects found by SOHO and ground-based NEO surveys in different colors. Here we clearly see a transition at 0.06~au, the distance that thermally-driven disruption is predicted to occur by \citet{Granvik2016}. We also overlay a $q^2$ curve to crudely match the histogram, which shows the number density stays constant throughout the region and argues against contamination from other small body populations (e.g. comets). Therefore, we conclude that at least some of the periodic SOHO ``comets'' might, in fact, be asteroids that are being destroyed.
\begin{figure}
\includegraphics[width=0.5\textwidth]{./soho-orb.pdf}
\caption{Distribution of perihelion distance $q$ of objects with $q<0.2$~au and $T_\mathrm{J}>2$. Objects found by SOHO (meaning that they will get to $V<8$ during perihelion) and ground-based NEO surveys are shown in different colors. Also shown is a $q^2$ curve that gauges the number density of objects as a function of $q$. The Jupyter notebook for this figure is available \href{https://github.com/Yeqzids/near-sun-disruptions/blob/master/nb/soho_objects.ipynb}{here}. \label{fig:soho}}
\end{figure}
The $q^2$ fit also provides some clues into the timescale of the disruption. If the timescale is short, then we should see no more than a few objects in this regime, since they are removed quite efficiently once they reach the disruption distance; if the timescale is long, then we should see a ``piled-up'' of objects in this regime. The fact that the distribution crudely agrees with the fit suggests that the timescale is unlikely to be too much different from the derived disruption rate of 0.6~$\mathrm{kyr^{-1}}$, which is also in line with the timescales we derived at the beginning of this section, although we caution that the small statistics effectively limits our discussion to the order-of-magnitude level.
\section{Conclusions}
It is quite possible that Sun-approaching meteoroid streams are fed by multiple sources. Some of $2<T_\mathrm{J}<3$ streams could have been produced by short-period comets instead of asteroids, while the possibility that thermally-driven disruption of asteroids could be a relatively lengthy process may also contribute to the number of Sun-approaching streams being seen.
The hypothesis that thermally-driven disruption is a lengthy process also implies that such a process might be observable on the current Sun-approaching asteroids, with SOHO objects as prominent examples. \citet{Granvik2016} predicts that thermally-driven disruption can occur on small, dark asteroids at slightly larger distances, possibly up to $\sim0.4$~au. The brightening effect on asteroids at a few tenths of an au will be less pronounced and would be difficult for SOHO and other coronagraphs to detect. Ground-based observers, on the other hand, could have sufficient sensitivity to detect any brightening but have difficulties with small solar elongations. However, space probes operating close to or inside the orbit of Mercury such as MESSENGER, BepiColombo or Parker Solar Probe will have a chance to test this hypothesis.
Our work offers some lessons for understanding solid-body disruptions in other planetary systems. Although we are yet to be able to directly image small bodies in exoplanetary systems, signatures of disrupting small bodies have been found in a variety of planetary systems \citep[e.g.][]{Montgomery2012, Kiefer2014, Vanderburg2015, Rappaport2016, Xu2016, Xu2018}. The direct exoplanetary equivalents of the debris streams investigated in this work (likely at the level of $10^{-10}$--$10^{-12}$ Earth mass) is beyond the detection capability of current techniques, but disruptions of larger bodies that are potentially detectable by current techniques should be governed by the same physics. Our finding of prolonged disintegration of Sun/star-approaching rocky bodies suggests that the observing window for such events is long, and may partly explain the common occurrence of such phenomenon in exoplanetary systems.
\acknowledgments
The authors thank Peter Brown for his contribution to an early version of the draft and Paul Wiegert for access to computational resource. Q.-Z. Ye is supported by the GROWTH project funded by the National Science Foundation under Grant No. 1545949. M. Granvik is supported by Grant No. 299543 from the Academy of Finland. This work was made possible by the facilities of the Shared Hierarchical Academic Research Computing Network (SHARCNET:www.sharcnet.ca) and Compute/Calcul Canada. We extend our thanks to the American Astronomical Society's Division for Planetary Science for holding its annual meeting, which provides an opportunity for the authors to meet in person and to fight their procrastination.
\facilities{SHARCNET}
\software{Astropy \citep{Robitaille2013}, Jupyter Notebooks \citep{Kluyver2016}, Matplotlib \citep{Hunter2007}, MERCURY6 \citep{Chambers1999}, NumPy \citep{Walt2011}}
\end{CJK*}
\bibliographystyle{aasjournal}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Sequence-to-sequence learning~\cite{seq2seq} based on encoder-decoder attention
models~\cite{bahdanau2014neural} has become popular for both machine
translation~\cite{wu2016google} and speech recognition~\cite{RPis2017,
KimHW17, battenberg2017exploring, WengCWWYSY18, ChiuSWPNCKWRGJL18}.
Such models are typically trained to output \emph{character-based} units:
graphemes, byte-pair encodings (BPEs)~\cite{sennrich16bpe}, or
word-pieces~\cite{SchusterN12}, which allow the model to directly map
the frame-level input audio features to the
output word sequence, without using a hand-crafted pronunciation lexicon.
Thus, when using such character-based output units, end-to-end speech
recognition models~\cite{lasicassp2016} jointly learn the acoustic model,
pronunciation model, and language model within a single neural network.
In fact, such models outperform conventional hybrid recognizers~\cite{Bourlard1993} when trained on
sufficiently large amounts of data~\cite{ChiuSWPNCKWRGJL18}.
One of the main advantages of character-based sequence-to-sequence models lies in their simplicity:
both for training, as well as decoding.
In fact, the use of characters as units for acoustic modeling has a long history for conventional
HMM-based automatic speech recognition (ASR) systems (e.g., \cite{kanthak02, KillerSS03, SungHBS09}, inter alia).
In the context of conventional ASR systems, for non-phonetic languages such as English, where the correspondence between orthography and pronunciation is less clear, previous works \cite{kanthak02, KillerSS03} have found that phoneme-based models outperform grapheme-based models; grapheme-based systems approach the performance of phoneme-based systems only when much larger amounts of training training data are available \cite{SungHBS09}.
It is therefore, natural to ask whether similar observations also apply to recently proposed attention-based encoder-decoder models: specifically, how do attention-based encoder-decoder models perform when using phonemes instead of character-based output units?
To the best of our knowledge, this question has only been empirically investigated in the setting where a large amount of labeled training data are available. In previous work \cite{sainath2017no, zhou2018comparison}, it has been empirically shown that the grapheme-based encoder-decoder models outperform the phoneme-based approach, while \cite{sainath2017no} find that use of lexica is still useful for recognizing rare words such as named entities.
In this work, we first investigate whether the previous result \cite{sainath2017no} which establishes the dominance of lexicon-free graphemic models over the phoneme-based models also hold on tasks with smaller amounts of training data.
We carry out evaluations on the three subsets of the LibriSpeech task \cite{panayotov2015librispeech}: 100hr, 460hr, and 960hr, where we find that grapheme or word-piece models do indeed consistently outperform phoneme-based models, even when training data is limited.
In Sec.~\ref{sec:part2}, we further investigate the benefits offered by phonemic models by studying the complementarity of different units. In experimental evaluations, we find that simple N-best list rescoring results in large improvements in WER. Finally, we conduct a detailed analysis of the differences in the hypotheses produced by the models with various output units, in terms of quality of the top hypotheses, as well as the oracle error rate of the N-best list.
\begin{figure}[b]
\vspace{-5mm}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.4\columnwidth]{las_base.pdf}}
\caption{\it LAS model.}
\label{fig:las_base}
\end{figure}
\vspace{-2mm}
\section{Sequence-to-Sequence Speech Models}
\label{sec:model}
All our models are Listen, Attend, and Spell (LAS)~\cite{lasicassp2016} speech models.
The LAS model, which is depicted in Figure \ref{fig:las_base}, has encoder, attention, and decoder modules.
The \textit{encoder} transforms the input frame-level audio feature sequence into
a sequence of hidden activations. The \textit{attention module} summarizes the
encoder sequence into a single vector for each prediction step, and finally,
the \textit{decoder} models the distribution of the output sequence conditioned
on the history of previously predicted labels.
Both the encoder and the decoder are modeled using recurrent neural networks,
and thus the entire model can be jointly optimized.
We refer the interested reader to~\cite{lasicassp2016, RPis2017, WeissCJWC17} for more details.
Standard LAS models use \textit{character-based} output units:
grapheme \cite{lasicassp2016}, word-piece \cite{ChiuSWPNCKWRGJL18} or BPE \cite{zeyer2018:asr-attention}.
\vspace{-2mm}
\section{Phonemic Sequence-to-Sequence Model}
\vspace{-1mm}
The phonemic LAS model can be obtained by using phonemes as the output unit.
Phonemes are natural labels for acoustic modeling of non-phonetic languages.
The use of a pronunciation lexicon can also ease integration of
completely new words or named entities\footnote{This might not be as relevant
for LibriSpeech evaluation as we use the official LibriSpeech lexicon without
modification.}\cite{bruguier19}.
However, by using a pronunciation lexicon, we give
up the end-to-end approach, which introduces complications for both training and
decoding.
For training, words with multiple pronunciation variants cause a problem, since
there is no unique mapping from such a word to its corresponding phoneme
sequence.
While we can potentially obtain the correct pronunciation variant by generating
alignments, we skip this extra effort by choosing a pronunciation simply by
randomly choosing one of the pronunciations for each word to define a unique
mapping.
In addition, we include an unknown token \texttt{UNK} as a part of the phoneme vocabulary and
use it to represent words which are not included in the lexicon.
We use a dedicated end-of-word token \texttt{EOW} (as part of the phoneme
inventory) to model word boundaries, as in~\cite{sainath2017no}, which we
find improves performance.
To deal with the ambiguity of homophones\footnote{By choosing phonemes as output units,
we are giving up the standalone recognition using the attention-based model. Also, while
acoustic modeling motivates the use of phonemes, the ability
of the decoder as a language model can possibly be weaker compared with character-based units,
since the phoneme-level language model can be viewed as a subword-level class-based language model \cite{Brown92}
where the clusters are formed based on the phonemic similarity.}
during decoding, we incorporate a
(word-based) n-gram language model. We use a general weighted finite-state
transducer (WFST) decoder to perform a beam search. The lexicon and language
model (LM) are represented as WFST $L$ and $G$ respectively and combined by means of
FST composition as the search network $L\circ G$~\cite{mohri2008}. The search
process then explores partial path hypotheses which are constrained by the
search network and scored by both the LAS model and the n-gram language model.
\vspace{-6mm}
\section{LibriSpeech Experimental Setup}
\subsection{Dataset}
\vspace{-1mm}
The LibriSpeech task \cite{panayotov2015librispeech} has three subsets with different amounts of
transcribed training data: 100hr, 460hr, and 960hr. A lexicon with pronunciations for 200K words
is officially distributed. The development and test data are both split into \textit{clean}
and \textit{other} subsets, each of them consisting of about 5 to 6 hours of audio. The number of unique words
observed in each subset as well as the out-of-vocabulary (OOV; unseen in training
data) rate is summarized in Table~\ref{tab:oov}.
For language modeling, extra text-only data of about 800M words is also
available, along with an officially distributed 3-gram word LM; we use the
unpruned 3-gram LM for decoding the phonemic LAS models.
In contrast, the grapheme and word-piece models are evaluated without a lexicon or a language model (unless otherwise indicated).
We train word piece models~\cite{SchusterN12} of size 16K (16,384) on each training subset.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{\it Out-of-vocabulary (OOV) rates (\%) with respect to the
vocabulary (unique word list) in different data scenarios, and with respect to the pronunciation lexicon.}
\label{tab:oov}
\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{tabular}{ |c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
Training & Vocab. & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{dev} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{test} \\ \cline{3-6}
data (h) & Size & clean & other & clean & other \\ \hline
100 & 34~K & 2.5 & 2.5 & 2.4 & 2.8 \\
460 & 66~K & 0.9 & 1.2 & 1.0 & 1.3 \\
960 & 89~K & 0.6 & 0.8 & 0.6 & 0.8 \\ \hline \hline
Lexicon & 200~K & 0.3 & 0.6 & 0.4 & 0.5 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-5mm}
\end{table}
\vspace{-2mm}
\subsection{Models and training}
\vspace{-1mm}
\label{sec:model_tr}
We use 80-dimensional log-mel features with deltas and accelerations as the
frame-level audio input features.
Reducing input frame rate in the encoder is important for successfully training
sequence-to-sequence speech models, especially for tasks such as LibriSpeech
which feature long utterances ($\sim$15s).
Thus, following~\cite{zhangCJ17}, our encoder layers include two layers of 3$\times$3 convolution
with 32 channels with a stride of 2, which results in a total time reduction factor of 4.
We consider three model (\textit{small}, \textit{medium}, and \textit{large})
which differ in terms of the sizes of model components.
On top of the convolutional layers, the encoder contains 3 (\textit{small}) or 4
(\textit{medium} and \textit{large}) layers of bi-directional
LSTMs~\cite{schuster1997bidirectional}, with either 256 (\textit{small}), 512
(\textit{medium}), or 1024 (\textit{large}) LSTM \cite{hochreiter1997long} cells
in each layer.
A projection layer and batch normalization are applied after each LSTM encoder
layer~\cite{zhangCJ17}.
The decoder consists of 1 (\textit{small}) or 2 (\textit{medium} and
\textit{large}) LSTM layers, and uses \emph{additive attention} as described in~\cite{WeissCJWC17}.
We train all models using 16 GPUs by asynchronous stochastic gradient descent
with Adam optimizer~\cite{kingma15} from random initialization without any
special pre-training method\footnote{We find training to be stable across repeated runs.
We avoid plateaus at the beginning of training (which we often observe) by tuning the initial learning rate.
We find that our models achieve the best WER on the dev-clean, earlier than on the dev-other set.} for about 80 epochs.
We use open-source Tensorflow Lingvo toolkit \cite{shen2019lingvo} for all experiments. Our
grapheme and word-piece based baseline configurations are publicly available online\footnote{\url{https://github.com/tensorflow/lingvo}}
where further details about the models can be found.
\vspace{-2mm}
\section{Standalone Performance Results}
\label{sec:part1}
\subsection{Baseline model performance on 960hr}
\vspace{-1mm}
The WER performance of grapheme and word-piece based models is summarized in
Table~\ref{baseline960}.
For both graphemes and word-pieces, we present the performance for \textit{small}, \textit{medium} and \textit{large}
model sizes (as shown by different numbers of parameters) as described in Sec \ref{sec:model_tr}. The difference of number of parameters between different units only comes from the unit-level vocabulary size.
As can be seen in Table \ref{baseline960}, models benefit from the additional parameters and the best
WERs are obtained for the large word-piece model.
\vspace{-2mm}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{\it WERs (\%) for grapheme and word-piece models.}
\vspace{-2mm}
\label{baseline960}
\begin{tabular}{ |l|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Unit} & \multirow{2}{*}{Param.} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{dev} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{test} \\ \cline{3-6}
& & clean & other & clean & other \\ \hline
\multirow{3}{*}{Grapheme} & 7~M & 7.6 & 20.5 & 7.9 & 21.3 \\
& 35~M & 5.3 & 15.6 & 5.6 & 15.8 \\
& 130~M & 5.3 & 15.2 & 5.5 & 15.3 \\ \hline
\multirow{3}{*}{Word-Piece} & 20~M & 5.8 & 16.0 & 6.1 & 16.4 \\
& 60~M & 4.9 & 14.0 & 5.0 & 14.1 \\
& 180~M & \textbf{4.4} & \textbf{13.2} & \textbf{4.7} & \textbf{13.4} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Phonemic model performance on 960hr}
\vspace{-1mm}
For phoneme based models, we first check the phoneme error rates (PER) in order to make
sure that the models are reasonable\footnote{By increasing the model size from 7~M to 35~M, then to 130~M, we improve
the PERs (\%) from (3.2, 9.7, 3.2, 9.9), to (2.8, 8.9, 3.0, 9.1), then to (2.4, 7.9, 2.5, 7.7) on the
dev-clean/other, test-clean/other sets.}.
The WER performance results for decoding with the
lexicon and the 3-gram word LM (88M n-grams) is shown in Table \ref{960overview}.
We observe that despite the use of an external LM
which is trained on much more data than the transcribed acoustic training data, the phonemic system performs worse
than the best graphemic model\footnote{This is similar to what is reported in \cite{sainath2017no}. Though, we note that we get about 2\% absolute degradation in WERs
with a model trained without \texttt{EOW} compared with the model with \texttt{EOW}.}.
It is nevertheless interesting to examine examples where the phonemic model outperforms the best word-piece
model. In Table \ref{plg_vs_wp}, we present some illustrative examples.
In addition, we find that decoding the graphemic model with the 3-gram word LM does not give improvement.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{0.5em}
\vspace{-2mm}
\caption{\it WERs (\%) for the \textbf{960hr} dataset.}
\vspace{-4mm}
\label{960overview}
\begin{tabular}{ |l|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Unit} & \multirow{2}{*}{LM} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{dev} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{test} \\ \cline{3-6}
& & clean & other & clean & other \\ \hline
Phoneme & 3-gram & 5.6 & 15.8 & 6.2 & 15.8 \\
Grapheme & None & 5.3 & 15.2 & 5.5 & 15.3 \\
Word-Piece 16K & None & 4.4 & 13.2 & 4.7 & 13.4 \\ \hline
Word-Piece 16K & LSTM & \textbf{3.3} & \textbf{10.3} & \textbf{3.6} & \textbf{10.3} \\ \hline \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{BPE 10K \cite{zeyer2018:asr-attention}} & None & 4.9 & 14.4 & 4.9 & 15.4 \\
& LSTM & 3.5 & 11.5 & 3.8 & 12.8 \\ \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{Hybrid system \cite{han2017capio}} & N-gram & 3.4 & 8.8 & 3.6 & 8.9 \\
& LSTM & 3.1 & 8.3 & 3.5 & 8.6 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-4mm}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\vspace{-2mm}
\caption{\it Examples where the phonemic system's 1-best \textbf{wins} against the word-piece model's 1-best.}
\vspace{-4mm}
\label{plg_vs_wp}
\begin{tabular}{ |c|c|} \hline
Phoneme & Word-Piece \\ \hline
when did you come \textbf{bartley} & when did you come partly \\
\textbf{kirkland} jumped for the jetty & kerklin jumped for the jetty \\
man's eyes \textbf{remained} fixed & man's eyes were made fixed \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-2mm}
\end{table}
In Table \ref{960overview}, we also include the WERs from previous work on LibriSpeech 960hr; for fair comparison, systems which employ data augmentation \cite{park2019specaugment} are excluded.
Our word-piece model performs better than the previously reported sequence-to-sequence model
in \cite{zeyer2018:asr-attention} while the performance is behind the conventional hybrid system with
an n-gram LM \cite{han2017capio}. We note that our word-piece models simply trained using the cross-entropy criterion
(without e.g. minimum word error rate training \cite{PrabhavalkarSWN18}) is competitive with
Sabour et al.'s model trained with optimal completion distillation \cite{sabour2018optimal}, which is reported to give 4.5\% and 13.3\% on the test-clean and test-other sets.
For further comparison, we also report the WERs of our best word-piece model combined with an LSTM language model \cite{sundermeyer2012lstm} by shallow fusion \cite{ChorowskiJ17, toshniwal2018comparison}\footnote{In our experiments,
we find it crucial to constrain the emission of end-of-sentence (\texttt{EOS}) tokens \cite{ChorowskiJ17} to penalize short sentences
(rather than applying length normalization) in shallow fusion:
we only allow the model to emit \texttt{EOS} when its score is within 1.0 of the top hypothesis. We check that tuning such an \texttt{EOS} emission
constraint does not improve the baseline systems without language model
nor beam search with the WFST decoder for phonemic models.}.
The LSTM LM consists of one input linear layer of dimension 1024 and 2 LSTM layers with 2048 nodes \cite{hochreiter1997long}.
The LM weight of 0.35 is found to be optimal for dev-clean and dev-other WERs.
We obtain similar relative improvements reported in \cite{zeyer2018:asr-attention} and achieve WERs of 3.6\%
on the test-clean, and 10.3\% on the test-other set, which reduces the performance gap from the best hybrid system reported in \cite{han2017capio}.
\subsection{Results on 100hr and 460hr tasks}
\vspace{-2mm}
We conduct the same experiments in the 100hr and 460hr conditions.
For each unit, we obtain the best performance for the \textit{large} models
for the 460hr scenario, whereas for the 100hr case, the \textit{medium} model perform
the best. The results are summarized in Table \ref{460100overview}. We find that even
in the small dataset scenarios with higher OOV rates, graphemic and word-piece based
models outperform the phonemic system. We also note that the performance of attention-based
models dramatically degrades when the amount of training data is reduced, unlike conventional
hybrid approach \cite{panayotov2015librispeech}.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\vspace{-3mm}
\caption{\it WERs for the \textbf{460hr} and \textbf{100hr} scenarios.}
\vspace{-1mm}
\vspace{-2mm}
\label{460100overview}
\begin{tabular}{ |c|c|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
Train & \multirow{2}{*}{Unit} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{dev} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{test} \\ \cline{3-6}
data & & clean & other & clean & other \\ \hline
\multirow{3}{*}{460hr} & Phoneme& 7.6 & 27.3 & 8.5 & 27.8 \\
& Grapheme& 6.4 & 23.5 & 6.8 & 24.1 \\
& Word-Piece & \textbf{5.7} & \textbf{21.8} & \textbf{6.5} & \textbf{22.5} \\ \hline
\multirow{3}{*}{100hr} & Phoneme & 13.8 & 38.9 & 14.3 & 40.9 \\
& Grapheme & \textbf{11.6} & 36.1 & \textbf{12.0} & 38.0 \\
& Word-Piece& 12.7 & \textbf{33.9} & 12.9 & \textbf{35.5} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-5mm}
\end{table}
\vspace{-3mm}
\section{Rescoring Experiments}
\label{sec:part2}
\vspace{-2mm}
While Sec.~\ref{sec:part1} focuses on the comparison of models with different output
units, our goal is to ideally get benefits from different model units.
We consider two methods for combining LAS models with different output units.
The first approach is simple \textit{N-best list rescoring}.
We generate a N-best list from one LAS model, convert the corresponding word
sequences to the rescorer LAS model's unit, score them, and combine the scores
by log-linear interpolation to get new scores.
However, rescoring is limited to the hypotheses generated by one LAS model.
Therefore, we also carry out \textit{union of N-best list with cross-rescoring}:
we independently generate N-best lists from two LAS models, rescore the
hypotheses generated by one model using the other model and vice versa, to get the
1-best from the union of the rescored (up to) 2N hypotheses.
\vspace{-3mm}
\subsection{N-best Rescoring results}
\vspace{-2mm}
We carry out the N-best rescoring of our best word-piece based model in the 960hr scenario by a graphemic, and
a phonemic model. In all following experiments, the interpolation weights are optimized to obtain the best
dev-clean WER (which typically also gives the best dev-other WER).
The WERs are presented in the upper part of Table \ref{tab:resc_wp}.
We obtain improvements of 9\% in both cases on the test-clean set;
on the test-other set, we obtain an 8\% relative with the phonemic model and a 9\% relative with the graphemic model.
Thus, it can be noted that rescoring is a simple method for using
a phonemic model without an additional language model.
To determine if gains by the graphemic and phonemic models are additive, we
combine the scores from all models, which obtains only slight improvements of up
to 0.1 absolute as shown in Table \ref{tab:resc_wp} (+ Both).
In Table \ref{wp_gr_vs_wp_g_p}, we again show some illustrative examples
where the phonemic model outperforms the combination
of word-piece and grapheme based models only.
It is for example interesting to observe that the correct spelling ``bartley" is in the N-best hypotheses
of the word-piece model, and that the phonemic model helps recognize it correctly.
In the other direction, we also rescore the N-best list generated by the phonemic system by the word-piece model.
The results are shown in the lower part of Table \ref{tab:resc_wp}. We find that the improvements are limited (only
up to 4\% relative). In fact, the 30-best list generated by a phonemic system has much higher oracle WERs than the 8-best
list of the word-piece model.
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{0.4em}
\caption{\it WER (\%) results for N-best list rescoring. Oracle WERs are
shown in parentheses.}
\vspace{-4mm}
\label{tab:resc_wp}
\begin{tabular}{ |l|c|c|c|c|} \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{ } & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{dev} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{test} \\ \cline{2-5}
& clean & other & clean & other \\ \hline \hline
Word-Piece & 4.4 (2.4) & 13.2 (9.2) & 4.7 (2.6) & 13.4 (9.1) \\
+ Phoneme & 4.1 & 12.4 & \textbf{4.3} & 12.4 \\
+ Grapheme & 4.0 & 12.3 & \textbf{4.3} &12.3 \\
+ Both & \textbf{3.9} & \textbf{12.2} & \textbf{4.3} & \textbf{12.2} \\ \hline \hline
Phoneme & 5.6 (4.9) & 15.8 (14.4) & 6.2 (5.5) & 15.8 (14.7) \\
+ Word-Piece & 5.4 & 15.5 & 6.0 & 15.5 \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\vspace{-3mm}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\caption{\it Examples where Word-Piece+Grapheme+Phoneme (WP+G+P) \textbf{wins} over Word-Piece+Grapheme (WP+G).}
\vspace{-3mm}
\label{wp_gr_vs_wp_g_p}
\resizebox{\columnwidth}{!}{
\begin{tabular}{ |c|c|} \hline
WP+G+\textbf{P} & WP+G \\ \hline
oh \textbf{bartley} did you write to me & oh bartly did you write to me \\
... lettuce leaf with \textbf{mayonnaise} ... & ... lettuce leaf with mayonna is ... \\
the manager \textbf{fell to} his musings & the manager felt of his musings \\
what \textbf{a fuss} is made about you & what are fusses made about you \\
... eyes \textbf{blazed with} indignation & ... eyes blaze of indignation \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
}
\vspace{-5mm}
\end{table}
\vspace{-3mm}
\subsection{Union of N-best lists with cross-rescoring results}
\vspace{-1mm}
The examples in Table \ref{plg_vs_wp} show some complementarity between the word-piece 1-best hypothesis
and the phonemic one.
To evaluate the potential value of hypotheses generated by the phonemic model,
we decode a N-best list from the word-piece based and phoneme based models independently,
rescore the respective hypotheses (cross-rescoring), and take the 1-best from the 2N hypotheses (union).
In Table \ref{tab:union}, we observe that we only obtain marginal improvements on the test-other set, compared with rescoring the 8-best
word-piece hypotheses. For a fairer comparison, we also carry out rescoring of 16-best lists generated by
the word-piece model by the phonemic model. We find that such an approach is slightly better than the union.
This suggests that decoding from the phonemic model has limited benefits for the LibriSpeech task.
\vspace{-1mm}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{0.3em}
\vspace{-2mm}
\caption{\it WERs (\%) results for union of N-best lists with
cross-rescoring. Oracle WERs are shown in parentheses.}
\vspace{-3mm}
\label{tab:union}
\begin{tabular}{ |l|c|c|c|c|c|} \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{ } & Num. & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{dev} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{test} \\ \cline{3-6}
& hyp. & clean & other & clean & other \\ \hline
Word-Piece & \multirow{2}{*}{8} & 4.4 (2.4) & 13.2 (9.2) & 4.7 (2.6) & 13.4 (9.1) \\
+ Phoneme & & 4.1 & 12.4 & 4.3 & 12.4 \\ \cline{2-6}
Union & 16 & 4.1 & 12.4 & 4.3 & 12.3 \\ \hline
Word-Piece & \multirow{2}{*}{16} & 4.4 (2.0) & 13.2 (8.3) & 4.7 (2.2) & 13.4 (8.1) \\
+ Phoneme & & \textbf{4.0} & \textbf{12.3} & \textbf{4.3} & \textbf{12.2} \\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\vspace{-4mm}
\subsection{Why is Oracle WER So High for Phonemic System?}
\vspace{-1mm}
The oracle WERs are much worse for the phonemic system than the word-piece model
(Table \ref{tab:resc_wp}).
We observe that the diversity of hypotheses in the N-best list generated by the phonemic
system is mainly based on homophones, rather than \textit{difficult} words (i.e. words with unusual
pronunciation).
For example, on the reference utterance \textit{``bozzle had always waited upon
him with a decent coat and a well brushed hat and clean shoes"}, where
\textit{bozzle} is not in the training data, the word-piece based model fills the 8-best beam
by proposing different spellings for \textit{bozzle} such as \{basil, bazil,
basle, bosel, bosal, bosell, bossel\}, which is a reasonable way to model the ambiguity.
The phoneme system, instead, only produces \{bazil, basil\} as a substitution
for \textit{bozzle} and lists homophones for \textit{shoes}, \{shoes, shews,
shoos, shues, shooes\} instead.
Homophone distinction might still be inefficient for a phonemic system as the
phonemic LAS model gives them all the same score, and a single parameter is used
to weight the external LM for the entire search.
Addressing this issue might be crucial to improve the phonemic system.
\subsection{Rescoring with an auxiliary decoder}
\vspace{-1mm}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=0.5\columnwidth]{aux_decoder.pdf}}
\vspace{-1mm}
\caption{\it LAS model with an auxiliary decoder: main
decoder operates on graphemes and the auxiliary decoder predicts
phonemes; dashed lines represent state copying for initialization at
each word boundary.}
\label{fig:las_aux}
\vspace{-6mm}
\end{figure}
\label{sec:twodecmodel}
Finally, we examine a model with two decoders operating on different units but using a single encoder.
Such a model can be convenient for model combination (e.g., rescoring or potentially also decoding from two decoders operating on different units and combining hypotheses in a word synchronous fashion).
The design of the model is illustrated in Figure~\ref{fig:las_aux}.
The main decoder (grapheme, in the example) works exactly as in the baseline LAS model (Sec.~\ref{sec:model}; Figure~\ref{fig:las_base}).
The auxiliary decoder (phoneme, in the example) is designed such that it
predicts \emph{only the next word as a sequence of the auxiliary units}.
We use separate parameters for the auxiliary attention and initialize all recurrent states
of the auxiliary component at each word boundary by those of the main decoder (i.e. the prediction
from the auxiliary decoder is conditioned on the word sequence generated thus far from the main decoder).
The model is trained in two stages;
the main decoder and the encoder are first trained, and their parameters are not modified during the training of
the auxiliary components.
In experiments, we use word-pieces for the main decoder, and phonemes for the
auxiliary decoder.
Table \ref{tab:aux} shows improvements by rescoring with an auxiliary phoneme decoder of the two decoder-model.
We obtain improvements despite small number of additional parameters (30M) corresponding to the phonemic 2-layer LSTM decoder and the attention layer, however rescoring with an independent phoneme model (as in Table \ref{tab:resc_wp}) gives larger improvements.
\vspace{-3mm}
\begin{table}[h]
\centering
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{0.3em}
\caption{\it WERs (\%) for rescoring with an auxiliary decoder.}
\vspace{-3mm}
\label{tab:aux}
\begin{tabular}{ |l|c|c|c|c|l|} \hline
\multirow{2}{*}{ } & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{dev} & \multicolumn{2}{|c|}{test} & Total \\ \cline{2-5}
& clean & other & clean & other & Param. \\ \hline
Word-Piece (WP) & 4.4 & 13.2 & 4.7 & 13.4 &180~M \\
WP + Auxiliary phoneme & 4.3 & 13.0 & 4.6 & 13.1 & 210~M\\
WP + Phoneme & 4.1 & 12.4 & 4.3 & 12.4 & 310~M\\ \hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\vspace{-6mm}
\section{Conclusion}
Our experiments on different LibriSpeech subsets show that word-piece and grapheme based models
consistently outperform phoneme based models.
Therefore, the dominance of character-based model units in the LAS speech model
is not due to the amount of training data. This indicates that this behavior is more likely
related to the model itself (e.g., the decoder is conditioned on all predecessor labels).
Furthermore, we find that the word-piece based attention models can achieve a relatively low
oracle WER with only 8-best hypotheses and rescoring that N-best hypotheses using
graphemic or phonemic models gives good improvements.
Future work will examine whether streaming end-to-end approaches
(e.g., RNN-T \cite{graves2012sequence,RaoSP17}) show similar trends.
\label{sec:foot}
\clearpage
\bibliographystyle{IEEEtran}
|
\section{Introduction}
Gradient backpropagation is the central computational operation of
contemporary deep learning. Its modular structure allows easy extension
across network architectures, and thus automatic computation of gradients
given the computational graph of the forward pass \citep[for a review,
see][]{baydin2018Autodiff}. But optimization using only the first-order information of the objective's gradient can be unstable and slow, due to ``vanishing'' or ``exploding'' behaviour of the gradient.
Incorporating curvature, second-order methods can avoid such
scaling issues and converge in fewer iterations.
Such methods locally approximate the objective function $E$ by a quadratic
\begin{math}
E(x) + \delta x^\top (x_* - x) + \frac{1}{2} (x_* - x)^\top C (x_*
- x)
\end{math}
around the current location $x$,
using the gradient $\delta x = \nicefrac{\partial E}{\partial x}$ and a
positive
semi-definite (PSD) curvature matrix $C$ --- the Hessian
of $E(x)$ or approximations thereof. The quadratic is minimized by
\begin{align}
\label{equ:NewtonUpdate}
x_* = x
+ \Delta x \quad \text{with} \quad \Delta x = -C^{-1} \delta x\,.
\end{align}
Computing the update step requires that the $C\Delta x = -\delta x$ linear system be solved. To accomplish this task, providing a matrix-vector multiplication with the curvature matrix $C$ is sufficient.
\paragraph{Approaches to second-order optimization:}
For some curvature matrices, exact multiplication can be performed at the
cost of one backward pass by automatic differentiation
\cite{pearlmutter1994FastExactHessianMultiplication,
schraudolph2002FastMatrixVectorProducts}. This \emph{matrix-free}
formulation can then be leveraged to solve~\eqref{equ:NewtonUpdate} using iterative solvers such as the method
of conjugate gradients~(CG)~\cite{martens2010HessianFree}. However, since
this linear solver can still
require multiple iterations,
the
increased per-iteration progress of the resulting optimizer might be
compensated by increased computational cost. Recently, a parallel version of
Hessian-free optimization was proposed
in~\cite{zhang2017BlockDiagonalHessianFree},
which only considers the content
of Hessian sub-blocks along the diagonal. Reducing the Hessian to a
block diagonal allows for parallelization, tends to lower the
required number of CG iterations, and seems to improve the optimizer's performance.
There have also been attempts to compute parts of the Hessian in an iterative
fashion \cite{mizutani2008StagewiseSecondOrderBackpropagation}.
Storing these constituents efficiently often requires an involved manual
analysis of the Hessian's structure, leveraging its outer-product form in
many scenarios \cite{naumov2017HessianInMatrixForm,
bakker2018OuterProductStructure}. Recent works developed different
block-diagonal approximations (BDA) of curvature matrices that provide fast
multiplication~\cite{martens2015KFAC, grosse2016KFACConvolution,
botev2017PracticalGaussNewton, chen2018BDAPCH}.
These works have repeatedly shown that, empirically, second-order information can
improve the training of deep learning problems. Perhaps the most important
practical hurdle to the adoption of second-order optimizers, however, is that
they tend to be tedious to integrate in existing machine learning frameworks,
requiring manual implementations. As efficient automated
implementations have arguably been more important for the wide-spread use of
deep learning than many conceptual advances, we
aim to develop a framework that makes computation of Hessian approximations
about as easy and automatable as gradient backpropagation.
\paragraph{Contribution:}
This paper introduces a modular formalism for the
computation of block-diagonal approximations of Hessian and curvature
matrices, to various block resolutions, for feedforward neural networks. The
framework unifies previous approaches in a form that, similar to
gradient backpropagation, reduces implementation and analysis to local
modules.
Following the design pattern of gradient backprop also has the
advantage that this formalism can readily be integrated into
existing machine learning libraries, and flexibly modified for different
block groupings and approximations.
The proposed framework consists of three principal steps:
\begin{enumerate}
\item a modular formalism for \emph{exact} computation of Hessian block
diagonals of feedforward nets.
We achieve a clear presentation
by leveraging the notation of matrix differential
calculus~\cite{magnus1999MatrixDifferentialCalculus}.
\item projections
onto the positive semi-definite cone
by eliminating sources of concavity.
\item backpropagation strategies to obtain (i) exact curvature
matrix-vector products (with previously inaccessible BDAs of
the Hessian) and
(ii) further approximated multiplication routines that save computations
by evaluating the matrix representations of intermediate quantities once,
at the cost of additional memory consumption.
\end{enumerate}
The first two contributions can be understood as an explicit formulation of
well-known tricks for fast multiplication by curvature matrices using
automatic
differentiation~\cite{pearlmutter1994FastExactHessianMultiplication,
schraudolph2002FastMatrixVectorProducts}.
However, we also address a new class of curvature matrices, the
positive-curvature Hessian (PCH) introduced in~\cite{chen2018BDAPCH}.
Our solutions to the latter two points are generalizations of previous
works~\cite{martens2015KFAC,botev2017PracticalGaussNewton,chen2018BDAPCH} to
the
fully modular case, which become accessible due to the first contribution.
\section{Notation}
\label{sec:basicSetting}
We consider feedforward neural networks composed of
$\ell$ modules $f^{(i)}, i = 1, \ldots, \ell$, which can be represented
as a
computational graph mapping the input $z^{(0)}=x$ to the
output $z^{(\ell)}$ (Figure~\ref{fig:setting}).
A module~$f^{(i)}$ receives the parental output~$z^{(i-1)}$, applies an
operation involving the network parameters~$\theta^{(i)}$, and sends the
output
$z^{(i)}$ to its
child. Thus, $f^{(i)}$ is of the form
\begin{math}
z^{(i)} = f^{(i)}(z^{(i-1)}, \theta^{(i)}).
\end{math}
Typical choices include elementwise nonlinear
activation without any parameters and affine transformations
$z^{(i)} = W^{(i)} z^{(i-1)} + b^{(i)}$ with parameters given by
the weights $W^{(i)}$ and the
bias $b^{(i)} $. Affine and activation modules are usually
considered as a single conceptual unit, one \emph{layer} of the network.
However, for backpropagation of derivatives it is simpler to consider
them separately as two \emph{modules}.
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}
{\scriptsize
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node (in1)
[inner sep=0]
{\tikz \drawMessagesWithArrows{$z^{(0)}$}{ }{ }{\hNodeDistance};};
\node (layer1)
[anchor=south west, inner sep=0]
at (in1.south east)
{\tikz \drawModuleWithParams{$f^{(1)}$}{16}{$\theta^{(1)}$}{$\delta \theta^{(1)}$}{ };};
\node (out1)
[inner sep=0, anchor=south west]
at (layer1.south east)
{\tikz \drawMessagesWithArrows{$z^{(1)}$}{$\delta z^{(1)}$}{ }{\hNodeDistance};};
\node (layer2)
[inner sep=0pt, anchor=south west]
at (out1.south east)
{\tikz\drawModuleNoParams{$f^{(2)}$}{5};};
\node (in2)
[inner sep=0, anchor=south west]
at (layer2.south east)
{\tikz \drawMessagesWithArrows{$z^{(2)}$}{$\delta z^{(2)}$}{ }{\hNodeDistance};};
\node (layer3)
[anchor=south west, inner sep=0]
at (in2.south east)
{\tikz \drawModuleWithParams{$f^{(3)}$}{16}{$\theta^{(3)}$}{$\delta \theta^{(3)}$}{ };};
\node (out3)
[inner sep=0, anchor=south west]
at (layer3.south east)
{\tikz \drawMessagesWithArrows{$z^{(3)}$}{$\delta z^{(3)}$}{ }{\hNodeDistance};};
\node (layer4)
[inner sep=0pt, anchor=south west]
at (out3.south east)
{\tikz\drawModuleNoParams{$f^{(4)}$}{5};};
\node (dots)
[xshift=2ex, inner sep=0pt, anchor=west]
at (layer4.east)
{$\dots$};
\node (layer5)
[xshift=12ex, anchor=south west, inner sep=0]
at (out3.south east)
{\tikz \drawModuleWithParams{$f^{(\ell)}$}{16}{$\theta^{(\ell)}$}{$\delta \theta^{(\ell)}$}{ };};
\node (out4)
[inner sep=0, anchor=south west]
at (layer5.south east)
{\tikz \drawMessagesWithArrows{$z^{(\ell)}$}{$\delta z^{(\ell)}$}{ }{\hNodeDistance};};
\node (lossLayer)
[inner sep=0pt, anchor=south west]
at (out4.south east)
{\tikz\drawModuleNoParams{$E$}{5};};
\node (loss)
[inner sep=0, anchor=south west]
at (lossLayer.south east)
{\tikz \drawMessagesWithArrows{$E$}{ }{ }{\hNodeDistance};};
\end{tikzpicture} }
\caption{Standard feedforward network architecture, i.e.~the
repetition of affine transformations parameterized by $
\theta^{(i)} = (W^{(i)}, b^{(i)})$ followed by elementwise
activations. Arrows from left to right and vice versa
indicate the data flow during forward pass and gradient
backpropagation, respectively.}
\label{fig:setting}
\end{figure}
Given the network output $z^{(\ell)}(x, \theta^{(1, \dots, \ell)})$
of a datum $x$ with label $y$, the goal is to minimize the expected
risk of the loss function $E(z^{(\ell)}, y)$.
Under the framework of empirical risk minimization,
the parameters
are tuned to optimize the loss on the training set $Q= \left\{(x,y)_{i=1}^N\right\}$, that is
\begin{align}
\label{equ:objective}
\min_{\theta^{(1,\dots, \ell)}} \frac{1}{|Q|} \sum_{(x, y) \in Q}
E(z^{(\ell)}(x), y)\,.
\end{align}
In practice, the objective is typically further approximated
stochastically by repeatedly drawing a mini-batch $B \subset Q$ from
the training set. We will treat both scenarios without further
distinction, since the structure relevant to our purposes is that
Equation~\eqref{equ:objective} is an
average of terms depending on individual data points.
Quantities for optimization, be it gradients or second
derivatives of the loss with respect to the network parameters, can be
processed in parallel, then averaged.
\section{Main contribution}
\label{sec:modularApproach}
First-order auto-differentiation for a custom module requires the
definition of only two local operations, \emph{forward} and
\emph{backward},
whose outputs are propagated along the computation graph. This
modularity facilitates the extension of gradient backpropagation
by new operations, which can then be used to build networks by
composition. To illustrate the principle, we consider a single
module from the network of Figure~\ref{fig:setting}, depicted in
Figure~\ref{fig:sketchModule}, in this section. The forward pass $f(x,\theta)$ maps
the input $x$ to the output $z$ by means of the module
parameters $\theta$. To simplify notation, we drop layer indices. All
quantities are assumed to be vector-shaped (tensor-valued
quantities can be vectorized, cf. Section~\ref{sec:matrixDifferentialCalculus}
of the Supplements). Optimization requires the gradient of the
loss function with respect to the parameters,
$\nicefrac{\partial E(\theta)}{\partial \theta} = \delta\theta$.
We will use the shorthand
\begin{align}
\delta\cdot = \frac{\partial E(\cdot)}{\partial \vec(\cdot)}\,.
\end{align}
During gradient backpropagation the module receives the loss gradient
with respect to its output, $\delta z$, from its child. The backward
operation computes gradients with respect to the module
parameters and input, $\delta \theta$ and $\delta x$ from
$\delta z$. Backpropagation continues by sending the gradient with
respect to the module's input to its parent, which proceeds in the same
way (see Figure~\ref{fig:setting}).
By the chain rule, gradients with respect to an element of the module's
input can be computed as $\delta x_i = \sum_j (\nicefrac{\partial
z_j}{\partial x_i}) \delta z_j$. The vectorized version is compactly
written in terms of the Jacobian matrix $\mathrm{D} z(x) = \nicefrac{\partial
z(x)}{\partial x^\top}$, which contains all partial derivatives of $z$
with respect to $x$. The arrangement of partial derivatives is such that
$[\mathrm{D} z(x)]_{j,i} = \nicefrac{\partial z_j(x)}{\partial x_i}$, i.e.
\begin{align}
\delta x &= \left[\mathrm{D} z(x)\right]^\top \delta z\,.
\label{equ:gradientBackpropagation}
\end{align}
Analogously, the parameter gradients are given by
$\delta\theta_i = \sum_j \frac{\partial z_j}{\partial \theta_i} \delta z_j$
i.e.
$\delta\theta = \left[ \mathrm{D} z(\theta) \right]^\top \delta z$,
which reflects the symmetry of both $x$ and $\theta$ acting
as input to the module. Implementing gradient backpropagation
thus requires multiplications by (transposed) Jacobians.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{minipage}{0.45\linewidth}
\centering
\resizebox{!}{2.6cm}{
{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node (in)
[inner sep=0]
{\tikz \drawMessagesWithArrows{$x$}{$\delta x$}{$\mathcal{H} x$}{\hNodeDistance};};
\node (module)
[anchor=south west, inner sep=0]
at (in.south east)
{\tikz \drawModuleWithParams{$f$}{16}{$\theta$}{$\delta\theta$}{$\mathcal{H} \theta$};};
\node (out)
[inner sep=0, anchor=south west]
at (module.south east)
{\tikz \drawMessagesWithArrows{$z$}{$\delta z$}{$\mathcal{H} z$}{\hNodeDistance};};
\end{tikzpicture} }
}
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}{0.5\linewidth}
\caption{Forward pass, gradient backpropagation, and Hessian
backpropagation for a single module.
Arrows from left to right
indicate the data flow in the forward pass $z = f(x,
\theta)$,
while the opposite
orientation indicates the backpropagation of the gradient by
Equation~\eqref{equ:gradientBackpropagation}. We suggest to
extend this by the backpropagation of the Hessian as
indicated by
Equation~\eqref{equ:hessianBackPropagation}.}
\label{fig:sketchModule}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
We can apply the chain rule a second time to obtain expressions for second-order partial derivatives of the loss function $E$
with respect to elements of $x$ or $\theta$, which yields
\begin{align}
\label{equ:chainRuleComponentwise}
\begin{split}
\!\frac{\partial^2 E(x)}{\partial x_i \partial x_j} &= \frac{\partial}{\partial x_j}\left( \sum_k \frac{\partial z_k}{\partial x_i} \delta z_k \right)
= \sum_{k, l} \frac{\partial z_k}{\partial x_i} \frac{\partial^2
E(z)}{\partial z_k \partial z_l}
\frac{\partial z_l}{\partial x_j} +\sum_k \frac{\partial^2 z_k}{\partial x_i \partial x_j} \delta z_k\,,
\end{split}
\end{align}
by means of $\nicefrac{\partial}{\partial x_j} = \sum_l
(\nicefrac{\partial z_l}{\partial x_j}) \nicefrac{\partial}{\partial
z_l}$ and the product rule.
The first term of Equation~\eqref{equ:chainRuleComponentwise} propagates
curvature information of the output further back, while the second
term introduces second-order effects of
the module itself. Using the Hessian matrix $\mathrm{H} E(x) =
\nicefrac{\partial^2 E(x)}{(\partial x^\top \partial x)}$ of a scalar
function with respect to a vector-shaped quantity $x$, the
Hessian of the loss function will be abbreviated by
\begin{align}
\mathrm{H} E(\cdot) = \mathcal{H} \cdot = \frac{\partial^2
E(\cdot)}{\partial
\vec(\cdot)^\top \partial \vec(\cdot)}\,,
\end{align}
which results in the matrix version of Equation~\eqref{equ:chainRuleComponentwise},
\begin{align}
\label{equ:hessianBackPropagation}
\mathcal{H} x &= \left[\mathrm{D} z(x)\right]^\top \mathcal{H} z \left[\mathrm{D} z(x)\right] +
\sum_k \left[\mathrm{H} z_k(x)\right] \delta z_k\,.
\end{align}
Note that the second-order effect introduced by the module itself via
$\mathrm{H} z_k(x)$ vanishes if $f_k(x, \theta)$ is linear in
$x$. Because the layer parameters $\theta$ can be regarded as inputs to
the layer, they can be treated in exactly the same way, replacing $x$ by
$\theta$ in the above expression.
Equation~\eqref{equ:hessianBackPropagation} is the central functional
expression herein, and will be referred to as the \emph{Hessian
backpropagation (HBP) equation}.
Our suggested extension of gradient backpropagation is to also send
the Hessian $\mathcal{H} z$ back through the graph. To do so, existing
modules have to be extended by the HBP equation:
\emph{Given the Hessian $\mathcal{H} z$ of the loss with respect to all module
outputs, an extended module has to extract the Hessians $\mathcal{H} \theta,
\mathcal{H} x$ by means of Equation~\eqref{equ:hessianBackPropagation}, and
forward the Hessian with respect to its input $\mathcal{H} x$ to the parent
module which proceeds likewise.}
In this way, backprop of gradients can be extended to compute
curvature information in modules. This corresponds to BDAs
of the Hessian that ignore second-order partial derivatives of
parameters in different modules.
Figure~\ref{fig:sketchFCNN} shows the data flow. The computations
required in Equation~\eqref{equ:hessianBackPropagation} depend only on
\emph{local quantities}
that are, mostly, already being computed during gradient
backpropagation.
Before we proceed, we highlight the following aspects:
\begin{itemize}
\item The BDA of the Hessian need not be PSD. But our scheme can
be modified to provide PSD curvature matrices by projection onto the positive semi-definite cone (see Subsection~\ref{subsec:curvatureMatrices}).
\item
Instead of
evaluating all matrices during backpropagation, we can define
matrix-vector products recursively. This yields exact
curvature matrix products with the block diagonals of the Hessian,
the generalized Gauss-Newton (GGN) matrix and the PCH. Products with
the first two matrices can also be
obtained by use of automatic differentiation
\cite{pearlmutter1994FastExactHessianMultiplication,
schraudolph2002FastMatrixVectorProducts}. We also get access
to the latter which, in contrast to
the GGN,
considers curvature information introduced by the
network (see
Subsection~\ref{subsec:curvatureMatrices})\footnote{Implementations
of HBP for exact matrix-vector products
can reuse multiplication by the (transposed) Jacobian
provided by many machine learning libraries.
The second term of~\eqref{equ:hessianBackPropagation} needs
special treatment though.}.
For standard neural networks, only second derivatives of nonlinear
activations have to be stored compared to gradient backpropagation.
\item There are approaches \cite{botev2017PracticalGaussNewton,
chen2018BDAPCH} that propagate matrix representations
back through the graph in order to save repeated computations in the
curvature matrix-vector product. The
size of the matrices $\mathcal{H} z^{(i)}$ passed between layer $i+1$ and
$i$ scales quadratically in
the number of output features of layer $i$. For convolutional layers
and in case of batched input data, the dimension of these quantities
exceeds computational budgets. In line with previous schemes
\cite{botev2017PracticalGaussNewton, chen2018BDAPCH}, we introduce
additional approximations for batch learning
in Subsection~\ref{subsec:batchLearning}. A connection to existing
schemes is drawn in the Supplements~\ref{subsec:relation}.
\end{itemize}
\begin{figure}[t]
\centering
\resizebox{\linewidth}{!}
{
\begin{tikzpicture}
\node (in1)
[inner sep=0]
{\tikz \drawMessagesWithArrows{$z^{(0)}$}{ }{ }{\hNodeDistance};};
\node (layer1)
[anchor=south west, inner sep=0]
at (in1.south east)
{\tikz \drawModuleWithParams{$f^{(1)}$}{16}{$\theta^{(1)}$}{$\delta \theta^{(1)}$}{$\mathcal{H} \theta^{(1)}$};};
\node (out1)
[inner sep=0, anchor=south west]
at (layer1.south east)
{\tikz \drawMessagesWithArrows{$z^{(1)}$}{$\delta z^{(1)}$}{$\mathcal{H} z^{(1)}$}{\hNodeDistance};};
\node (layer2)
[inner sep=0pt, anchor=south west]
at (out1.south east)
{\tikz\drawModuleNoParams{$f^{(2)}$}{5};};
\node (in2)
[inner sep=0, anchor=south west]
at (layer2.south east)
{\tikz \drawMessagesWithArrows{$z^{(2)}$}{$\delta z^{(2)}$}{$\mathcal{H} z^{(2)}$}{\hNodeDistance};};
\node (layer3)
[anchor=south west, inner sep=0]
at (in2.south east)
{\tikz \drawModuleWithParams{$f^{(3)}$}{16}{$\theta^{(3)}$}{$\delta \theta^{(3)}$}{$\mathcal{H} \theta^{(3)}$};};
\node (out3)
[inner sep=0, anchor=south west]
at (layer3.south east)
{\tikz \drawMessagesWithArrows{$z^{(3)}$}{$\delta z^{(3)}$}{$\mathcal{H} z^{(3)}$}{\hNodeDistance};};
\node (layer4)
[inner sep=0pt, anchor=south west]
at (out3.south east)
{\tikz\drawModuleNoParams{$f^{(4)}$}{5};};
\node (dots)
[xshift=2ex, inner sep=0pt, anchor=west]
at (layer4.east) {$\dots$};
\node (layer5)
[xshift=12ex, anchor=south west, inner sep=0]
at (out3.south east)
{\tikz \drawModuleWithParams{$f^{(\ell)}$}{16}{$\theta^{(\ell)}$}{$\delta \theta^{(\ell)}$}{$\mathcal{H} \theta^{(\ell)}$};};
\node (out4)
[inner sep=0, anchor=south west]
at (layer5.south east)
{\tikz \drawMessagesWithArrows{$z^{(\ell)}$}{$\delta z^{(\ell)}$}{$\mathcal{H} z^{(\ell)}$}{\hNodeDistance};};
\node (lossLayer) [inner sep=0pt, anchor=south west]
at (out4.south east)
{\tikz\drawModuleNoParams{$E$}{5};};
\node (loss)
[inner sep=0, anchor=south west]
at (lossLayer.south east)
{\tikz \drawMessagesWithArrows{$E$}{ }{ }{\hNodeDistance};};
\end{tikzpicture}
}
\caption{Extension of backprop to Hessians.
It yields diagonal blocks
of the full parameter Hessian.
}
\label{fig:sketchFCNN}
\end{figure}
HBP can easily be integrated into current machine
learning libraries, so that BDAs of curvature information can be provided
automatically for novel or existing second-order optimization methods.
Such methods have repeatedly been shown
to be competitive with first-order methods \cite{martens2015KFAC,
grosse2016KFACConvolution, botev2017PracticalGaussNewton,
zhang2017BlockDiagonalHessianFree,
chen2018BDAPCH}.
\paragraph{Relationship to matrix differential calculus:}
\label{sec:MDF}
To some extent, this paper is a re-formulation of
earlier results \cite{martens2015KFAC,
botev2017PracticalGaussNewton, chen2018BDAPCH} in the framework of matrix
differential calculus \cite{magnus1999MatrixDifferentialCalculus},
leveraged to achieve a new level of modularity. Matrix
differential calculus is a set of notational rules that allow a concise
construction of derivatives without the heavy use of indices.
Equation~\eqref{equ:hessianBackPropagation} is a special
case of the matrix chain rule of that framework. A more detailed
discussion of this connection can be found in Section
\ref{sec:matrixDifferentialCalculus} of the Supplements, which also
reviews definitions generalizing the concepts of Jacobian and Hessian in
a way that preserves the chain rule. The
elementary building block of our procedure is a \emph{module} as shown in
Figure~\ref{fig:sketchModule}. Like for gradient backprop, the
operations required for HBP can be tabulated. Table
\ref{table:backpropEquations} provides a selection of common
modules. The derivations, which again
leverage the matrix differential calculus framework, can be found in
Sections~\ref{sec:examples_fcnn}, \ref{sec:examples_loss}, and
\ref{sec:examples_cnn} of the Supplements.
\begin{table}[h]
\caption{HBP for common modules used in feedforward networks.
$I$ denotes the
identity
matrix. We assign matrices to upper-case ($W, X, \dots$) and
tensors to upper-case sans serif symbols ($\tensor{W},
\tensor{X}, \dots$).}
\label{table:backpropEquations}
\centering
\begin{tabular}{lll}
\toprule
Operation & Forward & HBP (Equation
\eqref{equ:hessianBackPropagation})
\\
\midrule
Matrix-vector & $z(x, W) = Wx$ & $\mathcal{H} x = W^\top (\mathcal{H}
z) W$\,,
\\
multiplication& & $\mathcal{H} W = x \otimes x^\top \otimes \mathcal{H} z$
\\
Matrix-matrix & $Z(X, W) = WX$ & $\mathcal{H} X = (I \otimes
W)^\top \mathcal{H} Z ( I \otimes W)$\,,
\\
multiplication& & $\mathcal{H} W = (X^\top \otimes I)^\top \mathcal{H} Z
(X^\top \otimes
I)$
\\
Addition & $z(x, b) = x + b$ & $\mathcal{H} x = \mathcal{H} b =\mathcal{H} z $
\\
Elementwise & $z(x) = \phi(x)$\,, & $\mathcal{H} x =
\operatorname{diag}[\phi'(x)] \mathcal{H} z \operatorname{diag}[\phi'(x)]$
\\
activation& $z_i(x) = \phi(x_i)$ & $\phantom{\mathcal{H} x=} +
\operatorname{diag}[\phi''(x)
\odot \delta z]$
\\
\midrule
Skip-connection & $z(x, \theta) = x + y(x, \theta)$ & $\mathcal{H} x =
[I + \mathrm{D} y(x)]^\top \mathcal{H} z [I + \mathrm{D} y(x)]$
\\
& & $\phantom{\mathcal{H} x=} + \sum_k [\mathrm{H} y_k(x)] \delta z_k$\,,
\\
& & $\mathcal{H} \theta = [\mathrm{D} y(\theta)]^\top \mathcal{H} z [\mathrm{D} y(\theta)]$
\\
& & $\phantom{\mathcal{H} x=} + \sum_k [\mathrm{H} y_k(\theta)] \delta z_k$
\\
\midrule
Reshape/view & $\tensor{Z}(\tensor{X})=
\mathrm{reshape}(\tensor{X})$ & $\mathcal{H} \tensor{Z} = \mathcal{H}
\tensor{X}$
\\
Index select/map $\pi$ & $z(x) = \Pi x\, ,$ $\Pi_{j,\pi(j)} =
1\,, $ & $\mathcal{H} x = \Pi^\top(\mathcal{H} z)\Pi$
\\
Convolution & $\tensor{Z}(\tensor{X}, \tensor{W}) = \tensor{X}
\star \tensor{W}$\,, & $\mathcal{H} \llbracket \tensor{X} \rrbracket =
(I \otimes W) \mathcal{H} Z (I \otimes W)$
\\
& $Z(W, \llbracket\tensor{X}\rrbracket) = W
\llbracket \tensor{X} \rrbracket$\,, & $\mathcal{H} W = (\llbracket
\tensor{X} \rrbracket^\top \otimes I)^\top \mathcal{H} Z (\llbracket
\tensor{X} \rrbracket^\top \otimes I)$
\\
\midrule
Square loss & $E(x, y) = (y-x)^\top (y - x)$ & $\mathcal{H} x = 2 I$
\\
Softmax cross-entropy & $E(x, y) = - y^\top \log\left[
p(x)\right]$ & $\mathcal{H} x = \operatorname{diag}\left[p(x)\right]- p(x)
p(x)^\top$
\\
\bottomrule
\end{tabular}
\end{table}
\subsection{Obtaining different curvature matrices}
\label{subsec:curvatureMatrices}
The HBP equation
yields
\emph{exact} diagonal
blocks $\mathcal{H} \theta^{(1)} , \dots, \mathcal{H} \theta^{(\ell)}$ of the
full parameter Hessian.
They can be of interest in their own right for analysis of the loss
function, but are not generally suitable for second-order optimization in
the sense of~\eqref{equ:NewtonUpdate}, as they need neither be PSD nor
invertible.
For application in optimization, HBP can be modified to yield
semi-definite BDAs of the Hessian.
Equation~\eqref{equ:hessianBackPropagation} again provides the foundation for
this adaptation, which is closely related to the concepts of
KFRA~\cite{botev2017PracticalGaussNewton}, BDA-PCH~\cite{chen2018BDAPCH},
and, under certain conditions, KFAC \cite{martens2015KFAC}. We
briefly review them here.
\paragraph{Generalized Gauss-Newton matrix:} The GGN emerges
as the curvature matrix in the quadratic expansion of the loss function
$E(z^{(\ell)})$ in terms of the network output $z^{(\ell)}$.
It is also obtained by linearizing the network output
$z^{(\ell)}(\theta, x)$ in $\theta$ before computing the loss
Hessian~\cite{martens2014NaturalGradient}, and reads
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{G}(\theta) = \frac{1}{|Q|} \sum_{(x, y) \in Q} \left[\mathrm{D} z^{(\ell)}(\theta)\right]^\top \mathrm{H} E(z^{(\ell)}) \left[\mathrm{D} z^{(\ell)}(\theta) \right]\,.
\end{align*}
To obtain diagonal blocks $\mathrm{G}(\theta^{(i)})$,
the Jacobian
can be unrolled by means of
the chain rule for Jacobians (Supplements, Theorem
\ref{the:chainRuleJacobians}) as
\begin{math}
\mathrm{D} z^{(\ell)}(\theta^{(i)}) = \left[\mathrm{D} z^{(\ell)}(z^{(\ell -
1)})\right] \left[\mathrm{D} z^{(\ell - 1)}(\theta^{(i)})\right] \dots
\end{math}
Continued expansion shows that the Hessian $\mathrm{H} E(z^{(\ell)})$
of the loss function with respect to the network output is
propagated back through a layer by multiplication from left and
right with its Jacobian.
This is accomplished in HBP by \emph{ignoring second-order effects
introduced by modules}, that is by setting the Hessian of
the module function to zero, therefore neglecting the second term in
Equation~\eqref{equ:hessianBackPropagation}. In fact, if all activations
in the network
are piecewise linear, (e.g.~ReLUs),
the GGN and Hessian blocks are
equivalent. Moreover, diagonal blocks of the GGN
are PSD if the loss function is convex (and thus $\mathrm{H} E(z^{(\ell)})$
is PSD). This is because blocks are recursively left- and
right-multiplied with Jacobians, which does not alter the definiteness.
Hessians of the loss functions listed in
Table~\ref{table:backpropEquations} are PSD.
The resulting recursive scheme has been used by
\citet{botev2017PracticalGaussNewton} under the acronym KFRA to optimize
convex loss functions of fully-connected neural networks with piecewise
linear activation functions.
\paragraph{Positive-curvature Hessian:} Another concept of
positive semi-definite BDAs of the Hessian (that additionally considers
second-order module effects) was studied in \cite{chen2018BDAPCH} and
named the PCH. It is obtained by
modification of terms in the second summand of
Equation~\eqref{equ:hessianBackPropagation} that can potentially
introduce concavity
during HBP. This ensures positive semi-definiteness since the first
summand is semi-definite by construction, assuming the Hessian $\mathrm{H}
E(z^{(\ell)})$ of the
loss with respect to the network output is positive semi-definite.
The authors of~\cite{chen2018BDAPCH} suggest to eliminate negative
curvature of a matrix by
computing the eigenvalue decomposition and either discard negative
eigenvalues or cast them to their absolute value.
This allows the construction of PSD curvature matrices even for
non-convex loss functions. In the setting of~\cite{chen2018BDAPCH}, the
PCH can empirically outperform optimization using the GGN. In usual
feedforward neural networks, the concavity is introduced by nonlinear
elementwise activations, and corresponds to a diagonal matrix
(Table~\ref{table:backpropEquations}). Thus, convexity can be
maintained during HBP by either clipping negative values to zero, or
taking their magnitude in the diagonal concave term.
\paragraph{Fisher information matrix:} If the network defines a
conditional probability density $r(y | z^{(\ell)})$ on the labels,
maximum likelihood learning for the parameterized density $p_\theta (y |
x)$ will correspond to choosing a negative log-likelihood loss function,
i.e.~$E(z^{(\ell)}, y) = - \log r(y | z^{(\ell)})$.
Many common loss functions like square and cross-entropy loss
can be interpreted in this way. Natural gradient descent
\cite{amari1998NaturalGradient} uses the Fisher information matrix
\begin{math}
\mathrm{F}(\theta) = \operatorname{\mathbb{E}}_{p_\theta(y | x)}\left[\left(\nicefrac{\mathrm{d} \log
p_\theta(y | x)}{\mathrm{d} \theta} \right) \left(\nicefrac{\mathrm{d} \log
p_\theta(y | x)}{\mathrm{d} \theta^\top} \right) \right]
\end{math}
as a PSD curvature matrix approximating the Hessian.
It can be expressed as the log predictive
density's expected Hessian
under $r$ itself: $F_r(z^{(\ell)}) = -
\operatorname{\mathbb{E}}_{r(y | z^{(\ell)})}\left[ \mathrm{H} \log r(y | z^{(\ell)}) \right]$.
Assuming truly i.i.d.\ samples $x$, the log-likelihood of multiple
data decomposes and results in the approximation\footnote{The necessary
nontrivial derivation can be found in Section~9 of
\cite{martens2014NaturalGradient}.}
\begin{align*}
\mathrm{F} (\theta) &\approx \dfrac{1}{|Q|} \sum_{(x, y) \in Q} \left[ \mathrm{D}
z^{(\ell)}(\theta)\right]^\top F_r(z^{(\ell)}) \left[\mathrm{D}
z^{(\ell)}(\theta)\right]\,.
\end{align*}
In this form, the computational scheme for obtaining BDAs of the Fisher resembles the HBP of the GGN. However, instead of propagating back the Hessian of the loss with respect to the network, the expected Hessian of the negative log-likelihood under the model's predictive distribution is used.
\citet{martens2015KFAC} use Monte-Carlo sampling to estimate this matrix
in their KFAC optimizer.
For square and cross-entropy loss, GGN and Fisher are equivalent
\citep[][Chapter~9]{martens2014NaturalGradient}.
\subsection{Batch learning approximations}
\label{subsec:batchLearning}
In our HBP framework, exact multiplication by the block of the
curvature matrix of parameter $\theta$ in a module comes at the
cost of one gradient backpropagation to this layer. The
multiplication is recursively defined in terms of multiplication by the
layer output Hessian $\mathcal{H} z$. If it were
possible to have an explicit representation of this matrix in memory, the
recursive
computations hidden in $\mathcal{H} z$ could be saved during the
solution of the linear system implied by
Equation~\eqref{equ:NewtonUpdate}.
Unfortunately, the size of the backpropagated exact matrices scales
quadratically in both the batch size and the number of output features of
the layer. However, instead of
propagating back the exact matrix, a batch-averaged version can be used
instead to circumvent the quadratic scaling in batch size (originating
from \citet{botev2017PracticalGaussNewton}).
In combination with structural information about the parameter
Hessian, this strategy is used in \cite{
botev2017PracticalGaussNewton, chen2018BDAPCH} to further approximate
curvature multiplications, using quantities computed
in a single backward pass and then kept in memory for application of
the matrix-vector product. We can embed these explicit schemes into
our modular approach.
To do so, we denote averages over a batch $B$ by a bar, for instance
\begin{math}
\nicefrac{1}{|B|} \sum_{(x, y) \in B} \mathrm{H} E(\theta) = \average{\mathrm{H}
E(\theta)}.
\end{math}
The modified backward pass of curvature information during HBP for a
module receives a batch average
of the Hessian with respect to the output, $\average{\mathcal{H} z}$, which is
used to formulate the matrix-vector product with the batch-averaged
parameter Hessian $\average{\mathcal{H} \theta}$.
An average of
the Hessian with respect to the module input, $\average{\mathcal{H} x}$, is
passed back.
Existing work \cite{martens2015KFAC, botev2017PracticalGaussNewton,
chen2018BDAPCH} differs primarily in the specifics of how this batch
average is computed. In HBP, these
approximations can be formulated compactly within
Equation~\eqref{equ:hessianBackPropagation}.
The relation to the cited works is discussed in more detail in the
Supplements~\ref{subsec:relation}.
The approximations amounting to relations used by
\citet{martens2015KFAC} and \citet{botev2017PracticalGaussNewton} read
\begin{align}
\label{equ:hessians_batch_average}
\average{\mathcal{H} x} \approx \average{\left[\mathrm{D} z(x)\right]^\top
\average{\mathcal{H} z} \left[\mathrm{D} z(x)\right]}
+ \sum_k \average{\left[\mathrm{H} z_k(x)\right] \delta z_k}\,,
\end{align}
and likewise for $\theta$. In case of a linear layer $z(x) = Wx + b$,
this approximation implies the relations
$\average{\mathcal{H} W} = \average{x \otimes x^\top} \otimes
\average{\mathcal{H} z}$, $\average{\mathcal{H} b} = \average{\mathcal{H} z}$, and
$\average{\mathcal{H} x} = W^\top
(\average{\mathcal{H} z}) W$.
A cheaper approximation, used in~\cite{chen2018BDAPCH},
\begin{align}
\label{equ:hessians_batch_average_approximation}
\average{\mathcal{H} x} &\approx \average{\left[\mathrm{D} z(x)\right]}^\top
\average{\mathcal{H} z}\ \, \average{\left[\mathrm{D} z(x)\right]} + \sum_k
\average{\left[\mathrm{H} z_k(x)\right] \delta z_k}\,,
\end{align}
leads to the modified relation $\average{\mathcal{H} W} = \average{x}
\otimes \average{x}^\top \otimes
\average{\mathcal{H} z}$ for a linear layer. As this
approximation is of the same rank as $\average{\mathcal{H} z}$, which is
typically small, CG requires only a few iterations during
optimization.
\paragraph{Remark:}
Both strategies for
obtaining BDAs of curvature matrices (implicit definition of exact matrix-vector
multiplications and explicit
propagation of approximated curvature estimates) are compatible.
Regarding the connection to cited works, we note that the
maximally modular structure of our framework
changes the nature of these approximations
and allows a more flexible formulation.
%
\section{Experiments \& implementation aspects}
\label{sec:experiments}
We illustrate the usefulness of incorporating curvature information with the
two outlined strategies by
experiments with a fully-connected and a convolutional neural network on the
CIFAR-10 dataset~\cite{krizhevsky2009CIFAR10}.
Following the guidelines of
\cite{schneider2018deepobs}, the
training loss is estimated on a random subset of the training set of equal
size as the
test set. Each experiment is performed for 10 different random seeds and we
show the mean values with shaded intervals of one standard deviation. For the
loss function we use cross-entropy. Details on the model architectures
and hyperparameters are given in
Supplements~\ref{sec:experimentalDetails}.
\paragraph{Training procedure and update rule:}
In comparison to a first-order optimization procedure, the training loop with
HBP has to be extended by a single backward pass to backpropagate the
batch-averaged or exact Hessian of the loss function with respect to the
network output. This yields matrix-vector products with a curvature estimate
$C^{(i)}$ for each parameter block $\theta^{(i)}$ of the network.
Parameter updates $\Delta \theta^{(i)}$ are obtained by applying CG to solve
the linear system\footnote{We use the same update rule as
\citet{chen2018BDAPCH} since we extend some of the results shown within this
work.}
\begin{align}
\label{equ:linearSystemCG}
\left[ \alpha I + (1 - \alpha) C^{(i)} \right] \Delta
\theta^{(i)} = - \delta \theta^{(i)}\,,
\end{align}
where $\alpha$ acts as a step size limitation to improve robustness
against noise. The CG routine terminates if the ratio of
the residual norm and the gradient norm falls below a certain threshold or
the maximum number of iterations has been reached. The solution returned by
CG is scaled by a learning rate $\gamma$, and parameters are updated by the
relation $\theta^{(i)} \leftarrow \theta^{(i)} + \gamma \Delta \theta^{(i)}.$
\paragraph{Fully-connected network with batch approximations and
sub-blocking:}
We demonstrate the flexibility of HBP by extending the results for an
experiment presented in \citet{chen2018BDAPCH}. The investigations are
performed using a fully-connected network with sigmoid activations. Solid
lines in Figure \ref{fig:experiment}a show the performance of the
Newton-style optimizer and momentum SGD in terms of the training loss. The
second-order method is capable to escape the initial plateau in
fewer iterations.
The modularity of HBP allows for additional parallelism by splitting the
linear system \eqref{equ:linearSystemCG} into smaller sub-blocks, which then
also need fewer iterations of CG. Doing so only requires a minor modification
of the parameter Hessian computation by~\eqref{equ:hessianBackPropagation}.
Consequently,
we split weights and bias terms rowwise into a specified number of
sub-blocks. Performance curves are shown in
Figure~\ref{fig:experiment}a.
In the initial phase, the BDA can be split into
a larger number of sub-blocks without suffering from a loss in performance.
The reduced curvature information is still sufficient to escape the initial
plateau. However, larger blocks have to be considered in later
stages to further reduce the loss efficiently.
The fact that this switch in modularity is necessary is an argument
in favor of the flexible form of HBP, which allows to efficiently realize
such switches: For this experiment, the splitting for each block
was artificially chosen to illustrate this flexibility. In
principle, the splitting could be decided individually for each parameter
block, and even changed at run time.
\begin{figure}[t]
\begin{minipage}{0.6\linewidth}
\begin{flushleft}
(a)
\end{flushleft}
\vspace{-3.5ex}
\centering
\footnotesize
\setlength{\figwidth}{\linewidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{0.6\figwidth}
\resetPGFStyle
\pgfkeys{/pgfplots/mystyle/.style={
original,
legend pos = north east,
ylabel near ticks,
xlabel near ticks,
xlabel style={opacity=0},
every axis plot/.append style={ultra thick},
}}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\definecolor{color1}{rgb}{0.145098039215686,0.203921568627451,0.580392156862745}
\definecolor{color3}{rgb}{0.254901960784314,0.713725490196078,0.768627450980392}
\definecolor{color2}{rgb}{0.172549019607843,0.498039215686275,0.72156862745098}
\definecolor{color4}{rgb}{0.631372549019608,0.854901960784314,0.705882352941177}
\definecolor{color0}{rgb}{0.992156862745098,0.552941176470588,0.235294117647059}
\begin{axis}[
legend entries={{SGD},{CG, 1 block},{CG, 2 blocks},{CG, 4 blocks},{CG, 16 blocks}},
mystyle,
xlabel={epoch},
ylabel={train loss},
]
\path [fill=color0, fill opacity=0.5] (axis cs:0.01,2.54470259369746)
--(axis cs:0.01,2.39812658606634)
--(axis cs:1.01,2.30397785030313)
--(axis cs:2.01,2.30315035369658)
--(axis cs:3.01,2.30290422052689)
--(axis cs:4.01,2.30318835137318)
--(axis cs:5.01,2.30288919856183)
--(axis cs:6.01,2.30309894900065)
--(axis cs:7.01,2.30283896327529)
--(axis cs:8.01,2.30281409289868)
--(axis cs:9.01,2.30295581042921)
--(axis cs:10.01,2.30266773011514)
--(axis cs:11.01,2.30280217768964)
--(axis cs:12.01,2.30224833502949)
--(axis cs:13.01,2.30097398862863)
--(axis cs:14.01,2.2906135934641)
--(axis cs:15.01,2.20945059331874)
--(axis cs:16.01,2.18795935378638)
--(axis cs:17.01,2.12139875883418)
--(axis cs:18.01,2.08840483534939)
--(axis cs:19.01,2.05237684934822)
--(axis cs:20.01,2.01559048354693)
--(axis cs:21.01,1.99367190701861)
--(axis cs:22.01,1.96413886585267)
--(axis cs:23.01,1.93623503431142)
--(axis cs:24.01,1.90870310282522)
--(axis cs:25.01,1.8913844777547)
--(axis cs:26.01,1.87138582954752)
--(axis cs:27.01,1.85021284863071)
--(axis cs:28.01,1.80940503847217)
--(axis cs:29.01,1.80498471586818)
--(axis cs:30.01,1.76282183132432)
--(axis cs:31.01,1.7304330432576)
--(axis cs:32.01,1.71107452673921)
--(axis cs:33.01,1.67669608210872)
--(axis cs:34.01,1.65712095671471)
--(axis cs:35.01,1.61655194410993)
--(axis cs:36.01,1.62488644024947)
--(axis cs:37.01,1.55124716013726)
--(axis cs:38.01,1.50993425933793)
--(axis cs:39.01,1.49103362405135)
--(axis cs:40.01,1.4774575828013)
--(axis cs:41.01,1.44102075511712)
--(axis cs:42.01,1.43244585810596)
--(axis cs:43.01,1.40065180495941)
--(axis cs:44.01,1.37905709663786)
--(axis cs:45.01,1.34104810544593)
--(axis cs:46.01,1.31255701110297)
--(axis cs:47.01,1.28895972758305)
--(axis cs:48.01,1.2737956870355)
--(axis cs:49.01,1.2192838114052)
--(axis cs:50.01,1.16889469805859)
--(axis cs:51.01,1.15848898523642)
--(axis cs:52.01,1.13751197747094)
--(axis cs:53.01,1.12548612117629)
--(axis cs:54.01,1.1096058479422)
--(axis cs:55.01,1.07254459010848)
--(axis cs:56.01,1.04288987284246)
--(axis cs:57.01,1.01644097622819)
--(axis cs:58.01,0.984790743381765)
--(axis cs:59.01,0.972246488704528)
--(axis cs:60.01,0.979251931937091)
--(axis cs:61.01,0.92053002900591)
--(axis cs:62.01,0.882016087898844)
--(axis cs:63.01,0.885197371686003)
--(axis cs:64.01,0.823337704444236)
--(axis cs:65.01,0.821596458286529)
--(axis cs:66.01,0.770426488830908)
--(axis cs:67.01,0.751410126816703)
--(axis cs:68.01,0.746443782840832)
--(axis cs:69.01,0.718349583715129)
--(axis cs:70.01,0.708565137249434)
--(axis cs:71.01,0.714043568241182)
--(axis cs:72.01,0.702198938976602)
--(axis cs:73.01,0.682048223921828)
--(axis cs:74.01,0.656190808185589)
--(axis cs:75.01,0.622533233672846)
--(axis cs:76.01,0.589114315279116)
--(axis cs:77.01,0.598851710931367)
--(axis cs:78.01,0.572640790977515)
--(axis cs:79.01,0.570621032755789)
--(axis cs:80.01,0.565895774101455)
--(axis cs:81.01,0.539599958696595)
--(axis cs:82.01,0.520488641910136)
--(axis cs:83.01,0.537438557869111)
--(axis cs:84.01,0.501419364311512)
--(axis cs:85.01,0.522499960319662)
--(axis cs:86.01,0.501669501234637)
--(axis cs:87.01,0.47400103162111)
--(axis cs:88.01,0.494744123090936)
--(axis cs:89.01,0.448405675127665)
--(axis cs:90.01,0.469486629098109)
--(axis cs:91.01,0.437573332137619)
--(axis cs:92.01,0.441203374037124)
--(axis cs:93.01,0.412284748150773)
--(axis cs:94.01,0.385252503779191)
--(axis cs:95.01,0.408801067213951)
--(axis cs:96.01,0.377331451850913)
--(axis cs:97.01,0.33790980036867)
--(axis cs:98.01,0.360589343004502)
--(axis cs:99.01,0.332310658807141)
--(axis cs:99.01,0.620126771813053)
--(axis cs:99.01,0.620126771813053)
--(axis cs:98.01,0.583279788799011)
--(axis cs:97.01,0.668371593397734)
--(axis cs:96.01,0.674668963474252)
--(axis cs:95.01,0.662320899624886)
--(axis cs:94.01,0.649913175675612)
--(axis cs:93.01,0.680437000201278)
--(axis cs:92.01,0.729044931760453)
--(axis cs:91.01,0.698186706953491)
--(axis cs:90.01,0.751485157877752)
--(axis cs:89.01,0.804006578490576)
--(axis cs:88.01,0.752743904720115)
--(axis cs:87.01,0.787721092001784)
--(axis cs:86.01,0.786152739356412)
--(axis cs:85.01,0.825735402448511)
--(axis cs:84.01,0.835623623035137)
--(axis cs:83.01,0.862014080756988)
--(axis cs:82.01,0.868574597187459)
--(axis cs:81.01,0.917748709878692)
--(axis cs:80.01,0.903367040420335)
--(axis cs:79.01,0.945236425358835)
--(axis cs:78.01,0.991739020309412)
--(axis cs:77.01,1.04561176858752)
--(axis cs:76.01,1.00432746910275)
--(axis cs:75.01,1.02266221472574)
--(axis cs:74.01,1.06086914979552)
--(axis cs:73.01,1.09814691691679)
--(axis cs:72.01,1.09089690004699)
--(axis cs:71.01,1.18083293570321)
--(axis cs:70.01,1.13409708990434)
--(axis cs:69.01,1.15731729689248)
--(axis cs:68.01,1.19014122625722)
--(axis cs:67.01,1.22978917347245)
--(axis cs:66.01,1.26478683857693)
--(axis cs:65.01,1.29279985156607)
--(axis cs:64.01,1.28954500505894)
--(axis cs:63.01,1.37026933983515)
--(axis cs:62.01,1.37332812415636)
--(axis cs:61.01,1.36266090088377)
--(axis cs:60.01,1.43255876418794)
--(axis cs:59.01,1.3895148428537)
--(axis cs:58.01,1.42358107468388)
--(axis cs:57.01,1.45989025775008)
--(axis cs:56.01,1.4803228222793)
--(axis cs:55.01,1.52151568783037)
--(axis cs:54.01,1.5439616092569)
--(axis cs:53.01,1.57316450119157)
--(axis cs:52.01,1.60185970374243)
--(axis cs:51.01,1.63503516084359)
--(axis cs:50.01,1.61914918240405)
--(axis cs:49.01,1.67948544804762)
--(axis cs:48.01,1.67741652838808)
--(axis cs:47.01,1.72199593991267)
--(axis cs:46.01,1.70993859245843)
--(axis cs:45.01,1.74574741533654)
--(axis cs:44.01,1.77212214549623)
--(axis cs:43.01,1.78815582557953)
--(axis cs:42.01,1.8869446534068)
--(axis cs:41.01,1.90833592003089)
--(axis cs:40.01,1.95023673787741)
--(axis cs:39.01,1.94358885443376)
--(axis cs:38.01,1.95672418983504)
--(axis cs:37.01,1.97856262475197)
--(axis cs:36.01,2.01478748419663)
--(axis cs:35.01,2.01359365334796)
--(axis cs:34.01,2.01911464757148)
--(axis cs:33.01,2.03336344147374)
--(axis cs:32.01,2.05555483536712)
--(axis cs:31.01,2.06119374392807)
--(axis cs:30.01,2.07270539798476)
--(axis cs:29.01,2.09978608758335)
--(axis cs:28.01,2.10160286653424)
--(axis cs:27.01,2.11042803481503)
--(axis cs:26.01,2.11745627631796)
--(axis cs:25.01,2.15273707375897)
--(axis cs:24.01,2.1979054548759)
--(axis cs:23.01,2.26610795274913)
--(axis cs:22.01,2.2787612434384)
--(axis cs:21.01,2.28692432539564)
--(axis cs:20.01,2.30981969177656)
--(axis cs:19.01,2.3171580722979)
--(axis cs:18.01,2.35053063523167)
--(axis cs:17.01,2.3446864367072)
--(axis cs:16.01,2.35725229515466)
--(axis cs:15.01,2.35084808794042)
--(axis cs:14.01,2.30948697149256)
--(axis cs:13.01,2.30425562753653)
--(axis cs:12.01,2.30336418137371)
--(axis cs:11.01,2.30412898419085)
--(axis cs:10.01,2.30386713240317)
--(axis cs:9.01,2.3044449883684)
--(axis cs:8.01,2.30412932369678)
--(axis cs:7.01,2.30355733036484)
--(axis cs:6.01,2.30493747372884)
--(axis cs:5.01,2.30463076184161)
--(axis cs:4.01,2.30499918105175)
--(axis cs:3.01,2.30391703038864)
--(axis cs:2.01,2.30552555534578)
--(axis cs:1.01,2.30508625186972)
--(axis cs:0.01,2.54470259369746)
--cycle;
\path [fill=color1, fill opacity=0.5] (axis cs:0.01,2.42867633899479)
--(axis cs:0.01,2.34985349575252)
--(axis cs:1.01,2.30295428171701)
--(axis cs:2.01,2.30277982006214)
--(axis cs:3.01,2.29947063956631)
--(axis cs:4.01,2.05329002514239)
--(axis cs:5.01,1.98078985634161)
--(axis cs:6.01,1.96085690876066)
--(axis cs:7.01,1.90997455503781)
--(axis cs:8.01,1.82966856231944)
--(axis cs:9.01,1.8036316639935)
--(axis cs:10.01,1.74720038031693)
--(axis cs:11.01,1.66066740049537)
--(axis cs:12.01,1.61356575376832)
--(axis cs:13.01,1.59391551558774)
--(axis cs:14.01,1.54011387168209)
--(axis cs:15.01,1.4941755804336)
--(axis cs:16.01,1.40541565041736)
--(axis cs:17.01,1.38603035028109)
--(axis cs:18.01,1.36563907147831)
--(axis cs:19.01,1.27502342587366)
--(axis cs:20.01,1.27132781990537)
--(axis cs:21.01,1.19623730688531)
--(axis cs:22.01,1.1312595897947)
--(axis cs:23.01,1.12675881511429)
--(axis cs:24.01,1.11921879932949)
--(axis cs:25.01,1.0974178916367)
--(axis cs:26.01,1.05854084152463)
--(axis cs:27.01,0.995639913746942)
--(axis cs:28.01,0.98535526152252)
--(axis cs:29.01,0.937082585213488)
--(axis cs:30.01,0.919745701290143)
--(axis cs:31.01,0.863300231186698)
--(axis cs:32.01,0.864351125349345)
--(axis cs:33.01,0.794952552870396)
--(axis cs:34.01,0.849342288254339)
--(axis cs:35.01,0.755938765699397)
--(axis cs:36.01,0.760092854586587)
--(axis cs:37.01,0.723127303219429)
--(axis cs:38.01,0.690908698684427)
--(axis cs:39.01,0.649568089178958)
--(axis cs:40.01,0.660149283266949)
--(axis cs:41.01,0.637669966484139)
--(axis cs:42.01,0.6405750943586)
--(axis cs:43.01,0.638338770631549)
--(axis cs:44.01,0.590535341193252)
--(axis cs:45.01,0.565021178205451)
--(axis cs:46.01,0.583648849860391)
--(axis cs:47.01,0.539703473256188)
--(axis cs:48.01,0.526474116686564)
--(axis cs:49.01,0.52244224440827)
--(axis cs:50.01,0.503662256955095)
--(axis cs:51.01,0.449985263658111)
--(axis cs:52.01,0.508500593593158)
--(axis cs:53.01,0.472113744607162)
--(axis cs:54.01,0.424988487453443)
--(axis cs:55.01,0.392902008784912)
--(axis cs:56.01,0.390779491061975)
--(axis cs:57.01,0.40529298054806)
--(axis cs:58.01,0.397780582509147)
--(axis cs:59.01,0.370670091140072)
--(axis cs:60.01,0.381864992712968)
--(axis cs:61.01,0.348791608842289)
--(axis cs:62.01,0.351376120956102)
--(axis cs:63.01,0.34963509382886)
--(axis cs:64.01,0.310247012774859)
--(axis cs:65.01,0.325152955850572)
--(axis cs:66.01,0.289184686477792)
--(axis cs:67.01,0.293962472895888)
--(axis cs:68.01,0.295852993706775)
--(axis cs:69.01,0.290553656275779)
--(axis cs:70.01,0.288493749449193)
--(axis cs:71.01,0.259464729508595)
--(axis cs:72.01,0.235254902872837)
--(axis cs:73.01,0.262150099888033)
--(axis cs:74.01,0.236437156571747)
--(axis cs:75.01,0.251047658594861)
--(axis cs:76.01,0.245427083347552)
--(axis cs:77.01,0.234386356152604)
--(axis cs:78.01,0.223299729891621)
--(axis cs:79.01,0.224214328653278)
--(axis cs:80.01,0.200153956870159)
--(axis cs:81.01,0.213309251307985)
--(axis cs:82.01,0.21189782682509)
--(axis cs:83.01,0.207343564007631)
--(axis cs:84.01,0.19848027084848)
--(axis cs:85.01,0.203053870530914)
--(axis cs:86.01,0.208445437868235)
--(axis cs:87.01,0.198862220359397)
--(axis cs:88.01,0.189060908957306)
--(axis cs:89.01,0.175640337383917)
--(axis cs:90.01,0.180434609398989)
--(axis cs:91.01,0.182030365264399)
--(axis cs:92.01,0.182088902839404)
--(axis cs:93.01,0.178153355636912)
--(axis cs:94.01,0.159863817810132)
--(axis cs:95.01,0.154361917421497)
--(axis cs:96.01,0.15929930246653)
--(axis cs:97.01,0.155431174682579)
--(axis cs:98.01,0.154350037679232)
--(axis cs:99.01,0.152921817130423)
--(axis cs:99.01,0.201904475265169)
--(axis cs:99.01,0.201904475265169)
--(axis cs:98.01,0.231551517739737)
--(axis cs:97.01,0.207220292640724)
--(axis cs:96.01,0.195343601338249)
--(axis cs:95.01,0.202832944348179)
--(axis cs:94.01,0.196970614672587)
--(axis cs:93.01,0.201525972566289)
--(axis cs:92.01,0.198654630533475)
--(axis cs:91.01,0.256049999201314)
--(axis cs:90.01,0.224233823075147)
--(axis cs:89.01,0.25906436868889)
--(axis cs:88.01,0.253394898370918)
--(axis cs:87.01,0.276594392942834)
--(axis cs:86.01,0.282734472433927)
--(axis cs:85.01,0.270766073731591)
--(axis cs:84.01,0.263663481130395)
--(axis cs:83.01,0.267609476472983)
--(axis cs:82.01,0.257858278717093)
--(axis cs:81.01,0.278747485042075)
--(axis cs:80.01,0.300613744994084)
--(axis cs:79.01,0.399682636731206)
--(axis cs:78.01,0.327768099240459)
--(axis cs:77.01,0.292305712424209)
--(axis cs:76.01,0.315601522351987)
--(axis cs:75.01,0.320177153078303)
--(axis cs:74.01,0.333955976591705)
--(axis cs:73.01,0.371248915777021)
--(axis cs:72.01,0.398842780556881)
--(axis cs:71.01,0.35871787003593)
--(axis cs:70.01,0.334943702867091)
--(axis cs:69.01,0.350994661395043)
--(axis cs:68.01,0.38954026820271)
--(axis cs:67.01,0.372911691446992)
--(axis cs:66.01,0.407028308574546)
--(axis cs:65.01,0.423199887672454)
--(axis cs:64.01,0.467625132401074)
--(axis cs:63.01,0.433335775712308)
--(axis cs:62.01,0.414051712839445)
--(axis cs:61.01,0.466375913588131)
--(axis cs:60.01,0.46784377899266)
--(axis cs:59.01,0.457041294348438)
--(axis cs:58.01,0.523498412766351)
--(axis cs:57.01,0.466652889374578)
--(axis cs:56.01,0.541837690477561)
--(axis cs:55.01,0.648063387380936)
--(axis cs:54.01,0.600574448614138)
--(axis cs:53.01,0.592274619946289)
--(axis cs:52.01,0.618040240118466)
--(axis cs:51.01,0.639913412022049)
--(axis cs:50.01,0.601841218710951)
--(axis cs:49.01,0.61063132989631)
--(axis cs:48.01,0.629033954497594)
--(axis cs:47.01,0.713024607493324)
--(axis cs:46.01,0.728342007263938)
--(axis cs:45.01,0.704386952440301)
--(axis cs:44.01,0.705398048470444)
--(axis cs:43.01,0.740239737268689)
--(axis cs:42.01,0.753115980489575)
--(axis cs:41.01,0.774040736888816)
--(axis cs:40.01,0.819439761780811)
--(axis cs:39.01,0.875871888466916)
--(axis cs:38.01,0.918679912441519)
--(axis cs:37.01,0.982247688674339)
--(axis cs:36.01,0.958444082650198)
--(axis cs:35.01,0.93118547469901)
--(axis cs:34.01,0.951700244666499)
--(axis cs:33.01,0.969406063004848)
--(axis cs:32.01,1.06043891132897)
--(axis cs:31.01,1.00876757791822)
--(axis cs:30.01,1.05335953857802)
--(axis cs:29.01,1.10282714712828)
--(axis cs:28.01,1.16301875953079)
--(axis cs:27.01,1.18112843685425)
--(axis cs:26.01,1.19466879707095)
--(axis cs:25.01,1.21784385381618)
--(axis cs:24.01,1.29954719855717)
--(axis cs:23.01,1.29792315834304)
--(axis cs:22.01,1.35334767758506)
--(axis cs:21.01,1.36995632142585)
--(axis cs:20.01,1.50858131400576)
--(axis cs:19.01,1.49244559878455)
--(axis cs:18.01,1.4761800002914)
--(axis cs:17.01,1.5529043096768)
--(axis cs:16.01,1.61775515456006)
--(axis cs:15.01,1.64045941502691)
--(axis cs:14.01,1.69931255043705)
--(axis cs:13.01,1.73485652859408)
--(axis cs:12.01,1.80010867231047)
--(axis cs:11.01,1.85098278032128)
--(axis cs:10.01,1.92260149861221)
--(axis cs:9.01,1.9189404719318)
--(axis cs:8.01,1.99434149989827)
--(axis cs:7.01,2.11507477376621)
--(axis cs:6.01,2.14413116554201)
--(axis cs:5.01,2.20151896056818)
--(axis cs:4.01,2.29614435062055)
--(axis cs:3.01,2.30493552651035)
--(axis cs:2.01,2.30390972843029)
--(axis cs:1.01,2.30450159177237)
--(axis cs:0.01,2.42867633899479)
--cycle;
\path [fill=color2, fill opacity=0.5] (axis cs:0.01,2.41338331671008)
--(axis cs:0.01,2.34937322168103)
--(axis cs:1.01,2.30291456041517)
--(axis cs:2.01,2.30309627979281)
--(axis cs:3.01,2.28828226955183)
--(axis cs:4.01,2.0493805591624)
--(axis cs:5.01,1.98604409995547)
--(axis cs:6.01,1.96610396661723)
--(axis cs:7.01,1.9182694411271)
--(axis cs:8.01,1.88510284900512)
--(axis cs:9.01,1.83034926822493)
--(axis cs:10.01,1.77341924939821)
--(axis cs:11.01,1.76499418361634)
--(axis cs:12.01,1.67801661035596)
--(axis cs:13.01,1.61632528084427)
--(axis cs:14.01,1.60662243860198)
--(axis cs:15.01,1.56815723847212)
--(axis cs:16.01,1.55731433982114)
--(axis cs:17.01,1.45839877783991)
--(axis cs:18.01,1.48438824274313)
--(axis cs:19.01,1.37222722527035)
--(axis cs:20.01,1.33694592625639)
--(axis cs:21.01,1.30152906320135)
--(axis cs:22.01,1.27238022845831)
--(axis cs:23.01,1.19779662941299)
--(axis cs:24.01,1.24809194058416)
--(axis cs:25.01,1.16121773340962)
--(axis cs:26.01,1.06152327567094)
--(axis cs:27.01,1.10273679687288)
--(axis cs:28.01,1.03587571282211)
--(axis cs:29.01,1.04743771917642)
--(axis cs:30.01,0.991533537288964)
--(axis cs:31.01,0.978344661874813)
--(axis cs:32.01,1.01155355363958)
--(axis cs:33.01,0.945925995071313)
--(axis cs:34.01,0.872028637383456)
--(axis cs:35.01,0.867202339693594)
--(axis cs:36.01,0.835478490751295)
--(axis cs:37.01,0.76225256845578)
--(axis cs:38.01,0.773421534624037)
--(axis cs:39.01,0.761150494198952)
--(axis cs:40.01,0.743988612817758)
--(axis cs:41.01,0.729146946060909)
--(axis cs:42.01,0.771368939560551)
--(axis cs:43.01,0.687506570501817)
--(axis cs:44.01,0.700350246924777)
--(axis cs:45.01,0.666472366693154)
--(axis cs:46.01,0.663150080565311)
--(axis cs:47.01,0.629740906520951)
--(axis cs:48.01,0.63363034016866)
--(axis cs:49.01,0.576661512288446)
--(axis cs:50.01,0.557656052692014)
--(axis cs:51.01,0.534110214514432)
--(axis cs:52.01,0.562066454664597)
--(axis cs:53.01,0.537571451026062)
--(axis cs:54.01,0.523325803467685)
--(axis cs:55.01,0.517463975947494)
--(axis cs:56.01,0.529869903882969)
--(axis cs:57.01,0.506115545522528)
--(axis cs:58.01,0.482086594273241)
--(axis cs:59.01,0.48483197293823)
--(axis cs:60.01,0.474501766081261)
--(axis cs:61.01,0.414977402571388)
--(axis cs:62.01,0.429449447954419)
--(axis cs:63.01,0.41840112782649)
--(axis cs:64.01,0.381666199863823)
--(axis cs:65.01,0.402211179987152)
--(axis cs:66.01,0.398038786702181)
--(axis cs:67.01,0.373016842518822)
--(axis cs:68.01,0.371069927231462)
--(axis cs:69.01,0.339581921872646)
--(axis cs:70.01,0.34657604532124)
--(axis cs:71.01,0.330928000962127)
--(axis cs:72.01,0.321751810496256)
--(axis cs:73.01,0.323112638072802)
--(axis cs:74.01,0.290092977530974)
--(axis cs:75.01,0.297292057320293)
--(axis cs:76.01,0.315618662506282)
--(axis cs:77.01,0.275802198066398)
--(axis cs:78.01,0.310049198781489)
--(axis cs:79.01,0.2797115401676)
--(axis cs:80.01,0.285864733377917)
--(axis cs:81.01,0.301367774775469)
--(axis cs:82.01,0.271368227773616)
--(axis cs:83.01,0.252792795184955)
--(axis cs:84.01,0.250095817547515)
--(axis cs:85.01,0.265728397424161)
--(axis cs:86.01,0.254860037941302)
--(axis cs:87.01,0.233454418834089)
--(axis cs:88.01,0.232780026727434)
--(axis cs:89.01,0.222686155354436)
--(axis cs:90.01,0.225403731498257)
--(axis cs:91.01,0.21708199895214)
--(axis cs:92.01,0.200269498575268)
--(axis cs:93.01,0.207754060475469)
--(axis cs:94.01,0.201116451915152)
--(axis cs:95.01,0.215753544824345)
--(axis cs:96.01,0.193626239246026)
--(axis cs:97.01,0.192289523511744)
--(axis cs:98.01,0.179059642386741)
--(axis cs:99.01,0.195885149681581)
--(axis cs:99.01,0.269432019150245)
--(axis cs:99.01,0.269432019150245)
--(axis cs:98.01,0.259430807995491)
--(axis cs:97.01,0.254315118760251)
--(axis cs:96.01,0.285002542191847)
--(axis cs:95.01,0.270093496186512)
--(axis cs:94.01,0.295080271069162)
--(axis cs:93.01,0.280590793640971)
--(axis cs:92.01,0.352437607299747)
--(axis cs:91.01,0.322670791379701)
--(axis cs:90.01,0.309717494812473)
--(axis cs:89.01,0.318934954488818)
--(axis cs:88.01,0.33204043275762)
--(axis cs:87.01,0.327127822581889)
--(axis cs:86.01,0.34754163585249)
--(axis cs:85.01,0.346080686395229)
--(axis cs:84.01,0.344274487990663)
--(axis cs:83.01,0.364639459367887)
--(axis cs:82.01,0.353584994501164)
--(axis cs:81.01,0.387753513285673)
--(axis cs:80.01,0.421211255868451)
--(axis cs:79.01,0.395436559493273)
--(axis cs:78.01,0.37328427561617)
--(axis cs:77.01,0.459599205837563)
--(axis cs:76.01,0.468592943280995)
--(axis cs:75.01,0.428727390721623)
--(axis cs:74.01,0.43916889166115)
--(axis cs:73.01,0.53621043436067)
--(axis cs:72.01,0.460881976897314)
--(axis cs:71.01,0.542614027703416)
--(axis cs:70.01,0.457191224528537)
--(axis cs:69.01,0.499199262085408)
--(axis cs:68.01,0.517926733477919)
--(axis cs:67.01,0.480713228072151)
--(axis cs:66.01,0.528202056832288)
--(axis cs:65.01,0.563669285520355)
--(axis cs:64.01,0.583839817344276)
--(axis cs:63.01,0.558171022165499)
--(axis cs:62.01,0.614050456916568)
--(axis cs:61.01,0.678528397198967)
--(axis cs:60.01,0.615734730844093)
--(axis cs:59.01,0.650680128712008)
--(axis cs:58.01,0.625934063027708)
--(axis cs:57.01,0.602882985580606)
--(axis cs:56.01,0.689343164602291)
--(axis cs:55.01,0.718068510491257)
--(axis cs:54.01,0.678153762629575)
--(axis cs:53.01,0.748504325789352)
--(axis cs:52.01,0.722264187558761)
--(axis cs:51.01,0.793466851907077)
--(axis cs:50.01,0.698577412979525)
--(axis cs:49.01,0.890823271837836)
--(axis cs:48.01,0.872408683230693)
--(axis cs:47.01,0.791600298122298)
--(axis cs:46.01,0.91892621862521)
--(axis cs:45.01,0.895829733965263)
--(axis cs:44.01,0.840177490215879)
--(axis cs:43.01,0.83043288977574)
--(axis cs:42.01,0.88553132327209)
--(axis cs:41.01,0.983571040045963)
--(axis cs:40.01,0.954318794084556)
--(axis cs:39.01,0.995981320757713)
--(axis cs:38.01,1.03299453583724)
--(axis cs:37.01,1.21324429586307)
--(axis cs:36.01,1.02453314645955)
--(axis cs:35.01,1.10054117627473)
--(axis cs:34.01,1.11159472420407)
--(axis cs:33.01,1.15614059333048)
--(axis cs:32.01,1.18811100334055)
--(axis cs:31.01,1.15609832318302)
--(axis cs:30.01,1.19736886463517)
--(axis cs:29.01,1.21601980560004)
--(axis cs:28.01,1.22411793570694)
--(axis cs:27.01,1.27813581035826)
--(axis cs:26.01,1.37694220036513)
--(axis cs:25.01,1.39944277188518)
--(axis cs:24.01,1.37714199572565)
--(axis cs:23.01,1.42724678661027)
--(axis cs:22.01,1.48241575199518)
--(axis cs:21.01,1.45261918165644)
--(axis cs:20.01,1.50757719367006)
--(axis cs:19.01,1.55885073188297)
--(axis cs:18.01,1.64609373948801)
--(axis cs:17.01,1.67985200226568)
--(axis cs:16.01,1.74829593544742)
--(axis cs:15.01,1.70289710093676)
--(axis cs:14.01,1.73668975336121)
--(axis cs:13.01,1.7985329888472)
--(axis cs:12.01,1.85077202775897)
--(axis cs:11.01,1.92165757076293)
--(axis cs:10.01,1.93863674368193)
--(axis cs:9.01,1.99057828018358)
--(axis cs:8.01,2.03597177982484)
--(axis cs:7.01,2.13157828092643)
--(axis cs:6.01,2.14641057691609)
--(axis cs:5.01,2.20368859467038)
--(axis cs:4.01,2.28574369506428)
--(axis cs:3.01,2.31006076900713)
--(axis cs:2.01,2.30477024585722)
--(axis cs:1.01,2.30531655492601)
--(axis cs:0.01,2.41338331671008)
--cycle;
\path [fill=color3, fill opacity=0.5] (axis cs:0.01,2.4009776213811)
--(axis cs:0.01,2.34741052597303)
--(axis cs:1.01,2.30328248369104)
--(axis cs:2.01,2.30260400006661)
--(axis cs:3.01,2.29670931694077)
--(axis cs:4.01,2.07587078028163)
--(axis cs:5.01,2.01708612544753)
--(axis cs:6.01,1.98959684199108)
--(axis cs:7.01,1.9381053730176)
--(axis cs:8.01,1.97025355243763)
--(axis cs:9.01,1.93152225143234)
--(axis cs:10.01,1.87776802768994)
--(axis cs:11.01,1.82146916274957)
--(axis cs:12.01,1.79575965610533)
--(axis cs:13.01,1.77602471424723)
--(axis cs:14.01,1.72362113152385)
--(axis cs:15.01,1.67762475864118)
--(axis cs:16.01,1.63170518417766)
--(axis cs:17.01,1.60752814372615)
--(axis cs:18.01,1.57027452475218)
--(axis cs:19.01,1.55268986622177)
--(axis cs:20.01,1.48529305048972)
--(axis cs:21.01,1.4669553924779)
--(axis cs:22.01,1.43071937928074)
--(axis cs:23.01,1.41909987397707)
--(axis cs:24.01,1.37335110330406)
--(axis cs:25.01,1.3301701883738)
--(axis cs:26.01,1.2617724120986)
--(axis cs:27.01,1.23467901338305)
--(axis cs:28.01,1.28615949787081)
--(axis cs:29.01,1.18927240659219)
--(axis cs:30.01,1.18740036556916)
--(axis cs:31.01,1.00034848958836)
--(axis cs:32.01,1.08801407788778)
--(axis cs:33.01,1.04644500378295)
--(axis cs:34.01,1.04246228712788)
--(axis cs:35.01,1.04592162313884)
--(axis cs:36.01,1.0121533517811)
--(axis cs:37.01,0.970501534010717)
--(axis cs:38.01,0.916232776985196)
--(axis cs:39.01,0.939883219006247)
--(axis cs:40.01,0.958592785706533)
--(axis cs:41.01,0.870051027031347)
--(axis cs:42.01,0.878848953378132)
--(axis cs:43.01,0.790508149766356)
--(axis cs:44.01,0.815683050798919)
--(axis cs:45.01,0.812523960879456)
--(axis cs:46.01,0.767142954704774)
--(axis cs:47.01,0.821332411986272)
--(axis cs:48.01,0.792021744574208)
--(axis cs:49.01,0.76495416570287)
--(axis cs:50.01,0.713686218193961)
--(axis cs:51.01,0.71001451427704)
--(axis cs:52.01,0.681785744424766)
--(axis cs:53.01,0.645790491966512)
--(axis cs:54.01,0.648650337987422)
--(axis cs:55.01,0.711130953917815)
--(axis cs:56.01,0.621330610046325)
--(axis cs:57.01,0.619329073710223)
--(axis cs:58.01,0.599067076585368)
--(axis cs:59.01,0.587627479699628)
--(axis cs:60.01,0.545881991011389)
--(axis cs:61.01,0.540271629357873)
--(axis cs:62.01,0.549262532753894)
--(axis cs:63.01,0.555221700841)
--(axis cs:64.01,0.499142874863549)
--(axis cs:65.01,0.482364015640906)
--(axis cs:66.01,0.504179938093211)
--(axis cs:67.01,0.529886362534944)
--(axis cs:68.01,0.461037519038722)
--(axis cs:69.01,0.486303377426544)
--(axis cs:70.01,0.516966014517926)
--(axis cs:71.01,0.445762458369509)
--(axis cs:72.01,0.431664073231133)
--(axis cs:73.01,0.429480287891957)
--(axis cs:74.01,0.427042096312717)
--(axis cs:75.01,0.433094506903543)
--(axis cs:76.01,0.422116082824716)
--(axis cs:77.01,0.349894731708451)
--(axis cs:78.01,0.359962316228248)
--(axis cs:79.01,0.344669464862275)
--(axis cs:80.01,0.363343018022)
--(axis cs:81.01,0.385883152109209)
--(axis cs:82.01,0.352703149270689)
--(axis cs:83.01,0.347845613379086)
--(axis cs:84.01,0.340398006887522)
--(axis cs:85.01,0.313117913444722)
--(axis cs:86.01,0.332053111550376)
--(axis cs:87.01,0.291785857779162)
--(axis cs:88.01,0.338356526895483)
--(axis cs:89.01,0.303333751924397)
--(axis cs:90.01,0.307387211157302)
--(axis cs:91.01,0.300732945620729)
--(axis cs:92.01,0.301882690468556)
--(axis cs:93.01,0.303893223083131)
--(axis cs:94.01,0.273770377087347)
--(axis cs:95.01,0.263516770504636)
--(axis cs:96.01,0.244541114349994)
--(axis cs:97.01,0.26266833257474)
--(axis cs:98.01,0.236556307933911)
--(axis cs:99.01,0.241613142490989)
--(axis cs:99.01,0.495347760319108)
--(axis cs:99.01,0.495347760319108)
--(axis cs:98.01,0.548973654248134)
--(axis cs:97.01,0.46297499227725)
--(axis cs:96.01,0.496404272536603)
--(axis cs:95.01,0.482431424952822)
--(axis cs:94.01,0.550606986832865)
--(axis cs:93.01,0.491054329597838)
--(axis cs:92.01,0.542310434302562)
--(axis cs:91.01,0.485371709645079)
--(axis cs:90.01,0.52528704779007)
--(axis cs:89.01,0.514729870788692)
--(axis cs:88.01,0.537236026720087)
--(axis cs:87.01,0.542624934810025)
--(axis cs:86.01,0.549336184504464)
--(axis cs:85.01,0.585718496600901)
--(axis cs:84.01,0.534539700298224)
--(axis cs:83.01,0.607663375716601)
--(axis cs:82.01,0.6017314363006)
--(axis cs:81.01,0.610794955867705)
--(axis cs:80.01,0.613042390617907)
--(axis cs:79.01,0.686295309031081)
--(axis cs:78.01,0.684408627079628)
--(axis cs:77.01,0.671518844894485)
--(axis cs:76.01,0.654656636796942)
--(axis cs:75.01,0.677838069752799)
--(axis cs:74.01,0.678856784645841)
--(axis cs:73.01,0.728411337273982)
--(axis cs:72.01,0.67227664613494)
--(axis cs:71.01,0.672590842917188)
--(axis cs:70.01,0.753422874794819)
--(axis cs:69.01,0.72269892069014)
--(axis cs:68.01,0.702570716082051)
--(axis cs:67.01,0.762193992155607)
--(axis cs:66.01,0.733494441255544)
--(axis cs:65.01,0.819102723536799)
--(axis cs:64.01,0.808734725329475)
--(axis cs:63.01,0.807957160300205)
--(axis cs:62.01,0.798337796168378)
--(axis cs:61.01,0.775090728735389)
--(axis cs:60.01,0.92686862506222)
--(axis cs:59.01,0.919393208357318)
--(axis cs:58.01,0.889889958956167)
--(axis cs:57.01,0.887525376992445)
--(axis cs:56.01,0.932030567398133)
--(axis cs:55.01,0.995581840386079)
--(axis cs:54.01,0.903246496386052)
--(axis cs:53.01,0.939225555988047)
--(axis cs:52.01,0.94652503133207)
--(axis cs:51.01,0.97836291377777)
--(axis cs:50.01,0.937111113139199)
--(axis cs:49.01,1.10529816936869)
--(axis cs:48.01,1.04495100465904)
--(axis cs:47.01,1.12018740870388)
--(axis cs:46.01,0.983402856948363)
--(axis cs:45.01,1.0188338877648)
--(axis cs:44.01,1.09960387165591)
--(axis cs:43.01,1.14115859398898)
--(axis cs:42.01,1.13290814625032)
--(axis cs:41.01,1.12319507530172)
--(axis cs:40.01,1.18906288016795)
--(axis cs:39.01,1.22132537483912)
--(axis cs:38.01,1.23567129339215)
--(axis cs:37.01,1.25555135819738)
--(axis cs:36.01,1.27109591913488)
--(axis cs:35.01,1.36106137094075)
--(axis cs:34.01,1.24898261052379)
--(axis cs:33.01,1.26240403291062)
--(axis cs:32.01,1.27616074110483)
--(axis cs:31.01,1.44980269163265)
--(axis cs:30.01,1.36598689486785)
--(axis cs:29.01,1.48059768389243)
--(axis cs:28.01,1.44671089016019)
--(axis cs:27.01,1.46398796449933)
--(axis cs:26.01,1.46589646931772)
--(axis cs:25.01,1.46699935393882)
--(axis cs:24.01,1.49657711363014)
--(axis cs:23.01,1.58640845350706)
--(axis cs:22.01,1.56829380622036)
--(axis cs:21.01,1.64350577104292)
--(axis cs:20.01,1.64292803219766)
--(axis cs:19.01,1.68622829517045)
--(axis cs:18.01,1.75339691155764)
--(axis cs:17.01,1.75063690582677)
--(axis cs:16.01,1.79146492938588)
--(axis cs:15.01,1.80535410984332)
--(axis cs:14.01,1.87517711962819)
--(axis cs:13.01,1.93214674876546)
--(axis cs:12.01,1.90413698944063)
--(axis cs:11.01,1.95399472827979)
--(axis cs:10.01,1.98355785617542)
--(axis cs:9.01,2.00952587001999)
--(axis cs:8.01,2.03746057605663)
--(axis cs:7.01,2.13159956491728)
--(axis cs:6.01,2.17335176640736)
--(axis cs:5.01,2.22256283657335)
--(axis cs:4.01,2.29586684293309)
--(axis cs:3.01,2.30654099586441)
--(axis cs:2.01,2.30435767939201)
--(axis cs:1.01,2.30467416418189)
--(axis cs:0.01,2.4009776213811)
--cycle;
\path [fill=color4, fill opacity=0.5] (axis cs:0.01,2.39671946546161)
--(axis cs:0.01,2.345309533867)
--(axis cs:1.01,2.3030319898782)
--(axis cs:2.01,2.30250250689852)
--(axis cs:3.01,2.30089785257021)
--(axis cs:4.01,2.09736513312562)
--(axis cs:5.01,2.06402980974296)
--(axis cs:6.01,1.98779678189746)
--(axis cs:7.01,1.96996472872184)
--(axis cs:8.01,1.98965125114837)
--(axis cs:9.01,1.95530071486188)
--(axis cs:10.01,1.93691173828118)
--(axis cs:11.01,1.89749489740132)
--(axis cs:12.01,1.91051907927853)
--(axis cs:13.01,1.8427540896647)
--(axis cs:14.01,1.79363772795063)
--(axis cs:15.01,1.76171009732523)
--(axis cs:16.01,1.79545994400196)
--(axis cs:17.01,1.74232277402048)
--(axis cs:18.01,1.71188521573782)
--(axis cs:19.01,1.67915745606559)
--(axis cs:20.01,1.65617890101043)
--(axis cs:21.01,1.58500307045783)
--(axis cs:22.01,1.60202983879776)
--(axis cs:23.01,1.5888369594335)
--(axis cs:24.01,1.5307281201651)
--(axis cs:25.01,1.53743966204309)
--(axis cs:26.01,1.53364824509042)
--(axis cs:27.01,1.47751926110991)
--(axis cs:28.01,1.45092365061484)
--(axis cs:29.01,1.42316147244747)
--(axis cs:30.01,1.37763416311234)
--(axis cs:31.01,1.41999151424504)
--(axis cs:32.01,1.37195331550683)
--(axis cs:33.01,1.44209996647039)
--(axis cs:34.01,1.30354650074666)
--(axis cs:35.01,1.28133383669957)
--(axis cs:36.01,1.31150111227144)
--(axis cs:37.01,1.33125419212155)
--(axis cs:38.01,1.27006658711483)
--(axis cs:39.01,1.2632632224044)
--(axis cs:40.01,1.26963416584079)
--(axis cs:41.01,1.2577621757095)
--(axis cs:42.01,1.27020160434476)
--(axis cs:43.01,1.21680878779552)
--(axis cs:44.01,1.16633097619074)
--(axis cs:45.01,1.15100116531059)
--(axis cs:46.01,1.15103184020224)
--(axis cs:47.01,1.14400081414298)
--(axis cs:48.01,1.13412638110848)
--(axis cs:49.01,1.1325221945669)
--(axis cs:50.01,1.1406506948673)
--(axis cs:51.01,1.10947629234995)
--(axis cs:52.01,1.09216006303563)
--(axis cs:53.01,1.13978071471663)
--(axis cs:54.01,1.05916948666915)
--(axis cs:55.01,1.0584536043781)
--(axis cs:56.01,1.05781747217638)
--(axis cs:57.01,1.01354306594331)
--(axis cs:58.01,1.03780609095741)
--(axis cs:59.01,1.02275019041834)
--(axis cs:60.01,1.04027045819666)
--(axis cs:61.01,0.95586116532065)
--(axis cs:62.01,1.05320590168429)
--(axis cs:63.01,0.945146996593547)
--(axis cs:64.01,0.960849428862135)
--(axis cs:65.01,0.954184980279092)
--(axis cs:66.01,0.93329992718549)
--(axis cs:67.01,0.94308995641637)
--(axis cs:68.01,0.977144316326401)
--(axis cs:69.01,0.932173086124916)
--(axis cs:70.01,0.911968963261505)
--(axis cs:71.01,0.870937274462908)
--(axis cs:72.01,0.868449199058242)
--(axis cs:73.01,0.833110211456678)
--(axis cs:74.01,0.820239413589692)
--(axis cs:75.01,0.871381247416382)
--(axis cs:76.01,0.810193110383543)
--(axis cs:77.01,0.832783224111179)
--(axis cs:78.01,0.778491332817843)
--(axis cs:79.01,0.84198479334288)
--(axis cs:80.01,0.824301816482232)
--(axis cs:81.01,0.794798464793989)
--(axis cs:82.01,0.810060988836239)
--(axis cs:83.01,0.798463609607487)
--(axis cs:84.01,0.758927669572573)
--(axis cs:85.01,0.737132350227442)
--(axis cs:86.01,0.779060323630869)
--(axis cs:87.01,0.755528363800697)
--(axis cs:88.01,0.795853659761337)
--(axis cs:89.01,0.713232402244808)
--(axis cs:90.01,0.683971571045929)
--(axis cs:91.01,0.696504123043225)
--(axis cs:92.01,0.717490194140137)
--(axis cs:93.01,0.675534978944056)
--(axis cs:94.01,0.7017172578374)
--(axis cs:95.01,0.697269146801669)
--(axis cs:96.01,0.671970591822329)
--(axis cs:97.01,0.703041449743727)
--(axis cs:98.01,0.687750926756661)
--(axis cs:99.01,0.674932403173632)
--(axis cs:99.01,0.994302242193037)
--(axis cs:99.01,0.994302242193037)
--(axis cs:98.01,0.973556694245536)
--(axis cs:97.01,0.999429067414782)
--(axis cs:96.01,0.990069808682737)
--(axis cs:95.01,0.998832065699857)
--(axis cs:94.01,1.06042481627072)
--(axis cs:93.01,1.02187546150089)
--(axis cs:92.01,1.06731312483722)
--(axis cs:91.01,1.01084305541594)
--(axis cs:90.01,1.06824842779059)
--(axis cs:89.01,1.0515848356092)
--(axis cs:88.01,1.0139783886548)
--(axis cs:87.01,1.02451119699413)
--(axis cs:86.01,1.01513531645626)
--(axis cs:85.01,1.07863832352439)
--(axis cs:84.01,1.0684865927222)
--(axis cs:83.01,1.08631897887442)
--(axis cs:82.01,1.08992797238355)
--(axis cs:81.01,1.19774595973986)
--(axis cs:80.01,1.07632983778031)
--(axis cs:79.01,1.08490128835268)
--(axis cs:78.01,1.1193101021759)
--(axis cs:77.01,1.12528567122879)
--(axis cs:76.01,1.15776520880362)
--(axis cs:75.01,1.13336318694031)
--(axis cs:74.01,1.11689156213357)
--(axis cs:73.01,1.15973974648628)
--(axis cs:72.01,1.15250132098036)
--(axis cs:71.01,1.15487829589155)
--(axis cs:70.01,1.10872925031577)
--(axis cs:69.01,1.15749878792141)
--(axis cs:68.01,1.18042139660237)
--(axis cs:67.01,1.19618708454204)
--(axis cs:66.01,1.17702475361972)
--(axis cs:65.01,1.20889223110091)
--(axis cs:64.01,1.22821882894655)
--(axis cs:63.01,1.25542817630761)
--(axis cs:62.01,1.29651598304318)
--(axis cs:61.01,1.27147693415903)
--(axis cs:60.01,1.26432753946874)
--(axis cs:59.01,1.23477465756597)
--(axis cs:58.01,1.21582733666252)
--(axis cs:57.01,1.35092792852919)
--(axis cs:56.01,1.28281588439482)
--(axis cs:55.01,1.28358562310756)
--(axis cs:54.01,1.35035557398454)
--(axis cs:53.01,1.29550957420854)
--(axis cs:52.01,1.39425278400645)
--(axis cs:51.01,1.36291983105932)
--(axis cs:50.01,1.40318740079768)
--(axis cs:49.01,1.37655108672125)
--(axis cs:48.01,1.39563998775749)
--(axis cs:47.01,1.36613052111551)
--(axis cs:46.01,1.40926133358774)
--(axis cs:45.01,1.39551999767616)
--(axis cs:44.01,1.45811069518072)
--(axis cs:43.01,1.44315977909901)
--(axis cs:42.01,1.47265868904361)
--(axis cs:41.01,1.52790169128726)
--(axis cs:40.01,1.47542100898679)
--(axis cs:39.01,1.44980345087441)
--(axis cs:38.01,1.51461923918674)
--(axis cs:37.01,1.50766954826542)
--(axis cs:36.01,1.58901141614805)
--(axis cs:35.01,1.48951474747554)
--(axis cs:34.01,1.52606139128978)
--(axis cs:33.01,1.59172757678828)
--(axis cs:32.01,1.60967407726203)
--(axis cs:31.01,1.56188531204128)
--(axis cs:30.01,1.67978427866012)
--(axis cs:29.01,1.70639678084079)
--(axis cs:28.01,1.6183424779252)
--(axis cs:27.01,1.70208190752259)
--(axis cs:26.01,1.72952988887412)
--(axis cs:25.01,1.72011372464514)
--(axis cs:24.01,1.72077942435241)
--(axis cs:23.01,1.72677337782388)
--(axis cs:22.01,1.75952652430801)
--(axis cs:21.01,1.85647890128289)
--(axis cs:20.01,1.82549119252595)
--(axis cs:19.01,1.84246248373848)
--(axis cs:18.01,1.83557317068338)
--(axis cs:17.01,1.87461700907584)
--(axis cs:16.01,1.91664630771465)
--(axis cs:15.01,1.93411803053579)
--(axis cs:14.01,1.92606573178906)
--(axis cs:13.01,1.93218799846243)
--(axis cs:12.01,1.98063461392063)
--(axis cs:11.01,1.98121494337321)
--(axis cs:10.01,2.02048310005194)
--(axis cs:9.01,2.0122961736803)
--(axis cs:8.01,2.03692948787293)
--(axis cs:7.01,2.14705554448678)
--(axis cs:6.01,2.15913162386426)
--(axis cs:5.01,2.24914210149666)
--(axis cs:4.01,2.30553770844237)
--(axis cs:3.01,2.30502637228331)
--(axis cs:2.01,2.3056650937332)
--(axis cs:1.01,2.30478289430759)
--(axis cs:0.01,2.39671946546161)
--cycle;
\addplot [, color0]
table [row sep=\\]{
0.01 2.4714145898819 \\
1.01 2.30453205108643 \\
2.01 2.30433795452118 \\
3.01 2.30341062545776 \\
4.01 2.30409376621246 \\
5.01 2.30375998020172 \\
6.01 2.30401821136475 \\
7.01 2.30319814682007 \\
8.01 2.30347170829773 \\
9.01 2.3037003993988 \\
10.01 2.30326743125916 \\
11.01 2.30346558094025 \\
12.01 2.3028062582016 \\
13.01 2.30261480808258 \\
14.01 2.30005028247833 \\
15.01 2.28014934062958 \\
16.01 2.27260582447052 \\
17.01 2.23304259777069 \\
18.01 2.21946773529053 \\
19.01 2.18476746082306 \\
20.01 2.16270508766174 \\
21.01 2.14029811620712 \\
22.01 2.12145005464554 \\
23.01 2.10117149353027 \\
24.01 2.05330427885056 \\
25.01 2.02206077575684 \\
26.01 1.99442105293274 \\
27.01 1.98032044172287 \\
28.01 1.9555039525032 \\
29.01 1.95238540172577 \\
30.01 1.91776361465454 \\
31.01 1.89581339359283 \\
32.01 1.88331468105316 \\
33.01 1.85502976179123 \\
34.01 1.8381178021431 \\
35.01 1.81507279872894 \\
36.01 1.81983696222305 \\
37.01 1.76490489244461 \\
38.01 1.73332922458649 \\
39.01 1.71731123924255 \\
40.01 1.71384716033936 \\
41.01 1.674678337574 \\
42.01 1.65969525575638 \\
43.01 1.59440381526947 \\
44.01 1.57558962106705 \\
45.01 1.54339776039124 \\
46.01 1.5112478017807 \\
47.01 1.50547783374786 \\
48.01 1.47560610771179 \\
49.01 1.44938462972641 \\
50.01 1.39402194023132 \\
51.01 1.39676207304001 \\
52.01 1.36968584060669 \\
53.01 1.34932531118393 \\
54.01 1.32678372859955 \\
55.01 1.29703013896942 \\
56.01 1.26160634756088 \\
57.01 1.23816561698914 \\
58.01 1.20418590903282 \\
59.01 1.18088066577911 \\
60.01 1.20590534806252 \\
61.01 1.14159546494484 \\
62.01 1.1276721060276 \\
63.01 1.12773335576057 \\
64.01 1.05644135475159 \\
65.01 1.0571981549263 \\
66.01 1.01760666370392 \\
67.01 0.990599650144577 \\
68.01 0.968292504549026 \\
69.01 0.937833440303802 \\
70.01 0.921331113576889 \\
71.01 0.947438251972198 \\
72.01 0.896547919511795 \\
73.01 0.890097570419311 \\
74.01 0.858529978990555 \\
75.01 0.822597724199295 \\
76.01 0.796720892190933 \\
77.01 0.822231739759445 \\
78.01 0.782189905643463 \\
79.01 0.757928729057312 \\
80.01 0.734631407260895 \\
81.01 0.728674334287643 \\
82.01 0.694531619548798 \\
83.01 0.699726319313049 \\
84.01 0.668521493673325 \\
85.01 0.674117681384087 \\
86.01 0.643911120295525 \\
87.01 0.630861061811447 \\
88.01 0.623744013905525 \\
89.01 0.62620612680912 \\
90.01 0.61048589348793 \\
91.01 0.567880019545555 \\
92.01 0.585124152898788 \\
93.01 0.546360874176025 \\
94.01 0.517582839727402 \\
95.01 0.535560983419418 \\
96.01 0.526000207662582 \\
97.01 0.503140696883202 \\
98.01 0.471934565901756 \\
99.01 0.476218715310097 \\
};
\addplot [, color1]
table [row sep=\\]{
0.01 2.38926491737366 \\
1.01 2.30372793674469 \\
2.01 2.30334477424622 \\
3.01 2.30220308303833 \\
4.01 2.17471718788147 \\
5.01 2.0911544084549 \\
6.01 2.05249403715134 \\
7.01 2.01252466440201 \\
8.01 1.91200503110886 \\
9.01 1.86128606796265 \\
10.01 1.83490093946457 \\
11.01 1.75582509040833 \\
12.01 1.7068372130394 \\
13.01 1.66438602209091 \\
14.01 1.61971321105957 \\
15.01 1.56731749773025 \\
16.01 1.51158540248871 \\
17.01 1.46946732997894 \\
18.01 1.42090953588486 \\
19.01 1.3837345123291 \\
20.01 1.38995456695557 \\
21.01 1.28309681415558 \\
22.01 1.24230363368988 \\
23.01 1.21234098672867 \\
24.01 1.20938299894333 \\
25.01 1.15763087272644 \\
26.01 1.12660481929779 \\
27.01 1.0883841753006 \\
28.01 1.07418701052666 \\
29.01 1.01995486617088 \\
30.01 0.986552619934082 \\
31.01 0.93603390455246 \\
32.01 0.962395018339157 \\
33.01 0.882179307937622 \\
34.01 0.900521266460419 \\
35.01 0.843562120199204 \\
36.01 0.859268468618393 \\
37.01 0.852687495946884 \\
38.01 0.804794305562973 \\
39.01 0.762719988822937 \\
40.01 0.73979452252388 \\
41.01 0.705855351686478 \\
42.01 0.696845537424088 \\
43.01 0.689289253950119 \\
44.01 0.647966694831848 \\
45.01 0.634704065322876 \\
46.01 0.655995428562164 \\
47.01 0.626364040374756 \\
48.01 0.577754035592079 \\
49.01 0.56653678715229 \\
50.01 0.552751737833023 \\
51.01 0.54494933784008 \\
52.01 0.563270416855812 \\
53.01 0.532194182276726 \\
54.01 0.512781468033791 \\
55.01 0.520482698082924 \\
56.01 0.466308590769768 \\
57.01 0.435972934961319 \\
58.01 0.460639497637749 \\
59.01 0.413855692744255 \\
60.01 0.424854385852814 \\
61.01 0.40758376121521 \\
62.01 0.382713916897774 \\
63.01 0.391485434770584 \\
64.01 0.388936072587967 \\
65.01 0.374176421761513 \\
66.01 0.348106497526169 \\
67.01 0.33343708217144 \\
68.01 0.342696630954742 \\
69.01 0.320774158835411 \\
70.01 0.311718726158142 \\
71.01 0.309091299772263 \\
72.01 0.317048841714859 \\
73.01 0.316699507832527 \\
74.01 0.285196566581726 \\
75.01 0.285612405836582 \\
76.01 0.28051430284977 \\
77.01 0.263346034288406 \\
78.01 0.27553391456604 \\
79.01 0.311948482692242 \\
80.01 0.250383850932121 \\
81.01 0.24602836817503 \\
82.01 0.234878052771092 \\
83.01 0.237476520240307 \\
84.01 0.231071875989437 \\
85.01 0.236909972131252 \\
86.01 0.245589955151081 \\
87.01 0.237728306651115 \\
88.01 0.221227903664112 \\
89.01 0.217352353036404 \\
90.01 0.202334216237068 \\
91.01 0.219040182232857 \\
92.01 0.19037176668644 \\
93.01 0.189839664101601 \\
94.01 0.17841721624136 \\
95.01 0.178597430884838 \\
96.01 0.17732145190239 \\
97.01 0.181325733661652 \\
98.01 0.192950777709484 \\
99.01 0.177413146197796 \\
};
\addplot [, color2, dashed]
table [row sep=\\]{
0.01 2.38137826919556 \\
1.01 2.30411555767059 \\
2.01 2.30393326282501 \\
3.01 2.29917151927948 \\
4.01 2.16756212711334 \\
5.01 2.09486634731293 \\
6.01 2.05625727176666 \\
7.01 2.02492386102676 \\
8.01 1.96053731441498 \\
9.01 1.91046377420425 \\
10.01 1.85602799654007 \\
11.01 1.84332587718964 \\
12.01 1.76439431905746 \\
13.01 1.70742913484573 \\
14.01 1.6716560959816 \\
15.01 1.63552716970444 \\
16.01 1.65280513763428 \\
17.01 1.5691253900528 \\
18.01 1.56524099111557 \\
19.01 1.46553897857666 \\
20.01 1.42226155996323 \\
21.01 1.37707412242889 \\
22.01 1.37739799022675 \\
23.01 1.31252170801163 \\
24.01 1.31261696815491 \\
25.01 1.2803302526474 \\
26.01 1.21923273801804 \\
27.01 1.19043630361557 \\
28.01 1.12999682426453 \\
29.01 1.13172876238823 \\
30.01 1.09445120096207 \\
31.01 1.06722149252892 \\
32.01 1.09983227849007 \\
33.01 1.0510332942009 \\
34.01 0.991811680793762 \\
35.01 0.983871757984161 \\
36.01 0.930005818605423 \\
37.01 0.987748432159424 \\
38.01 0.903208035230637 \\
39.01 0.878565907478333 \\
40.01 0.849153703451157 \\
41.01 0.856358993053436 \\
42.01 0.828450131416321 \\
43.01 0.758969730138779 \\
44.01 0.770263868570328 \\
45.01 0.781151050329208 \\
46.01 0.791038149595261 \\
47.01 0.710670602321625 \\
48.01 0.753019511699677 \\
49.01 0.733742392063141 \\
50.01 0.62811673283577 \\
51.01 0.663788533210754 \\
52.01 0.642165321111679 \\
53.01 0.643037888407707 \\
54.01 0.60073978304863 \\
55.01 0.617766243219376 \\
56.01 0.60960653424263 \\
57.01 0.554499265551567 \\
58.01 0.554010328650475 \\
59.01 0.567756050825119 \\
60.01 0.545118248462677 \\
61.01 0.546752899885178 \\
62.01 0.521749952435493 \\
63.01 0.488286074995995 \\
64.01 0.48275300860405 \\
65.01 0.482940232753754 \\
66.01 0.463120421767235 \\
67.01 0.426865035295486 \\
68.01 0.444498330354691 \\
69.01 0.419390591979027 \\
70.01 0.401883634924889 \\
71.01 0.436771014332771 \\
72.01 0.391316893696785 \\
73.01 0.429661536216736 \\
74.01 0.364630934596062 \\
75.01 0.363009724020958 \\
76.01 0.392105802893639 \\
77.01 0.367700701951981 \\
78.01 0.34166673719883 \\
79.01 0.337574049830437 \\
80.01 0.353537994623184 \\
81.01 0.344560644030571 \\
82.01 0.31247661113739 \\
83.01 0.308716127276421 \\
84.01 0.297185152769089 \\
85.01 0.305904541909695 \\
86.01 0.301200836896896 \\
87.01 0.280291120707989 \\
88.01 0.282410229742527 \\
89.01 0.270810554921627 \\
90.01 0.267560613155365 \\
91.01 0.26987639516592 \\
92.01 0.276353552937508 \\
93.01 0.24417242705822 \\
94.01 0.248098361492157 \\
95.01 0.242923520505428 \\
96.01 0.239314390718937 \\
97.01 0.223302321135998 \\
98.01 0.219245225191116 \\
99.01 0.232658584415913 \\
};
\addplot [, color3, dash pattern=on 1pt off 3pt on 3pt off 3pt]
table [row sep=\\]{
0.01 2.37419407367706 \\
1.01 2.30397832393646 \\
2.01 2.30348083972931 \\
3.01 2.30162515640259 \\
4.01 2.18586881160736 \\
5.01 2.11982448101044 \\
6.01 2.08147430419922 \\
7.01 2.03485246896744 \\
8.01 2.00385706424713 \\
9.01 1.97052406072617 \\
10.01 1.93066294193268 \\
11.01 1.88773194551468 \\
12.01 1.84994832277298 \\
13.01 1.85408573150635 \\
14.01 1.79939912557602 \\
15.01 1.74148943424225 \\
16.01 1.71158505678177 \\
17.01 1.67908252477646 \\
18.01 1.66183571815491 \\
19.01 1.61945908069611 \\
20.01 1.56411054134369 \\
21.01 1.55523058176041 \\
22.01 1.49950659275055 \\
23.01 1.50275416374207 \\
24.01 1.4349641084671 \\
25.01 1.39858477115631 \\
26.01 1.36383444070816 \\
27.01 1.34933348894119 \\
28.01 1.3664351940155 \\
29.01 1.33493504524231 \\
30.01 1.27669363021851 \\
31.01 1.2250755906105 \\
32.01 1.18208740949631 \\
33.01 1.15442451834679 \\
34.01 1.14572244882584 \\
35.01 1.20349149703979 \\
36.01 1.14162463545799 \\
37.01 1.11302644610405 \\
38.01 1.07595203518867 \\
39.01 1.08060429692268 \\
40.01 1.07382783293724 \\
41.01 0.996623051166534 \\
42.01 1.00587854981422 \\
43.01 0.96583337187767 \\
44.01 0.957643461227417 \\
45.01 0.915678924322128 \\
46.01 0.875272905826569 \\
47.01 0.970759910345078 \\
48.01 0.918486374616623 \\
49.01 0.935126167535782 \\
50.01 0.82539866566658 \\
51.01 0.844188714027405 \\
52.01 0.814155387878418 \\
53.01 0.79250802397728 \\
54.01 0.775948417186737 \\
55.01 0.853356397151947 \\
56.01 0.776680588722229 \\
57.01 0.753427225351334 \\
58.01 0.744478517770767 \\
59.01 0.753510344028473 \\
60.01 0.736375308036804 \\
61.01 0.657681179046631 \\
62.01 0.673800164461136 \\
63.01 0.681589430570602 \\
64.01 0.653938800096512 \\
65.01 0.650733369588852 \\
66.01 0.618837189674377 \\
67.01 0.646040177345276 \\
68.01 0.581804117560387 \\
69.01 0.604501149058342 \\
70.01 0.635194444656372 \\
71.01 0.559176650643349 \\
72.01 0.551970359683037 \\
73.01 0.57894581258297 \\
74.01 0.552949440479279 \\
75.01 0.555466288328171 \\
76.01 0.538386359810829 \\
77.01 0.510706788301468 \\
78.01 0.522185471653938 \\
79.01 0.515482386946678 \\
80.01 0.488192704319954 \\
81.01 0.498339053988457 \\
82.01 0.477217292785645 \\
83.01 0.477754494547844 \\
84.01 0.437468853592873 \\
85.01 0.449418205022812 \\
86.01 0.44069464802742 \\
87.01 0.417205396294594 \\
88.01 0.437796276807785 \\
89.01 0.409031811356544 \\
90.01 0.416337129473686 \\
91.01 0.393052327632904 \\
92.01 0.422096562385559 \\
93.01 0.397473776340485 \\
94.01 0.412188681960106 \\
95.01 0.372974097728729 \\
96.01 0.370472693443298 \\
97.01 0.362821662425995 \\
98.01 0.392764981091022 \\
99.01 0.368480451405048 \\
};
\addplot [, color4, dotted]
table [row sep=\\]{
0.01 2.37101449966431 \\
1.01 2.3039074420929 \\
2.01 2.30408380031586 \\
3.01 2.30296211242676 \\
4.01 2.201451420784 \\
5.01 2.15658595561981 \\
6.01 2.07346420288086 \\
7.01 2.05851013660431 \\
8.01 2.01329036951065 \\
9.01 1.98379844427109 \\
10.01 1.97869741916656 \\
11.01 1.93935492038727 \\
12.01 1.94557684659958 \\
13.01 1.88747104406357 \\
14.01 1.85985172986984 \\
15.01 1.84791406393051 \\
16.01 1.85605312585831 \\
17.01 1.80846989154816 \\
18.01 1.7737291932106 \\
19.01 1.76080996990204 \\
20.01 1.74083504676819 \\
21.01 1.72074098587036 \\
22.01 1.68077818155289 \\
23.01 1.65780516862869 \\
24.01 1.62575377225876 \\
25.01 1.62877669334412 \\
26.01 1.63158906698227 \\
27.01 1.58980058431625 \\
28.01 1.53463306427002 \\
29.01 1.56477912664413 \\
30.01 1.52870922088623 \\
31.01 1.49093841314316 \\
32.01 1.49081369638443 \\
33.01 1.51691377162933 \\
34.01 1.41480394601822 \\
35.01 1.38542429208756 \\
36.01 1.45025626420975 \\
37.01 1.41946187019348 \\
38.01 1.39234291315079 \\
39.01 1.3565333366394 \\
40.01 1.37252758741379 \\
41.01 1.39283193349838 \\
42.01 1.37143014669418 \\
43.01 1.32998428344727 \\
44.01 1.31222083568573 \\
45.01 1.27326058149338 \\
46.01 1.28014658689499 \\
47.01 1.25506566762924 \\
48.01 1.26488318443298 \\
49.01 1.25453664064407 \\
50.01 1.27191904783249 \\
51.01 1.23619806170464 \\
52.01 1.24320642352104 \\
53.01 1.21764514446259 \\
54.01 1.20476253032684 \\
55.01 1.17101961374283 \\
56.01 1.1703166782856 \\
57.01 1.18223549723625 \\
58.01 1.12681671380997 \\
59.01 1.12876242399216 \\
60.01 1.1522989988327 \\
61.01 1.11366904973984 \\
62.01 1.17486094236374 \\
63.01 1.10028758645058 \\
64.01 1.09453412890434 \\
65.01 1.08153860569 \\
66.01 1.0551623404026 \\
67.01 1.0696385204792 \\
68.01 1.07878285646439 \\
69.01 1.04483593702316 \\
70.01 1.01034910678864 \\
71.01 1.01290778517723 \\
72.01 1.0104752600193 \\
73.01 0.996424978971481 \\
74.01 0.968565487861633 \\
75.01 1.00237221717834 \\
76.01 0.983979159593582 \\
77.01 0.979034447669983 \\
78.01 0.948900717496872 \\
79.01 0.963443040847778 \\
80.01 0.950315827131271 \\
81.01 0.996272212266922 \\
82.01 0.949994480609894 \\
83.01 0.942391294240952 \\
84.01 0.913707131147385 \\
85.01 0.907885336875916 \\
86.01 0.897097820043564 \\
87.01 0.890019780397415 \\
88.01 0.904916024208069 \\
89.01 0.882408618927002 \\
90.01 0.876109999418259 \\
91.01 0.853673589229584 \\
92.01 0.892401659488678 \\
93.01 0.848705220222473 \\
94.01 0.881071037054062 \\
95.01 0.848050606250763 \\
96.01 0.831020200252533 \\
97.01 0.851235258579254 \\
98.01 0.830653810501099 \\
99.01 0.834617322683334 \\
};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture} \hfill
\resetPGFStyle
\vspace{-5.5ex}
\begin{flushleft}
(b)
\end{flushleft}
\vspace{-3.5ex}
\centering
\footnotesize
\setlength{\figwidth}{\linewidth}
\setlength{\figheight}{0.6\figwidth}
\resetPGFStyle
\pgfkeys{/pgfplots/mystyle/.style={
original,
legend pos = north east,
ylabel near ticks,
xlabel near ticks,
every axis plot/.append style={ultra thick},
}}
\begin{tikzpicture}
\definecolor{color0}{rgb}{0.992156862745098,0.552941176470588,0.235294117647059}
\definecolor{color1}{rgb}{0.741176470588235,0,0.149019607843137}
\definecolor{color2}{rgb}{0.145098039215686,0.203921568627451,0.580392156862745}
\definecolor{color3}{rgb}{0.172549019607843,0.498039215686275,0.72156862745098}
\definecolor{color4}{rgb}{0.254901960784314,0.713725490196078,0.768627450980392}
\definecolor{color5}{rgb}{0.631372549019608,0.854901960784314,0.705882352941177}
\begin{axis}[
legend entries={{SGD},{Adam},{PCH-abs},{PCH-clip},{GGN, $\alpha_1$},{GGN, $\alpha_2$}},
mystyle,
xlabel={epoch},
ylabel={train loss},
]
\path [fill=color0, fill opacity=0.5] (axis cs:0.002,2.35873490047425)
--(axis cs:0.002,2.32805966663391)
--(axis cs:0.252,2.30281602487773)
--(axis cs:0.502,2.30254221030175)
--(axis cs:0.752,2.30258946261969)
--(axis cs:1.002,2.30276994571003)
--(axis cs:1.252,2.30269257633627)
--(axis cs:1.502,2.30260907757832)
--(axis cs:1.752,2.30270566462903)
--(axis cs:2.002,2.30272220925276)
--(axis cs:2.252,2.30256626546111)
--(axis cs:2.502,2.30273498626424)
--(axis cs:2.752,2.30280882230017)
--(axis cs:3.002,2.30269028699974)
--(axis cs:3.252,2.30267900033434)
--(axis cs:3.502,2.30279640344132)
--(axis cs:3.752,2.30272767118024)
--(axis cs:4.002,2.30255124219763)
--(axis cs:4.252,2.3028117657025)
--(axis cs:4.502,2.30280938043234)
--(axis cs:4.752,2.30266793314635)
--(axis cs:5.002,2.30266512589013)
--(axis cs:5.252,2.30251004751708)
--(axis cs:5.502,2.30270163720663)
--(axis cs:5.752,2.30260326297673)
--(axis cs:6.002,2.30264669225614)
--(axis cs:6.252,2.30266190626142)
--(axis cs:6.502,2.3026183826258)
--(axis cs:6.752,2.30255548634633)
--(axis cs:7.002,2.30259758245843)
--(axis cs:7.252,2.30256139386875)
--(axis cs:7.502,2.30249373853282)
--(axis cs:7.752,2.30269503408882)
--(axis cs:8.002,2.30275388359602)
--(axis cs:8.252,2.30263586120801)
--(axis cs:8.502,2.30265657769639)
--(axis cs:8.752,2.30259681414608)
--(axis cs:9.002,2.30256636503242)
--(axis cs:9.252,2.30271986668616)
--(axis cs:9.502,2.30273991840521)
--(axis cs:9.752,2.30273027616322)
--(axis cs:10.002,2.30262272825138)
--(axis cs:10.252,2.30286804157403)
--(axis cs:10.502,2.30262147437472)
--(axis cs:10.752,2.30284419618969)
--(axis cs:11.002,2.30266705134169)
--(axis cs:11.252,2.30260221455205)
--(axis cs:11.502,2.30261880026687)
--(axis cs:11.752,2.3025767484376)
--(axis cs:12.002,2.30264529183613)
--(axis cs:12.252,2.30256276115997)
--(axis cs:12.502,2.30245485756161)
--(axis cs:12.752,2.30260109063197)
--(axis cs:13.002,2.3026982335487)
--(axis cs:13.252,2.30263634086455)
--(axis cs:13.502,2.30271341646034)
--(axis cs:13.752,2.30256534549271)
--(axis cs:14.002,2.30259033968859)
--(axis cs:14.252,2.30256093032704)
--(axis cs:14.502,2.30257041464106)
--(axis cs:14.752,2.30260959072984)
--(axis cs:15.002,2.30250563806379)
--(axis cs:15.252,2.30268708509446)
--(axis cs:15.502,2.30257412697667)
--(axis cs:15.752,2.30255848522636)
--(axis cs:16.002,2.30262052757834)
--(axis cs:16.252,2.30273834523305)
--(axis cs:16.502,2.3026827110942)
--(axis cs:16.752,2.30259574621736)
--(axis cs:17.002,2.30251634274024)
--(axis cs:17.252,2.30266544248159)
--(axis cs:17.502,2.3025930170695)
--(axis cs:17.752,2.30262846899224)
--(axis cs:18.002,2.30258123071106)
--(axis cs:18.252,2.30263028928323)
--(axis cs:18.502,2.30263701933862)
--(axis cs:18.752,2.30278225922566)
--(axis cs:19.002,2.30262728208553)
--(axis cs:19.252,2.30249980721036)
--(axis cs:19.502,2.30276300754036)
--(axis cs:19.752,2.30262411033911)
--(axis cs:19.752,2.30321442687708)
--(axis cs:19.752,2.30321442687708)
--(axis cs:19.502,2.30313074741874)
--(axis cs:19.252,2.30296231475314)
--(axis cs:19.002,2.30301861291874)
--(axis cs:18.752,2.30303625082988)
--(axis cs:18.502,2.30301178437232)
--(axis cs:18.252,2.303076354775)
--(axis cs:18.002,2.30338881819336)
--(axis cs:17.752,2.30302543687629)
--(axis cs:17.502,2.30298597768147)
--(axis cs:17.252,2.30314562891429)
--(axis cs:17.002,2.30329406108361)
--(axis cs:16.752,2.30326010018767)
--(axis cs:16.502,2.30321137765091)
--(axis cs:16.252,2.30333779993907)
--(axis cs:16.002,2.3031126763096)
--(axis cs:15.752,2.30319631938484)
--(axis cs:15.502,2.30310633872157)
--(axis cs:15.252,2.30323799806594)
--(axis cs:15.002,2.3030200462929)
--(axis cs:14.752,2.30322761134231)
--(axis cs:14.502,2.30337932100042)
--(axis cs:14.252,2.30302326194896)
--(axis cs:14.002,2.30310824582166)
--(axis cs:13.752,2.30322860744918)
--(axis cs:13.502,2.30312307035607)
--(axis cs:13.252,2.30312099098359)
--(axis cs:13.002,2.30316734033436)
--(axis cs:12.752,2.30296898726415)
--(axis cs:12.502,2.3029672100806)
--(axis cs:12.252,2.30311179175751)
--(axis cs:12.002,2.30319868132366)
--(axis cs:11.752,2.30317505209951)
--(axis cs:11.502,2.30323947800767)
--(axis cs:11.252,2.30305679347408)
--(axis cs:11.002,2.30304235837205)
--(axis cs:10.752,2.30335735715503)
--(axis cs:10.502,2.3030938958035)
--(axis cs:10.252,2.30342716258857)
--(axis cs:10.002,2.30307967195614)
--(axis cs:9.752,2.30315580171763)
--(axis cs:9.502,2.30308998805841)
--(axis cs:9.252,2.30345221812219)
--(axis cs:9.002,2.30317198869683)
--(axis cs:8.752,2.30322818089481)
--(axis cs:8.502,2.30319264067214)
--(axis cs:8.252,2.30318207664294)
--(axis cs:8.002,2.30316547751848)
--(axis cs:7.752,2.30307998841789)
--(axis cs:7.502,2.3030142551653)
--(axis cs:7.252,2.30304382692592)
--(axis cs:7.002,2.30356281983954)
--(axis cs:6.752,2.30323012194529)
--(axis cs:6.502,2.30309055025079)
--(axis cs:6.252,2.30328916452411)
--(axis cs:6.002,2.30310782625278)
--(axis cs:5.752,2.30313737957088)
--(axis cs:5.502,2.30316670233195)
--(axis cs:5.252,2.30307967606995)
--(axis cs:5.002,2.30302606864417)
--(axis cs:4.752,2.30332862790407)
--(axis cs:4.502,2.30345978842142)
--(axis cs:4.252,2.30332140919374)
--(axis cs:4.002,2.30295784822595)
--(axis cs:3.752,2.30326216646624)
--(axis cs:3.502,2.3034391960765)
--(axis cs:3.252,2.30331937269728)
--(axis cs:3.002,2.30311019861122)
--(axis cs:2.752,2.30323647150781)
--(axis cs:2.502,2.30327196983622)
--(axis cs:2.252,2.3034284836081)
--(axis cs:2.002,2.30338392897661)
--(axis cs:1.752,2.30330677509876)
--(axis cs:1.502,2.30314801585124)
--(axis cs:1.252,2.30357730777323)
--(axis cs:1.002,2.30320487156597)
--(axis cs:0.752,2.30315828480158)
--(axis cs:0.502,2.30356321267189)
--(axis cs:0.252,2.30335677518636)
--(axis cs:0.002,2.35873490047425)
--cycle;
\path [fill=color1, fill opacity=0.5] (axis cs:0.002,2.33338249881173)
--(axis cs:0.002,2.31838098805045)
--(axis cs:0.252,2.30448049033077)
--(axis cs:0.502,2.0363776715207)
--(axis cs:0.752,1.87941224169155)
--(axis cs:1.002,1.82708539953634)
--(axis cs:1.252,1.78834909192047)
--(axis cs:1.502,1.80361085489524)
--(axis cs:1.752,1.77788222770684)
--(axis cs:2.002,1.75184517957053)
--(axis cs:2.252,1.72106430358557)
--(axis cs:2.502,1.66813119519582)
--(axis cs:2.752,1.62868223262072)
--(axis cs:3.002,1.59350719096258)
--(axis cs:3.252,1.53851462377076)
--(axis cs:3.502,1.52573507359253)
--(axis cs:3.752,1.49446007238795)
--(axis cs:4.002,1.47026924328176)
--(axis cs:4.252,1.4440170942509)
--(axis cs:4.502,1.41260971775055)
--(axis cs:4.752,1.40758416503915)
--(axis cs:5.002,1.34830388753549)
--(axis cs:5.252,1.32975583499273)
--(axis cs:5.502,1.31604482916042)
--(axis cs:5.752,1.29326835568898)
--(axis cs:6.002,1.2775994169247)
--(axis cs:6.252,1.2514219821608)
--(axis cs:6.502,1.2374550737552)
--(axis cs:6.752,1.21762417557636)
--(axis cs:7.002,1.17944812873381)
--(axis cs:7.252,1.16446925370508)
--(axis cs:7.502,1.1305240190715)
--(axis cs:7.752,1.12737133483206)
--(axis cs:8.002,1.10582243110737)
--(axis cs:8.252,1.07368642657931)
--(axis cs:8.502,1.05666818010529)
--(axis cs:8.752,1.0520231721128)
--(axis cs:9.002,1.02888056553593)
--(axis cs:9.252,1.00999492242219)
--(axis cs:9.502,0.97957359235905)
--(axis cs:9.752,0.974407434453424)
--(axis cs:10.002,0.940727032771435)
--(axis cs:10.252,0.903527688278805)
--(axis cs:10.502,0.892857805939578)
--(axis cs:10.752,0.864141292344202)
--(axis cs:11.002,0.856817298278823)
--(axis cs:11.252,0.816161771538077)
--(axis cs:11.502,0.800076412109508)
--(axis cs:11.752,0.787087124053198)
--(axis cs:12.002,0.752215147653294)
--(axis cs:12.252,0.73246472356075)
--(axis cs:12.502,0.71478377117956)
--(axis cs:12.752,0.693613737980602)
--(axis cs:13.002,0.663279660291732)
--(axis cs:13.252,0.65662712081648)
--(axis cs:13.502,0.626425505249836)
--(axis cs:13.752,0.615761914644818)
--(axis cs:14.002,0.571046367270345)
--(axis cs:14.252,0.558954962517077)
--(axis cs:14.502,0.536263286737726)
--(axis cs:14.752,0.514691071057327)
--(axis cs:15.002,0.505354261481423)
--(axis cs:15.252,0.470174427007952)
--(axis cs:15.502,0.457012446162303)
--(axis cs:15.752,0.430996776797884)
--(axis cs:16.002,0.40640539718641)
--(axis cs:16.252,0.388181647496136)
--(axis cs:16.502,0.371034841041397)
--(axis cs:16.752,0.353002211325815)
--(axis cs:17.002,0.339069143416312)
--(axis cs:17.252,0.306538520705136)
--(axis cs:17.502,0.29057640212065)
--(axis cs:17.752,0.279165332068579)
--(axis cs:18.002,0.258987248859817)
--(axis cs:18.252,0.243623935068133)
--(axis cs:18.502,0.229358239056284)
--(axis cs:18.752,0.216785451909735)
--(axis cs:19.002,0.206151742745426)
--(axis cs:19.252,0.179823770942916)
--(axis cs:19.502,0.175095422973478)
--(axis cs:19.752,0.166039314339597)
--(axis cs:19.752,0.439097124119561)
--(axis cs:19.752,0.439097124119561)
--(axis cs:19.502,0.450592854211485)
--(axis cs:19.252,0.468671009865771)
--(axis cs:19.002,0.499652924131367)
--(axis cs:18.752,0.510907405474947)
--(axis cs:18.502,0.52003047060806)
--(axis cs:18.252,0.544974723076341)
--(axis cs:18.002,0.583509134330338)
--(axis cs:17.752,0.588812544892652)
--(axis cs:17.502,0.610099597997606)
--(axis cs:17.252,0.626502688277332)
--(axis cs:17.002,0.661306690691087)
--(axis cs:16.752,0.65281095219309)
--(axis cs:16.502,0.67507195045488)
--(axis cs:16.252,0.695321992201893)
--(axis cs:16.002,0.722486601343024)
--(axis cs:15.752,0.752580045483)
--(axis cs:15.502,0.764713274004856)
--(axis cs:15.252,0.779191898132048)
--(axis cs:15.002,0.792161136782508)
--(axis cs:14.752,0.830940045571319)
--(axis cs:14.502,0.830907446475699)
--(axis cs:14.252,0.84884297010774)
--(axis cs:14.002,0.870748016255504)
--(axis cs:13.752,0.901347509230991)
--(axis cs:13.502,0.897519969374798)
--(axis cs:13.252,0.924286035454501)
--(axis cs:13.002,0.943217269830644)
--(axis cs:12.752,0.953240889151814)
--(axis cs:12.502,0.97003924117243)
--(axis cs:12.252,0.990984590079845)
--(axis cs:12.002,0.996959566435146)
--(axis cs:11.752,1.01477329188232)
--(axis cs:11.502,1.04614232883059)
--(axis cs:11.252,1.06263666558045)
--(axis cs:11.002,1.08187053884505)
--(axis cs:10.752,1.08687894843949)
--(axis cs:10.502,1.10384529426489)
--(axis cs:10.252,1.13609577487503)
--(axis cs:10.002,1.14164793337313)
--(axis cs:9.752,1.1474883675676)
--(axis cs:9.502,1.17006454784252)
--(axis cs:9.252,1.18544517920134)
--(axis cs:9.002,1.20966872655163)
--(axis cs:8.752,1.21962778594842)
--(axis cs:8.502,1.23204715860168)
--(axis cs:8.252,1.25381475120847)
--(axis cs:8.002,1.2776352772514)
--(axis cs:7.752,1.29903044720377)
--(axis cs:7.502,1.30191485517319)
--(axis cs:7.252,1.3195988538999)
--(axis cs:7.002,1.34324705502016)
--(axis cs:6.752,1.36935549971661)
--(axis cs:6.502,1.38411088808257)
--(axis cs:6.252,1.40070170749069)
--(axis cs:6.002,1.4152242076862)
--(axis cs:5.752,1.43573330942637)
--(axis cs:5.502,1.47286803933934)
--(axis cs:5.252,1.46214215332667)
--(axis cs:5.002,1.49496562750205)
--(axis cs:4.752,1.52164573818198)
--(axis cs:4.502,1.55237801322937)
--(axis cs:4.252,1.56460533750416)
--(axis cs:4.002,1.61489265723856)
--(axis cs:3.752,1.64352935327123)
--(axis cs:3.502,1.6677259630896)
--(axis cs:3.252,1.69452735411162)
--(axis cs:3.002,1.72246339676783)
--(axis cs:2.752,1.74270675110578)
--(axis cs:2.502,1.76085125338206)
--(axis cs:2.252,1.78570683174463)
--(axis cs:2.002,1.85957001589456)
--(axis cs:1.752,1.8695551778794)
--(axis cs:1.502,1.9196861450361)
--(axis cs:1.252,2.06609035738983)
--(axis cs:1.002,2.16295995721415)
--(axis cs:0.752,2.2282637159882)
--(axis cs:0.502,2.2910646407199)
--(axis cs:0.252,2.3083829072675)
--(axis cs:0.002,2.33338249881173)
--cycle;
\path [fill=color2, fill opacity=0.5] (axis cs:0.02,2.31350109622399)
--(axis cs:0.02,2.30522267773231)
--(axis cs:0.26,2.30329997626618)
--(axis cs:0.5,2.30331400055571)
--(axis cs:0.74,2.30333519179584)
--(axis cs:0.98,2.30344679208915)
--(axis cs:1.02,2.30335447136132)
--(axis cs:1.26,2.30350825440199)
--(axis cs:1.5,2.30287127623335)
--(axis cs:1.74,2.18018686489744)
--(axis cs:1.98,2.07344011655022)
--(axis cs:2.02,2.05375127071632)
--(axis cs:2.26,1.96442616076132)
--(axis cs:2.5,1.87257946034559)
--(axis cs:2.74,1.76621710952376)
--(axis cs:2.98,1.66052026604574)
--(axis cs:3.02,1.65962795038383)
--(axis cs:3.26,1.56158794383981)
--(axis cs:3.5,1.46868804451386)
--(axis cs:3.74,1.40763796261655)
--(axis cs:3.98,1.34659189741144)
--(axis cs:4.02,1.34156135176124)
--(axis cs:4.26,1.27639222670682)
--(axis cs:4.5,1.238114041044)
--(axis cs:4.74,1.18381086493643)
--(axis cs:4.98,1.19486934494324)
--(axis cs:5.02,1.1910341320069)
--(axis cs:5.26,1.17349220696152)
--(axis cs:5.5,1.15761461365291)
--(axis cs:5.74,1.13543269121911)
--(axis cs:5.98,1.10612719152976)
--(axis cs:6.02,1.09993266573927)
--(axis cs:6.26,1.08987915956502)
--(axis cs:6.5,1.06233477318451)
--(axis cs:6.74,1.03306262928593)
--(axis cs:6.98,1.01673883218693)
--(axis cs:7.02,1.01272502572794)
--(axis cs:7.26,0.986034184144987)
--(axis cs:7.5,0.971948726924912)
--(axis cs:7.74,0.942467481977003)
--(axis cs:7.98,0.928711240224844)
--(axis cs:8.02,0.913014682378544)
--(axis cs:8.26,0.897004425710955)
--(axis cs:8.5,0.881214387455505)
--(axis cs:8.74,0.855922295122867)
--(axis cs:8.98,0.839141019657484)
--(axis cs:9.02,0.837609909095402)
--(axis cs:9.26,0.812529144265443)
--(axis cs:9.5,0.801346313237705)
--(axis cs:9.74,0.758236762530105)
--(axis cs:9.98,0.765175368517628)
--(axis cs:10.02,0.755872065656247)
--(axis cs:10.26,0.725295012194059)
--(axis cs:10.5,0.720692505759826)
--(axis cs:10.74,0.704989286015655)
--(axis cs:10.98,0.686836758949534)
--(axis cs:11.02,0.691236541779984)
--(axis cs:11.26,0.666402045627544)
--(axis cs:11.5,0.662858004066391)
--(axis cs:11.74,0.637780769508622)
--(axis cs:11.98,0.633772238889231)
--(axis cs:12.02,0.616454482038829)
--(axis cs:12.26,0.605848976123693)
--(axis cs:12.5,0.5985549946207)
--(axis cs:12.74,0.578279937257702)
--(axis cs:12.98,0.569635780568412)
--(axis cs:13.02,0.56378399412535)
--(axis cs:13.26,0.544473328217204)
--(axis cs:13.5,0.541429409401131)
--(axis cs:13.74,0.520615124865843)
--(axis cs:13.98,0.508216905297692)
--(axis cs:14.02,0.504020241986248)
--(axis cs:14.26,0.490541389173685)
--(axis cs:14.5,0.480319388523219)
--(axis cs:14.74,0.478181462970626)
--(axis cs:14.98,0.450634416368431)
--(axis cs:15.02,0.45705786478114)
--(axis cs:15.26,0.430476875880728)
--(axis cs:15.5,0.426357212559593)
--(axis cs:15.74,0.412482438325453)
--(axis cs:15.98,0.398695863276321)
--(axis cs:16.02,0.394068708917564)
--(axis cs:16.26,0.374701064370009)
--(axis cs:16.5,0.365217392556614)
--(axis cs:16.74,0.356822890960564)
--(axis cs:16.98,0.343439745697546)
--(axis cs:17.02,0.339290529517516)
--(axis cs:17.26,0.329069108727028)
--(axis cs:17.5,0.32183973565672)
--(axis cs:17.74,0.314704848221391)
--(axis cs:17.98,0.30734790047004)
--(axis cs:18.02,0.302882345434764)
--(axis cs:18.26,0.287793650304741)
--(axis cs:18.5,0.272210033929216)
--(axis cs:18.74,0.266183525553919)
--(axis cs:18.98,0.269627895987459)
--(axis cs:19.02,0.256178677367383)
--(axis cs:19.26,0.242897228236904)
--(axis cs:19.5,0.235468251552987)
--(axis cs:19.74,0.227531727596931)
--(axis cs:19.98,0.22588490008532)
--(axis cs:19.98,0.355234404810081)
--(axis cs:19.98,0.355234404810081)
--(axis cs:19.74,0.366619906380959)
--(axis cs:19.5,0.383675416264128)
--(axis cs:19.26,0.38592142081667)
--(axis cs:19.02,0.401931297493762)
--(axis cs:18.98,0.412671327554754)
--(axis cs:18.74,0.420178702243589)
--(axis cs:18.5,0.430538145506514)
--(axis cs:18.26,0.442327869856887)
--(axis cs:18.02,0.458662472251317)
--(axis cs:17.98,0.462741138736465)
--(axis cs:17.74,0.481800492712409)
--(axis cs:17.5,0.484413506835956)
--(axis cs:17.26,0.495826535460899)
--(axis cs:17.02,0.51218811270775)
--(axis cs:16.98,0.519442025032472)
--(axis cs:16.74,0.522915660417686)
--(axis cs:16.5,0.542455263025814)
--(axis cs:16.26,0.55787397668567)
--(axis cs:16.02,0.567604431608254)
--(axis cs:15.98,0.57762173911969)
--(axis cs:15.74,0.587293233633471)
--(axis cs:15.5,0.598570421441185)
--(axis cs:15.26,0.61444958867692)
--(axis cs:15.02,0.632209645394565)
--(axis cs:14.98,0.630637708875709)
--(axis cs:14.74,0.650042546304811)
--(axis cs:14.5,0.663022045478703)
--(axis cs:14.26,0.682651743703665)
--(axis cs:14.02,0.700092412938145)
--(axis cs:13.98,0.697574246225898)
--(axis cs:13.74,0.714779609278368)
--(axis cs:13.5,0.728305634839821)
--(axis cs:13.26,0.733196018115346)
--(axis cs:13.02,0.762118491722123)
--(axis cs:12.98,0.754357079748818)
--(axis cs:12.74,0.782436143407887)
--(axis cs:12.5,0.789595601997952)
--(axis cs:12.26,0.820224241268275)
--(axis cs:12.02,0.833085095922139)
--(axis cs:11.98,0.830475822290884)
--(axis cs:11.74,0.848056010562636)
--(axis cs:11.5,0.87294452717598)
--(axis cs:11.26,0.877028223136952)
--(axis cs:11.02,0.910368968931686)
--(axis cs:10.98,0.910814818046315)
--(axis cs:10.74,0.926559702803468)
--(axis cs:10.5,0.952599868851075)
--(axis cs:10.26,0.959911699098208)
--(axis cs:10.02,0.988067715532718)
--(axis cs:9.98,0.985976753503093)
--(axis cs:9.74,1.01491004561733)
--(axis cs:9.5,1.03954023194357)
--(axis cs:9.26,1.05430966856262)
--(axis cs:9.02,1.07377755828894)
--(axis cs:8.98,1.08215237013973)
--(axis cs:8.74,1.10171599242138)
--(axis cs:8.5,1.12312288757272)
--(axis cs:8.26,1.16292157154628)
--(axis cs:8.02,1.18885995522522)
--(axis cs:7.98,1.18551347977638)
--(axis cs:7.74,1.21528978835915)
--(axis cs:7.5,1.24850700303648)
--(axis cs:7.26,1.27831649239157)
--(axis cs:7.02,1.30813364355306)
--(axis cs:6.98,1.31275176982952)
--(axis cs:6.74,1.34355870049846)
--(axis cs:6.5,1.36675689494445)
--(axis cs:6.26,1.40766666687007)
--(axis cs:6.02,1.45503175744036)
--(axis cs:5.98,1.47200416232538)
--(axis cs:5.74,1.51507306611274)
--(axis cs:5.5,1.59609107863835)
--(axis cs:5.26,1.69524000701248)
--(axis cs:5.02,1.79858760261224)
--(axis cs:4.98,1.8073482339447)
--(axis cs:4.74,2.01191090439645)
--(axis cs:4.5,2.05756123666597)
--(axis cs:4.26,2.14907106827609)
--(axis cs:4.02,2.18144616033135)
--(axis cs:3.98,2.18915684659949)
--(axis cs:3.74,2.24721383162631)
--(axis cs:3.5,2.25832346919616)
--(axis cs:3.26,2.28132236976645)
--(axis cs:3.02,2.34559234361489)
--(axis cs:2.98,2.34906013156015)
--(axis cs:2.74,2.3983858615532)
--(axis cs:2.5,2.42791473368517)
--(axis cs:2.26,2.43534312157969)
--(axis cs:2.02,2.40085693126427)
--(axis cs:1.98,2.39882889399361)
--(axis cs:1.74,2.36881177707034)
--(axis cs:1.5,2.30532913079485)
--(axis cs:1.26,2.30517113555162)
--(axis cs:1.02,2.30522463973792)
--(axis cs:0.98,2.30554297117074)
--(axis cs:0.74,2.30545367996929)
--(axis cs:0.5,2.305124252847)
--(axis cs:0.26,2.30521213921234)
--(axis cs:0.02,2.31350109622399)
--cycle;
\path [fill=color3, fill opacity=0.5] (axis cs:0.02,2.32426483013936)
--(axis cs:0.02,2.31020057818583)
--(axis cs:0.26,2.30283603602375)
--(axis cs:0.5,2.30095598152674)
--(axis cs:0.74,1.97021587311911)
--(axis cs:0.98,1.63419510102441)
--(axis cs:1.02,1.59311583432844)
--(axis cs:1.26,1.40503164547247)
--(axis cs:1.5,1.31588735123844)
--(axis cs:1.74,1.28106212973277)
--(axis cs:1.98,1.24137088636337)
--(axis cs:2.02,1.24956830679102)
--(axis cs:2.26,1.1980713896377)
--(axis cs:2.5,1.15461084267032)
--(axis cs:2.74,1.1252330033752)
--(axis cs:2.98,1.08947413709458)
--(axis cs:3.02,1.0888682384159)
--(axis cs:3.26,1.04994980526332)
--(axis cs:3.5,1.02238170514744)
--(axis cs:3.74,1.00316934907706)
--(axis cs:3.98,0.98044279029258)
--(axis cs:4.02,0.971875047437532)
--(axis cs:4.26,0.945931009619176)
--(axis cs:4.5,0.924202370230115)
--(axis cs:4.74,0.899076400606344)
--(axis cs:4.98,0.887664651727921)
--(axis cs:5.02,0.885953126398129)
--(axis cs:5.26,0.862132236856636)
--(axis cs:5.5,0.851219994921474)
--(axis cs:5.74,0.832670351850951)
--(axis cs:5.98,0.809177141034569)
--(axis cs:6.02,0.797519995277466)
--(axis cs:6.26,0.795861326240012)
--(axis cs:6.5,0.774308258533799)
--(axis cs:6.74,0.768683983019989)
--(axis cs:6.98,0.752115174528552)
--(axis cs:7.02,0.755605818903286)
--(axis cs:7.26,0.732463567562688)
--(axis cs:7.5,0.731493543611065)
--(axis cs:7.74,0.713496564012935)
--(axis cs:7.98,0.706123999955055)
--(axis cs:8.02,0.700677896169966)
--(axis cs:8.26,0.688924917700647)
--(axis cs:8.5,0.673003050540418)
--(axis cs:8.74,0.676085410377208)
--(axis cs:8.98,0.66334487276041)
--(axis cs:9.02,0.660869519585521)
--(axis cs:9.26,0.642989786379651)
--(axis cs:9.5,0.643345481065992)
--(axis cs:9.74,0.629694505193221)
--(axis cs:9.98,0.619087125366709)
--(axis cs:10.02,0.62127128773112)
--(axis cs:10.26,0.608194519179835)
--(axis cs:10.5,0.61117577690037)
--(axis cs:10.74,0.597044948422787)
--(axis cs:10.98,0.595692981812813)
--(axis cs:11.02,0.597909196815271)
--(axis cs:11.26,0.575001717520281)
--(axis cs:11.5,0.574859157522426)
--(axis cs:11.74,0.564523809438481)
--(axis cs:11.98,0.564987661172454)
--(axis cs:12.02,0.558037979655826)
--(axis cs:12.26,0.553292151945491)
--(axis cs:12.5,0.544914754290369)
--(axis cs:12.74,0.538277686574576)
--(axis cs:12.98,0.541095105577565)
--(axis cs:13.02,0.536382632997621)
--(axis cs:13.26,0.522217922199577)
--(axis cs:13.5,0.524407917881061)
--(axis cs:13.74,0.514688749778556)
--(axis cs:13.98,0.509741608855089)
--(axis cs:14.02,0.510542891453755)
--(axis cs:14.26,0.502155822003602)
--(axis cs:14.5,0.503274965196135)
--(axis cs:14.74,0.494879035531569)
--(axis cs:14.98,0.479815830089229)
--(axis cs:15.02,0.491876470491838)
--(axis cs:15.26,0.471723923661795)
--(axis cs:15.5,0.452561764450658)
--(axis cs:15.74,0.464353780993238)
--(axis cs:15.98,0.459997537207423)
--(axis cs:16.02,0.455100881995602)
--(axis cs:16.26,0.43948937213113)
--(axis cs:16.5,0.441911991670228)
--(axis cs:16.74,0.446189040403382)
--(axis cs:16.98,0.450758266544649)
--(axis cs:17.02,0.445772874159512)
--(axis cs:17.26,0.433360698607738)
--(axis cs:17.5,0.421083135326177)
--(axis cs:17.74,0.421648164598644)
--(axis cs:17.98,0.422528582824919)
--(axis cs:18.02,0.419946214127501)
--(axis cs:18.26,0.410095637064019)
--(axis cs:18.5,0.401806833781139)
--(axis cs:18.74,0.407094294630976)
--(axis cs:18.98,0.412821687026013)
--(axis cs:19.02,0.408489015627698)
--(axis cs:19.26,0.38932294449023)
--(axis cs:19.5,0.383796729311836)
--(axis cs:19.74,0.379264324641381)
--(axis cs:19.98,0.38187486149453)
--(axis cs:19.98,0.422036103232872)
--(axis cs:19.98,0.422036103232872)
--(axis cs:19.74,0.424716806673851)
--(axis cs:19.5,0.431808446183312)
--(axis cs:19.26,0.419466982277119)
--(axis cs:19.02,0.442373612593813)
--(axis cs:18.98,0.445622944073688)
--(axis cs:18.74,0.450350534117727)
--(axis cs:18.5,0.438053551875217)
--(axis cs:18.26,0.436553306360206)
--(axis cs:18.02,0.453933152985612)
--(axis cs:17.98,0.45956839917734)
--(axis cs:17.74,0.457670483978092)
--(axis cs:17.5,0.467710178177088)
--(axis cs:17.26,0.456979063364689)
--(axis cs:17.02,0.466074013905826)
--(axis cs:16.98,0.475653284692457)
--(axis cs:16.74,0.478045522708877)
--(axis cs:16.5,0.478148839638137)
--(axis cs:16.26,0.488608567360142)
--(axis cs:16.02,0.486037761030751)
--(axis cs:15.98,0.49709106438178)
--(axis cs:15.74,0.501920659295306)
--(axis cs:15.5,0.506298126248728)
--(axis cs:15.26,0.510150315782937)
--(axis cs:15.02,0.513525271966505)
--(axis cs:14.98,0.51583927740894)
--(axis cs:14.74,0.530155809343767)
--(axis cs:14.5,0.530711501926897)
--(axis cs:14.26,0.529772639786483)
--(axis cs:14.02,0.547505911160457)
--(axis cs:13.98,0.544081397298018)
--(axis cs:13.74,0.548625843059731)
--(axis cs:13.5,0.556204157447766)
--(axis cs:13.26,0.559413642894417)
--(axis cs:13.02,0.570452827665221)
--(axis cs:12.98,0.572420092653178)
--(axis cs:12.74,0.579965948126199)
--(axis cs:12.5,0.579446176629279)
--(axis cs:12.26,0.593866554242711)
--(axis cs:12.02,0.587245659775174)
--(axis cs:11.98,0.600207207868989)
--(axis cs:11.74,0.603030855173335)
--(axis cs:11.5,0.612212213556065)
--(axis cs:11.26,0.610726415204481)
--(axis cs:11.02,0.617751399078589)
--(axis cs:10.98,0.62727891054406)
--(axis cs:10.74,0.632146104490878)
--(axis cs:10.5,0.64707447153179)
--(axis cs:10.26,0.637452029091344)
--(axis cs:10.02,0.654195476242116)
--(axis cs:9.98,0.661657272273519)
--(axis cs:9.74,0.665223924658311)
--(axis cs:9.5,0.68420736202788)
--(axis cs:9.26,0.693955699689075)
--(axis cs:9.02,0.687816805964558)
--(axis cs:8.98,0.700789522362118)
--(axis cs:8.74,0.71019653294402)
--(axis cs:8.5,0.725352874542742)
--(axis cs:8.26,0.723692253110053)
--(axis cs:8.02,0.734557806821519)
--(axis cs:7.98,0.748345907328728)
--(axis cs:7.74,0.755721940415929)
--(axis cs:7.5,0.765372968687519)
--(axis cs:7.26,0.773188967399012)
--(axis cs:7.02,0.787121615731877)
--(axis cs:6.98,0.798426774743603)
--(axis cs:6.74,0.802732824154694)
--(axis cs:6.5,0.824567514419234)
--(axis cs:6.26,0.833692587830118)
--(axis cs:6.02,0.851365004474579)
--(axis cs:5.98,0.855673666155372)
--(axis cs:5.74,0.860241177690065)
--(axis cs:5.5,0.893266539674016)
--(axis cs:5.26,0.910771515470329)
--(axis cs:5.02,0.927189483198123)
--(axis cs:4.98,0.929090893411391)
--(axis cs:4.74,0.956492091806223)
--(axis cs:4.5,0.987541556771839)
--(axis cs:4.26,1.00566092315441)
--(axis cs:4.02,1.02630494857611)
--(axis cs:3.98,1.03696562836282)
--(axis cs:3.74,1.07327956831186)
--(axis cs:3.5,1.09533997167904)
--(axis cs:3.26,1.14196954536076)
--(axis cs:3.02,1.17557799628717)
--(axis cs:2.98,1.18215879652206)
--(axis cs:2.74,1.22533982110295)
--(axis cs:2.5,1.28064797500241)
--(axis cs:2.26,1.32717463449407)
--(axis cs:2.02,1.40735856355505)
--(axis cs:1.98,1.43383818288864)
--(axis cs:1.74,1.5972351992162)
--(axis cs:1.5,1.87333097914486)
--(axis cs:1.26,2.16943672877985)
--(axis cs:1.02,2.25154473390887)
--(axis cs:0.98,2.29476891779731)
--(axis cs:0.74,2.35795058787179)
--(axis cs:0.5,2.30481412955725)
--(axis cs:0.26,2.30367870396648)
--(axis cs:0.02,2.32426483013936)
--cycle;
\path [fill=color4, fill opacity=0.5] (axis cs:0.02,2.31868030697486)
--(axis cs:0.02,2.30773742526391)
--(axis cs:0.26,2.30314436104752)
--(axis cs:0.5,2.30250363160528)
--(axis cs:0.74,2.16193885237978)
--(axis cs:0.98,1.93141287711191)
--(axis cs:1.02,1.89855277418178)
--(axis cs:1.26,1.60137449020294)
--(axis cs:1.5,1.27414319292705)
--(axis cs:1.74,1.01317420876238)
--(axis cs:1.98,0.838263478369714)
--(axis cs:2.02,0.806640489351199)
--(axis cs:2.26,0.707828628164242)
--(axis cs:2.5,0.694887007370087)
--(axis cs:2.74,0.710946813122299)
--(axis cs:2.98,0.712900502034413)
--(axis cs:3.02,0.689897537071731)
--(axis cs:3.26,0.684896978963637)
--(axis cs:3.5,0.68810941250909)
--(axis cs:3.74,0.696038449380074)
--(axis cs:3.98,0.712909112071814)
--(axis cs:4.02,0.675532932250596)
--(axis cs:4.26,0.640947456205271)
--(axis cs:4.5,0.652998959958609)
--(axis cs:4.74,0.641071115932923)
--(axis cs:4.98,0.655641788201815)
--(axis cs:5.02,0.632252648586084)
--(axis cs:5.26,0.59757455026826)
--(axis cs:5.5,0.607018889890958)
--(axis cs:5.74,0.606614467576426)
--(axis cs:5.98,0.61085765241712)
--(axis cs:6.02,0.573895206588109)
--(axis cs:6.26,0.553560490724364)
--(axis cs:6.5,0.5713192037168)
--(axis cs:6.74,0.554159349600384)
--(axis cs:6.98,0.556510050767198)
--(axis cs:7.02,0.541268177762128)
--(axis cs:7.26,0.515921486758232)
--(axis cs:7.5,0.514923652774089)
--(axis cs:7.74,0.524714714750239)
--(axis cs:7.98,0.531257318889418)
--(axis cs:8.02,0.500462289241413)
--(axis cs:8.26,0.483502640193334)
--(axis cs:8.5,0.472431799581762)
--(axis cs:8.74,0.503038419186964)
--(axis cs:8.98,0.49659339879128)
--(axis cs:9.02,0.477798817673484)
--(axis cs:9.26,0.440434687238088)
--(axis cs:9.5,0.443325829742998)
--(axis cs:9.74,0.47377873518501)
--(axis cs:9.98,0.474198728101113)
--(axis cs:10.02,0.438087701106856)
--(axis cs:10.26,0.425069235408391)
--(axis cs:10.5,0.448362800396652)
--(axis cs:10.74,0.44060839079279)
--(axis cs:10.98,0.447119867468321)
--(axis cs:11.02,0.434301898592141)
--(axis cs:11.26,0.407895113950824)
--(axis cs:11.5,0.419194835888613)
--(axis cs:11.74,0.430872168007148)
--(axis cs:11.98,0.4020956479919)
--(axis cs:12.02,0.3898022297794)
--(axis cs:12.26,0.369980339353032)
--(axis cs:12.5,0.401019451442763)
--(axis cs:12.74,0.393892331325703)
--(axis cs:12.98,0.406339606519945)
--(axis cs:13.02,0.393964946929034)
--(axis cs:13.26,0.361563622639343)
--(axis cs:13.5,0.386619104339099)
--(axis cs:13.74,0.407092960785914)
--(axis cs:13.98,0.403756297951875)
--(axis cs:14.02,0.38777553129093)
--(axis cs:14.26,0.368509088107568)
--(axis cs:14.5,0.375439352878455)
--(axis cs:14.74,0.380956431071874)
--(axis cs:14.98,0.363495473800327)
--(axis cs:15.02,0.352326391173927)
--(axis cs:15.26,0.344619152282457)
--(axis cs:15.5,0.358155531863795)
--(axis cs:15.74,0.353357249518604)
--(axis cs:15.98,0.367036933489931)
--(axis cs:16.02,0.355833869207766)
--(axis cs:16.26,0.325896720646207)
--(axis cs:16.5,0.339830041578148)
--(axis cs:16.74,0.36093542843674)
--(axis cs:16.98,0.372065255995774)
--(axis cs:17.02,0.347655857150551)
--(axis cs:17.26,0.335318752016795)
--(axis cs:17.5,0.33560220530507)
--(axis cs:17.74,0.358039141159623)
--(axis cs:17.98,0.379557917915033)
--(axis cs:18.02,0.352664069872511)
--(axis cs:18.26,0.319804181223488)
--(axis cs:18.5,0.339747352477697)
--(axis cs:18.74,0.346296457057589)
--(axis cs:18.98,0.364107166368437)
--(axis cs:19.02,0.342790218348892)
--(axis cs:19.26,0.316347995509219)
--(axis cs:19.5,0.344203037601863)
--(axis cs:19.74,0.360714344843034)
--(axis cs:19.98,0.348592977669188)
--(axis cs:19.98,0.414785135839036)
--(axis cs:19.98,0.414785135839036)
--(axis cs:19.74,0.414022452966567)
--(axis cs:19.5,0.405166458505239)
--(axis cs:19.26,0.408214238177228)
--(axis cs:19.02,0.417227272038071)
--(axis cs:18.98,0.427954734724093)
--(axis cs:18.74,0.441831579203016)
--(axis cs:18.5,0.404079990509363)
--(axis cs:18.26,0.392766670817756)
--(axis cs:18.02,0.40994001771866)
--(axis cs:17.98,0.424567712940527)
--(axis cs:17.74,0.415552013654144)
--(axis cs:17.5,0.425292617769271)
--(axis cs:17.26,0.414402637992132)
--(axis cs:17.02,0.418717842752938)
--(axis cs:16.98,0.429599144104934)
--(axis cs:16.74,0.453601047698514)
--(axis cs:16.5,0.421980124065544)
--(axis cs:16.26,0.394702388288196)
--(axis cs:16.02,0.430436677705381)
--(axis cs:15.98,0.433838748148787)
--(axis cs:15.74,0.422699421623974)
--(axis cs:15.5,0.434018187542333)
--(axis cs:15.26,0.410499915148039)
--(axis cs:15.02,0.449249859617623)
--(axis cs:14.98,0.456323028864239)
--(axis cs:14.74,0.446920267898921)
--(axis cs:14.5,0.440918593517419)
--(axis cs:14.26,0.428989430120963)
--(axis cs:14.02,0.447843310357172)
--(axis cs:13.98,0.460612212294402)
--(axis cs:13.74,0.457348016787481)
--(axis cs:13.5,0.455713598536038)
--(axis cs:13.26,0.439404249503449)
--(axis cs:13.02,0.466188394364301)
--(axis cs:12.98,0.466880115989439)
--(axis cs:12.74,0.479923181331463)
--(axis cs:12.5,0.456492873605684)
--(axis cs:12.26,0.473822529966883)
--(axis cs:12.02,0.465730636936985)
--(axis cs:11.98,0.497805908976789)
--(axis cs:11.74,0.480844519672143)
--(axis cs:11.5,0.484522103799116)
--(axis cs:11.26,0.483680747026349)
--(axis cs:11.02,0.494050999767157)
--(axis cs:10.98,0.511676222419298)
--(axis cs:10.74,0.504276875034389)
--(axis cs:10.5,0.505568435870438)
--(axis cs:10.26,0.48996052280656)
--(axis cs:10.02,0.501030326580217)
--(axis cs:9.98,0.523401964409492)
--(axis cs:9.74,0.521413375353472)
--(axis cs:9.5,0.518070125342756)
--(axis cs:9.26,0.510822493929514)
--(axis cs:9.02,0.530642171582421)
--(axis cs:8.98,0.554192464608226)
--(axis cs:8.74,0.555955915749179)
--(axis cs:8.5,0.564431539365534)
--(axis cs:8.26,0.533076844746242)
--(axis cs:8.02,0.552793054195782)
--(axis cs:7.98,0.581771362388811)
--(axis cs:7.74,0.569571530357411)
--(axis cs:7.5,0.579249087208516)
--(axis cs:7.26,0.574425374127388)
--(axis cs:7.02,0.593017534479998)
--(axis cs:6.98,0.606894807345137)
--(axis cs:6.74,0.606426649888446)
--(axis cs:6.5,0.61604389633508)
--(axis cs:6.26,0.608057873132906)
--(axis cs:6.02,0.638879701954524)
--(axis cs:5.98,0.669822694071833)
--(axis cs:5.74,0.66238621763857)
--(axis cs:5.5,0.668281875146578)
--(axis cs:5.26,0.651859372499379)
--(axis cs:5.02,0.696469446903418)
--(axis cs:4.98,0.72756276730966)
--(axis cs:4.74,0.730504501857299)
--(axis cs:4.5,0.744076812326852)
--(axis cs:4.26,0.748800032293417)
--(axis cs:4.02,0.768532042534255)
--(axis cs:3.98,0.80092289676684)
--(axis cs:3.74,0.847903084185448)
--(axis cs:3.5,0.886747345608586)
--(axis cs:3.26,0.961819687257981)
--(axis cs:3.02,1.01543760315654)
--(axis cs:2.98,1.04871144836308)
--(axis cs:2.74,1.18169105957362)
--(axis cs:2.5,1.35432870279303)
--(axis cs:2.26,1.58841247643857)
--(axis cs:2.02,1.76244520400818)
--(axis cs:1.98,1.80185616961002)
--(axis cs:1.74,1.99133804166105)
--(axis cs:1.5,2.23557920678456)
--(axis cs:1.26,2.36884936576935)
--(axis cs:1.02,2.39343886495549)
--(axis cs:0.98,2.4040476665206)
--(axis cs:0.74,2.36637447445585)
--(axis cs:0.5,2.30488348196589)
--(axis cs:0.26,2.30460553023361)
--(axis cs:0.02,2.31868030697486)
--cycle;
\path [fill=color5, fill opacity=0.5] (axis cs:0.02,2.32195069625144)
--(axis cs:0.02,2.3093690650248)
--(axis cs:0.26,2.3030163419302)
--(axis cs:0.5,2.30306204647483)
--(axis cs:0.74,2.30320958602938)
--(axis cs:0.98,2.30320876088987)
--(axis cs:1.02,2.30305661377421)
--(axis cs:1.26,2.3032476948873)
--(axis cs:1.5,2.302783311817)
--(axis cs:1.74,2.30319235872545)
--(axis cs:1.98,2.30290774087002)
--(axis cs:2.02,2.30298988592735)
--(axis cs:2.26,2.24705610991032)
--(axis cs:2.5,2.16179698473506)
--(axis cs:2.74,2.10487189402894)
--(axis cs:2.98,2.02745597693824)
--(axis cs:3.02,2.02095923237864)
--(axis cs:3.26,1.94920176946214)
--(axis cs:3.5,1.81665184575798)
--(axis cs:3.74,1.6967865741025)
--(axis cs:3.98,1.55916587779585)
--(axis cs:4.02,1.5391828518264)
--(axis cs:4.26,1.39796746885009)
--(axis cs:4.5,1.26557368101309)
--(axis cs:4.74,1.1274855184494)
--(axis cs:4.98,1.03917462988185)
--(axis cs:5.02,1.01486033811495)
--(axis cs:5.26,0.930642923077549)
--(axis cs:5.5,0.878047059179269)
--(axis cs:5.74,0.813281942543894)
--(axis cs:5.98,0.752510577892834)
--(axis cs:6.02,0.728356005997714)
--(axis cs:6.26,0.679837037611669)
--(axis cs:6.5,0.642712382435387)
--(axis cs:6.74,0.598492752539985)
--(axis cs:6.98,0.56434082739197)
--(axis cs:7.02,0.551714095453086)
--(axis cs:7.26,0.518730970547129)
--(axis cs:7.5,0.504532057450252)
--(axis cs:7.74,0.478250364256539)
--(axis cs:7.98,0.48360079753773)
--(axis cs:8.02,0.451876405606979)
--(axis cs:8.26,0.442735714406963)
--(axis cs:8.5,0.432523066647473)
--(axis cs:8.74,0.433765042090559)
--(axis cs:8.98,0.420471675041816)
--(axis cs:9.02,0.406745837801969)
--(axis cs:9.26,0.368139332505022)
--(axis cs:9.5,0.380193961045414)
--(axis cs:9.74,0.362911542348766)
--(axis cs:9.98,0.368093894677337)
--(axis cs:10.02,0.342693350187846)
--(axis cs:10.26,0.314641159753601)
--(axis cs:10.5,0.304034047339677)
--(axis cs:10.74,0.299390401834921)
--(axis cs:10.98,0.298325881293496)
--(axis cs:11.02,0.289617802527497)
--(axis cs:11.26,0.254283887736208)
--(axis cs:11.5,0.248123833483498)
--(axis cs:11.74,0.250023320592632)
--(axis cs:11.98,0.249673896105204)
--(axis cs:12.02,0.235613631610986)
--(axis cs:12.26,0.2035011771909)
--(axis cs:12.5,0.194755930556517)
--(axis cs:12.74,0.198115557969597)
--(axis cs:12.98,0.201089941540118)
--(axis cs:13.02,0.187139919987197)
--(axis cs:13.26,0.163794936402607)
--(axis cs:13.5,0.155435403060707)
--(axis cs:13.74,0.153892287850912)
--(axis cs:13.98,0.165713390034029)
--(axis cs:14.02,0.157996540387031)
--(axis cs:14.26,0.140116829949247)
--(axis cs:14.5,0.13392046578605)
--(axis cs:14.74,0.1272204186157)
--(axis cs:14.98,0.129909480097898)
--(axis cs:15.02,0.123333313801843)
--(axis cs:15.26,0.101081332847145)
--(axis cs:15.5,0.0938556477808269)
--(axis cs:15.74,0.092666286984697)
--(axis cs:15.98,0.0936594642792119)
--(axis cs:16.02,0.0924274020587306)
--(axis cs:16.26,0.0827456880372407)
--(axis cs:16.5,0.0740150494716625)
--(axis cs:16.74,0.0733748660092253)
--(axis cs:16.98,0.0723555341622828)
--(axis cs:17.02,0.0679125316672347)
--(axis cs:17.26,0.0646300816786422)
--(axis cs:17.5,0.0593163552881994)
--(axis cs:17.74,0.0529205275700332)
--(axis cs:17.98,0.0530195619991543)
--(axis cs:18.02,0.049522714377917)
--(axis cs:18.26,0.0482097708062295)
--(axis cs:18.5,0.0472401792325828)
--(axis cs:18.74,0.0440055188573881)
--(axis cs:18.98,0.0435462243399276)
--(axis cs:19.02,0.0425919985108252)
--(axis cs:19.26,0.0412289721736847)
--(axis cs:19.5,0.0378856256140004)
--(axis cs:19.74,0.0356401387931194)
--(axis cs:19.98,0.034616250118379)
--(axis cs:19.98,0.141335113027926)
--(axis cs:19.98,0.141335113027926)
--(axis cs:19.74,0.152778967809549)
--(axis cs:19.5,0.147299323277401)
--(axis cs:19.26,0.155521007083899)
--(axis cs:19.02,0.172909534192813)
--(axis cs:18.98,0.185472291008507)
--(axis cs:18.74,0.187687968757005)
--(axis cs:18.5,0.182150260158553)
--(axis cs:18.26,0.19251098480066)
--(axis cs:18.02,0.232617632983648)
--(axis cs:17.98,0.240601206190276)
--(axis cs:17.74,0.219775687344289)
--(axis cs:17.5,0.217661000490018)
--(axis cs:17.26,0.237570391421305)
--(axis cs:17.02,0.261311987019298)
--(axis cs:16.98,0.251257379327059)
--(axis cs:16.74,0.262896424471865)
--(axis cs:16.5,0.269861376450254)
--(axis cs:16.26,0.273611242695486)
--(axis cs:16.02,0.295043597301354)
--(axis cs:15.98,0.314183857282601)
--(axis cs:15.74,0.309015242000803)
--(axis cs:15.5,0.310208772084781)
--(axis cs:15.26,0.316247233465645)
--(axis cs:15.02,0.346854175886554)
--(axis cs:14.98,0.36731782358586)
--(axis cs:14.74,0.375418149368405)
--(axis cs:14.5,0.377098780494143)
--(axis cs:14.26,0.378695309383048)
--(axis cs:14.02,0.416716224829796)
--(axis cs:13.98,0.432236463505438)
--(axis cs:13.74,0.42719837105221)
--(axis cs:13.5,0.436052037406174)
--(axis cs:13.26,0.446062274114323)
--(axis cs:13.02,0.483523600706582)
--(axis cs:12.98,0.496954441985731)
--(axis cs:12.74,0.512691997944328)
--(axis cs:12.5,0.517881151185769)
--(axis cs:12.26,0.528372507930636)
--(axis cs:12.02,0.550590605134848)
--(axis cs:11.98,0.57032154592761)
--(axis cs:11.74,0.586235382877598)
--(axis cs:11.5,0.608887597972114)
--(axis cs:11.26,0.620682268746489)
--(axis cs:11.02,0.65260343966191)
--(axis cs:10.98,0.664297935435096)
--(axis cs:10.74,0.689419487720056)
--(axis cs:10.5,0.721355516697646)
--(axis cs:10.26,0.739095294494828)
--(axis cs:10.02,0.774663438924245)
--(axis cs:9.98,0.785471380991761)
--(axis cs:9.74,0.827067289657689)
--(axis cs:9.5,0.86998060307774)
--(axis cs:9.26,0.914631193904128)
--(axis cs:9.02,0.964605058556521)
--(axis cs:8.98,0.983067010995247)
--(axis cs:8.74,1.04901008579717)
--(axis cs:8.5,1.14970136200624)
--(axis cs:8.26,1.24663108518601)
--(axis cs:8.02,1.34996792303491)
--(axis cs:7.98,1.37585842382534)
--(axis cs:7.74,1.51921676616605)
--(axis cs:7.5,1.65224686224656)
--(axis cs:7.26,1.7784661567951)
--(axis cs:7.02,1.95150021614665)
--(axis cs:6.98,1.98838879115738)
--(axis cs:6.74,2.05698964692367)
--(axis cs:6.5,2.1319566448931)
--(axis cs:6.26,2.25242948384219)
--(axis cs:6.02,2.27673738971228)
--(axis cs:5.98,2.28242344214959)
--(axis cs:5.74,2.31227815038213)
--(axis cs:5.5,2.35071771323589)
--(axis cs:5.26,2.35329450730423)
--(axis cs:5.02,2.35637932405546)
--(axis cs:4.98,2.3545593364687)
--(axis cs:4.74,2.36069020748749)
--(axis cs:4.5,2.37310810027887)
--(axis cs:4.26,2.37787572229676)
--(axis cs:4.02,2.38858878799751)
--(axis cs:3.98,2.38990917732653)
--(axis cs:3.74,2.43176359774962)
--(axis cs:3.5,2.44901125353096)
--(axis cs:3.26,2.48700008905837)
--(axis cs:3.02,2.45023286528524)
--(axis cs:2.98,2.44685330059625)
--(axis cs:2.74,2.4064215410678)
--(axis cs:2.5,2.37790180676884)
--(axis cs:2.26,2.33317245721309)
--(axis cs:2.02,2.30432565438637)
--(axis cs:1.98,2.30403634329746)
--(axis cs:1.74,2.30457436490736)
--(axis cs:1.5,2.30474113085573)
--(axis cs:1.26,2.30455193050943)
--(axis cs:1.02,2.30463424506673)
--(axis cs:0.98,2.30491497072329)
--(axis cs:0.74,2.30472579490629)
--(axis cs:0.5,2.30454875140725)
--(axis cs:0.26,2.30421675323886)
--(axis cs:0.02,2.32195069625144)
--cycle;
\addplot [, color0]
table [row sep=\\]{
0.002 2.34339728355408 \\
0.252 2.30308640003204 \\
0.502 2.30305271148682 \\
0.752 2.30287387371063 \\
1.002 2.302987408638 \\
1.252 2.30313494205475 \\
1.502 2.30287854671478 \\
1.752 2.30300621986389 \\
2.002 2.30305306911468 \\
2.252 2.30299737453461 \\
2.502 2.30300347805023 \\
2.752 2.30302264690399 \\
3.002 2.30290024280548 \\
3.252 2.30299918651581 \\
3.502 2.30311779975891 \\
3.752 2.30299491882324 \\
4.002 2.30275454521179 \\
4.252 2.30306658744812 \\
4.502 2.30313458442688 \\
4.752 2.30299828052521 \\
5.002 2.30284559726715 \\
5.252 2.30279486179352 \\
5.502 2.30293416976929 \\
5.752 2.3028703212738 \\
6.002 2.30287725925446 \\
6.252 2.30297553539276 \\
6.502 2.30285446643829 \\
6.752 2.30289280414581 \\
7.002 2.30308020114899 \\
7.252 2.30280261039734 \\
7.502 2.30275399684906 \\
7.752 2.30288751125336 \\
8.002 2.30295968055725 \\
8.252 2.30290896892548 \\
8.502 2.30292460918426 \\
8.752 2.30291249752045 \\
9.002 2.30286917686462 \\
9.252 2.30308604240417 \\
9.502 2.30291495323181 \\
9.752 2.30294303894043 \\
10.002 2.30285120010376 \\
10.252 2.3031476020813 \\
10.502 2.30285768508911 \\
10.752 2.30310077667236 \\
11.002 2.30285470485687 \\
11.252 2.30282950401306 \\
11.502 2.30292913913727 \\
11.752 2.30287590026855 \\
12.002 2.3029219865799 \\
12.252 2.30283727645874 \\
12.502 2.30271103382111 \\
12.752 2.30278503894806 \\
13.002 2.30293278694153 \\
13.252 2.30287866592407 \\
13.502 2.3029182434082 \\
13.752 2.30289697647095 \\
14.002 2.30284929275513 \\
14.252 2.302792096138 \\
14.502 2.30297486782074 \\
14.752 2.30291860103607 \\
15.002 2.30276284217835 \\
15.252 2.3029625415802 \\
15.502 2.30284023284912 \\
15.752 2.3028774023056 \\
16.002 2.30286660194397 \\
16.252 2.30303807258606 \\
16.502 2.30294704437256 \\
16.752 2.30292792320252 \\
17.002 2.30290520191193 \\
17.252 2.30290553569794 \\
17.502 2.30278949737549 \\
17.752 2.30282695293427 \\
18.002 2.30298502445221 \\
18.252 2.30285332202911 \\
18.502 2.30282440185547 \\
18.752 2.30290925502777 \\
19.002 2.30282294750214 \\
19.252 2.30273106098175 \\
19.502 2.30294687747955 \\
19.752 2.30291926860809 \\
};
\addplot [, color1]
table [row sep=\\]{
0.002 2.32588174343109 \\
0.252 2.30643169879913 \\
0.502 2.1637211561203 \\
0.752 2.05383797883987 \\
1.002 1.99502267837524 \\
1.252 1.92721972465515 \\
1.502 1.86164849996567 \\
1.752 1.82371870279312 \\
2.002 1.80570759773254 \\
2.252 1.7533855676651 \\
2.502 1.71449122428894 \\
2.752 1.68569449186325 \\
3.002 1.6579852938652 \\
3.252 1.61652098894119 \\
3.502 1.59673051834106 \\
3.752 1.56899471282959 \\
4.002 1.54258095026016 \\
4.252 1.50431121587753 \\
4.502 1.48249386548996 \\
4.752 1.46461495161056 \\
5.002 1.42163475751877 \\
5.252 1.3959489941597 \\
5.502 1.39445643424988 \\
5.752 1.36450083255768 \\
6.002 1.34641181230545 \\
6.252 1.32606184482574 \\
6.502 1.31078298091888 \\
6.752 1.29348983764648 \\
7.002 1.26134759187698 \\
7.252 1.24203405380249 \\
7.502 1.21621943712234 \\
7.752 1.21320089101791 \\
8.002 1.19172885417938 \\
8.252 1.16375058889389 \\
8.502 1.14435766935349 \\
8.752 1.13582547903061 \\
9.002 1.11927464604378 \\
9.252 1.09772005081177 \\
9.502 1.07481907010078 \\
9.752 1.06094790101051 \\
10.002 1.04118748307228 \\
10.252 1.01981173157692 \\
10.502 0.998351550102234 \\
10.752 0.975510120391846 \\
11.002 0.969343918561936 \\
11.252 0.939399218559265 \\
11.502 0.923109370470047 \\
11.752 0.900930207967758 \\
12.002 0.87458735704422 \\
12.252 0.861724656820297 \\
12.502 0.842411506175995 \\
12.752 0.823427313566208 \\
13.002 0.803248465061188 \\
13.252 0.79045657813549 \\
13.502 0.761972737312317 \\
13.752 0.758554711937904 \\
14.002 0.720897191762924 \\
14.252 0.703898966312408 \\
14.502 0.683585366606712 \\
14.752 0.672815558314323 \\
15.002 0.648757699131966 \\
15.252 0.62468316257 \\
15.502 0.61086286008358 \\
15.752 0.591788411140442 \\
16.002 0.564445999264717 \\
16.252 0.541751819849014 \\
16.502 0.523053395748138 \\
16.752 0.502906581759453 \\
17.002 0.500187917053699 \\
17.252 0.466520604491234 \\
17.502 0.450338000059128 \\
17.752 0.433988938480616 \\
18.002 0.421248191595078 \\
18.252 0.394299329072237 \\
18.502 0.374694354832172 \\
18.752 0.363846428692341 \\
19.002 0.352902333438396 \\
19.252 0.324247390404344 \\
19.502 0.312844138592482 \\
19.752 0.302568219229579 \\
};
\addplot [, color2]
table [row sep=\\]{
0.02 2.30936188697815 \\
0.26 2.30425605773926 \\
0.5 2.30421912670135 \\
0.74 2.30439443588257 \\
0.98 2.30449488162994 \\
1.02 2.30428955554962 \\
1.26 2.30433969497681 \\
1.5 2.3041002035141 \\
1.74 2.27449932098389 \\
1.98 2.23613450527191 \\
2.02 2.2273041009903 \\
2.26 2.1998846411705 \\
2.5 2.15024709701538 \\
2.74 2.08230148553848 \\
2.98 2.00479019880295 \\
3.02 2.00261014699936 \\
3.26 1.92145515680313 \\
3.5 1.86350575685501 \\
3.74 1.82742589712143 \\
3.98 1.76787437200546 \\
4.02 1.7615037560463 \\
4.26 1.71273164749146 \\
4.5 1.64783763885498 \\
4.74 1.59786088466644 \\
4.98 1.50110878944397 \\
5.02 1.49481086730957 \\
5.26 1.434366106987 \\
5.5 1.37685284614563 \\
5.74 1.32525287866592 \\
5.98 1.28906567692757 \\
6.02 1.27748221158981 \\
6.26 1.24877291321754 \\
6.5 1.21454583406448 \\
6.74 1.1883106648922 \\
6.98 1.16474530100822 \\
7.02 1.1604293346405 \\
7.26 1.13217533826828 \\
7.5 1.1102278649807 \\
7.74 1.07887863516808 \\
7.98 1.05711236000061 \\
8.02 1.05093731880188 \\
8.26 1.02996299862862 \\
8.5 1.00216863751411 \\
8.74 0.978819143772125 \\
8.98 0.960646694898605 \\
9.02 0.955693733692169 \\
9.26 0.933419406414032 \\
9.5 0.920443272590637 \\
9.74 0.886573404073715 \\
9.98 0.875576061010361 \\
10.02 0.871969890594482 \\
10.26 0.842603355646133 \\
10.5 0.83664618730545 \\
10.74 0.815774494409561 \\
10.98 0.798825788497925 \\
11.02 0.800802755355835 \\
11.26 0.771715134382248 \\
11.5 0.767901265621185 \\
11.74 0.742918390035629 \\
11.98 0.732124030590057 \\
12.02 0.724769788980484 \\
12.26 0.713036608695984 \\
12.5 0.694075298309326 \\
12.74 0.680358040332794 \\
12.98 0.661996430158615 \\
13.02 0.662951242923737 \\
13.26 0.638834673166275 \\
13.5 0.634867522120476 \\
13.74 0.617697367072105 \\
13.98 0.602895575761795 \\
14.02 0.602056327462196 \\
14.26 0.586596566438675 \\
14.5 0.571670717000961 \\
14.74 0.564112004637718 \\
14.98 0.54063606262207 \\
15.02 0.544633755087853 \\
15.26 0.522463232278824 \\
15.5 0.512463817000389 \\
15.74 0.499887835979462 \\
15.98 0.488158801198006 \\
16.02 0.480836570262909 \\
16.26 0.46628752052784 \\
16.5 0.453836327791214 \\
16.74 0.439869275689125 \\
16.98 0.431440885365009 \\
17.02 0.425739321112633 \\
17.26 0.412447822093964 \\
17.5 0.403126621246338 \\
17.74 0.3982526704669 \\
17.98 0.385044519603252 \\
18.02 0.38077240884304 \\
18.26 0.365060760080814 \\
18.5 0.351374089717865 \\
18.74 0.343181113898754 \\
18.98 0.341149611771107 \\
19.02 0.329054987430572 \\
19.26 0.314409324526787 \\
19.5 0.309571833908558 \\
19.74 0.297075816988945 \\
19.98 0.2905596524477 \\
};
\addplot [, color3, dashed]
table [row sep=\\]{
0.02 2.3172327041626 \\
0.26 2.30325736999512 \\
0.5 2.30288505554199 \\
0.74 2.16408323049545 \\
0.98 1.96448200941086 \\
1.02 1.92233028411865 \\
1.26 1.78723418712616 \\
1.5 1.59460916519165 \\
1.74 1.43914866447449 \\
1.98 1.33760453462601 \\
2.02 1.32846343517303 \\
2.26 1.26262301206589 \\
2.5 1.21762940883636 \\
2.74 1.17528641223907 \\
2.98 1.13581646680832 \\
3.02 1.13222311735153 \\
3.26 1.09595967531204 \\
3.5 1.05886083841324 \\
3.74 1.03822445869446 \\
3.98 1.0087042093277 \\
4.02 0.999089998006821 \\
4.26 0.975795966386795 \\
4.5 0.955871963500977 \\
4.74 0.927784246206284 \\
4.98 0.908377772569656 \\
5.02 0.906571304798126 \\
5.26 0.886451876163483 \\
5.5 0.872243267297745 \\
5.74 0.846455764770508 \\
5.98 0.832425403594971 \\
6.02 0.824442499876022 \\
6.26 0.814776957035065 \\
6.5 0.799437886476517 \\
6.74 0.785708403587341 \\
6.98 0.775270974636078 \\
7.02 0.771363717317581 \\
7.26 0.75282626748085 \\
7.5 0.748433256149292 \\
7.74 0.734609252214432 \\
7.98 0.727234953641892 \\
8.02 0.717617851495743 \\
8.26 0.70630858540535 \\
8.5 0.69917796254158 \\
8.74 0.693140971660614 \\
8.98 0.682067197561264 \\
9.02 0.67434316277504 \\
9.26 0.668472743034363 \\
9.5 0.663776421546936 \\
9.74 0.647459214925766 \\
9.98 0.640372198820114 \\
10.02 0.637733381986618 \\
10.26 0.62282327413559 \\
10.5 0.62912512421608 \\
10.74 0.614595526456833 \\
10.98 0.611485946178436 \\
11.02 0.60783029794693 \\
11.26 0.592864066362381 \\
11.5 0.593535685539246 \\
11.74 0.583777332305908 \\
11.98 0.582597434520721 \\
12.02 0.5726418197155 \\
12.26 0.573579353094101 \\
12.5 0.562180465459824 \\
12.74 0.559121817350388 \\
12.98 0.556757599115372 \\
13.02 0.553417730331421 \\
13.26 0.540815782546997 \\
13.5 0.540306037664413 \\
13.74 0.531657296419144 \\
13.98 0.526911503076553 \\
14.02 0.529024401307106 \\
14.26 0.515964230895042 \\
14.5 0.516993233561516 \\
14.74 0.512517422437668 \\
14.98 0.497827553749084 \\
15.02 0.502700871229172 \\
15.26 0.490937119722366 \\
15.5 0.479429945349693 \\
15.74 0.483137220144272 \\
15.98 0.478544300794601 \\
16.02 0.470569321513176 \\
16.26 0.464048969745636 \\
16.5 0.460030415654183 \\
16.74 0.46211728155613 \\
16.98 0.463205775618553 \\
17.02 0.455923444032669 \\
17.26 0.445169880986214 \\
17.5 0.444396656751633 \\
17.74 0.439659324288368 \\
17.98 0.441048491001129 \\
18.02 0.436939683556557 \\
18.26 0.423324471712112 \\
18.5 0.419930192828178 \\
18.74 0.428722414374351 \\
18.98 0.429222315549851 \\
19.02 0.425431314110756 \\
19.26 0.404394963383675 \\
19.5 0.407802587747574 \\
19.74 0.401990565657616 \\
19.98 0.401955482363701 \\
};
\addplot [, color4, dash pattern=on 1pt off 3pt on 3pt off 3pt]
table [row sep=\\]{
0.02 2.31320886611938 \\
0.26 2.30387494564056 \\
0.5 2.30369355678558 \\
0.74 2.26415666341782 \\
0.98 2.16773027181625 \\
1.02 2.14599581956863 \\
1.26 1.98511192798615 \\
1.5 1.7548611998558 \\
1.74 1.50225612521172 \\
1.98 1.32005982398987 \\
2.02 1.28454284667969 \\
2.26 1.14812055230141 \\
2.5 1.02460785508156 \\
2.74 0.946318936347961 \\
2.98 0.880805975198746 \\
3.02 0.852667570114136 \\
3.26 0.823358333110809 \\
3.5 0.787428379058838 \\
3.74 0.771970766782761 \\
3.98 0.756916004419327 \\
4.02 0.722032487392426 \\
4.26 0.694873744249344 \\
4.5 0.698537886142731 \\
4.74 0.685787808895111 \\
4.98 0.691602277755737 \\
5.02 0.664361047744751 \\
5.26 0.62471696138382 \\
5.5 0.637650382518768 \\
5.74 0.634500342607498 \\
5.98 0.640340173244476 \\
6.02 0.606387454271317 \\
6.26 0.580809181928635 \\
6.5 0.59368155002594 \\
6.74 0.580292999744415 \\
6.98 0.581702429056168 \\
7.02 0.567142856121063 \\
7.26 0.54517343044281 \\
7.5 0.547086369991302 \\
7.74 0.547143122553825 \\
7.98 0.556514340639114 \\
8.02 0.526627671718597 \\
8.26 0.508289742469788 \\
8.5 0.518431669473648 \\
8.74 0.529497167468071 \\
8.98 0.525392931699753 \\
9.02 0.504220494627953 \\
9.26 0.475628590583801 \\
9.5 0.480697977542877 \\
9.74 0.497596055269241 \\
9.98 0.498800346255303 \\
10.02 0.469559013843536 \\
10.26 0.457514879107475 \\
10.5 0.476965618133545 \\
10.74 0.47244263291359 \\
10.98 0.479398044943809 \\
11.02 0.464176449179649 \\
11.26 0.445787930488587 \\
11.5 0.451858469843865 \\
11.74 0.455858343839645 \\
11.98 0.449950778484345 \\
12.02 0.427766433358192 \\
12.26 0.421901434659958 \\
12.5 0.428756162524223 \\
12.74 0.436907756328583 \\
12.98 0.436609861254692 \\
13.02 0.430076670646667 \\
13.26 0.400483936071396 \\
13.5 0.421166351437569 \\
13.74 0.432220488786697 \\
13.98 0.432184255123138 \\
14.02 0.417809420824051 \\
14.26 0.398749259114266 \\
14.5 0.408178973197937 \\
14.74 0.413938349485397 \\
14.98 0.409909251332283 \\
15.02 0.400788125395775 \\
15.26 0.377559533715248 \\
15.5 0.396086859703064 \\
15.74 0.388028335571289 \\
15.98 0.400437840819359 \\
16.02 0.393135273456574 \\
16.26 0.360299554467201 \\
16.5 0.380905082821846 \\
16.74 0.407268238067627 \\
16.98 0.400832200050354 \\
17.02 0.383186849951744 \\
17.26 0.374860695004463 \\
17.5 0.38044741153717 \\
17.74 0.386795577406883 \\
17.98 0.40206281542778 \\
18.02 0.381302043795586 \\
18.26 0.356285426020622 \\
18.5 0.37191367149353 \\
18.74 0.394064018130303 \\
18.98 0.396030950546265 \\
19.02 0.380008745193481 \\
19.26 0.362281116843224 \\
19.5 0.374684748053551 \\
19.74 0.3873683989048 \\
19.98 0.381689056754112 \\
};
\addplot [, color5, dotted]
table [row sep=\\]{
0.02 2.31565988063812 \\
0.26 2.30361654758453 \\
0.5 2.30380539894104 \\
0.74 2.30396769046783 \\
0.98 2.30406186580658 \\
1.02 2.30384542942047 \\
1.26 2.30389981269836 \\
1.5 2.30376222133636 \\
1.74 2.30388336181641 \\
1.98 2.30347204208374 \\
2.02 2.30365777015686 \\
2.26 2.29011428356171 \\
2.5 2.26984939575195 \\
2.74 2.25564671754837 \\
2.98 2.23715463876724 \\
3.02 2.23559604883194 \\
3.26 2.21810092926025 \\
3.5 2.13283154964447 \\
3.74 2.06427508592606 \\
3.98 1.97453752756119 \\
4.02 1.96388581991196 \\
4.26 1.88792159557342 \\
4.5 1.81934089064598 \\
4.74 1.74408786296844 \\
4.98 1.69686698317528 \\
5.02 1.68561983108521 \\
5.26 1.64196871519089 \\
5.5 1.61438238620758 \\
5.74 1.56278004646301 \\
5.98 1.51746701002121 \\
6.02 1.502546697855 \\
6.26 1.46613326072693 \\
6.5 1.38733451366425 \\
6.74 1.32774119973183 \\
6.98 1.27636480927467 \\
7.02 1.25160715579987 \\
7.26 1.14859856367111 \\
7.5 1.0783894598484 \\
7.74 0.998733565211296 \\
7.98 0.929729610681534 \\
8.02 0.900922164320946 \\
8.26 0.844683399796486 \\
8.5 0.791112214326859 \\
8.74 0.741387563943863 \\
8.98 0.701769343018532 \\
9.02 0.685675448179245 \\
9.26 0.641385263204575 \\
9.5 0.625087282061577 \\
9.74 0.594989416003227 \\
9.98 0.576782637834549 \\
10.02 0.558678394556046 \\
10.26 0.526868227124214 \\
10.5 0.512694782018661 \\
10.74 0.494404944777489 \\
10.98 0.481311908364296 \\
11.02 0.471110621094704 \\
11.26 0.437483078241348 \\
11.5 0.428505715727806 \\
11.74 0.418129351735115 \\
11.98 0.409997721016407 \\
12.02 0.393102118372917 \\
12.26 0.365936842560768 \\
12.5 0.356318540871143 \\
12.74 0.355403777956963 \\
12.98 0.349022191762924 \\
13.02 0.335331760346889 \\
13.26 0.304928605258465 \\
13.5 0.29574372023344 \\
13.74 0.290545329451561 \\
13.98 0.298974926769733 \\
14.02 0.287356382608414 \\
14.26 0.259406069666147 \\
14.5 0.255509623140097 \\
14.74 0.251319283992052 \\
14.98 0.248613651841879 \\
15.02 0.235093744844198 \\
15.26 0.208664283156395 \\
15.5 0.202032209932804 \\
15.74 0.20084076449275 \\
15.98 0.203921660780907 \\
16.02 0.193735499680042 \\
16.26 0.178178465366364 \\
16.5 0.171938212960958 \\
16.74 0.168135645240545 \\
16.98 0.161806456744671 \\
17.02 0.164612259343266 \\
17.26 0.151100236549973 \\
17.5 0.138488677889109 \\
17.74 0.136348107457161 \\
17.98 0.146810384094715 \\
18.02 0.141070173680782 \\
18.26 0.120360377803445 \\
18.5 0.114695219695568 \\
18.74 0.115846743807197 \\
18.98 0.114509257674217 \\
19.02 0.107750766351819 \\
19.26 0.0983749896287918 \\
19.5 0.0925924744457006 \\
19.74 0.0942095533013344 \\
19.98 0.0879756815731525 \\
};
\end{axis}
\end{tikzpicture} \hfill
\resetPGFStyle
\end{minipage}
\hfill
\begin{minipage}{0.39\linewidth}
\caption{(a) SGD and
different versions of a Newton-style
optimizer using the PCH with absolute value casting of concave terms
computed by HBP with batch
approximations. The same fully-connected neural network
of~\cite{chen2018BDAPCH} has been used to generate the solid baseline
results. Our modular approach, allows further splitting the parameter
blocks into sub-blocks that can independently be optimized in
parallel (dashed lines). (b) Comparison of SGD, Adam and Newton-style
methods leveraging different exact curvature matrix-vector products
provided by HBP. We train a CNN with sigmoid activation functions
(see Supplements~\ref{sec:experimentalDetails}) and checked carefully
that SGD is not capable to optimize the net for learning rates
of various magnitudes.}
\label{fig:experiment}
\end{minipage}
\end{figure}
\paragraph{Convolutional neural network (CNN) with exact matrix-vector
products:}
For convolutional layers, the large number of hidden
features makes the strategy of backpropagating a batch average of a
curvature matrix
infeasible. Therefore, we use the exact curvature matrix-vector products
provided by our HBP approach. The CNN possesses sigmoid activations and cannot be trained by SGD (cf.~Figure~\ref{fig:experiment}b). The second-order methods progress fast
in the initial stage of the optimization. However, progress in later
phases stagnates. This may be caused by the limited sophistication of the
update
rule~\eqref{equ:linearSystemCG}: If a small value for
$\alpha$ is chosen, the optimizer will perform well in the beginning (GGN,
$\alpha_1$). As the
gradients become smaller, and hence more noisy, the step size limitation is
too optimistic, which leads to a slow-down in optimization progress. A more
conservative step size limitation improves the overall performance, but
leads to a slow-down in the initial phase (GGN, $\alpha_2$).
Despite the more adaptive nature of second-order methods, their full power
seems to still require adaptive damping, to account for the quality
of the local quadratic approximation and restrict the
update if necessary. Such adaptation, however, is beyond the scope of this
text.
\begin{figure}[t]
\end{figure}
\section{Conclusion}
We have outlined a procedure to compute block-diagonal approximations of
different curvature matrices for feedforward neural networks by a scheme that
can be realized on top of gradient backpropagation. In contrast to other
recently proposed second-order methods, our implementation is
aligned with the design of current machine learning frameworks and can
flexibly compute Hessian sub-blocks to different levels of refinement.
Its modular formulation facilitates the closed-form analysis of
Hessian diagonal blocks, and unifies the formulation of previous approaches
\cite{botev2017PracticalGaussNewton, chen2018BDAPCH}.
Within our framework we presented two strategies: (i) Obtaining exact curvature
matrix-vector products that have not been
accessible before by auto-differentiation (PCH),
and (ii) backpropagation of further approximated matrix representations
to save computations during optimization. As for gradient backpropagation, the Hessian backpropagation for
different operations can be derived independently of the underlying graph.
The extended modules
can then be used as a drop-in replacement for existing modules to construct deep neural networks. Training
procedures only have to be extended by an additional Hessian backward pass
through the graph to compute curvature information.
\newboolean{showAcknowledgements}
\setboolean{showAcknowledgements}{true}
\ifthenelse{\boolean{showAcknowledgements}}{
\section*{Acknowledgements}
The authors would like to thank Frederik Künstner, Matthias Werner, Frank Schneider, and Agustinus Kristiadi for their constructive feedback on the manuscript.
Felix Dangel and Philipp Hennig gratefully acknowledge financial support by the European Research Council through ERC Action StG 757275 / PANAMA. Felix Dangel kindly acknowledges the support of the International Max Planck Research School for Intelligent Systems (IMPRS-IS).
}{
}
|
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Training learning models on symbolic datasets, such as text and graphs, generally requires a reasonable representation of said data in an appropriate embedding space. Moreover, the efficacy of such models is determined in large part by such feature representations -- if the embedding does not accurately reflect the underlying structure of the data, then any analysis performed on the embedding will be correspondingly inaccurate. Predominantly, the embedding space is chosen to be Euclidean and an embedding technique is performed to give the data a corresponding Euclidean vectorial representation. However, recent literature has shown that various data types may have more suitable representations in non-Euclidean spaces. For instance, natural image patches have been shown to be better represented in spaces similar in topology to the Klein bottle \citep{image_patches_on_klein},
and network data with hierarchical structure is better represented in hyperbolic spaces \citep{hgeom_poincare_embedding_fb, hgeom_mds_reptradeoff}.
In particular, the recent interest in representations of symbolic data in hyperbolic space has motivated the conversion of several classical machine learning algorithms to operate effectively in such hyperbolic spaces, such as support vector machines \citep{hgeom_svm} and recommender systems \citep{hgeom_recsys}. While these methods may be performed on any set of data embedded in hyperbolic space, they rely crucially on the structure of hyperbolic spaces, such as explicitly given hyperbolic metric tensors, and the corresponding inner products and distance functions. Thus, although the generalization of prediction algorithms to hyperbolic spaces is an important step, a more fundamental problem remains unsolved. Most notably, if a practitioner has identified a new, previously unexplored non-Euclidean representation for their data, they have no way of applying existing algorithms for their data analysis needs. Ideally, there should be a general framework for developing learning algorithms on a large class of non-Euclidean representations. A key challenge, of course, is that this class needs to be broad enough to cover many representations of contemporary interest, while being manageable enough to be conducive to theoretical analysis and efficient algorithm development.
As a first step towards this goal, we consider the problem of distance metric learning. Distance metric learning is a supervised method that has been shown to improve performance of both classification \citep{mlrn_lmnn, mlrn_itml} and clustering \citep{mlrn_mmc} in Euclidean space. However, current methods for distance metric learning are reliant on the convenient algebraic and geometrical structure of Euclidean space, and are not immediately extendable to the more general problem of working on an arbitrary manifold. In this paper, we propose a general framework for distance metric learning on any manifold that is globally diffeomorphic to an open subset of Euclidean space (i.e.\ there exists an atlas for the manifold containing only one chart), which we will henceforth refer to as \emph{generalized surfaces} (or $\GS$). Successful theoretical analysis and practical implementation of distance metric learning algorithms on such manifolds perhaps indicates that this general class is amenable to the design of a wide range of algorithms.
We demonstrate an increase in the quality of clustering and classification on metric learned generalized surfaces.
Moreover, we derive the corresponding metric learning sample complexity rates for data in such representations, thus directly extending some of the key theoretical results by \citet{mlrn_verma_samplecomplexity} to manifold data.
Additionally we present (i) an algorithm for $k$-means clustering on data embedded on such surfaces, and (ii) an algorithm for approximating the shortest (geodesic) distance on such surfaces. These algorithms were developed during the process of testing the generalized distance metric learning framework, as we require a $k$-means technique for measuring clustering performance on such surfaces and a way to estimate the distances between points on the surface before and after learning the metric.
\ifarxiv
\begin{figure}[t]
\vskip 0.2in
\begin{center}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{figs/monge_patch02.pdf}}
\caption{An example $d$-dimensional manifold $S \subset \R^{D}$ that can be expressed in a single chart. The specific map being used here is $F: x \mapsto (x,h(x))$, for some fixed smooth height function $h$. Therefore, the ambient dimension here is $D = d+1$. These types of maps are an important subclass of $\GS$ and are known as a Monge patch parameterization \citep{difgeom_oneill}, or simply, surface manifolds.}
\label{fig:monge_patch}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.2in
\end{figure}
\fi
\section{Formulation}
\label{sec:formulation}
We will focus our attention to a specific class of non-Euclidean representations that can be modelled by manifolds that are globally diffeomorphic\footnote{Two topological spaces are diffeomorphic if there exists a smooth bijection with a smooth inverse between them.} to an open subset of $\mathbb{R}^d$. Equivalently, for any manifold in this class, there exists an atlas that contains exactly one chart. We shall refer to this class of manifolds as generalized surfaces ($\GS$). We'll see later that this restriction of having a single chart representation helps perform explicit geometrical calculations on such surfaces which directly benefits algorithmic design. More concretely, a $d$-dimensional generalized surface $S$ that resides in some ambient space $\mathbb{R}^D$ (not necessarily inheriting the metric structure from the ambient space), is defined by a diffeomorphism $F$ over some $d$-dimensional base space $B\subset \mathbb{R}^d$ that maps it to $\mathbb{R}^D$. Thus, the generalized surface $S \subset \mathbb{R}^D$ is given by the image of the map $F$, i.e.\ $S = { \{F(x): x\in B\} }$. See Figure \ref{fig:monge_patch} for an illustration.
\ificml
\begin{figure}[t]
\vskip 0.2in
\begin{center}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{figs/monge_patch02.pdf}}
\caption{An example $d$-dimensional manifold $S \subset \R^{D}$ that can be expressed in a single chart. The specific map being used here is $F: x \mapsto (x,h(x))$, for some fixed smooth height function $h$. Therefore, the ambient dimension here is $D = d+1$. These types of maps are an important subclass of $\GS$ and are known as a Monge patch parameterization \citep{difgeom_oneill}, or simply, surface manifolds.}
\label{fig:monge_patch}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.2in
\end{figure}
\fi
It is worth noting that this class of manifolds is expressive enough to model non-linear geometries of contemporary interest. For instance, the upper sheet of the hyperboloid of two sheets---an immensely useful model for working in hyperbolic geometry that has recently generated significant interest in machine learning---is one such manifold. Other classical geometries that can be modeled by such a parameterization include elliptical, parabolic, and surface manifolds.
Given such a manifold ${S \in \GS}$, how can we do Maha\-lanobis-type distance metric learning? Naively since ${S\subset \R^D}$, one could potentially consider distance transformations induced by applying linear maps on $\R^D$ itself. Unfortunately, such a map has an undesirable effect
of distorting the global shape of the representation space $S$ itself. Instead, ideally, what one wants is to have a transformation that can move points around \emph{in} $S$ without having to distort the shape of $S$.
This is precisely where our diffeomorphism $F$ comes in handy. Since\footnote{Stating $S=F(B)$ is clearly an abuse of notation; we simply mean $S = \{F(x) \;|\; x\in B\}$. We will make similar abuse of notation throughout the text for sake of clarity and readability.} $S = F(B)$, rather than applying transformations on $S$ directly (which distorts $S$), one can consider applying transformations on the base space $B$ instead. Let $L$ be a linear transform on $\R^d$; then the transformed $S$, namely $S_L$, is defined as $ (F \circ L) (B) = F(L(B)) = F(LB)$. One simple way to understand why this has the desired effect is to imagine a coordinate grid in $B$. Applying $L$ first (linearly) distorts the coordinate grid -- stretching it in some directions and compressing it in others. The subsequent application of $F$ maps this transformed grid into the same shape as $S$. See Figure \ref{fig:grid_spacing} for an illustration. This therefore has the
requisite effect of stretching some directions in $S$ while compressing other directions in $S$, thus in effect ``pushing" or "pulling" any data that may reside on such a manifold.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\vskip 0.2in
\begin{center}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=2.3in]{figs/grid_spacing_hyperboloid.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=2.3in]{figs/grid_spacing_swissroll.png}
\includegraphics[width=2.5in]{figs/grid_spacing_klein.png}
}
\caption{Example change in the coordinate system when applying a different $L$ on various manifolds. The red grid lines in lighter shade shows the mapping of the original coordinate system, the black grid lines in the darker shade shows the mapping of the linearly transformed coordinate system. Left: application on a hyperboloid (which uses a non-Riemannian metric structure). Center: application on a `swiss roll' (which has no intrinsic curvature and inherits the Euclidean metric structure from the ambient space). Right: application on a section of a Klein surface (which has intrinsic curvature and inherits the Euclidean metric structure from the ambient space).}
\label{fig:grid_spacing}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.2in
\end{figure*}
While this formulism is helpful, a significant challenge still needs to be addressed. Particularly, since many machine learning algorithms rely on comparing pairwise distances between datapoints, one must still be able to compute distances between points that reside on $S$. Since we allow $S$ to have its own metric structure (and not necessarily using the Euclidean structure that gets inherited from the ambient space), this issue needs to be addressed carefully. We shall provide an algorithmic approximation to calculate distances over the transformed manifolds in Section \ref{sec:dist_over_S}.
\subsection{Example Instantiations}
\label{sec:example_instances}
\textbf{Flat manifold.} Taking the base space $B=\mathbb{R}^d$ and choosing $F$ to be the identity map yields a flat surface (i.e.\ Euclidean space). In this case, we recover back the standard Mahalanobis metric learning framework on $d$-dimensional Euclidean spaces. Concretely, let $F(x) = x$ be the identity map. Then, every point $s \in S = F(B) = B$ gets transformed as $F(Lb) = Lb$, where $b = F^{-1}(s)$, which equals $s$. The (squared) distance between two points $s_1, s_2 \in S$ after this transformation simply becomes ${(s_1-s_2)^\mathsf{T} L^\mathsf{T}L (s_1-s_2)}$. The matrix $L^\mathsf{T}L$ is precisely the (quadratic form of) the Mahalanobis metric \citep{mlrn_verma_samplecomplexity}.
\textbf{Hyperboloid manifold.} A classic example of a non-linear surface is the $d$-dimensional hyperboloid, which resides in $d+1$ dimensional ambient space. Using standard derivations (see for example an excellent introduction by \citealp{hgeom_reynolds}) the diffeomporhism $F:\R^d \rightarrow \R^{d+1}$ in this case is\footnote{This setting of $F(x)$ yields a hyperboloid of two sheets: one sheet is obtained from the positive root, and the other sheet from the negative root. For hyperbolic geometry, one usually restricts themselves to one of the sheets; typically the positive sheet.} ${x \mapsto \big(x, (1+x^\mathsf{T}x)^{1/2} \big)}$.
See Figure \ref{fig:path_estimation} (center) for an illustration of the 2-dimensional hyperboloid.
Due to the non-linear geometry, the standard Euclidean distance is no longer the shortest distance between a pair of points (cf.\ Figure \ref{fig:path_estimation} center). Instead, distance $\rho^{\textrm{hyp}}$ between any two points $s_1,s_2$ on the $d$-dimensional hyperboloid $S \subset \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ is given by
\begin{align*}
\rho^{\textrm{hyp}}(s_1,s_2) & := \textup{arccosh}(-s_1^\mathsf{T} G s_2),
\end{align*}
where the $(d+1) \times (d+1)$ matrix $G :=\Big[\begin{array}{cc} I_{d\times d} & 0\\ 0 & -1 \end{array} \Big]$ encodes the (indefinite) Lorentzian metric signature used for computing the innner product between $s_1$ and $s_2$ (see \citealp{hgeom_reynolds}, for a detailed derivation of distance).
Therefore, the distance between linearly transformed points on the hyperboloid $S$, that is $F(LB)$, simply becomes
(for any $L$)
\ificml
\begin{align*}
\rho^{\textrm{hyp}}_L (s_1,s_2) &=\rho^{\textrm{hyp}} (F(Lb_1),F(Lb_2)) \\
&= \textup{arccosh}\Big( \sqrt{(1+\Delta_{11})(1+\Delta_{22})} -\Delta_{12} \Big),
\end{align*}
\else
\begin{align*}
\rho^{\textrm{hyp}}_L (s_1,s_2) &=\rho^{\textrm{hyp}} (F(Lb_1),F(Lb_2))
= \textup{arccosh}\Big( \sqrt{(1+\Delta_{11})(1+\Delta_{22})} -\Delta_{12} \Big),
\end{align*}
\fi
where $\Delta_{ij} := b_i^\mathsf{T}L^\mathsf{T}L b_j$, and $b_i = F^{-1}(s_i)$.
\iffalse
\fi
\textbf{Helicoid manifold.}
We take the helicoid as our last demonstrative example. This non-linear manifold is \emph{not} a surface (i.e.\ it does not have a mapping of the kind $F: x \mapsto (x,h(x))$, cf.\ Figure \ref{fig:monge_patch}), but does have a global diffeomorphism ${F: \R^2\rightarrow \R^3}$ defined as ${(x_1,x_2) \mapsto \big(x_1 \cos(x_2), x_1 \sin(x_2), x_2\big)}$, and is thus a generalized surface. See Figure \ref{fig:path_estimation} (left) for an illustration. It is interesting to note that this relatively simple and well-known surface, which borrows the Euclidean metric structure from the ambient space, does not have a known closed form expression for distances between pairs of points. This necessitates a procedure to approximate distances between datapoints on a generalized surface $S$ that is specified via $F$. (See next section.)
\begin{figure*}[t]
\vskip 0.2in
\begin{center}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=2.3in]{figs/path_helicoid.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=2.3in]{figs/path_hyperboloid.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=2.3in]{figs/path_sinusoid.pdf}
}
\caption{Estimation of the shortest path using the proposed algorithm on some example generalized surfaces. Shortest distance approximation on (i) Left: a helicoid -- a generalized surface that inherits ambient Euclidean metric structure, (ii) Center: a hyperboloid -- a surface that does not use the Euclidean (or even a Riemannian) metric structure, (iii) Right: a sinusoid -- a surface that inherits the ambient Euclidean metric structure. Observe that the hyperboloid and sinusoid are surfaces (center and right plots), that is, have a parameterization $x \mapsto(x,h(x))$; we can thus show the corresponding path projection onto the base space (the bottom two coordinates, i.e.\ the bottom plane).}
\label{fig:path_estimation}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.2in
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Computing Distances on Arbitrary Generalized Surfaces}
\label{sec:dist_over_S}
Recall that the length of any curve $\gamma:[0,1]\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{D}$ is given by the arc length integral $\int_0^1 { \sqrt{ \big\langle \frac{d}{dt}\gamma(t), \frac{d}{dt}\gamma(t) \big\rangle} dt} $, where the inner product is with respect to whichever metric structure is endowed on the underlying space. Thus, for a given generalized surface $S$ embedded in $\R^D$ (with its own metric tensor, and not necessarily the one inherited from the surrounding Euclidean space), computing the distance between any two points $x, y \in S$ involves minimizing the functional
$$\LEN[\gamma(t)] := \int_0^1 \sqrt{ \Big\langle \frac{d}{dt}\gamma(t), \frac{d}{dt}\gamma(t) \Big\rangle} dt$$
over all paths $\gamma(t)$ such that $\gamma(t) \in S, \forall t \in [0, 1]$ with $\gamma(0) = x$ and $\gamma(1) = y$ (see for instance \citealp{calcofvar}).
However, since $S$ is diffeomorphic to the base space $B$ (via $F$), any path $\gamma(t)$ such that $\gamma(t) \in S \ \forall t \in [0, 1]$ is given by some path $\kappa(t): [0, 1] \to B$, which is then mapped to $\gamma(t)$ by using $F$. In other words, for any $\gamma(\cdot) \subset S$, $\exists \ \kappa: [0, 1] \to B$ such that $F(\kappa(t)) = \gamma(t)$.
Therefore, formally stated, computing the distance function $\rho^\textup{mfd}(x,y)$ for an arbitrary generalized surface manifold (given by $F$) is equivalent to solving the following variational problem:
$$\inf_{\kappa: [0, 1] \to B} \LEN_F[\kappa] = \inf_\kappa \int_0^1 \sqrt{ \Big\langle \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)), \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)) \Big\rangle} dt,$$
such that $ F(\kappa(0)) = x, F(\kappa(1)) = y$ (boundary conditions).
Since the integrand is only a function of $\kappa(t)$ and $\dot{\kappa}(t)$ (where $\dot{\kappa}$ denotes the derivative of $\kappa$ with respect to $t$), finding the minima of $\LEN$ is equivalent to finding the solution $\kappa^\ast$ to the following differential equation, also known as the Euler-Lagrange equation \citep{calcofvar}:
\ificml
\begin{align*}
\frac{\partial}{\partial \kappa} \Bigg [ & \sqrt{ \Big\langle \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)), \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)) \Big\rangle} \Bigg] \\
&
= \frac{d}{dt} \frac{\partial}{\partial \dot{\kappa}} \Bigg[\sqrt{ \Big\langle \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)), \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)) \Big\rangle} \Bigg],
\end{align*}
\else
\begin{align*}
\frac{\partial}{\partial \kappa} \Bigg [ & \sqrt{ \Big\langle \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)), \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)) \Big\rangle} \Bigg]
= \frac{d}{dt} \frac{\partial}{\partial \dot{\kappa}} \Bigg[\sqrt{ \Big\langle \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)), \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)) \Big\rangle} \Bigg],
\end{align*}
\fi
with the same boundary conditions.
For an arbitrary generalized surface $S$, computing the optimal minimum-distance geodesic path $\kappa^\ast$ can be computationally prohibitive, and therefore we present an algorithm to approximate this path using piecewise linear paths. Let $F^{-1}(x)=a_0$, $a_1,\ldots, a_n, a_{n+1} = F^{-1}(y)$ be $n$ intermediate points on a path $\kappa$ (where $a_0$ and $a_{n+1}$ are the end points). Define
$$\sigma(a_i,a_{i+1}) := \int_0^1 \sqrt{ \Big\langle \frac{d}{dt}F(\bar\kappa(t)), \frac{d}{dt}F(\bar\kappa(t)) \Big\rangle} dt,$$
where in this case, $\bar\kappa(t) = (1-t) a_i + t a_{i+1}$, a straight line path $a_i$ and $a_{i+1}$ in the base space $B$.\\
\begin{algorithm}[htb!]
\caption{Manifold Distance Approximation}
\label{alg:path_approx}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\INPUT $x,y \in S$ (path connected), number of intermediate points $n$, number of samples $m$.
\STATE Let $\{a_i\}, i = 1, \ldots, n$ be a set of $n$ points linearly spaced\footnotemark ~between $a_0 = F^{-1}(x)$ and $a_{n+1} = F^{-1}(y)$ in $B$
\REPEAT
\FOR{each intermediate point $a_i$ between $a_0$ and $a_{n+1}$}
\STATE { $r_i = 2 \cdot \max(\|a_i - a_{i-1}\|, \|a_i - a_{i+1}\|)$}
\STATE {Let $\{b_j\}, j = 1, \ldots, m$ be points sampled from\footnotemark ~$\mathbb{B}(a_i,r_i) \cap B$ }
\STATE{Set $j^\ast = \argmin_{j} \ \sigma(a_{i-1}, b_j) + \sigma(b_j, a_{i+1})$}
\IF{$\sigma(a_{i-1}, b_{j^\ast}) + \sigma(b_{j^\ast},a_{i+1}) < \sigma(a_{i-1}, a_i) + \sigma(a_i, a_{i+1})$}
\STATE{$a_i \leftarrow b_{j^\ast}$}
\ENDIF
\ENDFOR
\UNTIL {convergence}
\STATE \textbf{return} ${\rho^F(x,y) = \sum_{i=0}^n \sigma(a_i, a_{i+1})}$ as the approximated length between $x$ and $y$ on $S$.
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\addtocounter{footnote}{-1}\footnotetext{This initialization assumes (for convenience) that the base $B$ is convex and contains the straight line joining the points. If that is not the case, simply initialize $a_i$ in any reasonable way such that each $a_i \in B$.}
\addtocounter{footnote}{1}\footnotetext{$\mathbb{B}(x,r)$ denotes the ball of radius $r$ centered at $x$.}
Note that if any linear transformation $L$ is being applied to points in the base space $B$ (as needed for distance metric learning, cf.\ Section \ref{sec:formulation}), we can simply apply the same equations on $L \kappa(t)$ instead of $\kappa(t)$ in our computations.
A concrete instantiation of our distance approximation procedure (Algorithm ~\ref{alg:path_approx}) for the hyperboloid manifold is given in Appendix \ref{app:derive_hyperbolic_path_approx}.
A qualitative demonstration of our Algorithm \ref{alg:path_approx} is shown on various types of generalized surfaces in Figure \ref{fig:path_estimation}. It is instructive to note that, at a cursory glace, for the hyperboloid (Figure \ref{fig:path_estimation} center), it may seem like the estimated path on the surface is \emph{not} the shortest path (a sideways bend on the surface seems shorter than the depicted bottom bend). This mismatch is due to limitations of our intuition: recall that hyperboloid inherits the indefinite Lorentzian metric signature. Since we are used to Euclidean metrics, any attempt to visualize shortest distances in other metrics (especially indefinite metrics) is futile. Fortunately, since we do know
the closed form expression for distances on a hyperboloid (cf.\ Section \ref{sec:example_instances}), we can quantitatively evaluate the approximation returned by Algorithm \ref{alg:path_approx}, and indeed verify that the displayed path is in fact the shortest (see Section \ref{sec:expt_mfd_dist_approx} for details).
\section{Metric Learning on Manifolds}
\label{sec:mmlrn}
With this mathematical machinery in place, we can trivially generalize existing metric learning algorithms such as Large Margin Nearest Neighbor (LMNN, \citealp{mlrn_lmnn}) and Mahalanobis Metric for Clustering (MMC, \citealp{mlrn_mmc}).
\subsection{MMC on Manifolds for Improved \texorpdfstring{$k$-means} ~~Clustering}
\label{sec:mfd_mmc}
Given labelled data $(x_1,y_1),\ldots, (x_m,y_m)$, the goal for MMC is to find a linear transformation $L$ that brings data from the same category together while pushing away data from different categories \citep{mlrn_mmc}. This pull-push action has the desired effect of making the category-based clusters in the transformed data representation more pronounced, which can thus be easily recovered by a simple clustering algorithm like $k$-means. This is achieved by constructing two sets of pairs---the \emph{similar pairs} set, which we call $P$, and the \emph{dissimilar pairs} set, which we call $Q$---from the given labelled data. Concretely, (for all $1\leq i,j \leq m$)
\begin{align*}
P &:= \{(x_i,x_j) \; | \; y_i = y_j\}, \\
Q &:= \{(x_i,x_j)\; | \; y_i \neq y_j\}.
\end{align*}
Then, the following optimization finds the desired transformation:
$$
\min_{L \in \R^{d \times d}} \underbrace{\sum_{(x_i,x_j) \in P} \| Lx_i - Lx_j\|^2}_{\textup{pull term}} - \lambda \underbrace{\sum_{(x_i,x_j) \in Q} \| Lx_i - Lx_j\|^2}_{\textup{push term}},
$$
where $\lambda$ is a hyper-parameter controlling the tradeoff between the pull and the push term.
This can be extended to the manifold case, where the given labelled data $(x_1,y_1),\ldots, (x_m,y_m)$ resides on a known $d$-dimensional generalized surface $S$ (specified by the diffeomorphism $F$). Define $b_i$ in the base space $B\subset\R^d$ as the points $b_i = F^{-1}(x_i)$ (for all $1\leq i \leq m$), and let $\rho^F(x_i,x_j)$ denote the distance between points $x_i$ and $x_j$ on $S$ (with respect to whichever metric tensor is endowed on $S$). Then, as before, the $L$-transformed distance on $S$ is (cf.\ Sections \ref{sec:formulation} and \ref{sec:example_instances}):
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:FLB}
\rho^F_L(x_i,x_j) := \rho^F\big(F(Lb_i),F(Lb_j)\big).
\end{equation}
Therefore, the corresponding manifold MMC optimization simply becomes:
$$
\min_{L \in \R^{d \times d}} \underbrace{\sum_{(x_i,x_j) \in P} \rho^F_L(x_i,x_j)}_{\textup{pull term on } S} - \lambda \underbrace{\sum_{(x_i,x_j) \in Q} \rho^F_L(x_i,x_j)}_{\textup{push term on } S},
$$
where $P$, $Q$, and $\lambda$ are defined as before.
As discussed earlier, if a closed form expression of the distance function over $S$ is known, one can simply plug in that expression for $\rho$; otherwise, they can use Algorithm \ref{alg:path_approx} to approximate it (cf.\ Section \ref{sec:dist_over_S}).
\subsection{LMNN on Manifolds for Improved Nearest Neighbor Classification}
\label{sec:mfd_lmnn}
LMNN \citep{mlrn_lmnn} can be viewed as a ``localized" version of MMC, where instead of pulling and pushing \emph{all} datapoints that belong to the same and different categories (respectively), it pulls and pushes only those in a local
neighborhood of a given datapoint. This local action directly helps in improving the $k$-nearest neighbor classification quality. Specifically, the classic formulation works on triples (unlike pairs that get used in MMC) of points. Let $(x_1,y_1),\ldots,(x_m,y_m)$ be a given labelled dataset on a $d$-dimensional generalized surface $S$ (specified by the diffeomorphism $F$).
Then, for any $i$, let the relation $j\sim i$ denote that $x_j$ is a true neighbor of $x_i$ (i.e.\ $y_i = y_j$), and the relation $l\not \sim i$
denote that $x_l$ is an imposter neighbor of
$x_i$ (i.e.\ $y_i \neq y_l$). Then, the LMNN optimization on a manifold is given as
\begin{equation*}
\min_{L\in\R^{d\times d}} \underbrace{\sum_{i,j\sim i} \rho^F_L\big(x_i,x_j \big)}_{\textup{pull term on }S} + \lambda \underbrace{\sum_{i,j\sim i, l\not \sim i} \Big[1+\rho^F_L\big(
x_i,x_j\big) - \rho_L^F\big(x_i,x_l \big) \Big]_+}_{\textup{push term on } S},
\end{equation*}
where $[\cdot]_+ := \max(\cdot,0)$ denotes the hinge loss.
Observe that selecting $F$ as the identity map immediately gives us back the classical Euclidean formulation of LMNN (cf.\ Section \ref{sec:example_instances}).
We will demonstrate that metric learned manifold representations of symbolic data (rather than naive Euclidean representation) can yield better clustering and classification results. See Section \ref{sec:experiments} for more details.
\section{Sample Complexity of Manifold Metric Learning}
Here, we will derive PAC-style sample complexity bounds for distance metric learning on generalized surface manifolds.
Given a $d$-dimensional generalized surface $S\subset \R^D$ (specified by the diffeomorphism $F$, that is, $S=F(B)$, for an open set $B\subset \R^d$), we want to find a linear
transformation $L^*$ that minimizes some notion of \emph{error} on data drawn from a fixed unknown distribution $\D$ on $S\times\{0,1\}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:errD}
L^* := \argmin_{L \in \mathsterling} \err(L,\D),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathsterling$ is a class of linear transformations under consideration.
A practitioner typically defines \emph{error} in a way that makes the optimization prefer those linear transformations that bring data from same class closer together than those from different classes (see, for instance, how error, or the loss function, is defined for LMNN or MMC, cf.\ Section \ref{sec:mmlrn}). More concretely, following the setup discussed in \cite{mlrn_verma_samplecomplexity}, most generally, $\err(\cdot, \cdot)$ can be defined as
\begin{align*}
\err^\lambda(L,\D) := {\mathbb E}_{\substack{(x,y)\sim \D \\ (x',y') \sim \D}} \Big[ \phi^\lambda\Big( \rho^F_L(x,x'), Y \Big) \Big],
\end{align*}
where $\phi^\lambda(\dist, Y)$ is a generic distance-based loss function that
computes the degree of violation between distance $\rho^F_L(x,x')$ as defined in Eq.\ \eqref{eq:FLB} and the label agreement $Y := \indicate[y = y']$, and
penalizes it by factor $\lambda$.
This generalized notion of error incorporates many interesting metric learning losses including MMC and LMNN (see \citealp{mlrn_verma_samplecomplexity}, for a detailed discussion and derivation).
We are interested in how well one can approximate Eq.\ \eqref{eq:errD} if only a finite size i.i.d.\ sample $(x_1,y_1),\ldots,(x_m,y_m)$ from $\D$ is available.
Specifically, let $Z_m$ denote a size $m$ i.i.d.\ sample from $\D$, and $\err(M,Z_m)$ denote the corresponding \emph{empirical} error.
We can thus define the empirical risk minimizing transform based on $m$ samples as
$L^*_m := \argmin_L \err(L,Z_m)$,
and compare its generalization performance to that of the theoretically optimal $L^*$, that is, how
\begin{equation}
\err(L^*_m, \D) - \err(L^*,\D)
\label{eq:erm_conv}
\end{equation}
behaves as the sample size $m$ grows.
Interestingly, we can derive a good convergence rate for the key expression above, and directly extend ${\textrm{Theorem 1}}$ of \citet{mlrn_verma_samplecomplexity} for the case of
$d$-dimensional generalized surface manifolds\footnote{For readability, we only present the statement of the theorem in the main text. An interested reader should refer to Appendix \ref{app:proofs} for a detailed proof.}.
Particularly, (i) let $C_F$ be a measure of how distances are potentially stretched or changed by the diffeomorphism $F$ and the specific choice of metric tensor endowed on $S$; that is, we have
$\rho^F(F(b),F(b')) \leq C_F \|b - b'\|^2$
for all $b,b' \in B$,
(ii) let $C_L$ be a bound on the quadratic form of the linear transformations being considered, that is,
$C_L := \sup_{L \in \mathsterling} \|L^\mathsf{T}L\|_\textup{fro}$, and (iii)
let $C_B$ be the bound on the support of the distribution $\D$ in the base space $B$, that is, $\|b\|^2\leq C_B$, for any $x\sim \mathcal{D}|_S$ such that $F(b) = x$ (with probability 1). Then, we have the following result.
\begin{theorem}
\label{lm:unif_conv_all}
For any generalized $d$-dimensional surface $S$ (with corresponding diffeomorphism $F$), let $\phi^\lambda$ be a distance-based loss function that is $\lambda$-Lipschitz
in the first argument. Then, with probability at least $1-\delta$ over an i.i.d.\ draw of $m$ samples
$Z_m$, we have
\ificml
\begin{align*}
\sup_{L\in \mathsterling} \Big[ \err^\lambda (L,\D) - &
\err^\lambda (L,Z_m) \Big]
\\
&\leq O\left( \lambda C_F C_L C_B \sqrt{ \frac{\ln(1/\delta)}{m}}\right).
\end{align*}
\else
\begin{align*}
\sup_{L\in \mathsterling} \Big[ \err^\lambda (L,\D) -
\err^\lambda (L,Z_m) \Big]
\; \leq \; O\left( \lambda C_F C_L C_B \sqrt{ \frac{\ln(1/\delta)}{m}}\right).
\end{align*}
\fi
\end{theorem}
\begin{figure}[t]
\vskip 0.2in
\begin{center}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=3in]{figs/dist_approx_hyperboloid.pdf}
}
\caption{Quality of distance approximation on a hyperboloid. We plot the ratio between the approximated and the true distance (averaged over multiple pairs of points drawn randomly). The reference line at $1$ (solid dashed line) indicates perfect approximation.}
\label{fig:expt_mfd_dist_approx}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.2in
\end{figure}
The uniform bound presented above this directly implies $1/\sqrt{m}$ rate of convergence of Eq.\ \eqref{eq:erm_conv}. It is instructive to note that while this rate is dimension independent (i.e.\ it is independent of the manifold dimension $d$), the constants (e.g.\ $C_L$) can very well depend on $d$ for some interesting practical cases.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\vskip 0.2in
\begin{center}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=2.0in]{figs/cluster_result_helicoid_raw.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=2.0in]{figs/cluster_result_helicoid_before.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=2.0in]{figs/cluster_result_helicoid_after.pdf}
}
\caption{Clustering result on the helicoid. Left: A synthetic dataset containing two intertwined clusters (cluster identities shown in blue dots and red triangles). Observe that there is no linear transformation that can separate the two clusters for $k$-means. Center: The same synthetic dataset (as depicted in the Left plot) along with the underlying helicoidal structure that can better represent the given dataset. Right: Metric learned representation of the given dataset on the helicoid using manifold-MMC. The two clusters separate out very naturally when an appropriate non-Euclidean representation is considered.}
\label{fig:cluster_helicoid}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.2in
\end{figure*}
\section{Empirical Evaluation}
\label{sec:experiments}
With the manifold metric learning framework in place, we would like to know how much improvement in performance (if any) one can expect by doing metric learning on data that can be modelled more effectively as a generalized surface. Here we compare the performance of both $k$-nearest neighbor classification and $k$-means clustering on representative benchmark datasets.
Each dataset has a symbolic representation (i.e.\ only the relationships between pairs of datapoints are available), which can be used to embed it (via multidimensional scaling) in any generalized surface (including Euclidean space). We can thus compare prediction performance on Euclidean, metric learned Euclidean, generalized surface, and metric learned generalized surface representations of the given data\footnote{Code is available at: \texttt{\href{https://github.com/m-k-S/manifold\_ml}{https://github.com/m-k-S/manifold\_ml}}.}.
It is worth noting that even though most of our reported experimental results are on hyperbolic spaces (due to results in previous literature showing it to be an effective representation for such datasets), our published code works for any generalized surface.
\subsection{Approximation of Manifold Distances}
\label{sec:expt_mfd_dist_approx}
As detailed in Section \ref{sec:dist_over_S}, even simple manifolds can have distance functions with no explicit closed form expression. It is imperative to have a good algorithm for approximating distances on generalized surfaces.
Taking the hyperboloid manifold (which is endowed with the Minkowski metric), which has a known closed form expression for distance, as a reference (cf.\ Section \ref{sec:example_instances}), we can gauge the effectiveness of our proposed Algorithm \ref{alg:path_approx} for distance approximation.
Figure \ref{fig:expt_mfd_dist_approx} depicts the quality of distance approximation on the hyperboloid as a function of the number of intermediate points used in the computation; as expected, a larger number of intermediate points yields a closer approximation to the true distance. Interestingly, the result also indicates that we can get a good approximation with only a few intermediate points; thus potentially gaining on some computational savings.
\subsection{Evaluation Setting}
Experiments were conducted on demonstrative synthetic datasets, as well as the following publicly available real-world datasets. \begin{itemize}
\item \dataset{football}: A network of collegiate American football teams, where edges between nodes represent regular season games in the fall of 2000. There are 12 unique categories, representing the 12 divisions of the NCAA DI football conference \citep{football}.
\item \dataset{polbooks}: A network of books about US politics published around the 2004 presidential election. Edges between books represent frequent co-purchasing of books by the same buyers on the website Amazon.com. There are 3 unique categories, representing political affiliations (`liberal', `conservative', or `neutral') \citep{polbooks}.
\item \dataset{adjnoun}: A network of words (nouns and adjectives) taken from the Charles Dickens novel \textit{David Copperfield}. Edges between nodes represent adjacencies between nouns and adjectives, and each node is labelled as either a noun or an adjective \citep{adjnoun}.
\item \dataset{20newsgroup}: A network of newsgroup documents, where edges between nodes represent a categorical relation. There are 20 unique categories, each representing a different newsgroup \citep{20newsgroup}.
\end{itemize}
\ificml
\begin{table*}[htb]
\centering
\caption{$k$-nearest neighbor classification results.}
\label{tab:clf_res}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Dataset & Euclidean & Euclidean+Metric Learn & Hyperbolic & Hyperbolic+Metric Learn \\
\hline \hline
\dataset{football} & 0.41 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.40 $\pm$ 0.09 & 0.29 $\pm$ 0.09 & \textbf{0.25 $\pm$ 0.10} \\
\dataset{polbooks} & 0.24 $\pm$ 0.05 & 0.31 $\pm$ 0.12 & 0.25 $\pm$ 0.06 & \textbf{0.23 $\pm$ 0.06} \\
\dataset{adjnoun} & 0.58 $\pm$ 0.06 & 0.56 $\pm$ 0.07 & 0.55 $\pm$ 0.09 & \textbf{0.49 $\pm$ 0.05} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\fi
Each of these real-world examples are network-type data, and thus are well-suited to hyperbolic embeddings \citep{hgeom_mds_reptradeoff}. Therefore, we shall use
hyperboloid as our non-Euclidean representation for
these network-type datasets.
\ifarxiv
\begin{algorithm}[htb!]
\caption{$k$-Means on Generalized Surfaces}
\label{alg:cluster}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE $\Theta \leftarrow$ randomly assign each point on the manifold in the dataset $X$ to one of $k$ clusters
\REPEAT
\FOR{$x_i \in \{x_1, ..., x_n\}$}
\STATE {current cost = $C(\Theta; X)$}
\STATE {min cost $\leftarrow$ current cost}
\FOR{$j \in \{1, ..., k\}$}
\STATE{Set $\Theta_{new}$ to be equal to $\Theta$ but with the label of $x_i$ set to $j$}
\STATE{new cost = $C(\Theta_{new}; X)$}
\IF {new cost $<$ min cost}
\STATE{$\Theta \leftarrow \Theta_{new}$}
\ENDIF
\ENDFOR
\ENDFOR
\UNTIL {convergence}
\STATE \textbf{return} $\Theta$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\fi
\subsection{Clustering on Generalized Surfaces}
To demonstrate the efficacy of generalized distance metric learning (via manifold-MMC, cf.\ Section \ref{sec:mfd_mmc}) with respect to improving cluster performance, we utilize the \dataset{20newsgroup} dataset, as well as a synthetically generated dataset consisting of points sampled from a helicoid manifold. The results on the synthetic dataset are depicted in Figure \ref{fig:cluster_helicoid}. This dataset was carefully chosen to show the immense potential of considering the an appropriate representation for a given dataset: in the the Euclidean representation, there is no (linear) transformation that can achieve an effective $k$-means clustering, but once the right representation is chosen (the helicoid, in this case), distance metric learning makes the clustering task almost trivial.
This also leads to the question: \emph{how} exactly can clustering be done in a non-Euclidean space?
Note that an arbitrary generalized surface is not necessarily even a vector space (as $S$ is not guaranteed to be closed under vector addition), and thus there does not exist a notion of a \emph{mean vector} or a \emph{center}, a key concept that is required to run the typical $k$-means algorithm. Nevertheless, we can generalize $k$-means in a more natural way. Recall that the $k$-means objective attempts to find a $k$-partition $C_1,\ldots,C_k$ of a given dataset $X = \{x_1,\ldots,x_n\}$
that minimizes
$$
\sum_{j=1}^k \sum_{i\in C_j} \|x_i - \mu_j \|^2,
$$
where $\mu_j$ is the mean of cluster $C_j$. Since on a generalized surface, we have no concept of the mean, we cannot minimize this form.
To circumvent this, we note that the inside summation can be equivalently rewritten as (for any $j$)
$$
\sum_{i\in C_j} \|x_i - \mu_j \|^2 = \frac{1}{2 |C_j|} \sum_{i,i'\in C_j} \|x_i - x_{i'}\|^2.
$$
This change reformulates the $k$-means optimization solely in terms of pairwise distances \citep{kmeanshardness} and thus extends it to manifolds.
Leveraging this formulation, we present a generalized $k$-means algorithm that can operate on any generalized surface. We define a cluster assignment $\Theta$ to be the assignment of one cluster label from $\{1, ..., k\}$ to each point $x_i$ in our dataset $X = \{x_1, ..., x_n\}$; the value $y_i \in \Theta$ refers to the cluster assignment of the point $x_i$. We define a counting function:
$$K(y_i) = \sum_{j = 1}^n \mathbf{1}[y_i = y_j],$$
which outputs the number of points in $X$ with the same cluster assignment as $x_i$ (including the point $x_i$). The dataset $X$ consists of points embedded in a generalized surface with distance function $\rho$. Thus, the cost of a given cluster assignment $\Theta$ is:
$$C(\Theta; X) = \sum_{i = 1}^n \sum_{j = 1}^n \mathbf{1}[y_i = y_j] \rho(x_i, x_j) \frac{1}{2K(y_i)}.$$
See Algorithm \ref{alg:cluster} for a detailed implementation. (Notice that the optimization style is akin to Hartigan's method for $k$-means optimization, \citealp{hartigans})
\ificml
\begin{algorithm}[htb!]
\caption{$k$-Means on Generalized Surfaces}
\label{alg:cluster}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE $\Theta \leftarrow$ randomly assign each point on the manifold in the dataset $X$ to one of $k$ clusters
\REPEAT
\FOR{$x_i \in \{x_1, ..., x_n\}$}
\STATE {current cost = $C(\Theta; X)$}
\STATE {min cost $\leftarrow$ current cost}
\FOR{$j \in \{1, ..., k\}$}
\STATE{Set $\Theta_{new}$ to be equal to $\Theta$ but with the label of $x_i$ set to $j$}
\STATE{new cost = $C(\Theta_{new}; X)$}
\IF {new cost $<$ min cost}
\STATE{$\Theta \leftarrow \Theta_{new}$}
\ENDIF
\ENDFOR
\ENDFOR
\UNTIL {convergence}
\STATE \textbf{return} $\Theta$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\fi
For the \dataset{20newsgroup} dataset, we perform the generalized $k$-means clustering on a hyperboloid embedding and a metric learned hyperboloid embedding (via metric-MMC).
We use normalized mutual information (NMI) to measure the quality of the obtained $20$-way clustering.
Relative to the hyperboloid embedding, the performance of clustering on the metric learned hyperboloid improves by $0.015$ units (or $3\%$ improvement). Given that this dataset has 20 different categories and is thus very difficult to properly cluster, this improvement is significant.
\ifarxiv
\begin{table*}[tb]
\centering
\caption{$k$-nearest neighbor classification results.}
\label{tab:clf_res}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Dataset & Euclidean & Euclidean+Metric Learn & Hyperbolic & Hyperbolic+Metric Learn \\
\hline \hline
\dataset{football} & 0.41 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.40 $\pm$ 0.09 & 0.29 $\pm$ 0.09 & \textbf{0.25 $\pm$ 0.10} \\
\dataset{polbooks} & 0.24 $\pm$ 0.05 & 0.31 $\pm$ 0.12 & 0.25 $\pm$ 0.06 & \textbf{0.23 $\pm$ 0.06} \\
\dataset{adjnoun} & 0.58 $\pm$ 0.06 & 0.56 $\pm$ 0.07 & 0.55 $\pm$ 0.09 & \textbf{0.49 $\pm$ 0.05} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\fi
\subsection{Classification on the Hyperboloid}
To demonstrate the efficacy of generalized distance metric learning (via manifold-LMNN, cf.\ Section \ref{sec:mfd_lmnn}) with respect to improving classification performance, we use the \dataset{football}, \dataset{polbooks}, and \dataset{adjnoun} datasets. Note that the generalized surface we have chosen for each of these datasets is the two-dimensional hyperboloid.
For each dataset, the classifier performance is measured using the standard 0-1 error, and the results are presented in Table \ref{tab:clf_res}. In all cases, the classification performance on the metric-learned hyperboloid is significantly better than in the other three embedding options. This emphasizes that the right notion of distance and an appropriate (perhaps non-Euclidean) choice of representation is sometimes crucial to attain good performance.
In particular, we note that linear classifier performance on the \dataset{football} dataset (using a one-vs-rest strategy) is particularly poor, with best reported error (as per \citealp{hgeom_svm}) being $0.79$ on a Euclidean embedding, with an slight improvement to $0.76$ on a hyperboloid embedding. In contrast, our $k$-nearest neighbor error on the metric-learned hyperboloid is $0.25 \pm 0.10$, a significant improvement.
\nocite{manifold_ml}
\section{Introduction}
\label{sec:intro}
Training learning models on symbolic datasets, such as text and graphs, generally requires a reasonable representation of said data in an appropriate embedding space. Moreover, the efficacy of such models is determined in large part by such feature representations -- if the embedding does not accurately reflect the underlying structure of the data, then any analysis performed on the embedding will be correspondingly inaccurate. Predominantly, the embedding space is chosen to be Euclidean and an embedding technique is performed to give the data a corresponding Euclidean vectorial representation. However, recent literature has shown that various data types may have more suitable representations in non-Euclidean spaces. For instance, natural image patches have been shown to be better represented in spaces similar in topology to the Klein bottle \citep{image_patches_on_klein},
and network data with hierarchical structure is better represented in hyperbolic spaces \citep{hgeom_poincare_embedding_fb, hgeom_mds_reptradeoff}.
In particular, the recent interest in representations of symbolic data in hyperbolic space has motivated the conversion of several classical machine learning algorithms to operate effectively in such hyperbolic spaces, such as support vector machines \citep{hgeom_svm} and recommender systems \citep{hgeom_recsys}. While these methods may be performed on any set of data embedded in hyperbolic space, they rely crucially on the structure of hyperbolic spaces, such as explicitly given hyperbolic metric tensors, and the corresponding inner products and distance functions. Thus, although the generalization of prediction algorithms to hyperbolic spaces is an important step, a more fundamental problem remains unsolved. Most notably, if a practitioner has identified a new, previously unexplored non-Euclidean representation for their data, they have no way of applying existing algorithms for their data analysis needs. Ideally, there should be a general framework for developing learning algorithms on a large class of non-Euclidean representations. A key challenge, of course, is that this class needs to be broad enough to cover many representations of contemporary interest, while being manageable enough to be conducive to theoretical analysis and efficient algorithm development.
As a first step towards this goal, we consider the problem of distance metric learning. Distance metric learning is a supervised method that has been shown to improve performance of both classification \citep{mlrn_lmnn, mlrn_itml} and clustering \citep{mlrn_mmc} in Euclidean space. However, current methods for distance metric learning are reliant on the convenient algebraic and geometrical structure of Euclidean space, and are not immediately extendable to the more general problem of working on an arbitrary manifold. In this paper, we propose a general framework for distance metric learning on any manifold that is globally diffeomorphic to an open subset of Euclidean space (i.e.\ there exists an atlas for the manifold containing only one chart), which we will henceforth refer to as \emph{generalized surfaces} (or $\GS$). Successful theoretical analysis and practical implementation of distance metric learning algorithms on such manifolds perhaps indicates that this general class is amenable to the design of a wide range of algorithms.
We demonstrate an increase in the quality of clustering and classification on metric learned generalized surfaces.
Moreover, we derive the corresponding metric learning sample complexity rates for data in such representations, thus directly extending some of the key theoretical results by \citet{mlrn_verma_samplecomplexity} to manifold data.
Additionally we present (i) an algorithm for $k$-means clustering on data embedded on such surfaces, and (ii) an algorithm for approximating the shortest (geodesic) distance on such surfaces. These algorithms were developed during the process of testing the generalized distance metric learning framework, as we require a $k$-means technique for measuring clustering performance on such surfaces and a way to estimate the distances between points on the surface before and after learning the metric.
\ifarxiv
\begin{figure}[t]
\vskip 0.2in
\begin{center}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{figs/monge_patch02.pdf}}
\caption{An example $d$-dimensional manifold $S \subset \R^{D}$ that can be expressed in a single chart. The specific map being used here is $F: x \mapsto (x,h(x))$, for some fixed smooth height function $h$. Therefore, the ambient dimension here is $D = d+1$. These types of maps are an important subclass of $\GS$ and are known as a Monge patch parameterization \citep{difgeom_oneill}, or simply, surface manifolds.}
\label{fig:monge_patch}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.2in
\end{figure}
\fi
\section{Formulation}
\label{sec:formulation}
We will focus our attention to a specific class of non-Euclidean representations that can be modelled by manifolds that are globally diffeomorphic\footnote{Two topological spaces are diffeomorphic if there exists a smooth bijection with a smooth inverse between them.} to an open subset of $\mathbb{R}^d$. Equivalently, for any manifold in this class, there exists an atlas that contains exactly one chart. We shall refer to this class of manifolds as generalized surfaces ($\GS$). We'll see later that this restriction of having a single chart representation helps perform explicit geometrical calculations on such surfaces which directly benefits algorithmic design. More concretely, a $d$-dimensional generalized surface $S$ that resides in some ambient space $\mathbb{R}^D$ (not necessarily inheriting the metric structure from the ambient space), is defined by a diffeomorphism $F$ over some $d$-dimensional base space $B\subset \mathbb{R}^d$ that maps it to $\mathbb{R}^D$. Thus, the generalized surface $S \subset \mathbb{R}^D$ is given by the image of the map $F$, i.e.\ $S = { \{F(x): x\in B\} }$. See Figure \ref{fig:monge_patch} for an illustration.
\ificml
\begin{figure}[t]
\vskip 0.2in
\begin{center}
\centerline{\includegraphics[width=3.5in]{figs/monge_patch02.pdf}}
\caption{An example $d$-dimensional manifold $S \subset \R^{D}$ that can be expressed in a single chart. The specific map being used here is $F: x \mapsto (x,h(x))$, for some fixed smooth height function $h$. Therefore, the ambient dimension here is $D = d+1$. These types of maps are an important subclass of $\GS$ and are known as a Monge patch parameterization \citep{difgeom_oneill}, or simply, surface manifolds.}
\label{fig:monge_patch}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.2in
\end{figure}
\fi
It is worth noting that this class of manifolds is expressive enough to model non-linear geometries of contemporary interest. For instance, the upper sheet of the hyperboloid of two sheets---an immensely useful model for working in hyperbolic geometry that has recently generated significant interest in machine learning---is one such manifold. Other classical geometries that can be modeled by such a parameterization include elliptical, parabolic, and surface manifolds.
Given such a manifold ${S \in \GS}$, how can we do Maha\-lanobis-type distance metric learning? Naively since ${S\subset \R^D}$, one could potentially consider distance transformations induced by applying linear maps on $\R^D$ itself. Unfortunately, such a map has an undesirable effect
of distorting the global shape of the representation space $S$ itself. Instead, ideally, what one wants is to have a transformation that can move points around \emph{in} $S$ without having to distort the shape of $S$.
This is precisely where our diffeomorphism $F$ comes in handy. Since\footnote{Stating $S=F(B)$ is clearly an abuse of notation; we simply mean $S = \{F(x) \;|\; x\in B\}$. We will make similar abuse of notation throughout the text for sake of clarity and readability.} $S = F(B)$, rather than applying transformations on $S$ directly (which distorts $S$), one can consider applying transformations on the base space $B$ instead. Let $L$ be a linear transform on $\R^d$; then the transformed $S$, namely $S_L$, is defined as $ (F \circ L) (B) = F(L(B)) = F(LB)$. One simple way to understand why this has the desired effect is to imagine a coordinate grid in $B$. Applying $L$ first (linearly) distorts the coordinate grid -- stretching it in some directions and compressing it in others. The subsequent application of $F$ maps this transformed grid into the same shape as $S$. See Figure \ref{fig:grid_spacing} for an illustration. This therefore has the
requisite effect of stretching some directions in $S$ while compressing other directions in $S$, thus in effect ``pushing" or "pulling" any data that may reside on such a manifold.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\vskip 0.2in
\begin{center}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=2.3in]{figs/grid_spacing_hyperboloid.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=2.3in]{figs/grid_spacing_swissroll.png}
\includegraphics[width=2.5in]{figs/grid_spacing_klein.png}
}
\caption{Example change in the coordinate system when applying a different $L$ on various manifolds. The red grid lines in lighter shade shows the mapping of the original coordinate system, the black grid lines in the darker shade shows the mapping of the linearly transformed coordinate system. Left: application on a hyperboloid (which uses a non-Riemannian metric structure). Center: application on a `swiss roll' (which has no intrinsic curvature and inherits the Euclidean metric structure from the ambient space). Right: application on a section of a Klein surface (which has intrinsic curvature and inherits the Euclidean metric structure from the ambient space).}
\label{fig:grid_spacing}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.2in
\end{figure*}
While this formulism is helpful, a significant challenge still needs to be addressed. Particularly, since many machine learning algorithms rely on comparing pairwise distances between datapoints, one must still be able to compute distances between points that reside on $S$. Since we allow $S$ to have its own metric structure (and not necessarily using the Euclidean structure that gets inherited from the ambient space), this issue needs to be addressed carefully. We shall provide an algorithmic approximation to calculate distances over the transformed manifolds in Section \ref{sec:dist_over_S}.
\subsection{Example Instantiations}
\label{sec:example_instances}
\textbf{Flat manifold.} Taking the base space $B=\mathbb{R}^d$ and choosing $F$ to be the identity map yields a flat surface (i.e.\ Euclidean space). In this case, we recover back the standard Mahalanobis metric learning framework on $d$-dimensional Euclidean spaces. Concretely, let $F(x) = x$ be the identity map. Then, every point $s \in S = F(B) = B$ gets transformed as $F(Lb) = Lb$, where $b = F^{-1}(s)$, which equals $s$. The (squared) distance between two points $s_1, s_2 \in S$ after this transformation simply becomes ${(s_1-s_2)^\mathsf{T} L^\mathsf{T}L (s_1-s_2)}$. The matrix $L^\mathsf{T}L$ is precisely the (quadratic form of) the Mahalanobis metric \citep{mlrn_verma_samplecomplexity}.
\textbf{Hyperboloid manifold.} A classic example of a non-linear surface is the $d$-dimensional hyperboloid, which resides in $d+1$ dimensional ambient space. Using standard derivations (see for example an excellent introduction by \citealp{hgeom_reynolds}) the diffeomporhism $F:\R^d \rightarrow \R^{d+1}$ in this case is\footnote{This setting of $F(x)$ yields a hyperboloid of two sheets: one sheet is obtained from the positive root, and the other sheet from the negative root. For hyperbolic geometry, one usually restricts themselves to one of the sheets; typically the positive sheet.} ${x \mapsto \big(x, (1+x^\mathsf{T}x)^{1/2} \big)}$.
See Figure \ref{fig:path_estimation} (center) for an illustration of the 2-dimensional hyperboloid.
Due to the non-linear geometry, the standard Euclidean distance is no longer the shortest distance between a pair of points (cf.\ Figure \ref{fig:path_estimation} center). Instead, distance $\rho^{\textrm{hyp}}$ between any two points $s_1,s_2$ on the $d$-dimensional hyperboloid $S \subset \mathbb{R}^{d+1}$ is given by
\begin{align*}
\rho^{\textrm{hyp}}(s_1,s_2) & := \textup{arccosh}(-s_1^\mathsf{T} G s_2),
\end{align*}
where the $(d+1) \times (d+1)$ matrix $G :=\Big[\begin{array}{cc} I_{d\times d} & 0\\ 0 & -1 \end{array} \Big]$ encodes the (indefinite) Lorentzian metric signature used for computing the innner product between $s_1$ and $s_2$ (see \citealp{hgeom_reynolds}, for a detailed derivation of distance).
Therefore, the distance between linearly transformed points on the hyperboloid $S$, that is $F(LB)$, simply becomes
(for any $L$)
\ificml
\begin{align*}
\rho^{\textrm{hyp}}_L (s_1,s_2) &=\rho^{\textrm{hyp}} (F(Lb_1),F(Lb_2)) \\
&= \textup{arccosh}\Big( \sqrt{(1+\Delta_{11})(1+\Delta_{22})} -\Delta_{12} \Big),
\end{align*}
\else
\begin{align*}
\rho^{\textrm{hyp}}_L (s_1,s_2) &=\rho^{\textrm{hyp}} (F(Lb_1),F(Lb_2))
= \textup{arccosh}\Big( \sqrt{(1+\Delta_{11})(1+\Delta_{22})} -\Delta_{12} \Big),
\end{align*}
\fi
where $\Delta_{ij} := b_i^\mathsf{T}L^\mathsf{T}L b_j$, and $b_i = F^{-1}(s_i)$.
\iffalse
\fi
\textbf{Helicoid manifold.}
We take the helicoid as our last demonstrative example. This non-linear manifold is \emph{not} a surface (i.e.\ it does not have a mapping of the kind $F: x \mapsto (x,h(x))$, cf.\ Figure \ref{fig:monge_patch}), but does have a global diffeomorphism ${F: \R^2\rightarrow \R^3}$ defined as ${(x_1,x_2) \mapsto \big(x_1 \cos(x_2), x_1 \sin(x_2), x_2\big)}$, and is thus a generalized surface. See Figure \ref{fig:path_estimation} (left) for an illustration. It is interesting to note that this relatively simple and well-known surface, which borrows the Euclidean metric structure from the ambient space, does not have a known closed form expression for distances between pairs of points. This necessitates a procedure to approximate distances between datapoints on a generalized surface $S$ that is specified via $F$. (See next section.)
\begin{figure*}[t]
\vskip 0.2in
\begin{center}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=2.3in]{figs/path_helicoid.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=2.3in]{figs/path_hyperboloid.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=2.3in]{figs/path_sinusoid.pdf}
}
\caption{Estimation of the shortest path using the proposed algorithm on some example generalized surfaces. Shortest distance approximation on (i) Left: a helicoid -- a generalized surface that inherits ambient Euclidean metric structure, (ii) Center: a hyperboloid -- a surface that does not use the Euclidean (or even a Riemannian) metric structure, (iii) Right: a sinusoid -- a surface that inherits the ambient Euclidean metric structure. Observe that the hyperboloid and sinusoid are surfaces (center and right plots), that is, have a parameterization $x \mapsto(x,h(x))$; we can thus show the corresponding path projection onto the base space (the bottom two coordinates, i.e.\ the bottom plane).}
\label{fig:path_estimation}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.2in
\end{figure*}
\subsection{Computing Distances on Arbitrary Generalized Surfaces}
\label{sec:dist_over_S}
Recall that the length of any curve $\gamma:[0,1]\rightarrow \mathbb{R}^{D}$ is given by the arc length integral $\int_0^1 { \sqrt{ \big\langle \frac{d}{dt}\gamma(t), \frac{d}{dt}\gamma(t) \big\rangle} dt} $, where the inner product is with respect to whichever metric structure is endowed on the underlying space. Thus, for a given generalized surface $S$ embedded in $\R^D$ (with its own metric tensor, and not necessarily the one inherited from the surrounding Euclidean space), computing the distance between any two points $x, y \in S$ involves minimizing the functional
$$\LEN[\gamma(t)] := \int_0^1 \sqrt{ \Big\langle \frac{d}{dt}\gamma(t), \frac{d}{dt}\gamma(t) \Big\rangle} dt$$
over all paths $\gamma(t)$ such that $\gamma(t) \in S, \forall t \in [0, 1]$ with $\gamma(0) = x$ and $\gamma(1) = y$ (see for instance \citealp{calcofvar}).
However, since $S$ is diffeomorphic to the base space $B$ (via $F$), any path $\gamma(t)$ such that $\gamma(t) \in S \ \forall t \in [0, 1]$ is given by some path $\kappa(t): [0, 1] \to B$, which is then mapped to $\gamma(t)$ by using $F$. In other words, for any $\gamma(\cdot) \subset S$, $\exists \ \kappa: [0, 1] \to B$ such that $F(\kappa(t)) = \gamma(t)$.
Therefore, formally stated, computing the distance function $\rho^\textup{mfd}(x,y)$ for an arbitrary generalized surface manifold (given by $F$) is equivalent to solving the following variational problem:
$$\inf_{\kappa: [0, 1] \to B} \LEN_F[\kappa] = \inf_\kappa \int_0^1 \sqrt{ \Big\langle \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)), \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)) \Big\rangle} dt,$$
such that $ F(\kappa(0)) = x, F(\kappa(1)) = y$ (boundary conditions).
Since the integrand is only a function of $\kappa(t)$ and $\dot{\kappa}(t)$ (where $\dot{\kappa}$ denotes the derivative of $\kappa$ with respect to $t$), finding the minima of $\LEN$ is equivalent to finding the solution $\kappa^\ast$ to the following differential equation, also known as the Euler-Lagrange equation \citep{calcofvar}:
\ificml
\begin{align*}
\frac{\partial}{\partial \kappa} \Bigg [ & \sqrt{ \Big\langle \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)), \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)) \Big\rangle} \Bigg] \\
&
= \frac{d}{dt} \frac{\partial}{\partial \dot{\kappa}} \Bigg[\sqrt{ \Big\langle \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)), \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)) \Big\rangle} \Bigg],
\end{align*}
\else
\begin{align*}
\frac{\partial}{\partial \kappa} \Bigg [ & \sqrt{ \Big\langle \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)), \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)) \Big\rangle} \Bigg]
= \frac{d}{dt} \frac{\partial}{\partial \dot{\kappa}} \Bigg[\sqrt{ \Big\langle \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)), \frac{d}{dt}F(\kappa(t)) \Big\rangle} \Bigg],
\end{align*}
\fi
with the same boundary conditions.
For an arbitrary generalized surface $S$, computing the optimal minimum-distance geodesic path $\kappa^\ast$ can be computationally prohibitive, and therefore we present an algorithm to approximate this path using piecewise linear paths. Let $F^{-1}(x)=a_0$, $a_1,\ldots, a_n, a_{n+1} = F^{-1}(y)$ be $n$ intermediate points on a path $\kappa$ (where $a_0$ and $a_{n+1}$ are the end points). Define
$$\sigma(a_i,a_{i+1}) := \int_0^1 \sqrt{ \Big\langle \frac{d}{dt}F(\bar\kappa(t)), \frac{d}{dt}F(\bar\kappa(t)) \Big\rangle} dt,$$
where in this case, $\bar\kappa(t) = (1-t) a_i + t a_{i+1}$, a straight line path $a_i$ and $a_{i+1}$ in the base space $B$.\\
\begin{algorithm}[htb!]
\caption{Manifold Distance Approximation}
\label{alg:path_approx}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\INPUT $x,y \in S$ (path connected), number of intermediate points $n$, number of samples $m$.
\STATE Let $\{a_i\}, i = 1, \ldots, n$ be a set of $n$ points linearly spaced\footnotemark ~between $a_0 = F^{-1}(x)$ and $a_{n+1} = F^{-1}(y)$ in $B$
\REPEAT
\FOR{each intermediate point $a_i$ between $a_0$ and $a_{n+1}$}
\STATE { $r_i = 2 \cdot \max(\|a_i - a_{i-1}\|, \|a_i - a_{i+1}\|)$}
\STATE {Let $\{b_j\}, j = 1, \ldots, m$ be points sampled from\footnotemark ~$\mathbb{B}(a_i,r_i) \cap B$ }
\STATE{Set $j^\ast = \argmin_{j} \ \sigma(a_{i-1}, b_j) + \sigma(b_j, a_{i+1})$}
\IF{$\sigma(a_{i-1}, b_{j^\ast}) + \sigma(b_{j^\ast},a_{i+1}) < \sigma(a_{i-1}, a_i) + \sigma(a_i, a_{i+1})$}
\STATE{$a_i \leftarrow b_{j^\ast}$}
\ENDIF
\ENDFOR
\UNTIL {convergence}
\STATE \textbf{return} ${\rho^F(x,y) = \sum_{i=0}^n \sigma(a_i, a_{i+1})}$ as the approximated length between $x$ and $y$ on $S$.
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\addtocounter{footnote}{-1}\footnotetext{This initialization assumes (for convenience) that the base $B$ is convex and contains the straight line joining the points. If that is not the case, simply initialize $a_i$ in any reasonable way such that each $a_i \in B$.}
\addtocounter{footnote}{1}\footnotetext{$\mathbb{B}(x,r)$ denotes the ball of radius $r$ centered at $x$.}
Note that if any linear transformation $L$ is being applied to points in the base space $B$ (as needed for distance metric learning, cf.\ Section \ref{sec:formulation}), we can simply apply the same equations on $L \kappa(t)$ instead of $\kappa(t)$ in our computations.
A concrete instantiation of our distance approximation procedure (Algorithm ~\ref{alg:path_approx}) for the hyperboloid manifold is given in Appendix \ref{app:derive_hyperbolic_path_approx}.
A qualitative demonstration of our Algorithm \ref{alg:path_approx} is shown on various types of generalized surfaces in Figure \ref{fig:path_estimation}. It is instructive to note that, at a cursory glace, for the hyperboloid (Figure \ref{fig:path_estimation} center), it may seem like the estimated path on the surface is \emph{not} the shortest path (a sideways bend on the surface seems shorter than the depicted bottom bend). This mismatch is due to limitations of our intuition: recall that hyperboloid inherits the indefinite Lorentzian metric signature. Since we are used to Euclidean metrics, any attempt to visualize shortest distances in other metrics (especially indefinite metrics) is futile. Fortunately, since we do know
the closed form expression for distances on a hyperboloid (cf.\ Section \ref{sec:example_instances}), we can quantitatively evaluate the approximation returned by Algorithm \ref{alg:path_approx}, and indeed verify that the displayed path is in fact the shortest (see Section \ref{sec:expt_mfd_dist_approx} for details).
\section{Metric Learning on Manifolds}
\label{sec:mmlrn}
With this mathematical machinery in place, we can trivially generalize existing metric learning algorithms such as Large Margin Nearest Neighbor (LMNN, \citealp{mlrn_lmnn}) and Mahalanobis Metric for Clustering (MMC, \citealp{mlrn_mmc}).
\subsection{MMC on Manifolds for Improved \texorpdfstring{$k$-means} ~~Clustering}
\label{sec:mfd_mmc}
Given labelled data $(x_1,y_1),\ldots, (x_m,y_m)$, the goal for MMC is to find a linear transformation $L$ that brings data from the same category together while pushing away data from different categories \citep{mlrn_mmc}. This pull-push action has the desired effect of making the category-based clusters in the transformed data representation more pronounced, which can thus be easily recovered by a simple clustering algorithm like $k$-means. This is achieved by constructing two sets of pairs---the \emph{similar pairs} set, which we call $P$, and the \emph{dissimilar pairs} set, which we call $Q$---from the given labelled data. Concretely, (for all $1\leq i,j \leq m$)
\begin{align*}
P &:= \{(x_i,x_j) \; | \; y_i = y_j\}, \\
Q &:= \{(x_i,x_j)\; | \; y_i \neq y_j\}.
\end{align*}
Then, the following optimization finds the desired transformation:
$$
\min_{L \in \R^{d \times d}} \underbrace{\sum_{(x_i,x_j) \in P} \| Lx_i - Lx_j\|^2}_{\textup{pull term}} - \lambda \underbrace{\sum_{(x_i,x_j) \in Q} \| Lx_i - Lx_j\|^2}_{\textup{push term}},
$$
where $\lambda$ is a hyper-parameter controlling the tradeoff between the pull and the push term.
This can be extended to the manifold case, where the given labelled data $(x_1,y_1),\ldots, (x_m,y_m)$ resides on a known $d$-dimensional generalized surface $S$ (specified by the diffeomorphism $F$). Define $b_i$ in the base space $B\subset\R^d$ as the points $b_i = F^{-1}(x_i)$ (for all $1\leq i \leq m$), and let $\rho^F(x_i,x_j)$ denote the distance between points $x_i$ and $x_j$ on $S$ (with respect to whichever metric tensor is endowed on $S$). Then, as before, the $L$-transformed distance on $S$ is (cf.\ Sections \ref{sec:formulation} and \ref{sec:example_instances}):
\begin{equation}
\label{eq:FLB}
\rho^F_L(x_i,x_j) := \rho^F\big(F(Lb_i),F(Lb_j)\big).
\end{equation}
Therefore, the corresponding manifold MMC optimization simply becomes:
$$
\min_{L \in \R^{d \times d}} \underbrace{\sum_{(x_i,x_j) \in P} \rho^F_L(x_i,x_j)}_{\textup{pull term on } S} - \lambda \underbrace{\sum_{(x_i,x_j) \in Q} \rho^F_L(x_i,x_j)}_{\textup{push term on } S},
$$
where $P$, $Q$, and $\lambda$ are defined as before.
As discussed earlier, if a closed form expression of the distance function over $S$ is known, one can simply plug in that expression for $\rho$; otherwise, they can use Algorithm \ref{alg:path_approx} to approximate it (cf.\ Section \ref{sec:dist_over_S}).
\subsection{LMNN on Manifolds for Improved Nearest Neighbor Classification}
\label{sec:mfd_lmnn}
LMNN \citep{mlrn_lmnn} can be viewed as a ``localized" version of MMC, where instead of pulling and pushing \emph{all} datapoints that belong to the same and different categories (respectively), it pulls and pushes only those in a local
neighborhood of a given datapoint. This local action directly helps in improving the $k$-nearest neighbor classification quality. Specifically, the classic formulation works on triples (unlike pairs that get used in MMC) of points. Let $(x_1,y_1),\ldots,(x_m,y_m)$ be a given labelled dataset on a $d$-dimensional generalized surface $S$ (specified by the diffeomorphism $F$).
Then, for any $i$, let the relation $j\sim i$ denote that $x_j$ is a true neighbor of $x_i$ (i.e.\ $y_i = y_j$), and the relation $l\not \sim i$
denote that $x_l$ is an imposter neighbor of
$x_i$ (i.e.\ $y_i \neq y_l$). Then, the LMNN optimization on a manifold is given as
\begin{equation*}
\min_{L\in\R^{d\times d}} \underbrace{\sum_{i,j\sim i} \rho^F_L\big(x_i,x_j \big)}_{\textup{pull term on }S} + \lambda \underbrace{\sum_{i,j\sim i, l\not \sim i} \Big[1+\rho^F_L\big(
x_i,x_j\big) - \rho_L^F\big(x_i,x_l \big) \Big]_+}_{\textup{push term on } S},
\end{equation*}
where $[\cdot]_+ := \max(\cdot,0)$ denotes the hinge loss.
Observe that selecting $F$ as the identity map immediately gives us back the classical Euclidean formulation of LMNN (cf.\ Section \ref{sec:example_instances}).
We will demonstrate that metric learned manifold representations of symbolic data (rather than naive Euclidean representation) can yield better clustering and classification results. See Section \ref{sec:experiments} for more details.
\section{Sample Complexity of Manifold Metric Learning}
Here, we will derive PAC-style sample complexity bounds for distance metric learning on generalized surface manifolds.
Given a $d$-dimensional generalized surface $S\subset \R^D$ (specified by the diffeomorphism $F$, that is, $S=F(B)$, for an open set $B\subset \R^d$), we want to find a linear
transformation $L^*$ that minimizes some notion of \emph{error} on data drawn from a fixed unknown distribution $\D$ on $S\times\{0,1\}$:
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{eq:errD}
L^* := \argmin_{L \in \mathsterling} \err(L,\D),
\end{eqnarray}
where $\mathsterling$ is a class of linear transformations under consideration.
A practitioner typically defines \emph{error} in a way that makes the optimization prefer those linear transformations that bring data from same class closer together than those from different classes (see, for instance, how error, or the loss function, is defined for LMNN or MMC, cf.\ Section \ref{sec:mmlrn}). More concretely, following the setup discussed in \cite{mlrn_verma_samplecomplexity}, most generally, $\err(\cdot, \cdot)$ can be defined as
\begin{align*}
\err^\lambda(L,\D) := {\mathbb E}_{\substack{(x,y)\sim \D \\ (x',y') \sim \D}} \Big[ \phi^\lambda\Big( \rho^F_L(x,x'), Y \Big) \Big],
\end{align*}
where $\phi^\lambda(\dist, Y)$ is a generic distance-based loss function that
computes the degree of violation between distance $\rho^F_L(x,x')$ as defined in Eq.\ \eqref{eq:FLB} and the label agreement $Y := \indicate[y = y']$, and
penalizes it by factor $\lambda$.
This generalized notion of error incorporates many interesting metric learning losses including MMC and LMNN (see \citealp{mlrn_verma_samplecomplexity}, for a detailed discussion and derivation).
We are interested in how well one can approximate Eq.\ \eqref{eq:errD} if only a finite size i.i.d.\ sample $(x_1,y_1),\ldots,(x_m,y_m)$ from $\D$ is available.
Specifically, let $Z_m$ denote a size $m$ i.i.d.\ sample from $\D$, and $\err(M,Z_m)$ denote the corresponding \emph{empirical} error.
We can thus define the empirical risk minimizing transform based on $m$ samples as
$L^*_m := \argmin_L \err(L,Z_m)$,
and compare its generalization performance to that of the theoretically optimal $L^*$, that is, how
\begin{equation}
\err(L^*_m, \D) - \err(L^*,\D)
\label{eq:erm_conv}
\end{equation}
behaves as the sample size $m$ grows.
Interestingly, we can derive a good convergence rate for the key expression above, and directly extend ${\textrm{Theorem 1}}$ of \citet{mlrn_verma_samplecomplexity} for the case of
$d$-dimensional generalized surface manifolds\footnote{For readability, we only present the statement of the theorem in the main text. An interested reader should refer to Appendix \ref{app:proofs} for a detailed proof.}.
Particularly, (i) let $C_F$ be a measure of how distances are potentially stretched or changed by the diffeomorphism $F$ and the specific choice of metric tensor endowed on $S$; that is, we have
$\rho^F(F(b),F(b')) \leq C_F \|b - b'\|^2$
for all $b,b' \in B$,
(ii) let $C_L$ be a bound on the quadratic form of the linear transformations being considered, that is,
$C_L := \sup_{L \in \mathsterling} \|L^\mathsf{T}L\|_\textup{fro}$, and (iii)
let $C_B$ be the bound on the support of the distribution $\D$ in the base space $B$, that is, $\|b\|^2\leq C_B$, for any $x\sim \mathcal{D}|_S$ such that $F(b) = x$ (with probability 1). Then, we have the following result.
\begin{theorem}
\label{lm:unif_conv_all}
For any generalized $d$-dimensional surface $S$ (with corresponding diffeomorphism $F$), let $\phi^\lambda$ be a distance-based loss function that is $\lambda$-Lipschitz
in the first argument. Then, with probability at least $1-\delta$ over an i.i.d.\ draw of $m$ samples
$Z_m$, we have
\ificml
\begin{align*}
\sup_{L\in \mathsterling} \Big[ \err^\lambda (L,\D) - &
\err^\lambda (L,Z_m) \Big]
\\
&\leq O\left( \lambda C_F C_L C_B \sqrt{ \frac{\ln(1/\delta)}{m}}\right).
\end{align*}
\else
\begin{align*}
\sup_{L\in \mathsterling} \Big[ \err^\lambda (L,\D) -
\err^\lambda (L,Z_m) \Big]
\; \leq \; O\left( \lambda C_F C_L C_B \sqrt{ \frac{\ln(1/\delta)}{m}}\right).
\end{align*}
\fi
\end{theorem}
\begin{figure}[t]
\vskip 0.2in
\begin{center}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=3in]{figs/dist_approx_hyperboloid.pdf}
}
\caption{Quality of distance approximation on a hyperboloid. We plot the ratio between the approximated and the true distance (averaged over multiple pairs of points drawn randomly). The reference line at $1$ (solid dashed line) indicates perfect approximation.}
\label{fig:expt_mfd_dist_approx}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.2in
\end{figure}
The uniform bound presented above this directly implies $1/\sqrt{m}$ rate of convergence of Eq.\ \eqref{eq:erm_conv}. It is instructive to note that while this rate is dimension independent (i.e.\ it is independent of the manifold dimension $d$), the constants (e.g.\ $C_L$) can very well depend on $d$ for some interesting practical cases.
\begin{figure*}[t]
\vskip 0.2in
\begin{center}
\centerline{
\includegraphics[width=2.0in]{figs/cluster_result_helicoid_raw.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=2.0in]{figs/cluster_result_helicoid_before.pdf}
\includegraphics[width=2.0in]{figs/cluster_result_helicoid_after.pdf}
}
\caption{Clustering result on the helicoid. Left: A synthetic dataset containing two intertwined clusters (cluster identities shown in blue dots and red triangles). Observe that there is no linear transformation that can separate the two clusters for $k$-means. Center: The same synthetic dataset (as depicted in the Left plot) along with the underlying helicoidal structure that can better represent the given dataset. Right: Metric learned representation of the given dataset on the helicoid using manifold-MMC. The two clusters separate out very naturally when an appropriate non-Euclidean representation is considered.}
\label{fig:cluster_helicoid}
\end{center}
\vskip -0.2in
\end{figure*}
\section{Empirical Evaluation}
\label{sec:experiments}
With the manifold metric learning framework in place, we would like to know how much improvement in performance (if any) one can expect by doing metric learning on data that can be modelled more effectively as a generalized surface. Here we compare the performance of both $k$-nearest neighbor classification and $k$-means clustering on representative benchmark datasets.
Each dataset has a symbolic representation (i.e.\ only the relationships between pairs of datapoints are available), which can be used to embed it (via multidimensional scaling) in any generalized surface (including Euclidean space). We can thus compare prediction performance on Euclidean, metric learned Euclidean, generalized surface, and metric learned generalized surface representations of the given data\footnote{Code is available at: \texttt{\href{https://github.com/m-k-S/manifold\_ml}{https://github.com/m-k-S/manifold\_ml}}.}.
It is worth noting that even though most of our reported experimental results are on hyperbolic spaces (due to results in previous literature showing it to be an effective representation for such datasets), our published code works for any generalized surface.
\subsection{Approximation of Manifold Distances}
\label{sec:expt_mfd_dist_approx}
As detailed in Section \ref{sec:dist_over_S}, even simple manifolds can have distance functions with no explicit closed form expression. It is imperative to have a good algorithm for approximating distances on generalized surfaces.
Taking the hyperboloid manifold (which is endowed with the Minkowski metric), which has a known closed form expression for distance, as a reference (cf.\ Section \ref{sec:example_instances}), we can gauge the effectiveness of our proposed Algorithm \ref{alg:path_approx} for distance approximation.
Figure \ref{fig:expt_mfd_dist_approx} depicts the quality of distance approximation on the hyperboloid as a function of the number of intermediate points used in the computation; as expected, a larger number of intermediate points yields a closer approximation to the true distance. Interestingly, the result also indicates that we can get a good approximation with only a few intermediate points; thus potentially gaining on some computational savings.
\subsection{Evaluation Setting}
Experiments were conducted on demonstrative synthetic datasets, as well as the following publicly available real-world datasets. \begin{itemize}
\item \dataset{football}: A network of collegiate American football teams, where edges between nodes represent regular season games in the fall of 2000. There are 12 unique categories, representing the 12 divisions of the NCAA DI football conference \citep{football}.
\item \dataset{polbooks}: A network of books about US politics published around the 2004 presidential election. Edges between books represent frequent co-purchasing of books by the same buyers on the website Amazon.com. There are 3 unique categories, representing political affiliations (`liberal', `conservative', or `neutral') \citep{polbooks}.
\item \dataset{adjnoun}: A network of words (nouns and adjectives) taken from the Charles Dickens novel \textit{David Copperfield}. Edges between nodes represent adjacencies between nouns and adjectives, and each node is labelled as either a noun or an adjective \citep{adjnoun}.
\item \dataset{20newsgroup}: A network of newsgroup documents, where edges between nodes represent a categorical relation. There are 20 unique categories, each representing a different newsgroup \citep{20newsgroup}.
\end{itemize}
\ificml
\begin{table*}[htb]
\centering
\caption{$k$-nearest neighbor classification results.}
\label{tab:clf_res}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Dataset & Euclidean & Euclidean+Metric Learn & Hyperbolic & Hyperbolic+Metric Learn \\
\hline \hline
\dataset{football} & 0.41 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.40 $\pm$ 0.09 & 0.29 $\pm$ 0.09 & \textbf{0.25 $\pm$ 0.10} \\
\dataset{polbooks} & 0.24 $\pm$ 0.05 & 0.31 $\pm$ 0.12 & 0.25 $\pm$ 0.06 & \textbf{0.23 $\pm$ 0.06} \\
\dataset{adjnoun} & 0.58 $\pm$ 0.06 & 0.56 $\pm$ 0.07 & 0.55 $\pm$ 0.09 & \textbf{0.49 $\pm$ 0.05} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\fi
Each of these real-world examples are network-type data, and thus are well-suited to hyperbolic embeddings \citep{hgeom_mds_reptradeoff}. Therefore, we shall use
hyperboloid as our non-Euclidean representation for
these network-type datasets.
\ifarxiv
\begin{algorithm}[htb!]
\caption{$k$-Means on Generalized Surfaces}
\label{alg:cluster}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE $\Theta \leftarrow$ randomly assign each point on the manifold in the dataset $X$ to one of $k$ clusters
\REPEAT
\FOR{$x_i \in \{x_1, ..., x_n\}$}
\STATE {current cost = $C(\Theta; X)$}
\STATE {min cost $\leftarrow$ current cost}
\FOR{$j \in \{1, ..., k\}$}
\STATE{Set $\Theta_{new}$ to be equal to $\Theta$ but with the label of $x_i$ set to $j$}
\STATE{new cost = $C(\Theta_{new}; X)$}
\IF {new cost $<$ min cost}
\STATE{$\Theta \leftarrow \Theta_{new}$}
\ENDIF
\ENDFOR
\ENDFOR
\UNTIL {convergence}
\STATE \textbf{return} $\Theta$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\fi
\subsection{Clustering on Generalized Surfaces}
To demonstrate the efficacy of generalized distance metric learning (via manifold-MMC, cf.\ Section \ref{sec:mfd_mmc}) with respect to improving cluster performance, we utilize the \dataset{20newsgroup} dataset, as well as a synthetically generated dataset consisting of points sampled from a helicoid manifold. The results on the synthetic dataset are depicted in Figure \ref{fig:cluster_helicoid}. This dataset was carefully chosen to show the immense potential of considering the an appropriate representation for a given dataset: in the the Euclidean representation, there is no (linear) transformation that can achieve an effective $k$-means clustering, but once the right representation is chosen (the helicoid, in this case), distance metric learning makes the clustering task almost trivial.
This also leads to the question: \emph{how} exactly can clustering be done in a non-Euclidean space?
Note that an arbitrary generalized surface is not necessarily even a vector space (as $S$ is not guaranteed to be closed under vector addition), and thus there does not exist a notion of a \emph{mean vector} or a \emph{center}, a key concept that is required to run the typical $k$-means algorithm. Nevertheless, we can generalize $k$-means in a more natural way. Recall that the $k$-means objective attempts to find a $k$-partition $C_1,\ldots,C_k$ of a given dataset $X = \{x_1,\ldots,x_n\}$
that minimizes
$$
\sum_{j=1}^k \sum_{i\in C_j} \|x_i - \mu_j \|^2,
$$
where $\mu_j$ is the mean of cluster $C_j$. Since on a generalized surface, we have no concept of the mean, we cannot minimize this form.
To circumvent this, we note that the inside summation can be equivalently rewritten as (for any $j$)
$$
\sum_{i\in C_j} \|x_i - \mu_j \|^2 = \frac{1}{2 |C_j|} \sum_{i,i'\in C_j} \|x_i - x_{i'}\|^2.
$$
This change reformulates the $k$-means optimization solely in terms of pairwise distances \citep{kmeanshardness} and thus extends it to manifolds.
Leveraging this formulation, we present a generalized $k$-means algorithm that can operate on any generalized surface. We define a cluster assignment $\Theta$ to be the assignment of one cluster label from $\{1, ..., k\}$ to each point $x_i$ in our dataset $X = \{x_1, ..., x_n\}$; the value $y_i \in \Theta$ refers to the cluster assignment of the point $x_i$. We define a counting function:
$$K(y_i) = \sum_{j = 1}^n \mathbf{1}[y_i = y_j],$$
which outputs the number of points in $X$ with the same cluster assignment as $x_i$ (including the point $x_i$). The dataset $X$ consists of points embedded in a generalized surface with distance function $\rho$. Thus, the cost of a given cluster assignment $\Theta$ is:
$$C(\Theta; X) = \sum_{i = 1}^n \sum_{j = 1}^n \mathbf{1}[y_i = y_j] \rho(x_i, x_j) \frac{1}{2K(y_i)}.$$
See Algorithm \ref{alg:cluster} for a detailed implementation. (Notice that the optimization style is akin to Hartigan's method for $k$-means optimization, \citealp{hartigans})
\ificml
\begin{algorithm}[htb!]
\caption{$k$-Means on Generalized Surfaces}
\label{alg:cluster}
\begin{algorithmic}[1]
\STATE $\Theta \leftarrow$ randomly assign each point on the manifold in the dataset $X$ to one of $k$ clusters
\REPEAT
\FOR{$x_i \in \{x_1, ..., x_n\}$}
\STATE {current cost = $C(\Theta; X)$}
\STATE {min cost $\leftarrow$ current cost}
\FOR{$j \in \{1, ..., k\}$}
\STATE{Set $\Theta_{new}$ to be equal to $\Theta$ but with the label of $x_i$ set to $j$}
\STATE{new cost = $C(\Theta_{new}; X)$}
\IF {new cost $<$ min cost}
\STATE{$\Theta \leftarrow \Theta_{new}$}
\ENDIF
\ENDFOR
\ENDFOR
\UNTIL {convergence}
\STATE \textbf{return} $\Theta$
\end{algorithmic}
\end{algorithm}
\fi
For the \dataset{20newsgroup} dataset, we perform the generalized $k$-means clustering on a hyperboloid embedding and a metric learned hyperboloid embedding (via metric-MMC).
We use normalized mutual information (NMI) to measure the quality of the obtained $20$-way clustering.
Relative to the hyperboloid embedding, the performance of clustering on the metric learned hyperboloid improves by $0.015$ units (or $3\%$ improvement). Given that this dataset has 20 different categories and is thus very difficult to properly cluster, this improvement is significant.
\ifarxiv
\begin{table*}[tb]
\centering
\caption{$k$-nearest neighbor classification results.}
\label{tab:clf_res}
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|c|c|c|}
\hline
Dataset & Euclidean & Euclidean+Metric Learn & Hyperbolic & Hyperbolic+Metric Learn \\
\hline \hline
\dataset{football} & 0.41 $\pm$ 0.01 & 0.40 $\pm$ 0.09 & 0.29 $\pm$ 0.09 & \textbf{0.25 $\pm$ 0.10} \\
\dataset{polbooks} & 0.24 $\pm$ 0.05 & 0.31 $\pm$ 0.12 & 0.25 $\pm$ 0.06 & \textbf{0.23 $\pm$ 0.06} \\
\dataset{adjnoun} & 0.58 $\pm$ 0.06 & 0.56 $\pm$ 0.07 & 0.55 $\pm$ 0.09 & \textbf{0.49 $\pm$ 0.05} \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\end{table*}
\fi
\subsection{Classification on the Hyperboloid}
To demonstrate the efficacy of generalized distance metric learning (via manifold-LMNN, cf.\ Section \ref{sec:mfd_lmnn}) with respect to improving classification performance, we use the \dataset{football}, \dataset{polbooks}, and \dataset{adjnoun} datasets. Note that the generalized surface we have chosen for each of these datasets is the two-dimensional hyperboloid.
For each dataset, the classifier performance is measured using the standard 0-1 error, and the results are presented in Table \ref{tab:clf_res}. In all cases, the classification performance on the metric-learned hyperboloid is significantly better than in the other three embedding options. This emphasizes that the right notion of distance and an appropriate (perhaps non-Euclidean) choice of representation is sometimes crucial to attain good performance.
In particular, we note that linear classifier performance on the \dataset{football} dataset (using a one-vs-rest strategy) is particularly poor, with best reported error (as per \citealp{hgeom_svm}) being $0.79$ on a Euclidean embedding, with an slight improvement to $0.76$ on a hyperboloid embedding. In contrast, our $k$-nearest neighbor error on the metric-learned hyperboloid is $0.25 \pm 0.10$, a significant improvement.
\nocite{manifold_ml}
|
Subsets and Splits